The GOP's "Big 4"

[ShamDam]

At this point, it seems to me that the Republicans have 4 candidates with a serious shot at the nomination: Scott Walker, Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, and Chris Christie. At this point, are there any other candidates who seem likely to run that could join this rank of legitimacy? Could someone come out of the blue and crush all of these people? And I'm starting to have my doubts about Christie -- should he even be listed among the other three?

[retromike22]

I wouldn't could out Huckabee, he still could pull off a Iowa win.

[SPC]

I wouldn't could out Huckabee, he still could pull off a Iowa win.

Aside from Iowa and the Greater South, Huckabee only broke 20% in one contest before Romney's withdrawal (after which Huckabee became the generic anti-McCain protest vote and only won Kansas and Louisiana.) With a divided field, he could definitely win Iowa and possibly South Carolina, but in that scenario it seems that whomever wins New Hampshire would automatically become the frontrunner (as 2008 and 2012 proved). Even if Paul won New Hampshire, I would think that Republican powerbrokers would more likely prefer someone with an unorthodox foreign policy to an economic populist who could easily prove to be a national Todd Akin.

[TomC]

Agree- except for Paul and Christie.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

If Rubio runs, he will absolutely have a following that puts him in that group. Also, my assumption is that Huckabee will basically be running a jacked-up version of Santorum's campaign from last time. So it's really a big five or big six depending on Rubio's decision.

[Maxwell]

I might remove Christie and add Huckabee. Christie is telegenic but he blows up any chance he gets in the spotlight.

Rubio does seem to be surging in the eye of donors, so I could see him worming his way back to this group.

[IceSpear]

If Rubio runs, he will absolutely have a following that puts him in that group. Also, my assumption is that Huckabee will basically be running a jacked-up version of Santorum's campaign from last time. So it's really a big five or big six depending on Rubio's decision.

I'd be hesitant to include Huckabee simply because I can't see the establishment letting him get the nomination. Even if he caught fire, I think they'd be more likely to try to engineer a brokered convention somehow than let Huckabee get it. As for Rubio, I doubt there's room for two "illegal loving" Floridians in the Republican primary, and every single day Jeb soaks up more of Rubio's would-be contributors.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If Rubio runs, he will absolutely have a following that puts him in that group. Also, my assumption is that Huckabee will basically be running a jacked-up version of Santorum's campaign from last time. So it's really a big five or big six depending on Rubio's decision.

I'd be hesitant to include Huckabee simply because I can't see the establishment letting him get the nomination. Even if he caught fire, I think they'd be more likely to try to engineer a brokered convention somehow than let Huckabee get it. As for Rubio, I doubt there's room for two "illegal loving" Floridians in the Republican primary, and every single day Jeb soaks up more of Rubio's would-be contributors.

A majority of the delegates are pledged, meaning they are required to vote a certain way at the convention even if they support someone else. Even if every superdelegate voted against Huck, Huck could still get through easily with only pledged delegates, Romney got something like 1450 pledged delegates and the number of delegate votes to win the nomination was only 1144 in 2012. (The rest of Romney's 2061 delegate votes came from superdelegates and Gingrich/ Santorum delegates that were released from their pledges by Gingrich/Santorum) I highly doubt the RNC would be unethical enough to change the rules right in the middle of the primary season.

[IceSpear]

If Rubio runs, he will absolutely have a following that puts him in that group. Also, my assumption is that Huckabee will basically be running a jacked-up version of Santorum's campaign from last time. So it's really a big five or big six depending on Rubio's decision.

I'd be hesitant to include Huckabee simply because I can't see the establishment letting him get the nomination. Even if he caught fire, I think they'd be more likely to try to engineer a brokered convention somehow than let Huckabee get it. As for Rubio, I doubt there's room for two "illegal loving" Floridians in the Republican primary, and every single day Jeb soaks up more of Rubio's would-be contributors.

A majority of the delegates are pledged, meaning they are required to vote a certain way at the convention even if they support someone else. Even if every superdelegate voted against Huck, Huck could still get through easily with only pledged delegates, Romney got something like 1450 pledged delegates and the number of delegate votes to win the nomination was only 1144 in 2012. (The rest of Romney's 2061 delegate votes came from superdelegates and Gingrich/ Santorum delegates that were released from their pledges by Gingrich/Santorum) I highly doubt the RNC would be unethical enough to change the rules right in the middle of the primary season.

