2012 Presidential Election

[Elephant]

I know it's early, but we are about to begin to get a clearer picture of who will be running within the next 6 months. It is still a wide open race in the GOP. Of course we know who will be representing the DNC, although there could be a shake up if things in the Middle East continue to make Obama look as inept as he does right now.

I am wondering who some of you feel could step up for the GOP and who will ultimately win the next Presidential race.

I am going on record to say that I think we are likely looking at a 2 term Presidency for Obama. Look, I do not want it! I think he is the worst President we have had in 30 years, perhaps in 100 years. But, he already has a team in place, headed up by a game David Axelrod. They orchestrated one of the better campaigns in recent history and are fully capable of repeating, even with Obama being such a worthless Executive.

I see 2012 much like the 2004 race and the 1996 race, Clinton could have been defeated, but Dole was a terrible candidate for the Republicans. I think Newt could have had a better chance of beating Clinton than Dole did. Just like Bush could have been defeated, but the best the Democratic party could come up with was John Kerry.

The GOP finds itself in a quandary. The chance of Mitt Romney earning the Republican nomination is slim, but he can win it. His two major obstacles are his Health Care fiasco in Massachussets and his religion. Sarah Palin could easily win the nomination, but she will lose to Obama! She is too divisive and many independents will not vote for her. Newt has too many personal issues after trading his wife in on a newer model. I like Mitch Daniels, hopefully he can garner more national juice before going in.

On the Democratic side, Obama will represent, but he could face a Clinton revolt if his numbers fall.

I think Obama wins a narrow victory for his second term because the GOP will beat themselves up pretty good trying to figure out who will best represent them. I just threw up in my mouth a little!

 

[Sarge]

The last election proved beyond a doubt that people are stupid. But even stupid people can figure that the current occupant is making life worse for teh average American, not better

As far as I'm concerned, the worst candidate the repubs can put up will be far better than the rube that sits in the office now

 

[redskins26]

He will blame bush the elctoriate will fall for it and he will be reelected

 

[Lanky Livingston]

The last election proved beyond a doubt that people are stupid. But even stupid people can figure that the current occupant is making life worse for teh average American, not better

As far as I'm concerned, the worst candidate the repubs can put up will be far better than the rube that sits in the office now

What a ridiculous statement - 2000 and 2004 also proved people were stupid, depending on your point of view. 1980 and 1984 proved people were stupid. 1988 proved people were REALLY stupid.

 

[Sarge]

Are you better off today than you were then?

The fact is that we are, at this time, leaderless. Obama's "Summer of Recovery" last year was a load of crap. TARP has only gone to his business buddies, who he took on his current jaunt to South America. He admitted there is no such thing as "Shovel ready jobs", so where did all the money go? His foreign policy is a joke. Gas is headed for $4.00 again and not because of the Middle East, but because we won't drill. Obamacare is going to be shot down by the Supremes. His "leadership" on the oil spill was a disaster.

But he's got time to film an ESPN special

 

[Ax]

All the people who voted for Oh-Bummer will NEVER admit they were wrong, by voting against him next time. He likely won't get the turn-out he did before, but with the media still in his pocket, he only has to not get caught in bed with an under-aged boy to have them once again lead the charge against anybody he faces. Even if Abe ****in' Lincoln rose from the grave to run against him.

Sucks for the country, though I sure hope I'm wrong.

Obama makes Jimmy Carter suck less. Though they both still suck.

 

[Elephant]

What a ridiculous statement - 2000 and 2004 also proved people were stupid, depending on your point of view. 1980 and 1984 proved people were stupid. 1988 proved people were REALLY stupid.

Can you honestly tell us this country is better off with Obama in office? Unfortunately, the only thing his machine has been able to do right is campaign. Well there is a difference between being a leader and playing one on TV. Unfortunately, I think the American people will buy into his fallacies and elect him again in 2012.

The people in all those years you refer to were not stupid, look at the opponents in each case.

1980 Jimmy Carter. Need I say more.
1984 Walter Mondale - Yeah, he would have stood up to the Russians in a meaningful way destroying communism as we knew it.
1988 - Michael Dukakis - Who?
2000 - Al Gore - I want you to be honest here, would you really have wanted Al Gore as President when those towers came down?
2004 - John Kerry - Really? He was not a viable option to G.W. Bush. I can only imagine how much further in debt we would have been had he been President. Not that Bush didn't give us unprecedented debt, but Kerry would have spent like a drunken Obama.

