The coming Obama landslide

Now that President Obama’s poll numbers are at record lows is a good time to make my prediction:  He will win re-election.  Easily.  Maybe in a landslide.

That the economy is a mess and that he has botched so many of his jobs will make no difference.  Yes, polls show any generic Republican can beat him.  But we have no generic Republicans running against him.  They are each highly particular.   And they all either turn off or scare to death the general public.

It isn’t that they are necessarily too conservative.  A conservative could have a good chance today.  But not an angry conservative.

To be sure, when Americans want their leaders to “do something” to fix the economy, that is not the best time to sell an ideology of limited government.  So actual conservative policies–as opposed to just conservative rhetoric–will be a hard sell.  But what Americans want most of all is someone to bring them out of the national funk.

The model, again, is Ronald Reagan, the cheerful and optimistic conservative, who brought us out of the malaise of Jimmy Carter.  That’s what would win today.  But there is no Ronald Reagan on the horizon, as far as I can see.

In the meantime, even though they don’t think very highly of him, Americans will go along with Obama again.  The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know.  No need to change horses in midstream, all of those maxims.  He comes across as more likeable than his opponents, and I believe that–not economics–trumps everything else.

Please understand, I am not saying that the current crop of Republican candidates might not all make good presidents and better than what we have now.  I am just saying that none of them, in my opinion, is electable.

As I have said, most people hope they are right.  I find myself more often hoping that I’m wrong.

If you can shoot down my analysis, I’ll be much obliged.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • SKPeterson

    Your analysis conforms to what I have said in this forum previously. Even though Obama is one of the weakest presidents in the last 75+ years, none of the contenders in the Republican field appear to be able to knock him off his perch. I’d like to see Ron Paul make a go of it, but I think his age is his greatest handicap. Reagan took office when he was almost 70 years old, but Paul is already 76. I’d like Ron to live to be 90; the Presidency would hasten his demise.

    One of the things Obama had going for him in 2008 was that he wasn’t overly bitter or angry in his public appearances, but he was optimistic and forthright. Wrong, generally, on everything, but not in an alarming way. McCain, on the other hand, was wrong on most things and in rather disconcerting fashion. Right now there is nothing to suggest there won’t be a repeat of 2008 in 2012.

    However, I think that if Obama does win, he will face both a Republican House and Senate. He may be reelected, but the people will give him a much shorter leash in order to minimize the damage, real or perceived.

  • SKPeterson

    Your analysis conforms to what I have said in this forum previously. Even though Obama is one of the weakest presidents in the last 75+ years, none of the contenders in the Republican field appear to be able to knock him off his perch. I’d like to see Ron Paul make a go of it, but I think his age is his greatest handicap. Reagan took office when he was almost 70 years old, but Paul is already 76. I’d like Ron to live to be 90; the Presidency would hasten his demise.

    One of the things Obama had going for him in 2008 was that he wasn’t overly bitter or angry in his public appearances, but he was optimistic and forthright. Wrong, generally, on everything, but not in an alarming way. McCain, on the other hand, was wrong on most things and in rather disconcerting fashion. Right now there is nothing to suggest there won’t be a repeat of 2008 in 2012.

    However, I think that if Obama does win, he will face both a Republican House and Senate. He may be reelected, but the people will give him a much shorter leash in order to minimize the damage, real or perceived.

  • Tom Hering

    “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!” That message didn’t work for Goldwater, and it isn’t working for the Tea-prodded Republican Party now. Not at the national level, anyways. The good news is that a loss in 2012 may result in moderates taking back control of the GOP’s image and message. Which would set them up nicely for 2016, when Americans will probably have grown tired of having a Democrat in the White House for eight years. (We Americans love change for the sake of change alone – which might be all that really drove the Tea Party wave in 2010, just as it was all that really drove the Obama victory in 2008.) So hang in there, Dr. Veith. You won’t need another once-in-a-hundred-years Reagan.

  • Tom Hering

    “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!” That message didn’t work for Goldwater, and it isn’t working for the Tea-prodded Republican Party now. Not at the national level, anyways. The good news is that a loss in 2012 may result in moderates taking back control of the GOP’s image and message. Which would set them up nicely for 2016, when Americans will probably have grown tired of having a Democrat in the White House for eight years. (We Americans love change for the sake of change alone – which might be all that really drove the Tea Party wave in 2010, just as it was all that really drove the Obama victory in 2008.) So hang in there, Dr. Veith. You won’t need another once-in-a-hundred-years Reagan.

  • WebMonk

    I listened to a generic news reporter at a local job fair. The report was vaguely hopeful in tone – that we have jobs available in some areas and that the overall unemployment rate in this area is good, but it’s still not great and there are still a lot of people out of work, especially in DC itself.

    They interviewed several people, but especially a guy who was very outspoken and well-spoken and made good-sounding news interview. What he was saying though, was galling to me. The section I best remember went something like:

    “I’ve been looking for a job for quite a while and it is extremely difficult to nail down a job that can support a family. This is no time for the government to be doing tiny little nothings or cutting back! They need to go big! It’s the government’s responsibility to make sure we have jobs.”

    I still get a little steamed at thinking of that.

  • WebMonk

    I listened to a generic news reporter at a local job fair. The report was vaguely hopeful in tone – that we have jobs available in some areas and that the overall unemployment rate in this area is good, but it’s still not great and there are still a lot of people out of work, especially in DC itself.

    They interviewed several people, but especially a guy who was very outspoken and well-spoken and made good-sounding news interview. What he was saying though, was galling to me. The section I best remember went something like:

    “I’ve been looking for a job for quite a while and it is extremely difficult to nail down a job that can support a family. This is no time for the government to be doing tiny little nothings or cutting back! They need to go big! It’s the government’s responsibility to make sure we have jobs.”

    I still get a little steamed at thinking of that.

  • Steve Billingsley

    Way too early to tell. Events can always change. The economy can improve, or we could hurtle into double-dip recession. A foreign policy crisis could emerge or a major scandal could rock the administration. I don’t feel comfortable making a call on this until this time next year at the earliest.

  • Steve Billingsley

    Way too early to tell. Events can always change. The economy can improve, or we could hurtle into double-dip recession. A foreign policy crisis could emerge or a major scandal could rock the administration. I don’t feel comfortable making a call on this until this time next year at the earliest.

  • James Sarver

    “Please understand, I am not saying that the current crop of Republican candidates might not all make good presidents and better than what we have now. I am just saying that none of them, in my opinion, is electable.”

    Sad but true.

    A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse….

  • James Sarver

    “Please understand, I am not saying that the current crop of Republican candidates might not all make good presidents and better than what we have now. I am just saying that none of them, in my opinion, is electable.”

    Sad but true.

    A horse, a horse! My kingdom for a horse….

  • Dave

    Wow! You’ve got to be kidding.

    The White House has just announced that unemployment will not improve before the 2012 election. The latest job report (as of this AM) shows no jobs were added to the economy in August.

    For Obama to be re-elected is to give the nation 4 more years of the same stuff. Worse, he will have no restraints in his second term to re-make the nation because he will not face re-election in 2016. That’s the case Republicans have to make and its a pretty easy one to make.

  • Dave

    Wow! You’ve got to be kidding.

    The White House has just announced that unemployment will not improve before the 2012 election. The latest job report (as of this AM) shows no jobs were added to the economy in August.

    For Obama to be re-elected is to give the nation 4 more years of the same stuff. Worse, he will have no restraints in his second term to re-make the nation because he will not face re-election in 2016. That’s the case Republicans have to make and its a pretty easy one to make.

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    I know, Dave. I also know it’s early. Early predictions are the most impressive. :-) And, everybody, understand that I don’t want this. I’m sure I’ll settle down and support one of the candidates. I’m just predicting that we will indeed, like it or not, have four more years of an Obama administration. But I want to be convinced otherwise!

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    I know, Dave. I also know it’s early. Early predictions are the most impressive. :-) And, everybody, understand that I don’t want this. I’m sure I’ll settle down and support one of the candidates. I’m just predicting that we will indeed, like it or not, have four more years of an Obama administration. But I want to be convinced otherwise!

  • Joe

    We have a long way to go, the current portraits of the candidates (especially Perry) with change some. Right now its first impression stage.

  • Joe

    We have a long way to go, the current portraits of the candidates (especially Perry) with change some. Right now its first impression stage.

  • r.thomas.wright@gmail.com

    Trust not in the princes or kings of this world.

  • r.thomas.wright@gmail.com

    Trust not in the princes or kings of this world.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To my big brother, “Dr. Veith”, the smartest person I know. You are absolutely correct in your political analysis. While you hope you are wrong, I hope you are right.

    My question is: Why are so many of your conservative friends so confident in a Republican victory in 2012, while you correctly analyzed the situation and predict an Obama victory? Then I realized that I, your “lefty” brother, deserve a great deal of credit for your astute political analysis. Let me explain:

    Most of your conservative friends only associate with other conservatives, they only talk to other conservatives that agree with them, and only listen to Fox “News”, where their own right wing point of view is constantly reinforced. When they say, “Everyone I talk to thinks the President is doing a lousy job”, it is an accurate statement. The problem is, they do not talk to everyone.

