Is Paul Ryan the frontrunner for the Republicans in 2016 as of the end of 2012?

Well sure glad that billion dollar spin campaign got you to believe it. Fact is Ryan's plans will be discussed in history as what "could have" saved a great nation from financial ruin, but lies spread for the gain of leftist power made it impossible to "sell."

obvious Child said:

Romney got his ass beat for a variety of reasons, one of which was appearing dishonest.

Ryan earned his nickname Lyin' Ryan. And his budget proposals shaft the economy by damaging non-healthcare sectors by sucking out money with a plan that is in no way even remotely capable of keeping disbursements to healthcare costs. Not to mention his own budget plan increases the deficit. Plus he holds the same beliefs as Akins on abortion, not to mention anti-gay marriage beliefs.

A proven liar, with a plan that screws over people and the economy, raises the deficit by trading safety net for rich tax cuts, has extremely conservative social beliefs. Good luck with that.

Click to expand...

Einzige said:

The Republicans have long acted in accord with the "next in line" principle for their Presidential nominations, but just who the next-in-line is sometimes varies: occasionally it's the runner-up in the previous primary (Reagan), occasionally it's their Congressional leader (Dole), but Republican Vice-Presidents and Vice-Presidential nominees, actually, have not had much success in becoming Presidential nominees. With the exception of George H.W. Bush, the last former Vice-Presidential nominee on the Republican ticket to attain the Presidential nomination was Bob Dole in 1996, and there was a twenty year gap between his Vice-Presidential and Presidential nominations.

I think, for now, Ryan has to be assumed to be the frontrunner for want of any other candidate. I do not at all think he will be the nominee. I think it's especially unlikely he'll be nominated if the Democrats put up Biden because of how badly Biden beat him in this year's Vice-Presidential debates.

In short: I answer 'yes' to my own question, but 'no' to the greater question of whether he'll actually win the nomination.

Click to expand...

Its been 80 years since a losing VP nominee became President. Its a bit of a kiss of death. But, what is a bigger kiss of death for Ryan is he is a little too far to the right to ever be elected POTUS.

a351 said:

Absolutely not. Ryan won't simply ride into the sunset ala Sarah Palin, but his influence in the GOP peaked during this election cycle due to the Romney loss. I'd look for Rubio, or a conservative that could appeal to more a moderate crowd such as Mitch Daniels or Rob Portman in 2016.

Click to expand...

Sarah Palin hardly rode into the sunset.... she went kicking and screaming until she finally realized she was yesterday's news and today was irrelevant.

CalGun said:

Well sure glad that billion dollar spin campaign got you to believe it. Fact is Ryan's plans will be discussed in history as what "could have" saved a great nation from financial ruin, but lies spread for the gain of leftist power made it impossible to "sell."

Click to expand...

That's because the people pushing it can't do math.

Ryan's own math keeps the deficit climbing for years. He admitted it would take 30 years before we got back to the black. Furthermore, his healthcare reform is a terrible idea as it pegs program outlays to standard inflation while medical inflation typically runs at least 7% higher. One can do a simple compounding of this to show after 5 years out of pocket costs skyrocket. This will directly hurt consumer spending as consumers are now forced into a China like system where most costs are covered out of pocket. Net that with the pathetic savings most Americans have and you get a very bad outcome for America. Not a good time to be long on retail equities.

Most people never bothered to actually research what he said, you for instance, but instead just went on the claims of bigwigs who can't do math themselves.

Ryan's idea that we must cut spending is right, but if he actually gave a **** about deficit reduction, he'd let the tax cuts expire. Instead he pushed a gutting of the safety system to fund tax cuts for the rich that by his own math don't let the budget get back to the black for three long decades. And he's doing it on assumptions that make Obama's crazy budget plan look realistic. It's F-ing Hilarious to watch people bash Obama's budget as unrealistic and then turn around and say that Ryan's is realistic when Ryan's assumptions aren't even supported by organizations like Cato and Heritage. Shows how much thinking is going on upstairs for them.

DA60 said:

You people are seriously discussing who the front runner is for 2016...in Nov. 2012?

Why not 2020? Or 2032?

Why not discuss which pre-schoolers have the edge for 2064?



Partisan politics is destroying America.

Click to expand...

It was talked about the night of the election. Heck, it was talked about long before the election.

johnny_rebson said:

Not after Christie helped Obama get reelected.

Click to expand...

By doing his job as a Governor. You wouldn't want your Governor to be irresponsible and "playing politics" while thousands of your people are out of their homes and are facing winter weather, would you?

Well, you shouldn't anyways.

He lacked charisma as seen in losing his own district for the presidential race and overall was boring to people.