The unseasonable warmth may be about to make an exit from Massachusetts, and the French Toast Alert is crawling out of its summer hibernation for the first time this season. It must be time for the beloved BMG prognosticators to dust off their crystal balls and make predictions for the new year.
2016 Elections:
If you are playing, name the tickets and the electoral vote total for the winner.
- Bernie gives her a good run through Iowa and New Hampshire, but Hillary dominates the rest of the way and wins the Democratic nomination. She chooses Sen. Sherrod Brown as her running mate.
- After a strong win in Iowa, enough of the GOP establishment lines up behind Ted Cruz with hope of stopping Donald Trump. Trump has 40% of the delegates going into the convention, but Cruz comes through with a strong enough second to assemble a majority on the third ballot. In an attempt to broaden the ticket’s appeal, Cruz names Nikki Haley as his running mate.
- Hillary wins the presidency with 329 electoral votes.
- Kelly Ayotte, Ron Johnson, and Mark Kirk lose their senate seats in the general election, while John McCain loses the GOP primary. Senate goes 51D-49R, which is thrown into a tie with the resignation of Vice President Brown.
- Democrats gain 20 house seats, and with only 228 seats Speaker Paul Ryan will be challenged with the prospect of dealing with Democrats or seeking permission of the hard right on every vote.
Massachusetts:
- Launching into a chorus of “Whatever It is, I’m Against It,”voters reject all the 2016 ballot questions.
- Charlie Baker‘s carefully-honed “Mr. Fix-It” image crashes and burns when it runs into the MBTA.
- A pair of MA house Democrats loyal to the Speaker suffer from unexpected primary losses, causing a minor rumbling in the leadership.
- Bill Weld and Michael Dukakis gain some steam for the North-Sough Rail Link, as the cost of the South Station Expansion looks even more costly and impractical.
- Work begins to gather support for ballot initiatives for a “Top Two” or “Jungle” primary system and an independent redistricting commission.
- A member of the MA congressional delegation emerges as the likely candidate to oppose Charlie Baker in 2018.
- The Plainridge Park Casino will close.
World:
- In a case of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” there is a noticeable thaw in US-Iranian relations as an international coalition builds to defeat ISIS.
- There will be increased disagreement with the Canadians over trade and border crossing restrictions with the US.
- The inevitable move toward normalization of US-Cuba relations will accelerate, as special interests (particularly the agriculture sector) press for removal of economic sanctions.
- The NFL announces international expansion.
- Prime Minister Abe provokes a constitutional crisis over his plans to expand the role of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces.
Sports and Entertainment:
- The Patriots start the new year by beating the Dolphins, and ride home field advantage into Super Bowl 50, where they beat the Arizona Cardinals.
- The Red Sox make it back to the playoffs as AL East Champions, but lose to the Cubs in the World Series.
- My annual prediction. I have been listening to Tony Bennett and Lady Gaga sing together, and I will keep repeating the inevitable until it comes true. Thus, I predict once again that Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta fulfills her childhood dream by playing the lead role of a revival on Broadway.
- Keith Olbermann returns to cable, and instantly spices up the commentary on the GOP primary.
Wild Guesses:
- Major scandal rocks charter school industry.
- Cats maintain their dominance of the Internet, and seven cats win write-in elections in November.
- Citing low 17th Century crime rates, major GOP candidate advocates for the reinstatement of pillories and public corporal punishment.
- After open road tolling fails to solve traffic problems in Charlton, the state announces plan to widen the MassPike between Exits 9 and 10.
Please share widely!
You got it almost all right, except you left out the best part. There arises a movement to change the town charter and draft Pablo S for mayor of Menotomy.
Framingham may be flirting with a new charter and a city form of government, but I doubt Ahlington will abandon Town Meeting anytime soon.
Now with electronic voting!
n/t
I agree with a lot of them! However:
– Hillary will choose former San Antonio Mayor and current HUD Secretary Julian Castro as her running mate, thereby avoiding the problem of opening up Sherrod Brown’s Senate seat.
– The Cruz theory is an interesting one, but I think the GOP establishment’s hatred for Cruz burns so hot that he will be unable to consolidate enough support to gain the nomination (though I do think he’s likely to win Iowa). I’m sticking to my prediction of a Trump nomination – though I do think there’s a possibility of serious shenanigans at the convention that could result in a nominee who is not presently running. Paul Ryan, maybe, or someone even less likely.