    But since you have the privilege of associating yourself with members of your own family, such as I, “A Man of the People”, you know that not everyone thinks like your conservative friends. You can understand how a ‘Country-club Republican like Romney gives working class people like me the creeps. You can also understand why right-wingers like Bachmann and Perry are so scary. Therefore, you owe it all to me for your acute political analysis. Thank you very much.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To my big brother, “Dr. Veith”, the smartest person I know. You are absolutely correct in your political analysis. While you hope you are wrong, I hope you are right.

    My question is: Why are so many of your conservative friends so confident in a Republican victory in 2012, while you correctly analyzed the situation and predict an Obama victory? Then I realized that I, your “lefty” brother, deserve a great deal of credit for your astute political analysis. Let me explain:

    Most of your conservative friends only associate with other conservatives, they only talk to other conservatives that agree with them, and only listen to Fox “News”, where their own right wing point of view is constantly reinforced. When they say, “Everyone I talk to thinks the President is doing a lousy job”, it is an accurate statement. The problem is, they do not talk to everyone.

    But since you have the privilege of associating yourself with members of your own family, such as I, “A Man of the People”, you know that not everyone thinks like your conservative friends. You can understand how a ‘Country-club Republican like Romney gives working class people like me the creeps. You can also understand why right-wingers like Bachmann and Perry are so scary. Therefore, you owe it all to me for your acute political analysis. Thank you very much.

  • Bob

    The majority of Americans won’t vote for candidates who spend their time proposing nothing new and helpful and instead, spend the little time we have on earth griping, whining, blaming, and pointing fingers.

    So I think Dr. Veith is spot on.

  • Bob

    The majority of Americans won’t vote for candidates who spend their time proposing nothing new and helpful and instead, spend the little time we have on earth griping, whining, blaming, and pointing fingers.

    So I think Dr. Veith is spot on.

  • kerner

    Dr. Veith:

    I can’t poke any holes in your analysis yet, but we’ll see. You are absolutely right about Reagan as the model. He convinced people that he cared about them and that his policies (despite the conventional wisdom of his day) were the best thing for the country. And Reagan’s personality had a lot ot do with this. I believe that he really did love America and Americans, and he really didn’t seem to hate his adversaries here, or even those abroad.

    Perry seems to be the darling of the right, especially the angry right, at the moment. But he won’t win this election by appearing to be angry at the left. A conservative candidate has to stick to his principles and still project his love for this whole country to win. Maybe Perry can do that, but we’ll just have to wait and see.

  • kerner

    Dr. Veith:

    I can’t poke any holes in your analysis yet, but we’ll see. You are absolutely right about Reagan as the model. He convinced people that he cared about them and that his policies (despite the conventional wisdom of his day) were the best thing for the country. And Reagan’s personality had a lot ot do with this. I believe that he really did love America and Americans, and he really didn’t seem to hate his adversaries here, or even those abroad.

    Perry seems to be the darling of the right, especially the angry right, at the moment. But he won’t win this election by appearing to be angry at the left. A conservative candidate has to stick to his principles and still project his love for this whole country to win. Maybe Perry can do that, but we’ll just have to wait and see.

  • Jimmy Veith

    Compliments go to my big brother on his willingness to predict something he does not want to happen. I do not have this capability, as I always predict what I want to happen. I just knew that George McGovern would pull it out in the closing days of the campaign, and that this will be the year for the Cubs to win it all!

    To all my conservative friends who are upset about my big brother’s prediction, I have a few words of comfort that come from “Dr. Veith” himself, which come from one of his books (I forgot which one.). He said: “You are less likely to be disillusioned if you have no illusions in the first place.” Words of wisdom to live by.

  • Jimmy Veith

    Compliments go to my big brother on his willingness to predict something he does not want to happen. I do not have this capability, as I always predict what I want to happen. I just knew that George McGovern would pull it out in the closing days of the campaign, and that this will be the year for the Cubs to win it all!

    To all my conservative friends who are upset about my big brother’s prediction, I have a few words of comfort that come from “Dr. Veith” himself, which come from one of his books (I forgot which one.). He said: “You are less likely to be disillusioned if you have no illusions in the first place.” Words of wisdom to live by.

  • JH

    I come into this with very little experience, having only followed campaigns since 2008. So you may be right. I just feel like you’re absolutely dead wrong. Obama was elected with huge turnout from his base- ethnically and politically. I don’t think they’re going to turn out in the same numbers (not even close). McCain had very little enthusiasm with his base. I think conservatives will be much more likely to get up and go this time. And I hope and pray Ron Paul gets the nomination.

  • JH

    I come into this with very little experience, having only followed campaigns since 2008. So you may be right. I just feel like you’re absolutely dead wrong. Obama was elected with huge turnout from his base- ethnically and politically. I don’t think they’re going to turn out in the same numbers (not even close). McCain had very little enthusiasm with his base. I think conservatives will be much more likely to get up and go this time. And I hope and pray Ron Paul gets the nomination.

  • http://jdueck.net Joel D.

    If you use the presidential approval tracker to compare Obama and Reagan’s approval ratings over the course of their terms, you see that Obama’s approval ratings so far have tracked almost exactly with Reagan’s at the same points in their terms. Reagan, you’ll recall, won reelection in a landslide.

    Also remember, the rise out of the “Carter malaise” didn’t happen overnight. Reagan supported the move to let interest rates rise to as high as 18% in his first year in order to put a clamp on stagflation.

    From which we may understand that low approval ratings and a bad economy, even at this stage in a first term, are no indicator of reelection success.

  • http://jdueck.net Joel D.

    If you use the presidential approval tracker to compare Obama and Reagan’s approval ratings over the course of their terms, you see that Obama’s approval ratings so far have tracked almost exactly with Reagan’s at the same points in their terms. Reagan, you’ll recall, won reelection in a landslide.

    Also remember, the rise out of the “Carter malaise” didn’t happen overnight. Reagan supported the move to let interest rates rise to as high as 18% in his first year in order to put a clamp on stagflation.

    From which we may understand that low approval ratings and a bad economy, even at this stage in a first term, are no indicator of reelection success.

  • John

    I tend to agree…only never count out a GOP candidate who has a decade of Bilderberg invites under his belt (Perry).

  • John

    I tend to agree…only never count out a GOP candidate who has a decade of Bilderberg invites under his belt (Perry).

  • David

    Dr. Veith,
    I appreciate your analysis, but in hopes of encouraging you, I don’t see how any presidential election predictions now are any more accurate than pre-season BCS rankings. The game still needs to be played.

    For what it’s worth, I think it’s safe to point out that the electorate is more sharply divided than it’s been, even under GWB. The only person who can win is one who can make the most people feel good about the future. Frankly, I don’t know if Obama can do that any more, because he is over-exposed, and anecdotally (from California), it seems that most people don’t care to listen anymore.

    Ironically, I think that Obama can win only if Perry, Bachmann, or another “scary” type conservative is not the Republican nominee. If that happens, then the Republican ticket may get split by a third party, or suffer from voter apathy.

    But, if the nominee is a conservative that can bring in the moderates who feel betrayed by President’s failure to bring the hope and change he promised, Obama will have problems winning again.

    Remember, all politics is personal. And Obama, now on the defensive, just does not seem personable anymore.

  • David

    Dr. Veith,
    I appreciate your analysis, but in hopes of encouraging you, I don’t see how any presidential election predictions now are any more accurate than pre-season BCS rankings. The game still needs to be played.

    For what it’s worth, I think it’s safe to point out that the electorate is more sharply divided than it’s been, even under GWB. The only person who can win is one who can make the most people feel good about the future. Frankly, I don’t know if Obama can do that any more, because he is over-exposed, and anecdotally (from California), it seems that most people don’t care to listen anymore.

    Ironically, I think that Obama can win only if Perry, Bachmann, or another “scary” type conservative is not the Republican nominee. If that happens, then the Republican ticket may get split by a third party, or suffer from voter apathy.

    But, if the nominee is a conservative that can bring in the moderates who feel betrayed by President’s failure to bring the hope and change he promised, Obama will have problems winning again.

    Remember, all politics is personal. And Obama, now on the defensive, just does not seem personable anymore.

  • https://profiles.google.com/114761676313688657626#114761676313688657626/about P. C.

    Obama will be a one-termer because “Its the economy, stupid!” Today’s job numbers are in the tank and I don’t think they will be getting better after his speech next week, or the week after that, or the week after that.

    Those of you who are “independents” will be the one’s electing our next president. They need to do the right thing because America cannot, as Dave @6 said, “For Obama to be re-elected is to give the nation 4 more years of the same stuff. Worse, he will have no restraints in his second term to re-make the nation because he will not face re-election in 2016. ”

    Step up to the plate, “independents”.

  • https://profiles.google.com/114761676313688657626#114761676313688657626/about P. C.

    Obama will be a one-termer because “Its the economy, stupid!” Today’s job numbers are in the tank and I don’t think they will be getting better after his speech next week, or the week after that, or the week after that.

    Those of you who are “independents” will be the one’s electing our next president. They need to do the right thing because America cannot, as Dave @6 said, “For Obama to be re-elected is to give the nation 4 more years of the same stuff. Worse, he will have no restraints in his second term to re-make the nation because he will not face re-election in 2016. ”

    Step up to the plate, “independents”.

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    Friends, you see what life is going to be like for me if and, if my prediction is correct, when President Obama gets re-elected. My brother Jimmy will torment me. Possibly with as little mercy as I showed him when George W. Bush got elected. And then re-elected.

