mb666:

For the love of god I just want a fiscal conservative GOP for once. Jeb's brother def wasn't one.

I'm a big Ron Paul fa (LIBERTARIAN) so will probably end up supporting Rand. That said he is too engaged with some of the crazy elements of the Tea Party.

I do love me some Ron Paul, but the problem is he's too extreme. We need a more moderate libertarian candidate.

"You stop being an asshole when it sucks to be you." -IlliniProgrammer "Your grammar made me wish I'd been aborted." -happypantsmcgee
 

I think that kind of over the top support for those kind of issues are the only way a Republican can win. Plus, he's Cuban too. The Republicans need to get a much bigger chunk of minority voters if they expect to win.

Competition is a sin. -John D. Rockefeller
 

It would be great if we had a candidate who not only treasured fiscal conservative and small government views, but who had a moderate and perhaps even progressive stance on social issues and foreign policy.

I'm all for the GOP, but all of these guys seem to feel okay saying "let's blow up x country if they look at us the wrong way," x country usually being in the Middle East.

My problems with the Democratic Party are too many to name, but generally along the same lines of extremism: not every social "issue" needs to be catered to and not every whim of the people is a good idea.

Strong disclaimer: I know exactly jack shit about politics.

in it 2 win it
 
crackjack:
WalMartShopper:

marco will be the face

Not sure about that anymore. Kinda shot himself in the foot with his over-the-top support for the Senate's immigration bill. Turned a lot of Republicans off to him.

that's exactly why he's the best candidate.

If the glove don't fit, you must acquit!
 
WalMartShopper:

marco will be the face

He's a complete moron who'll hopefully be forgotten about soon.

It doesn't really matter anyway though, since the Republicans will likely never win another presidential election. Oh well.

 

Ideal ticket would be Rand/Christie but I will accept a Christie/Rand....

Fiscal conservatives who will fight unions and Obamacare

"Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."
 
Gekko21:

Ideal ticket would be Rand/Christie but I will accept a Christie/Rand....

Fiscal conservatives who will fight unions and Obamacare

That would be an interesting ticket. However, I am not sure that they would get along well.

Another interesting ticket would be Christie/Crist or vis versa.

Also, I would like to see Gore run again, just not with Blood. It would not go over well.

"He that hath a beard is more than a youth, and he that hath no beard is less than a man." ― William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing
 
Silent Guardian:
Gekko21:

Ideal ticket would be Rand/Christie but I will accept a Christie/Rand....

Fiscal conservatives who will fight unions and Obamacare

That would be an interesting ticket. However, I am not sure that they would get along well.

Another interesting ticket would be Christie/Crist or vis versa.

Also, I would like to see Gore run again, just not with Blood. It would not go over well.

Crist as in Charlie Crist? Ha! Keep dreaming.

 
Silent Guardian:
Gekko21:

Ideal ticket would be Rand/Christie but I will accept a Christie/Rand....

Fiscal conservatives who will fight unions and Obamacare

That would be an interesting ticket. However, I am not sure that they would get along well.

Another interesting ticket would be Christie/Crist or vis versa.

Also, I would like to see Gore run again, just not with Blood. It would not go over well.

You should be endorsing Clinton, like the real Batman (Affleck).

"It's very easy to have too many goals and be overwhelmed by them... The trick is to find the one thing you can focus on that represents every other single thing you want in life." -- @"Edmundo Braverman"
 

ANT for dictator.

I disagree with the people who say we--the GOP--should nominate a moderate. That failed in 2012, 2008, 1996 and 1992. There is simply no evidence that the GOP is too far to the right. At the end of the day, the American people don't elect a political philosophy--they elect an individual, which is atypical for a modern democratic nation.

What the GOP needs--frankly, what the Democrats need--is a charismatic figurehead who can articulate his or her own philosophy in a manner that the masses can understand. He or she must also have that likability factor and/or the ability to maintain high personal approval ratings by the power of his or her personality. Ultimately, the candidate(s) who possess those qualities as well as the ability to raise substantial sums of money will win the nomination.

