The "Who is running?" tea leaves thread

[Marokai Backbeat]

Santorum basically confirms he's running. Congrats Phil. As a side note, prez16 is the new GOP12, for those of us who follow Heinze.

http://www.prez16.com/2013/01/santorum-i-shouldnt-be-where-i-am.html

Santorum strikes me as the John Edwards of the Right, somehow.

[justfollowingtheelections]

prez16 flagged this article on Columba Bush from way back in 1989, when Jeb was just the son of a president, not yet holding office himself:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-02-13/features/8903050279_1_jeb-columba-columba-bush-bush-campaign

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have a feeling this won't play well with Republicans:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Lupo]

I have a feeling this won't play well with Republicans:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why?

[Blackacre]

I have a feeling this won't play well with Republicans:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why?

Maybe it's a really well-written national anthem. They're all really good and tell a country's story

[RogueBeaver]

Klobuchar profile.

http://www.prez16.com/2013/01/meet-amy-klobuchar.html

[Lupo]

I have a feeling this won't play well with Republicans:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why?

Maybe it's a really well-written national anthem. They're all really good and tell a country's story

I mean why wouldn't it play well with Republicans?

[Mr. Morden]

Klobuchar profile.

http://www.prez16.com/2013/01/meet-amy-klobuchar.html

They mention this tidbit about Klobuchar attending Iowa Dems' inauguration party, which I missed:

http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2013/01/18/2016-watch-minnesota-sen-amy-klobuchar-to-attend-iowa-inauguration-party/article?nclick_check=1

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[seanNJ9]

Hello, first time poster.

Seems to be a lot of Cuomo supporters on here. Sure, he has a great resume, but he's one of the poorest speakers I've heard out of all the names being out there. I doubt Democrats will be be going from Obama, a great orator, to Cuomo, nails on a chalkboard.

[Mr. Morden]

Jindal gives a speech before the RNC Winter Meeting in Charlotte:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/jindal-gop-a-populist-party-86699.html?hp=l2

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RogueBeaver]

Related to said Jindal speech.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/one-tough-talking-nerd-bobby-jindal-brands-himself-as-republican-reformer-20130125?mrefid=skybox

[BluegrassBlueVote]

Hello, first time poster.

Seems to be a lot of Cuomo supporters on here. Sure, he has a great resume, but he's one of the poorest speakers I've heard out of all the names being out there. I doubt Democrats will be be going from Obama, a great orator, to Cuomo, nails on a chalkboard.

He's not so much a poor orator as he is an unpleasant speaker. His State of State address was pretty rousing, especially the rant on gun control, but his voice is very nasally and filled with Queens. I agree with Prez16's analysis that he's a New Yorker and you can never imagine him not being a New Yorker; he'd be a tough sell in a lot of regions. I'm having a hard time imagining him rolling up his sleeves and trying to be folksy at an Iowa fair.

However, I don't think it'll be a prerequisite for our next presidents to be equipped with Obama's soaring rhetoric; very few candidates are capable of that and voters will just be disappointed if they're expecting another guy to bring the house down with every speech. Rubio is probably the closest one to fitting that bill, but nominees are very rarely carbon-copies of the president they're replacing. You could argue that the nominees have been polar opposites of their predecessor for a while (Obama-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Reagan-Carter-Nixon).  

[Mr. Morden]

Looks like Jeb Bush's book tour (he has a new book on immigration) won't be making any stops in Iowa or NH:

http://www.prez16.com/2013/01/jebs-book-tour-wont-go-through-iowa-new.html

Hello, first time poster.

Seems to be a lot of Cuomo supporters on here. Sure, he has a great resume, but he's one of the poorest speakers I've heard out of all the names being out there. I doubt Democrats will be be going from Obama, a great orator, to Cuomo, nails on a chalkboard.

Really?  He may be no Obama, but I actually think Cuomo is one of the better orators among the Democratic 2016ers.  Better than, say, Schweitzer, who just made me feel like the stage was too big for him when I watched his 2012 DNC speech.  Cuomo at least projects authority, and it's easier for me to imagine him as prez than most of the others.

Also, welcome to the forum!

[Mr. Morden]

Santorum's top Super PAC donor, Foster Friess, will support him again in 2016 if/when Santorum decides to run again:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/279405-top-donor-friess-would-support-santorum-2016-run

[BluegrassBlueVote]

Really?  He may be no Obama, but I actually think Cuomo is one of the better orators among the Democratic 2016ers.  Better than, say, Schweitzer, who just made me feel like the stage was too big for him when I watched his 2012 DNC speech.  Cuomo at least projects authority, and it's easier for me to imagine him as prez than most of the others.

Personally, I see a lot of Nixon in Cuomo. Terrific political acumen, domineering figure, and one of the last people you can imagine kissing babies in a crowd. He'll need a top-notch campaign team to package him to voters against more cuddly candidates, like Nixon in '68.

[Mr. Morden]

Hillary Clinton

There are some potential 2016 candidates for whom the presidential buzz is entirely self-created.  No one would be talking about Martin O'Malley as a potential 2016er, for example, if he wasn't running around the country trying to draw attention to himself.  It's not just O'Malley though.  Most of the other 2016ers have done at least *something* to hint at an interest in running.

