Early is the understatement of the day but let’s explore them nonetheless.

Report from PPP:

For the third month in a row in our national 2016 GOP tracking Rubio leads the way. He’s at 22% to 15% for Paul Ryan, 13% each for Jeb Bush and Chris Christie, 11% for Mike Huckabee, 10% for Rand Paul, 4% for Bobby Jindal, 3% for Rick Perry, and 1% for Susana Martinez. Rubio continues to lead based on his appeal to the furthest right segment of the Republican Party- he’s at 28% with ‘very conservative’ voters to 15% for Huckabee and 14% for Ryan.

On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton continues to dominate both nationally and in Iowa. Nationally she’s at 58% to 19% for Joe Biden, 8% for Elizabeth Warren, and 3% for Andrew Cuomo. She’s even stronger in Iowa at 68% to 21% for Biden with no one else over 2%. Her favorability rating with Democrats there is 90/5.

The polling shows where the perceived leadership will come from on both sides in 2016 but we haven’t gotten into a campaign or a debate situation yet.

I would find it difficult to believe anyone on the Democratic side could topple Hillary Clinton given her popularity among the party loyalists.

On the GOP side, I’m not so sure that Rubio’s star power is enough to keep him at the top of the leaderboard once the attacks begin.


  1. Has-beens and pretenders.

    Hillary has gained gravitas and distance from her image as “suffering first lady,” but I’ve seen this story before. The GOP is known for knighting its next standard bearer years in advance, expecting people to fall in line. That’s what the rule changes were about: too much democracy. The party will pick its favorite within the next two years, and they’ll ram him through, the way they rammed Romney down our throats. But the Dems have always had chaos. They don’t like to have “leaders,” and they’re like herding cats. Whenever an obvious candidate pops up too early, the party bores of them. My guess is that another Obama-like surprise will arise and leave her in the dust.

    Back to the GOP, ordinarily, the guy who came in second has thought to have “earned” the spot the next time around. That would be Santorum, but my guess is that they’ll listen to Jindal and stop being the “stupid party.” Also, I’ve never seen such an obvious (and shameless) turnaround as the GOP did after the election. Almost immediately, the party turned Democratic on immigration.

    But Rubio would be a stupid choice. To have Rubio talk about immigration is like when Romney joked that he was “unemployed.” Aside from his questionable background, when Cubans sneak into the country, they are immediately privileged, entitled, pampered–FIRST IN LINE. The Cuban experience is exactly OPPOSITE of that of other Hispanic immigrants, so he will look ridiculous talking on the subject.

    So, bottom line, my guess is that Dems will pick someone not even considered at this point. And, for once, Republicans may do the same. Jeb has a bad name. Christie has done the ultimate flip-flop. Huckabee is a worn out old record, and the religious right is waning,anyway. Perry will never get over “oops,” and Jindal will never get over his failed reply to the State of the Union. So of the contenders, I’d bet on Rand Paul. He is the only candidate that can appeal to his dad’s constituency, yet he has shown that he’s a slut for the establishment, so he’ll be seen as harmless to the status quo.

  2. Huckabee lied about his education-spending record in Arkansas, Rubio is constitutionally ineligible to be POTUS (as is Jindal), Ryan is big-government, Christie is also big-government when it affects him directly, Perry is seen as not-so-brilliant, and Rand Paul is simultaneously alienating Ron’s supporters and the GOP old guard. Justin Amash, perhaps? I would love to see Andrew Napolitano, but the GOP is not open to that.

    • Neville: Rubio and Jindal were born here.

      Rubio did try to make it sound like his family made a heroic escape from Castro, but not only was he born here, his family left before Castro. Does prefabricating matter these days?

      Jindal said the GOP should stop being the “stupid party,” but is, himself, anti-evolution.


      • Goethe (and Eric), being born here or not is not their problem. Neither is it Obama’s problem. We went over all this last year, and I don’t want to rehash it, but the summary is that the founders (via their own writings and their reference and deference to Vattel), the author of the 14th amendment, several SCOTUS decisions, and the US Dept. of State, have all made it clear that anyone born with any technical allegiance to (especially including citizenship in) another country, is not eligible. Each of these men, at the time of his birth, had at least one parent who was not a citizen of the United States. Such was also the case for Chester A. Arther, who played along with a red-herring argument (which said that he wasn’t born here) that was publicly proven false, thus very effectively obscuring the real issue. Then, after his presidency, Arthur burned almost all of his papers. It was only in 2008 that the microfiche copies of Arthur’s father’s naturalization record were discovered, proving that Chester lied when he stated his father’s date of naturalization. Chester’s problem, and solution, is nearly identical to that of Mr. Obama. The full history of Jindal’s and Rubio’s problem has yet to be written.