There really are only 2 candidates in the GOP that could represent the articulate, likable/respected candidate, and that's Ted Cruz and Chris Christie. I think ultimately Chris Christie wins the nomination because he'll be able to raise the most money from the country club Republicans and he'll be viewed as having the best ability to win a general election. The Democrats have 2 candidates that fit that mould as well--Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden. No one else will even remotely compete. If both had a heart attack and died before 2015 the Democrats would have no shot in 2016 as there is a cavernous gap between the top 2 candidates and everyone else in the Democrat Party.

I'm saying the GOP ultimately nominates Chris Christie and the Democrats Hillary Clinton. And 2016 will again set new spending records since both candidates will have the ability to raise large sums of money. The dark horse is Mike Huckabee for the GOP who has high likability and who is amazingly articulate. But I doubt he runs.

 

As a political science undergrad I can attest that moderates don't do well in elections. Conventional wisdom assumes that moderates are the best candidates but in reality voters are more attracted to candidates on the periphery (more extreme/partisan views).

Whoever wins, Democrat or Republican, he will be better than Obama. Obama promised "change" but gave bullshit. I actually sympathized with him because he ran under a somewhat libertarian ticket in terms of social issues and on international policy. And of course this clown didn't do sh1t on US interventionist policy in the Middle East, and elsewhere throughout the world, and he also has been hostile against legalizing drugs such as marijuana. And he is attempting to bring the financial sector into the stone ages. GTFO Obama

 
FutureWaller:

Rand Paul 2016

I can only hope...I worked on Ron's campaign in Iowa during the caucuses and it sucked to see us come so close. I think Rand can pull it, he has been leading the GOP field in Iowa.

Re: Bus running in 2016, what a joke. Add the possibility of Hillary for the Dems and Liz Cheney running for Wyoming's Senate seat and you a huge load of fail.

"There are only two opinions in this world: Mine and the wrong one." -Jeremy Clarkson
 

Romney is a business Democrat. You cannot possibly get more moderate than him.

Guys, let me just sum it up for you. This country will continue to spend money it doesn't have. The 70% of this country without an education will continue to breed at higher rates than the 30% of this country that are educated.Immigration "reform" will pass, fucking blacks and unions (Dems get a new, growing voter block and Republicans finally break big union backs). The toilet bowl will continue to swirl.

Minimize your tax exposure, liquidity is a premium and fend for yourself.

 
TNA:

Romney is a business Democrat. You cannot possibly get more moderate than him.

Guys, let me just sum it up for you. This country will continue to spend money it doesn't have. The 70% of this country without an education will continue to breed at higher rates than the 30% of this country that are educated.Immigration "reform" will pass, fucking blacks and unions (Dems get a new, growing voter block and Republicans finally break big union backs). The toilet bowl will continue to swirl.

Minimize your tax exposure, liquidity is a premium and fend for yourself.

Are you Jesus?

 
TNA:

Romney is a business Democrat. You cannot possibly get more moderate than him.

Guys, let me just sum it up for you. This country will continue to spend money it doesn't have. The 70% of this country without an education will continue to breed at higher rates than the 30% of this country that are educated.Immigration "reform" will pass, fucking blacks and unions (Dems get a new, growing voter block and Republicans finally break big union backs). The toilet bowl will continue to swirl.

Minimize your tax exposure, liquidity is a premium and fend for yourself.

Please get on the ticket for 2016. You've got a [questionably] strong voter base from WSO alone.

in it 2 win it
 

Ted Cruz is not a natural born American citizen, he was born in Canada to a Cuban father and American mother, and he is not eligible to be President. Granted he is already trying to argue that since his mother was American, he is as well, but in my opinion the Constitution is clear that a only a "natural born US citizen may be President"

"Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, for knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA."
 
