Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1866166 times)

Oblivion · « **Reply #5640 on:** October 21, 2009, 07:30:29 PM »

Quote from: Chipopo on October 21, 2009, 04:37:30 PM

but like, what if she won? That's some sad scary shit. Not that I think she would...but what if she did?

While there's no guarantee what may happen in the future, this article should at least alleviate some fears:

Quote

Let us take a trip back into history. Not ancient history. Recent history. It is the winter of 2007. The presidential primaries are approaching. The talk jocks like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and the rest are over the moon about Fred Thompson. They’re weak at the knees at the thought of Mitt Romney. Meanwhile, they are hurling torrents of abuse at the unreliable deviationists: John McCain and Mike Huckabee.

Yet somehow, despite the fervor of the great microphone giants, the Thompson campaign flops like a fish. Despite the schoolgirl delight from the radio studios, the Romney campaign underperforms.

Meanwhile, Huckabee surges. Limbaugh attacks him, but social conservatives flock.

Along comes New Hampshire and McCain wins! Republican voters have not heeded their masters in the media. Before long, South Carolina looms as the crucial point of the race. The contest is effectively between Romney and McCain. The talk jocks are now in spittle-flecked furor. Day after day, whole programs are dedicated to hurling abuse at McCain and everybody ever associated with him. The jocks are threatening to unleash their angry millions.

Yet the imaginary armies do not materialize. McCain wins the South Carolina primary and goes on to win the nomination. The talk jocks can’t even deliver the conservative voters who show up at Republican primaries. They can’t even deliver South Carolina!

So what is the theme of our history lesson? It is a story of remarkable volume and utter weakness. It is the story of media mavens who claim to represent a hidden majority but who in fact represent a mere niche — even in the Republican Party. It is a story as old as “The Wizard of Oz,” of grand illusions and small men behind the curtain.

But, of course, we shouldn’t be surprised by this story. Over the past few years the talk jocks have demonstrated their real-world weakness time and again. Back in 2006, they threatened to build a new majority on anti-immigration fervor. Republicans like J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, both of Arizona, built their House election campaigns under that banner. But these two didn’t march to glory. Both lost their campaigns.

In 2008, after McCain had won his nomination, Limbaugh turned his attention to the Democratic race. He commanded his followers to vote in the Democratic primaries for Hillary Clinton because “we need Barack Obama bloodied up politically.” Todd Donovan of Western Washington University has looked at data from 38 states and could find no strong evidence that significant numbers of people actually did what Limbaugh commanded. Rush blared the trumpets, but few of his Dittoheads advanced.

Over the years, I have asked many politicians what happens when Limbaugh and his colleagues attack. The story is always the same. Hundreds of calls come in. The receptionists are miserable. But the numbers back home do not move. There is no effect on the favorability rating or the re-election prospects. In the media world, he is a giant. In the real world, he’s not.

But this is not merely a story of weakness. It is a story of resilience. For no matter how often their hollowness is exposed, the jocks still reweave the myth of their own power. They still ride the airwaves claiming to speak for millions. They still confuse listeners with voters. And they are aided in this endeavor by their enablers. They are enabled by cynical Democrats, who love to claim that Rush Limbaugh controls the G.O.P. They are enabled by lazy pundits who find it easier to argue with showmen than with people whose opinions are based on knowledge. They are enabled by the slightly educated snobs who believe that Glenn Beck really is the voice of Middle America.

So the myth returns. Just months after the election and the humiliation, everyone is again convinced that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and the rest possess real power. And the saddest thing is that even Republican politicians come to believe it. They mistake media for reality. They pre-emptively surrender to armies that don’t exist.

They pay more attention to Rush’s imaginary millions than to the real voters down the street. The Republican Party is unpopular because it’s more interested in pleasing Rush’s ghosts than actual people. The party is leaderless right now because nobody has the guts to step outside the rigid parameters enforced by the radio jocks and create a new party identity. The party is losing because it has adopted a radio entertainer’s niche-building strategy, while abandoning the politician’s coalition-building strategy.