There are, however, a few for whom the buzz is entirely external.  People speculate about the potential candidate in question even though they've given no meaningful signals that they're interested in running.  This is true of Elizabeth Warren, for instance.  But it's also largely true of Hillary Clinton.

Judging by the normal metrics, she's not running.  But because her polling is so dominant and so many people want her to run, the speculation continues at a fevered pace.  This seems to infect all of the coverage of her potential candidacy, and makes it difficult to interpret many of the signals.

This story, about an event honoring Clinton, is one of the more extreme cases:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/12/hillary-is-running-a-dispatch-from-the-saban-forum.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But that's the thing.  The logic seems to go like this: "There's demand for her to run.  Everyone wants her to run.  Therefore, she's running."  But that kind of ignores the fact that she'll have to affirmatively decide to run herself.

She has stated on numerous occasions for the public record that she's not running.  It would take up too much space to go through every single denial, but I'll list a few, starting from October 2009….

October 2009:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=103546.15

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/62999-clinton-no-interest-in-running-for-president-again

You must be logged in to read this quote.

November 2010:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20021921-503544.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

May 2012:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/hillary-clinton-female-president_n_1493289.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

October 2012:

http://www.marieclaire.com/world-reports/inspirational-women/hillary-clinton-farewell-4

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/10/clinton-definitely-leaving-politics-or-may-stay.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

November 2012:

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/hillary-2016-president-exercise/2012/11/12/id/463780/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

December 2012:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/us/politics/hillary-clintons-countless-choices-could-hinge-on-2016-election.html?ref=hillaryrodhamclinton&pagewanted=all

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/12/12/bonus_quote_of_the_day.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However, that's not the end of the story.  Since last month, there have been a few more signals suggesting that she hasn't truly ruled out a run.

December 2012:

http://politicker.com/2012/12/hillary-clintons-under-the-radar-letter-writing-campaign/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Hillary-Clinton-sends-early-signal-about-2016-bid-on-Irish-visit-181736491.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

January 2013:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=167549.0

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But here is the biggest story, coming just last week:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/16/hillary-clinton-2016-women-look-ahead-to-history-in-the-making.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is the thing though.  Because the MSM seems to take it for granted that HRC's many denials of interest were less than sincere, the sentence quoted above is treated as a throwaway line.  It should be a pretty BFD though.  Clinton has ruled out running in 2016 many times over.  So when "friends close to Clinton" say that her "plan has been to take a break after leaving her post as secretary of state before laying the groundwork for a second run for the presidency" where are those friends getting that from?  Are they just projecting onto her their own wishes, or have they been informed directly, by her, that that's what she intends to do.  Again, if it's the latter, it's a BFD.

But the media seems to have already made up its mind that all of her denials have been insincere, so they seem to be uninterested in investigating actual evidence that would shed light on whether they were sincere or not.  Ugh.

[Bacon King]

Given how they've utterly ignored her denials, I'm assuming that reporters have been told by their Clinton sources for a long time now, off the record, that she would probably be running. It's the only thing that would explain the constant dismissal of Hillary's own words. It would also explain why nobody is making a big deal about the BFD line- it's only telling the media what they've known for possibly years.

[RogueBeaver]

Salena Zito interviews Jindal.

http://triblive.com/politics/politicalheadlines/3300421-74/jindal-republican-state#axzz2J8zVXFgS

[RogueBeaver]

Ryan on MTP just now: "I'll decide later."

[Bacon King]

Hillary and Obama just totally dodged the question in their joint interview. She's definitely sounding like she's in.

[Mr. Morden]

Hillary and Obama just totally dodged the question in their joint interview. She's definitely sounding like she's in.

Here's what she said:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57565734/obama-and-clinton-the-60-minutes-interview/?pageNum=4

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Interesting that it's no longer a no now that Obama's been re-elected. I think she's gonna do it. And I think she could very well be the best president since Reagan.

[Mr. Morden]

I don't think she's decided definitively, but just two months or so ago, I would have put the odds of her running at about 1 in 3, but there are now enough signals that she's open to it, that I'd have to put it above 50/50.

Which is kind of unfortunate, on a pure political spectator point of view.  I was hoping we'd have interesting primaries for both parties in 2016.  But if Clinton runs, the Democratic primary is much more likely to be very boring.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Unless Biden decides to challenge Clinton anyway. Hillary would win, but it would be interesting to see Biden completely implode.

Also, how would Hillary market herself? Would she be "Hillary," or "Clinton?" How will the VP pick incorporate into her logo if she's "Hillary?" I've wondered this for a while. In '08, would it have been, say, "Hillary-Evan," or "Hillary-Bayh?"

[RogueBeaver]

Either one is fine. Less need to differentiate the family brand than in '08, though that might change in the GE.

[Mr. Morden]

Politico does their own compilation of HRC answers over the years when asked if she'll run in 2016, using many of the same quotes I compiled and also noting how her answers have evolved from outright denial to dodging the question:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/hillary-clintons-quotes-on-2016-86804.html?hp=l6