Just curious about what your thoughts are on the number of Republican candidates.

[marym625]

I have my own idea. I suspect that they really don't want a Republican to win.

I would think if the RNC was serious about a Republican winning, they would be vocal about so many candidates throwing their hat in the ring.

I think that the candidates themselves are not really running for President. Instead they are just trying to get the amount they can charge for appearances to increase and increase the likelihood a book would sell.

What are your thoughts? Besides how absolutely asinine it all is.

[Electric Monk]

1. Some are simply auditioning to get their own shows on FAUX. nt

[marym625]

2. That is probably exactly right

They are making a mockery of the entire thing and the office, IMHO

[arcane1]

3. They get the chance to raise some money and establish a "brand" to cash in on.

I can't think of any of the repub candidates who actually want to be president.

[marym625]

5. see, that's what I think

Well possibly Jebbro. But he isn't in yet.

I think there's something more sinister at play about who they really want in office

[Populist_Prole]

4. Desperately throwing any and all shit against the wall to see what sticks?

Despite our own democratic party schism between corporatist vs populists, the GOP has to pull in a more disparate group: Gun nuts, christian fundamentalists, bigots, chicken hawks/xenophobes, plutocrats, reactionaries. Yeah, there's some overlap among them but when you think about it, the safest move for them is to go full-on batshit crazy right, as it guarantees the most overlap.

[marym625]

6. interesting take on it

Could be. Maybe a combination of see what sticks and make sure it all falls off. Then they get what they really want while gaging the Republican public

[F4lconF16]

7. The GOP has moved too far right.

It's becoming unpredictable and self-destructive as people begin to actually believe in and fight for the ideology introduced in the waves of conservatism in the 80s. Big money is still in the hands of the uber-capitalists, but it's beginning to sponsor the Democrats, as the capitalists seek stability. In the meantime, the right is useful in that they whip up half a country into a solid rightward pulling voting block that helps to implement the capitalists' demands. Wealth doesn't care what they do or say, because they have reliable candidates elsewhere. So the conservatives pull harder rightwards for the personal and ideological gains they can use to control their people, and the capitalists get an easy way to pass blatantly facist laws. It's an ingenius system, when you get down to it. It also results in a wide variety of complete and total dumbasses making fools of themselves to the general horror of the nation at large.

[marym625]

10. Well said

But I think it's even more sinister and well planned than that. The right has pulled the both parties to the right. And they've done it so well that many on the "left" don't even see they're really on the right

[darkangel218]

8. A bunch of clowns.

Pandering to the blind masses.

[marym625]

11. I think they lost their masses

More like a mass.

[darkangel218]

13. Don't underestimate their blindness

Already had a worker refer to Sen Sanders as "socialist". They don't even know the difference, or what a socialist democrat means!! They're so fucking backwords, its sickening!

[marym625]

15. It's really sad

And it saddens me we allowed the dumbing down of America while we lost all real information. They planned and executed all of this very well. And we let so much slip away

[darkangel218]

17. No kidding.

Thank faux news and Limbaugh.
They're mindless drones, repeating the sickos mantra.

There is no hope. Except to unite coming November and beat them! That too, provided we have a real progressive as a candidate, not a fake one.

[marym625]

18. If we only have a fake one

It's over.

[darkangel218]

21. That's a guarantee.

Let's hope that doesn't happen. If I t does, we are screwed.

[marym625]

27. It won't take long either, I don't think.

I think that we will succeed in causing change the numbers are better every day

[darkangel218]

31. I think so too.

People can only be fooled and numbed for so long.

The truth will always surface , sooner or later.

Sooner now, that Bernie, no nonsense, Sanders is running!!

[sorefeet]

59. Sooner or later

I am 63 years old and I have heard all my life, we will get them next time. How many life times do people have to suffer. It has been a fight for my entire life just to survive humanely. I have buried many people who didn't have a chance their entire lives. When can I relax and say, "it finally happened." I vote every time and I vote Democrat every time. I can't imagine another Republican president, ESPECIALLY any one of the idiots that are running now. It scares me to think about it.