– I think the return of Olbermann is unlikely. His moment is over.
Castro is a great choice, a smart, charismatic, progressive latino.
He’s definitely charismatic and hits the right demographic notes, but is he really a great choice beyond that?
He was mayor in a weak mayor city where nothing major occurred during his time in power, and he has been at HUD for a short time.
Maybe that what makes him a great pick, though. Plenty of charm and not enough record to pick apart.
Is he a solid progressive? I’m not sure there is enough evidence yet.
I don’t judge candidates for office based upon past offices held. I look at a career. I like his. He certainly seems as qualified as all of the GOP leaders.
Once upon a time I held a minor government position. If you judged me based on that minor post, you would lose everything after. It is not the office, it is the person.
I don’t need a long career, I just want some solid evidence that a candidate has the right values – having had those values tested in the past. It’s tough to find that evidence on Castro. I agree that the person is more important than the post, but the record at the post often gives the best insights into the person.
Googling him in various ways leads mostly to speculation about the VP run. In terms of stances on the issues, he seems to be a strong supporter of equal marriage and comprehensive immigration reform (although not at all a national leader on that issue).
I’d like to see more than just a career that looks good on paper and the ability to give a decent speech or Sunday show performance. Is there really a there there?
Thinking about this from an identity politics perspective, not from a who’s-best-to-govern perspective…
I think if Clinton’s running mate is something other than a white man, I worry that oodles of moderate white men are going to go GOP. Sure, plenty already do, but this will push a whole lot more over that way. The rhetoric of folks like Trump will just seep in the skull. This exodus could include a number of trades — cops and firemen, but also building trades and some other blue collar private sector unions.
It will just be too easy for white men to conclude that there’s no place for white men in the Democratic Party. I don’t think that is an accurate conclusion, but I worry that it’s a likely conclusion.
David:
I might have agreed with you on the Olbermann comment (His moment is over) but that was before Trump. If Trump goes nuts over the Union-Leader, imagine the fun of the running discourse between Trump and Olbermann. (It would be huge! Huge!)
I hate to play old school ethnic politics, but unless the GOP nominates Rubio, the toxic party rhetoric will have Hispanic/Latino voters running to the polls to vote for Hillary. I agree with stormv that a progressive white male who can bring in blue collar white male voters would make the most sense. Unfortunately, the poster child for a strong labor progressive with working-class appeal is already Vice President, and I don’t think he would sign on for another four years in a Clinton administration. (It would be brilliant strategy if he would run.) Sherrod Brown is progressive enough to motivate the Berine Sanders – Elizabeth Warren wing of the party, and locking up Ohio is the traditional key to keeping the GOP out of the White House.
If not Sherrod Brown, the next name down my list of Hillary VPs is Governor Mark Dayton of Minnesota. Granted, Minnesota is not a swing state, but the Minnesota under Dayton – Wisconsin under Scott Walker comparison is really a poster child for a pragmatic argument to support progressive policies.
That said, Hillary is smart and pragmatic, and I am sure she will choose someone who can energize key support from folks who aren’t motivated by her candidacy or the threat of a Republican in the White House.
Trump + Cruz together scares the shit out of me.
Ah, but what will be the next one to close?
(1) Sherrod Brown is a good senator, but Hillary would be stupid to choose him as a VP. He represents a swing state with a Republican governor. If she picks him and they win, Kasich appoints a successor or it goes to a special election, in which low turnout would mean an easy Republican pick-up.
(2) I don’t see the math in your Senate predictions. If there are only 3 Democratic pick-ups, it’s 51R-49D.
And a non-quibble: If anyone from the delegation challenges Charlie, I’d guess it would be Katherine Clark. I can’t see any of the others doing so.
The three states I specifically called out (NH, WI, IL) aren’t the only states that will flip R to D. I hate to call specific states beyond where incumbents are obviously in trouble, but I think the final outcome will be 51-49.
In part, this boils down to who wins the primary. I make the argument that the tea party and Trump enthusiasts will be out in force, which could result in the defeat of John McCain in Arizona. That could make a Democrat the favorite in Arizona. Pennsylvania and Florida also have potential for flipping to the Democrats, and while not likely Ohio could come into play. Democrats could lose Nevada, depending on how things play out as well.
