US, after the election, is the road to the presidential

Store the mid-term elections for the US opens the long way of the presidential election of 2016, with the election campaigns for the primaries in their respective camps. In the field of democracy, there should be few surprises: Hillary Clinton should be the nominee. It does not seem to be threatened by Elizabeth Warren, a champion of the fight against the power of finance and banking, which has, however, forced Clinton to a different attitude on these issues, even before the competition for the primaries. However, if the time is ripe for a woman as president of the United States, the experience of Clinton does not seem to have any rivals. A very different situation in the Republican Party, which is divided and fragmented, despite the recent electoral victory. One thing is elections, which allow you to coagulate the votes of the party around the symbol and the flag, and another to find a summary of a candidate capable of representing different instances too often to be a single party. That part of the Tea Party, is strongly opposed to a federal state with powers more and more focused on the economy and security, seems to have found his representative Rand Paul, son of Senator Ron Paul, to address clear liberal and populist. The extreme right of the party sees the governor of Texas, Ted Cruz its candidate, while other possible candidates Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, and especially Jeb Bush, son and brother of the two presidents Bush. This uncertainty shows how the Republican Party lacks a kind of common line, able to attract consensus, one of the decisive factors that enabled Obama to win quite easily the last two presidential lessons. Of course the political characteristic of the two major American parties is to be containers of trends often contradict each other, but the Republican Party seems to be influenced too much by the polarization of the ideas in it, which makes it impossible to find a single candidate in an easy manner . The clash with the statist liberals, proponents of closed borders with those who want to make it easier to enter the country, especially for economic and foreign policy plans of battle shall be on several levels: those who want the new 'international hegemony of the US, who is a less prominent, who, indeed, is in favor of isolationist tendencies that put the country out of international disputes. In this context, the influence of the old leaders of the party, certainly with liberal ideas but with a strong sense of the state, has faded in favor of a greater role for local issues and populist carried out by the current Tea Party. Even in the US, and especially in the states has always been defined as the heartland, have been reinforced those interests that represent local communities in the face of what is considered the intrusiveness of the federal state, seen as an increasingly intrusive. It is a phenomenon similar to what happens in Europe, where populist parties and regional collect more and more successful because of the inefficiency and what is seen as a meddling by the institution of the European Union, as well as the central powers of the individual states. This peculiarity of the Republican Party is likely to be unattractive to most modern states and large cities, where these issues are felt to a lesser extent. A big risk for the US is that it profiles the horizon a duel Clinton against Bush, who still senses the bulky dynasties in power in the country that calls itself the ultimate meritocracy. Would present a bad sign that highlights the lack of renewal in the land of great opportunities for everyone.