Not necessarily in that sense. More like stop Huckabee from being able to attain enough pledged delegates by bringing a "savior" into the race such as Mitt Romney. Fuel him with tons of cash, and devote tons of cash to destroying Huckabee, then hash it out in the brokered convention. The GOP actually debated doing this when it looked like Romney couldn't put away joke candidates like Santorum and Gingrich. I believe names of some "savior candidates" they floated were Christie and Daniels.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

If Rubio runs, he will absolutely have a following that puts him in that group. Also, my assumption is that Huckabee will basically be running a jacked-up version of Santorum's campaign from last time. So it's really a big five or big six depending on Rubio's decision.

I'd be hesitant to include Huckabee simply because I can't see the establishment letting him get the nomination. Even if he caught fire, I think they'd be more likely to try to engineer a brokered convention somehow than let Huckabee get it. As for Rubio, I doubt there's room for two "illegal loving" Floridians in the Republican primary, and every single day Jeb soaks up more of Rubio's would-be contributors.

A majority of the delegates are pledged, meaning they are required to vote a certain way at the convention even if they support someone else. Even if every superdelegate voted against Huck, Huck could still get through easily with only pledged delegates, Romney got something like 1450 pledged delegates and the number of delegate votes to win the nomination was only 1144 in 2012. (The rest of Romney's 2061 delegate votes came from superdelegates and Gingrich/ Santorum delegates that were released from their pledges by Gingrich/Santorum) I highly doubt the RNC would be unethical enough to change the rules right in the middle of the primary season.

Not necessarily in that sense. More like stop Huckabee from being able to attain enough pledged delegates by bringing a "savior" into the race such as Mitt Romney. Fuel him with tons of cash, and devote tons of cash to destroying Huckabee, then hash it out in the brokered convention. The GOP actually debated doing this when it looked like Romney couldn't put away joke candidates like Santorum and Gingrich. I believe names of some "savior candidates" they floated were Christie and Daniels.

Well, they'd first have to do it by Early March at the very latest due to filing deadlines and whatnot. They would also have to get someone to actually run, which may be hard.

[SPC]

There are four (arguably five) major constituencies in the GOP primaries: 1) moderates, 2) mainstream conservatives, 3) very (social) conservatives, 4) very (fiscal) conservatives, and 5?)libertarians (although the last category is fairly novel and contains substantial overlap with the first and fourth categories). Looking back at the major nominating contests of the past:
1980: Reagan (2,3,4) beats Bush (1), Anderson (1), et. al (1)
1988: Bush (2, 1 to some extent) beats Dole (1), Robertson (3), Kemp (4)
1996: Dole (2, 1 to some extent) beats Alexander (1), Buchanan (3), Forbes (4)
2000: Bush (2, 3) beats McCain (1), Keyes (3), Forbes (4)
2008: McCain (1, 2 to some extent) beats Huckabee (3), Romney (4, 1 to some extent), Giuliani (1)
2012: Romney (2, 1 and 4 to some extent) beats Santorum (3), Gingrich (3 and 4 to some extent), Paul (5, 1 to some extent)

Admittedly, this analysis may be an instance of the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy, but I think it works heuristically to say that the person with the plurality of factions on their side wins the nomination in the end. The first category will go for Bush or Christie, with few other plausible options on the horizon. The third will likely gravitate toward Walker or Rubio, with Paul or Cruz having a shot as well. Fourth goes to Huckabee, with Cruz, Carson, or Perry having a shot. Fifth (if it still exists in sizable numbers) belongs to Paul. That leaves the second, which is usually the decisive category. I believe that Walker, Bush, or Rubio are the best fits for this category.

I believe the last two contests have demonstrated that the primaries serve less to generate momentum and more to weed out various aspirants for each category. For example, Huntsman and Giuliani ceased to be viable mantle-holders for category 1 when they failed to win decisive primaries, clearing the way for Romney and McCain respectively to obtain dominance of that category. Category 3 will be determined by Iowa, Category 1 by New Hampshire, and Category 2 by either New Hampshire or South Carolina.