I had a co-worker during the spring of '08 tell me why he was voting for Obama. He said, "I want to be part of history by voting for the 1st black President." I said OK, you can vote for whatever reason you want. I will tell you this, by this time next year if Obama is President, you will be out of a job. Sure enough, a year later he was laid off because the owner of the company made massive cuts for fear of the oncoming expenditures associated with laws passed by Obama. Tell me that guys reasoning for voting for Obama was logical!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

2008 - opponents were McCain/Palin. What's your point?

EDIT: 2000 - yes, I wanted Al Gore president. What makes you think he would have been any less of a leader than Dubya during those times of crisis? The same exact thing would have happened - we'd have declared war on Afghanistan and carpet-bombed the crap out of them. The only difference is, Gore most likely would NOT have gone to war in Iraq, and put us in the cluster-f of a situation we're in now.

Its ironic - all Bush did was make a couple speeches after 911 - and he gets all sorts of credit. Now the right bashes Obama for the same thing, making speeches and bringing the country together.

 

[Elephant]

2008 - opponents were McCain/Palin. What's your point?

EDIT: 2000 - yes, I wanted Al Gore president. What makes you think he would have been any less of a leader than Dubya during those times of crisis? The same exact thing would have happened - we'd have declared war on Afghanistan and carpet-bombed the crap out of them. The only difference is, Gore most likely would NOT have gone to war in Iraq, and put us in the cluster-f of a situation we're in now.

Its ironic - all Bush did was make a couple speeches after 911 - and he gets all sorts of credit. Now the right bashes Obama for the same thing, making speeches and bringing the country together.

Al Gore would have done the same thing Clinton did when those taking shelter in Afghanistan bombed the USS Cole and the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. He would have sent a few planes and bombed a region and acted like they did something. The idea that he would have been tough on the terrorists embedded in Afghanistan is laughable. You were a teenager when it happened so I am not sure how much you actually remember, but Clinton bombed and it didn't work!

As for McCain and Obama, McCain is a proven leader! He would have been a far better President. Here is an example of the American people being duped by Obama. McCain was a change from the Bush era, but people bought into the phrase likening McCain to four more years of Bush's failed policies. Actually, McCain was a big change, and more of what middle America was looking for.

Palin? Well, to counteract Palin all I have to do is remind you of who our Vice President is, Joseph Biden!

Lately I have been wondering what the world would be like had we not taken Saddam Hussein out. Well, countries like Libya, Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen should give us a clue. The only difference, Hussein would have been far more destructive to the people in his country. We would likely see another few hundred thousand dead Iraqis killed by the hand of Saddam. The people of Iraq have had a tough adjustment, but as we have fewer and fewer combat troops on the ground there, even your beloved Obama is claiming a victory there. Of course he is taking the credit for it! LOL!

 

[fansince62]

What a ridiculous statement - 2000 and 2004 also proved people were stupid, depending on your point of view. 1980 and 1984 proved people were stupid. 1988 proved people were REALLY stupid.

yes...but 2008 proved not only are they stupid...but they are deaf, dumb and blind......

this guy will go down in history as one of the most inept, destructive Presidents we have ever had. but that brings us back to the "what is intentional...what is competence" debate that isn't popular in these parts.

 

[fansince62]

Al Gore would have done the same thing Clinton did when those taking shelter in Afghanistan bombed the USS Cole and the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. He would have sent a few planes and bombed a region and acted like they did something. The idea that he would have been tough on the terrorists embedded in Afghanistan is laughable. You were a teenager when it happened so I am not sure how much you actually remember, but Clinton bombed and it didn't work!

As for McCain and Obama, McCain is a proven leader! He would have been a far better President. Here is an example of the American people being duped by Obama. McCain was a change from the Bush era, but people bought into the phrase likening McCain to four more years of Bush's failed policies. Actually, McCain was a big change, and more of what middle America was looking for.

Palin? Well, to counteract Palin all I have to do is remind you of who our Vice President is, Joseph Biden!

Lately I have been wondering what the world would be like had we not taken Saddam Hussein out. Well, countries like Libya, Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen should give us a clue. The only difference, Hussein would have been far more destructive to the people in his country. We would likely see another few hundred thousand dead Iraqis killed by the hand of Saddam. The people of Iraq have had a tough adjustment, but as we have fewer and fewer combat troops on the ground there, even your beloved Obama is claiming a victory there. Of course he is taking the credit for it! LOL!

It hasn't escaped your notice that Obama and Holder are basically using many of the same arguments Bush employed to justify Iraq?!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Al Gore would have done the same thing Clinton did when those taking shelter in Afghanistan bombed the USS Cole and the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya.