[darkangel218]

79. I hear you.

But we can't lose hope. Losing hope is giving up any chance we may have to change things.

[libodem]

9. Feels like a Dog and Pony Show

I think Hillary may be inevitable and the Rebublicans want her more thsn we do. .It all comes down to the banks and big oil as far as I'm concerned.

I predict Hillary will bring about the Keystone oil pipeline, after she wins, even though she is a Democrat, and that is why she will win. Betcha.

[marym625]

12. BINGO!

I have hinted at it but haven't outright said it here. Wondered if anyone else sees it.

Their thought is they will have 2 people in the general and either one is acceptable. But they are hoping that just the one will win

[Exilednight]

51. They want Hillary because they can beat her. They picked our candidate for us.

[libodem]

70. I don't know if they can

I feel both ways. She is more of a man than Lindsay Graham and less crooked than Christy but more to the right than JEB. They only wish she were driving that clowncar.

[marym625]

110. She is "more of a man"?

Excuse me?

[Jackpine Radical]

105. They don't need to beat her.

They already bought her.

WASHINGTON -- Two Canadian banks tightly connected to promoting the controversial Keystone XL pipeline in the United States either fully or partially paid for eight speeches made by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the period not long before she announced her campaign for president. Those speeches put more than $1.6 million in the Democratic candidate's pocket.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce and TD Bank were both primary sponsors of paid Clinton speeches in 2014 and early 2015, although only the former appears on the financial disclosure form she filed May 15. According to that document, CIBC paid Clinton $150,000 for a speech she gave in Whistler, British Columbia, on Jan. 22, 2015.

Clinton reported that another five speeches she gave across Canada were paid for by tinePublic Inc., a promotional company known for hosting speeches by world leaders and celebrities. Another speech was reported as paid for by the think tank Canada 2020, while yet another speech was reportedly funded by the Vancouver Board of Trade. But a review of invitations, press releases and media reports for those seven other speeches reveals that they, too, were either sponsored by or directly involved the two banks.


Both banks have financial ties to TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL pipeline, and have advocated for a massive increase in pipeline capacity, including construction of Keystone. Further, Gordon Giffin, a CIBC board member and onetime U.S. ambassador to Canada, is a former lobbyist for TransCanada and was a contributions bundler for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/31/hillary-clinton-speeches-keystone_n_7463108.html

[marym625]

109. +1000

[Agnosticsherbet]

14. They looked at history and realize that only twice have Democrats

won an election for a third term in the White House.

Seeing history on their side, everybody wants a chance at the gold ring.

[marym625]

16. You really think that's it?

I mean do you really think that most of them actually think they have a chance?

[Agnosticsherbet]

30. Yes, a lot of it is hubris at work.

hu·bris

ˈ h)yo͞obrəs/

noun

excessive pride or self-confidence.

synonyms:arrogance, conceit, haughtiness,hauteur, pride, self-importance,egotism, pomposity, superciliousness,superiority; More

(in Greek tragedy) excessive pride toward or defiance of the gods, leading to nemesis.

There is no down side to running for President, even if they have no chance. They can collect money. Many of them have found a personal millionaire to bankroll them.

With history on their side and so much money sloshing around, everyone wants a piece of the pie.

[marym625]

39. Yeah, that's quite probable

But I think that the RNC has something else in mind

[Agnosticsherbet]

80. I think the RNC wants to find a candidate that appeals to independents

Most of their candidates are too far right.

In 2012, 2008, 2000, and 2006 they nominated candidates that appeared to appeal to independents, which they see as centrists.

And no matter how we viewed Romney, McCain, "W", or Dole, they were seen by Republicans as appealing to independents and centrists.

[marym625]

89. One might wonder then

Why the dems are so stuck on wanting to appeal to the same group.