The GOP ultimately knows better than that. As much as I would love to see a real convention in my lifetime I’ve learned not to get my hopes up.
I bet his campaign is praying he doesn’t peak in the next couple weeks. If he opens up a gap in Iowa, he will face the full weight of public scrutiny, which will be a field day. Carson lasted about 15 seconds once he passed Trump in a couple polls. Cruz would last longer, but I think he’d fall hard after hitting the top. That’s exactly the situation that could open the door for Rubio, who I think would easily get the institutional support that hates both Trump and Cruz.
I’m scared of a Rubio-Clinton matchup.
He’s touted as among the most likely to get nominated AND the one HRC should most fear. He doesn’t seem that formidable to me in either the primary or general.
in the general on immigration and youth. If he put Kasich on the ticket they could win Florida and Ohio.
Fred Rich LaRiccia
I agree. I think he’d be strong in a general. In various polls, he performs better (generally within margin of error) against either Dem in a general election matchup. He also has decent favorability ratings – generally net 0, compared to some sharply net negative ratings for most of the Republican candidates.
Even though his positions are deeply conservative and terrible, painting him with an extremist brush, like one can easily do for Trump, Cruz, and a handful of other Repubs, will be a lot tougher.
But Rubio, so far at least, has not delivered on it.
Wait and Kirk in the background, keep your name in the news and have your presence felt in the early primary states and wait for the lead fronteunners to falter as people come back to Earth from the summer of Trump. His argument would be that Trump is the Dean of this race and Cruz the Gephardt.
Iowa is hard to poll. I don’t see Trump having a ground game there to the extent Cruz does, and Rubio just need to be the second choice of enough other establishment voters (Bush, Kasich, Christie) and enough Carson and Trump voters to be viable. If he comes out in the top three in Iowa and the top two in NH he is in great shape for the rest of the primary.
…and Marco Rubio is no John Kerry.
Kerry started out as the presumptive frontrunner before yielding for a while to Dean. He had more gravitas and preparedness than Rubio does, and going with Rubio would deviate from the habit of going with the next in line. Not to mention he’s not trusted by the base on immigration. He just doesn’t impress me either politically or on the merits. I still think Bush is going to surprise a lot of people.
(NB: The title of this comment should not be taken literally, just setting up the quote.)
… I don’t know that being out-polled by Al Sharpton (which is where Kerry was around this time, when it was December 2003, in the cycle) was ever a part of the Kerry 04 strategy.
Assuming ‘kirk’ is shorthand for ‘lurk’, I’m at a loss to wonder which election you were watching in Dec 2003. Trump is closer to bizarro-opposite Al Sharpton (who went pretty far in 2004) than to Dean… and I say opposite because Trump (and his supporters) feels deeply the aggrieved victimization as only former victimizers can feel. Sharptons on the other side of that divide…
Kerry foundered for a long time. And it was only with a marathon barnstorming of the state of Iowa, leading right up to the caucuses, that he started to hit his stride. It was, by no means, a done deal for the longest time, however.
Dean and Gephardt were the opposing poles of Democratic feeling for the war in Iraq, Gephardt having sponsored the AUMF in the house. And Kerry, muddled and contradictory as he was on the war, represented the middle… because Americans and America is muddled and contradictory when it comes to issues of war and peace. Kerry’s mistake, if mistake it was rather than a misreading of the perspicacity and acumen of the electorate, was to project gravitas and sober minded effort as worthy of ascendance. There was, also, palpable feelings of ‘anybody but Bush’ that actually never made their way to the ballot…
Rubio, if anything, is trying to play the Obama strategy: telegenic, youthful, and quietly, yet pointedly, failing to adequately deny the messianic undercurrents swirling around. It’s rather dismally anharmonic with Cruz attempting the exact same strategy.
I am just referring to the Iowa dynamics. I agree Rubio and Cruz are almost openly following the Obama playbook. Rubio can bring a crowd to its knees, but I don’t know if he has fired up grassroots supporter like Obama did. Cruz has those in spades. But it’s why I think they have the best shot to make it to the finish line.
… Between Barack Obama and John Edwards. Edwards was every bit the speaker that Obama is, without, however, the essential moral core that Obama seems to possess (however unpracticed in its use as he sometimes seems…) . And if you were to ask me who Rubio reminds me of most I would say John Edwards.
