Skip to content

2012 is a Referendum on Obama


2012 is a referendum on Obama.

Republicans could run Daffy Duck (R); or a Bachmann-Palin ticket with Condi as SoS and Liz Cheney as SecDef and enlist the Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders into the Secret Service. Or a cold ham sandwich. Doesn’t matter. 2012 is a referendum on Obama.

We’ll deal with the flaws of the Republican in due time. There will be plenty, regardless of whom.

That, and 2012 is a referendum on Obama (and Liberalism and the Chicago Thug Way.) Obama must – MUST – be defeated.

9 Comments leave one →
  1. ccoffer permalink
    2011/12/12 21:58

    The broadest possible appeal is important because whoever turns out to vote republican is going to vote the whole ticket. This has the makings of a watershed election. Personally, I’m liking Gingrich more and more. I hear folks babbling about this or that “skill” that who ever happens to have. What the hell ever happened to truth? Say what you will about Gingrich, he’s not a bullshitter and he never has been. He’s certainly never been afraid to think out loud. Weak minded people hate him for that.

    I have nothing but contempt for the mass of unthinking anti-Romney zombies who’re shrieking from every corner of the conservative movement lately, but I have to admit, Romney looked quite small Saturday night gnawing on Newt’s ankles. He didn’t look as pathetic as Bachmann did, but he still didn’t come out looking too good to me. ingrich didn’t attack any republican. Republicans appreciate that more than republican candidates realize.

    I’ve been a Santorum guy from the get, but he has this mealy-mouthed delivery that just doesn’t win people over. I’ll still probably vote for him in the primary.

  2. 2011/12/12 23:20

    Gingrich is a human shrapnel machine with a long history of blowing himself up before he gets anywhere near the enemy. I fully expect that he’ll explode before he wins the nomination but God, won’t it be funny if he does it afterwards?

    Gingrich’s own party staged a coup against him. Do you have any idea how rare that is?

    As to your idea about a referendum. Well, I remember that 2004 was supposed to be that, too. But then the Democrats nominated John Kerry and made it a choice election. I fully expect that the GOP will do that this time. And Barack Obama is at least as good a campaigner as Bush the Younger was.

    The biggest thing that Romney has going for him is that he can say that he was Obama before Obama was cool. That might make the election closer than it should be, and the Republicans won’t lose that many states with Romney, but they won’t win new ones either.

    Almost everyone else in this field has said such freakishly stupidly things that they can’t help but make this a choice election. And every single one of them would lose that choice in an awesomely formidible way.

    By the way, what states do Gingrich, Perry, Santorum and Bachmann put into play that aren’t already safely Republican. If nothing else, Romney makes Michigan and probably Pennsylvania and Ohio competetive, even though I believe that he’ll lose all three.

    The only guy in the race who I believe can win is Huntsman. He’d almost certainly win New Hampshire, Colorado, Nevada and maybe New Mexico back from Obama and build outward from there, The only problem is that he can’t be nominated. My original guy, Mitch Daniels could have done the same thing from the midwest, carrying the big electoral college states that Obama won and must retain to keep his job..

    Everybody but Huntsman starts the race fighting in their own backyards, not in Democratic pick-up states from four years ago. And that’s exactly how elections are lost, particularly when Obama has both incumbency and a billion dollars at his disposal.

    Then you need to look at the Republican governors elected in 2010, almost all of whom have approval ratings somewhere between Obama and a dangerous pedophile. Combine deeply unpopular governors and a weak presidential nominee, and you can kiss the prospect of winning back Ohio and Florida goodbye. And can you remember the last time the GOP won without carrying both of those states?

    If there’s one lesson an entire generation of Democrats can teach you, it’s that you should never fall in love with a field of deeply flawed candidates. They’ll only break your heart.

    • 2011/12/12 23:54

      My best to Dan in Van and to Damian Penny, old buddies. The bird to “Dara” and “Dr. Dawg” if either of them show up at your place.

      Truth be told, what you say here sucks. Not because you’re wrong, mind, it’s just that I’m not in the mood for news that, you know, sucks. To be honest further, I don’t pretend to know how American politics works. I’m concerned because your analysis is probably accurate – it usually is. Many thanks for your thoughts.

      I do know this: The waning influence of the liberal media and the rise of the motivated, growing Tea phenomenon has changed the picture. I also know that a lot Demos are deflated.

      I also know that I need to begin praying for an act of G-d. A BIG one.

  3. 2011/12/13 00:37

    My ability to bring joy is second to none. I really am reveared everywhere for it.

    I was hoping that you’d bring up the Tea folks, since those were the governors I was talking about. If you want to get really depressed, look up the approval ratings of governors Walker in Wisconsin, Scott in Florida, Kasich in Ohio and Haley in South Carolina. All of them were Tea Party darlings, and each and every once of them now have lower approval ratings than Obama. In most of their cases, significantly lower. Scott, I think, is in the low twenties.