[Agnosticsherbet]

93. As of 2012, 42% of voters identified as independent.

Record-High 42% of Americans Identify as Independents

Independents work as swing voters in elections.

Democrats will not win elections without picking up some independent voters.

That is why Democrats and Republicans go after them.


Added: This Huffington post article covers how Independent voters voted Republican in 2010. We lost the House in 2010.

Exit polls in 2006 indicate that Independents voted for Democrats, and we won the house.

Obama won independent voters in 2008.

[marym625]

104. I didn't realize that

That large a percentage of voters identify as centrists, which is what I believe you are saying. Independent and centrists are not synonymous. At least they weren't before. And that's what I was talking about. Those that consider themselves centrists

[Agnosticsherbet]

126. Independents are unaffiliated voters. Some of them are too far right or too far left

to feel comfortable within the two party system. Most of them are at the contested center and tend to switch back and forth.

Democrats won independent voters in 2006 and 2008. We lost them in 2010. In 2012, independents in traditional swing states swung Republican, and elsewhere tended to vote with Democrats.

Independents who voted in 2014 went Republican.

The political ideology of a centrists tends lay close to the political center between the parties. Centrists are independents only if they are unaffiliated with a party.

Note: Members of the Libertarian, Green Party, Socialist Party USA, Constitution Party, and a dozen others are not Independents. None of the parties I mentioned are centrists.

[marym625]

128. Yes

My response was based on yours.

My main point and question was why the Democrats would seek the vote of a centrist, which was in your reply.

Considering where both major parties now lie in the right v left, the centrists are not really center any longer. They are as far as current party platforms, but not in the reality of the the middle.

[jwirr]

69. Excellent definition of a R.

[TexasBushwhacker]

87. The "Wht not me?" candidate

I think they believe their lies about Obama and think that most Americans feel the same way. I think that they assume that most of America is sick of the liberal commies and that the GOP candidate will absolutely win the general election. Humility isn't their strong suit, and the bigger the clown car gets, the more you have people like Lindsay Graham or Donald Trump think "Why not me?"

[Warren DeMontague]

19. Remember what happened in 2012?

They need a big bunch of candidates so that the party can test each one out as "front runner" for 2 weeks before chucking them off to the side.

[marym625]

22. Good point

[hatrack]

60. And pretty much the same dynamic is playing itself out this time. . .

The main difference from four years ago is that it's taking place six months earlier (God help us!).

[peecoolyour]

20. I wish we had just as many with no clear front-runner this early. nt

[marym625]

24. I wouldn't want that many.

I also think that the clear front runner won't be so clear very soon.

I would like to see more candidates, but that number is just too many.

[peecoolyour]

26. I'm thinking the amount of people who have already announced.

I didn't count exploratory committees.

2008 ran a good number of Democratic candidates.

[marym625]

32. I'm too tired right now to look it up

I am about to shut down for the night. But I believe the number of actually declared in the GOP is 20. I will look in the morning. But 20 is too many IMHO

[peecoolyour]

33. Oh, I thought it was like 9 or 10.

Yeah, 20 is too much.

[marym625]

37. No it's definitely about 20

Just checked. There are 18 declared. http://2016.republican-candidates.org/#Declared-Republican-Candidates

Sorry for a Republican link. In this case I think it's appropriate

[csziggy]

85. It's down by a few - early May it was 22 GOP presidential candidates

According to Rachel Maddow:

The Rachel Maddow Show
5/5/15
GOP overwhelmed with 2016 candidates for president
Rachel Maddow reviews the list of arguably-credible Republican contenders for the 2016 presidential nomination (at least 22 of them) and reports on the genuinely daunting challenge for the party to organize a fair system for them to debate each other.
Video at link: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/gop-overwhelmed-with-2016-candidates-440405571784

[marym625]

92. Thank you

I did put up a link to some office Republican site the other night. It was quite actually declared. Since then at least Jebro has declared. Probably more.

Ridiculous

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Even as wannabee clowns they're a flop.

