what are the chances of the GOP nominating a woman?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -

what are the chances of the GOP nominating a woman as their candidate for president in 2016?

as you may or may not know, Hillary Clinton is in the same position Obama was for the 2008 and 2012 elections. This means she is going to win.

why?

because a woman will win in 2016 and it WILL (most likely) be Hillary Clinton.

if you don't think a woman will win in 2016, when?

#2 Posted by Nuck81 (5835 posts) -

I hate Tea Party Republicans but if it came down to Clinton or Christie I'd have to make a tough decision.

2016 may be one of the first Presidential Elections in a long time where the American people will have two decent Candidates.

#3 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3794 posts) -

I like Hilary, I think she gets a lot of undeserved hate.

#4 Posted by Master_Live (14199 posts) -


because a woman will win in 2016 and it WILL (most likely) be Hillary Clinton.

How so?

#5 Edited by Serraph105 (27824 posts) -

You know this is sort of a side thought, but I was actually thinking about the number of women in the GOP ranks (those who have held office) who I consider to truly contain substance from a standpoint of ideas and legislation passed. I couldn't come up with much sadly. I don't really think the more well known ones really count. Michelle Bachman was more about spreading catchy messages that don't hold up to logical breakdowns (tax cuts cost the government nothing for instance). Sarah Palin offered a certain charm that the GOP was severely lacking at the time, but I can't think of much that she presented as a really substantive idea for the party to strive to achieve. Both were certainly effective at achieving the things mentioned above, but it amounts to little more than being cheerleaders for your party.

On the democrat side you have people that immediately come to mind like Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Nancy Pelosi, and Wendy Davis. Now I'm sure there are women in the GOP ranks that have decent ideas and vision on how to run things. I suppose my question is why are they not more famous than their fluffier counter-parts?

Oh I would be remissed if I didn't at least mention Condoleezza Rice, she's good, but much like Bachman and Palin she's currently out of the game.

#6 Edited by Barbariser (6724 posts) -

They have two potential female candidates (Bachmann and Palin) and both of them are reputed to be fucking nuts. Based on the most recent G.O.P. primaries, the least nutty Republican is the one who gets the nomination.

#7 Edited by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@4myAmuzumament said:

because a woman will win in 2016 and it WILL (most likely) be Hillary Clinton.

How so?

I have a feeling in my gut. I'm certain the woman in power topic will be a hot topic around then.

I think Obama winning and him sucking really bad and all the crazy emotions that were brought up in the last election will push more than fifty percent of the population to change their mind again on the person that should represent the country.

I think Obama is the guinea pig in our little movement towards a better country. He isn't that great, but his victories represent something more.

He was guaranteed the last two elections because he was the hottest political celebrity. Hillary (or some other woman) will be the next president because it is a topic people will jump on easily.

#8 Edited by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -

I think that the chances of Hilary getting elected in 2016 are probably pretty low. Obama's approval ratings at this point in his presidency are lower than any other president in the last 50 years with the exception of Nixon (and over the last 50 years, there has only been one time that a single party controlled the presidency for more than 8 years)

Unless his approvals turn around (which historically they don't with a lame duck), Hilary is going to have a hard time. She might not even run in 2016 and wait until 2020.

Oh and the chances of the GOP nominating a woman are very slim. Maybe vice president but not president.

#9 Posted by Master_Live (14199 posts) -

Unless his approvals turn around (which historically they don't with a lame duck), Hilary is going to have a hard time. She might not even run in 2016 and wait until 2020.

No way, some people already think she is to old to run on 2016, it is a run on 16' or it is over her.

#10 Posted by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -

@Jacobistheman: I honestly think that Hillary being a woman i.e. something different, will trump any negativity caused by Obama. If not 2016, then 2020 like you said. Though, by then, a younger and more inspiring woman will be in a better position than Hillary.

after Bush, the strategy to winning presidency in the states is just being something different.

#11 Posted by Master_Live (14199 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@4myAmuzumament said:

because a woman will win in 2016 and it WILL (most likely) be Hillary Clinton.

How so?

I have a feeling in my gut. I'm certain the woman in power topic will be a hot topic around then.

I think Obama winning and him sucking really bad and all the crazy emotions that were brought up in the last election will push more than fifty percent of the population to change their mind again on the person that should represent the country.

I think Obama is the guinea pig in our little movement towards a better country. He isn't that great, but his victories represent something more.

He was guaranteed the last two elections because he was the hottest political celebrity. Hillary (or some other woman) will be the next president because it is a topic people will jump on easily.

Lets revisit your thoughts after the 2014 midterm elections, Obama looks like he is sinking and might take the whole party with him. Obamacare has been a real drag and the employer mandate hasn't gone into effect yet.

#12 Posted by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -

@Jacobistheman: I honestly think that Hillary being a woman i.e. something different, will trump any negativity caused by Obama. If not 2016, then 2020 like you said. Though, by then, a younger and more inspiring woman will be in a better position than Hillary.

after Bush, the strategy to winning presidency in the states is just being something different.

