| 0 |
Subject: If Obama is "Supposed" to Win...
Posted by: nerveclinic
- [40352125] Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 10:59
... I am not saying that he is "supposed" to win. I am not claiming anything, or even noticing anything. But if "they:" do decide they want him back for 4 years, I think what we will see a strong 3rd party candidate like Ron Paul for example running.
I told Atlanta Action a month ago I thought there was a good chance they want Obama back, and if they do, I think they would assure it by running a strong conservative third party candidate and I used the example of Ron Paul. Now Drudge is reporting he may run as a third party candidate.
See: Perot running to get Bill Clinton elected and John Anderson running to get Ronald Reagan elected. Will be interesting to watch.
|
| 1 | Mötley Crüe
ID: 08352621
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 11:08
|
I'll be sure to remember that you weren't claiming or noticing anything if Obama does in fact win. Incidentally that entire post reads like one hedge after another. It easily insulates you from being wrong in any event, and allows you to claim some kind of special foresight later in the event that Obama is elected.
I think Obama's going to win because the entire Republican field is lackluster and the apparent frontrunner, Mitt Romney, is not going to excite the electorate enough to get out and vote GOP.
|
| 2 | nerveclinic
ID: 40352125
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 12:32
|
Motely why would I not hedge, I am not claiming to know anything, or have any knowledge of anything. So since I am not claiming that "this will definitely happen" of course it's a hedge.
I am just mentioning here something I am watching.
In terms of your second point, if the economy stays as bad as it is now, it might be very difficult for him to win. Of course in election years economies tend to get better, but if it doesn't I think it would take a 3rd party candidate for him to beat almost anyone. I have to assume they are not going to nominate one of the complete idiots. Gingrich, Romney certainly can beat him if things are really bad.
So here is the "non hedge". At this point, if the economy stays this bad (9%+ unemployment) I don't think Obama can win unless a third party conservative candidate takes votes away from the republican candidate.
In any case I have no problem being "wrong". We are just having a laugh right?
|
| 3 | Mötley Crüe
ID: 08352621
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 12:48
|
OK, I find a lot more substance in that post. The first one read like an attempt to predict without any possibility of truly being wrong. The second one makes it clear you have some conviction about what you expect to occur and I appreciate that.
I don't expect much to be different no matter who wins the election. But one of the keys is that I wouldn't expect another war that we start unless a Republican is elected; that alone makes it worth it to me to pull for Obama's re-election.
|
| 4 | Boldwin
ID: 910491911
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 12:49
|
What do you think would be the effect of another October surprise in the form of a deeper depression from being dragged down by the fall of the EU and it's economy. There are derivitives bets placed on EU survival all over the place that add up to way too much.
Are they less likely to change horses in the middle of that stream?
|
| 5 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 17:29
|
So here is the "non hedge". At this point, if the economy stays this bad (9%+ unemployment) I don't think Obama can win unless a third party conservative candidate takes votes away from the republican candidate.
that still seem a bit non-hedge.
the fact remains, the GOP isn't presenting someone who is a reasonable opponent to Obama. with or without candidate, it's like a field of also-rans or ne'er do wells running against him.
a third party candidate is the best thing for the Republicans in the long haul, because maybe it will pull them out of the Tea Party moron hole in time to do something for 2016.
|
| 6 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 17:57
|
the GOP isn't presenting someone who is a reasonable opponent to Obama
Exactly. Elections are about choices. If the GOP fumbles their chance to take votes from Obama by nominating a fringe candidate then Obama will win easily, despite the economy.
|
| 7 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 18:36
|
with or without candidate
should read: with or without a third party candidate.
|
| 8 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 14:48
|
Gingrich going all-in on the crazy, it seems: "Roll back child labor laws!"
|
| 9 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 15:41
|
I'm all for counter-intuitive thinking...as long as it makes sense on some level. This doesn't.
Gingrich is a bright guy who will say anything and change his position on anything to get elected.
|
| 10 | Boldwin
ID: 2310542014
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 19:23
|
I call it the 'make paperboys legal' act and predict newspapers will swallow hard and accept it if presented in the right way.
|
| 11 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 21:02
|
There is no way the adults in the room would be willing to start letting children take the few jobs that are available.
|
| 12 | Boldwin
ID: 1010252119
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 21:56
|
Did a paperboy deliver your paper today?
|
| 13 | sarge33rd
ID: 201042113
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 22:00
|
As a matter of fact....no. Not unless a "paperboy" has suddenly gone to work for the PO and handles a vehicle on a rural route. IOW, your "gotcha" garbage, is just that....garbage.
|
| 14 | Boldwin
ID: 1010252119
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 22:07
|
Ah, you are one of those people who are gonna find out their house isn't located according to the regional smartcode.
|
| 15 | sarge33rd
ID: 201042113
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 22:10
|
more garbage, more deflection, more off topic derailment......
go start your own blog B
|
| 16 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 23:19
|
paperboys??? really???? oy.
|
| 17 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 00:15
|
Actually, I get my papers from perky but dirty faced newsies who talk in Brooklyn accents and are likely orphans helping out their younger siblings back at Five Points.