    But, my dear brother, my prediction does not come from consulting you, as opposed to watching Fox News. You, as you say, always predict what you hope for, even though that big McGovern landslide never materialized. (I know, he was robbed!) My mournful prediction comes from reason and reason alone and from not, as you say, having any illusions. (But I am wide open to having illusions, if anyone can provide me any!)

    Also, Dave, as for this prediction being just as premature as the predictions for the BCS championship, I DO cling to those predictions, since they have my alma mater, the Oklahoma Sooners being #1. I don’t want that to change! I don’t want the games to be played if that’s what it takes to preserve that! (My brother went to Oklahoma State, since that was a more bluegrass-friendly university than OU, but then he went to law school at OU. Oklahoma State is also highly ranked this year. I suspect he’ll support OSU, tormenting me in the unlikely event they upset OU, but if OU plays for the championship, he’ll change his football politics and pull for the Sooners too.)

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    Friends, you see what life is going to be like for me if and, if my prediction is correct, when President Obama gets re-elected. My brother Jimmy will torment me. Possibly with as little mercy as I showed him when George W. Bush got elected. And then re-elected.

    But, my dear brother, my prediction does not come from consulting you, as opposed to watching Fox News. You, as you say, always predict what you hope for, even though that big McGovern landslide never materialized. (I know, he was robbed!) My mournful prediction comes from reason and reason alone and from not, as you say, having any illusions. (But I am wide open to having illusions, if anyone can provide me any!)

    Also, Dave, as for this prediction being just as premature as the predictions for the BCS championship, I DO cling to those predictions, since they have my alma mater, the Oklahoma Sooners being #1. I don’t want that to change! I don’t want the games to be played if that’s what it takes to preserve that! (My brother went to Oklahoma State, since that was a more bluegrass-friendly university than OU, but then he went to law school at OU. Oklahoma State is also highly ranked this year. I suspect he’ll support OSU, tormenting me in the unlikely event they upset OU, but if OU plays for the championship, he’ll change his football politics and pull for the Sooners too.)

  • http://gslcnm.com Pastor Spomer

    You may be correct, and even though I look at things through a neo-libertarian conservative point of view, a suspect that it might be a good thing. My rational is that America is in need of a deep course correction on a level that neither party much contemplates. History has illustrated that the nanny state is unsustainable.

    The public is not now willing to make the difficult readjustment. If a Republican were to be elected, he/she would tinker around the edges, but fundamentally, he/she would just be the caretaker of the current semi-socialist state.

    America needs to have its nose rubbed in its sin. We need to drink deep of this cup so that we then vomit it up for good. So, let’s tax the rich, take all their wealth and eat their lunch for Thanksgiving. Then, let’s increase the debt until paying the interest requires 100% of all the money in the country. Then all the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid/military pay/federal bureaucrat pay checks etc. will bounce. Then we’ll try to buy bread with wheel barrels full of paper money like the Germans, or wait in long lines in the hope that at the end will be something with which we can barter like the USSR. People will riot in the streets for money that simply does not exist, like Greece.

    Only then will the American people look back and decide, “We’ll never do that again!”
    It is inevitable, and the longer we put it off the worse it will be.

  • http://gslcnm.com Pastor Spomer

    You may be correct, and even though I look at things through a neo-libertarian conservative point of view, a suspect that it might be a good thing. My rational is that America is in need of a deep course correction on a level that neither party much contemplates. History has illustrated that the nanny state is unsustainable.

    The public is not now willing to make the difficult readjustment. If a Republican were to be elected, he/she would tinker around the edges, but fundamentally, he/she would just be the caretaker of the current semi-socialist state.

    America needs to have its nose rubbed in its sin. We need to drink deep of this cup so that we then vomit it up for good. So, let’s tax the rich, take all their wealth and eat their lunch for Thanksgiving. Then, let’s increase the debt until paying the interest requires 100% of all the money in the country. Then all the Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid/military pay/federal bureaucrat pay checks etc. will bounce. Then we’ll try to buy bread with wheel barrels full of paper money like the Germans, or wait in long lines in the hope that at the end will be something with which we can barter like the USSR. People will riot in the streets for money that simply does not exist, like Greece.

    Only then will the American people look back and decide, “We’ll never do that again!”
    It is inevitable, and the longer we put it off the worse it will be.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Early predictions are the most impressive, yes, but, given that Obama is almost certain to be one of only two candidates who get any electoral votes at all … it’s not that impressive. It’s a binary choice.

    That’s why I’m going for the real gusto and predicting Perry. Not only that Perry will win the Republican nomination, but that you, Dr. Veith, will end up supporting him in your state’s primary — which, given that you’ll be voting on Super Tuesday, may be the election that seals the deal for Perry. Heck, I’ll go ahead and predict that, too. The Republicans will want to coalesce early on a candidate so as to reduce party divisiveness.

    This, of course, all stems from my belief that the Republicans are replaying 2004 (but on the opposite side, obviously). You don’t have any truly strong candidates running this year, because incumbents are hard to beat, and no one wants to be the guy who lost in 2012 to Obama, because that’ll pretty much doom your future Presidential aspirations. Just ask John K… something … (who?).

    Myself, I’m not actually willing to predict that Obama will win. I agree it’s too early.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Early predictions are the most impressive, yes, but, given that Obama is almost certain to be one of only two candidates who get any electoral votes at all … it’s not that impressive. It’s a binary choice.

    That’s why I’m going for the real gusto and predicting Perry. Not only that Perry will win the Republican nomination, but that you, Dr. Veith, will end up supporting him in your state’s primary — which, given that you’ll be voting on Super Tuesday, may be the election that seals the deal for Perry. Heck, I’ll go ahead and predict that, too. The Republicans will want to coalesce early on a candidate so as to reduce party divisiveness.

    This, of course, all stems from my belief that the Republicans are replaying 2004 (but on the opposite side, obviously). You don’t have any truly strong candidates running this year, because incumbents are hard to beat, and no one wants to be the guy who lost in 2012 to Obama, because that’ll pretty much doom your future Presidential aspirations. Just ask John K… something … (who?).

    Myself, I’m not actually willing to predict that Obama will win. I agree it’s too early.

  • Michael Z.

    Yep, I think you’re right, and for none of the reasons your brother mentioned. I just have no confidence in people.

  • Michael Z.

    Yep, I think you’re right, and for none of the reasons your brother mentioned. I just have no confidence in people.

  • WebMonk

    I’ll make an opposing prediction. I think Obama is going to lose.

    The economy plays a REALLY big role in how elections turn out. We’ve gotten a couple presidents that wouldn’t normally have had a chance, become president because of economic and other worldwide issues.

    I think the Republicans will be pretty solidly behind whoever runs against Obama, precisely because that person is running against Obama. However, the middle-ground people will be pretty heavily dissatisfied with Obama because of the economy. The Democrats will be supporting Obama, but not with much fervency.

    So, there’s my prediction.

    Short of something really stupid happening, such as a major split on the Republican side with the Tea Party forming their own party, I think Obama is going to lose this by at least 30 electoral votes.

  • WebMonk

    I’ll make an opposing prediction. I think Obama is going to lose.

    The economy plays a REALLY big role in how elections turn out. We’ve gotten a couple presidents that wouldn’t normally have had a chance, become president because of economic and other worldwide issues.

    I think the Republicans will be pretty solidly behind whoever runs against Obama, precisely because that person is running against Obama. However, the middle-ground people will be pretty heavily dissatisfied with Obama because of the economy. The Democrats will be supporting Obama, but not with much fervency.

    So, there’s my prediction.

    Short of something really stupid happening, such as a major split on the Republican side with the Tea Party forming their own party, I think Obama is going to lose this by at least 30 electoral votes.

  • SAL

    I suspect Obama might win because his performance as President is irrelevant to many of the groups who support him (Minorities, Unions, Special Interest Groups).

    We could literally enter a Depression that knocks half the people out of work and be defeated in war and Obama would still get no worse than 45% of the vote (coming from loyal Democrats).

    I think we’re likely to be a one-party nation in the future as the Democratic demographic groups are increasing rapidly and unlikely to shift from leftist tendencies.

  • SAL

    I suspect Obama might win because his performance as President is irrelevant to many of the groups who support him (Minorities, Unions, Special Interest Groups).

    We could literally enter a Depression that knocks half the people out of work and be defeated in war and Obama would still get no worse than 45% of the vote (coming from loyal Democrats).

    I think we’re likely to be a one-party nation in the future as the Democratic demographic groups are increasing rapidly and unlikely to shift from leftist tendencies.

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    tODD, my prediction is not that of an even-odds binary coin toss. I am predicting that Obama will win against his Republican opponent EVEN though his approval ratings are at record lows and EVEN though the economy is horrible and will probably get worse. So I think that is a bold prediction. And if I am proven correct–which I earnestly hope that I am not–my prediction, given when it took place, should at least count as “impressive.” Give me that at least, which, however, will not be much consolation. (You have seen how my brother is.)

    If I am wrong, however, I will eat my words in this public forum, and I will praise those of you who are predicting a Republican win and will credit your foresight as being “impressive.”

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    tODD, my prediction is not that of an even-odds binary coin toss. I am predicting that Obama will win against his Republican opponent EVEN though his approval ratings are at record lows and EVEN though the economy is horrible and will probably get worse. So I think that is a bold prediction. And if I am proven correct–which I earnestly hope that I am not–my prediction, given when it took place, should at least count as “impressive.” Give me that at least, which, however, will not be much consolation. (You have seen how my brother is.)

