|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 16, 2011 12:09:43 GMT -8
In a football game, when you are down a TD late in the game, you are in bad shape if the other team has the ball and your only strategy is to hope they fumble. Perhaps that's where the Democrats are right now. Barack Obama, who came in like a lion, has managed to burn a whole lot of bridges during the past two years. Will he lose because of that? Not necessarily. Here are some reasons why Obama is in trouble and why he may win anyway. (A bit like how a mediocre performance by Connecticut was enough to win the national championship against a pathetic performance by their opponents.) peggynoonan.com/AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecmusician on Apr 16, 2011 13:31:43 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign.
A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012.
|
|
|
|
Post by William L. Rupp on Apr 16, 2011 15:57:45 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign. A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012. The problem is that the fringe elements of both parties get all worked up over candidates who have no change. Does anyone remember McGovern in 1972? 49 states to the GOP! (And I must mention here that McGovern, though many of his positions I disagree with, did very honorable combat service in WWII.) Or Goldwater in 1964? Obama was nominated because Hilary Clinton's campaign made one of the crucial mistakes in politics (or in life in general), namely that of underestimating one's opponent. And there was was a perfect storm of events in the general that worked out for BHO. The financial collapse just before the election doomed McCain; he had been about even with or slightly ahead of Obama before that. Palin or Bachman would be annihilated if nominated. At this point I think that Romney has the best chance. If Obama's numbers are as bad or worse than those of today (they are bad!) in Nov. '12, things will boil down to whether the electorate finds the GOP candidate acceptable. In other words, if the nation has decided that Obama is a loser and must be replaced, the Republicans will win unless their man or woman is seen as totally unacceptable. Romney, Pawlenty, Huckabee, and maybe others, probably would seem acceptable. Palin, Bachman, land some others probably would not. Many things can and will happen between now and then. The problem for Obama is that there is a greater possibility of bad things happening than good. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Apr 16, 2011 19:08:32 GMT -8
The only way that Obama loses is if the economy seriously double dips.
Yoda out...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 16, 2011 19:17:17 GMT -8
The only way that Obama loses is if the economy seriously double dips. Yoda out... The first intelligent response offered in this thread. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 16, 2011 19:26:51 GMT -8
In a football game, when you are down a TD late in the game, you are in bad shape if the other team has the ball and your only strategy is to hope they fumble. Perhaps that's where the Democrats are right now. Barack Obama, who came in like a lion, has managed to burn a whole lot of bridges during the past two years. Will he lose because of that? Not necessarily. Here are some reasons why Obama is in trouble and why he may win anyway. (A bit like how a mediocre performance by Connecticut was enough to win the national championship against a pathetic performance by their opponents.) peggynoonan.com/AzWm Peggy Noonan is a Republican moderate living in a sea of fanatical, fundamentalists Republicans (watch Morning Joe when she's on if you don't believe me). Shoot, for all I know the Republican candidate may win if the economy goes south again, but the Republican "base", read the Teabaggers, are likely going to screw it up big time in the primaries. I mean really; as it stands the Teabagger favorites are Palin an Bachmann, neither of which are electable. But then again, I'd love to see the Republicans nominate them. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 16, 2011 19:29:08 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign. A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012. Jeeze, you really don't understand politics, do you? =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 17, 2011 7:04:23 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign. A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012. Jeeze, you really don't understand politics, do you? =Bob What would make you think that? Looks like some pretty good issues to build a campaign around. How is Obama going to spin those things to his advantage? If the economy comes roaring back, I could take four more years of Obama as long as the GOP made further gains in the House and Senate. |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Apr 17, 2011 9:01:53 GMT -8
The economy will come back in 2012 cuz it's an election year. Everything corrects itself in an election year, then reverts back after the elections.
Obama will lose because most intelligent Americans see right through this guy and won't be sold the bill of goods again. This time he will be put through the ringer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2011 9:37:31 GMT -8
The economy will not be roaring back. It's barely crawling back and generating NO jobs in the process. Gas is approaching $5.00/gal, a level that even the Democrats admit will do real damage to the economy.
