Comment

House Republican Compares Debt Default to the American Revolution

64
kirkspencer10/12/2013 1:52:02 pm PDT

Let’s face it. The reason we saw Romney and McCain as candidates was because the Republican party changed the rules just like the Democrats did after their 1968 debacle. The rule give the establishment a strong say in who wins. If the popular candidate is overwhelmingly popular he wins, but less than 60% means the establishment candidate wins instead. In the last couple of runs the bonus was that while the Tea Party had the majority of votes they split their strength between various choices, while the establishment remained fairly constant behind their only real choice. (Huntsman wasn’t a choice for them, sorry.)

I’d like to say I expect the same of 2016, but I haven’t seen an establishment option stand out. Romney may run again but I doubt it, and even if he does he’ll get nothing like the attention he did before. Huntsman still carries the Obama taint and the ‘we have to raise taxes’ taint that caused most of the establishment to recoil. We still have time, of course, but at this time I think 2016 will be the year the TP selects the nominee.

It’s going to be amusing, in a macabre sort of way.