    If I am wrong, however, I will eat my words in this public forum, and I will praise those of you who are predicting a Republican win and will credit your foresight as being “impressive.”

  • kenneth

    Excuse me but I would like to know how among all the predictions why Ron Paul would be a choice for a better government, ideologically, along republican lines.

    Pastor Spomer seems to have it right that we as a nation are lost to what matters, especially in moral matters, being given over to a postmodern carelessness about morality. Is it not now a country turned into relativism and personal growth via massge and new agey spiritualism? Indeed a nanny stae with personal cells replete with crystals and all manner of absurd juxtapostions of Ghandi, Buddha, Martin Luther King, hollywood icons turning into and out of gods of their own creation?

    The gist of this rather rhetorical questioning, is again, how on earth could Ron Paul be an adovocate for change to sanity in national life if he supports prostitution legalization and I suppose the general mindset of postmodern thinking? Nothing matters if morality has no objective basis as proclaimed by academic prophets.

    If Bachmann is considered outlandish in her conservative Christian world view, morality is gone and we can look forward to Huxley’s “Brave New World”. That is if we are not living in it already.

  • kenneth

    Excuse me but I would like to know how among all the predictions why Ron Paul would be a choice for a better government, ideologically, along republican lines.

    Pastor Spomer seems to have it right that we as a nation are lost to what matters, especially in moral matters, being given over to a postmodern carelessness about morality. Is it not now a country turned into relativism and personal growth via massge and new agey spiritualism? Indeed a nanny stae with personal cells replete with crystals and all manner of absurd juxtapostions of Ghandi, Buddha, Martin Luther King, hollywood icons turning into and out of gods of their own creation?

    The gist of this rather rhetorical questioning, is again, how on earth could Ron Paul be an adovocate for change to sanity in national life if he supports prostitution legalization and I suppose the general mindset of postmodern thinking? Nothing matters if morality has no objective basis as proclaimed by academic prophets.

    If Bachmann is considered outlandish in her conservative Christian world view, morality is gone and we can look forward to Huxley’s “Brave New World”. That is if we are not living in it already.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dr. Veith (@25), I realize you factored in various things in coming to your conclusion. That’s not my point.

    My point is that predicting that one party or the other will win, no matter how early you make it, isn’t really all that impressive. It’s going to be one of the two. And Obama is all but certain to be the man for one of those two.

    What would be more impressive, statistically, is for you to predict the Republican nominee, given that there are at least three major candidates, and not a few significant-but-minor candidates.

    I’ll use a sports metaphor. Predicting who will win in the Superbowl, the AFC or the NFC, no matter how early or how many factors you consider, will never be as impressive as predicting who the AFC or NFC champion will be.

    That’s all I’m saying. Sure, you get some credit for predicting something you’re not hoping for, which points to some objectivity on your part. But you’re still predicting a one-out-of-two contest. Good luck getting an oddsmaker to give you a strong return on that prediction.

    But what do you think of my prediction that you’ll support Perry? Search your feelings, you know it to be true. Or will you take the Greek drama approach and attempt to do anything to avoid fulfilling my prediction?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dr. Veith (@25), I realize you factored in various things in coming to your conclusion. That’s not my point.

    My point is that predicting that one party or the other will win, no matter how early you make it, isn’t really all that impressive. It’s going to be one of the two. And Obama is all but certain to be the man for one of those two.

    What would be more impressive, statistically, is for you to predict the Republican nominee, given that there are at least three major candidates, and not a few significant-but-minor candidates.

    I’ll use a sports metaphor. Predicting who will win in the Superbowl, the AFC or the NFC, no matter how early or how many factors you consider, will never be as impressive as predicting who the AFC or NFC champion will be.

    That’s all I’m saying. Sure, you get some credit for predicting something you’re not hoping for, which points to some objectivity on your part. But you’re still predicting a one-out-of-two contest. Good luck getting an oddsmaker to give you a strong return on that prediction.

    But what do you think of my prediction that you’ll support Perry? Search your feelings, you know it to be true. Or will you take the Greek drama approach and attempt to do anything to avoid fulfilling my prediction?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “The good news is that a loss in 2012 may result in moderates taking back control of the GOP’s image and message.”

    I wonder whether moderates aren’t actually worse than either the far left or far right.

    Like the health care situation. If it were entirely free market, the costs would be lower because insurers wouldn’t be getting the hefty cut that they do and providers would have to compete more. If it were single payer, the government would hold down costs, and one bureaucracy that doesn’t take a profit is still cheaper than two bureaucracies, one of which is taking a profit. So either the far left or the far right is better than the compromise which was the Health Care bill that guarantees greedy insurers a profit and forces people to pay for two bureaucracies.

    So, I fear that moderates and their compromises to the powers that be are worse than either of the two extremes.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “The good news is that a loss in 2012 may result in moderates taking back control of the GOP’s image and message.”

    I wonder whether moderates aren’t actually worse than either the far left or far right.

    Like the health care situation. If it were entirely free market, the costs would be lower because insurers wouldn’t be getting the hefty cut that they do and providers would have to compete more. If it were single payer, the government would hold down costs, and one bureaucracy that doesn’t take a profit is still cheaper than two bureaucracies, one of which is taking a profit. So either the far left or the far right is better than the compromise which was the Health Care bill that guarantees greedy insurers a profit and forces people to pay for two bureaucracies.

    So, I fear that moderates and their compromises to the powers that be are worse than either of the two extremes.

  • SKPeterson

    Okay. The next big question. Who will be announcing that they will leave the United States if Obama wins another term? We always hear about leftists who threaten to decamp should a Republican win and take us into a corporatist/fascist war-mongering future, but I never hear about rightists threatening to pull up stakes to escape the impending corporatist/socialist war-mongering future if a Democrat wins. And if you leave, where do you go? Canada? China? Australia? Botswana?

  • SKPeterson

    Okay. The next big question. Who will be announcing that they will leave the United States if Obama wins another term? We always hear about leftists who threaten to decamp should a Republican win and take us into a corporatist/fascist war-mongering future, but I never hear about rightists threatening to pull up stakes to escape the impending corporatist/socialist war-mongering future if a Democrat wins. And if you leave, where do you go? Canada? China? Australia? Botswana?

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    You may be right about Obama winning in a landslide.

    There are enough people in this country who have gone through the public education system and university who never learned how to think…just what to think.

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    You may be right about Obama winning in a landslide.

    There are enough people in this country who have gone through the public education system and university who never learned how to think…just what to think.

  • nowafonseca

    I think you and I share a similar talent for being right when we would love to be wrong. I think you are right about the current political climate. If we don’t have an “ol’ reliable” conservative who can practice what he preaches with favorite results, expect Mr. President O to keep up the……work.

  • nowafonseca

    I think you and I share a similar talent for being right when we would love to be wrong. I think you are right about the current political climate. If we don’t have an “ol’ reliable” conservative who can practice what he preaches with favorite results, expect Mr. President O to keep up the……work.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To sg @ 28, you stated “If it (health care) were entirely free market, the costs would be lower because insurers wouldn’t be getting the hefty cut that they do and providers would have to compete more.”

    If it were entirely free market, then no insurance company would want to insure sick people, and would continue to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, more and more people would drop out of the system, and the costs would be passed on to the people that have insurance, which would continue to increase so even healthy people could not afford to get insurance, so on and so on. This is what has been going on, and this is the vicious cycle that health care reform was designed to break.

    But this post is about politics and not health care. However, one of the reasons that someone like Ric Perry can not win, is because of his radical stance on health care and social security. When Ric Perry wants to privatize Medicare, and calls social security a “ponzi scheme”, there is just no way he can carry a Florida, and no republican can win without Florida.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To sg @ 28, you stated “If it (health care) were entirely free market, the costs would be lower because insurers wouldn’t be getting the hefty cut that they do and providers would have to compete more.”

    If it were entirely free market, then no insurance company would want to insure sick people, and would continue to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, more and more people would drop out of the system, and the costs would be passed on to the people that have insurance, which would continue to increase so even healthy people could not afford to get insurance, so on and so on. This is what has been going on, and this is the vicious cycle that health care reform was designed to break.

    But this post is about politics and not health care. However, one of the reasons that someone like Ric Perry can not win, is because of his radical stance on health care and social security. When Ric Perry wants to privatize Medicare, and calls social security a “ponzi scheme”, there is just no way he can carry a Florida, and no republican can win without Florida.

  • Cincinnatus

    Barring an unforeseen catastrophe/act of God, Obama will lose. I’ll bet money on it. He isn’t just losing to a generic Republican in polls; he’s also losing to most of the actual Republican candidates.

    But the clincher, as WebMonk states, is the economy. FDR is probably the only prominent president re-elected during a bad economy, and he was re-elected because he at least appeared to be acting decisively. Bad/sluggish economies have been the death knell for most other incumbents.

  • Cincinnatus

    Barring an unforeseen catastrophe/act of God, Obama will lose. I’ll bet money on it. He isn’t just losing to a generic Republican in polls; he’s also losing to most of the actual Republican candidates.

