If not Christie who becomes the "Establishment Candidate" for the GOP?

[eric82oslo]

Probably Walker, though I still believe (maybe foolishly) that Huntsman could make a run at it. I really doubt Bush will run.

Probably not in 2016, but perhaps in 2020. Yet probably only in the case Hillary wins in a landslide, Democrats retake the house and keep both chambers in the 2018 midterms. Actually not that unlikely a scenario.

[eric82oslo]

Probably Walker, though I still believe (maybe foolishly) that Huntsman could make a run at it. I really doubt Bush will run.

Agreed, Martinez is more likely to run than Bush.

Martinez has said she'd never leave her state due to her sister. Don't think Bush has said anything similar?

[whanztastic]

Probably Walker, though I still believe (maybe foolishly) that Huntsman could make a run at it. I really doubt Bush will run.

Agreed, Martinez is more likely to run than Bush.

Martinez has said she'd never leave her state due to her sister. Don't think Bush has said anything similar?

His wife isn't a great English speaker and he just seems hesitant over all.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

If Walker, Thune, and Martinez don't run, then the GOP is mostly screwed for 2016, although to be honest I could see Rubio winning the general against Hillary, under the right conditions.

[bedstuy]

It's foolish to assume that 2016 will play out like 2012, with Christie or someone similar in the Romney role and various conservatives competing to be the alternative.  There could no consensus establishment candidate at all.  In 2008, the Republican Party establishment was split between McCain, Giuliani and Romney.   I see no reason that couldn't happen again.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

How about a Walker/Thune/Rubio race?

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

It's foolish to assume that 2016 will play out like 2012, with Christie or someone similar in the Romney role and various conservatives competing to be the alternative.  There could no consensus establishment candidate at all.  In 2008, the Republican Party establishment was split between McCain, Giuliani and Romney.   I see no reason that couldn't happen again.

Didn't it turn into a McCain, Romney, and Huckabee race?
So a Walker, Thune, and Rubio race would be similar:
Two establishment conservatives, and one tea Partier.

[Mr. Morden]

How about a Walker/Thune/Rubio race?

I suppose Thune could run, but he's shown no interest so far.  If he really wanted to be president, he could have run in 2012, when there was a gaping hole in the field for a semi-competent anti-Romney.  That was also a year when Thune wasn't up for reelection in the Senate, whereas he is up for reelection in 2016.

[BaconBacon96]

How about a Walker/Thune/Rubio race?

I suppose Thune could run, but he's shown no interest so far.  If he really wanted to be president, he could have run in 2012, when there was a gaping hole in the field for a semi-competent anti-Romney.  That was also a year when Thune wasn't up for reelection in the Senate, whereas he is up for reelection in 2016.

Hence why John Thune is not going to be a candidate either.

[Bull Moose Base]

Probably Walker, though I still believe (maybe foolishly) that Huntsman could make a run at it. I really doubt Bush will run.

fwiw, Huntsman is essentially saying he suspects Christie knew and is now lying.

I'd guess Bush is more likely to run than not right now. I assume Christie's strength was one of the major deterrents to Bush pre-Bridgegate.  Won't be surprised if he starts courting donors keeping a nervous eye on Christie's scandals.

Walker losing re-election would be good news for Christie, the head of the RGA. Keep an eye out for  subtle ways Christie tries to undercut Walker.

[Peter the Lefty]

Paul Ryan seems to fit the bill if no one else can step into the role.  The stunt he pulled with Patty Murray puts him firmly to the left of Cruz.  They Romney folks probably won't have a very difficult time getting behind him.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/homenews/188898-thune-wont-rule-out-presidential-run
John Thune is open to running.

[Mister Mets]

One reason the establishment likes Christie is that his political talents have been established for some time. Wealthy donors wouldn't want to back someone who looks good on paper, but then turns out to not be ready for prime-time.

They'll probably keep a close eye on the contenders from Wisconsin and Florida (Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio). Ryan's been a national figure for a while, and did well enough as a candidate for national office, so he's the safest bet, although it's not clear he's going to run. Jeb Bush is going to have a lot of rich Republicans who have known him for decades, and can vouch for him. But it's also not certain he's not going to run.

If Scott Walker and Marco Rubio are the only two from this group to run for the nomination, I could see donors waiting until it's clear that one has a better shot at the nomination than the other.

[Frodo]

If Gov. Scott Walker doesn't win re-election in a walk, then it's probably going to be Jeb Bush who will be facing Hillary Clinton two years from now. 

[Mr. Morden]

I agree with bedstuy that there's no firm rule stating that there has to be a singular "establishment" candidate, and that it's perfectly possible for there to be multiple such candidates, a la 2008.  "Bridgeghazi" and other such Christie scandals might not be enough to bump Christie out of the race, but merely enough to weaken him, so that the establishment is more divided between him and other candidates.  The obvious choices for establishment rivals would be whichever Floridian runs and whichever Wisconsinite runs.

But who knows?  A lot of things could happen that are hard to anticipate now.  Bush could decide against running, while Rubio fails to get off the ground.  Walker could lose reelection, while Ryan decides to focus on the Ways & Means Committee chairmanship rather than run for prez.  If none of them gain traction, then you could have other folks, like Jindal, getting more of a look.

[Illiniwek]

It seems many are jumping on the Walker bandwagon, but it really does make sense. He's tolerable to the social conservatives, he has been a model reformer to earn the support of the establishment, he is not poisoned by Washington. He is a guy that gets things done, but doesn't seem like a New Jersey crime boss. He also isn't Rick Perry, because Rick Perry was just stupid, and could not handle being in front of a camera. Walker is a smart guy, he will hold his own in debates and on tv. As someone with Democratic tendencies, there is no candidate right now that I fear more than Scott Walker.

[Matty]

Scott Walker would probably be the guy most establishment people hop over to.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If Gov. Scott Walker doesn't win re-election in a walk, then it's probably going to be Jeb Bush who will be facing Hillary Clinton two years from now. 

A Bush vs. Clinton race would be pure nepotism.

[RJEvans]

Who does the GOP nominate if both Christie and Rubio chose not to run? I could see Christie choosing not to run because of whatever baggage he has (assuming he has more) and I could see Rubio staying in the Senate believing he can achieve more in the legislative body.

So who do they nominate? Cruz? Paul? Walker?

For the GOP if the two top dogs choose not to run I could see this being more like 1964 (except not a 20+ point blow out for the Dems) than 1980.

I think Walker can mount a credible and competent campaign but at the end of the day I'm not sure he can win against any serious Democrat.