Bull Moose Base
Sr. Member
![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif) ![*](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/star.gif)
Posts: 3,488
![](./avatars/Democratic/D_CA.gif)
|
![](https://talkelections.org/FORUM/IMG/post/xx.gif) |
« on: March 28, 2013, 03:09:19 PM » |
|
The invisible primary has grown less invisible each cycle and polling and speculation has started earlier. But there's no particular reason to think the consensus of 2016 speculation will end up any less off than the 2012 speculation. The assumption that Jindal will run might end up as inaccurate as assumptions Barbour would run. Or the questions about who will run between Jeb Bush and Rubio (or Ryan and Walker) may end up like the similar speculation about eventual non-candidates Daniels and Barbour (and Daniels and Pence). Rubio's leads in most states (and Christie's in others) might not compel them to get in any more than Huckabee's strong polls in 2009-10. And we'll probably see unexpected candidacies again like we did from Huntsman, Bachmann, Perry.
|