President Snyder...?

For a guy who’s played very little on the national stage, Gov. Rick Snyder is picking up surprising looks as a possible Republican presidential contender.

Credit his so-far masterful handling of the Detroit bankruptcy for lifting the governor’s profile. Lately, every time Snyder’s name is mentioned in the national media, it’s followed by the words, “a potential candidate for president in 2016.”
Snyder has passively fueled the speculation by not denying an interest, while not confirming it either. And he’d have to be handicapped as a long shot if he did get in the race.
But a country weary of inept ideologues at its helm might rally to a pragmatic problem solver with a record of getting the job done in a state that was nearly as screwed up when he took over as the nation is today.

“Absolutely he’s a viable candidate,” says Michigan pollster Steve Mitchell. “He’s a Republican governor from a swing state — if he wins reelection this fall by eight or 10 points, he’ll be an attractive option.”

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz342O4vKhd

'Course there's joy at the thought of the continued dynasty: Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush... agh....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vic01

For a guy who’s played very little on the national stage, Gov. Rick Snyder is picking up surprising looks as a possible Republican presidential contender.

Credit his so-far masterful handling of the Detroit bankruptcy for lifting the governor’s profile. Lately, every time Snyder’s name is mentioned in the national media, it’s followed by the words, “a potential candidate for president in 2016.”
Snyder has passively fueled the speculation by not denying an interest, while not confirming it either. And he’d have to be handicapped as a long shot if he did get in the race.
But a country weary of inept ideologues at its helm might rally to a pragmatic problem solver with a record of getting the job done in a state that was nearly as screwed up when he took over as the nation is today.

“Absolutely he’s a viable candidate,” says Michigan pollster Steve Mitchell. “He’s a Republican governor from a swing state — if he wins reelection this fall by eight or 10 points, he’ll be an attractive option.”

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz342O4vKhd

---

Dream on, Nolan [[Finley).

Last time I checked, Snyder pushed for Medicaid expansion in MI and is working toward the Detroit bankruptcy deal.

Snyder is absolutely disqualified by the far right base of the GOP.

To the rural, Tea Party folks in the GOP Detroit is the North American version of Moscow.

"Enid [[Oklahoma) forever, Detroit [[NYC, D.C., etc.) never..."

[[I'm picking on Enid as a small city in a beet red state, Oklahoma.)

Some might consider Governor Snyder as a possible candidate for the Republicans in 2016. However, there is no much more of an organized effort to promote the candidacy of Detroiter
Ben Carson. His new and very popular book may be part of his own effort to raise his
profile as a possible candidate. The last Republican nominee was born and raised in Detroit.
It seems to me that it is unlikely that the Republicans will select Ben Carson but he has won
some straw polls. Frankly, I think Romney has a better chance of being nominated by the Republicans in 2016 than Ben Carson.

He will be eaten alive. Please run for president. He will face the real media, not the cupcake reporters we have around here.

Is this a joke?

Heck I am a viable candidate too. To be viable you must be of a certain age and born here. Do I want it? Not a chance.

Is Nolan Finley dilusional about who votes in republican primaries?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cliffy

He will be eaten alive. Please run for president. He will face the real media, not the cupcake reporters we have around here.

---

My first thoughts too.

He may or may not have dirt to be dug up by the mudslingers, but I wonder about his nice guy image. Can he swim with the sharks?

*** BREAKING NEWS ***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

Heck I am a viable candidate too. To be viable you must be of a certain age and born here. Do I want it? Not a chance.

---

You heard it here first folks. Michigan resident DetroitPlanner is considering a run for president in 2016. DYes News tried to pin down a few of DetroitPlanner's views on important issues affecting the nation, but was unable to do so. While DYes news was unable to secure an interview with this potential candidate, the statement "Do I want it? Not a chance," is usually uttered by those who want to keep their political ambitions under their hat. We've come across information that DetroitPlanner has formed an exploratory committee and plans to visit Iowa, an early primary state, sometime this summer.

Stay tuned to DYes News for more breaking coverage of the 2016 Presidential race.

