First, there is the race for the nomination of leadership in the Republican Party, and second, there is the race for the US presidency. This is the rational order to see things. Usually, though, things tend to turn complicated enough, especially in the electoral campaigns.
This substantially means that the multitude of republican candidates will express a common agenda, reflecting the positions that should be followed officially by the Republican Party in the new political era, afterwards 2016. Specifically, issues like the external policy, the moral social issues, as the debate about the Planned Parenthood, will be reflected by the Republicans candidates in about the same political way. Of course the variation in intensity of expression could make the difference among these candidates. Is the variation in intensity of expression enough to magnifying the odds?
The common agenda in the Republican Party is dictated entirely by the conditions, which are designed inside and outside the US right now.
What are, however, the distinct political focal points on which the internal party conflict is being developed?
First economy and then the agenda of social issues.
After two terms of government Obama, the political map in the US has changed. State intervention returned as the solution to avoid the economic collapse. The welfare state began to make its appearance through the Obama Care. The citizenship and immigration issues differentiated also the political attitude. Scraping together the army, far cry from the previous war homes, as a solution to reduce government spending and invest inside, possibly created audiences more receptive to a political perception, which the Republicans almost never approached.
This means that potentially a more liberal candidate of the Republicans could easily and perhaps with more claims be involved in a close competition with Democrats and gain resonance from social layers, which felt politically convenient with Obama’s policy.
On the other hand, there are much different conditions in the foreign policy in contrast with 4 years behind, such as the dramatic extension of ISIS and the tragedy in Syria, which oblige, specifically, the Republicans mainly to draw an outward-looking foreign policy.
There is only one question in this case. What allows the economy?
Overall the partisan competition always comes to give a solution. The political confrontation in the Republicans seems for now to be equally split between the economy and foreign policy. Somehow similar solutions, somehow different ones.
There are major issues to be resolved and it seems the next four years to be politically strong for the US. Passive trend, concerning the external policy seems to force the huge refugee problem, bringing significant economic and social consistent.
Thus the minimum equilibriums should be sought. Alliances, which Republicans seeking, are based on timeless history of the party. That is why Iran Deal cannot be positive operating point for them, as relations with Israel are at first priority. However, if one looks closer to correlations this agreement formed, geopolitically mainly, will understand that there is a danger the new correlations that consequently formed mainly in the Middle East, to be skipped or to mislead.
The stabilization of the economy during the last term, now come to be tested because of the state of the European economy and reflection, arising from the economy of China. As we said more than anything else the season is shaped through the looking of the minimum equilibriums, to deal with the threats and easily move to the next strategic step.
This way the conditions are set for the next leader of the Republicans.
The third of the Bush family?
As the campaign of Clinton enables the public to deal with low-importance political points, and at the same time as the public is superficially concerned with the heritage of the consequences of the TEA Party on Republicans, without seeing the refugee issue, without even imagine the economic and geopolitical circumstances of the new era, the new national formal policy will be devised and new leader will be prepared.