        • Neville: I was just saying that even if you WANT to continue the Birther issue, it would not apply to either of these gentlemen, anyway.

          • I guess I don’t see why you’re making that point. I’m not addressing the “birther” issue at all. I view it as a red herring. If, tomorrow, Obama trotted out a real original long-form BC that Joe Arpaio, Donald Trump, and Orly Taitz all agreed was the real thing showing he was born in the USofA, it would not make him eligible, but it WOULD cause a lot of knee-jerk bandwagon-jumpers to sit back and shut up and drop the eligibility issue.

            • Neville: Nonsense. When partisans come up with an “issue” facts don’t matter. If Obama showed a film of his birth, with the then-governor of Hawaii assisting, birthers would just say it was a doctored photo. You can’t win fights like this, yet, you if you don’t fight it, you also look guilty.

              It’s like the old story of the candidate asking his opponent, “when did you stop beating your wife?” If you say you didn’t stop, you look guilty. If you act shocked, they say you look guilty. If you try to dismiss it, they say you’re hiding something. People believe what they want to believe, despite the truth.

              Someone from the New York Daily News made up a rumor that a group called “Friends of Hamas” were involved in the Libya attack, and Fox and allied media outdid each other in screaming about it–never bothering to fact-check, because they wanted to believe it. It didn’t matter that it wasn’t true.

              The reporter said he purposely picked such a stupid, impossible name for the fictitious group so that people would know it was a joke. But reason didn’t enter the picture. And now there are people who will not be convinced that there is no such conspiracy.

            • Goethe,

              I’m not sure if you understand my point. If Obama showed a film of his birth, with the then-governor of Hawaii assisting, I wouldn’t care because it has absolutely nothing to do with the more obvious and clear-cut issue, which is that he still would not be eligible.

  3. Hillary is a worn out old tired lady. Obama had one call regarding Benghazi. I really am tired of the Democrates. They just talk and never do anything. America needs new blood, new ideas. Democrates have neither.

    • It is really amazing, isn’t it, how much Hillary has appeared to age after 4 years as SoS? She really does look tired now.

      • Neville: I think part of that was her concussion and illness. But I’ve noticed for many years that vibrant men have become president and hobbled out of the office.

        Hillary is going to take time off to rest and strategize. You’re going to see a bright and energetic Hillary before 2014.

  4. Either way, the 2 “Establishment” political parties will always put up another Neocon Tyrant to be elected POTUS – so why the hell should we even bother to care?

    And if we do wind up caring, all we have left, as a way to make a statement, is to vote for anyone who ISN’T a Republican or Democrat. They are both the same…

  5. “Making a statement” does nothing to assist in changing the ideology and direction of the Country.

    Right now, this day, is the time to bring together a Party, call it the Constitution Party or whatever and start the campaign with a leader like Andrew Napolitano, Gary Johnson, or whoever. Start winning the MainMedia NOW. By election time the new party will have already captured the hearts and minds of the general population and media. A long winded survey to at least 100 million asking what they want the ideology to be.

    The new party once commanding a lead can pick on both the other Parties as well as advocate to what the general population wants and establish an ideology based on that. No statement pro or con about religion, abortion, homosexuality. Only Rights of citizens, adherence to the Constitution, international interaction for business only, no international ideology interference. Simple international defense policy, “Don’t Tread On Me”. Prompt increase in LEGAL migration to assimilation.

    Far better than the present road we are headed down.

    • For once, I agree with Sam, and have been saying that for months. The Republican Party arose when the Whigs proved to be irrelevant. Now that the Republicans are suddenly trying their damndest to sound like Democrats, the time is right to start a new party.

  6. Dr. Ben Carson for President. Look him up or check out his speech 2/7 at the National Prayer Breakfast. Mark my words, he’ll run.

  7. A third new party is the real answer – but there is no Soros or Buffett to ramrod it and buy the media.

    The Dems have another two years to find another BHO – and all the bright Blacks and Latinos are Pubs. Maybe they could try Powell, but don’t think Dems trust him

    No matter who the Pubs put up they will find dirt somewhere to preach to the masses.

    ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN will elect who next, even there will even be a new POTUS in ’16.

    I like Amy’s pick of Dr. Carson – But if you google National Prayer Breakfast on ABC /CBS / NBC/ sites — no mention of Carson. Have to go to FOX and alternate media’s.

    Goethe – They would go for a black Dem, but not a black Pub

Comments are closed.