Jimmy Carter

Rand Paul And Bill Clinton: A Losing Strategy!

Ronald 2 Comments

Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul Has decided that he is willing to bring up the controversies surrounding Bill Clinton’s indiscretions a generation ago as his tactic to win the Presidency of the United States in 2016.

This is a strategy that will fail, as it does not dignify Rand Paul to talk about an issue that is dead and gone a long time ago.

Let me make it clear, that this author deplored the behavior of Bill Clinton, and at the time, took the position that the President should resign over his misbehavior, but should NOT be impeached.

Be that as it may, Bill Clinton suffered total humiliation and exposure, was impeached, was found not guilty by the US Senate, finished his term, and has gone on to achieve a level of popularity for a former President unmatched by any in American history, even Theodore Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, or Ronald Reagan in their retirement years.

Bill Clinton has done a lot of good with his Clinton Initiative, following the work at good deeds only matched in retirement by former President Jimmy Carter, who has not been as fortunate to be as popular and respected and admired as Bill Clinton.

While his private behavior then, and by rumor even now, is reprehensible, Bill Clinton is no worse than millions of American men, and many Republican and Democratic Congressmen, Senators, and Governors. The difference is that he was a President, but then when one examines the sexual exploits of other Presidents, he is far from unique.

The point is that no matter how much one might condemn his behavior, he did not create any “victims”, as Monica Lewinsky was not a child, was not an innocent, knew precisely what she was doing, wanted to do what she did, and is responsible for her own behavior.

If anything, Rand Paul needs to answer for his voting record, for his statements against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and if one is going to bring up the past, let him explain the wacky behavior and voting record and associations of his libertarian father, former Congressman Ron Paul, with racist and secessionist groups over his long career.

One might say that would be unfair, but would it be any more unfair than to try to harm Hillary Clinton by attacking her husband’s behavior, which has caused much grief for her, behavior which she personally is not responsible for, and for her to have to hear him being called a “sexual predator” by a man who cannot walk in her husband’s shoes in his level of intelligence, accomplishment, and historic role in American history?

The Dangers Of An Impeachment Move Against President Obama

Ronald 12 Comments

With reckless discussion and growing threats of an impeachment move against President Barack Obama, the country lurches toward a situation which creates great dangers for the nation, as well as the 44th President of the United States.

The irony of it all is that, under no circumstances, would an impeachment move lead to the removal of the President from his position before the time his term of office ends on January 20, 2017!

Were it otherwise, Vice President Joe Biden would succeed Obama, and be likely to get an edge on the 2016 nomination, and to keep the office for the full term, similar to what happened after Lyndon B. Johnson became President upon the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, and almost happened to Gerald Ford after he succeeded the resigned Richard Nixon in 1974, only losing the Presidency by two percentage points to Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976, and even would have won that election if a few thousand votes had switched in the states of Ohio and Hawaii.

But although Obama would survive any impeachment threat, the idea is very bad for the stability of the American nation and political system in the following ways:

It would bring up the ugly element of racism, which is very prevalent in our society as it is, but would be elevated by an attack of the right wing on Obama, a lot of it based on suspicion of the “black man” in the White House, who doesn’t seem to be a “true” American to the hate mongers, who have been unwilling to accept the fact that he was born in Hawaii, and is a legitimate President, elected twice by the American people in a clear cut electoral vote and popular vote margin!

The racial tensions already evident in our society are not just of blacks and whites, but also between Latinos and white Anglos, and even between Asian Americans and whites, who resent that they are in a losing battle demographically in a nation rapidly becoming a majority minority within the next three decades. Nothing will change that reality, and the future will include the likelihood of other African American Presidents, or more likely a Latino President, or even possibly an Asian American President, and even the possibility of a non Christian President, whether Jewish or Muslim! Additionally, we are going to have a future woman President, even if it is not Hillary Clinton!

Beyond the racial divide, an Obama impeachment would undermine the ability of the nation to continue its economic recovery, and that is something this country cannot afford, as it harms not just the Obama economic record, but real life situations of millions of Americans, and harms women and children, even more than men in the long run, as it inflates the poverty level of single women and their children, scarring the future for millions of American children, whose childhood experiences can harm them for life!

An Obama impeachment would endanger the international scene, and the ability to fight terrorism, and face the challenges of Iran, North Korea, Russia, China, and other nations that would love a wounded America in foreign policy and national security.