    But the clincher, as WebMonk states, is the economy. FDR is probably the only prominent president re-elected during a bad economy, and he was re-elected because he at least appeared to be acting decisively. Bad/sluggish economies have been the death knell for most other incumbents.

  • http://www.allenthemelancholy.com/ Allen

    I can’t really make a prediction, at the moment all the Republicans are incompetent at managing image. One may get some good advisers. But, in general, people tend to like one part in the White House and the other in Congress. They may put Senate and House both with Republicans, and keep Obama.

  • http://www.allenthemelancholy.com/ Allen

    I can’t really make a prediction, at the moment all the Republicans are incompetent at managing image. One may get some good advisers. But, in general, people tend to like one part in the White House and the other in Congress. They may put Senate and House both with Republicans, and keep Obama.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “When Ric Perry wants to privatize Medicare, and calls social security a “ponzi scheme”, there is just no way he can carry a Florida, and no republican can win without Florida.”

    Social Security is a ponzi scheme.

    So, no honest man can win. I guess I knew that. I still like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I wish those two would run on an independent ticket. They would get at least one vote.

    If it were entirely free market, then no insurance company would want to insure sick people, and would continue to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, more and more people would drop out of the system, and the costs would be passed on to the people that have insurance, which would continue to increase so even healthy people could not afford to get insurance, so on and so on. This is what has been going on, and this is the vicious cycle that health care reform was designed to break.

    This isn’t completely accurate. People with preexisting conditions can buy insurance, it just doesn’t cover the condition, usually for the first two years. So, in a free market these folks would shop based on price for the uncovered condition, and providers would have to compete for the business. The reason many don’t buy insurance is not that they can’t afford it, but that they just don’t want to pay for it. If there were no insurance period, people would just choose to buy less service and they would question the costs and benefits very carefully. Since the first doctor charged the poor a chicken and the rich guy much more, there has been cost shifting, but insurance diverts tons of money to people who provide no services to anyone and insurance companies and their employees take much of the money in salaries and profits. Consider the CEO of United Healthcare who personally received over a billion $ in compensation. He is only one man. They still had to pay all the other folks and advertise and pay their rent etc. The new healthcare legislation is going to just continue this problem of diverting healthcare dollars to people who do not provide any healthcare to anyone. At least single payer would mean only one bureaucracy and no billion dollar CEO’s.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “When Ric Perry wants to privatize Medicare, and calls social security a “ponzi scheme”, there is just no way he can carry a Florida, and no republican can win without Florida.”

    Social Security is a ponzi scheme.

    So, no honest man can win. I guess I knew that. I still like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I wish those two would run on an independent ticket. They would get at least one vote.

    If it were entirely free market, then no insurance company would want to insure sick people, and would continue to deny coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, more and more people would drop out of the system, and the costs would be passed on to the people that have insurance, which would continue to increase so even healthy people could not afford to get insurance, so on and so on. This is what has been going on, and this is the vicious cycle that health care reform was designed to break.

    This isn’t completely accurate. People with preexisting conditions can buy insurance, it just doesn’t cover the condition, usually for the first two years. So, in a free market these folks would shop based on price for the uncovered condition, and providers would have to compete for the business. The reason many don’t buy insurance is not that they can’t afford it, but that they just don’t want to pay for it. If there were no insurance period, people would just choose to buy less service and they would question the costs and benefits very carefully. Since the first doctor charged the poor a chicken and the rich guy much more, there has been cost shifting, but insurance diverts tons of money to people who provide no services to anyone and insurance companies and their employees take much of the money in salaries and profits. Consider the CEO of United Healthcare who personally received over a billion $ in compensation. He is only one man. They still had to pay all the other folks and advertise and pay their rent etc. The new healthcare legislation is going to just continue this problem of diverting healthcare dollars to people who do not provide any healthcare to anyone. At least single payer would mean only one bureaucracy and no billion dollar CEO’s.

  • Jonathan

    @30 Steve Martin, play more often the worm theologian here and uber-rightist at Spenser’s monk blog.

  • Jonathan

    @30 Steve Martin, play more often the worm theologian here and uber-rightist at Spenser’s monk blog.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I think Perry actually has a fairly good chance just because he has never lost. That is just superstition, but the guy is very very lucky.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I think Perry actually has a fairly good chance just because he has never lost. That is just superstition, but the guy is very very lucky.

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    On the surface of it I doubt that whites are still a large enough fraction of the electorate for Obama to lose.

    Republicans would have to win 65-70% of whites to unseat Obama. Now while minorities vote nationally as monolithic groups you don’t see that sort of behavior among whites nationally.

    This allows Obama to be a truly bad President and still remain competitive because 45% of the nation votes for Democrats without caring what they do in office.

    In these times if a Republican were in office, Tavis Smiley’s Poverty Tour would be embraced instead of hated by the black establishment. That tells you most of what you need to know about Democrat voters.

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    On the surface of it I doubt that whites are still a large enough fraction of the electorate for Obama to lose.

    Republicans would have to win 65-70% of whites to unseat Obama. Now while minorities vote nationally as monolithic groups you don’t see that sort of behavior among whites nationally.

    This allows Obama to be a truly bad President and still remain competitive because 45% of the nation votes for Democrats without caring what they do in office.

    In these times if a Republican were in office, Tavis Smiley’s Poverty Tour would be embraced instead of hated by the black establishment. That tells you most of what you need to know about Democrat voters.

  • Jonathan

    SAL, should I assume you’re a Southern white Republican who loves Jesus?

  • Jonathan

    SAL, should I assume you’re a Southern white Republican who loves Jesus?

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    Actually I’m a Black Muslim Lesbian Sea Monster from the Chesapeake Bay. I’d be pulling for Obama as a Black Muslim Lesbian except the Sea Monster part of me greatly desires global warming to expand my habitat.

    However that’s fairly irrelevant to the facts of minority and white voting behavior.

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    Actually I’m a Black Muslim Lesbian Sea Monster from the Chesapeake Bay. I’d be pulling for Obama as a Black Muslim Lesbian except the Sea Monster part of me greatly desires global warming to expand my habitat.

    However that’s fairly irrelevant to the facts of minority and white voting behavior.

  • Lou

    While it may be too early to predict whether Obama will be re-elected, certainly, we ought to at least have a Republican candidate who “likes” government and believes that his or her role in governmental office should and ought to make a difference. For me, most of the Republican platform at this time seems to be running counterintuitive. Each sector – government, business, and citizenry — has its role to play, and I for one want to hear someone cast a vision and lay out a plan for how to fix the government working through the government. That’s my thought.

  • Lou

    While it may be too early to predict whether Obama will be re-elected, certainly, we ought to at least have a Republican candidate who “likes” government and believes that his or her role in governmental office should and ought to make a difference. For me, most of the Republican platform at this time seems to be running counterintuitive. Each sector – government, business, and citizenry — has its role to play, and I for one want to hear someone cast a vision and lay out a plan for how to fix the government working through the government. That’s my thought.

  • steve

    Are people still using the “extremist” label? That thing just won’t go away, will it. I guess it’s one of those memes whose survival highlights how big the chasm between ideologies really is in some circles. Many Democrats think its so obvious it need not even be thought about critically, while most Republicans think it’s so obviously wrong that it’s silly to even address it.

  • steve

    Are people still using the “extremist” label? That thing just won’t go away, will it. I guess it’s one of those memes whose survival highlights how big the chasm between ideologies really is in some circles. Many Democrats think its so obvious it need not even be thought about critically, while most Republicans think it’s so obviously wrong that it’s silly to even address it.

  • LAJ

    There are black Republicans who are trying to educate the black community on how the Democrats have not helped them and in fact have perpetuated their problems. Let’s hope they can before the next election! Are the Mexican/Americans likely to vote for Obama this time? Aren’t they more conservative than that generally?

  • LAJ

    There are black Republicans who are trying to educate the black community on how the Democrats have not helped them and in fact have perpetuated their problems. Let’s hope they can before the next election! Are the Mexican/Americans likely to vote for Obama this time? Aren’t they more conservative than that generally?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SAL (@40), I have to say, that made me snicker.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SAL (@40), I have to say, that made me snicker.

  • DonS

    I’m pretty confident in predicting that neither candidate is going to win the presidency in a landslide, even an electoral vote landslide (popular vote landslides have been almost nonexistent). Obama won comfortably in 2008, but it wasn’t a landslide, and he certainly will not win re-election by anywhere near that same margin in 2012, if he wins at all. He had a historic turnout of minority voters, and a substantial number of votes from people who normally wouldn’t have voted for him, except for the chance to make history by electing the first black president and because of Bush and war fatigue. The economic collapse of September 2008 sealed the deal for him. This time, he is swimming against the economic tide, and there is no sign of the economy substantially improving in time to increase his fortunes. Additionally, despite the fact that he is still receiving historically favorable media coverage, his prickly narcissistic-appearing personality, his penchant for high-end leisure, and his insistence on blaming others for every bad thing that happens are not endearing qualities, which is one reason why his favorability ratings have dropped so precipitously. Frankly, he is in way over his head, and that fact has become apparent to many of his 2008 voters. Additionally, re-apportionment will cost Obama a dozen or so electoral votes that he picked up in 2008, even if he gets all of the same voters he got then. So that is one more hill he must climb.

