|
On November 09 2011 13:27 Probulous wrote:
In the immortal words of Bob Dylan
"The Romney my friends, is blowin in the wind. The Romney is blowin in the wind"
Even with this he is the only one that looks presidential. Yes, the Paul supporters will shout from the rooftops, but the guy looks like he is half way to parlor and probably won't make it. Even with this lackluster group of condidates, Obama is having trouble, imagine what happens if they find someone reasonable? Who knows, the next US president could be out there, still waiting to be found.
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name.
|
Canada11398 Posts
On November 09 2011 02:52 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:21 BestZergOnEast wrote:
Herman Cain just isn't a credible candidate. There's no way a black man can become president. I don't get the joke... And this idea that Cain out of the blue forced himself on this girl, and her response was, "I have a boyfriend." Ok, so in other words it's ok if this man tries to pull your head to his crotch if you are single, but you aren't, and that was the first thing that came to mind to say? And then this guy who just tried to have his way with her suddenly says, "Oh, you have a boyfriend? Ok nevermind let me drive you home." Yeah he's got no problem with suddenly grabbing at a woman's parts and pulling her head down, but if she says she's taken, you turn into a gentleman. Oh, and she remembers exactly what everyone was wearing 14 years ago. I guess because it was so traumatizing, which explains why she never mentioned it until he started running for office. God, it's blatant paid character assassination and everyone knows it, but all the talking heads in the media go along with the soap opera.
First bold- it's a round about way of saying no. I wouldn't read too much into it; she could have been single and said the same thing. As for the second, it's not too far-fetched that he would get cold feet after being told no. I don't think anyone's trying to claim he's a rapist...
I don't know. If she was the only one, then maybe. But with three more waiting in the wings, then I doubt it. One thing's for sure is if it is a paid job, someone will 'fess up soon. People are terrible at keeping secrets and this particular woman is going to be put through the meat grinder aka will have every fact of her life dug up to discredit her. If it is a paid job, then I hope he'll weathers the storm. But guilty or no, I don't think he'll last.
|
On November 09 2011 13:13 Probulous wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 12:56 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Personhood Amendment in Mississippi has been defeated. Every single GOP candidate with the exception of Huntsman backed it. The sad thing is I doubt this will have any real impact on the nominations. Policy and principles tend to get drowned out by whatever gaffe someone may or may not have said at some point in their political history. Public backing of a defeated amendment hardly registers. Similar process is happening down here and the consequence is a whole lot of jaded voters, like me 
At the very least, it tells us a more centered candidate will be required to take the presidency. If the Republican electorate continues to push the nomination too far to the right, the candidate will be unelectable in the general election. Even classic social issues are being shot down, so it won't take much to send them spiraling downward.
|
On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name.
Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides.
I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast.
|
On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast.
Well, a far right R nomination would likely be just as energizing as a pre-2009 Obama. Plus, Presidential elections usually attract a wider electorate to the polls. People who first voted ~3 years ago aren't likely to see the importance of taking the time to vote for a no-name (to them) congressman in the midterms, but voting again for Obama would likely be something they would mobilize for.
|
On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast.
I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all.
-The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base.
- The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval.
- Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote.
- Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left.
|
On November 09 2011 15:42 ZeaL. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast. I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all. -The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base. - The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval. - Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote. - Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left.
I agree with all of this. (I was surprised MS of all places rejected a personhood bill.) I'll clarify my statement as this: if 2008 was a 0, and 2010 was a 10, 2012 is looking like a 6. Purely my own speculation.
Although, as much as Romney doesn't motivate Tea Partiers, he also doesn't really scare liberals the way somebody like Perry does, and there's probably some people in the US center-right with voting preference Romney > Obama > Perry/Cain/Tea Party. I still think he's the worst matchup for Obama among the Republicans who can actually get the nomination.
|
On November 09 2011 03:01 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2011 23:29 Promises wrote:
On the whole "voting for religious reasons" discussion: the ideas aren't by definition to be discarded because they are religious ideas or ideals, they are to be discarded because they often have no logical basis, ie no arguments explaining why that rule should be enforced or that view should be taken other then "it's in the bible". Assuming we want laws to be made according to logical discussion and reasoning, that is why these ideas should be discarded. Gay marriage? It doesnt hurt or infringe on anyone else's right, and I can't see a reason to not allow it. Abortion is a more debatable subject, as to the fetus being a sentient being or not (altho there is plenty scientific data to show that it really isnt more then a blob of cells, and can by no means be called a sentient person yet), but at least I can see where debate would arise there.
