President Snyder...?

[DetroitPlanner]

*** 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!

[Hypestyles]

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

[ABetterDetroit]

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.

[emu steve]

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.

[ABetterDetroit]

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.

[antongast]

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.

[emu steve]

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').

[rb336]

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

[Junjie]

“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.

[emu steve]

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.

[mwilbert]

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.

[iheartthed]

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.

[Pam]

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.

[313WX]

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

[mwilbert]

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

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

The accent isn't the problem.

[313WX]

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.

[Pam]

The accent isn't the problem.

Right. The high pitched whiney sound is the problem.

[Mackinaw]

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.

[Hermod]

-

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.

[Oddz313]

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

[rb336]

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

[Fulcanelli]

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