Tuesday Open Thread [8.12.14]

Ed Kilgore suspects that if the GOP does real well in 2014 (i.e. winning the Senate), then they will become overconfident in 2016 and nominate someone who cannot possibly win:
In both 2008 and 2012 the GOP managed to nominate presidential candidates with relatively moderate images and demonstrated swing-voter appeal. In both cases, the nominations were in no small part fortuitous following a demolition derby of more ideologically rigid rivals. The odds of the “most electable” candidates winning a third straight GOP nomination have been diminished by the relatively low popularity of Chris Christie (damaged significantly by “Bridgegate” and already controversial for supporting a Medicaid expansion in his state), Jeb Bush (headed for a direct collision with conservative activists for his championship of Common Core education standards) and Marco Rubio (more distant from conservative sentiment than ever as the prime Senate sponsor of “amnesty” legislation).
Personally, I think no matter how well the GOP does this year, the dye is already cast for 2016. The radical tea bagger base of the Republican Party already thinks that they lost in 2008 and 2012 because the Establishment forced them to nominate two liberals. And of course they lost because their candidate was not conservative enough.