He was an incumbent, and hadn't yet destroyed the Republican Party.

He was an incumbent in 2004. In 2000, he was a coddled son of a president who had no political experience, no successful business experience, no eloquence, no real ideas, and a slight criminal record.

Primaries tend to be driven by extremists who favor psychotics because not enough average people vote in them.

Is it possible to register Republican now, ahead of 2016? You could always change your affiliation later, but, with a candidate for that party who generally aligns with your beliefs, why would you?

Ah, I had my dates off

Yeah not surprised he won 2000 either though strictly because he was a legacy. I think he's the actual reason the idea of legacy political families have fallen out of favor. I mean I know the Kennedy's had their critics, but that was specific to that family, and not at the idea of there being a political family. I think in 2000 people actually thought someone raised in the field of national politics would be better suited. Nowadays though, good luck getting that sentiment across. I think that is thanks to his dismal failure. But then again, Jeb is giving it a good run among the candidates with an actual shot of getting the nomination.

Alas, if I had a buck for every time I've read the GOP was staring extinction in the face (starting in my case with the post-Watergate election of 1976) ... I'd have a tidy little stack of singles. As long as reactionaries exist, the Republican Party will be in solid shape, & very likely it will continue to dominate my somewhat beloved (in FB lingo, "it's complicated") but hopelessly backwards South.

I see a couple of folks have already taken up the mantle of defending the Scandinavian nations, but I need to chime in as well. This characterization is about as far from the truth as you can get. I'd be extremely skeptical about whoever gave you this false information. Just about the only thing this description gets right is that the populations of the Scandinavian countries are small relative to the U.S. (and much of Western Europe). In the past Scandinavian countries might not have been diverse, but that's rapidly changing. For instance, Oslo is one of Europe's fastest growing cities, thanks mostly to immigration. As I mentioned in Meanwhile, I went to Denmark in May. While not nearly as diverse as New Jersey where I live, I saw people who appeared to be East Asian, Middle Eastern, and black. That ties into the next point. I get the impression that Scandinavian is pretty welcoming to immigrants. They are some of the major destination points for immigrants or refugees from places like Somalia, Iraq, and Syria.

And the accusation of anti-Semitism is particular irksome given that Denmark and Sweden are jointly responsible for probably the greatest effort to save Jews from the Holocaust. During World War II, Germany was invaded and occupied by Germany. The Danes got wind of the timing of the planning deportation of Danish Jews to concentration camps. The Danish people launched a massive, quick plane to secret evacuate Danish Jews. A massive flotilla of civilian boats helped Danish Jew to neutral Sweden, where they were out of reach of the Germans. Because of this, Danish Holocaust deaths were almost zero.

The only growing belief in unsustainability sounds like it came from conservative website that angry that the success of Scandinavia devastates their economic theories. Rather than being massively in debt to China, the Scandinavia countries are among the least indebted countries in all of Europe (see, for example, this map: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt#/media/File:Eurostat_public_debt_GDP.png). It's true that Scandinavian countries have higher taxes, but I think it's easy to make the case that this investment is paying off. Investing in the education and health of your population makes good economic sense and leads to more success. Denmark has been rated the happiest country on Earth. It gets a huge part of its energy from renewable wind power. Granted I was only in Denmark for 5 days, but I think I saw one police car that whole time.

One hopes. The hopelessly backwards enclaves like the entirety (typing off the top of my head; there may actually be a couple of oases, though I doubt it) of the South & some of the more paranoid western states seem to fall far short of boasting enough electoral votes to have a major impact on the presidential results. I'm far from a fan of the Electoral College (it's a major reason I haven't bothered to register to vote here nearly 14 years after moving here --as I've noted elsewhere, I could've voted 100,000 times in the last several elections & had no effect whatsoever on Alabama's place on the side of hateful ignorance), but I guess it has its uses.