Assessing the GOP Presidential Election Field

With Jeb Bush making noises that he will enter the GOP presidential candidate clown car, it's appropriate to consider the rest of the GOP candidate field which compared to the Republicans that I knew growing up and during my years in the GOP is nothing less than a freak show.  Given the Christofascist and Tea Party (generally a bunch of Christofacists hiding under a different name along with white supremacists), don't expect much sanity in the nominating process.  A piece in the New York Times looks at the GOP field which ought to frighten sane Americans.  Here are highlights:

When it comes to products, sports or politics, matchups matter. There is a premium for quality, but whom you are selling to or competing against often affects outcomes.

That is a useful framework for assessing the 2016 Republican presidential contest at this early stage. If, as all signals suggest, Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor and brother and son of presidents, is about to get in, the race quickly intensifies.

To oversimplify, there are two distinct candidate types: the mainstream conservatives and the movement conservatives. There really are no moderates.

Establishment conservatives are the favorites of Wall Street, big business and traditional Republicans. Movement candidates are embraced by the Tea Party, social and cultural conservatives, and the populist right.

Jeb Bush is a conservative; he is also the quintessential establishment Republican.

On the movement side, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is in. And the more Senator Ted Cruz of Texas alienates official Washington, the more popular he is with the grass-roots right. The retired pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson has surprisingly impressive poll showings and fervent followers. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, once the darling of the social right, is contemplating a last run.  These mays and maybes matter.

“It is not just who rises to the occasion,” said Fred Davis, a leading Republican media strategist. “It’s what is in that mix.” That was evident in 2012. Mr. Romney controlled the center-right; the only competition was former Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. of Utah, whose candidacy never lived up to his credentials. The right-wing candidates divided votes, enabling Mr. Romney to score well  . . . .

Polls by Bloomberg Politics this fall in New Hampshire and Iowa underscored this point. In both instances, in aggregate, mainstream candidates were almost even with movement conservatives; a winnowed field on either side would matter.

Money, the mother’s milk of American politics, will. On the establishment side, Mr. Bush and Mr. Christie tap some of the same resources, but the New Jersey governor probably has sufficient support from rich Garden State and Wall Street Republicans to run, too. Money is a challenge for other center-right hopefuls.

On the movement side, the Paul network taps into lots of grass-roots resources. It is less clear elsewhere. For example, is there enough Texas money for both Gov. Rick Perry and Mr. Cruz? Over the long haul, the only shot for Mr. Huckabee, a notoriously poor fund-raiser, or Mr. Santorum would be support from a donor with deep pockets.

All of these men — no women yet — are testing the waters with the understanding that running means at least a yearlong grueling grind. There are incentives, though: The losers often get lucrative speaking and TV punditry contracts, or write books or produce videos.

In short, it's not a field that should instill confidence.   Add in the pandering that will be needed to win Christofascist/Tea Party voters and the coming two years will offer much insanity.