Cruz, on the wholly other hand, puts me in mind of Grover Norquist wearing a Ronald Reagan mask inside out… constantly self-referencing that which he wishes to have. Only Cruz is crippled by having much less intelligence than either Norquist or Reagan. Still, he’s not as dumb as George W, so he has a shot if we use that as a bar…
I don’t think that Rubio would pick Kasich (although he’d be smart to) because Kasich doesn’t motivate the base. But, you’re right on about the rest of it. Rubio is—by far—the Rs best chance. If you close your eyes, and listen to Rubio he is the only one of these clowns who has a remotely forward looking, positive message, and he sells it in a compelling way. He’s been good on his feet in the debates and he can pass muster with real conservatives, unlike Christie, Bush, Kasich.
I have no clue how Rubio will win anywhere in the primaries, or if he can win the nomination by finishing second in a ton of states, but I think he can (I didn’t say will) win the presidency, and that cannot be said for Trump, Cruz, Carson (RIP), Paul, Fiorina, etc. BTW, it’s still very early and the race on the Republican side is still fluid and I wouldn’t be surprised if someone came out of nowhere and won NH. More and more, it looks like Cruz may win Iowa.
my Republican nightmare ticket would be Rubio / Kasich.
I can only hope that the Dems will be smart enough to nominate Clinton and the Con-Pukes will be stupid enough to nominate the Fascist.
Fred Rich LaRiccia
this seems unlikely. They would be tough to beat, if they had cash.
There’s an easy prediction.
Competent Governor from a big swing state that almost always picks the winner – actually makes a lot of sense to me.
The days of appealing to swift voters are over. It’s all about dat base. He doesn’t have a base in the party, and it’s doubtful his presence would carry the state as his ratings have gone south along with his presidential hopes. He is just too awkward and abrasive as a candidate. It’ll be Cruz/Rubio or Rubio/Cruz. An establishment nominee throwing red meat to the base or a base candidate making peace with the establishment to unify the party. Trump will have a prime time speaking slot that will make Clint Eastwood look like the dream will never die speech.
Last I checked Kasich was doing pretty well in Ohio. Cruz and Rubio strike me as oil and water and I can’t imagine the GOP trying an all-Hispanic ticket. If the RNC/nominee are smart they won’t let Trump anywhere near the convention podium.
That certainly makes sense. Kasich is really popular in Ohio, even among independents– I have similarly minded family there.
But I don’t think that’s why GOP picks VP nominees, at least not lately. I mean, what state did Cheney help turn red? Wyoming? What about Palin? Wyoming and Alaska would be red states if the GOP nominated the crud on the bottom of your shoe (and they might). Paul Ryan’s Wisconsin was stronger for Obama than it was for Kerry or Gore.
I don’t think that is the GOP strategy. OI think their strategy is: Most Democratic voters just can’t be bothered to vote unless someone reminds them 376 times, knocks on their door, and drives them to the polling station. So, all they really need to do is get their own base out in force. Think Bush, gay marriage, 2004. Our people show up, yours do not, and so all we need is someone who energized that base and that’s it. Forget crossover appeal.
Kasich doesn’t energize their base, and so I dont think he will be the nominee.
Beats the hell out of me who they choose, though. The only one energizing anything is Trump. Yikes.
I’ve seen (in the WSJ, most recently) opinion supporting your thesis about the GOP turning out its own base.
Interestingly, the WSJ argues that this is why nominating Donald Trump would be a disaster for the GOP. The WSJ observes that Mr. Trump actually appeals to at most about 35% of GOP voters — about one in three. The other 65% — about two in three — are likely to just stay home. Few will vote for a Democrat, and will instead simply not vote.
We Democrats, on the other hand, will be working hard to turn out our base AND appeal to independent voters.
The result is a scenario where down-ticket GOP candidates — especially less extreme right-wingers — lose seats that have been assumed to be solidly red.
This strikes me as a scenario where nominating Donald Trump could not only elect Hillary Clinton, but could also bring the Senate and perhaps the House back into Democratic Party control.
The idea that the guy who is one heart attack away from being president of the united state of america is chosen to appeal to identity voters is scary. Kasich, EVEN if you don’t like Republicans, is a governor, experienced, and competent. You can do a lot worse if something happens to the POTUS.