[marym625]

25. LOL!

Good one!

[struggle4progress]

28. It's great IMO! Nobody can possibly keep them straight!

"Who's ahead this week, Screaming Bonkers or Batshizz Crazy?"
Neither: Screaming Bonkers was ahead last week and Batshizz Crazy was the week before.
"So who's ahead this week?"
Right now, Whackadoodle and Looney Tunes seem to be tied
"Which one will be the nominee?"
Dunno. Maybe Fruitcake?

[marym625]

34. Maybe they should just play musical chairs

At least until they're down to 10.

[struggle4progress]

43. The more, the merrier, I say: it provides unlimited opportunity

to use the phrase "insane Republican presidential candidate" often enough for everyone to remember it reflexively

[marym625]

45. "insane Republican presidential candidate"

LOVE IT! I believe I will say that every time I mention one of the insane Republican presidential candidates from now on.

[JI7]

29. if Hillary dropped out you would see something similar on the Dem side

[marym625]

35. I think it is because of Hillary that we are seeing it on the GOP side

I do believe we might see more candidates if she dropped out. But not like the GOP side. No way

[CBGLuthier]

36. Remember in 2008 how Bush was so horrible that America went and elected its first black president?

In their minds Obama is so horrible they think America will elect its second (GWB was the first) criminally stupid and unqualified president.

So fuck it, they figure even the real morons like Perry and Santorum have a shot.

[marym625]

38. It's really disgusting

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

40. The RNC knows an idiot like Perry, kooks like Carson and Cruz, bible thumpers like Santorum and Huck

Will make Bush and Walker look reasonable.

[marym625]

41. oy vey!

What a horrible thought

[lovemydog]

42. Oh, this is fun. Here's my take.

I think most of them do think they can become President. They each have their constituencies and people who vote for them. I think they kind of live in a cocoon of their constituents and conservative and right wing media, so it's not inconceivable to them that they may win the Presidency. And either way it gets them in touch with national visibility which can lead to more money for the same tired speeches.

Now here's the fun part. My take on each candidate.

Santorium: Hates gay people - fuck that guy.
Paul: Really weird in a racist or scientologist kind of way.
Huckabee: Christian nation television huckster. Supposedly the meanest of the bunch, which is really saying a lot.
Perry: Handsome and vacant like a guy in an eyeglasses commercial.
Rubio: Hates Fidel Castro. Hates immigrants except his parents. Drinks bottled water like there's no tomorrow.
Bush: Brother of the worst President in modern history. Likes brother's policies. Terrible on education while governor of Florida. Also probably helped throw the election toward his bro.
Christie: Mean, arrogant, sleazy. Maybe plays well in Jersey and with the owner of the Dallas Cowboys. Not nationwide. The Grinch.
That super tall weird white guy with the five o'clock shadow: Very smart and creepy like Ann Coulter or similar. Seems like a total dick.
Cain: Clarence Thomas ideology. At least he was successful in business.
Fiorina: Laid off people & outsourced jobs, I don't like that.
Jindal: Only saw him when he replied to a State of the Union address and his eyes bugged out like Beetlejuice.

Note. None of these people will do a damn thing for anyone other than billionaires and big corporations. They'd run our foreign policy into the ground. They don't give a fuck about voting rights, the climate, social or economic justice, the middle class or poor people or even rich people who aren't racist homophobic sexist jerks. They all still believe in trickle down tax policy, the biggest lie perpetrated on the American public since I don't know what. Every one of them would bring our country back to the brink of disaster via massive increases in military spending, cutting education and social spending and dismantling of diplomacy abroad and gains in health care at home. They'd appoint and get approval for Supreme Court justices who love Citizens United, robber barons, and a social, political and economic landscape akin to a Charles Dickens novel.

[marym625]

44. I think you are too kind

Much too kind. But still great descriptions of each.