Also, just to adress the point of atheism being a religion. If atheists proclaim they know for sure there is no god, then you are right, that is an unfounded belief. However most atheists (at least the ones I know) say that there is no reason to believe there is a god, and as such find it unlikely that there is one. Atheism itself is a strange and wrong term, as it defines a group by something they do not do. Adults are probably all Asmurfists, but it seems a meaningless term. It is also because of this defenition that people say things like "but Stalin was an atheist and look what he did", while true it does not mean much. If someone does something because of the convictions of his philosophy then that's something you can point to, like people suicide bombing because they believe they'll get into heaven/become martyrs etc. As far as I am aware no attroceties has been commited because someone was a firm rational thinker. Do not put religion and rationalism in the same class, it's horribly missinformed. Sorry, but there is no logical basis for any morality. It is all either based upon human emotion or subjective reasoning or religious doctrine. If we did things on a purely rational cost/benefit analysis, then most of the people living in nursing homes or mental institutions would be dead right now. And do you honestly think the only reason people oppose gay marriage is because of the bible? Edit: Oh shit, I'm a tank now!
First of let me mention my train of thought is heavily influenced by Sam Harris, and like him I do believe there are some logical and rational reasons for morality that can be easily applied to the broader lines. Also note that it isnt rational to discard emotion wholly, it just gives it a certain place in discussion. I do not think people oppose gay mariage only because of religious reasons (altho I do believe it is by far the largest cause), I do believe people oppose gay mariage only for irrational reasons.
|
On November 09 2011 16:15 Signet wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 15:42 ZeaL. wrote:On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast. I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all. -The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base. - The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval. - Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote. - Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left. I agree with all of this. (I was surprised MS of all places rejected a personhood bill.) I'll clarify my statement as this: if 2008 was a 0, and 2010 was a 10, 2012 is looking like a 6. Purely my own speculation. Although, as much as Romney doesn't motivate Tea Partiers, he also doesn't really scare liberals the way somebody like Perry does, and there's probably some people in the US center-right with voting preference Romney > Obama > Perry/Cain/Tea Party. I still think he's the worst matchup for Obama among the Republicans who can actually get the nomination.
I think it can/will be closer. Obama is in a fragile position. There are only about 6 different scandals rolling around out there. Obama will face fire on himself, as well as those who worked under him(Holder). I really don't know what is going to be headline news next week, but Solyndra and the Dept of Energy Fail-outs(bailout grants.), ATF gun-running, now he embarrassed Neteyahu(AIPAC). He's taken shit on our commitment to run off and bomb whoever, whenever in support of U.N and Nato. Acorn back in the news this week, sigh.
At any given moment, all hell could break loose. With Tea Party people now protesting OWS protesting Washington, while Obama sysmpathizes with OWS, while Oakland reloads and redistributes rubber to the rubberless because Planned Parenthood. Afghanistan is ready to fight with Pakistan against America. Yay! Mission Accomplished(for who?). Russia is pissed, China is getting fat and sassy. Europe is doing fabulous. We are in Africa, we want to be in Boliva, but Evo says no-go. Romney will fix that. Polar Bears are or are not dying, who the hell knows.
It's not been even remotely like this, a year before election...ever. No candidate that is taken seriously, is safe. No cadidate currently announced that is. Palin, if she has any native IQ, will see the action in the mosh-pit and wait for a VP nod from Perry or Cain(stimulus plus severance). No coffee day, forgive me.
|
I think you need the opposite of coffee lol.
|
The biggest fear of conservatives and even most Republicans is that if/when Romney wins the nomination he will have to go moderate in order to win. If he does win he will turn into another Obama.
Which is exactly what he will have to do.
|
On November 09 2011 15:42 ZeaL. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast. I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all. -The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base. - The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval. - Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote. - Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left.
I disagree with your assessment of two things, and your assertion that Obama will win in a landslide.
First, I disagree that "the general mood of the country is moving away from republicans." The general mood of the country is, and has been for some time, moving away from the status quo not just the republican party. Election results in 2006, 2008, 2010, and last night all point to that. Congressional approval has been low for years, and lets not forget that some of that goes to the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats.
