Marco Rubio announces his candidacy for 2016 (what about Mitt?)

In my column “Last stand for liberals”
I warned that the party of Mitt Romney would not recreate the Reaganism
of 1980, but would recreate the robber barons of 1890. My view is that
Romney has at least a 50-50 chance of being elected, and
probably slightly more. I found it strange that Marco Rubio
introduced Romney by giving a speech about Marco Rubio, as Chris
Christie, whom my colleague A.B. Stoddard wrote about perceptively in her column,
gave a speech about Chris Christie. Meanwhile Ron Paul was disrespected
by Mitt Romney, while Rand Paul began his campaign for 2016.

On the Democratic side there is enormous support for Hillary Clinton as vice president with Obama, but this will not happen, because Obama would rather lose the strength he would get with Hillary than admit he needs help from her. But support surges for Hillary in 2016, while she continues what I can only describe as a rather strange global tour that seems to never end.

{mosads}When Democrats meet, obviously the big speech will be Bill Clinton, who will bring down the house. Less obviously, I predict the big winner of the Democratic convention will be Elizabeth Warren. She may well be the only speaker at either convention who champions the true populist spirit and agenda that in my view Democrats should have been standing for all along, as opposed to whatever it is that Timothy Geithner actually does, and whatever it is that Mitt Romney actually stands for.

Neither Romnney nor Obama has offered anything of substance about what they would do to make things better in the next four years. While Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Rand Paul and Hillary Clinton are all playing 2016 politics for themselves, with little regard for either nominee in 2012.

I love Clint Eastwood like a brother, but he was totally incoherent addressing Republicans, which probably makes him the most appropriate voice for the campaign of 2012.