An Obama impeachment would also poison ever further the political divide between Republicans and Democrats, between “red” and “blue” states, and could lead to the long range danger of a civil war, not just of racial and ethnic groups, but between those who dream of secession from America, and unfortunately, have paranoid elements who have been building up large caches of firearms, that they would be ready to use against other Americans, law enforcement authorities, and even the US military, which could cost tens of thousands of lives! There is already a powder keg situation, in which crime against people based on their ethnicity, race, or sexual orientation has been growing!

Finally, and the greatest fear for anyone who cares about the long term American future, there is the massive danger of a successful attempt against the life of President Obama, with the realization, as this author has discovered in research for his upcoming book on Presidential Assassinations and the American Presidency, due out in 2015, that Obama has been subjected to an average of up to 30 stated or revealed threats per day, or about 10,000 per year, since he has become President, more than any President except maybe Abraham Lincoln, but probably more than Lincoln in reality!

Reported and published threats in the news media number at least 36 at this writing, much more than any other modern President for sure, and the number keeps on growing, and this is just what we know publicly, not the true story of Secret Service records, which remain secret!

So the publicity of an Obama impeachment effort would bring out ever more whackos and wing nuts who would like nothing better than to use the excuse of the impeachment controversy to try to gain permanent fame by assassinating Barack Obama, and that would further poison the American populace, and would likely be the beginning of a widespread civil insurrection, that might be hard to stop!

This author has hinted at these fears before, and it can be hoped that Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders will understand the dangers of an impeachment move, stop the rhetoric that Obama is a dictator breaking the Constitution, and allow our 44th President to finish his time in office, without further endangering his personal security and safety, and realize that they have made a dangerous error in allowing themselves to cater to an extreme right that endangers not only Obama, but really themselves, and also the civil order of the American nation!

It is time to stop the divisiveness, and to work with President Obama for the benefit and progress of the American people, or else the names and reputations of these Republican leaders will be condemned in the long run of American history!

Republican Party Historically On Corruption And Impeachment: It Speaks For Itself!

Ronald 4 Comments

The Republican Party has a very interesting history when it comes to corruption on the national level, and to the issue of Presidential impeachment.

The “self righteous” party, which tries to convince us that they are “holier than thou”, when it comes to corruption and scandal, has been responsible for the four most corrupt Presidencies in American history, and arguably, the fifth most corrupt Presidency as well!

At the same time, it is the Republican Party, in the 19th, 20th, and now the 21st century, that has constantly pursued the idea of Presidential impeachment as a weapon against Presidents of the Democratic Party!

Witness the following:

The Presidency of Richard Nixon, along with that of Ulysses S. Grant, Warren G. Harding, and Ronald Reagan saw widespread corruption on a regular basis, and these are the four Presidents to have been in charge of the worst examples of corruption in American history, bar none!

Nixon is remembered for the Watergate scandal, but there is much more than that to be recognized as corruption.

Grant is remembered for the Credit Mobilier scandal, but there is much more than that to be recognized as corruption.

Harding is remembered for the Teapot Dome scandal, but there is much more than that to be recognized as corruption.

Reagan is remembered for the Iran-Contra scandal, but there is much more than that to be recognized as corruption.

And, by the way, George W. Bush is remembered for numerous scandals and malfeasance, much of it still hidden, but to be uncovered as time goes by, and once the junior Bush leaves us, when documents become much more available.

There is no one among Democrats who can match these five GOP Presidents in corruption, although many make out Bill Clinton and his personal demons as a scandal on the same level. But most of the so called other “scandals” under Clinton are conjured up, are manufactured, just as with Barack Obama and his so called, but not real “scandals” over Benghazi, the IRS, and other controversies which are not indeed “scandals”, but instead part of the plan to undermine him, as was done with Bill Clinton.

Sure, there were personal scandals under John F. Kennedy, and rumors of scandals under Lyndon B. Johnson, and minor scandals under Harry Truman, and accusations of scandals under Jimmy Carter, but none ever worked out to be on the level of scandals under Nixon, Grant, Harding, Reagan and the second Bush! And only Nixon was a justifiable case to bring impeachment charges, as he actually abused the Constitution and the Presidential office, and was, rightfully, in process of being removed from office, had he not resigned in 1974!