    That being the case, I’d say that the “phenomenon” is anything but “growing”. Anywhere these people are elected to executive positions, they’re tanking. And Ohio and Florida are hugely important to the Republicans winning the While House.

    Want to see how important the Tea Party is? The Republican House, elected almost solely because of the Teapers, is going to start passing some king-hell spending bills in the very near future, and the Tea Party isn’t going to do a goddamned thing about it. After all, what can they do? Run a third-party ticket with a congenital loser like John Kasich as their nominee and guarantee the Democrats the White House for the next friggin’ century? I don’t think so.

    The Tea Party stopped being relevant over a year ago. But they do give the Democrats some very good targets to campaign against next year.

    I’ll give you an example of how this works. Bob Dole was a pretty inoffensive guy. In fact, Bill Clinton deeply respected him. So the Clinton ’96 campaign didn’t run against Dole, they ran against Gingrich instead. All of their ads showed the same picture of Gingrich and Dole. And that was hilarious because Bob and Newt actively despised one another.

    Can you imagine the Dems running ads showing the eventual Republican nominee with Kasich and Scott in Florida and Ohio? I can. And it will be ruinous, unless you think that the GOP has a broad enough base that it can afford to lose those two states. The only problem is that they’ve never had that broad a base.

    And there, my friend, is your choice election.

    • 2011/12/13 02:06

      and each and every once of them now have lower approval ratings than Obama.” … as indicated by selective liberal push-polling organizations – the same ones who, prior to the elections, did their best to “show” how popular the incumbent Demos were. Naw – there’s a lot I don’t know. Hard-earned wisdom teaches that the Media and their propaganda wings in their “polling” services are full of $h!t.

      Hold on – Teapers are motivated like never before, and there are more of us, not fewer. To make matters more interesting, a lot of us are insinuating ourselves directly into local Party structures and election returns counting. Showing-up at town hall meetings? Yesterday’s tactics. It’s all off-camera these days. What i’m seeing from the ground here looks interesting.

      I’m sure you’re right about Demos pulling a “choice” tactic next year. Will it be enough?

  4. ccoffer permalink
    2011/12/13 04:30

    “The only guy in the race who I believe can win is Huntsman. “

    I gather you masturbate an awful lot.

  5. ccoffer permalink
    2011/12/13 04:33

    Perhaps the Swiss are the “only” ones who can defeat the Nazis.

    and visions of sugarplums;
    danced in their heads.

  6. 2011/12/13 09:58

    “Selective liberal push-polling organizations”? Like, say, Fox News, which has never questioned the veracity of those numbers on their actual news programming? I suppose that the Wisconsin recall movement and Kasich’s union referendum whalloping were all parts of a mass hallucination, too.

    Lookee, from a purely strategic point of view, the Tea Party is contrary to all of the laws of American politics. Since Republicans never constitute more than about 35% of the vote, they run to the right in the primary, and then move back to the center for the general election. This allows them to pick up enough independents and conservative Democrats to actually win. The Teapers pervert that process, and it’s probably going to screw them into the ground next year. Ask Barry Goldwater how that works.

    Assuming that anger toward Obama – particulary when real live Republicans (as opposed to the fantastical “generic” kind) as about as unpopular as the president – will bring about a victory is an exercise in wishful thinking. It might just happen, but no self-respecting student of history or politics would put money on it.

    You also seem to be mistaking why Democrats are “deflated.” Liberals are disappointed that their golden boy seems to be (to them) a creature of Goldman Sachs and just a little too comfortable with Bush’s military and foreign policies. They’re all weepy because they don’t see Obama as being liberal enough. And that was true when they saw the Tea Party as a joke.

    But no one thinks that they’ll let that disappointment elect Newt Gingrich, who the left has viewed as an almost satanic force for nearly thirty years. They might stay home and allow Romney or Huntsman to win, but never Gingrich, Perry or Bachmann. They motivate Democrats every bit as much as Obama does the Tea Party, if not more so.

    Besides, the Democrats are going to have the 2008 map and a shitload of money on their side. Remember also that Citizens United works both ways. Unions will be able to spend unlimited amounts of money – besides the billion that Obama is expected to raise – supporting Democrats.

    • 2011/12/13 14:29

      ““Selective liberal push-polling organizations”? Like, say, Fox News, which has never questioned the veracity of those numbers on their actual news programming?

      Yes. Fox is Progressive, as is their sister ship Dow Jones. I know of no libertarians or conservatives on-line nor even in person who trust Fox or WSJ. Murdoch knows to meet his competition by flavoring his product to be the least insulting to 40% of America totally ignored by the others; but Fox News is what it is – a liberal/progressive organization with Murdoch’s state-corporatist agenda. (Compared to the CBeffingC, Fox seems “conservative,” but then again the Ceeb and it’s progenitor Prabda are hard statist-left.)

      The only libertarian or conservative media organizations are, all of them, in radio and on-line.

      We’ll have to agree to disagree on the rest.

      Thanks for your time and thoughts Skipp!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s