2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

[Bakunin]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

One note though. Obama gets the nod even in a medeocre economy.

Mediocre by what definition? 9% unemployment is not mediocre - it's bad.

He connects with people

Reading a teleprompter and talking professorially in seemingly every ****ing speech he gives is hardly "connecting with people". You seem to be stuck on how he was perceived running in '08 vs what he has actually been as the president. The two are distinctly different.

he's largely a known quantity

If being generally ineffective as a leader is a known quantity, then sure, he's a known quantity. As for the budget, that is mostly up to Congress, not him.

Obama's public approval is bad but much better than that of the economy...and indeed, he doesn't get much blame for the situation.

I can all but guarantee that he WILL get much of the blame (as will Congress) if we continue to be in this mess a year from now. If this administration cannot make serious headway in solving the problems it inherited over the span of four years, then it's abundantly clear they aren't going to solve the problems if given another four years. The American voters know that, and they will judge harshly. There's nearly 50 million people on food stamps right now - is that a sign of a healthy economy? Of anything near healthy? I don't think so.

His approval is vastly better than congress.

People do not elect "Congress". They elect their own senators and representatives, which renders any poll regarding a generic approval rating of Congress completely devoid of meaning.

Indeed, even with the baggage...he's only a bit behind a generic Republican (which usually is a best case Republican). And against the top Republican prospect, Romney, he's at worst in a deadheat. Even then, much of Romney's support is coming from the NE USA...where Obama will likely sweep anyways. And in polls numbers, he is trouncing every other GOP candidate.

None of this means a **** thing until the GOP selects a nominee, and I would strongly argue against any poll claiming he "trounces" anyone from the GOP - because once the party makes its decision, 40% of the electorate will immediately swing behind their candidate simply due to party identification. Should Obama win re-election, I would hazard a guess it will be by a much slimmer margin than the one he enjoyed over McCain in '08 due to the not-so-good economy combined with what will likely be a lower voter turnout on his behalf (my reasoning for this: at least some of his former supporters will stay home due to their dissatisfaction aimed at his watered-down policies).

Economic numbers seem a bit better than we expected this summer (note the run up in the stock market). So prospects of a double dip are down.

Apparently you haven't the slightest idea what's going on in Europe right now or what it means for the global economy. I will give a one-word hint: Italy.

 

[Handyman]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

It's because the only possible reason someone would vote for a GOP candidate is because they're a filthy racist. duh. It was also proven recently (I forget the columnist, sorry) that a supporter of Herman Cain has to be a racist, because he's black, or something.
I don't think I can cast a vote for either major party. Politics has no remaining dignity. You're either a racist redneck, or a "libtard".

Well Ann Colture told us that their blacks are better than the Dem's blacks so take it for what you will

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

If McCain can get 47% of the vote in 2008 with a lousy running mate, *any* Republican has a decent shot in 2012.

Correct

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

You make a great point. There are still enough racists in the illiteracy belt to give Romney a fighting chance. And voter fraud can come into play as well.

Romney is a GOP / Democrat / whatever way the wind is blowing candidate. Which is why the MSM and Democrats want him as the GOP nominee. He does not present a contrast to the current Democratic polices because, at one time or another, he espoused them.

I'm not saying he'll be the nominee, but Newt vs. Obama would present that contrast and we would have a referendum on the direction of the country.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

Reading a teleprompter and talking professorially in seemingly every ****ing speech he gives is hardly "connecting with people". You seem to be stuck on how he was perceived running in '08 vs what he has actually been as the president. The two are distinctly different.

If being generally ineffective as a leader is a known quantity, then sure, he's a known quantity. As for the budget, that is mostly up to Congress, not him.


I can all but guarantee that he WILL get much of the blame (as will Congress) if we continue to be in this mess a year from now. If this administration cannot make serious headway in solving the problems it inherited over the span of four years, then it's abundantly clear they aren't going to solve the problems if given another four years. The American voters know that, and they will judge harshly. There's nearly 50 million people on food stamps right now - is that a sign of a healthy economy? Of anything near healthy? I don't think so.

People do not elect "Congress". They elect their own senators and representatives, which renders any poll regarding a generic approval rating of Congress completely devoid of meaning.

None of this means a **** thing until the GOP selects a nominee, and I would strongly argue against any poll claiming he "trounces" anyone from the GOP - because once the party makes its decision, 40% of the electorate will immediately swing behind their candidate simply due to party identification. Should Obama win re-election, I would hazard a guess it will be by a much slimmer margin than the one he enjoyed over McCain in '08 due to the not-so-good economy combined with what will likely be a lower voter turnout on his behalf (my reasoning for this: at least some of his former supporters will stay home due to their dissatisfaction aimed at his watered-down policies).


Apparently you haven't the slightest idea what's going on in Europe right now or what it means for the global economy. I will give a one-word hint: Italy.

We'll see about Italy (and yes as I have property in the med, I'm versed). But again US growth numbers are quite strong right now. In fact without Europe, the US Dow (arguably the best indicator of confidence in US business) could be approaching all time highs...and that's on the back of those same unemployment numbers. Remember more still blame Bush for the recession than Obama. And more trust Obama to fix the issues that do exist than congressional Republicans by 45 to 38 as of July.