The rise of Beck, Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and the rest has correlated almost perfectly with the decline of the G.O.P. But it’s not because the talk jocks have real power. It’s because they have illusory power, because Republicans hear the media mythology and fall for it every time.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5641 on:** October 21, 2009, 09:33:12 PM »

You guys are underestimating a couple of things- namely, the lack of quality candidates amongst the opposition and the fact that while Obama's ratings have slipped a little bit (since rebounding to the mid 50's) absolutely NO ONE likes the Republicans and pretty much recognize that they don't have any ideas or policies that will help.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #5642 on:** October 21, 2009, 09:35:01 PM »

Quote from: The Card Cheat on October 21, 2009, 09:33:12 PM

You guys are underestimating a couple of things- namely, the lack of quality candidates amongst the opposition and the fact that while Obama's ratings have slipped a little bit (since rebounding to the mid 50's) absolutely NO ONE likes the Republicans and pretty much recognize that they don't have any ideas or policies that will help.

Not to mention we are years away from an election so its a bit silly for people to start predicting the future.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5643 on:** October 21, 2009, 09:36:34 PM »

Exactly. For fucks sakes, some idiots are already saying the Dems are going to lose the House in 2010. Yeah right.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #5644 on:** October 21, 2009, 09:47:28 PM »

Saying Obama is a one termer is Maddow-esque hand wringing. Also, there is no Republican leadership. People say he's Carter 2.0 but there's no Reagan to take advantage of it. The GOP right now is just a raving hatefuck of egotistical pundits and fringe congresspeople who would never have a voice if there was even a shred more stability in the country.

I suppose Palin could be the bizarro Reagan.

Hitler Stole My Potato · « **Reply #5645 on:** October 21, 2009, 10:21:57 PM »

If by some cruel fate Palin is elected president, I'd seriously consider moving up north to Vancouver.

Mandark · « **Reply #5646 on:** October 22, 2009, 12:47:08 AM »

I consider Romney at least even odds to get the nomination.

The British betting houses have him at 5-1 against and won't take wagers from Americans. I wish I had kept in touch with my old English friends.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #5647 on:** October 22, 2009, 12:47:14 AM »

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on October 21, 2009, 09:41:42 PM

Quote from: FlameOfCallandor on October 21, 2009, 06:22:13 PM
If we had an election today obama wouldn't win re-election. So unless things drastically change he's carter 2.0
but who would beat him?

the constitution

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5648 on:** October 22, 2009, 10:41:51 AM »

Quote from: Professor Prole on October 22, 2009, 12:47:14 AM

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on October 21, 2009, 09:41:42 PM
Quote from: FlameOfCallandor on October 21, 2009, 06:22:13 PM
If we had an election today obama wouldn't win re-election. So unless things drastically change he's carter 2.0
but who would beat him?

the constitution

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5649 on:** October 22, 2009, 05:17:03 PM »

FlameofCallandor, can you get a webcam and record your facial reaction after this segment:

[youtube=560,345]TgqqSHr0wVA[/youtube]

How angry are you on a scale of one to ten gold bars?

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5650 on:** October 22, 2009, 05:28:59 PM »

Franken always has hot babes behind his seat

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5651 on:** October 22, 2009, 05:57:11 PM »

I don't get the point of that video? I bet some people went bankrupt paying their mortgage too. Should everyone get a free house paid for by uncle sam? What about jobs, I bet people who don't have jobs go bankrupt. Lets just give out money to everyone so nobody ever goes bankrupt.

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5652 on:** October 22, 2009, 05:59:34 PM »

I'm not angry, I'm more amazed that liberals actually think this is an argument for their side of the debate.

"Shit's expensive, so we'll just have someone else pay for it"

I guess that about sums out most of modern liberalism though.

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5653 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:11:09 PM »

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on October 22, 2009, 06:07:34 PM

firefighting is expensive too..

... and is not the same thing.

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5654 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:13:28 PM »

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5655 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:21:44 PM »

How many time does it take for me to say that libertarian =/= anarchist ??

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5656 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:25:43 PM »

Do you think that will happen before or after Obama loses re-election?

Robo · « **Reply #5657 on:** October 22, 2009, 06:41:00 PM »

That snarky strawman post is pretty humorous considering your response to the video.