Unfortunately, I think there are candidates on our side that would bring the world economy to the brink again. I don't think we're very far from the edge of the cliff as it is

[lovemydog]

78. Yeah, it's tough finding descriptors for such out of touch

miserable people. There was an article a few weeks ago saying that most presidential elections tend to boil down to some important issue. I hope inequality of wealth and the shrinking middle class becomes that issue in the next one. I hope a lot of people can see and recognize this, even if the corporate media doesn't emphasize it. I think democrats address this much better than republicans. Most of whom tend to focus more on junk like culture wars, moral decay, fear of terrorism and other smokescreen issues. And I agree, there are some on our side that aren't a whole lot better on the important economic issues. I hope people demand that they focus on them. That's why I'm rooting for Bernie and all things considered plan on voting for him in the primary. He doesn't need to swing around to it. He's been sharply focused on these issues his entire adult life.

[marym625]

88. +1

[Vinca]

46. It's a whole lot of people trying to pad their resumes for speaking fees.

Unless they are totally "committable" - to a hospital - they must know there is no chance in hell they'll win a dogcatcher election. I say we enjoy the ride and the great gift to the comedians of America.

[marym625]

48. It sure is fodder for the comedians!

Can't get better stuff.

Just good to know that none of the, so far, declared candidates, have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected

[HereSince1628]

47. Walker's not yet-but inevitable entry set the bar very low & many can step over it

Every R with a billionaire friend thinks he's as good or better than Walker, and every such R is correct.

[marym625]

50. I was finishing your last sentence in my mind

Before I read it. It ended the same way

It does amaze me how he is doing in the polls. The guy doesn't even have a college education. Frankly, in many areas, I think that diploma is overrated. But not when it comes to the Office of the President of the United States. Absolutely, positively, a needed degree. Especially when it comes to people as stupid as Walker. Hardly an autodidact. And, if he were, I would worry about what subjects.

[jwirr]

75. In our party we would ignore anyone without some higher education because our elected officials

actually have to know something. We expect it.

Rs are another matter. Their presidents are usually front pieces for their handlers (big business) and are told what to do. Just look at how many of them are using ALEC. Remember bushie and his boss Cheney. So they end up with 20 failures running for president - what is new? That is exactly what the handlers want - for the country to fail. Their candidates are experts at that.

[marym625]

76. Well said! n/t

[Exilednight]

49. I'm kind of jealous. I wish we had this many people running.

[HereSince1628]

53. They may not all be in yet. It's actually not historically late

The compromise space to occupy in the primary is the ideological space between Sanders and Clinton. That space seems large enough to fit at least 2 or 3 candidates.

[KoKo]

64. Flood the Market with Candidates to Distract from Democrats?

Get more air-time, as each announces, covering up what they really stand for, meanwhile building cash reserves for their future use to either stay in power or eventually work as Lobbyists where the big bucks are? They can also join NGO's and get on Corporate Boards raking in the big bucks paid for their "so called expertise" in their time served on the Hill.

Meanwhile I doubt any of those Repub Candidates care whether Hillary, Bernie or Murphy or their own Repub Nominated Candidate wins the Presidency. They stand for nothing but greed and obstruction. And the way Congress is today the Repubs aren't alone in taking paybacks because there are those on our Dem side who aren't shy about it, either.

Do I sound like a cynic?

[HereSince1628]

82. Real democracy requires options to choose between, they thin out quite quickly

by the first Super Tuesday.

There really is plenty of room for candidates between Sanders and Clinton. There is room there for at least a few more.

On the other hand, nothing good seems to be happening at this time for the candidate to Clinton's right.

[loooneranger]

84. I feel the same way.

Sanders is the only one who doesn't feel like he was "handed" to us by our betters. I want options and debate.
And some how they have 2 hispanics, a woman, an Indian, and a black guy but we have 1 woman and 3 white men.

[kenfrequed]

106. Well...

Honestly I don't think we need many more candidates running at this point. We have some good contrasting policies and priorities out there from the candidates running. There is still room for one or two more, but unless they are going to put forth strong policies and be bold about it there really is no point in it. There is a decent chance anyone that throws their hat in the ring now is just going to be running for VP anyhow.