Everyone knows that Hilary isn't something different: She spent 8 years as the first lady, 8 years as a senator and 4 years as secretary of state. Obama was able to convince everyone he was a Washington outsider and would shake up the establishment then blame all of the countries problems on his predecessor's "failed" policies to get elected twice. Hilary can't do either of those things. Just because she is a woman doesn't mean she will get elected (and most of the people who vote for a woman just for the sake of voting for a woman are already voting for a democrat anyway)

#13 Posted by Iszdope (9678 posts) -

1 in 69 dude!

#14 Edited by MysteryJ0ker (93 posts) -

I got a better question; What are the chances that it'll be a worthwhile candidate? You have more of a chance seeing the Atlantic ocean drying up before that occurs.

#15 Edited by jimmyjjohn (4 posts) -

Online betting sites have the governor listed anywhere from 13 to 2 to 11 to 2 and all but one give him front runner status. Book maker William Hill of the United Kingdom puts the odds at Marco Rubio winning the GOP nomination at 5 to 1, while Christie is close behind at 6 to 1. (If you don't know how to read odds, they're expressed as a ratio. 13 to 2 odds are 6.5 to one, which means they give Christie less of a chance to win than 6 to 1 odds do.)

Thanks

Free Motion Backgrounds

#16 Edited by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

Fairly high, actually; now that the Democrats nominated (and elected) a black man, the GOP will want to play catch-up on the progress department by shoving a bunch of women onto the platform. "See? We can be cool too!"

It's the same reason why McCain picked Sarah Palin for VP.

#17 Posted by airshocker (29042 posts) -

I don't think there's going to be a female Republican candidate. The GOP has basically decided in advance that it's going to be Christie. I think maybe the DNC has done the same with Hilary.

#18 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7745 posts) -

I don't see a woman getting the nomination from the GOP. I'd say either Christie or Rubio. Would be cool to see Huntsman pop back up again.

#19 Edited by lamprey263 (23196 posts) -

Not likely, the current selection of GOP women are batshit crazy... well, most of the men too for that matter.

I don't think Christ Christie is going to make it to election until he addresses the controversial closer of the George Washington Bridge and throws his two appointees that resigned under the bus to say they went rogue, but he's yet to do that, but I think to escape this in coming years he can't let uncertainty on what happened loom over his campaign, he's gonna have to pin that on someone.

#20 Posted by Master_Live (14199 posts) -

Not likely, the current selection of GOP women are batshit crazy...

Is the Governor of New Mexico "batshit crazy"?

#21 Posted by junglist101 (5457 posts) -

At this point I'm convinced that it doesn't matter who's president.

#22 Posted by lamprey263 (23196 posts) -

@lamprey263 said:

Not likely, the current selection of GOP women are batshit crazy...

Is the Governor of New Mexico "batshit crazy"?

don't know, but I'm certain if she does decide to campaign for President then she will have to continue to throw her base red meat and avoid saying anything sensible thereby repeating the same mistakes of John Huntsman, she's already all good on opposing marriage equality, being an enemy to women's reproductive rights, and being a global warming denier, but that's par for the course with any Republican she's gonna have to be even more outrageous than that

#23 Posted by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -
@4myAmuzumament said:

@Jacobistheman: I honestly think that Hillary being a woman i.e. something different, will trump any negativity caused by Obama. If not 2016, then 2020 like you said. Though, by then, a younger and more inspiring woman will be in a better position than Hillary.

after Bush, the strategy to winning presidency in the states is just being something different.

Everyone knows that Hilary isn't something different: She spent 8 years as the first lady, 8 years as a senator and 4 years as secretary of state. Obama was able to convince everyone he was a Washington outsider and would shake up the establishment then blame all of the countries problems on his predecessor's "failed" policies to get elected twice. Hilary can't do either of those things. Just because she is a woman doesn't mean she will get elected (and most of the people who vote for a woman just for the sake of voting for a woman are already voting for a democrat anyway)

I thought on it and yea, Hillary may not be the something different in 2016. However, I feel that whoever takes the helm on the woman's rights issue and runs with it is guaranteed the victory. And who would do it better than a woman?

A strong and inspiring woman still has time to emerge before 2016 similar to how Obama seemingly came out of no where.

The republicans are not going to win in 2016. I still think they will be still be on the losing end of an uphill battle by 2016. People are veering more to the "left" side on social issues and I don't see a republican candidate (right now) that can make convincing arguments to both sides. This is also why I think Hillary has the best shot, because if a republican doesn't win, Hillary basically wins.

#24 Edited by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -

@4myAmuzumament said:

@Master_Live said:

@4myAmuzumament said:

because a woman will win in 2016 and it WILL (most likely) be Hillary Clinton.

How so?

I have a feeling in my gut. I'm certain the woman in power topic will be a hot topic around then.

I think Obama winning and him sucking really bad and all the crazy emotions that were brought up in the last election will push more than fifty percent of the population to change their mind again on the person that should represent the country.

I think Obama is the guinea pig in our little movement towards a better country. He isn't that great, but his victories represent something more.

He was guaranteed the last two elections because he was the hottest political celebrity. Hillary (or some other woman) will be the next president because it is a topic people will jump on easily.