    Even with all of the above factors working against Obama, the odds are still long for the Republican challengers. One reason is that the Republicans are practically guaranteed to win the Senate in 2012, giving them both houses of Congress. Americans prefer divided government, so Democrats will probably use this virtual certainty as an argument to re-elect Obama. A second reason is that Obama will have far greater financial resources than his Republican challenger and the Democrats have already signaled their intention to win by any means necessary, especially using whatever personal attacks they deem necessary to destroy the political viability of the Republican candidate. The media will abet them in this, as they always do. It’s already started, as evidenced by the attacks on Rick Perry, even by Republicans, which is hard to understand at this stage of the campaign. On the surface, at least, his experience makes him far more qualified for the office of President than Obama was in 2007, so why don’t Republicans sit back and let he and the other candidates get their feet on the ground and state their case for election before running them into the ground?

  • DonS

    I’m pretty confident in predicting that neither candidate is going to win the presidency in a landslide, even an electoral vote landslide (popular vote landslides have been almost nonexistent). Obama won comfortably in 2008, but it wasn’t a landslide, and he certainly will not win re-election by anywhere near that same margin in 2012, if he wins at all. He had a historic turnout of minority voters, and a substantial number of votes from people who normally wouldn’t have voted for him, except for the chance to make history by electing the first black president and because of Bush and war fatigue. The economic collapse of September 2008 sealed the deal for him. This time, he is swimming against the economic tide, and there is no sign of the economy substantially improving in time to increase his fortunes. Additionally, despite the fact that he is still receiving historically favorable media coverage, his prickly narcissistic-appearing personality, his penchant for high-end leisure, and his insistence on blaming others for every bad thing that happens are not endearing qualities, which is one reason why his favorability ratings have dropped so precipitously. Frankly, he is in way over his head, and that fact has become apparent to many of his 2008 voters. Additionally, re-apportionment will cost Obama a dozen or so electoral votes that he picked up in 2008, even if he gets all of the same voters he got then. So that is one more hill he must climb.

    Even with all of the above factors working against Obama, the odds are still long for the Republican challengers. One reason is that the Republicans are practically guaranteed to win the Senate in 2012, giving them both houses of Congress. Americans prefer divided government, so Democrats will probably use this virtual certainty as an argument to re-elect Obama. A second reason is that Obama will have far greater financial resources than his Republican challenger and the Democrats have already signaled their intention to win by any means necessary, especially using whatever personal attacks they deem necessary to destroy the political viability of the Republican candidate. The media will abet them in this, as they always do. It’s already started, as evidenced by the attacks on Rick Perry, even by Republicans, which is hard to understand at this stage of the campaign. On the surface, at least, his experience makes him far more qualified for the office of President than Obama was in 2007, so why don’t Republicans sit back and let he and the other candidates get their feet on the ground and state their case for election before running them into the ground?

  • steve

    The reason I’ve always thought Obama would be a one-termer is because I don’t believe those 15 million new voters who turned out in 2008 are likely to return in any sizable numbers. They didn’t in 2010 but that’s no surprise since many Obama voters are also drop-off voters. But his declining popularity among liberal Democrats, combined with the fact that he’s appearing more and more like a career politician that the “One we’ve been waiting for”, mean he’s unlikely to garner the same political traction as he did before. Those liberal voters will probably still vote for him but they’re not going to go out and canvas for him in as large of numbers. In my opinion, and judging from the people showing up at my own polling house, 2008 was an aberration, not a trend, and will remain an aberration in 2013.

  • steve

    The reason I’ve always thought Obama would be a one-termer is because I don’t believe those 15 million new voters who turned out in 2008 are likely to return in any sizable numbers. They didn’t in 2010 but that’s no surprise since many Obama voters are also drop-off voters. But his declining popularity among liberal Democrats, combined with the fact that he’s appearing more and more like a career politician that the “One we’ve been waiting for”, mean he’s unlikely to garner the same political traction as he did before. Those liberal voters will probably still vote for him but they’re not going to go out and canvas for him in as large of numbers. In my opinion, and judging from the people showing up at my own polling house, 2008 was an aberration, not a trend, and will remain an aberration in 2013.

  • http://strangeherring.com Anthony Sacramone

    Allow me to second Professor Veith’s opinion here. Once the Republicans won the House, the economy became, at least to some extent, their mess too. And given the Republican field, which I wouldn’t wish on Democrats, I think it is fair to say that most people will stick with the quiet guy, even if he hasn’t a clue either.

  • http://strangeherring.com Anthony Sacramone

    Allow me to second Professor Veith’s opinion here. Once the Republicans won the House, the economy became, at least to some extent, their mess too. And given the Republican field, which I wouldn’t wish on Democrats, I think it is fair to say that most people will stick with the quiet guy, even if he hasn’t a clue either.

  • Lou

    DonS. you reminded me of the 2007-2008 primary and what Republicans did to Mike Huckabee when you wrote: “as evidenced by the attacks on Rick Perry, even by Republicans, which is hard to understand at this stage of the campaign”. I think Perry might find himself in a similar scenario. In the last election, the folks who were undermining Huckabee were empowered by an eager anticipation of Fred Thompson’s entry into the race (which ended as a complete flop).

  • Lou

    DonS. you reminded me of the 2007-2008 primary and what Republicans did to Mike Huckabee when you wrote: “as evidenced by the attacks on Rick Perry, even by Republicans, which is hard to understand at this stage of the campaign”. I think Perry might find himself in a similar scenario. In the last election, the folks who were undermining Huckabee were empowered by an eager anticipation of Fred Thompson’s entry into the race (which ended as a complete flop).

  • HistoryProfBrad

    This election has, at least to me, all the characteristics of 2004…only this time it is the GOP who is overconfident. The bottom line from my perspective is that people are voting more and more on the basis of ideology and partisanship. In many ways, it is a throwback to the political battles of the early nineteenth century up to the era of the Civil War. Only when the whole system collapses and our little ideological fantasy worlds get destroyed will anything change. Then again, we may be so delusional that it won’t make any difference. For all of the postmodern bravado bantered about in our culture, we still cling to what we believe is factual. The problem now is that facts are viewed as a product of feelings. In other words, the more certain we are that there is no truth “out there,” the more staunchly we hold on to our own versions of truth, whether they bear any connection to anything outside of ourselves or not. Our politics today are postmodernism personified. With that in mind, I think Dr. Veith is correct in his prediction. Guess we will all find out, huh?

    I have now depressed myself thoroughly. Have a great weekend! lol

  • HistoryProfBrad

    This election has, at least to me, all the characteristics of 2004…only this time it is the GOP who is overconfident. The bottom line from my perspective is that people are voting more and more on the basis of ideology and partisanship. In many ways, it is a throwback to the political battles of the early nineteenth century up to the era of the Civil War. Only when the whole system collapses and our little ideological fantasy worlds get destroyed will anything change. Then again, we may be so delusional that it won’t make any difference. For all of the postmodern bravado bantered about in our culture, we still cling to what we believe is factual. The problem now is that facts are viewed as a product of feelings. In other words, the more certain we are that there is no truth “out there,” the more staunchly we hold on to our own versions of truth, whether they bear any connection to anything outside of ourselves or not. Our politics today are postmodernism personified. With that in mind, I think Dr. Veith is correct in his prediction. Guess we will all find out, huh?

    I have now depressed myself thoroughly. Have a great weekend! lol

  • http://www.pastoralmeanderings.blogspot.com Pastor Larry Peters

    In order for Republicans to be elected, they must be for something and not just against Obama and other things. While it may not be fair to characterize them all as nattering nabobs of negativism, they do not speak with the same calm positive image as Reagan. We want a President who exudes the image of calm and certainty and so far, at least, none of the GOP contenders has found that message.

  • http://www.pastoralmeanderings.blogspot.com Pastor Larry Peters

    In order for Republicans to be elected, they must be for something and not just against Obama and other things. While it may not be fair to characterize them all as nattering nabobs of negativism, they do not speak with the same calm positive image as Reagan. We want a President who exudes the image of calm and certainty and so far, at least, none of the GOP contenders has found that message.

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    Good discussion, everyone. I haven’t been convinced, though, to change my prediction. Please, keep trying!

    (tODD, I would gladly predict who will win the GOP nomination, which indeed would be much more impressive, but I don’t have any definite ideas about that outcome right now. It would be even more impressive if I could predict what the stock market would do in the next week. I don’t claim to be able to predict EVERYTHING, or to be able to turn on and off my predictive powers or to train them on other topics. I don’t have ESP, much less prophetic powers that would make me deserve to be stoned if I am wrong. I just offered some analysis of Obama’s re-election prospects; that’s all.)

  • http://www.geneveith.com Gene Veith

    Good discussion, everyone. I haven’t been convinced, though, to change my prediction. Please, keep trying!

    (tODD, I would gladly predict who will win the GOP nomination, which indeed would be much more impressive, but I don’t have any definite ideas about that outcome right now. It would be even more impressive if I could predict what the stock market would do in the next week. I don’t claim to be able to predict EVERYTHING, or to be able to turn on and off my predictive powers or to train them on other topics. I don’t have ESP, much less prophetic powers that would make me deserve to be stoned if I am wrong. I just offered some analysis of Obama’s re-election prospects; that’s all.)

  • kenneth

    Okay lets suppose. Morality is apparently beyond the pale as an election issue. What they in academia teach is all they, voters hear, as one blogger noted. Nobody will listen to such conservative drivel as morality. The hell with salvation, then. So sorry. Critcal thinking about politics and educative quibbling about pedagogy appears the only activity resultant and there just won’t be many results worthwhile. Little if any change for the better if anyone outside of very conservative circles could be converted.