I would like to suggest a a running mate to DetroitPlanner's non candidacy Ron Paul. Although Ron Paul would bring much to the table in experience and non Washington insider allure. It would assuredly enhance DP's "Do I want it? Not a chance," stance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Wesson

I would like to suggest a a running mate to DetroitPlanner's non candidacy Ron Paul. Although Ron Paul would bring much to the table in experience and non Washington insider allure. It would assuredly enhance DP's "Do I want it? Not a chance," stance.

---

16 years = non-insider in what universe?

I will give Snyder some credit on the Detroit bankruptcy, but only because it is the ONLY EFM appointment he has gotten right. The others [[esp. Hamtramck's) have been either ineffective or outright disasters. I will also give him credit for understanding that Michigan's viability is non-existent without a strong Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

...Snyder is absolutely disqualified by the far right base of the GOP.

To the rural, Tea Party folks in the GOP Detroit is the North American version of Moscow.

"Enid [[Oklahoma) forever, Detroit [[NYC, D.C., etc.) never..."

...

---

If the Tea Party wing holds veto, then you are right. But there have been signs that the GOP is waking up to moderation.

In spite of the DY hate team's feelings, Snyder is actually quite moderate. He'd likely draw out fewer Occupy-inspired lemmings to the polls. Real liberals don't hate Snyder -- except labor where unions money supply is threatened by workers freedom of [[dis)association, aka RTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

I will give Snyder some credit on the Detroit bankruptcy, but only because it is the ONLY EFM appointment he has gotten right. The others [[esp. Hamtramck's) have been either ineffective or outright disasters. I will also give him credit for understanding that Michigan's viability is non-existent without a strong Detroit.

---

Detroit's EM [[let's be clear with that, he's not an EFM) didn't "get it right."

Had Kevyn Orr only been able to use the same methods that other EMs used, which was raising taxes on Detroiters and reducing services even further, he would have failed just like the other EMs.

Instead, Kevyn Orr has been the only EM allowed to restructure a municipality's finances in Michigan through Federal Bankruptcy court, as he otherwise wouldn't have legally been able to cut retirement benefits.

Of course, what made Detroit different from the other cities is Lansing finally got a clue and now see the interest they have in saving the state's largest city:

-Outsiders see the entire state of Michigan as Detroit, like people see Chicago as the entire state of Illinois or NYC as the entire state of New York.

-They want to put a stop to the "Detroit creep" into the suburbs that's now happening [[see Eastpointe, Harper Woods, Southfield and Oak Park), as Detroit's problems are now going beyond its own borders.

-Detroit is the only area in the entire state of Michigan that can offer the big city feel that 48% of all Michigan college graduates continue to steadily move to Chicago, Minneapolis and Philadelphia for. Unless their parents and grandparents in suburban Michigan want to continue to see their children and grandchildren leave them, they now realize they have to offer in Michigan what those cities offer to convince them to stay.

At the time, the only way Detroit could be saved from its downward spiral was by drastically improving services levels and reducing the cost to do business in Detroit, and that couldn't happen without restructuring the city's legacy costs which took up half of its budget [[given a 17% unemployment rate and 1/3 of the population living below poverty).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

If the Tea Party wing holds veto, then you are right. But there have been signs that the GOP is waking up to moderation.

In spite of the DY hate team's feelings, Snyder is actually quite moderate. He'd likely draw out fewer Occupy-inspired lemmings to the polls. Real liberals don't hate Snyder -- except labor where unions money supply is threatened by workers freedom of [[dis)association, aka RTW.

---

He's moderate only when compared to the Republican party as a whole, which is still very far to the right of where it was even in Goldwater's day [[and has been since LONG before the tea party). He's far to the right of a true moderate like Milliken. Worse, he, like Hillary and most main-stream pols of either party, is a pure corporatist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

If the Tea Party wing holds veto, then you are right. But there have been signs that the GOP is waking up to moderation.

In spite of the DY hate team's feelings, Snyder is actually quite moderate. He'd likely draw out fewer Occupy-inspired lemmings to the polls. Real liberals don't hate Snyder -- except labor where unions money supply is threatened by workers freedom of [[dis)association, aka RTW.

---

Every time the Nerd says he's for gay rights and equality and then backtracks in the same breath, he show's he's neither moderate nor a leader.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

He's moderate only when compared to the Republican party as a whole, which is still very far to the right of where it was even in Goldwater's day [[and has been since LONG before the tea party). He's far to the right of a true moderate like Milliken. Worse, he, like Hillary and most main-stream pols of either party, is a pure corporatist.

