"A 2016 Ballot Without Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush"

[Divernan]

Last edited Sun Nov 30, 2014, 05:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Charlie Cook, one of the most respected political experts in the country, believes Hillary Clinton has only a 25-30 percent chance of running for president, and in any case he thinks she is either “rusty” or “she has lost her fastball.” He bases that on her disastrous book tour, in which she said some very inappropriate things and also did not sell many books.

The author of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report newsletter for almost 30 years also disappointed a local audience when he did not give Jeb Bush much of a chance of gaining the Republican nomination.

“Bush has two issues working against him to win the Republican primary for the 2016 presidential election,” Cook said. “One is immigration reform, which he favors; and two, is his advocacy of education reform.”

Neither of those causes would sit well with Republican primary voters, Cook said.

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/steve-rose/article4189947.html#storylink=cpy

I came across this article on the front page of Huffington Post. The entire article is chock full of commentary on demographics, young voters, voter turnout & causes of Obama's disapproval ratings. The author is Charlie Cook: Charlie Cook is Editor and Publisher of The Cook Political Report, and political analyst for National Journal, where he writes two weekly columns . He also writes a regular column for Washington Quarterly, published by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and is a political analyst for NBC News. In 2010, Charlie was a co-recipient of the American Political Science Association's prestigious Carey McWilliams award to honor "a major journalistic contribution to our understanding of politics." http://www.nationaljournal.com/reporters/bio/2

The National Journal is owned and published by David Bradley:
Politically, Bradley considers himself a centrist,[1] although he has also described himself as "a neocon guy" who was "dead certain about the rightness" of invading Iraq.[8] In the 2008 U.S. presidential primaries he donated $4,300 to Hillary Clinton and $2,300 to Barack Obama and to Mitt Romney.[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Journal

[Divernan]

1. Nov. 17/2014 Cook column: "Are We Ready for Hillary?"

This is the article referred to in the column quoted in the OP:

Questions still remain, however. Did Clinton miss her chance—or is her time about to come? Was her uneven performance on the recent book tour just a sign of being rusty from her eight-year absence from the campaign trail? Or is she like a major league pitcher who has lost his fastball? Indeed, there is one school of thought that suggests she needs something more than token opposition to get her own skill set back into shape and to test her team's abilities before the general election. Many believe that Obama was a stronger general-election candidate in 2008 after being so thoroughly tested by Clinton in that knock-down, drag-out fight for the Democratic nomination.

Another question is whether paranoia and bad blood between Clinton and the media could threaten to become a vicious cycle for her, turning the people who are covering Clinton's campaign against her. It was an over-the-top move, by any standard, to send a female press aide into the lavatory at a recent Clinton Global Initiatives meeting to follow a female New York Times reporter assigned to the Hillary Clinton beat. The best way to create enemies in the press corps is to treat them that way from the beginning.

Then there is the campaign itself. On every level, the 2008 Obama campaign outgunned the Clinton folks, but not just on the strategic, mechanical, and technological sides of the business. In 2008, many top operatives in the Clinton campaign seemed to be more preoccupied with screwing over their rivals within the campaign than with electing their candidate. At the 2008 quadrennial postelection conference at Harvard University's Institute of Politics, the operatives attending from the Clinton and McCain campaigns marveled at a panel of top Obama campaign officials talking about their regular conference calls as an opportunity for the team to air and discuss their challenges. The Obama advisers said they knew that whatever they said on the strategy calls would not be leaked to the press nor used as ammunition against each other down the road. There was a sense of loyalty up and down the ladder in the Obama campaign, while the Clinton and McCain campaigns seemed to be marked by vicious inward-aimed firing squads.

Just in the past week, we have already seen that kind of infighting beginning anew, with emails leaked to make one potential campaign manager look bad. Clinton's backers had hoped that this time would be different.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/off-to-the-races/are-we-ready-for-hillary-20141117

[DonCoquixote]

2. the ugly fact is

Both Jeb and Hillary both sell themselves on screwing over their base. Part of the reason we had Rick Scott is because he sold himself as the NOT Bush, which is why Jeb's hand picked place warmer, Bill McCollum, is little more than a trivia question. Asfar as Hillary, she has been jabbing the left throughout her career, condeming those who attack the wealthy:

http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/12/12/hillary-clinton-tells-wall-street-she-believes-anti-wall-street-rhetoric-foolish/


However,the truth is,the Oligrachy that controls BOTH parties do not want either side to show their poltical colors. Yes, they obviously want right wing tax cuts, to plunder what was the commons, but even they are smart enough to realize that someone who was honest about giving them that would be shot down. Asfar as them supporting Hillary,the last thing they would want is to lose the false center they have buolt, the one firmly to the right of FDR, not because of any fear that bernie will run for President and win, but because they woudl then expose how much the actual game is rigged towards them.

That is why,oddly enough, the true sibling are the hardcore beret wearing radicals and cowboy hat wearing reactionaries. Both know that their parties are already trying to ditch them even as they are wooed.

[drynberg]

3. Hope Cook is right, Hillary would be Obama on a bad day and Jeb...forget Bush

I do want to add a third major reason that Jeb won't surface as the GOP top dog...his father and brother...ya'know.

[Socal31]

4. Updated Dynasty Possibilities

Bush
Clinton
Bush
Obama
Clinton
Bush (jeb?)
?
Bush (rising Prescott kid)



Are they selling tickets to relocate to the moon colony yet?

[RedstDem]

5. I just hope they wear name tags

so I'll be able to tell the those two apart from each other

[blackcrowflies]

6. Biden and Sanders

Uncle Joe can work with even a Congress populated by idiots, as he's shown.

In my dreams, Howard would have a substantial place in that administration.

[Scuba]

7. The Clintons and the Bushes. Two sides of the same coin.

[Reter]

8. From a 1983 BBQ with George Wallace

Wow, that is one vintage pic.

[LawDeeDah]

9. wonder what kind of ugly deals that father and adopted son did together

[kairos12]

10. One or the other will be on the ballot.

[brooklynite]

11. UPDATE: Charlie Cook denies he said this...

Veteran political analyst Charlie Cook says he never predicted that Hillary Clinton is unlikely to run for president.

Cook, the publisher of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, caused a stir this weekend among 2016 watchers when the Kansas City Star reported that he told a private gathering in the city that the former secretary of state is unlikely to throw her hat in the ring.

...snip...

But Cook says the report is wrong.

“I have never said that the odds of her running were less than 60%. Clearly this person misheard me. From other conversations with people over dinner, after my speech, no one else heard 25-30 chance of running,” Cook told msnbc.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/charlie-cook-hillary-clinton-unlikely-run-2016

[davidpdx]

12. I think it is almost a foregone conclusion that those are the two we'll be stuck with

The powers that be are going to select the nominee this time around. If that is the case, I will be very unhappy.