Meanwhile, the Republican Party historically has worked to promote impeachment of Democratic Presidents on a regular basis, and have brought unsubstantiated and unjustifiable charges against:

Andrew Johnson in 1868 over attempt to remove Secretary of War Edwin Stanton

Bill Clinton in 1998-1999 on his personal life scandals

Also, they have promoted impeachment threats or attempted moves to remove:

Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1934-1935 over the New Deal
Harry Truman in 1951 over the firing of General Douglas MacArthur
Jimmy Carter in general, working to undermine everything he promoted

So the so called party of enforcing the law and the Constitution has been involved in a systematic attempt to promote the cause of big business corporations and personal power grabbing while moving to undermine most of our Democratic Presidents in the past century and a half!

Part of this is also the attempt, constantly, to besmirch the record in office of Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, Carter, Clinton and now Obama! Conspiracy theories have been rife in the Republican mind!

Realize that since Abraham Lincoln’s election, our first Republican President, there was constant deterioration after, until Theodore Roosevelt still upheld the good image of the GOP overall. But then there was rapid decline after, with a temporary revival under Dwight D. Eisenhower, and then constant decline after, with a smidgen of decency and class under Gerald Ford, and then much more rapid deterioration up to now. The GOP wishes to be regarded with respect, when it does not deserve it, based on the historical realities!

Also, realize that since 1861 to 2017, a total of 156 years, from Lincoln to Obama leaving office, we have had 18 GOP Presidents from Lincoln to Bush II and only 10 Democratic Presidents from Andrew Johnson to Obama. Republicans have held the White House for 88 years and Democrats for 68 years!

So the historical reality of the Republican Party being the party of corruption and lawlessness, and yet having the gall to threaten three Democratic Presidents with impeachment, two Democratic Presidents with actual impeachment, and on the road to impeaching Barack Obama on flimsy charges, speaks legions as to their lack of ethics and morality!

Running For The Presidency While Out Of Office: An Advantage?

Ronald 11 Comments

Three Presidents in the past 50 years made their successful run for the Presidency while out of office–Richard Nixon in 1968, Jimmy Carter in 1976, and Ronald Reagan in 1980. Additionally, Abraham Lincoln won in 1860 while being out of office for 12 years!

It could be that being out of office will again affect the upcoming Presidential Election of 2016.

On the Democratic side, we have Hillary Clinton, former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, and next year former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley all seen now as likely Presidential contenders, with Hillary having a massive edge, but still likely to have at least nominal, if not more, challenges from, at least, Schweitzer and O’Malley, based on their recent public statements.

On the Republican side, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (who is now ahead in at least one poll) seen as possible choices to compete. Huckabee surged to the lead by bringing up the need of women to control their libidos, of all things, and this is enough in the anti women, disrespectful GOP to give him a sudden lead. The fact that Huckabee, who used to sound sane, has gone berserk since gaining an hour a week on Fox News Channel, is a sign of the trouble the Republican Party is in!

Running for the Presidency while out of office has been, and may, once again, give an edge, and only time will tell!

Obama’s State Of The Union Speech: Cooperation Where Possible, But Executive Orders When Necessary!

Ronald 72 Comments

President Barack Obama made another magnificent State of the Union speech last night, and made it clear that where cooperation is possible with the Republicans in Congress, he will encourage it, but he will NOT be powerless IF the GOP does not cooperate!

Instead, he will use executive orders where possible to take action on urgent matters, and he has every right to do so, as executive orders are used on a regular basis by ALL Presidents, with George W. Bush having used it 291 times, Bill Clinton 364 times, Ronald Reagan 381 times, and Jimmy Carter 320 times, as recent examples!

The idea that Speaker of the House John Boehner suggests possible impeachment because of use of executive orders is totally outrageous, another sign that the person two heartbeats away from the Presidency has no regard or respect for the President.

Even though Nancy Pelosi never cared for George W. Bush when she was Speaker, she always showed basic respect for him as the President, and dismissed ideas of impeachment charges against Bush, showing much more class than Boehner has done, and that does not reflect well on his character.

Obama will do what he must do, and to hell with the whacko Tea Party Movement and their anarchistic and racist sentiments!

The Dominance Of Political Family Dynasties

Ronald 7 Comments

It now seems clear that Hillary Clinton will be running for the Presidency, and that she is very likely to become the 45th President of the United States, and its first woman President.

Every poll imaginable shows her far in the lead against any Democratic challenger, including Vice President Joe Biden, who is the only other Democrat to even score more than a couple of percent in any poll, but about 50-60 points behind the former First Lady, former Senator, and former Secretary of State.

And every poll also shows that NO Republican comes anywhere near Hillary Clinton, with the only one who seemed to compete, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, rapidly collapsing in the midst of the “Bridgegate ” and associated scandals, with the issue of funding of projects with federal money for Hurricane Sandy the more dangerous scandal for Christie and his future.