My guy is the one in the middle, with the job. Cute little tyke:
|
| 18 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 10:53
|
Extry, Extry, read all about it!
Baldwin's fixation on paperboys is...curious.
|
| 19 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 10:55
|
It'd be nice for a change if the GOP fanatics, even the ones who claim to be non-political, would say, "Ya, that's stupid" when they hear a stupid idea out of one of their leaders' mouths.
|
| 20 | Khahan
ID: 373143013
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 11:44
|
Ok
"Ya, that's stupid"
|
| 21 | Frick
ID: 387512315
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 11:51
|
Do you have to be a fanatic to lean towards the right? If not, all add a ditto to 20.
|
| 22 | weykool
ID: 3610582210
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 11:59
|
It would be nice to hear you left-wingnuts say "Ya, that's stupid" when your leaders make idiotic statements.
Works both ways.
The problem for Obama in 2012 is now he has a record that he has to run on.
By any measure the last 3 years has been a failed presidency.
Things have gotten worse not better.
When the inevitable debate question is asked, "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?", it isnt going to go well for the do-nothing president.
He might have been able to get away with voting not present when he was a senator but that doesnt fly when you are the president.
|
| 23 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 12:10
|
Things have gotten worse not better.
Can you specify? Are you speaking personally, or in national terms?
|
| 24 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 12:17
|
When Obama or anyone on the left claims something as brainless as supporting child labor as a ill worth discussing, much less as a partial fix to the nation's economic woes, I'll say "that's stupid."
I can't figure out if Republicans don't like the policies Obama has enacted or that they felt he has done nothing. Surely it can't be both.
Personally, I am much better off than I was 4 years ago - I was unemployed on election day after having been laid off. I've bought a home. My salary is up. I realize, though, my situation is not the norm, but it's not uncommon either. Economic indicators are trending upwards, however. And the business community is doing much, much better than they were when Obama was in office, so if GOP fanatics should be happy. It's the people that are hurting. Cue Occupy Wall Street.
|
| 25 | Mith
ID: 23217270
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 12:36
|
By any measure the last 3 years has been a failed presidency.
This isn't true. In the very next sentence after critiquing the above posters (if not all the liberals in this forum) for being inobjective, you declare that there no measure by which Obama's first term have been successful. Many such cases have been made, from legislative success to foreign policy to homeland security to - yes - economic.
I'm not saying that you have to agree that he has been successful in any of those areas. But to deny that there is even a logical argument to be made for a president who ordered OBL and numerous high-level foreign terrorists killed, saw two Middle Eastern dictators removed from power, including one with no shortage of American blood on his hands, has drawn down the second-longest war in American history, ramped up the simultaneous longest war in history upon entering office, prevented a major foreign terrorist attack on American soil (many people call Bush's last 7 years a success for this alone) and effected legislation that most economists say successfully prevented a far worse economic disaster than we had, even if it failed the secondary goal of restoring sufficient growth to reduce unemployment.
To say that none of those things even deserve any objective consideration as possible successes of this presidential term might be the least objective (not to mention the stupidest) commentary on this presidency in this forum. I don't think weykool's demands that the "left wing nuts" be more objective are going to be taken very seriously.
|
| 26 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 13:00
|
When the inevitable debate question is asked, "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?", it isnt going to go well for the do-nothing president.
as MITH already pointed out, the statement in bold is about as ludicrous as it gets.
am i better off than i was four years ago? no, but that's hardly Obama's fault. I was laid off a few weeks after his election, as the economy was already in the midst of $hitting the bed. i've been unable to find steady work since, but again, as a rational person, I hardly hold Obama responsible for that.
the funny thing about all the critics of Obama is that they really have little clarity. Obama is about as centrist as it gets - he's not a lot different from Clinton in that respect.
He's certainly not the liberal candidate i voted for - which is disappointing - but he's still the best person currently for the job, from the list of candidates, and he's the most centrist of them all.
|
| 27 | Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 13:05
|
By any measure, bailing out GM is a success.