Just pointing out how none of the “good on paper” candidates are doing well on the other side of the aisle this year. The governing experience of the top three fronteunners combined is less than a 1/3 of Kasich’s entire career.
it would be smart for Rubio to pick Kasich as his running mate. A good balance between youth and experience, no ?
Fred Rich LaRiccia
Six of the past eight Republican nominees have been establishment/base pairings. Rubio/Cruz is in the same vein. If Cruz wins you’ll see him go with Rubio. It’ll be this year’s Reagan/Bush. You haven’t seen establishment/establishment since Nixon/Lodge which was for a very different kind of Republican Party.
…is how I would characterize GOP tickets in 1976, 2000, and 2012 (plus tickets seeking re-election are by definition establishment). Rubio/Cruz in either order is among the LEAST likely parings IMO.
Rockefeller was the establishment incumbent VP dumped by Ford for the more conservative Dole to keep the Reaganites in the fold. Cheney was chosen for the base and closing the experience deficit Bush had over expected moderate shortlisters like Danforth, Keating, Pataki or Powell. And Ryan was a tea party favorite (in 2012, they hate him today) who could shore up Romney with conservatives while delivering a swing state like WI. He was also wonkish and an anti-Palin.
Dole and Cheney are the epitome of establishment in my book. Ryan was chair of a key House committee – hard to get more establishment than that.
Work on route 20 is going on at a frenetic pace. Deadman’s curve will be fixed in a couple of weeks. An outstanding response from the state, only it’s sad the last accident (head-on crash where a cement truck killed a women and her baby) had to be on the front page for it to get fixed.
Plainridge won’t close next year, it will be able to milk the state for a couple of bailouts and close in three years.
Good list, pablo. Respect for sticking to your guns on Lady G. You are, however, still wrong. 🙂 I think she reverses course and goes back to making borderline-brilliant pop records (up until Born This Way, anyway).
As for the GOP nomination, I would not count out Jeb, formerly known as Jeb Factorial. They don’t like him (they’re right), they don’t want him (right again), but the pattern of GOP voters is to reach for the more familiar. They really wanted McCain in 2000, but they went instead for President Bush’s kid. In 2008, Romney was a dream candidate by their standards — self-made (more or less) gazillionaire, red governor of a blue state, etc. But then McCain was the familiar one. In 2012, desperate and fearful of the Tea Party (and pretty much knowing they would lose to Obama), they cast around like cats, throwing support to Newt Gingrich (a few days) and Rick Santorum (a week maybe?) before settling on the by-then familiar Romney.
So, in this crazy year, if they end up seeking safe harbors, primary voters might just turn to Jeb. I agree with the comments above; they won’t let it get to the convention, the voters will decide.
That prediction is so safe I’ll bet a Fred style lobstah dinnah on it. Any takers?
I stopped short of predicting he’ll win. But I do think he’ll rebound and be more formidable than he is now, because he is the safest harbor standing (for GOP voters, if they are true to form).
Dinner and a movie, maybe Star Wars if it is still in the theaters.
Will continue to post disappointing numbers, and the corporate casino lobby will request that restrictions designed to abate gambling addiction be removed, and will request that the state and local taxes on the casino be lowered.
MA Democratic legislative leadership will sprint to accommodate these requests, saying that they are doing so “to preserve jobs.” MA Democratic “progressives” (self-described) will cast a fart-in-the-wind vote against, lose, and say that they did everything they could. Then (2017 here) they will vote to re-elect the MA legislative leadership that opposes tax revenues, favors corporate casino gambling, opposes the T, opposes funding higher education (or any education), opposes public sector unions other than the police, and opposes government services to the poor, and will be celebrated on BMG for their various fart-in-the wind votes that don’t matter.
I still remember the year I predicted the great accumulation of power by Kim Jong Un’s uncle; he had the uncle killed shortly thereafter. Still…
* Clinton wins, but Castro’s blunt lobbying for the VP job eventually gets on the campaign’s nerves. She ends up picking former Senator Mark Udall, signaling the shift of the battleground from the rust belt to the mountains.
* Rubio does win the nomination, but this only happens after party grandees convince Cruz to drop out before the convention in return for VP.
* Sanders’s supporters continue to edge toward ridiculousness as he piles up losses, but the bitterness isn’t too significant.Trump threatens to run independently, but doesn’t. He does, however, damage his party with his refusal to shut up.