TNA:

Romney is a business Democrat. You cannot possibly get more moderate than him.

Guys, let me just sum it up for you. This country will continue to spend money it doesn't have. The 70% of this country without an education will continue to breed at higher rates than the 30% of this country that are educated.Immigration "reform" will pass, fucking blacks and unions (Dems get a new, growing voter block and Republicans finally break big union backs). The toilet bowl will continue to swirl.

Minimize your tax exposure, liquidity is a premium and fend for yourself.

The GOP's suicide in re immigration reform has pretty much turned me away from the party forever. It just doesn't make any sense. Hell, they're about to lose Texas forever (TEXAS!) due to its changing demographics and they just don't seem to understand or even care.

 
Gekko21:

Ted Cruz is not a natural born American citizen, he was born in Canada to a Cuban father and American mother, and he is not eligible to be President. Granted he is already trying to argue that since his mother was American, he is as well, but in my opinion the Constitution is clear that a only a "natural born US citizen may be President"

This is incorrect. The Constitution does NOT define what a natural born citizen is and this point has never been litigated before, so there is no final answer from the courts. Ted Cruz was a U.S. citizen at birth because his mother was a U.S. citizen. Until a court says otherwise, this is the accepted interpretation of the federal government regarding "natural born". The federal government's default position as of right now is that anyone who was a U.S. citizen at birth is a natural born U.S. citizen. No doubt Cruz will be challenged on this point legally, but the courts will throw out the lawsuits for lack of standing. So the only way Cruz is ever ruled ineligible is if Congress itself sues and overturns--in the Supreme Court--the commonly accepted position of natural born.

Wikipedia has a thorough entry on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause

 

Chris Christie is my favorite.

The Republicans will not win the presidency for a long time until their political machine changes. The fundamental issue is not views or beliefs - but rather the way they go about winning elections. The GOP machine's explanation for every election they lose is that there was not 'enough' of a turnout of their constituency. This is partially because the GOP has had and will continue to have dramatic victories on the Congressional level because their constituency's activism dominates utterly at the grassroots level for specific districts. The GOP then has the same people (these political directors rise through the ranks) then run their senatorial and presidential campaigns and they just don't do as well. The fact that even 2012 when Democrats were on very unfavorable terms - they still managed to hold on to both the Senate and the presidency.

Different approaches work well for national level politics. I know some posters on the forum think Democrats are stupid - but do not confuse critique of their policy with their political finesse. Democrats are much, much better at manipulating the political consciousness of the nation than republicans. A couple of Republican senatorial candidates make comments on rape, and they are able to keep that fresh in the minds of voters constantly. Yet when you look at Democratic issues - fast and furious, IRS scandal, Benghazi inconsistencies, seizure of documents from the Associated Press - Republicans are completely unable to capitalize.

The reason for that is that Democrats are much better at linking issues/scandals/controversey in the Republican Party directly to how it will negatively impact a voter's life (if a women is raped, she will not be able to get an abortion if pregnant, etc.) Republicans are unable to do this - they keep throwing out 'big government' and how the debt will be the doom of us all - but quite honestly an average American voter cannot seemingly comprehend how the mind boggling debt will impact their life personally. The only issue Republicans seem to be able to manipulate politically is gun control - and that isn't even their political machine, that's the NRA's. Republicans need a national "message" or theme. The Democrats have a pretty effective one - income inequality, women's rights, and 'protection' of minorities. To win national politics you need effective messaging - it can't just be the economy sucks and I promise I will fix it better than the other guy.

 

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

 

As a fairly moderate Democrat (and fucking bleeding heart lib on WSO), these are the Republicans I could potentially back in 2016: Jon Huntsman and Chris Christie.

"For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."
 

Republicans keep pushing moderates and they will keep losing. Democrats are never voting Republican no matter how moderate they are. Romney rolled out Romneycare in Mass, had gun control in Mass, was pro choice, he was outside the traditional Christian religion and was as clean as a white sheet. Dude lost to Obama with a pretty crappy record.