Second, last night's voting results don't just point to Republican losses. Kasich and the Republicans in Ohio overreached by including Firefighter and Police unions in that ballot measure. If they had not done so, the results may have been different. Also, the same state passed a (largely symbolic) amendment rejecting a portion of the health care reform law passed when the Democratic party had full control of Congress and the White House.
Another interesting development is the defeat of the "Personhood" referendum in Mississippi. While on face value it is a defeat for the Republican pro-life agenda even Governor Haley Barbour had some misgivings about it can easily be read more as the voters rejecting the premise that the government should be making such decisions than a rejection of Republicans in Mississippi. I at least also like that it makes us in the South not look quite as backwards as people make us out to be. It's possible abortion has finally moved away from a litmus test issue for Republican candidates for office. (I'm not betting on it.)
All of that being said, I don't think President Obama is in quite as bad shape as the Republican party would like to think. He will be hard to defeat, but he is beatable. Traditionally, during bad times, the electorate votes for someone to fix what is going on. That is why "Hope and Change" resonated so well in 2008. Running against his record, I'm not sure that the President will do as well as you think. He needs some results in the year between now and the election or he may be in deep trouble.
However, I do think that there were potential GOP candidates that did not run because they thought that the President would be very hard to defeat. If he was as week as some would like to say I think that Jeb Bush and Chris Christie at a minimum would have gotten into the nomination fight. I think they took the calculated risk that Obama has a good chance of winning and that they could run against Vice President Biden or another Democratic nominee in 2016.
Either way, all signs point to a close election. I think it is oddly possible that both houses of Congress could change control and right now the President looks more like President Carter than Presidents Reagen or Clinton, but things change and a year is a long time.
|
On November 10 2011 00:51 ey215 wrote:
However, I do think that there were potential GOP candidates that did not run because they thought that the President would be very hard to defeat. If he was as week as some would like to say I think that Jeb Bush and Chris Christie at a minimum would have gotten into the nomination fight. I think they took the calculated risk that Obama has a good chance of winning and that they could run against Vice President Biden or another Democratic nominee in 2016.
Either way, all signs point to a close election. I think it is oddly possible that both houses of Congress could change control and right now the President looks more like President Carter than Presidents Reagen or Clinton, but things change and a year is a long time.
Some part of me wonders if the Chris Christies and Paul Ryans are staying out of the race because 2013-16 has a lot of potential economic perils outside of their control. The common wisdom has been that financial crises tend to last ~5 years, so whoever wins 2012 will look good and position themselves well for re-election (or to transition the presidency to a fellow party member, in Obama's case). But if the euro zone falls apart, that could go out the window. It's impossible to say what will happen in that case, but I can't see it being anything but bad news for the US economy.
But by 2016 the euro crisis should be over one way or another...
|
The next debate is tonight at 8 EST on CNBC.
I think Chris Christie and Paul Ryan stayed out because they're simply not ready. I don't think that timing world/national events has anything to do with it. It's too speculative.
|
On November 09 2011 13:44 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 02:52 jdseemoreglass wrote:On November 09 2011 02:21 BestZergOnEast wrote:
Herman Cain just isn't a credible candidate. There's no way a black man can become president. I don't get the joke... And this idea that Cain out of the blue forced himself on this girl, and her response was, "I have a boyfriend." Ok, so in other words it's ok if this man tries to pull your head to his crotch if you are single, but you aren't, and that was the first thing that came to mind to say? And then this guy who just tried to have his way with her suddenly says, "Oh, you have a boyfriend? Ok nevermind let me drive you home." Yeah he's got no problem with suddenly grabbing at a woman's parts and pulling her head down, but if she says she's taken, you turn into a gentleman. Oh, and she remembers exactly what everyone was wearing 14 years ago. I guess because it was so traumatizing, which explains why she never mentioned it until he started running for office. God, it's blatant paid character assassination and everyone knows it, but all the talking heads in the media go along with the soap opera. First bold- it's a round about way of saying no. I wouldn't read too much into it; she could have been single and said the same thing. As for the second, it's not too far-fetched that he would get cold feet after being told no. I don't think anyone's trying to claim he's a rapist... I don't know. If she was the only one, then maybe. But with three more waiting in the wings, then I doubt it. One thing's for sure is if it is a paid job, someone will 'fess up soon. People are terrible at keeping secrets and this particular woman is going to be put through the meat grinder aka will have every fact of her life dug up to discredit her. If it is a paid job, then I hope he'll weathers the storm. But guilty or no, I don't think he'll last.
