Trump, should he run 3rd party, might well take more votes from the Republican nominee in 2016. But Perot was certainly not why Bill Clinton was elected POTUS. That’s a myth usually coming from conservatives who want to pretend Clinton’s election was a fluke. Exit polling showed otherwise. Perot took votes from both of the major party candidates. And minus Perot, Clinton would still have won and with a very healthy 349-189 Electoral College landslide.I’ve suspected for a while now that Trump is the new Ross Perot. He has supported Hillary financially in the past, and has mentioned favoring single-payer health care. The threat of a third party run is exactly what I expect from him. After all, it worked for Bill.
Jon
What do you mean “even” Bernie Sanders? Based on current polls, he is gaining on Hillary Clinton. And Joe Biden might throw his hat in the ring as well.
You must have watched Rachel Maddow (as I did), who spoke about this. Perot was actually not the spoiler he is claimed to have been.
I saw Carly shadowing Hillary in SC awhile back. But I forget if on MSNBC, CNN, or FOX.Was the mainstream media even covering Carly? Or are they deathly afraid of giving a GOP minority the spotlight?
PS–which party has a more diverse set of candidates?
Why? I thought Clinton 2016 was supposed to be said and done, and that no one should even bother trying. Or is the left now noticing her massive drop in favorably ratings and her troubles in places like PA and MI?
If you really want to pull the “we were first card”, would you mind telling me which party sent the first african american senator to Washington?I saw Carly shadowing Hillary in SC awhile back. But I forget if on MSNBC, CNN, or FOX.
Since it was you who played the diversity card here, a better question to me then is which of the 2 parties has nominated the first woman for VP and has elected the 1st black POTUS and then reelected him? And who in 2016 has the better chance of electing the 1st woman President? If you want to talk diversity.
Sen Revels, a minister in the AME church and he served in the Union Army during the Civil War. But surely you know the parties have changed since then. We can’t say he would have been a Republican in the 20th century let alone today.If you really want to pull the “we were first card”, would you mind telling me which party sent the first african american senator to Washington?
Yes he is gaining which might be something Biden is looking at. But I am just still thinking it’s going to be an uphill road to pass Hillary so that’s why I said it that way. I actually am planning to vote for Bernie but then would vote for Hillary in the general. But if he does get the nomination, a CNN poll shows him beating more of the Republicans than just Trump in the general.
No, I am being facetious.
African American Babies are 3 times more likely to be aborted than a white child.
More like the more things change, the more they stay the same! 
Indeed. Much of what’s been posted serves only to be provocative and antagonistic.
Yeah. I’m disappointed in the direction of the thread. It was meant to be a discussion of the candidates running for the Republican nomination.
You say this so definitively. Not usually a good idea this far out. I heard someone on TV today say that the second group may do better than the first group because they won’t have Trump to try to out-talk.
“IMO we do not have an informed electorate for the most part.” That is the understatement of the century! I also like what I’ve heard about John Kasich. Both he and Jeb Bush are two of the “adults” on the Republican side.
But does Kasich throw enough red meat to the Republican base? And he did expand Medicaid under Obamacare. That’s not popular with the Republican base from what I can tell. He has passed up chances to criticize Hillary and he revealed Hillary even came to his engagement party. But I agree with what Meltzerboy said about Kasich and Bush being the adults among the Republican candidates. And I do think if the GOP nomination goes the route it has taken in previous yrs, that Bush or Kasich still have a chance. I actually think they would be a couple of Republicans with a better chance in the general. But then I don’t subscribe to the theory that just because McCain and Romney lost to Obama, it means America would elect someone even more extreme and appealing to the “further right”.
I say that definitely because the candidates who aren’t on the stage for this first debate are essentially fringe candidates. With an unprecedented number of candidates running, these minor candidates have almost no chance of gaining any traction.