    On the more practical side of life. Why shouldn’t there be something like Perry’s dream in regard to medicare. Lets leave aside social security which looks too top heavy but maybe we could get “youth” to care about the elderly.

    So medicare and insurance is a priority . Why couldn’t high risk patients, in other words, poor patients find an insurer. A profit is not something nobody unhealthy doesn’t know about. Hence some reasonable insurance scheme could be idea-ized unless sheer cyncism reigns in government and economic spheres. So perhaps preaching morality or the law might be a way toward a more rational politics. It, by all appearances, couldn’d
    take with large swaths of the population but at least we will have tried.

    How about a lutheran perspective? Praying with God’s right hand involved with the churches efforts to at least ameliorate the suffering coupled with the secular side of business might have some effect. That is like saying the two kingdoms theology is real and even optimistic. All the spheres, to borrow a little reformed history recalling Kupyer from Amsterdam, might have some unity for: education that fits vocation, church that is geared for “change” toward a little like the postmillinalist’s idealism, even morality that when preached could just drive some people to Christ for, you know, salvation.

  • kenneth

    Okay lets suppose. Morality is apparently beyond the pale as an election issue. What they in academia teach is all they, voters hear, as one blogger noted. Nobody will listen to such conservative drivel as morality. The hell with salvation, then. So sorry. Critcal thinking about politics and educative quibbling about pedagogy appears the only activity resultant and there just won’t be many results worthwhile. Little if any change for the better if anyone outside of very conservative circles could be converted.

    On the more practical side of life. Why shouldn’t there be something like Perry’s dream in regard to medicare. Lets leave aside social security which looks too top heavy but maybe we could get “youth” to care about the elderly.

    So medicare and insurance is a priority . Why couldn’t high risk patients, in other words, poor patients find an insurer. A profit is not something nobody unhealthy doesn’t know about. Hence some reasonable insurance scheme could be idea-ized unless sheer cyncism reigns in government and economic spheres. So perhaps preaching morality or the law might be a way toward a more rational politics. It, by all appearances, couldn’d
    take with large swaths of the population but at least we will have tried.

    How about a lutheran perspective? Praying with God’s right hand involved with the churches efforts to at least ameliorate the suffering coupled with the secular side of business might have some effect. That is like saying the two kingdoms theology is real and even optimistic. All the spheres, to borrow a little reformed history recalling Kupyer from Amsterdam, might have some unity for: education that fits vocation, church that is geared for “change” toward a little like the postmillinalist’s idealism, even morality that when preached could just drive some people to Christ for, you know, salvation.

  • fws

    Kenneth @ 52

    How about a lutheran perspective? Praying with God’s right hand involved with the churches efforts to at least ameliorate the suffering coupled with the secular side of business might have some effect

    In the Lutheran Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms, the Church, along with the family and society , is one of the 3 “ordos” or governments or orders that God uses to rule , with the Law in the Earthly , right hand kingdom.

    The other kingdom is the kingdom where God rules alone faith alone in Christ alone. This kingdom is invisible and includes nothing we can see or do, which is why the visible church is Earthly or Right hand kingdom.

    The two kingdoms doctrine is really just another version of Law and Gospel. To include the Church in the Gospel side is to say sanctification or administration of word and sacraments is Gospel. And of course they are not.

  • fws

    Kenneth @ 52

    How about a lutheran perspective? Praying with God’s right hand involved with the churches efforts to at least ameliorate the suffering coupled with the secular side of business might have some effect

    In the Lutheran Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms, the Church, along with the family and society , is one of the 3 “ordos” or governments or orders that God uses to rule , with the Law in the Earthly , right hand kingdom.

    The other kingdom is the kingdom where God rules alone faith alone in Christ alone. This kingdom is invisible and includes nothing we can see or do, which is why the visible church is Earthly or Right hand kingdom.

    The two kingdoms doctrine is really just another version of Law and Gospel. To include the Church in the Gospel side is to say sanctification or administration of word and sacraments is Gospel. And of course they are not.

  • Tom Hering

    No matter how bad the economy is in 2012, all Obama has to do is look stable and reasonable compared to his opponent. He can do this by talking about measured reforms, as opposed to the slash-and-burn ideas of his opponent (any of the front runners). Piece of cake.

  • Tom Hering

    No matter how bad the economy is in 2012, all Obama has to do is look stable and reasonable compared to his opponent. He can do this by talking about measured reforms, as opposed to the slash-and-burn ideas of his opponent (any of the front runners). Piece of cake.

  • Rick Penner

    You’re half-right, Veith: we can’t know that Obama will be defeated. But this is so because (more to the point) the election of 2012 is — on principle — UNPREDICTABLE.

    The public is slamming back and forth from one extreme (2008 election) to the other (2010 election) and the oscillation is a sign that the system’s in a state of instability.

    Underneath it all, the decline is occurring because the nanny state is unsustainable; especially within the context of the global competition of rising nations and our plummeting ability to manufacture or to innovate anymore. We’ve lost our belief in self-reliance so we don’t know where to turn within ourselves (or in our past) for guidance. Besides, the stance of the Baby-Boomers has always been one of rebellion against our heritage and now we have only vague “hope” and “change” to entrance us. Remember the “cosmic giggle”? Remember the primacy of style?

    At least Obama has that.

    The public refuses to give up its dreams for more comfort (higher salaries and benefits, greater equality of outcomes, more free stuff) brought about because we go out and “protest” for it – “We have our rights!” Since this isn’t working anymore somebody must be cheating us! Our rising anger has to be directed towards something or somebody.

    The choice we face is more dream-world liberalism and its rising debt (and falling dollar) OR desperate sacrifice for years until we earn our way out.

    How can we choose either one?

    Unpredictability is the new norm.

  • Rick Penner

    You’re half-right, Veith: we can’t know that Obama will be defeated. But this is so because (more to the point) the election of 2012 is — on principle — UNPREDICTABLE.

    The public is slamming back and forth from one extreme (2008 election) to the other (2010 election) and the oscillation is a sign that the system’s in a state of instability.

    Underneath it all, the decline is occurring because the nanny state is unsustainable; especially within the context of the global competition of rising nations and our plummeting ability to manufacture or to innovate anymore. We’ve lost our belief in self-reliance so we don’t know where to turn within ourselves (or in our past) for guidance. Besides, the stance of the Baby-Boomers has always been one of rebellion against our heritage and now we have only vague “hope” and “change” to entrance us. Remember the “cosmic giggle”? Remember the primacy of style?

    At least Obama has that.

    The public refuses to give up its dreams for more comfort (higher salaries and benefits, greater equality of outcomes, more free stuff) brought about because we go out and “protest” for it – “We have our rights!” Since this isn’t working anymore somebody must be cheating us! Our rising anger has to be directed towards something or somebody.

    The choice we face is more dream-world liberalism and its rising debt (and falling dollar) OR desperate sacrifice for years until we earn our way out.

    How can we choose either one?

    Unpredictability is the new norm.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @54 yeah, that sounds about right. The moderates who decide elections are the least informed and vote on how they perceive the candidate. People who understand the issues better are more likely to be either on the left or the right, not confused and in the middle.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    @54 yeah, that sounds about right. The moderates who decide elections are the least informed and vote on how they perceive the candidate. People who understand the issues better are more likely to be either on the left or the right, not confused and in the middle.

  • Bob

    ‘all Obama has to do is look stable and reasonable compared to his opponent’

    This he could do with his eyes blindfolded. Even many stalwart conservatives have commented on what a wackadoodle bunch of screwballs the current bunch is.

  • Bob

    ‘all Obama has to do is look stable and reasonable compared to his opponent’

    This he could do with his eyes blindfolded. Even many stalwart conservatives have commented on what a wackadoodle bunch of screwballs the current bunch is.

  • helen

    If anyone looked at Bush II’s record, how did they vote for him?

    If Obama wins again, it will be because too many “used to be Republicans” voted third party or stayed home in disgust. I haven’t decided which it will be yet.

  • helen

    If anyone looked at Bush II’s record, how did they vote for him?

    If Obama wins again, it will be because too many “used to be Republicans” voted third party or stayed home in disgust. I haven’t decided which it will be yet.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “If Obama wins again, it will be because too many “used to be Republicans” voted third party or stayed home in disgust. I haven’t decided which it will be yet.”

    Indeed, the Democrats are likely saying if Obama doesn’t win it will be because too many “used to be Democrats” stayed home in disgust.

    The third party that could really derail the Democrats would be Peace party whose platform would be ending the wars and single payer/public option healthcare with no money being forced from taxpayers to insurance companies

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “If Obama wins again, it will be because too many “used to be Republicans” voted third party or stayed home in disgust. I haven’t decided which it will be yet.”

    Indeed, the Democrats are likely saying if Obama doesn’t win it will be because too many “used to be Democrats” stayed home in disgust.

    The third party that could really derail the Democrats would be Peace party whose platform would be ending the wars and single payer/public option healthcare with no money being forced from taxpayers to insurance companies

  • Lou

    Anyone see Meet the Press on MSNBC today? Great discussion from most of the panelists. Thomas Friedman is an absolute genius and makes some of the best points of anyone I’ve heard. In fact, his new book is coming out tomorrow and I can’t wait to read it: “That Used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back.”