---

Exactly. Saying 'Snyder is not bad... for a Republican' is about the best I can do. It means that he is still way to the right of once-reasonable moderate 'good government' Republicans [[Milliken is a perfect example), but still not ideologically pure enough to be appealing to the Foxoid Tea Party and Christian Taliban types who turn out to vote in GOP primaries. Hell, just the act of trying to save Detroit, land of 'those crazy n's' who should be, I gather, walled off and left to rot, is probably enough to rule him out for much of that electorate.

Of course, that's not to say that the right handlers and focused media campaign couldn't 'remkae' him, Mitt Romney style [[and there are some similarities between Mitt and Ricky), to appeal to the retrograde right. But, much like Mitt, that would probably render him unelectable in front of the general electorate anyway.

He would try to implement his Michigan politics on the rest of the country. No thank you. The only think he got right was the first step in getting Detroit back on firm ground, even though it has a long way to go to get turned around, it is a start in the right direction. His other policies, not so much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

If the Tea Party wing holds veto, then you are right. But there have been signs that the GOP is waking up to moderation.

In spite of the DY hate team's feelings, Snyder is actually quite moderate. He'd likely draw out fewer Occupy-inspired lemmings to the polls. Real liberals don't hate Snyder -- except labor where unions money supply is threatened by workers freedom of [[dis)association, aka RTW.

---

I understand what you are saying but I think the GOP and the Tea Party have essentially merged so that the 'base' and the Tea Party are pretty close.

Someone essentially said the base has by and large been coopted by the Tea Party.

So instead of 'moderate' and 'Tea Party' wings of the GOP the two wings have essentially merged into an 'GOP establishment/Tea Party' party.

The Base '/' Tea Party would declare the gov as a RINO [[Republican In Name Only).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

I will give Snyder some credit on the Detroit bankruptcy, but only because it is the ONLY EFM appointment he has gotten right. The others [[esp. Hamtramck's) have been either ineffective or outright disasters. I will also give him credit for understanding that Michigan's viability is non-existent without a strong Detroit.

---

A governor of a state whose largest city goes bankrupt is a non-starter for presidential aspirations. It will be a huge political liability for his party and I don't think the Republicans will want to stomach that risk this time around. They fare much better when they can say that Detroit is the democrats fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rb336

16 years = non-insider in what universe?

---

Ron Paul

16 years = experience

Ostracized by both sides of the aisle = outsider

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iheartthed

A governor of a state whose largest city goes bankrupt is a non-starter for presidential aspirations. It will be a huge political liability for his party and I don't think the Republicans will want to stomach that risk this time around. They fare much better when they can say that Detroit is the democrats fault.

---

I don't think the world sees Detroit and Michigan in the same light. Tainted light, to be sure.

To me the biggest reason Snyder has an opening is that he doesn't lead from his heart. Obama was proof that good intentions are not enough.

In the long-haul, I think Duggan is more interesting as presidential material. If Detroit rebounds in any meaningful way, his star will rise. And similar to Snyder, he's not really that tight to his party's line -- they're both more centrist and more like each other at the core. They both fight for their party's issues because they have to, not because they believe.

I think someone practical might be a dark horse. How about Snyder 2016, Duggan 2020.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

I don't think the world sees Detroit and Michigan in the same light. Tainted light, to be sure.

---

They do. Bankrupt Detroit is just an extension of the Rust Belt environment that is Michigan. Once a brutal presidential campaign gets heated up it will not be hard at all to saddle Snyder with the political baggage of overseeing a downtrodden state with bankrupt cities that is having trouble reinventing itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

To me the biggest reason Snyder has an opening is that he doesn't lead from his heart. Obama was proof that good intentions are not enough.

---

Good intentions are not enough because our political system was designed in fucking 1787 and it's finally reached the point where it is incapable of functioning in any meaningful sense. We can't have a system that has as many checks and balances and veto points as ours does, and also have political parties that are as disciplined and polarized as ours are. We need to either figure out a way to get back to the era of horse-trading and earmarking and "all politics is local" [[which will probably involve significant campaign finance reform, since the superPAC money and interest-group scorecards are a key tool for scaring potential dealmakers back into line) or else we need to design a system where winning an election confers the power to actually implement one's agenda with relatively few hindrances beyond the threat of being voted out next time.