Exactly. The last few times I can remember when a girl came onto me instead of saying no I just said "I have a girlfriend, sorry." It seemed easier somehow. They got the hint and backed off. You're reading way too much into that.
|
On November 10 2011 00:51 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 15:42 ZeaL. wrote:On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast. I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all. -The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base. - The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval. - Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote. - Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left. + Show Spoiler +I disagree with your assessment of two things, and your assertion that Obama will win in a landslide. First, I disagree that "the general mood of the country is moving away from republicans." The general mood of the country is, and has been for some time, moving away from the status quo not just the republican party. Election results in 2006, 2008, 2010, and last night all point to that. Congressional approval has been low for years, and lets not forget that some of that goes to the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats. Second, last night's voting results don't just point to Republican losses. Kasich and the Republicans in Ohio overreached by including Firefighter and Police unions in that ballot measure. If they had not done so, the results may have been different. Also, the same state passed a (largely symbolic) amendment rejecting a portion of the health care reform law passed when the Democratic party had full control of Congress and the White House. Another interesting development is the defeat of the "Personhood" referendum in Mississippi. While on face value it is a defeat for the Republican pro-life agenda even Governor Haley Barbour had some misgivings about it can easily be read more as the voters rejecting the premise that the government should be making such decisions than a rejection of Republicans in Mississippi. I at least also like that it makes us in the South not look quite as backwards as people make us out to be. It's possible abortion has finally moved away from a litmus test issue for Republican candidates for office. (I'm not betting on it.) All of that being said, I don't think President Obama is in quite as bad shape as the Republican party would like to think. He will be hard to defeat, but he is beatable. Traditionally, during bad times, the electorate votes for someone to fix what is going on. That is why "Hope and Change" resonated so well in 2008. Running against his record, I'm not sure that the President will do as well as you think. He needs some results in the year between now and the election or he may be in deep trouble. However, I do think that there were potential GOP candidates that did not run because they thought that the President would be very hard to defeat. If he was as week as some would like to say I think that Jeb Bush and Chris Christie at a minimum would have gotten into the nomination fight. I think they took the calculated risk that Obama has a good chance of winning and that they could run against Vice President Biden or another Democratic nominee in 2016. Either way, all signs point to a close election. I think it is oddly possible that both houses of Congress could change control and right now the President looks more like President Carter than Presidents Reagen or Clinton, but things change and a year is a long time.
What I meant by the general mood is shifting away from the Republicans is that prior to 2010, people were pissed at the Democrats and voted in Republicans in huge numbers. Seeing what they've done in congress for the past two years, I think many who supported republicans in 2010 are extremely unhappy and are going to be much less likely to vote republican in 2012. But, like you said, it doesn't mean they're happy with the democratic party either, the pendulum is swinging to the left but where its at is obscured by the fact that it was so far right in 2010.
Based on what I'm seeing I think it will end up being an election year where neither party is particularly motivated which gives the advantage to Obama. Him being the incumbent + his campaign skills/fundraising ability + lack of a decent Republican candidate all point to an Obama win at this point. Obviously, many things can change between now and election day, scandals, gaffes, and amusing photos can alter the course of things, but if nothing super surprising occurs I expect a reelection.