    The reason I mention the show is that Maxine Waters, Democrat from California, was towing the Democratic line and was completely left in the dust by the other 5 panelists. Her answer to the jobs creation problem was that the government needs to spend 1 trillion right away to put people to work. Yeah, right.

    My point is that it really isn’t THAT hard to come up with a coherent strategy/ message/ vision that can easily trump the worn out tax and spend tripe of the Democratic position. The discussion between the Wall Street Journal Editor, Friedman, historian Doris Kearns Goodman, and the other two pundits was fascinating, smart, and generated a great deal of doable, reasonable ideas.

    The fact that we can’t find one sane Republican candidate who is competent and confident enough to put together a coherent message is mindboggling. They’re going to have to come up with something, right? I mean they can’t get elected just by complaining about Obama, can they?

  • Lou

    Anyone see Meet the Press on MSNBC today? Great discussion from most of the panelists. Thomas Friedman is an absolute genius and makes some of the best points of anyone I’ve heard. In fact, his new book is coming out tomorrow and I can’t wait to read it: “That Used to Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back.”

    The reason I mention the show is that Maxine Waters, Democrat from California, was towing the Democratic line and was completely left in the dust by the other 5 panelists. Her answer to the jobs creation problem was that the government needs to spend 1 trillion right away to put people to work. Yeah, right.

    My point is that it really isn’t THAT hard to come up with a coherent strategy/ message/ vision that can easily trump the worn out tax and spend tripe of the Democratic position. The discussion between the Wall Street Journal Editor, Friedman, historian Doris Kearns Goodman, and the other two pundits was fascinating, smart, and generated a great deal of doable, reasonable ideas.

    The fact that we can’t find one sane Republican candidate who is competent and confident enough to put together a coherent message is mindboggling. They’re going to have to come up with something, right? I mean they can’t get elected just by complaining about Obama, can they?

  • Tom Hering

    “Indeed, the Democrats are likely saying if Obama doesn’t win it will be because too many ‘used to be Democrats’ stayed home in disgust.” – sg @ 59.

    Like labor …

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ie1c1FGtApdzJ9103dZYzgGBLCqw?docId=fdd973dd84444c059626c73feac7de15

    … and environmentalists.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/science/earth/04air.html

  • Tom Hering

    “Indeed, the Democrats are likely saying if Obama doesn’t win it will be because too many ‘used to be Democrats’ stayed home in disgust.” – sg @ 59.

    Like labor …

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ie1c1FGtApdzJ9103dZYzgGBLCqw?docId=fdd973dd84444c059626c73feac7de15

    … and environmentalists.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/04/science/earth/04air.html

  • Chris B

    Dr. Veith,

    I agree with your analysis to a degree. You may find my reason for it a bit different than yours. I predict that if a moderate (like Romney) gets the nomination, Obama will be re-elected because most will see them as the same person. Why vote for a professional poser without experience when you can at least get the guy with expereince? However, if the GOP nominates someone who is the polar opposite of Obama, it will be Obama who will lose in a Lanslide defeat. Why? Glad you asked. The nation has clearly seen that obamanomics doesn’t work. Unemployment is insane, oppressive, and crippling. People are fed up and all fingers point to Obama. You recited an interesting political cliche: “Better to vote for the devil you know than the one you don’t know” (paraphrase). However, in this condition the country has already experienced what this devil can do and I believe they’re willing to try anything different. In other words, all cliches fly out the window. If all we can expect is for things to get worse and the same failed policies to be implemented the country is gasping for air and any lifeline will do. That’s why I believe Obama will lose and lose big. Any claims of radicalism the left attempts to make against a GOP candidate will be drowned out by the impending cries of doom from economists and business owners.

  • Chris B

    Dr. Veith,

    I agree with your analysis to a degree. You may find my reason for it a bit different than yours. I predict that if a moderate (like Romney) gets the nomination, Obama will be re-elected because most will see them as the same person. Why vote for a professional poser without experience when you can at least get the guy with expereince? However, if the GOP nominates someone who is the polar opposite of Obama, it will be Obama who will lose in a Lanslide defeat. Why? Glad you asked. The nation has clearly seen that obamanomics doesn’t work. Unemployment is insane, oppressive, and crippling. People are fed up and all fingers point to Obama. You recited an interesting political cliche: “Better to vote for the devil you know than the one you don’t know” (paraphrase). However, in this condition the country has already experienced what this devil can do and I believe they’re willing to try anything different. In other words, all cliches fly out the window. If all we can expect is for things to get worse and the same failed policies to be implemented the country is gasping for air and any lifeline will do. That’s why I believe Obama will lose and lose big. Any claims of radicalism the left attempts to make against a GOP candidate will be drowned out by the impending cries of doom from economists and business owners.

  • kenneth

    fws

    Thanks so much for your insight into what is afterall, the most important blog to think on, if rationality is to be appreciated, yes even for sports and politics. I do console myself that someone sees the significance, with Rev Spomer and yourself.

    To carry on, why is that sanctification is only a present reality ouside of the church’s function to preach faithfully. According to St Peter,”we are a holy people a holy nation?”

    The gospel is appropriated with the Holy Spirit wherever a christian goes, secular or churchly. Also if we do carry on some many might pe persuaded by churchly good works and come to faith. Justified wherever they go!

  • kenneth

    fws

    Thanks so much for your insight into what is afterall, the most important blog to think on, if rationality is to be appreciated, yes even for sports and politics. I do console myself that someone sees the significance, with Rev Spomer and yourself.

    To carry on, why is that sanctification is only a present reality ouside of the church’s function to preach faithfully. According to St Peter,”we are a holy people a holy nation?”

    The gospel is appropriated with the Holy Spirit wherever a christian goes, secular or churchly. Also if we do carry on some many might pe persuaded by churchly good works and come to faith. Justified wherever they go!

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    I think the election of Obama was a pretty clear indication America’s in a mid-life crisis. We’re no longer the young nation with a bright future. We’re not a nation full of young people. We’re a nation full of elderly people.

    We’re over-the-hill and hoping to relieve our old glory. For Democrats that meant going back to Kennedy. On that measure Obama’s liberalism failed because it was for another time when America was young and dynamic.

    Liberalism has to be shed as nations age and become brittle. Scandinavia, the UK and the whole European continent are rolling back their welfare states as they get older. Before the decade is out they’ll have smaller welfare states than we do now.

  • http://steadfastlutherans.org/ SAL

    I think the election of Obama was a pretty clear indication America’s in a mid-life crisis. We’re no longer the young nation with a bright future. We’re not a nation full of young people. We’re a nation full of elderly people.

    We’re over-the-hill and hoping to relieve our old glory. For Democrats that meant going back to Kennedy. On that measure Obama’s liberalism failed because it was for another time when America was young and dynamic.

    Liberalism has to be shed as nations age and become brittle. Scandinavia, the UK and the whole European continent are rolling back their welfare states as they get older. Before the decade is out they’ll have smaller welfare states than we do now.

  • CRB

    I am reminded of a quote attributed to Benjamin Disraeli:
    “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage. ”
    I WONDER: how close are we to “bondage”?

  • CRB

    I am reminded of a quote attributed to Benjamin Disraeli:
    “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage. ”
    I WONDER: how close are we to “bondage”?

  • steve

    @54, for Obama to win, he has to “look stable and reasonable” while his supporters continue the meme that the Republican candidates are slash-and-burn extremists. To that end, you’re certainly doing your part.

    I would argue that “stable and reasonable” can easily be misinterpreted as “unconcerned and out of touch” to middle-class Americans who feel they’re losing their voice in addition to their retirements.

  • steve

    @54, for Obama to win, he has to “look stable and reasonable” while his supporters continue the meme that the Republican candidates are slash-and-burn extremists. To that end, you’re certainly doing your part.

    I would argue that “stable and reasonable” can easily be misinterpreted as “unconcerned and out of touch” to middle-class Americans who feel they’re losing their voice in addition to their retirements.

  • steve

    I realize that “misinterpreted”, above, should have been “interpreted”. I was giving the President the benefit of the doubt that he really isn’t unconcerned and out of touch.

  • steve

    I realize that “misinterpreted”, above, should have been “interpreted”. I was giving the President the benefit of the doubt that he really isn’t unconcerned and out of touch.

  • Wayne A

    Yes these Republicans are so extreme that 50 years ago they would have been called Democrates. How come no one is ever concerned about the exteminsm that has taken over the Democrate party? McCain was about as moderate a candidate as you can find, and he refused to go on the attack and he got trounced. The reason the main street media always pushes for a moderate candidates is because those are the ones they feel the democrates have the best chance of beating. I say we put up a true conservative candidate and give the people a real choice rather than a choice between socialism and socialism light.

  • Wayne A

    Yes these Republicans are so extreme that 50 years ago they would have been called Democrates. How come no one is ever concerned about the exteminsm that has taken over the Democrate party? McCain was about as moderate a candidate as you can find, and he refused to go on the attack and he got trounced. The reason the main street media always pushes for a moderate candidates is because those are the ones they feel the democrates have the best chance of beating. I say we put up a true conservative candidate and give the people a real choice rather than a choice between socialism and socialism light.

  • Pingback: It’s the likability, stupid

  • Pingback: It’s the likability, stupid


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X