Hillary Clinton enters the 2016 campaign almost as if she was an incumbent, and really, no one has ever been in as enviable a position as she seems to be. But this means that she must not take anything for granted, run hard and vigorously and not assume victory as Republican nominee Thomas E. Dewey thought in 1948, before he lost in an upset victory by President Harry Truman.

Hillary Clinton must be able and willing to take as much flak and attacks on everything imaginable in her record and life story, and she does seem to be tough enough to deal with that, plus the inevitable death threats which will be visited upon her at a rate probably at least equivalent to Abraham Lincoln, and possibly at the same astronomical rate of President Barack Obama, who faces, approximately, 30 death threats in some form per day!

Many might think that a person who will be 69 and three months of age at the time of the inauguration, making her the second oldest inaugurated President in American history, after Ronald Reagan, who was about eight months older at his first inauguration, would think twice about spending the next ten years of her life, until age 77 and three months, if she served two complete terms, with the pressure cooker and stresses of running for President, and dealing with an increasingly complex and troubled world and nation. But she seems game for the challenge, and would certainly come into office more experienced and better equipped for the Presidency than almost any occupant of the Oval Office we have seen.

But her likely accession to the Presidency, with the full team support and financial backing of many Obama Administration and campaign functionaries, is a true sign that Vice President Joe Biden should give up the quest for the White House, as he is about five years older, and would be the oldest first term President, and if he were to serve two terms, would be past 82 at the end. This author is a great Joe Biden fan, but it does seem time for party unity, in the midst of Republican chaos and anarchy, for him to accept reality, and as soon as Hillary Clinton announces, to be gracious and announce he will not challenge her for the nomination.

There is no likelihood of any Democrat bothering to challenge her, particularly if Biden drops out, and the long range shot by former Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer would only be like a Don Quixote battling a windmill!

If Hillary Clinton succeeds in her quest, she will have made the Clinton dynasty the most dominant in modern American history, without any debate. Consider that her husband, Bill Clinton affected the nation from the time he ran in 1992 until he left in 2001, followed by Hillary as Senator from New York for eight years, and then four years as Secretary of State, making for a total of 21 years, now followed by two years in private life, but ten years into the future of campaigning, and possible two terms in the Presidency, which would make for a grand total of 31 years of national influence. And even these two years of private life, Hillary Clinton remains a national figure of great respect and renown, so one could say 33 years, a third of a century, the Clintons may have been the dominant influence in American history–between 1992 and 2025!

The dominance of the Clintons is only matched recently by the Bushes, with father George H. W. on the political radar from his 1980 challenge to Ronald Reagan until his forced retirement in 1993, after losing to Bill Clinton. Then, his son George W. came on the scene as Texas Governor in 1995 and son Jeb as Florida Governor starting in 1999. When George W. ran in 2000, and then won two terms, leaving in 2009, it meant a total of 14 years of senior Bush, followed by 14 years of junior Bush, for a total of 28 years. Ironically, if Jeb were now to run, which his mother does not advise him to do, and which Speaker of the House John Boehner thinks he should do, and were he to win, he could surpass the potential Clinton family record!

Compared to the Clintons and the Bushes, no other family dominates, as the Kennedy generation of John and Robert only lasted 8 years, and after Ted Kennedy lost his only real chance for the Presidency in 1980 against Jimmy Carter in the primaries, it meant a total of maybe 20 years of Kennedy dominance, although Ted did stay as an influential Senator until his death in 2009.

The only other family worthy of mention are the Roosevelts, if one counts Teddy and Franklin as part of the same dynasty, although different parties and generations completely. But even TR and FDR were only dominant for a total of 20 years combined, although TR remained a national figure for the ten years after his Presidency until his death.

It would certainly be ironic if we ended up with Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush opposing each other in 2016, as a battle of the titans, the two families who have more dominated American politics than any other in American history!

Robert Gates’ Criticism Of Joe Biden On Distrusting Military Is A Plus!

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates has made news with his memoir, in which he makes some strong criticism of President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

And yet, he is positive overall on Obama, and thinks both Biden and Clinton would probably make good Presidents.

Most interesting is his criticism of Biden, that he has been critical of military leadership, and that he has, according to Gates, never been right in the past 40 years on any national security matter. And yet he would make a good President, so figure that!