|
On November 10 2011 03:24 ZeaL. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2011 00:51 ey215 wrote:On November 09 2011 15:42 ZeaL. wrote:On November 09 2011 13:57 Signet wrote:On November 09 2011 13:38 ZeaL. wrote:
He's having trouble yes, but not moreso than many past presidents who have been reelected. Both clinton and reagan dipped below 40 in approval ratings and were reelected. I think a lot of the reason Obama's approval has dropped is due to liberals disappointed to find that Obama is pretty much not liberal at all. That group, while disappointed, would never EVER vote for any person with an R next to their name. Staying home is just as good. The 2010 elections were as much about conservatives being super-motivated and all going to the polls while liberals stayed home as it was about people switching sides. I expect the motivation gap to be larger than it was in 2008 but smaller than 2010. Conservatives will be just as motivated in 2012 (with the chance to be rid of Obama once and for all) as they were in 2010 (with the chance to handcuff him for the rest of his term). Will liberals close the gap? Eh, probably somewhat. But my suspicion is that it'll be closer to 2010 -- Obama hasn't done much to get his base energized. Better milk the Iraq withdrawal for all the public support it's worth... but if he invades Iran, he's toast. I don't think it will be close to 2010 at all. -The GOP is going to end up with a candidate they don't love. The last few months have been an exercise in destroying the image of every single gop contender while Obama hasn't had to lift a single finger. Its going to get worse too once the primaries actually begin. All signs point to Romney which is about the worst buzzkill you can give to the GOP base. - The general mood of the country is moving away from the republicans. Everyone is pissed at the way the government is heading but the republicans didn't do themselves any favors with their handling of the deficit. It's important to note that congress has the lowest approval rating in history, 9% on the low end while Obama has managed to maintain a ~45% approval. - Liberals are disappointed in Obama but play some clips from the debates like how every R wants to repeal the HCR bill (which is letting a ton of young people stay on their parents insurance plan), how every GOP candidate is terrified of the HPV vaccine, how every GOP candidate is staunchly for abortion (and is still pushing for limits on abortion like what they just tried to do in mississippi), etc. All strong motivators to hold your nose and vote. - Look at tonight's voting results. Tonight was a pretty bad night for the Republican party and indicates how the wins in 2010 by the republican party are leaving a bitter taste in people's mouths. If 2010 was the pendulum swing right, its coming back now pretty hard towards the left. + Show Spoiler +I disagree with your assessment of two things, and your assertion that Obama will win in a landslide. First, I disagree that "the general mood of the country is moving away from republicans." The general mood of the country is, and has been for some time, moving away from the status quo not just the republican party. Election results in 2006, 2008, 2010, and last night all point to that. Congressional approval has been low for years, and lets not forget that some of that goes to the Senate, which is controlled by Democrats. Second, last night's voting results don't just point to Republican losses. Kasich and the Republicans in Ohio overreached by including Firefighter and Police unions in that ballot measure. If they had not done so, the results may have been different. Also, the same state passed a (largely symbolic) amendment rejecting a portion of the health care reform law passed when the Democratic party had full control of Congress and the White House. Another interesting development is the defeat of the "Personhood" referendum in Mississippi. While on face value it is a defeat for the Republican pro-life agenda even Governor Haley Barbour had some misgivings about it can easily be read more as the voters rejecting the premise that the government should be making such decisions than a rejection of Republicans in Mississippi. I at least also like that it makes us in the South not look quite as backwards as people make us out to be. It's possible abortion has finally moved away from a litmus test issue for Republican candidates for office. (I'm not betting on it.) All of that being said, I don't think President Obama is in quite as bad shape as the Republican party would like to think. He will be hard to defeat, but he is beatable. Traditionally, during bad times, the electorate votes for someone to fix what is going on. That is why "Hope and Change" resonated so well in 2008. Running against his record, I'm not sure that the President will do as well as you think. He needs some results in the year between now and the election or he may be in deep trouble. However, I do think that there were potential GOP candidates that did not run because they thought that the President would be very hard to defeat. If he was as week as some would like to say I think that Jeb Bush and Chris Christie at a minimum would have gotten into the nomination fight. I think they took the calculated risk that Obama has a good chance of winning and that they could run against Vice President Biden or another Democratic nominee in 2016. Either way, all signs point to a close election. I think it is oddly possible that both houses of Congress could change control and right now the President looks more like President Carter than Presidents Reagen or Clinton, but things change and a year is a long time. What I meant by the general mood is shifting away from the Republicans is that prior to 2010, people were pissed at the Democrats and voted in Republicans in huge numbers. Seeing what they've done in congress for the past two years, I think many who supported republicans in 2010 are extremely unhappy and are going to be much less likely to vote republican in 2012. But, like you said, it doesn't mean they're happy with the democratic party either, the pendulum is swinging to the left but where its at is obscured by the fact that it was so far right in 2010. Based on what I'm seeing I think it will end up being an election year where neither party is particularly motivated which gives the advantage to Obama. Him being the incumbent + his campaign skills/fundraising ability + lack of a decent Republican candidate all point to an Obama win at this point. Obviously, many things can change between now and election day, scandals, gaffes, and amusing photos can alter the course of things, but if nothing super surprising occurs I expect a reelection.