Oblivion · « **Reply #5658 on:** October 22, 2009, 07:25:52 PM »

Quote from: FlameOfCallandor on October 22, 2009, 05:57:11 PM

I don't get the point of that video? I bet some people went bankrupt paying their mortgage too. Should everyone get a free house paid for by uncle sam? What about jobs, I bet people who don't have jobs go bankrupt. Lets just give out money to everyone so nobody ever goes bankrupt.

Quote from: FlameOfCallandor on October 22, 2009, 06:11:09 PM

... and is not the same thing.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5659 on:** October 22, 2009, 07:42:08 PM »

[youtube=560,345]rMOBQZwDMAE[/youtube]

That's a Borys-esque SMH moment

AdmiralViscen · « **Reply #5660 on:** October 22, 2009, 10:50:43 PM »

Quote from: Phoenix Dark on October 22, 2009, 07:42:08 PM

[youtube=560,345]rMOBQZwDMAE[/youtube]

That's a Borys-esque SMH moment

Wow. That guy must really love Reagan!

Oblivion · « **Reply #5661 on:** October 23, 2009, 01:56:56 AM »

omg this is all kinds of awesome:

Quote

A collection of essays about former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, titled Going Rouge, will be released the same day as Palin's own much-awaited book, Going Rogue.

The essays, collected by The Nation senior editors Richard Kim and Betsy Reed and written by Max Blumenthal, Katha Pollitt, Matt Taibbi and several others, will examine "the nightmarish prospect of her continuing to dominate the nation's political scene."

And yes, the book is available for pre-order.

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/going-rouge-to-come-out-same-day-as-palins-book.php?ref=fpb

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2009/10/going-rogue-rouge-palin-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg

The Nation

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5662 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:00:21 AM »

Meh, liberals sure do hate her huh

Oblivion · « **Reply #5663 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:05:18 AM »

They hate her cause she's good looking.

[/O'reilly]

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5664 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:19:26 AM »

I will say as a registered Republican, that if our country ever manages to vote her into office, that I'd seriously consider relocating to another country. And not because of sour liberal grapes either - but because she acts as sort of a litmus test for the intelligence of our nation.

Once it hits below a certain point, it's time to jettison to another democracy.

Oblivion · « **Reply #5665 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:20:59 AM »

Not just that, but also the worry about someone like her having access to the nucular codes.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #5666 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:22:39 AM »

Meh, I'm not so worried about the fabled "nuclear codes" scare-tactic as I am with Willco's fear.

I may be living in London in four years time anyway, so no skin off my nose.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5667 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:29:56 AM »

Quote from: BrandNew on October 23, 2009, 02:22:39 AM

Meh, I'm not so worried about the fabled "nuclear codes" scare-tactic as I am with Willco's fear.

I may be living in London in four years time anyway, so no skin off my nose.

Until the British National Party takes over

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5668 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:30:02 AM »

London, Kentucky?

Mandark · « **Reply #5669 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:50:09 AM »

Quote from: FlameOfCallandor on October 22, 2009, 06:11:09 PM

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on October 22, 2009, 06:07:34 PM
firefighting is expensive too..
... and is not the same thing.

Actually, why do you support a publicly funded firefighting department rather than private/volunteer firefighting? What aspect of firefighting (unshared with medical care) distinguishes it from the other goods and services that naturally fall to the market?

They don't say anything about fire engines in the Constitution.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5670 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:55:26 AM »

Robo · « **Reply #5671 on:** October 23, 2009, 03:14:51 AM »

If folks didn't move for a second Bush term, they'll never do it. That said, in the unlikely Palin victory scenario, I feel like I would need to strongly consider it.

TakingBackSunday · « **Reply #5672 on:** October 23, 2009, 03:26:55 AM »

Quote from: Willco on October 23, 2009, 02:30:02 AM

London, Kentucky?

There's a London, Kentucky?

EmCeeGrammar · « **Reply #5673 on:** October 23, 2009, 04:54:02 AM »

Quote from: BrandNew on October 23, 2009, 03:26:55 AM

Quote from: Willco on October 23, 2009, 02:30:02 AM
London, Kentucky?

There's a London, Kentucky?

There's a London, Arkansas!
Wait, no, it's England, Arkansas.