Moderates don't get people out to vote.

I wish Republicans would simply let the gay rights thing die and support pro choice. But in the end of the day they don't really have to do anything. They might lose the Presidency more times than win it going forward, but they have gained ground in the House and in State legislatures. Bifurcated power and in the end both parties are exactly the same.

 

Other than Chris Christie's personal embrace of Obama--which has utterly infuriated me--the guy has a pretty solid (almost amazingly solid) conservative track record, starting first and foremost with his absolute destruction of the public sector unions and his getting the budget back from going over the cliff (by cutting things like the NY/NJ tube project).

Christie is downright right wing by the standards of the vast, VAST majority of conservatives and he's been so in a deep blue state. It's not like he's running Texas. His record is in the face of intense opposition.

 
TNA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_preside...

Romney won by 1.2MM voters. Democrats are going to need to get more people out to vote considering less than half of Texas population voted.

And what keeps Texas from turning blue is the fact that you need to be a legal citizen to actually vote. Considering the redistricting efforts that Texas has been doing I think they are safe for the immediate future.

Wow that's a bigger margin of victory than I would have expected. I definitely see your point though hahaha

 
TNA:

And what keeps Texas from turning blue is the fact that you need to be a legal citizen to actually vote. Considering the redistricting efforts that Texas has been doing I think they are safe for the immediate future.

With both Republicans and Democrats fully supporting immigration amnesty, how long do you think this will last? Amnesty means an automatic 15MM+ new blue voters, ones who also completely outbreed red voters.

 
Best Response

Just as much as I want Republicans to become less socially conservative can we also agree that the Democrats need to evolve past the point of just giving away free shit? I mean yeah, one day Texas will probably turn blue because of immigration and birth rates, but is that a good thing?

This country no longer needs uneducated workers. Everything and anything is becoming automated. We cannot employ the English speaking, US citizens we have now. Is it really a good idea to encourage more people, who have little education, who don't even speak English, to immigrate? Especially with higher than replacement rate birth rates?

Democrats need to evolve just as Republicans do or else their victories will by pyrrhic. There is a point (IMO we've already past it) where you cannot simply raise taxes to solve fiscal problems. Europe is in deep financial trouble and they have little defense spending and very high taxes. One day this will be the US.

And just as poor, white Republicans vote against their best interest can we also admit that Democrats do the same thing? The unemployment rate in African American communities is astounding. Union membership is declining. Does anyone think immigration reform is going to hurt educated, white collar workers? It is going to fuck minority and union workers, the same people voting for the guys pushing for this.

 
holla_back:
TNA:

And what keeps Texas from turning blue is the fact that you need to be a legal citizen to actually vote. Considering the redistricting efforts that Texas has been doing I think they are safe for the immediate future.

With both Republicans and Democrats fully supporting immigration amnesty, how long do you think this will last? Amnesty means an automatic 15MM+ new blue voters, ones who also completely outbreed red voters.

Pass ID laws and redistrict and you can hold on for a long time. Hispanics might naturally be Democrat, but getting them to vote is another thing. Texas already has enough Mexicans to be Democrat, yet the state is pretty much under control.

Also, this is an easy fix. You can just tweak the Republican model in TX and you'll have Mexican Republicans. The national doctrine is different from the local doctrine. Just like you'll have conservative, Catholic Democrats voting blue because of union cards and you'll have educated liberals in SF voting blue because of gay rights and environmental issues.

Mexican immigrants don't give a shit about gay rights which is a big national issue. They care about healthcare and the economy. So the national Democrat platform might not appeal to them.

http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2013/jun/04/karl-rove/karl-r…

 
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

 
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against an overarching federal decision.

 
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

I wonder if this was done solely so that he could keep some cred with mouthbreathers in the South and Midwest?