Personally, Sanders is more than enoug for me.

[marym625]

112. I'm not

I would like to see a few more, but not THAT many. 22 candidates is too many IMHO

[rock]

52. From the point of view of the party

This is a horrible idea. Maybe two or three of them can draw voters, but the majority of them are clowns. This sends the message that the vast majority of republican politicians lack common sense and are divas who like to preen and parade before the public.

[marym625]

55. Exactly

And it's why I suspect there is more to this than meets the eye.

[randr]

54. Each one is a greed head that has figured out that you can get rich

by running for President. It is like an eternal hall pass.

[marym625]

56. Maybe I will run.

What the heck. I can go out and get signatures. I'm willing to put a little effort into it.

What a world we're living in

[randome]

57. It shows what I've been saying for a while now: no one is in charge of the GOP.

It's a sign of their decline.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[marym625]

58. I hope so!

It's definitely declining. I just hope it doesn't come back, full force, in some other horrible incarnation

I think we can actually thank the tea party for this. Great job!

[workinclasszero]

61. Fux "news" is in control this time

They have stated that only the top ten clowns in the car get to participate in their televised debates.

Ranked by actual polls I assume, not the fantasy ones that showed Rmoney beating President Obama in a landslide LOL

So that will cut out a lot of book sellers and random nuts. Still ten of these right wing freaks is to much lol

[marym625]

65. Most definitely. 1 is too much but what ya gonna do? :)

[underpants]

62. If this continues Fox News are going to have take off their shoes to keep track

[marym625]

66. LOL!

Good one!

[Orsino]

63. Publishers Clearing House gives away a lot less free money, and millions enter.

That career grifters will flock to a grifting contest does not surprise me.

[marym625]

67. Yeah, true. just still amazing to me.

[Bluenorthwest]

68. Less is more.

That's what I think.

[marym625]

114. I agree

I don't think even 10 would be too many. Close but not too many. But this is ridiculous

[MineralMan]

71. The Republican Party has no real national leadership it can call on

when it needs candidates. The party is bankrupt in many important ways. If we fail to take advantage of that, shame on us.

[workinclasszero]

81. The leaders of the republican party are the Koch bros

that casino owner in Vegas and Wall Street hustlers.

Its the 1%er party for real.

The right wing teahaddists and other assorted freaks thing they run the show but they will be very surprised when they have to go vote for Jebby Bush next year LOL

[olddots]

72. its like a big super market full of everything but food .

Convenient snack food but nothing of substance .

[marym625]

94. LOL! Good one! n/t

[n2doc]

73. ...

[marym625]

95. Love this! Thanks! eom

[bigwillq]

74. I have no issue with it

Some may be running because of some of the reasons you listed, but anyone that is eligible and goes through the proper procedures is free to run, and I welcome any and all candidates on either side. I like democracy.

[marym625]

96. As do I

And I agree, if you go through the process then more power to you.

My issues with it are; the RNC seems to have no comment on it (maybe I just haven't seen any) and I think that is telling, I don't believe for a minute that many of the candidates believe for a minute they have a chance, are actually trying to win or are contributing anything to the process and only are doing it for self profit, and that in doing it for self profit they're making a mockery of the process and the Office

[bigwillq]

118. Every one has a chance at this point

And all candidates, on either side, will likely benefit from a presidential run, both professionally and financially.

[marym625]

119. No doubt.

And for at least a few, that is the only reason they're running

[HooptieWagon]

77. RNC really can't control who runs. Anybody can declare.

As for individual motivations, I think you're spot on. Most of the republican candidates aren't seriously running for president. They're just looking for exposure to boost book sales and speaking fees.