[Türkisblau]

I'd say that the "Big" 4 would be Huckabee, Bush, Christie, and King.

[Lincoln Republican]

There's really only the "Big 2", I believe, Bush and Walker.

Paul is too out of the mainstream, and Christie's star has fizzled as fast as it rose.

[Reaganfan]

Walker, Christie, Rubio, Bush.

[heatmaster]

The fix is, now that Jeb is in, Rubio won't - my bet is, he's flirting with the idea, but just that and will likely decide his best bet is sticking with another go at the Senate. Bush has the donor's lining up behind him and Rubio is a smart guy, he's not gonna diss Bush or his supporters,  like I said Rubio is a smart guy, he's keeping his powder dry.

[PresidentTRUMP]

Walker, Christie, Rubio, Bush.

Agreed 100%.

[136or142]

I posted these 8 as being the credible candidates in order of likelyhood:

1.Jeb Bush
2.Scott Walker
3.Rand Paul
4.John Kasich
5.Mike Huckabee
6.Ted Cruz
7.Chris Christie
8.Ben Carson

After the top 3:
4.John Kasich, doesn't seem to be running.
5.Mike Huckabee is just too loose lipped to win the nomination
His latest quote: Mike Huckabee says expecting Christians to accept same-sex marriage is “like asking someone who’s Jewish to start serving bacon-wrapped shrimp in their deli,” CNN reports.
He also called homosexuality part of a lifestyle, like drinking and swearing

While many Republicans no doubt agree with him, they also know that these days presidential candidates can't say those sorts of things publicly and expect to win.  There are many tea baggers who don't care about winning, but the bulk of the Republican Party primary voters still like to support the most winnable candidate in the general.

6.Ted Cruz, seems to have been pushed aside by Rand Paul for the Tea Party wing of the party.  Of course, Ted has far too big an ego to step aside and endorse Paul instead of running himself.

7.Chris Christie, probably can't win after his endless scandals, even if he somehow wasn't personally involved in any of them.  He still hired the people that were.

8.Ben Carson, as he's never run before we don't know how well he can do.  I'd call him the lone real wild card in the race.  Up against the top 2 though he probably can't beat them. In 2012 he may have won the nomination.

As for Ran Paul, while there are more Republican primary voters who are semi libertarian and semi isolationist as Paul is there is no question they aren't the majority of the party and if Rand Paul ends up in a two way race against either Jeb Bush or Scott Walker he'd be crushed.

[ShadowRocket]

I'd agree with that line-up. I'd be tempted to include Huckabee, but ultimately I expect he'll only be able to make some noise at best.

[chrisras]

It will come down to Jeb Bush or Scott Walker.  It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.  Here's why I think the other candidates aren't as strong.

1.  Christie - terrible governor, corrupt, what's his message?

2.  Huckabee - Todd Akin on steriods.

3.  Rubio - What has he done?

4.  Paul - What has he done?  To many incoherent statements.  Foreign Policy doesn't fly.

[Maxwell]

It will come down to Jeb Bush or Scott Walker.  It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.  Here's why I think the other candidates aren't as strong.

1.  Christie - terrible governor, corrupt, what's his message?

2.  Huckabee - Todd Akin on steriods.

3.  Rubio - What has he done?

4.  Paul - What has he done?  To many incoherent statements.  Foreign Policy doesn't fly.

It will come down to Hillary Clinton or John Kerry, here's why:

1. John Edwards - what has he done?

2. Barack Obama - what has he done?

[Del Tachi]

Jeb Bush
Scott Walker
Rand Paul
Mike Huckabee

[BaconBacon96]

Jeb Bush
Scott Walker
Rand Paul
Mike Huckabee

Yep, this.

Bush and Walker will compete for the establishment mainstream vote, although Walker will have more overtones to Tea Party types. Huckabee and Paul will obviously have their own voting bases.

[politicus]

Jeb Bush
Scott Walker
Rand Paul
Mike Huckabee

Yep, this.

Bush and Walker will compete for the establishment mainstream vote, although Walker will have more overtones to Tea Party types. Huckabee and Paul will obviously have their own voting bases.

This definitely seems like the logical answer. People advocating Rubio and Christie as major candidates at this point base it on what appears to be unrealistic assumptions.