|
|
|
|
Post by azdick on Apr 17, 2011 10:33:23 GMT -8
The economy will come back in 2012 cuz it's an election year. Everything corrects itself in an election year, then reverts back after the elections. Obama will lose because most intelligent Americans see right through this guy and won't be sold the bill of goods again. This time he will be put through the ringer. Who's going to put him through the ringer? Sarah? Mitt? Get real. The problem with the Republican Party is that there isn't one. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecmusician on Apr 17, 2011 12:17:38 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign. A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012. Jeeze, you really don't understand politics, do you? =Bob Bob, you have been consistantly wrong on almost every political issue. I guess I don't understand YOUR left skewed version of politics. |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Apr 17, 2011 12:33:00 GMT -8
The economy will come back in 2012 cuz it's an election year. Everything corrects itself in an election year, then reverts back after the elections. Obama will lose because most intelligent Americans see right through this guy and won't be sold the bill of goods again. This time he will be put through the ringer. Who's going to put him through the ringer? Sarah? Mitt? Get real. The problem with the Republican Party is that there isn't one. Nope. The liberal media. They now have to ask him the tough questions this time around because of the results of his policies. |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Apr 17, 2011 12:36:19 GMT -8
The economy will not be roaring back. It's barely crawling back and generating NO jobs in the process. Gas is approaching $5.00/gal, a level that even the Democrats admit will do real damage to the economy. I was joking. It's pretty dismal. but govt. will find a way to sugarcoat the damn thing up until the election day.  |
|
|
|
Post by temeculaaztec on Apr 17, 2011 15:23:04 GMT -8
Let's see who the Republicans run. If they are smart the GOP candidate will not pull punches like McCain did during the 2008 campaign. A faltering economy, $5.00/gallon gas, 3 wars, an a litany of presidential flip flops/lies are plenty of ammo for a lively 2012. The problem is that the fringe elements of both parties get all worked up over candidates who have no change. Does anyone remember McGovern in 1972? 49 states to the GOP! (And I must mention here that McGovern, though many of his positions I disagree with, did very honorable combat service in WWII.) Or Goldwater in 1964? Obama was nominated because Hilary Clinton's campaign made one of the crucial mistakes in politics (or in life in general), namely that of underestimating one's opponent. And there was was a perfect storm of events in the general that worked out for BHO. The financial collapse just before the election doomed McCain; he had been about even with or slightly ahead of Obama before that. Palin or Bachman would be annihilated if nominated. At this point I think that Romney has the best chance. If Obama's numbers are as bad or worse than those of today (they are bad!) in Nov. '12, things will boil down to whether the electorate finds the GOP candidate acceptable. In other words, if the nation has decided that Obama is a loser and must be replaced, the Republicans will win unless their man or woman is seen as totally unacceptable. Romney, Pawlenty, Huckabee, and maybe others, probably would seem acceptable. Palin, Bachman, land some others probably would not. Many things can and will happen between now and then. The problem for Obama is that there is a greater possibility of bad things happening than good. AzWm On McGovern (and I did read his book THE WILD BLUE by Steven Ambrose), the only reason he got the 1972 Democratic nomination was because Edmund Muskie (the Democratic frontrunner and an electable Moderate) was destroyed by the Canuck Letter and the dirty tricks campaign run by the Nixon Admin. (including fake letters and false press leads). Nixon was terrified of losing in 1972 (even though he was winning in all the polls) so his "plumbers" turned "dirty tricksters" (Segretti, Liddy, Hunt, Krogh) went after the Muskie campaign with full fervor and Muskie was forced to pull out . So, Nixon's men destroyed the candidacy of the one candidate who had a chance to unseat Nixon and got the opponent they wanted in George McGovern, a much more liberal anti-war candidate. The result was a stunning blowout by Nixon over McGovern. (BTW, although McGovern was not really electable, his WWII story as a US Army Air Corps Bomber Pilot in WWII Europe is a fascinating read for any WWII buffs...the guy was a true hero). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2011 17:25:17 GMT -8
The economy will come back in 2012 cuz it's an election year. Everything corrects itself in an election year, then reverts back after the elections. Obama will lose because most intelligent Americans see right through this guy and won't be sold the bill of goods again. This time he will be put through the ringer. Your premise is flawed. Most americans are far from "intelligent." JYP, I thought the same thing when I read the sentence but wasn't sure how to respond without sounding as if I was making a political statement. Your comment was perfect. |
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Apr 17, 2011 20:08:26 GMT -8
Peggy Noonan is a Republican moderate living in a sea of fanatical, fundamentalists Republicans (watch Morning Joe when she's on if you don't believe me). Shoot, for all I know the Republican candidate may win if the economy goes south again, but the Republican "base", read the Teabaggers, are likely going to screw it up big time in the primaries. I mean really; as it stands the Teabagger favorites are Palin an Bachmann, neither of which are electable. But then again, I'd love to see the Republicans nominate them. =Bob I've brought this up before but Alan Cranston is the perfect example. This bastion of liberalism would never have even been elected to the Senate but for fact that the extreme right wing of the Republican Party threw out their own moderate incumbent in the primary for not being "conservative enough". Yoda out... |
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Apr 18, 2011 8:46:43 GMT -8
The economy will come back in 2012 cuz it's an election year. Everything corrects itself in an election year, then reverts back after the elections. Obama will lose because most intelligent Americans see right through this guy and won't be sold the bill of goods again. This time he will be put through the ringer. Your premise is flawed. Most americans are far from "intelligent." Read closer.I didn't say most americans are intelligent, rather most intelligent americans...... Most americans are stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 18, 2011 11:09:29 GMT -8
The economy does not always bounce back in a presidential election year. It certainly did not in 1932. There was a recession in 1960, as well. And in 1992, although the recession of '91/'92 was technically over, the electorate had not had enough time to see the economy growing; results, the Zipster won.
It appears that the economy will still be weak next year. Perhaps not the second half of a double dip, but pretty weak nonetheless. My guess is that 2012 would be a great year for the GOP to run the table if - - - I say IF - - - they had a really strong candidate. With a solid but perhaps not inspiring person such as Romney, the Republicans might still win. It would be a hard fought battle. On the other hand, if a charismatic and inspiring candidate (much as Obama was in '08) were in the wings, there might be a fairly easy GOP win. By that I mean a total popular vote count of 52% with Obama getting 47%.
So far I don't see a Republican Obama. (Marco Rubio might be the guy in 2016 or 2020.)
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Apr 18, 2011 17:11:59 GMT -8
Jeeze, you really don't understand politics, do you? =Bob Bob, you have been consistantly wrong on almost every political issue. I guess I don't understand YOUR left skewed version of politics. Sorry, but as much as I don't care to ever attack you because your music is incredible, I would suggest you leave politics to those of us who understand it. I am seriously loath to attack you when it comes to politics but please don't assume I won't do it if you force me to do so. =Bob |
|