I actually disagree with the second part. We're not likely to see 2008 type turnout numbers, but I think the Republican party is particularly motivated specifically to beat President Obama. Is that enough for them to win? I'm honestly not sure. I think the Democrats or specifically President Obama may have a problem precisely because there may not be as much motivation to turn out to reelect him from their side. He came in offering transformation and we got the same old party politics as usual (from both sides) and in fact many voters that voted for him the first time around are worse off today than they were four years ago. EDIT: Not that I think that's enough to get them to vote for a Republican, but it may be enough for them to not bother going to the polls.
It's exactly why he's had to play the, "Hey look at those rich people, they're the reason that you're suffering" card. While there is a very valid concern with the growing economic inequality in this country, the President's policies have solidified if not exacerbated the problem. Essentially, he's as bought as the rest of them but has to try hard to not appear to be so. We'll have to see if his attempts to turn Congress into Truman's "Do Nothing Congress" works.
|
On November 10 2011 02:54 xDaunt wrote:
The next debate is tonight at 8 EST on CNBC.
I think Chris Christie and Paul Ryan stayed out because they're simply not ready. I don't think that timing world/national events has anything to do with it. It's too speculative.
Paul Ryan wouldn't have stood a chance with the certain Medicare plan he came up with. He practically went into hiding after that. Chris Christie would have surged in the polls but when he believes in climate change, civil unions and that a mosque/community center has the right to be built in NYC the Tea party would have been frothing at the mouth.
|
On November 10 2011 02:58 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 13:44 Falling wrote:On November 09 2011 02:52 jdseemoreglass wrote:On November 09 2011 02:21 BestZergOnEast wrote:
Herman Cain just isn't a credible candidate. There's no way a black man can become president. I don't get the joke... And this idea that Cain out of the blue forced himself on this girl, and her response was, "I have a boyfriend." Ok, so in other words it's ok if this man tries to pull your head to his crotch if you are single, but you aren't, and that was the first thing that came to mind to say? And then this guy who just tried to have his way with her suddenly says, "Oh, you have a boyfriend? Ok nevermind let me drive you home." Yeah he's got no problem with suddenly grabbing at a woman's parts and pulling her head down, but if she says she's taken, you turn into a gentleman. Oh, and she remembers exactly what everyone was wearing 14 years ago. I guess because it was so traumatizing, which explains why she never mentioned it until he started running for office. God, it's blatant paid character assassination and everyone knows it, but all the talking heads in the media go along with the soap opera. First bold- it's a round about way of saying no. I wouldn't read too much into it; she could have been single and said the same thing. As for the second, it's not too far-fetched that he would get cold feet after being told no. I don't think anyone's trying to claim he's a rapist... I don't know. If she was the only one, then maybe. But with three more waiting in the wings, then I doubt it. One thing's for sure is if it is a paid job, someone will 'fess up soon. People are terrible at keeping secrets and this particular woman is going to be put through the meat grinder aka will have every fact of her life dug up to discredit her. If it is a paid job, then I hope he'll weathers the storm. But guilty or no, I don't think he'll last. Exactly. The last few times I can remember when a girl came onto me instead of saying no I just said "I have a girlfriend, sorry." It seemed easier somehow. They got the hint and backed off. You're reading way too much into that.
It wasn't a man coming on to her.... It was a man reaching over, sticking his hand up her skirt, and shoving her head down to his crotch, allegedly. That isn't something the average girl is going to respond to by saying, "Hey, I have a boyfriend!" Especially if she is naive enough to believe this man who took her to dinner and got her a hotel room is only interested in discussing work.
Here is another interesting tidbit about Cain's accuser, from the Associated Press:
"Three years after Karen Kraushaar settled her sexual harassment complaint against Herman Cain and quit the trade association where they worked, she filed another complaint at her new job. She argued that supervisors there unfairly denied her request to work from home after a car accident and accused one of them of circulating a sexually oriented email, The Associated Press has learned.
Two former supervisors say she initially demanded a settlement of thousands of dollars, a promotion on the federal pay scale, reinstated leave time and a one-year fellowship to Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. The promotion itself would have increased her annual salary between $12,000 and $16,000, according to salary tables in 2002 from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management."
|
I expect Rick Perry to announce his dropping out of the running. The man is a train wreck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