Still, I can see that coming back to haunt him in a presidential election.

 

Susana Martinez, Kelly Ayotte, Nikki Haley have been eyed. I don't think they will be ready but right now someone that's off the radar is better than any of these jackoffs on the radar. if a white guy runs it's auto loss

If the glove don't fit, you must acquit!
 
holla_back:
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

I wonder if this was done solely so that he could keep some cred with mouthbreathers in the South and Midwest?

Still, I can see that coming back to haunt him in a presidential election.

I don't support gay marriage, and for many people who support gay marriage it comes in #100 on a list of issues they care about when walking into the voting booth. For example, I'm pro-life on abortion but it ranks just below one's position on AIDS relief in Africa for me when I consider who I'm voting for.

The world doesn't revolve around the degenerate belief systems of New York and San Francisco. I recommend getting out of your bubble if you want to understand American politics.

 
DCDepository:
holla_back:
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

I wonder if this was done solely so that he could keep some cred with mouthbreathers in the South and Midwest?

Still, I can see that coming back to haunt him in a presidential election.

I don't support gay marriage, and for many people who support gay marriage it comes in #100 on a list of issues they care about when walking into the voting booth. For example, I'm pro-life on abortion but it ranks just below one's position on AIDS relief in Africa for me when I consider who I'm voting for.

The world doesn't revolve around the degenerate belief systems of New York and San Francisco. I recommend getting out of your bubble if you want to understand American politics.

It's funny, because you're probably gonna have to get out of a lot of bubbles before you truly understand much of the world outside of politics.

But I digress...

 
ShotsFired:
DCDepository:
holla_back:
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

I wonder if this was done solely so that he could keep some cred with mouthbreathers in the South and Midwest?

Still, I can see that coming back to haunt him in a presidential election.

I don't support gay marriage, and for many people who support gay marriage it comes in #100 on a list of issues they care about when walking into the voting booth. For example, I'm pro-life on abortion but it ranks just below one's position on AIDS relief in Africa for me when I consider who I'm voting for.

The world doesn't revolve around the degenerate belief systems of New York and San Francisco. I recommend getting out of your bubble if you want to understand American politics.

It's funny, because you're probably gonna have to get out of a lot of bubbles before you truly understand much of the world outside of politics.

But I digress...

If your comment even made a modicum of sense then I think I would care.

 
DCDepository:
holla_back:
DCDepository:
mb666:

Middle America won't vote for Christie. He's conservative mainly on business issues. 6 pack Joe isn't going to nominate someone from New Jersey to run the ticket... and it is a golden opportunity for the Republicans considering what a clown Obama is.

Rand Paul may be the best albeit I much prefer his father. I also like Gary Johnson, actually voted for him in 2012 lolz.

Christie came out against gay marriage.

I wonder if this was done solely so that he could keep some cred with mouthbreathers in the South and Midwest?

Still, I can see that coming back to haunt him in a presidential election.

I don't support gay marriage, and for many people who support gay marriage it comes in #100 on a list of issues they care about when walking into the voting booth. For example, I'm pro-life on abortion but it ranks just below one's position on AIDS relief in Africa for me when I consider who I'm voting for.

The world doesn't revolve around the degenerate belief systems of New York and San Francisco. I recommend getting out of your bubble if you want to understand American politics.

Do you mean the bubble of well-educated, high-earners? If so, I'm happy to be placed into that bubble.

There are no practical reasons to be against two adults that love each other entering into a contract.

And, frankly, I really wonder about people who are strongly opposed to gay marriage. Really strange.

 

Yeah. I mean just look at it. We've doubled the debt and I can't see it ever decreasing. We'll keep spending borrowed money because politicians are incentivized to spend and penalized to tax. Nothing will change this.

Me, personally, I am very illiquid asset adverse. I think owning property is dead weight. Build up a cash reserve and try to minimize your tax exposure however you possibly can. Start a business on the side or have multiple revenue streams. Be mobile and be liquid.