Surely you aren't comparing those incidents to the 9/11 tragedy, and pretending the response by even Clinton himself would have been the same...for shame, El.

He would have sent a few planes and bombed a region and acted like they did something. The idea that he would have been tough on the terrorists embedded in Afghanistan is laughable. You were a teenager when it happened so I am not sure how much you actually remember, but Clinton bombed and it didn't work!

I doubt it - the largest attack on US soil would have provoked far more than a fly-by bombing. Come on, you have to give Gore more credit than that...otherwise you're just being completely partisan.

As for McCain and Obama, McCain is a proven leader!

A proven leader who is 98 years old! Who's second in command is a cartoon character! If you believe Sarah Palin is the leader of the free world, you're fooling yourself, and just being anti-Obama. Biden was not my first choice for VP, however Obama does not have one foot in the grave, so its unlikely Biden will ever see the Oval Office from behind the president's desk.

He would have been a far better President.

And how do you know this? This is just an emotional response from a right-wing, anti-Obama guy. I've posted this before - I actually would have voted for McCain if he hadn't kowtowed to the right and their policies. He swayed from his view points to fall in line with his party.

Here is an example of the American people being duped by Obama. McCain was a change from the Bush era, but people bought into the phrase likening McCain to four more years of Bush's failed policies.

Again, not why I didn't vote for him, but you can keep pigeonholing all democrats with your rhetoric if it makes you feel better.

Lately I have been wondering what the world would be like had we not taken Saddam Hussein out. Well, countries like Libya, Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen should give us a clue. The only difference, Hussein would have been far more destructive to the people in his country. We would likely see another few hundred thousand dead Iraqis killed by the hand of Saddam. The people of Iraq have had a tough adjustment, but as we have fewer and fewer combat troops on the ground there, even your beloved Obama is claiming a victory there. Of course he is taking the credit for it! LOL!

Let me ask you a question, and I want you to be honest. When, in history, has a president EVER credited his predecessor for ANYTHING (of significance), if that predecessor happened to be from the other party?

 

[Lanky Livingston]

yes...but 2008 proved not only are they stupid...but they are deaf, dumb and blind......

Eh, I am proud of my vote for Obama still, and would probably do it again against the same opponents. Palin should be kept as far from the White House as possible. Obama had the potential for leadership - we have the benefit of hindsight now to see he hasn't been the greatest leader; however in 2008 it was just more right-wing rhetoric.

 

[fansince62]

El..more to the point....why does it matter?

The legislative process means almost NOTHING any longer in this country. By all appearances...the judiciary has decided that elections, legislation by duly elected representatives, Constitutions...mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the face of their profound and overwhelming intellectual and moral superiority. they have progressively substituted their inclinations and emotional predispositions for the will of the people.

in case you missed it...Democracy has been dying in this country for decades. activist judges rule!

 

[Elephant]

Surely you aren't comparing those incidents to the 9/11 tragedy, and pretending the response by even Clinton himself would have been the same...for shame, El.

Who said I was comparing them Lanky, now you are putting words in my mouth. Why would you even suggest I made such an assertion when nothing I wrote even remotely suggests such a foolish claim! That's why discussion with you is difficult at times. You infer assertions that aren't even made and then defend it to your liking!

What the air strikes in Afghanistan in 1998 after the 2 embassy and Cole bombings give us is an example of how the Clinton administration, of which Gore was a member, considered action when Americans were killed. Given that example, the much more liberal Gore would more than likely been hesitant to go after the Taliban and Al Qaeda the way Bush did, aggressively with ground troops! Gore's track record suggests this not me!

I doubt it - the largest attack on US soil would have provoked far more than a fly-by bombing. Come on, you have to give Gore more credit than that...otherwise you're just being completely partisan.

OK again, just because you believe Gore would have been more aggressive does not prove he would have so Partisanship goes both ways there buddy!

A proven leader who is 98 years old! Who's second in command is a cartoon character! If you believe Sarah Palin is the leader of the free world, you're fooling yourself, and just being anti-Obama. Biden was not my first choice for VP, however Obama does not have one foot in the grave, so its unlikely Biden will ever see the Oval Office from behind the president's desk.

This isn't something I will argue with you. McCain is proving with his actions in the Senate he is still capable, but I get your point. However, I will counter your point with the fact that many didn't believe Obama would make it through his first year because of racism or pure hatred which could have put the buffoon Biden in office.

I am finished defending Palin. I don't like her anymore and I have expressed that numerous times so I won't go there.