EmCeeGrammar · « **Reply #5674 on:** October 23, 2009, 04:58:14 AM »

Quote from: Willco on October 22, 2009, 05:17:03 PM

FlameofCallandor, can you get a webcam and record your facial reaction after this segment:

[youtube=560,345]TgqqSHr0wVA[/youtube]

How angry are you on a scale of one to ten gold bars?

Delicious

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5675 on:** October 23, 2009, 10:33:25 AM »

Quote from: The Business on October 23, 2009, 03:04:33 AM

Every election I hear that "I'll move to another country" threat. Does anyone know anyone that expatriated because of an election?

I know a couple that moved to Vancouver in 2005, although it was pretty easy for them to do that because she had dual citizenship.

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5676 on:** October 23, 2009, 10:52:25 AM »

Pelosi scoffs at The Constitution.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55971

Quote

CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”

Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”

constitution

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5677 on:** October 23, 2009, 11:16:00 AM »

Article I Section 8. "General welfare." Yeah, "welfare" is in the US Constitution. OH TEH NOEZ!

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #5678 on:** October 23, 2009, 11:22:23 AM »

Wow, considering everything in section 8 thats a really liberal (literal meaning) view of it.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5679 on:** October 23, 2009, 11:25:58 AM »

Not really. It also says explicitly in there that they can tax people, and we all know how much you hate that.

Brehvolution · « **Reply #5680 on:** October 23, 2009, 11:32:28 AM »

Where in the constitution does it say that the government can detain people without charges, wiretap citizens, hire mercenaries, and lie to it's people to go to war?

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #5681 on:** October 23, 2009, 12:27:16 PM »

in foc's defense, he's never argued for the bush administrations civil rights violations as i recall

on the other hand, the constitution is an open, living document. it took 14 amendments just to get a humane baseline for civil rights

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #5682 on:** October 23, 2009, 01:14:58 PM »

Has Flame still not responded to Mandark's question about why he feels entitled to government run firefighting services, and not volunteer and/or privately run services?

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #5683 on:** October 23, 2009, 02:20:01 PM »

How do we know he's not out dumping a truckload of teabags on his nearest fire-hydrant?

Mandark · « **Reply #5684 on:** October 23, 2009, 03:57:31 PM »

Did you guys know that George Washington was a volunteer firefighter in his youth, roughly a century before public fire departments started popping up?

It's clear that the founders never intended for me to be taxed because FoC left the stove on.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5685 on:** October 24, 2009, 01:48:50 PM »

[youtube=560,345]frx81trnXwU[/youtube]
worst troll ever

Oblivion · « **Reply #5686 on:** October 25, 2009, 12:02:09 AM »

[youtube=560,345][/youtube]

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5687 on:** October 25, 2009, 04:07:43 AM »

Quote

Almost a year after his election as President, Barack Obama continues to lead his most likely 2012 rivals in hypothetical contests for reelection.

Obama leads Mike Huckabee 47-43, Mitt Romney 48-40, Sarah Palin 52-40, and Tim Pawlenty 50-30.

This is the seventh time PPP has conducted this poll and the seventh time Huckabee has polled closest to Obama. Speaking to the weakness of the field of potential Republican candidates he's the only with a positive favorability rating and even then it's only 33/29.

Huckabee's doing well because he connects better than the other GOP hopefuls with voters in the Midwest and South. For instance while Romney, Palin, and Pawlenty trail by 9, 17, and 18 points respectively in the Midwest Huckabee is down by just 3, something that could be a good omen for his prospects of again winning the Iowa primary as he did in 2008.

Romney is actually the most popular of the Republican candidates with independents, sporting a 38/28 favorability rating with them and holding Obama to just a 41-40 lead. One thing he'll probably have to contend with to a greater extent if he gets the 2012 nomination is his religion- 34% of respondents say they have an unfavorable opinion of it to 21% who look on it positively.

Palin's numbers have been somewhat mystifying over the last four months. Immediately after her resignation they actually improved to a positive 47/45 favorability rating. Since then though they've plummeted even with her largely out of the public eye and only 36% of voters have a favorable view of her with 51% holding a negative one. She has by far the worst numbers with both Democrats and independents.

