Advertisement

U.S. Election: GOP candidates have major disadvantages going against big-name Clinton

Senator Ted Cruz addresses firefighters on March 10, 2015. (Reuters)
Senator Ted Cruz addresses firefighters on March 10, 2015. (Reuters)

There are still 16 months before the U.S. presidential election, but you might think it was just around the corner with all the campaign frenzy that’s running, if not in high gear, at far higher RPMs than one would believe justified.

On the other hand, you could argue the 2016 presidential election campaign began election night November, 6 2012. And it has never stopped. Indeed, one might conclude the United States has been in constant presidential campaign mode since the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon election over 50 years ago.

If anything, intensity is even greater pointing toward the 2016 election with an “open” presidency and incumbent vice president more a joke than a realistic candidate.

An Early Evaluation

Democrats

The obvious Democrat is no surprise—Hillary Clinton. She has money, organization, and even more stars on her resume than in 2008 (she can now add Secretary of State and grandmother). Polls suggest that the strong majority of Democrats expect and want her to be the Democratic presidential nominee.

Just as important, perhaps, is she has a legend—the first woman president pushing those interested in historic firsts to support her (some with greater enthusiasm than others). Now is (finally) her time albeit eight years later than she expected. Nor are there prominent alternatives to challenge her—no major governor or charismatic senator standing in the way of the Clinton inevitability.

[ Opposing view: Hillary Clinton an open book, thanks to 'Hard Choices' ]

Her negatives are also obvious. The Clinton name inspires—and repels. The thought of her husband back in the White House turns stomachs for millions. She has been around the track many times; her campaigning appears rusty/dutiful rather than energetic; moreover, she will be 69 with never-fully-explained health issues lingering in the background. She is not the charismatic campaigner that Bill was and remains.

She also brings with her a long string of complicated, virtually inexplicable scandals dating from Arkansas politics over 35 years ago to the most recent head-shaking exercises associated with manipulation of private and official e-mails. Moreover, having been sandbagged once, when the Clinton express was derailed by the better organized Obama grassroots effort, opponents know she can be beaten.

Alternative Democrats

On the other hand, finding a Democrat that wants to go toe-to-toe with the Clinton meat grinder is akin to locating teeth in a hen.

The most bruited about is Senator Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts), who is the current darling of the Democrat left. Steadfastly denying she intends to run, Warren appears to be more of a stalking horse designed to drag Clinton leftward.

Republicans

Prospective GOP candidates, on the other hand, multiply faster than rabbits. A recently circulated preference list identified 33 possibilities. Most (somewhat cruelly) can be jumbled together as has-beens, never-weres, and never will-bes. When you have 33 potential candidates, you don’t have a candidate. Each has looked at the competition and said, “I may not be Abraham Lincoln, but I’m as good as these other guys and gals.”

Again, the big name in this gaggle is former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. But what is his legend? Make it the first instance in which both father and two sons became president? It’s not incredibly compelling. The positive case is that “Bush 45” is competent, experienced, (very) well financed, and with an engaging family (Hispanic wife; attractive children).

But his strengths are his weaknesses: too many “Bushes” (even earlier declared by his mother, who subsequently rescinded the remark), too much fat-cat support, too fragile a wife, too “middle-of-the-road” for Republican conservatives, and too little personal charisma, especially when compared with a barn-burner speechifier such as first term Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

And Cruz (Canadian born but still a U.S. citizen qualified to be president) is the darling of the Tea Party right and with Hispanic ancestry to boot. He hit every conservative hot button during his March 23 announcement of his candidacy for president at a Christian college in Virginia. By being first to announce his candidacy, Cruz gathered useful momentum and media attention. He encounters, however, the same question that faced first term senator Barak Obama—can a man who has never run anything (but gives a great speech) become a good president? A skeptical U.S. voter might say that we’ve tried that type of candidate from the left as president—to enormous societal division. Do we really want a comparably (un)qualified individual from the right?

Whoever Republicans and Democrats select, Democrats have the easier path to victory. With more large states (California, NY, Illinois, Pennsylvania) “in the bag” for Democrats, Republicans may have to count on voter fatigue with Democrat Obama after two terms to pull them through.

David T. Jones is a retired State Department Senior Foreign Service Career Officer who has published several hundred books, articles, columns, and reviews on U.S. - Canadian bilateral issues and general foreign policy. During a career that spanned over 30 years, he concentrated on politico-military issues, serving as advisor for two Army Chiefs of Staff. He has just published Alternative North Americas: What Canada and the United States Can Learn from Each Other.