Lets revisit your thoughts after the 2014 midterm elections, Obama looks like he is sinking and might take the whole party with him. Obamacare has been a real drag and the employer mandate hasn't gone into effect yet.

I don't think the sting of Obama will affect the Dems more than the seemingly everlasting sting of Bush on the republicans. I don't see it carrying over in such a way that causes the democratic nominee to lose even though some people want to believe that.

#25 Posted by Rhazakna (11022 posts) -

As Obama's approval rating continues to dip, Hillary will incrementally distance herself from him and his policies. Whether it'll be enough remains to be seen. She's a very status-quo politician, and I think the electorate will be looking for someone who can sell themselves as a Washington outsider with a fresh perspective. Obviously none of them will actually fit the bill, but that'll the sales pitch. I don't think the slit between her legs will be enough to get her into office, the novelty of "the first _______ President" is slowly wearing off.

As for the GOP electing a woman, I doubt it. Sarah Palin might run since she's rapidly becoming irrelevant, but she wouldn't win. Bachmann is unelectable, and who else is there?

#26 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (859 posts) -

Doubt it. For the past couple elections, female GOP candidates have proven themselves to be far from electable. They need people who can scrutinize the democrats beyond just rhetoric, and I don't think any of them are female.

#27 Posted by Master_Live (14199 posts) -
#28 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3794 posts) -

@airshocker: I dunno, he's a moderate, wouldn't social conservatives chastise him?

#29 Edited by airshocker (29042 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch: Romney wasn't a social conservative and he dominated the primary.

#30 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3794 posts) -
#31 Edited by mattbbpl (10572 posts) -

I don't think there's going to be a female Republican candidate. The GOP has basically decided in advance that it's going to be Christie. I think maybe the DNC has done the same with Hilary.

That's on the mark. If those two run, they're going to be the nominees barring some unforeseen event. I expect the Tea Party group will attempt to put up a fight on some level, but I don't think they have the strength behind them to make it all that meaningful.

#32 Edited by Master_Live (14199 posts) -

@mattbbpl said:

@airshocker said:

I don't think there's going to be a female Republican candidate. The GOP has basically decided in advance that it's going to be Christie. I think maybe the DNC has done the same with Hilary.

That's on the mark. If those two run, they're going to be the nominees barring some unforeseen event. I expect the Tea Party group will attempt to put up a fight on some level, but I don't think they have the strength behind them to make it all that meaningful.

They can beat Christie if they coalesce behind one candidate and not splinter.

#33 Posted by 4myAmuzumament (1748 posts) -

@MakeMeaSammitch: Romney wasn't a social conservative and he dominated the primary.

"Dominated" is very poor diction. Romney was just the least incompetent candidate the GOP had to offer.

It's like Lebron James competing against children for an All-Star spot. Of course he will win.

#34 Posted by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: Romney wasn't a social conservative and he dominated the primary.

"Dominated" is very poor diction. Romney was just the least incompetent candidate the GOP had to offer.

It's like Lebron James competing against children for an All-Star spot. Of course he will win.

We also have no clue if he was a social conservative, because he kept flip-flopping on everything he dearly believed in. The only things he stayed consistent on were "gays are bad" and "abortion is bad," both highly social conservative (see: fascist) issues.

#35 Edited by mattbbpl (10572 posts) -

@Master_Live said:

@mattbbpl said:

@airshocker said:

I don't think there's going to be a female Republican candidate. The GOP has basically decided in advance that it's going to be Christie. I think maybe the DNC has done the same with Hilary.

That's on the mark. If those two run, they're going to be the nominees barring some unforeseen event. I expect the Tea Party group will attempt to put up a fight on some level, but I don't think they have the strength behind them to make it all that meaningful.

They can beat Christie if they coalesce behind one candidate and not splinter.

I don't see the intra-party favorability ratings to support that outcome (unless the Republican primary voters dispraportionately consisted of Tea Party members, of course), but it would certainly be interesting if that turned out to be the case.

#36 Posted by airshocker (29042 posts) -

@airshocker said:

@MakeMeaSammitch: Romney wasn't a social conservative and he dominated the primary.

"Dominated" is very poor diction. Romney was just the least incompetent candidate the GOP had to offer.

It's like Lebron James competing against children for an All-Star spot. Of course he will win.

Dominated is very appropriate. For whatever reason, he still curb-stomped his competition.

#37 Posted by airshocker (29042 posts) -
@mattbbpl said:

@airshocker said:

I don't think there's going to be a female Republican candidate. The GOP has basically decided in advance that it's going to be Christie. I think maybe the DNC has done the same with Hilary.

That's on the mark. If those two run, they're going to be the nominees barring some unforeseen event. I expect the Tea Party group will attempt to put up a fight on some level, but I don't think they have the strength behind them to make it all that meaningful.


The tea party will put up Cruz, Rubio and Walker. Walker will probably have the best shot out of them all at beating Christie. But I don't think he will. He's very bland compared to Christie.

#38 Posted by hippiesanta (9812 posts) -

I like Hilary, I think she gets a lot of undeserved hate.

be prepare for Malik lewinsky scandal