Somewhat counterintuitively the best news in this poll might be for Tim Pawlenty. Only 27% of respondents have an opinion of him and it breaks down negatively, 16/11. He trails Obama by the widest margin. But with all of the better known Republican candidates looking pretty weak the door is really open for someone like him to step in and have a big impact on this race. No one expected Barack Obama to be the Democrats' 2008 nominee at this time four years ago, and the best hope for Republicans in 2012 may be to move beyond the Huckabee/Palin/Romney trio that all has the loser stench from last year.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-continues-to-lead-2012-contests.html

The responses are gold

Quote

Good luck on relying on pools. I get a better idea of how things really are by reading the newspapers of the states,the blogs,opinions,comments to articles. The bama is hated and he will never be re elected. Keep dreaming though if that works for you.

Quote

Huckubee,believe in globe warming,he want a cardon tax, he want to make all the illegal, legal,we need someone like Sarin Palin.

Quote

Just another misleading poll not disclosing the people they polled.

likely like that other nonsensical of WaPo that had much too high number of people polled say they were democrats and much less number say they were republicans [ie http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002282/ ]

wonder if this will get through the "moderator" aka censor on this website

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #5688 on:** October 25, 2009, 01:10:21 PM »

Too early to draw anything from these early polls except the already known. Huckabee is personable despite his bizzare religious beliefs (which a lot of the country share). Palin is essentially Hillary Clinton. Well known but favorability issues. And nobody knows or cares about the rest of the field at this stage.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #5689 on:** October 25, 2009, 02:10:54 PM »

Tim Pawlenty is like Evan Bayh: has no serious shot of making it but people keep bringing him up as a possibility anyway.

I'm pretty sure the GOP nominee will be unknown as of yet. After 2004, nobody really thought Obama was going to run in 2008 but 2012 or 2016. After 2000, people thought Lieberman was going to be the front runner and turned out to be one of the first to run out of steam. Remember all of that Mark Warner hype? Saying Huckabee or Romney is like saying Joe Lieberman or Evan Bayh at this point. They could be the ones who make it but it is too early to tell. Maybe Jindal will re-engineer a recovery.

Dickie Dee · « **Reply #5690 on:** October 25, 2009, 03:55:42 PM »

Someone raised the point the other day about how it's somewhat difficult to square away the grassroots support for Palin against the minor insurrection that occurred when Huckabee was gaining momentum. Christy's are surprisingly fickle I guess.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #5691 on:** October 25, 2009, 04:08:45 PM »

Quote from: Mamacint on October 25, 2009, 03:55:42 PM

Someone raised the point the other day about how it's somewhat difficult to square away the grassroots support for Palin against the minor insurrection that occurred when Huckabee was gaining momentum. Christy's are surprisingly fickle I guess.

The reason they rallied to Palin is simply situational. She was more preferable to them than McCain and they were looking for a reason to rally around McCain anyway so she was the outlet.

Once it become clear that she was an idiot, they doubled down their support on her and started their attacks against the elitists just because.

Both Palin and Huckabee have a lot of grassroots support from the fundie crowd. The people who don't like Huckabee is the pundit crowd in Republican circles because they think he is the Republican version of Bill Clinton.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5692 on:** October 25, 2009, 04:09:53 PM »

Rush and Co. really tried destroying Huck after Iowa, which only half worked. His campaign lost steam, but the candidate few in the GOP wanted wound up gaining the momentum. Romney didn't really benefit from that initial outrage. So when the economic conservatives throw a fit over Huck again, or sane republicans throw a fit over Palin early, who will benefit?

Mandark · « **Reply #5693 on:** October 25, 2009, 04:50:59 PM »

I'm calling the GOP nomination for Romney.

Human Snorenado · « **Reply #5694 on:** October 25, 2009, 04:54:40 PM »

I think it will be Palin; I'm not sure that we've reached Peak Wingnut just yet, and there are plenty more people out there ready to double down on the crazy in the GOP before they do some honest self-reflection... then again, these are Republicans I'm talking about here. They'll probably never do any honest self-reflection.

The only way I could see Romney getting the nomination is if the economy is still crappy/unemployment is still really high. I expect both situations to be improved enough by early 2012 to let the nuts have one last party.

Oblivion · « **Reply #5695 on:** October 25, 2009, 05:11:31 PM »

No way Palin will be the pick.There was a poll conducted like a week or two ago that had Palin's approval ratings at their lowest ever. Not to mention her opposition would have tons more ammo to attack her with (quitting her job after 2 years). She's about as popular as Dick Cheney.

