What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Elections in 3-D!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
That much is true:

Gas-Chart-copy.jpg
Click to expand...

This graph shows not a lot of correlation between the two after 1980. While it may seem that things are related towards the end of the Bush presidency, his unpopularity had little to do with gas prices. High oil prices certainly helped sink Jimmy Carter, but that was 32 years ago. Most Americans have the sense, be it a Republican or Democrat in office, that gas prices in the near term aren't under the President's control.

It reminds me of a joke circling around in 2000 about Things You Have to Believe to be a Good Republican. One of them was, "you have to believe current economic boom is due to policies Reagan enacted 20 years ago, but yesterday's gas prices are all Clinton's fault. ;)

PS: Let me add that yes 5 dollar gas would be a big problem for Obama, but I see no reason gas prices will ever get that high. Its costs OPEC more at that level because people start changing their habits over the long term which is the last thing the cartel wants.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Does it matter? Another 800 bucks a year isn't lifestyle changing anyway. It just eats up the 1% or so a year raise that you might be lucky to get nowadays. We're all going bankrupt anyway. Gas prices are just another symptom of a huge problem that no one in Washington wants to solve cause the 1% are doing just fine. Just fine.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
"They're des-per-ate."

"Get used to it."

It's what they've got. Right now, Obama can just run Zombie Reagan's 1984 "Morning in America" ad with the names changed. "Why would we want to go back to those failed policies of just a few short years ago?" That kind of thing resonates.
Click to expand...

He can even do the 'bear' commercial (substitute terrorism for Communism), except this time when he confronts the bear, he shoots him square between the eyes and dumps its carcass in the Indian Ocean. :D
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

walrus said:
Interesting read on crude prices and the next bubble to burst
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/01/chris-cook-naked-oil.html
Click to expand...

Interesting read, thanks for posting.

One consideration, which maybe I just overlooked its mention, is a change in relative price of currency. It is possible we could see oil prices go down in many of the world's currencies and yet not go down in dollars once the European financial situation is resolved, since the impetus to hold dollars as a "safe haven" will be gone and people worldwide will once again become concerned with just how many dollars are shoshing around globally.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Priceless said:
He can even do the 'bear' commercial (substitute terrorism for Communism), except this time when he confronts the bear, he shoots him square between the eyes and dumps its carcass in the Indian Ocean. :D
Click to expand...
I haven't seen a Threatdown on Colbert in forever. Does he still do them?

In other news, 538 has the following projected winners for the upcoming primaries. What a cluster:

AZ: Mittens*
MI: Frothy
GA: Newt
OH: Frothy*
OK: Frothy*
VA: Mittens*

* locks (p > .9)

Let's say Santorum actually manages to eek the nomination out, with Romney at 40% or so of delegates. Who was the last major party candidate to lose twice in hotly contested primaries and come back for a third go 'round? Has there been one in the post-smoke-filled-room era? I'm trying to remember whether Dole ran in both 1980 and 1988 -- that would be my guess.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
I haven't seen a Threatdown on Colbert in forever. Does he still do them?

In other news, 538 has the following projected winners for the upcoming primaries. What a cluster:

AZ: Mittens*
MI: Frothy
GA: Newt
OH: Frothy*
OK: Frothy*
VA: Mittens*

* locks (p > .9)

Let's say Santorum actually manages to eek the nomination out, with Romney at 40% or so of delegates. Who was the last major party candidate to lose twice in hotly contested primaries and come back for a third go 'round? Has there been one in the post-smoke-filled-room era? I'm trying to remember whether Dole ran in both 1980 and 1988 -- that would be my guess.
Click to expand...

The smartest thing the GOP could do right now is throw up their hands and pick Romney, and focus on holding the House and winning back the Senate. They've got a good shot of winning both houses of Congress right now, with 23 Dems up in the Senate. Romney is the safe choice if they want to do this - he's uninspiring enough that he won't really inspire anyone to come out for or against the GOP. If they nominate Frothy that will cause the independents and moderates to have a coronary and send them to the polls for the Dems in spades, and that would cost them their shot at the Senate and possibly even the House.

Alternatively, the REALLY shrewd thing would be to do what you alluded to earlier; give up entirely, throw out Santorum as a sacrificial lamb, get OMG***PWNED, eject the old deadwood GOP/Teabaggers, and start fresh in 2016 with folks like Huntsman, Christie, Gary Johnson, etc. Still, that would mean 4 more years of Obama AND possibly the Democrats gaining both houses of Congress to boot. I suspect the 1% wouldn't go for that.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
I haven't seen a Threatdown on Colbert in forever. Does he still do them?