To say that Biden has been wrong for the past 40 years makes us think that, supposedly, every President since Nixon has been right on national security and defense matters. And to say that Biden has NEVER been right is totally preposterous! And what is the record on Presidents since JFK?

Was Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and particularly Bush II, REALLY right all of the time? Give me a break!

When one thinks back, the military leadership misled John F. Kennedy on the Bay of Pigs.

The military leadership misled Lyndon B. Johnson on Vietnam.

The military leadership was wrong on Vietnam under Nixon, as well.

In the brief tenure of Gerald Ford, thank goodness no major flub by the military leadership.

The military leadership misled Jimmy Carter on the Iranian hostage military rescue attempt.

The military leadership misled Ronald Reagan on dealing with “freedom fighters” in Afghanistan, and in dealing with Iraq’s leader Saddam Hussein.

The military leadership misled George H. W. Bush on Somalian intervention.

The military leadership misled Bill Clinton on dealing with Al Qaeda.

The military leadership misled George W. Bush on Afghanistan and Iraq.

So if Barack Obama was skeptical and IS skeptical about the military leadership in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, that was good!

And if Joe Biden had, and has, a healthy dose of skepticism about the military leadership, that is VERY GOOD!

And that means Joe Biden would be an excellent successor to Barack Obama, because he questions, has doubts, does not worship the military leadership!

That is the kind of President we have now, and need, in the future!

Thank goodness for who we have in our top two positions in our national government, men with a dose of skepticism, with the reminder that we have a civilian government, not one run by the military, and that is what has kept us free, and will continue to do so!

Religion And The Presidency

Ronald 1 Comment

The right wing in America tries to tell us we are a Christian nation, rather than a nation of a majority of the Christian faith.

The fact that the Constitution does not have a religious test, that we have separation of church and state, is ignored, as the right wing promotes its propaganda.

So they tell us the Founding Fathers were “good Christians”, when in fact, in many ways, they were not!

And they fail to accept that many of our Presidents have doubted organized religion entirely, or have been Deist, Unitarian or Quaker , which are seen as a few steps away from atheism by many experts.

For the record:

The following Presidents had NO specific religious affiliation:

Thomas Jefferson
Franklin Pierce
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Johnson
Ulysses S. Grant
Rutherford B. Hayes
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Barack Obama

Deist Beliefs

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Tyler

Unitarianism

John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Millard Fillmore
William Howard Taft

Quaker

Herbert Hoover
Richard Nixon

That makes 18 Presidents who do not fit the mold of a typical religious person.

At the same time, some Presidents have been very devout, including:

James A. Garfield
Benjamin Harrison
William McKinley
Woodrow Wilson
Jimmy Carter

The other half of our Presidents were irregular church goers, and in many cases, they were not very committed to their faiths, but would identify with a faith that was considered Christian, with John F. Kennedy the only Catholic President..

The largest number of Presidents (12) were Episcopalians; 8 were Presbyterians; 4 Methodists; 4 Baptists; 3 Disciples of Christ; 2 Congregationalists; and 2 Dutch Reformed Church.

Presidents And Alcohol Issues

Ronald Leave a comment

There are many ways that scholars and Presidential “junkies” evaluate Presidents, and one not often thought about is the problem of alcohol issues, Presidents who have had problems of drunkenness that affected their ability to do their job.

Three are well known for having major alcohol problems, and at least for two of them, it affected their performance in office.

Franklin Pierce (1853-1857) had a massive alcohol problem, made worse by the fact that his last and only child was killed in a train accident shortly before the inauguration in 1853. His Presidency is seen as one of the absolute worst, and his signing of the Kansas Nebraska Act in 1854 was a major step toward the Civil War.

Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877) was a great General who won the surrender of Robert E. Lee, and yet, it was well known that he drank too much, although it was claimed that he made better military decisions when drunk. But this massive drinking problem undermined his ability to do his job, and his Presidency became one of massive scandals, generally known as the Credit Mobilier Scandals, which along with the Panic of 1873, undermined his historical reputation.

George W. Bush was also a certifiable alcoholic, although it seems as if he had stopped drinking after his wife, Laura, threatened to leave him in 1986, when their twin daughters were still very young. But some have wondered about whether some of his decision making was influenced either by “stealing” a drink, or the damage done by the alcohol dependency that he had become captive of in earlier years.

Additionally, there are many who think that the following Presidents may have had too much dependency on liquor, while not maybe at the level of Pierce, Grant, and George W.