* In state, there isn’t much to predict. The Globe keeps playing up Healey to try to sell papers. But Democrats prefer to being useless and helpless, blaming Baker for their own governmental indolence. The fight to raise the income tax rate for millionaires starts to heat up. Millions pour into the state to convince voters to raise the cap on charters. The money outspent pays off when people are convinced to vote for privatization, especially as they are fighting against a deeply divided teachers union.
WORLD
* China officially drops the “one country, two systems” policy and fully integrates Hong Kong now that the main paper and executive are fully under their control.
* The army attempts to rise up in Burma after announced intentions to change the constitution to allow Aum Sung Suu Kyi to become head of government.
* The almost inconceivable becomes conventional wisdom by year’s end — the refugee situation has Angela Merkel’s own party to suggest she resign. She refuses, leaving von der Leyen with a tough decision of whether to run openly.
* Dilma Rouseff resigns. So does Jacob Zuma. The second is an improvement, the first isn’t. Convulsions in Thailand when the king dies.
ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT
* The Red Sox make the playoffs and exit early. The Bruins make the playoffs and are stonewalled by the Canadiens as usual. The Celtics remain forgettable. The Patriots can’t overcome the injury tear and lose to the Chiefs in the AFC Championship.
* “When We Were Young” by Adele gets released, and threatens “I Will Always Love You” for historical ubiquity and popularity.
* Stephen Colbert loses his post at the Late Show.
WILD GUESSES
* A Black Lives Matter protest goes bad, and police open fire. Riots break out in many inner cities.
* There is a wide-ranging investigation of Amazon’s practices, leading to a state of semi-open warfare between Amazon and the US Government.
* Pope Francis quietly begins some Vatican considerations of ordaining women to be priests.
… that with so many candidates and no one legit polling higher than any other, that one of them will be the candidate for President and another will be candidate for VP. This is not because of popularity but because it will be some billionaires choice (and not, as above, the choice of ‘party grandees’) I don’t know if any can say, this far out, who will be in which position, I think the only thing I can venture for certain is that Jeb won’t accept VP outta pride. The choices will range from the barely acceptable, Bush/Kasich, to the apocalyptic, Trump/Fiorina and almost any of the permutations in between.
I hope not. He’s still trying to find his voice after dropping the faux-pundit shtick, but he’s perhaps the bravest person on TV right now and I quite enjoy it. Why do you think he’ll lose it?
The consideration, perhaps, will occur, but no female will be ordained a priest nor will such even be publicly hinted at until priestly celibacy is dropped and present priests, and nuns, are released from their vows and allowed to marry and entering novitiates aren’t bound by vows of celibacy. The two issues are not as unrelated as you might imagine given that seminaries aren’t equipped to handle females and any introduction of females into those seminaries is going to lead to questions of relationships. I think abolishing celibacy is a necessary first step (and it has already happened around the fringes by allowing married Anglican/Episcopal pastors to re-enter the Catholic fold)
I agree on the Papal and Late Night tea leaves. Colbert is clearly losing to Fallon, but but he is still beating Letterman overall and is beating his competition in the 18-35 demographic that advertisers supposedly want. I think Moonves was pleased with Letterman’s performance for so many years and will be pleased with Colbert’s. It’s not as consistently funny or insightful as the Colbert Report, but that too took a full year to really find its voice.
A Syrian baby will be born somewhere in the EU who will become the founder of Europe’s most successful technology company.
“* In state, there isn’t much to predict. The Globe keeps playing up Healey to try to sell papers. But Democrats prefer to being useless and helpless, blaming Baker for their own governmental indolence. The fight to raise the income tax rate for millionaires starts to heat up. Millions pour into the state to convince voters to raise the cap on charters.”
Voters are fed up with the rich and their systems and the old Barbara Anderson canard about screwing the middle class won’t work this year in the fight over the grad tax. But they will accept hedge fund mangers ability to get taxpayers to pay for their charter school investments.
Thailand will have a complete meltdown when the king dies. Bhumibol will die without an heir apparent (the family and the country are divided on this subject) and red shirts will fight the current military dictatorship in the chaos. Be careful of the color of the shirt you wear in Bangkok, but in Chiang Mai, red is de rigeur.
Ang San Suu Kyi is headstrong and stubborn but if she gets tempered guidance from those who have the longview, she can be in charge as the power behind the presidency. It will take a long play for the Tatmadaw to give up their constitutionally guaranteed 25% of seats the military has in parliament. How she deals with the 969 anti-Muslim movement and the continuing economic abuse by China, and to a slightly lesser extent Thailand, will define her rule. The endemic corruption in the country will not be solved during her tenure.