You can say that once a Republican nominee gets selected they will walk to victory. But national polls comparing Obama's prospects vs. Republican candidates are assuming they win the nomination. Does this mean a Gingrich could close the gap from a 11 pt deficit to Obama? Probably. But I don't think that means Romney is going to move from 2 pts down to 10 pts up. In the end, who's your dream GOP candidate who is in the field? I have yet to see a Reagan or even someone as strongly backed as W in 2000/2004 in this field. I see the likelihood of the GOP nominee having the backing of a McCain as being pretty good.

My point of all of this is that Obama will not be easy to beat - I never said anything more. If you disagree, feel free to state why.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

There are three reasons the GOP will have trouble beating Obama...
1) The American people trust him on the economy more than the Republicans
2) He has the power of incumbency working for him
3) Umm..the third reason is...the EPA? No, not the EPA...ummm...I can't remember. Sorry.

Oops.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

If McCain can get 47% of the vote in 2008 with a lousy running mate, *any* Republican has a decent shot in 2012.

This is probably the only thing that's sure right now: we have an electorate where the country is split very close to 50/50, and it comes down to who comes to the polls. I don't know if the GOP will be more motivated than last time, but it seems likely, as of right now, that Dems will not be.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

We'll see about Italy (and yes as I have property in the med, I'm versed). But again US growth numbers are quite strong right now. In fact without Europe, the US Dow (arguably the best indicator of confidence in US business) could be approaching all time highs.

The Dow is just 30 companies. The S&P500 is a better barometer of large US businesses. Beyond that, there's the small cap indices like the russell 2000. I'd never ever base my assessment of the US market on the Dow. The real evidence of confidence or lack thereof is whether or not companies are hiring more people / planning to hire more people. If they are standing pat or cutting staff, this recovery - such as it is - is dead in the water and a jobless one.

Remember more still blame Bush for the recession than Obama.

Bush isn't running against Obama, so this really doesn't matter.

And more trust Obama to fix the issues that do exist than congressional Republicans by 45 to 38 as of July.

Obama isn't going to be running against "Congressional Republicans" next November. He may attempt to frame the race in that fashion, but that isn't the choice the voters will be faced with: it'll be him vs one of the schmucks in the GOP field.

You can say that once a Republican nominee gets selected they will walk to victory.

I haven't said that at all. I've said things aren't going to be rosy for Obama this time around when he seeks to retain his office; he is no longer the fresh-faced optimistic "hope and change" candidate - he's the guy defending the status quo of his administration. Given the percentage of the vote McCain got under ideal circumstances for Democrats (attempting to gain power on the heels of an awful second term by W while the economy was being flushed down the proverbial toilet), I think that it's incredibly unlikely that Obama will "trounce" any GOP candidate. No matter how obscenely dumb the GOP nominee might be this time around, it's looking like this will be a very close race - at best - for Obama (unless we see a significant improvement in the employment picture in the coming 8-12 months).

But national polls comparing Obama's prospects vs. Republican candidates are assuming they win the nomination.

Of course they're assuming that; that doesn't mean the voters are good at pretending so-and-so is the nominee. As I said, the "what if" games don't matter a hell of a lot until the GOP picks somebody.

My point of all of this is that Obama will not be easy to beat - I never said anything more. If you disagree, feel free to state why.

And my point is that the GOP won't be a pushover, either. Given the economic situation, I'd say they're a 5 point underdog at worst and probably closer than that. There's a reason "it's the economy, stupid" became a political catchphrase - it's because it's true and often applies. Good economy = nearly impossible to defeat an incumbent. Bad economy = very beatable incumbent since voters tend to get really p*ssed off at those who are in power when things aren't going well.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

The Dow is just 30 companies. The S&P500 is a better barometer of large US businesses. Beyond that, there's the small cap indices like the russell 2000. I'd never ever base my assessment of the US market on the Dow. The real evidence of confidence or lack thereof is whether or not companies are hiring more people / planning to hire more people. If they are standing pat or cutting staff, this recovery - such as it is - is dead in the water and a jobless one.

Bush isn't running against Obama, so this really doesn't matter.

I haven't said that at all. I've said things aren't going to be rosy for Obama this time around when he seeks to retain his office; he is no longer the fresh-faced optimistic "hope and change" candidate - he's the guy defending the status quo of his administration. Given the percentage of the vote McCain got under ideal circumstances for Democrats (attempting to gain power on the heels of an awful second term by W while the economy was being flushed down the proverbial toilet), I think that it's incredibly unlikely that Obama will "trounce" any GOP candidate. No matter how obscenely dumb the GOP nominee might be this time around, it's looking like this will be a very close race - at best - for Obama (unless we see a significant improvement in the employment picture in the coming 8-12 months).

And my point is that the GOP won't be a pushover, either. Given the economic situation, I'd say they're a 5 point underdog at worst and probably closer than that. There's a reason "it's the economy, stupid" became a political catchphrase - it's because it's true and often applies. Good economy = nearly impossible to defeat an incumbent. Bad economy = very beatable incumbent since voters tend to get really p*ssed off at those who are in power when things aren't going well.