John Adams (1797-1801)
Martin Van Buren (1837-1841)
James Buchanan (1857-1861)
Chester Alan Arthur (1881-1885)
Grover Cleveland (1885-1889, 1893-1897)
William Howard Taft (1909-1913)
Warren G. Harding (1921-1923)
Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)
Richard M. Nixon (1969-1974)

The strongest cases would be Cleveland and Taft, both of whom were very overweight, and evidence of their extensive drinking is found in different sources about their lives. Also, it was known that Harding drank liquor every day in the White House, despite Prohibition being in effect

The evidence against Adams, Van Buren, Buchanan and Arthur is less extensive, but all three were known to be drinking a lot more than would be safe for one’s health.

The situation of Johnson and Nixon is more based on their personality traits, that under stress, they were likely to drink excessively, but not apparently an habitual problem.

At the same time, those who would be seen as least likely to lean on alcohol would include Rutherford B. Hayes, whose wife was infamously known as “Lemonade Lucy” for banning alcohol at White House gatherings; Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover, who were vehement in their enforcement of Prohibition of liquor; and Jimmy Carter, who avoided alcohol, although his brother Billy was an alcoholic.

Governors And The Presidential Election Of 2016

Ronald Leave a comment

It has often been pointed out that more Governors have been elected President over the course of American history than Senators.

From 1900 on, the following Presidents were earlier Governors of their states—Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush.

The argument is that being a Governor prepares one better for the Presidency than serving in the national government in Washington, DC.

Whether this is true or not, the argument now is that the national government, and particularly the Congress, is so engaged in stalemate and gridlock, that the best choice in the Presidential Election of 2016 would be to go once again for a Governor or former Governor, as occurred four times of the past six Presidents, and seven of the past ten national elections.

So if that is the case, what is the market among Governors?

First, the Democratic side:

Martin O’Malley of Maryland
Andrew Cuomo of New York
John Hickenlooper of Colorado
Mark Warner of Virginia
Brian Schweitzer of Montana
Jerry Brown of California
Howard Dean of Vermont
Deval Patrick of Massachusetts
Dannel Malloy of Connecticut

Now the Republican side

Chris Christie of New Jersey
Jeb Bush of Florida
Scott Walker of Wisconsin
Bobby Jindal of Louisiana
Rick Perry of Texas
John Kasich of Ohio
Jon Huntsman of Utah
Nikki Haley of South Carolina
Mike Pence of Indiana
Brian Sandoval of Nevada
Susana Martinez of New Mexico
Rick Scott of Florida

So, at least in theory, nine former or sitting Democratic Governors and twelve former or sitting Republican Governors are potential Presidential nominees.

Having said that, it is clear that some of these two groups are highly unlikely to be a candidate, or to have any realistic chance to be the nominee, including for the Democrats: Brown, Dean, Malloy, and Patrick, and for the Republicans: Scott, Martinez, Sandoval, Pence, Haley, and sadly (because he would be the best choice for the GOP long term), Huntsman.

For the Democrats, O’Malley and Cuomo and Warner (who has also served in the Senate), would be the best choices, were it not for the “800 pound gorilla” of Hillary Clinton and the slightly smaller version of Joe Biden. Were it not for them, these three listed Democrats would be a great term to compete for the nomination. Hickenlooper is also a good candidate, but would not be considered as likely to have a good chance, and Schweitzer might very well run, based on recent comments and activities, but the odds for him, especially against Clinton and Biden as things now stand, are extremely high of failure, and even of being mostly ignored by political pundits.

For the Republicans, Christie and Bush would be the most likely to have a real opportunity for the Presidency, but with the Tea Party Movement, neither is very popular, to say the least. Walker might be a better bet on that score, with Jindal seeming less attractive as time goes by, and Perry a real long shot based on his past performances. The “dark horse” to watch would be Kasich, who had a long career on Capitol Hill and knows how Washington works, and despite his mixed record in so many areas, is personally appealing, unlike any of those listed In this paragraph, in many ways the most appealing personally other than Huntsman.

If one had to bet which of each list would have the best chance, all things being equal, one would say O’Malley for the Democrats and Kasich for the Republicans, but the odds are that it will be someone from Capitol Hill–Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden for the Democrats, and Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, or Paul Ryan for the Republicans, with the Democrats having the clear edge in the Electoral College, because of the support of the Atlantic Coast and Pacific Coast, and the likelihood of strong support in the upper Midwest and Illinois and Iowa, along with Virginia, an unmatchable scenario for the Republicans, as we look at the political situation as 2013 ends, but always subject to changing times that are unpredictable.