… but I’ll go out on a limb and predict that Trump will say something stupid and offensive, and that a non-trivial number of people won’t think it is a very big deal.
Clinton/? = 47.5; Rubio/Cruz = 41.5; Trump/? = 11.
A third election in the past seven electing a President Clinton with less than 50 percent of the vote? A fourth election in the past seven years electing a POTUS with less than half the vote, too.
Interesting times.
Clinton cruises to the nomination after NH. Wins the general election. She will pick whomever she wants as running mate as it won’t really matter. Maybe Huma.
Rubio gets the GOP nod after Trump shows weakness in the actual process of getting delegates. Cruz is second to Rubio but doesn’t get the VP slot. Not sure who it goes to. If I was forced to choose it’s Kasich to get OH. Getting OH and FL this round still doesn’t get enough electoral votes.
Snubbing of Cruz results in long term factionalism in the GOP (which has already started to some degree).
Republicans maintain control of both houses of Congress.
Charlie Baker becomes even more popular because stuff gets fixed (joke).
Beacon Hill continues as it always has, maybe worse. BMG complaining falls on deaf ears (of both progressive members and voters).
Patriots win the Super Bowl.
I have no doubt that Huma Abedin is a capable, inspiring woman. But I have a hard time imagining a 39 year old Muslim woman married to Anthony Weiner as Clinton’s running mate.
N/T
NY is an awfully big state to require electors to throw away their votes on someone else.
Someone would have to “move” (change paperwork). Not like the old days…
…for both sides of the ticket to be from the same state. The 12th amendment only prohibits electors from any state (in this case NY) to cast votes for two candidates from their own state. Hence my reference to throwing away votes.
Do you really think that I would think that was serious?
Don’t know about the veepstakes, though I guess O’Malley is as good a proxy as any. But it doesn’t signify, whoever it is: Clinton beats Bush/Rubio with 283 EVs, at least supposing the Supremes do not get involved.
Trump neither runs nor shuts up. The GOP implodes after the election.
Whoever is president will nominate a Wall Street banker as Secretary of the Treasury and a Republican technocrat as Defense.
The Senate is 50-50 and the House remains as firmly in Republican hands as the DNC remains in Wasserman-Schultz’s, or at any rate the hands of her crowd. (Tea Partiers threaten to abstain from voting for Speaker, thus throwing the election to Pelosi, but they don’t.)
Here in the Bay State lachrymous casino owners are so very sorry that they need a sweeter deal to build their pleasure palaces, and state and local officials fold like a pack of soggy cards. The fun does not, alas, increase enough when Scott Brown gets a job shilling for the “gaming industry.”
Charlie Baker will get a free pass for a second year in a row.
Locally the Menotomy Town Meeting falls in line and ratifies a new agreement for the Minuteman Technical School District despite opposition from some surprising quarters.
GOP Primary:
Carson drops out before Iowa due to financial issues. Endorses Cruz.
IA: Cruz, Trump, Rubio
NH: Trump, Rubio, Christie, Bush, Kasich, Cruz
SC: Trump, Cruz, Rubio
NV: Rubio, Trump, Cruz
Rubio wins big states like FL, IL, CA, NY
Trump carries border states like NM, AZ and rust belt states like OH, PA, and MI.
Rubio and Cruz team up as a ticket at the convention, Trump gives a big speech and is promised a cabinet position.
Clinton beats Bernie everywhere but NH where he wins big, and he narrowly loses to her in IA. Clinton/Castro beats Rubio/Cruz 308-227. She adds NC and loses IA, FL and NH to Rubio. Kirk loses to Duckworth, Toomey, Portman, and Ayotte win.
…the GOP primary process playing out the way you predict.
Those are the three front runners in every poll in every state. Who’s gonna beat them?
is that he has very little ground organization to turn out votes on primary day in any state. The polls overstate his support among actual people who are motivated to (and can) vote in the Republican primary.
So your scenario could work. As long as Trump doesn’t blow away the field someone else has a chance.
It’s why I don’t buy him winning Iowa. The majority of NH is voting against him but the five establishment types aren’t coalescing around one figure like they did already in 2008 and 2012. So he is getting a plurality victory, or maybe a surprise second.