Key figure: Labor costs will rise 1 percent a year during GM’s contract with the UAW, the smallest increase in a contract in four decades, the company has said.
If only Congress were able to negotiate for terms as well as GM and the UAW were able to.
|
| 28 | Razor
ID: 551031157
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 14:20
|
The reason Congress can't agree on anything is because we have the wrong people there. It's obvious that Congress does not represent the will of the people. The Tea Party experiment in Congress has proven to be a disaster - extremists who are unwilling to compromise and has ground the government to a halt. We've let a minority in the minority party control the entire government.
|
| 29 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 15:00
|
has been a failed presidency.
Put this in the "sun rises in the east" category: A conservative with ODS calls Obama's presidency a failure.
|
| 30 | Boldwin
ID: 35108223
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 16:40
|
Obama is about as centrist as it gets
If by centrist you mean 'couldn't get a neutrino between him and Karl marx'.
|
| 32 | weykool
ID: 3610582210
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 16:49
|
Razor:
All I'm asking from you is a little honesty.
Please provide the link where you have made the comment "Ya, that's stupid" or something similar regarding comments made by leaders of your party.
If your only defense is you have never heard Obama or someone from the left say anything brainless then dont bother responding.
Tree:
I agree with you that we should not blame the president, government, or wall street for our own employment situation.
Unfortunately you are part of the 1% of Dems who feel that way.
The other 99% look to the government/wall street to solve their problems and blame them when their expectations are unmet.
As for the Obama Presidency:
Unemployment was at 8% and is now at 9%.
And that doesnt include those who have given up looking for work.
Government spending is out of control.
The deficit has mushroomed to $15 trillion.
The one piece of legislation that Obama is taking credit for is his Obamacare, and that has cast a dark cloud over the economic recovery.
Businesses are reluctant to hire until they see how the legislation will affect them.
Even then Obama abdicated his leadership responsibilities and let the ultra left-wing faction of his party draft the legislation.
Ultimately Obamacare was passed and signed by the president UNREAD.
Where was the Obama leadership during the the budget Shutdown? MIA
Where was the Obama leadership during the super subcommitee budget negotiations? AWOL
Obama promised to to shut down Guantanamo. Promise broken.
Obama promised to get the troops out of Afghanistan, but he sent more troops.
Obama promised to get the troops out of Iraq immediately. As of today promise broken.
If you call this a success, the only explanation I can come up with is blind allegiance because of the (D) after his name.
|
| 33 | Seattle Zen
ID: 10732616
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 16:53
|
The deficit has mushroomed to $15 trillion.
You provided a dozen opinions and one fact, and this one fact is wrong, so you might understand why no one will think much of your opinions.
|
| 34 | Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 17:18
|
Jeez, plenty of misunderstandings there, wk. I guess I can see why you are mad if you believe untruths like "Obama promised to get the troops out of Iraq immediately" (he promised to start the troop withdrawal immediately. Here's PolitiFact on the timing) Or that Obama should have inserted himself into the Senate's internal workings. Or "The one piece of legislation that Obama is taking credit for...." Trust me, Obama is taking credit for a lot more, including:
-small business tax cuts
-Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
-DADT repeal
-new nuclear arms treaty with Russia
-Korean War Veterans War Act
-more deportations
-AARA
-auto bailout
-extended unemployment benefits
etc etc.
As a result, tax bills are down, job loss has stopped and is creeping back, to say nothing of his stopping al-qaeda, killing Osama, etc etc.
|
| 35 | DWetzel
ID: 53326279
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 17:59
|
"As for the Obama Presidency:
Unemployment was at 8% and is now at 9%."
Republican economic talking point: "We drove the car off the cliff and handed the keys to Obama, how dare he not make it stop suddenly in midair and back up off the cliff as fast as we'd like? This is proof positive that we should be given charge of the car again."
LOL, logic is hard. ODS isn't though.
|
| 36 | sarge33rd
ID: 610332217
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 18:33
|
DW, that is about as accurate a visual for the upcoming talking points as can be imagined. nicely done.
|
| 37 | Tree
ID: 41512710
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 18:46
|
I agree with you that we should not blame the president, government, or wall street for our own employment situation.
Unfortunately you are part of the 1% of Dems who feel that way.
The other 99% look to the government/wall street to solve their problems and blame them when their expectations are unmet.
back that up. got data to prove that above bolded statement?
|
| 38 | sarge33rd
ID: 610332217
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 19:22
|
<--Not looking to Wall Street for a solution. Looking AT Wall Street as the primary driving force behind the problem.
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: If Obama is
|