"Centrism" isn't the answer. Pete Peterson and Mike Bloomberg and a whole bunch of other rich East Coast elites have been flogging that horse for years, and the problem with it is that there's no constituency for their agenda other than rich East Coast elites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crumbled_pavement

*** BREAKING NEWS ***



You heard it here first folks. Michigan resident DetroitPlanner is considering a run for president in 2016. DYes News tried to pin down a few of DetroitPlanner's views on important issues affecting the nation, but was unable to do so. While DYes news was unable to secure an interview with this potential candidate, the statement "Do I want it? Not a chance," is usually uttered by those who want to keep their political ambitions under their hat. We've come across information that DetroitPlanner has formed an exploratory committee and plans to visit Iowa, an early primary state, sometime this summer.

Stay tuned to DYes News for more breaking coverage of the 2016 Presidential race.

---

LOL! I think I'd have to join a political party first!

Heh. Would Snyder be into having to wear a tie every single day on the campaign trail?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hypestyles

Heh. Would Snyder be into having to wear a tie every single day on the campaign trail?

---

LOL He would have to give speeches and he really is not good at that at all. A one term GOV would be pretty inexperienced. Beside he is far from done here, he is as close to a bipartisan GOV we are ever going to have and we need to get as much out of him as we can before we return to a far right or a far left silver tongued lawyer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

Good intentions are not enough because our political system was designed in fucking 1787 and it's finally reached the point where it is incapable of functioning in any meaningful sense. We can't have a system that has as many checks and balances and veto points as ours does, and also have political parties that are as disciplined and polarized as ours are. We need to either figure out a way to get back to the era of horse-trading and earmarking and "all politics is local" [[which will probably involve significant campaign finance reform, since the superPAC money and interest-group scorecards are a key tool for scaring potential dealmakers back into line) or else we need to design a system where winning an election confers the power to actually implement one's agenda with relatively few hindrances beyond the threat of being voted out next time.

"Centrism" isn't the answer. Pete Peterson and Mike Bloomberg and a whole bunch of other rich East Coast elites have been flogging that horse for years, and the problem with it is that there's no constituency for their agenda other than rich East Coast elites.

---

The sad story of U.S. politics is the new dynamics, new normal:

Agree, there is no political center because the country isn't really contested any more. Dems and GOP have divided up what they can...

The GOP has essentially given up winning the presidency unless the Dems screw up royally.

They seem content to 'governing' by controlling the House and controlling a lot of states, mostly red, which have very large rural populations. GOP is dead in states like N.Y., CA, etc. They don't have a ghost of a chance vs. Cuomo or Brown.

IF [[50-50) the GOP captures the Senate in November, they'll most likely lose it back in 2016 [[remember what goes around comes around 6 years later in Senate elections - the 2010 GOP Senators who won Democratic seats will face a real fight).

So we have essential political stalemate... The GOP 'governing' strategy is to block the Dems in Washington [[and pass almost no legislation other than trivial stuff) and rule the states that they can.

[[BTW, I live in No. Virginia and that strategy failed: The Dems last November won the Gov., Lt. Gov, and Attorney General and gained a +1 plurality in the Senate via the tie-breaking vote of the Lt. Gov.). Before Nov. The Va GOP controlled the entire commonwealth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

The sad story of U.S. politics is the new dynamics, new normal:

Agree, there is no political center because the country isn't really contested any more. Dems and Ghave divided up what they can...

The GOP has essentially given up winning the presidency unless the Dems screw up royally.

They seem content to 'governing' by controlling the House and controlling a lot of states, mostly red, which have very large rural populations. GOP is dead in states like N.Y., CA, etc. They don't have a ghost of a chance vs. Cuomo or Brown.

IF [[50-50) the GOP captures the Senate in November, they'll most likely lose it back in 2016 [[remember what goes around comes around 6 years later in Senate elections - the 2010 GOP Senators who won Democratic seats will face a real fight).

So we have essential political stalemate... The GOP 'governing' strategy is to block the Dems in Washington [[and pass almost no legislation other than trivial stuff) and rule the states that they can.