 

one question (I'm not American, so please excuse if this is a stupid question): I am aware that not going to a particular college doesn't mean one didn't get into it. one may have one's own private reasons etc. but what surprises me: why did George Bush go to Yale even though he was a poorly performing student in high school and had very low test scores, but his brother Jeb Bush who excelled in school to the University of Texas (which is certainly not a bad uni at all, but compared to yale...).

 

Probably wasn't into that whole Yale thing. Or maybe he just loved good looking women. Could be a combination of both, of course.

"For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."
 

In fairness to Bush, he moved around, went to a private school in Houston and then finished two years at The Phillips Academy, a prestigious prep school. He also studied history at Yale, not really a hard subject.

Love the Bush's or hate them, what an impressively powerful family. Two Presidents and a Governor. Pretty amazing.

 
<span class=keyword_link><a href=/company/trilantic-north-america>TNA</a></span>:

In fairness to Bush, he moved around, went to a private school in Houston and then finished two years at The Phillips Academy, a prestigious prep school. He also studied history at Yale, not really a hard subject.

Love the Bush's or hate them, what an impressively powerful family. Two Presidents and a Governor. Pretty amazing.

dude half of maine was named after the family already before their father was even born and their dad was POTUS...makes things signifigantly easier in life. If you want to be impressed go back to ones who actually made the money a couple of generations prior.

 

Jeb Bush probably won't run.

The problem with Republicans is that they have a lot of VP-caliber people but few Presidential-caliber guys. Rubio, Paul, Cruz, all those guys are lightweights in my opinion and you cant put out lightweights against Sec. Clinton. I see two people that could be prime time: Chris Christie and Scott Walker. Everyone else is ranges from a decent to a very impressive #2.

IN case you're wondering if Im talking about your guy

Cruz, Paul, Rubio, Ayotte, Martinez, Jindal, Sandoval, are definite losers at the top of the ticket.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." --Abraham Lincoln
 
UK2013plus:

one question (I'm not American, so please excuse if this is a stupid question): I am aware that not going to a particular college doesn't mean one didn't get into it. one may have one's own private reasons etc. but what surprises me: why did George Bush go to Yale even though he was a poorly performing student in high school and had very low test scores, but his brother Jeb Bush who excelled in school to the University of Texas (which is certainly not a bad uni at all, but compared to yale...).

George W. was rejected from the University of Texas Law School in 1970.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice2000/bush/cron.html

 

My political dream team would be Clint Eastwood as President and Schwarzenegger as Secretary of State. I cannot think of who would make a good VP.

"He that hath a beard is more than a youth, and he that hath no beard is less than a man." ― William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing
 

Jeb Bush is the ultimate moderate, corporate republican. He will raise a ton of money so he cant be written off and he may well end up as the candidate if the party once again chooses to go that route with it's nominee. Money talks and he will have a ton of it...I can speak from personal experience that he has spent the last few years working the donor circuit very hard (i work for a fairly prominent republican donor and he has been up to our offices multiple times and he has been giving speeches at wall st conferences for Barclays). He will be a formidable cash machine with little or no actual positions except that he is "moderate", "sensible", business-friendly, can deliver Florida, and has an hispanic wife.

I do think if he wins the GOP nomination a third party challenge from the right is very possible and in fact its possible that the republican party splits entirely between the corporate/neo-conservative wing and the tea party/libertarian wing.

 

One thing is for sure, I'm voting for Clinton if she runs.

"It's very easy to have too many goals and be overwhelmed by them... The trick is to find the one thing you can focus on that represents every other single thing you want in life." -- @"Edmundo Braverman"
 
Alexander Hamilton:

One thing is for sure, I'm voting for Clinton if she runs.

Do you see the irony that a supporter of the left-wing, liberal Democratic Party has a favorite historical figure who is often known for his defense of the U.S. Constitution in the Federalist Papers? Sort of major cognitive dissonance.

