Prepare the boner jokes!
- Join Date
- Sep 2006
- Location
- Moorhead, MN, USA
- Posts
- 14,442
Prepare the boner jokes!
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
I am not so sure. What if the economy improves substantially?Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough
President Obama will win re-election in 2012 according to the Lichtmann Test:
KEY 1 (Party Mandate): After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. This is certain to be FALSE
KEY 2 (Contest): There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. Almost certainly TRUE
KEY 3 (Incumbency): The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. TRUE
KEY 4 (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. Most likely TRUE
KEY 5 (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Probably true, but for now unknown
KEY 6 (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Unknown. Likely true though considering the worst drop in growth happened under Bush and we're now getting out of that.
KEY 7 (Policy change): The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. TRUE
KEY 8 (Social unrest): There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE. Teabaggers holding stupid misspelled signs don't count if the anti-Iraq war movement didn't.
KEY 9 (Scandal): The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. For the time being, true. Unknown long term
KEY 10 (Foreign/military failure): The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. For the time being, probably true, it remains to be seen if Afghanistan is not seen as such though.
KEY 11 (Foreign/military success): The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. Unknown. It's possible Obama could spin Iraq withdrawl as such.
KEY 12 (Incumbent charisma): The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic, or a national hero. TRUE. Obama is still charismatic.
KEY 13 (Challenger charisma): The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic, or a national hero. Unknown, but likely true.
So far most of the predictors are true or are likely to be true. The only apparent FALSE is that the President's Party is likely to lose Seats in Congress in net.
Now let's look at a loser (Jimmy Carter, 1980):
KEY 1 (Party Mandate): After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. FALSE
15 House seats lost. Tough standard; most Presidents' Parties lose some House seats in the midterm election. Obama can lose much more.
KEY 2 (Contest): There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. FALSE
Ted Kennedy.
KEY 3 (Incumbency): The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. TRUE
Incumbent Presidents have won 8 of the last 13 Presidential elections for which they ran. A huge, but far-from decisive key.
KEY 4 (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. FALSE
John Anderson, basically a moderate Republican who could win some Republicans who were uncomfortable with Ronald Reagan and some Democrats who couldn't quite bring themselves to vote for Carter. Reagan still barely won the popular vote nationwide, but Carter was creamed.
KEY 5 (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
FALSE -- not yet out of the stagflation.
KEY 6 (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms
FALSE
Lots of youth entering the job market, and they were not doing well.
KEY 7 (Policy change): The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
FALSE
His biggest legislative achievement was to split the Department of Education from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. In 1980 he still had to make fresh promises, and it was too late.
KEY 8 (Social unrest): There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE.
The first positive for Jimmy Carter other than incumbency.
KEY 9 (Scandal): The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
TRUE Jimmy Carter did run one of the most ethical administrations in American history.
KEY 10 (Foreign/military failure): The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs
FALSE. The Iranian hostage crisis sealed his defeat.
KEY 11 (Foreign/military success): The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
TRUE -- Camp David Accords. But Key #10 apparently mattered far more in 1980.
KEY 12 (Incumbent charisma): The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic, or a national hero.
FALSE. Carter wasn't particularly charismatic.
KEY 13 (Challenger charisma): The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic, or a national hero
FALSE -- Ronald Reagan.
Jimmy Carter 1980 -- four positives, nine negatives.
Even for a bare winner, the positives can be strong, as with George W. Bush in 2004:
KEY 1 (Party Mandate): After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. FALSE
Republicans gained 2. TRUE. Barely. Probably not without 9/11 and its aftermath, but still TRUE.
KEY 2 (Contest): There is no serious contest for the incumbent-party nomination. TRUE
KEY 3 (Incumbency): The incumbent-party candidate is the sitting president. TRUE
Incumbent Presidents have won 8 of the last 13 Presidential elections for which they ran. A huge, but a far-from-decisive key.
KEY 4 (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. TRUE
KEY 5 (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
TRUE -- It may have been on the brink of collapse, but it hadn't yet.
KEY 6 (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms
TRUE Ambiguous. The real estate meltdown had yet to happen.