Some of your posts just looks like your arguing for argument sake. Dow, S&P, it doesn't matter. The S&P is at 1265 which is not too far from its all time high of 1500. Considering fears in Europe...your arguing that the S&P is a good barometer and the Dow is a bad one is pretty irrelevant.

You can say that polls are meaningless, including those that show that the GOP is just as much on the hook for the recession as Dems. But to be clear...Cain is down 8 pts to Obama...Perry down 9 pts to Obama (prior to last debate; RCP)...the list goes on. Frankly with the exception of Romney which is down 2 pts and Paul at 6 pts down...no GOP candidate is within 8 pts of Obama. That is some serious ground to make up based on the balance of the GOP field's recognition and extreme social conservative positions.

You seem to be asserting that Obama has a very good chance to go down to a 'GOP candidate'. That's perhaps where we do differ. I'm of the opinion that unless the GOP puts up Romney or possibly a surging Gingrich (in which case its quite possible they'll win), conservatives are going to have to hope for an south European style meltdown coming to the US within a year to win the white house. This will not happen.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

I believe the nomination will be decided between Gingrich and Romney (edge: Gingrich). Cain might be a factor *if* he can convince enough GOP voters that he's innocent and that the allegations are frivolous. That would take a Clintonian machine/effort, and I don't know if his campaign is up to that challenge. Should Gingrich become the nominee, he will certainly pose a significant challenge to Obama. He isn't a debating imbecile like Perry (whose gaffes have very likely killed any chance of him being nominated), and he should certainly have little problem motivating the conservative base to turn out on his behalf (for Romney, this would definitely be a problem due to 1/2-3/4 of the party base not really trusting him).

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

I believe the nomination will be decided between Gingrich and Romney (edge: Gingrich). Cain might be a factor *if* he can convince enough GOP voters that he's innocent and that the allegations are frivolous. That would take a Clintonian machine/effort, and I don't know if his campaign is up to that challenge. Should Gingrich become the nominee, he will certainly pose a significant challenge to Obama. He isn't a debating imbecile like Perry (whose gaffes have very likely killed any chance of him being nominated), and he should certainly have little problem motivating the conservative base to turn out on his behalf (for Romney, this would definitely be a problem due to 1/2-3/4 of the party base not really trusting him).

I don't think Cain will have any trouble with GOP voters on the sexual harassment settlements. Republican voters live in their own factual world, literally, and anything that causes the least bit of cognitive dissonance is rejected as "liberal lies," blah blah blah.

Apparently it's now Newt's turn on the anybody but Mitt carousel. I expect that will last until the next incredibly stupid thing he says, so... give it a couple weeks.

This nomination was always going to be Romney's Wall Street money vs Some Other Schlub's tea party act. Unless Saint Joan gets into the race, Mitt is looking great for the nomination just because all the potential SOS's have face planted.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

The Dow is just 30 companies.

Which every newscast features and is easily the most recognizable facet on Wall Street. You may not base anything on the Dow, but the majority of Americans consider that as the Dow goes, so goes the economy. Sure, it may be false, but people believe it.

 

[busterman62]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

I don't think Cain will have any trouble with GOP voters on the sexual harassment settlements. Republican voters live in their own factual world, literally, and anything that causes the least bit of cognitive dissonance is rejected as "liberal lies," blah blah blah.

Seriously. The GOP has got to get their act together........ This just doesn't have the same WOW factor that "vast right wing conspiracy" does.

 

[walrus]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

I don't think Cain will have any trouble with GOP voters on the sexual harassment settlements. .

Did the Dems have any problems with Clintons issues?

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

Did the Dems have any problems with Clintons issues?

Did the Dems ram "family values" down our throats for a decade as the Party of Tearful Baby Jesus?

I won't argue about the distribution of hypocrisy, though. The GOP just wins in a gallop for distribution of self-delusion.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

Did the Dems have any problems with Clintons issues?

Just as much of a problem as the GOP had with David Vitter wearing a diaper and visiting prostitutes or Wide Stance picking up men in a Minneapolis bathroom or Mark Foley using the Congressional Page program as his own private dating service.

 

[busterman62]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

Did the Dems ram "family values" down our throats for a decade as the Party of Tearful Baby Jesus?

I won't argue about the distribution of hypocrisy, though. The GOP just wins in a gallop for distribution of self-delusion.

So are you saying that the Dems are just more self-aware of their hypocrisy?

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

So are you saying that the Dems are just more self-aware of their hypocrisy?

Yeah. We're pretty comfortable with it.

 

[Craig P.]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

Some of your posts just looks like your arguing for argument sake. Dow, S&P, it doesn't matter. The S&P is at 1265 which is not too far from its all time high of 1500.

16% = "not too far"? Math fail.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 Elections: Corndogs for everyone!

So are you saying that the Dems are just more self-aware of their hypocrisy?

Dems don't demagogue about "family values" or "Gays are an abomination" and then turn out to visit prostitutes or be caught in the closet.