 
DCDepository:
Alexander Hamilton:

One thing is for sure, I'm voting for Clinton if she runs.

Do you see the irony that a supporter of the left-wing, liberal Democratic Party has a favorite historical figure who is often known for his defense of the U.S. Constitution in the Federalist Papers? Sort of major cognitive dissonance.

Federalist= Strong central government Democrats favor strong central government

Hamilton believed in implied powers The (new) GOP favors Strict construction Democrats favor judicial activism

The GOP's stronghold is the south The GOP favors decentralized government

Hamilton would be a Wall Street Democrat. That is to say, barley a Democrat, like Jamie Dimon.

"It's very easy to have too many goals and be overwhelmed by them... The trick is to find the one thing you can focus on that represents every other single thing you want in life." -- @"Edmundo Braverman"
 

Ifjeb bush gets nominated and faces hillary there literally will be zero difference in terms of policy between the two candidates...i gues jeb may favor a 37% marginal tax rate whereas clinton might say 40% but that is the extent of the difference. It would be wide open for a third party challenge.

Talking about crist on a presidential ticket for either party is a waste of time...no chance.

 

Rerum voluptatem eius at doloremque expedita. Pariatur quas libero quis dolorum pariatur sed cupiditate. Repellat et non inventore ipsum ut ea. Quisquam labore amet sed. Doloremque ipsa numquam blanditiis ut.

"It's very easy to have too many goals and be overwhelmed by them... The trick is to find the one thing you can focus on that represents every other single thing you want in life." -- @"Edmundo Braverman"
 

Excepturi et tenetur nemo minima eaque consequatur voluptatem iure. Ut voluptates aspernatur voluptatem iste possimus sint fuga cupiditate. Consectetur omnis autem excepturi qui voluptas.

Doloribus nesciunt accusamus voluptates. Ducimus iure tenetur quam illo. Nesciunt dicta veritatis iure quis.

Dolorem in et optio sint. Adipisci ipsum nobis enim debitis. Quaerat eaque sit enim eaque non ea recusandae laborum. Eligendi et molestiae similique. Laboriosam dolore et voluptatem rerum laborum repellendus beatae.

 

Repudiandae nulla consequatur tempora molestiae architecto in. Quidem soluta aspernatur omnis quas corrupti occaecati. Quia vitae perspiciatis necessitatibus sit similique.

Quo praesentium ducimus magni aut nulla. Necessitatibus dolores dolor accusantium sapiente voluptatem provident quod. Sit consequatur qui est in sit sit est. Tempora qui aut rem facere.

Dolore voluptatibus labore omnis vitae sunt. Quidem ut placeat saepe necessitatibus quis temporibus. Suscipit ut vel a velit. Quia doloremque dolore tenetur nostrum ipsum.

 

Molestias numquam amet animi fugiat voluptas quo soluta quo. Laborum a molestiae maiores ut delectus.

Delectus facere consequatur ab maxime. Aliquam magnam adipisci neque voluptate assumenda et alias facere. Harum porro tempora quibusdam saepe consectetur quae est.

Laborum delectus voluptatem doloremque illo molestiae ipsum. Aut possimus facere assumenda aperiam quis corporis. Corporis sit laudantium porro.

 

Qui et nisi aspernatur est ea deleniti. Corrupti necessitatibus at qui molestiae. Cupiditate suscipit facilis suscipit veritatis. Dolorum molestiae sint nihil animi deserunt laudantium.

Iste dolore molestias impedit minus est illum iure aliquam. Eos omnis aliquam pariatur ea modi ratione. Tempora suscipit ut similique nemo modi. Qui qui ab nam quae voluptatem nostrum perspiciatis. Cum porro doloremque natus odio.

"He that hath a beard is more than a youth, and he that hath no beard is less than a man." ― William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”