[marym625]

97. Which I find disgusting

I realize that the RNC gas no control. I just feel like they are encouraging it. Which means that they are part of the mockery

[HooptieWagon]

141. I don't think they're encouraging it.

I'd be willing to bet that TPTB would prefer just Jeb vs Walker in the primaries. The others have baggage or are plain batshit crazy.

[loooneranger]

83. There are always this many in a primary.

Why is the number of runners in the 2016 cycle being treated as unheard of? The Dem field had 10 in 2008, The R's had 11. Its always like that unless one party has an incumbent.

[marym625]

98. But we're talking more than double that

That's something to talk about. And it's not ever been this large a field of candidates

[JEB]

86. The GOP could run a dog turn in the shape of Jesus

(no not Ted Cruz) and approx. 33% of the electorate would vote for it. A little help from the media and a pile of "Citizens United" cash and who know, it just might win. Russian roulette anyone?

[marym625]

99. yikes! what a thought

[LWolf]

90. I haven't really stopped to think about it.

It doesn't matter which one wins...I think we can beat all of them, so I'm focused on doing so with the best candidate we can run.

[marym625]

100. That is great!

I, however, am thinking about it. I think that there is more to this than just a bunch of people running for office

[LWolf]

143. I'm sure you're right;

I'm not sure, though, what they're thinking.

[TheKentuckian]

91. Not much, it just serves to split the anti establishment riff raff up a hundred ways

to make it so the evil fuck the greedheads in charge want wins by default just like last time.

[marym625]

101. hmmm.

I don't want to comment fully until I am sure I understand exactly what you mean. Care to elaborate a bit?

[TheKentuckian]

142. That the clowns split the non establishment vote which clears the path for the JEB/Romney type

who would likely be toast if the Teabagger loons unified behind one nut rather than splitting among 11.

[marym625]

145. Which is exactly why

I think there's more to it.

Whatever it is, I don't want any of them to make it to the general. Wish that could happen

[kenfrequed]

102. All of them are idiots.

Every republican candidate currently running are fools. The ones at the bottom should be chewing at the bit to debate Bernie Sanders if only to get some media play time and name recognition.

[marym625]

107. Oh what fun would that be!

Picturing it like a spelling bee kind of thing. Or jeopardy. He just knocks them down, one at a time

[kenfrequed]

121. He would murder them in debate

But... the single digit candidates would get a bit of name recognition. Sadly the Fox News/GOP crowd wants to start paring down the field as quickly as possible.

[marym625]

123. I can't believe an organization like fox "news" is in charge of it

Very telling though

[kenfrequed]

127. I don't know if they are officially in charge of it

But honestly they might as well be. Fox news has suggested a limited number of debates for republican candidates and that they will only allow the top eight or ten up on stage. Meanwhile the RNC is claiming they will not allow any candidates to take part in unsanctioned debates prior to the completion of the primaries under the threat of locking them out of the debates.

I will reiterate what I stated before, when the Republicans thougth that Bernie was just a foil to Hillary they were fine with it. Now that they realize his numbers are swelling very quickly they are getting worried. They don't have a plan to beat someone that speaks so plainly to issues of socioeconomic class. Bernie also speaks outside their 'Taxes-evil' schtick very effectively. They are especially worried since Bernie debating the single digit republicans would actually complicate their field and drag out their nomination process.

[marym625]

129. completely agree with everything you said

[dmosh42]

103. Just another way to 'skim' money from their supporters.

[marym625]

108. disgusting bunch they are

[Sancho]

111. It's a way to make a lot of money!! Why not run for President?

With all the big dollars chasing repubs - even at the local and state level - anyone who breaths air can get a PAC, a few personal donors, and a bank account.

Obviously many know they can't win, but they don't care. TV appearances, hiring friends and relatives as staff, siphoning off dollars for various expenses, book deals, possible appointments by the winner, etc.

[marym625]

113. I need some money

And would absolutely love to go to Ireland. Maybe I'll run as the LGBT candidate and take a trip to see how their new law is working.

[Sancho]

133. If you are in Florida, you should run!

I'm just sorry my parents insisted that college was valuable.