[[BTW, I live in No. Virginia and that strategy failed: The Dems last November won the Gov., Lt. Gov, and Attorney General and gained a +1 plurality in the Senate via the tie-breaking vote of the Lt. Gov.). Before Nov. The Va GOP controlled the entire commonwealth.

---

Agree completely. The alarm was sounded and the GOP answer was business as usual. You think they could here the nails going in the coffin loud and clear... but apparently not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

Agree, there is no political center because the country isn't really contested any more. Dems and GOP have divided up what they can...

---

That's perfectly true as well, but what I was getting at was that the preferred "centrist" consensus of the elites is just deeply unpopular with almost everyone in America. They always seem to prescribe a mix of liberal stances on social issues, spending cuts, and tax increases, which just pisses off the entire political spectrum without really giving anyone much of anything that they want.

George W. Bush, who was in many ways a terrible president, was politically astute enough to recognize that everybody hated the "centrist" agenda, and built a fairly successful governing coalition on almost the exact opposite set of policy prescriptions. High spending levels, low taxes, and social conservatism is a policy agenda that has significant popular support in America. Low spending levels, high taxes, and social liberalism is a policy agenda that only resonates in rich neighborhoods of metropolitan New York and D.C. I guess technically you could describe either agenda as "centrist," but in practice when people use that word they're almost always thinking of a specific set of policies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antongast

That's perfectly true as well, but what I was getting at was that the preferred "centrist" consensus of the elites is just deeply unpopular with almost everyone in America. They always seem to prescribe a mix of liberal stances on social issues, spending cuts, and tax increases, which just pisses off the entire political spectrum without really giving anyone much of anything that they want.

George W. Bush, who was in many ways a terrible president, was politically astute enough to recognize that everybody hated the "centrist" agenda, and built a fairly successful governing coalition on almost the exact opposite set of policy prescriptions. High spending levels, low taxes, and social conservatism is a policy agenda that has significant popular support in America. Low spending levels, high taxes, and social liberalism is a policy agenda that only resonates in rich neighborhoods of metropolitan New York and D.C. I guess technically you could describe either agenda as "centrist," but in practice when people use that word they're almost always thinking of a specific set of policies.

---

Reagan and 'W' did essentially the same thing: Cut taxes, increased spending [[increased deficits big time) and were social conservatives.

One [[Reagan) had an airport [[National airport in D.C.) named after him.

Bush - other than a presidential library not likely to have anything named after him [[except the 'Bush tax cuts').

"social liberalism" gets far better play when you actually mention the issues and what a social liberal solution might be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vic01

“Absolutely he’s a viable candidate,” says Michigan pollster Steve Mitchell. “He’s a Republican governor from a swing state — if he wins reelection this fall by eight or 10 points, he’ll be an attractive option.”

---

Haha, what? Michigan pollster Steve Mitchell doesn't seem to know very much about Michigan.

2012: Obama +9.5%
2008: Obama +16.5%
2004: Kerry +3.5%
2000: Gore +5%
1996: Clinton +13% [[vs. Dole alone) / Clinton +4.5% [[vs. Dole and Perot combined)
1992: Clinton +7.5% [[vs. Bush alone) / Clinton -13% [[vs. Bush and Perot combined)
1988: Bush +7.5%

When the GOP has lost a state six times in a row, and by 9.5% in the midst of a recession despite their own candidate being from that state, I'm not sure it's still considered to be "in play" for them. Obama's 2008 margin in Michigan was substantially larger than McCain's margin in Texas [[12%) - maybe Texas is a swing state too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Junjie

Haha, what? Michigan pollster Steve Mitchell doesn't seem to know very much about Michigan.

2012: Obama +9.5%
2008: Obama +16.5%
2004: Kerry +3.5%
2000: Gore +5%
1996: Clinton +13% [[vs. Dole alone) / Clinton +4.5% [[vs. Dole and Perot combined)
1992: Clinton +7.5% [[vs. Bush alone) / Clinton -13% [[vs. Bush and Perot combined)
1988: Bush +7.5%

When the GOP has lost a state six times in a row, and by 9.5% in the midst of a recession despite their own candidate being from that state, I'm not sure it's still considered to be "in play" for them. Obama's 2008 margin in Michigan was substantially larger than McCain's margin in Texas [[12%) - maybe Texas is a swing state too.