KEY 7 (Policy change): The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy
FALSE
More legislation than under Jimmy Carter, but on the whole rather weak. Biggest were Medicare D, the Patriot Act, Sarbanes-Oxley, and No Child Left Behind. All remain controversial except Sarbanes-Oxley (a response to the failure of Enron Corporation). The rest was mostly grandstanding on pet issues.
KEY 8 (Social unrest): There is no sustained social unrest during the term. TRUE.
KEY 9 (Scandal): The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
TRUE There was the CIA Leak scandal, but the President got away with it.
KEY 10 (Foreign/military failure): The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
TRUE. Bungled wars would hurt the Republican nominee, but not until 2008.
KEY 11 (Foreign/military success): The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
TRUE
Mission Accomplished, even if it was empty.
KEY 12 (Incumbent charisma): The incumbent-party candidate is charismatic, or a national hero.
FALSE. It's George W. Bush
KEY 13 (Challenger charisma): The challenging-party candidate is not charismatic, or a national hero
FALSE -- John Kerry, at the least a war hero.
Ten positive, three negative. Three of the positive were best described as "got away with it".
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
"KEY 4 (Third party): There is no significant third-party or independent campaign. Most likely TRUE"
Uh-uh. The Tea Party.
"KEY 5 (Short-term economy): The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Probably true, but for now unknown
KEY 6 (Long-term economy): Real per-capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Unknown. Likely true though considering the worst drop in growth happened under Bush and we're now getting out of that."
If you believe those, I have a "Prosperity is Just Around the Corner" button I can sell you as soon as I get it made up.
The Tea Party is not a third party as they will vote for Republicans.
The Tea Party, as far as I can see, is a wing of the GOP. I don't see Tea Partiers running as Independents in this cycle, do you?
I don't see them running a third party candidate for President in 2012, unless, possibly, an establishment figure like Romney gets the nod. And I don't see Romney getting through the primaries, which are dominated by the parties' bases.
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008
Indeed, if they did run as independents or as a formal third party, they would take votes away from the Republican nominee more than from President Obama. A third party or independent grabbing a part of the political center like Ross Perot or John Anderson in 1980
seemed to be, or one on the same side of the political spectrum as the President (a strong Green or Socialist) would be trouble for the President in what might otherwise be a close race.
The Tea Party is for all practical purposes a faction of the GOP.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
The Tea Party is the GOP by another name.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
No, not "The GOP". They are a wing of the GOP.
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008
Agreed. It's a function of set theory. The set of all Republicans includes but is not limited to the set of all Tea Party folks. Or, to put it another way, all Tea Partiers are Republicans, but not all Republicans are Tea Partiers.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"
My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/
The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903
I have to disagree a bit. There are TPers that are totally unaligned, mostly due their hate of politicians in general. There are others from the fringe parties, like the Constitutional and Libertarian Parties. I'll wager that some are conservative Democrats.Agreed. It's a function of set theory. The set of all Republicans includes but is not limited to the set of all Tea Party folks. Or, to put it another way, all Tea Partiers are Republicans, but not all Republicans are Tea Partiers.No, not "The GOP". They are a wing of the GOP.
TPers are just mad. Anyone can be mad. The GOP has more than anyone else, though.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.
I'd classify the tea partiers as partially dissaffected Repubs, many who sat out the 2006 and 2008 elections. Those who were disgusted from the spending spree the GOP went on in the mid 00's. Another group of tea partiers are former "Perotistas", those worried most about the deficit and spending, but are socially moderate. There are some conservative Dems who will support faux conservative Dems like Jim Webb etc. They generally support Repubs at the Presidential level although Obama was able to capture many of them in 08 (he's lost them now). There are, of course, traditional Repubs like me who would like to see the GOP leadership (read Boomers) to be overthrown with generally younger Xish leaders replacing them.
How would that change Republican policies?
Sarah Palin, Reality Show Star
What do you think about Sarah Palin becoming a Reality Show star? I watched Dancing with the Stars (found the performances of 77-year-old Florence Henderson and 50-year-old Jennifer Gray to be inspiring) and Bristol Palin takes her pro dancing partner up to Wasilla to see her Mom. And of course, TLC is also featuring Sarah Palin's Alaska, where Sarah Palin becomes a tour guide.