Of course, this is the same party that apparently thinks they lost because they weren't conservative enough.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5696 on:** October 25, 2009, 05:24:06 PM »

Someone brought up Jindal but he's the next target for the birther movement.

Romney will be pretty open to attack from the right, especially once the health care bill is passed. I can imagine tea party wingnuts swarming polls for Palin or Huck and making Romney the liberal outcast. Independents and sane republicans will probably flock to him though. In 08 they nominated the person they felt had the best chance to win, and they'll probably do that again in 2012 - so Romney. But if the wingnuttery results in a complete sabotage of the party and rich republicans stand around the laboratory wondering why the fuck they created the Frankenstein monster/teaparty movement...Palin (or whoever her male counterpart is) could win. Those crazy people are the only people who think she can win.

Olivia Wilde Homo · « **Reply #5697 on:** October 25, 2009, 05:40:48 PM »

It'll be someone who isn't doing much right now, laying low, or behind the scenes.

Romney will get reminded that he is a Mormon every minute of his campaign. Especially if Palin is in the primaries. I don't think his used car salesman shtick is as prominent as people want it to be but who does he have backing him? He doesn't seem to have a lot of conservative groups going to bat for him. He'll do as well as he did in 2008.

I still think Palin can make it. Her Oprah appearance will make or break her, along with Going Rogue. These will be her two opportunities to get back into relevance. Plus if she has a lot of prominent neocons who take her under their wing, they can recreate her. Some conservatives will bitch but like they did with McCain, if she is the chose one, they'll all fall in line. If she flubs it, she'll end up like Bobby Jindal and I agree that this will be the end of the mavericks.

Huckabee has a shot but he doesn't carry much traction outside of the religious right. I suppose it all depends on what factions win but I can see them grimace at a Huck presidency more than a Palin one. Grass roots won't amount to much if the business interests want to go elsewhere. I think he is on the decline. Kind of a pick with the independent religious right but they'll drop him like a sack of bricks, especially if Palin gains traction.

I think it will end up being a Governor (not Rick Perry) or a Senator not yet considered. If the public option passes, then that could be an opportunity for Bill Frist to take a crack at the GOP primaries, for example. He didn't leave on bad terms and he is a medical doctor with a conservative slant, just what the GOP wants if the public option is passed.

We don't know if the teabaggers / 9-12 set will have a falling out or in-fighting like these organizations always end up having and who will be the casualties. If the economy picks up, all of the gloom and doom will look bad and end up backfiring. Which is why I am hard pressed to think any of the candidates now (Romney, Palin, Huckabee) have a serious shot in 2012.

Stoney Mason · « **Reply #5698 on:** October 25, 2009, 05:41:42 PM »

I really do think it will be Huckabee, Pawlenty, or Romney.

I think Palin is more bark than bite and she would get trounced in a general election which is exactly why I hope she actually does run and gets the nomination.

After that it breaks down like this to me. Huckabee is the toughest if he actually gets the nomination because he is so smooth and media friendly. Whatever I think about his politics or his statements on record, he is so charming at times, its hard not to like him which is an impressive ability for a politican to have.

Pawlenty is the great unknown but I think that could actually be a benefit to him. By default he immediately seems the most rational Republican around because he hasn't been in all those national turf wars.

I feel the same way about Romney as I've always felt about him. He makes a great first impression but every time you see him after that he seems less and less likable and more and more slimey.

Phoenix Dark · « **Reply #5699 on:** October 25, 2009, 06:19:42 PM »

T EXP, you're referring to the Bill Frist who supports Obamacare? I don't see that going over well with the right

Huck is a nice guy who's better at selling himself than any of the other (known) possible candidates, but he's hated in the more powerful wings of the GOP.

Romney has been quiet lately but when health care passes many of his rivals will start taking early shots at him, and I'd imagine he'll come out of his hole to defend himself.

Yea, Pawlenty is under the radar. But it seems like he's not interested in playing to a moderate crowd, and has instead jumped head first into wingnuttery. How will voters react when they discover that.

News:

Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics (Read 1866166 times)