And how do you know this? This is just an emotional response from a right-wing, anti-Obama guy. I've posted this before - I actually would have voted for McCain if he hadn't kowtowed to the right and their policies. He swayed from his view points to fall in line with his party.

John McCain was not a divisive figure who went out of his way to threaten anyone in his party who would vote against a health care plan that is on track to be the next entitlement that the Federal Government cannot sustain!

Again, not why I didn't vote for him, but you can keep pigeonholing all democrats with your rhetoric if it makes you feel better.

Jamie, the man lied in his campaign when he said he was not going to raise taxes against the middle class! Lied! My fiance got almost 10 grand last year, nothing has changed in her income and this year she owes! How does that happen? She is lower middle class and her taxes were raised dramatically!

Let me ask you a question, and I want you to be honest. When, in history, has a president EVER credited his predecessor for ANYTHING (of significance), if that predecessor happened to be from the other party?

I'll get back to you on this, but what does it have to do with this discussion? There is a difference between crediting a predecessor and blaming them for everything!

 

[Elephant]

El..more to the point....why does it matter?

The legislative process means almost NOTHING any longer in this country. By all appearances...the judiciary has decided that elections, legislation by duly elected representatives, Constitutions...mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the face of their profound and overwhelming intellectual and moral superiority. they have progressively substituted their inclinations and emotional predispositions for the will of the people.

in case you missed it...Democracy has been dying in this country for decades. activist judges rule!

Just like the latest turn in the WI situation! I know! It's disheartening. I still believe there is some good in this country. I believe the process will prevail!

 

[fansince62]

think Reagan might have acknowledged Johnson for leading the Civil Rights Voting Act legislation......and I'm sure very few Repub Presidents have not accorded FDR his due for his leadership during WWII......plenty Repubs creditted CLinton for NAFTA

Plenty Dem leaders creditted Reagan - in varying degrees - for his vision/leadership in ending the Soviet Union.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Who said I was comparing them Lanky, now you are putting words in my mouth. Why would you even suggest I made such an assertion when nothing I wrote even remotely suggests such a foolish claim! That's why discussion with you is difficult at times. You infer assertions that aren't even made and then defend it to your liking!

What the air strikes in Afghanistan in 1998 after the 2 embassy and Cole bombings give us is an example of how the Clinton administration, of which Gore was a member, considered action when Americans were killed. Given that example, the much more liberal Gore would more than likely been hesitant to go after the Taliban and Al Qaeda the way Bush did, aggressively with ground troops! Gore's track record suggests this not me!

You are inferring what Gore would do, based on what Clinton did "when Americans were killed." Direct quote. You're making a direct comparison between the events! Its written in your last two posts. By assuming Gore's actions would have been the same, you're assuming the incidents themselves were of similar severity. It is basic logic.

OK again, just because you believe Gore would have been more aggressive does not prove he would have so Partisanship goes both ways there buddy!

Its common sense - we're talking a direct attack on US soil. You can point to every conflict in Africa that every Democrat in history has ever dealt with and try to use it as a basis for their response to 9/11, but it just doesn't fly! Maybe you're just anti-Democrat, and think we're all so against war we'd stand by as our countrymen were killed randomly? Need I remind you it was a Democrat (arguably a socialist) who took us to war against Japan?

John McCain was not a divisive figure who went out of his way to threaten anyone in his party who would vote against a health care plan that is on track to be the next entitlement that the Federal Government cannot sustain!

So, this one sentence is why McCain would have been "a far better president?"

Jamie, the man lied in his campaign when he said he was not going to raise taxes against the middle class! Lied! My fiance got almost 10 grand last year, nothing has changed in her income and this year she owes! How does that happen? She is lower middle class and her taxes were raised dramatically!

What is the relevance of this? I don't know anything about tax law, but if her taxes changed that drastically between this year and last year, I'd get a second opinion.

I'll get back to you on this, but what does it have to do with this discussion? There is a difference between crediting a predecessor and blaming them for everything!

You made light of the fact Obama was taking credit for victory in Iraq, I was simply pointing out that its a bit hypocritical to do so. Every president blames problems on the past administration and takes credit for their successes. Just like both sides take credit when things are going good, and point the finger when things are going bad.

 

[McD5]

I want Trump. I doubt he will run, but I hope he does.

 

[redskins26]

Eh, I am proud of my vote for Obama still, and would probably do it again against the same opponents. Palin should be kept as far from the White House as possible. Obama had the potential for leadership - we have the benefit of hindsight now to see he hasn't been the greatest leader; however in 2008 it was just more right-wing rhetoric.

in 2008 we knew what we were talking about

and Palin would still be ywice the president he was on any day of the week