What's all this about? My thought is that Palin is trying to humanize herself so that she can gain acceptance by middle America in a way that she couldn't if she stayed in political office and had to make nasty votes that alienate independents and moderates. With her bonifides as a "nice down to earth" person, she then runs for President.
If that's the case, shame on the TV networks, especially ABC and TLC, for promoting her cause.
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008
Her liability is the issue of preparedness for the job. Being on reality TV shows is not going to change that. She needs to get involved in substantive policy issues if she wants to run.
The networks arent interested in "her cause", they are interested in ratings. She has a large appeal to certain groups. As far as running for President, we have already seen what happens when a political neophyte like Obama becomes President.....Although I will say, after the grilling she has received over the last 2 years, if she were a Pres, she'd have a thick skin....unlike our current Pres who was never properly scrutinized by a fawning liberal media and now seems dazed by the sudden tough questions aimed at him......
Personally, she wont get my support unless she reenters politics and becomes a Senator or something and gets more experience. I guess if it came down to her and Obama i'd hold my nose and vote for her but it'd be a tough vote.
I think the Xer leadership will be more willing to make compromises and more willing to attack the problems instead of each other. There will be less ideology and more deals...will ideology disappear? Of course not, but it could be less of a factor......
I read a view on another blog that Palin is a new form of Oprah Winfrey and, if she's smart, will stick to that instead of trying to run for office again.
There are people who want to hear what she has to say (just like Glen Beck), but they would never want her actually governing them. Instead, her supporters want to hear her point of view and feel like she "gets" them, but they recognize that she doesn't have the experience or skill to solve the country's problems.
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." —Albert Einstein
"The road to perdition has ever been accompanied by lip service to an ideal." —Albert Einstein
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein
I would vote enthusiastically for a ham sandwich against Obama in 2012. But I'm not the one she has to convince.
I suspect the Republicans will come up with a candidate more viable than Sarah Palin by then. I don't see any really good options, but that one is so amazingly bad that the only reason I can see for nominating her is to get her out of the way in a throwaway year.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"
My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/
The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903
Yep, some are... at least according to a friend of mine who is a TP supporter (or was, last time we spoke on the subject).
"Better hurry. There's a storm coming. His storm!!!" :-O -Abigail Freemantle, "The Stand" by Stephen King
The only way it could be a throwaway year is if there is a massive economic rebound like there was before the 1984 election, with 8-9% quarterly growth and unemployment dropping several percentage points. That's extremely unlikely. The health care bill is going to be an albatross around the necks of Democrats until it is either mostly or fully repealed, but it is also going to do massive damage to the economy and the federal budget as its provisions kick in. Throw tax hikes on top of that, and there is nowhere for the Democrats to go but down.
Unless they reverse course completely and run screaming to the center, as many of their congressional candidates are (hopelessly) trying to do, I would put Obama's chances at re-election below 50-50. If seeing your own party members running ads against you isn't enough to wake them up, nothing will be. And they will continue to suffer losses until they do.
I disagree. The only way it could fail to be a throwaway year is if there is a further huge breakdown and Obama gets the blame for it. We be 4T, after all.
However, that's not really the question; the question is whether the Republican movers and shakers think it's a throwaway year, not whether it really is one. If they do, then tossing Palin to the wolves may seem like a good strategy. If not, then they will want to find someone they think has a chance to win the election.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"
My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/
The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903
People who identify themselves as Tea Party members tend to be fairly socially conservative, they feel that the nation is changing way too fast for their tastes, feel they are getting left behind economically and will vote for the party of Wall Street and the rich as their solution.
Go figure.
from Brian
.However, that's not really the question; the question is whether the Republican movers and shakers think it's a throwaway year, not whether it really is one. If they do, then tossing Palin to the wolves may seem like a good strategy. If not, then they will want to find someone they think has a chance to win the election
Well put. After all, it took a thrashing because of Barry Goldwater for the GOP to rebuild into the Reagan revolution. Maybe not putting up too much of a fuss among the Wall Street wing in 2012 and letting Palin get burned at the electoral stake may be a solid idea for them in the long run.
btw - does anyone in power ever even think about the long run anymore? Just asking.
Last edited by haymarket martyr; 09-28-2010 at 05:13 PM.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
They are the John Birch Society, V 2.0
Please, we need NEW information and insight.