I should have run for "dog catcher" 50 years ago! Maybe I'd have been as wealthy as Romney!

[marym625]

134. Ha!

We all have regrets

[nadinbrzezinski]

115. What you are seeing is three republican parties

Vying to take control of the heart and soul of the party. They are running to win. In the meantime the Dena are trying the it is your turn thing (which blew in their faces).

You got tea party types, the business wing and the libertarian wing vying for the future of the party and the presidency.

[marym625]

116. That makes sense

Hadn't thought of it that way

[nadinbrzezinski]

117. It's politics and almost no politician runs to lose

It is NOT in their DNA

[kenfrequed]

130. Eh...

Some candidates run to be VP as silly as that seems.

[nadinbrzezinski]

132. Which is not the same

but I do get what you are saying.

Well chafee done, I was late, had a local story that absolutely needed to be up yesterday... waiting for Perry... this gives me time to find a bio of Perry. I know he is a tad on the crazy side, but my reporting cannot let my own views out.

Chafee strikes me as an interesting one.

[Wounded Bear]

120. I don't really care how many they put up...

It'd be nice if at least one of them wasn't totally batshit crazy, though.

[marym625]

122. I suspect there are no Republicans left that aren't batshit crazy.

[Sheepshank]

124. They see historical trends that would normally shift the resident of the WH to a Republican

and they all think the odds are in their favor. 20:1 odds of residing in the Whitehouse is a pretty tempting deal for them.

What they fail to realize is that Dems have been bucking the trends in General Elections, for a few cycles now and their presumptions mean nothing.

For most, they have nothing to lose in getting name recognition now because if not 2016 then for sure 2020 will be their year. At least that how I think they think.

[marym625]

125. +1

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

131. There are a lot of contestants in the "America's Got Stupid" competition.

[marym625]

137. LOL!

Please tell me that is not a real show.

[Pisces]

135. It's an intentional strategy to water down the focus of any one candidate. Make it a circus so their

eyes can't adjust to the whats really in front of them. This is also their strategy for the debates. There will be very little
time given to each candidate because there are so many, thereby preventing the hard questions and possible implosion
of the candidate they really want. Many of these people are trying out for VP.

This is a coordinated plan, it's throw the shit against the wall and see what sticks.

[marym625]

138. I believe there is more to it than meets the eye

I am sure VP is part of it

[hamsterjill]

136. Rick Perry

I can almost guarantee you that Rick Perry thinks he will win not only the nomination, but also the election.

He's THAT stupid.

But even more so, he's THAT arrogant.

After a gazillion years with him as governor of my beloved Texas, I can tell by the look on that smug asshole's face.

Honestly, I don't think he has a chance and that gives me great comfort. But I still worry sometimes.

[marym625]

139. I understand the worry.

The thought of any of them as President is frightening beyond belief. At least one or two of them will no longer be in political office once the election is over. Small comfort

[KamaAina]

140. Too few.

Where, I ask, is the repuke equivalent of Lee Mercer, Jr. (ALL THREE!!!1!!11!!)?

[marym625]

146. ha!

https://mobile.twitter.com/leemercer2016

[spanone]

144. the more the scarier

idjits

[marym625]

147. ain't that the truth!

[Jamaal510]

148. I heard about

how the GOP was trying to arrange it to where their candidates have to clear a 10% threshold in the polls to participate in the debates. From their perspective, that might not be a bad idea in terms of controlling the flow, but it might alienate the supporters of the less popular candidates and have them think that their voices are limited. For obvious reasons, I'm hoping for a record number of candidates to announce on their side, but regardless, there's going to be some type of in-fighting.

[marym625]

149. Oh definitely

I believe that there already are a record number of candidates


But as long as we have 20 declared now, what the heck. I hope they double that

[GoneFishin]

151. They are probably just doing it for the money and whatever perks they might get.

[marym625]

152. How amazingly disgusting of them. eom.