---

Yeah, swing state seems pretty far off the mark for MI. Statewide Dem but down ballot GOP.

We see that a lot including MI: Dems win the presidential elections, U.S. Senate elections and typically governor [[before Snyder), but lose in the state legislator and the House in Washington. Dems can win the statewide elections but lose House and state legislator seats because of how the districts are drawn and how urban voters are packed in a small number of districts.

Snyder doesn't really fit the national GOP profile, and he has a terrible voice. It isn't impossible he could be the GOP nominee someday, but it is hard to see how that could actually happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

Bush - other than a presidential library not likely to have anything named after him [[except the 'Bush tax cuts').

---

You should go visit Dallas, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwilbert

Snyder doesn't really fit the national GOP profile, and he has a terrible voice. .

---

I don't understand how he's made it as far as he has with that voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pam

I don't understand how he's made it as far as he has with that voice.

---

It's a typical Michigan accent, especially outside of Detroit.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 313WX

It's a typical Michigan accent, especially outside of Detroit.

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

---

The accent isn't the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwilbert

The accent isn't the problem.

---

His voice is an extreme variation of the Yooper accent.

I'm not fond of his voice either, but if his voice bothers anyone who otherwise likes him to the point where they would vote against him, then Snyder's voice isn't the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwilbert

The accent isn't the problem.

---

Right. The high pitched whiney sound is the problem.

Michigan is still a swing state in theory, but not practice. 1992 was quirky. 1996 was a blow-out. 2000-2012 all had pretty much far-right and/or not-to-be-taken-seriously republican slates. We'd go R in an instant if there was a republican slate with any level of authenticity and charisma. GWB almost made it, but he just didn't fit. A pragmatic, real guy or gal who doesn't alienate the regular base would win Michigan.

Snyder would win Michigan. Would he get the chance? Not sure. If he poured forth his best effort and the others imploded [[quite likely), he'd be 1 or 2 in Iowa and NH, the bellwhethers.

The problem for him is the race is 2015-2016. I don't think Michigan's economy and Detroit's future will be fully on track, statistics-wise, by then. [[though the drop in the unemployment rate, especially since last fall, is notable). I also don't want him to leave early. Duggan and Snyder are perfect together for Detroit. Detroit, even pre-bankruptcy, has the state's rightful attention more now than ever in recent tenures. I much prefer the current regime to Granholm's. The far-right and the Detroit haters, even LBP, are less and less relevant because our executives, who the business community correctly embrace, are proactive, smart, and positive. They are breaking through a lot of bad vibes that had built up in the collective Michigan psyche, and are poised to change the state's character into one that is more urban and more regionally cooperative and oriented towards core cities.

-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by emu steve

Yeah, swing state seems pretty far off the mark for MI. Statewide Dem but down ballot GOP.

We see that a lot including MI: Dems win the presidential elections, U.S. Senate elections and typically governor [[before Snyder), but lose in the state legislator and the House in Washington. Dems can win the statewide elections but lose House and state legislator seats because of how the districts are drawn and how urban voters are packed in a small number of districts.

---

Always been that way. In the fifties, Soapy Williams used to win Wayne, Gennesee, and Iron counties and lose all the rest and still win the statewide popular vote. Now Democratic voters are spread out a little more.

Not that I think Snyder is the worst or anything but the unemployment drop has more to do with the auto bailout and the state cutting unemployment from 26 weeks to 20 weeks than it does some kind of corporate tax breaks or something he did. He also raised taxes and cut spending for education.

As a candidate for a state like Michigan he is fine because he has the money and the I'm just a nice guy from the midwest bit down to a T. As far as a candidate for president of the U.S? Not a chance in hell. The guy is socially inept, can't speak for crap,is boring,lackluster,etc. He could run but would not make the cut in the end. The closest comparison I could make on him from a personality stand point of someone who became a candidate for POTUS would be Al Gore

cutting unemployment to twenty weeks just took people off the unemployment list - mere number-juggling. Snyder has done nothing for Michigan except mortgage our future to stuff his buddies' pockets

He whines so much. I don't think I could handle four years of that voice!