In other news, 538 has the following projected winners for the upcoming primaries. What a cluster:

AZ: Mittens*
MI: Frothy
GA: Newt
OH: Frothy*
OK: Frothy*
VA: Mittens*

* locks (p > .9)

Let's say Santorum actually manages to eek the nomination out, with Romney at 40% or so of delegates. Who was the last major party candidate to lose twice in hotly contested primaries and come back for a third go 'round? Has there been one in the post-smoke-filled-room era? I'm trying to remember whether Dole ran in both 1980 and 1988 -- that would be my guess.
Click to expand...

Definitely Reagan who lost in 68 and 76. Not sure if Dole ran in 80 but he probably did as he was the VP nominee in 76.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Rover said:
Definitely Reagan who lost in 68 and 76. Not sure if Dole ran in 80 but he probably did as he was the VP nominee in 76.
Click to expand...

Dole tried in 1980 but only got 1% in Iowa and dropped out.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
I haven't seen a Threatdown on Colbert in forever. Does he still do them?

In other news, 538 has the following projected winners for the upcoming primaries. What a cluster:

AZ: Mittens*
MI: Frothy
GA: Newt
OH: Frothy*
OK: Frothy*
VA: Mittens*

* locks (p > .9)
Click to expand...

While I don't know how the delegates will be awarded, if this plays out that keeps Sanitarium in the lead over Mittens in states won. Furthermore he'll be showing far more geographical appeal than Romney, who's basically won the state next door, and states with a high Mormon population, plus his big win in Florida mostly as a result of a huge advertising advantage. Santorum would have won in the Rockies, the Midwest, the Rust Belt, and the South. Also if he wins GA, Gingrich is toast.

Look, if I'm a GOP operative, in no way shape or form can Santorum be the nominee. To that end I think Romney pulls ahead in delegates when the Californias and New Yorks of the country vote. Problem is those aren't where the GOP general election votes are. An alliance with his new best friend Ron Paul will help put him over the top in delegates but its interesting how the 2nd and 3rd place finishers seem to hate Romney so much that you have to wonder if they'll push for a brokered convention just to screw him.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

ScoobyDoo said:
Awesome. If it isn't spills to ruin the environment then it's a refinery fire to ruin the environment.
Click to expand...

And yet, people are still finding excuses to not buy hybrid cars. I think, in the long run, high gas prices will be better because they will lead to people making mroe environmentally sound decisions.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Rover said:
An alliance with his new best friend Ron Paul will help put him over the top in delegates but its interesting how the 2nd and 3rd place finishers seem to hate Romney so much that you have to wonder if they'll push for a brokered convention just to screw him.
Click to expand...
I wonder whether Romney's complete lack of convictions might help him. The only issue position Romney would not reverse for expediency is wanting to be president. (I assume not raising taxes on his 1% buddies runs a distant second.) He makes John Kerry look principled. And likeable.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Rover said:
Blah blah blah. Now that huskyfan has been discredited for the umpteenth time posting nonsense (I was in Florida just last weekend and all the stations were between 3.55-3.63) I have to laugh at the desperation out of the GOP. Anti Birth Control? Hoping gas prices go up to 5 bucks a gallon? How does this sound: unless Reagan's corpse rises up and wins the nomination in a brokered convention you guys aren't looking good. Every election year somebody puts out a story about potential sky high gas prices, and they do it because 1) reporters are lazy, and 2) gas prices rise every spring as people travel more. On an inflationary basis, gas prices would have to rise to over $4 bucks a gallon to be at their historic highs ($1 a gallon in 1980 remains the highest price ever per gallon). So, while paying an extra 50 cents may be annoying, it ain't gonna make Mittens or Sanitarium any more likeable.
Click to expand...

really? you were in Florida last weekend and you checked ALL the stations? blah blah blah.
 
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Rover said:
Definitely Reagan who lost in 68 and 76.
Click to expand...
Wow, I had no idea the GOP screwed Reagan in both 68 and 76. Dude persevered, I'll give him that. (If he had only won the nomination in 76, Carter would have cleaned his clock post-Watergate and a generation of conservative ideological childishness could have been avoided. If he had won in 68 that would have been a very interesting election, and I suspect a 1969-76 President Reagan would have governed about as centrist as Nixon did. And he couldn't have effed up Southeast Asia any worse than Nixon and Kissinger did. And it would have avoided Watergate, thus completely rewriting the 70's.)
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!

Kepler said:
I wonder whether Romney's complete lack of convictions might help him. The only issue position Romney would not reverse for expediency is wanting to be president. (I assume not raising taxes on his 1% buddies runs a distant second.) He makes John Kerry look principled. And likeable.
Click to expand...

"These are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top