I could see him losing both early primaries by getting in second when polls showed him in the lead, and maybe then Christopher’s scenario happens. But the establishment lane should’ve narrowed by now. I see McCain and Graham going for Rubio, which will help him surpass Christie (the Huntsmen/Lieberman of this cycle all in on NH) Kasich and Bush. It’ll also help him in SC. I see that being Trump territory due to all the ex military and his hostile rhetoric on racial issues. I see MI going his way because of his emphasis on trade issues, maybe PA and OH too.
But my assumption is his support won’t be enough to put him in contention for the nomination. He may just be a kingmaker between Cruz and Rubio, who on my scenario decide to skip the middleman and just team up to freeze him out. Or he puts Cruz on top since they are chummy and Rubio is his consolation pick for the general.
…is the only point I might agree with you on, but IA has a history of picking evangelicals that don’t go much further (Robertson 1988, Huckabee 2008, Santorum 2012). I still think polls might settle out and voters will hunker down and remember they are picking a President.
And those are the voters attracted to Trump. Non religious, downscale economically, who want to protect their hard earned benefits from vaguely others trying to take them away and distrust corporate candidates with the surname Bush.
…by a percentage point to Dole. You may be thinking of 1992 against Bush 41 which while he performed well against an incumbent of his own party he did not win. Of course, he did not become the nominee either. The occasional tweak notwithstanding NH voters in both parties are relatively reasonable folks for the most part. They even chose McCain over Bush 43 in 2000.
…If you can’t already tell I’m not falling into the poll trap. Both parties have recent history of polls saying one thing until the very last minute.
You are assuming the GOP primary electorate is rational, it’s not, it’s rabid and hungry for red meat. It actually believes it’s past unsuccessful nominees and presidents were failures since they weren’t conservative enough. It believes it’s high time we stop nominating “liberal Republicans” like McCain, Romney, and anyone with the surname Bush. All your historical models do not apply to this electorate. Using your logic, Trump should’ve faded a long time ago, he hasn’t and he will be a major factor in choosing the nominee.
I don’t think Cruz winds up on the ticket.
If anything the Tea Party has waned since they peaked in 2010 and nominated Sharon Angle, Richard Murdock, and Christine O’Donnell for Senate seats they should have won. They say every year we have to stop nominating reasonable people, but they do it anyway. It may or may not be Bush. I might concede an outside chance of Rubio. Christie could be the other surprise. I really don’t think it will be Cruz or Trump.
I am calling an establishment nominee. His name is Marco Rubio. I am saying all the non Rubio establishment picks are dead after NH, that Kasich gives Rubio nothing he doesn’t already possess himself electorally.
Clinton Gore is the one double down that worked. Otherwise you pick someone who brings in the base or adds something you lack. I see a strong early run for Trump in NH and SC that fizzles out on Super Tuesday. He’s third in delegates in my scenario. Enough to crown Cruz or tempt Rubio to freeze Trump out by picking Cruz. If Cruz wins he picks Rubio as his olive branch to the regular party. That make more sense?
is democratic, and thus in the hands of the rabid and hungry. It’s not.
Yet, anyway.
Trump wins Iowa, and some amusing panic ensues, but he doesn’t win New Hampshire, and fades from there.
Clinton nominates, gets some pressure to have a woman as VP, but doesn’t.
Baker’s name gets tossed around for VP, but he isn’t offered it.
Russia starts behaving a little better, China a little worse.
Sox go nowhere in the playoffs but contend for the entire season.
I don’t see the Rubio thing happening.
If there is someone despised by Bush it’s Marco Rubio. Enough of the GOP base is tied to Bush, they would rather take a 1964-style loss than line up behind Rubio. Cruz will come out of IA and SC with enough strength to position himself as the anti-Trump, and enough of the establishment (pragmatically) views Cruz as less of an electoral disaster than Trump, allowing Cruz to win the nomination.
I feel like the rest of the non-Bush establishment hates Cruz more. Folks
like Romney, McCain, Ryan and most of the GOP Senate Caucus. At the end of the day he gives the base what they want without the disaster of Trump, but Rubio could win the whole thing which none of the other two could possibly
do.
I heard a great line, don’t remember if it was NPR or the NYT, that said the only thing everyone in DC agrees on is that Cruz is an asshole.