Political & Elections

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: If you thought the 2008 campaign was bad, buckle up


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 660
Date: Nov 10, 2011
RE: If you thought the 2008 campaign was bad, buckle up
Permalink  
 


Other than the moderators, Romney and Hunstman were the only adults in the room



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1124
Date: Nov 10, 2011
Permalink  
 

I also noticed this very nice moment in last night's debate: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-nice-guy-in-a-season-of-nastiness

As Perry was free-falling into the abyss of lost thoughts Wednesday night, he turned to his fellow contestants as if to say, “Please, someone, can’t you tell me what I think?

Unhelpfully, Ron Paul suggested there were really five agencies he should cut. And then someone did try to help him, and this to me was the most memorable moment of the evening. From somewhere on the panel, a voice reached out to the struggling Texan, a suggestion that might help Perry gather himself and emerge from this utter humiliation.

The voice belonged to Mitt Romney. As Perry’s brain was hardening into arctic pack ice, Romney suggested that maybe the third agency he wanted to eliminate was the EPA. Yeah, that’s it! But no, it wasn’t. Pressed by Harwood, Perry said it wasn’t the EPA, but blast if he could remember what it was. (Later he said it was Energy.)

Romney’s suggestion when most of the others were squirmingly silent was an act of pure kindness and self-sacrificing generosity. It was not especially noticeable. But if you were Rick Perry in that moment, you were well aware that Romney was the one who tried to save you. When Perry finally said, “Oops,” it was Romney toward whom he looked.



-- Edited by hope on Thursday 10th of November 2011 04:05:32 PM

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2549
Date: Nov 8, 2011
Permalink  
 

MR still is in the lead with HC who has too big of  a core.evileye

 

 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 289
Date: Nov 8, 2011
Permalink  
 

Well I suppose that proves it then! If the liberals' favorite Republican candidate says it, it must be so!  :)

awwThe problem for Romney, apparently, is that a great percentage of GOP base voters believe his has no core either. Can you identify Romney's core, hope?



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1124
Date: Nov 6, 2011
Permalink  
 

Well I suppose that proves it then! If the liberals' favorite Republican candidate says it, it must be so!  :)



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 582
Date: Nov 6, 2011
Permalink  
 

Jon Huntsman agrees that Romney has no core.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 186
Date: Nov 6, 2011
Permalink  
 

2008 was not bad at all...Obama had a free pass from the media. I race can't really can't get "ugly" when the media is ga ga over one of the candidates.

It will be interesting to see if the media holds Obama's feet to the fire this time around. You would think that with the economy in the tank and one failed policy after another, that they would.
They probably won't though, but hopefully the American people fooled last time around will come to their senses.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1124
Date: Nov 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

Oope...labeling "Romney." What happened to the edit button?



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1124
Date: Nov 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

I wonder how this will really play out. Axelrod and Plouffe labeling Obama "the hollow man." Like Obama isn't?

From The New Republic:

 

The Wizard of Oz Attack

After David Plouffe declared yesterday on Meet the Press that Mitt Romney "has no core," Republicans flew into a state of high dudgeon. GOP consultant Mike Murphy, for one, called it a "step too far" and demanded a White House apology for the remark. But if this is a step too far, then it's one that's been taken long before now. The Obama reelection team and the DNC have clearly decided that simply branding Romney a flip-flopper is not sufficient -- that to really capture his lack of conviction, one needs to take inspiration from L. Frank Baum and declare Romney to be a hollow man, a man lacking an essential something inside.

When the DNC earlier this month debuted Whichmitt.com, a new site mocking Romney's switcheroos, party spokesman Brad Woodhouse said it was meant to demonstrate that Romney "has no core convictions or values." David Axelrod took it a step further when he declared on the CBS Early Morning Show on October 19 that "there is a sense there is no core to him." Plouffe did not cross a line -- he was repeating a line.

There's no doubt that this is a fruitful line of attack on Romney, given that the candidate seems unable to keep from continuing to provide examples of core-lessness -- on Ohio unions, on climate change, you name it. But even as the Obama machine is seeking cast Romney as some core-less automaton, I got a small reminder over the weekend that Romney's approach to making decisions on big issues is eerily reminiscent of a certain someone else's. I was reading Ben Wallace-Wells' excellent piece on Romney's rise at Bain Capital when I came across this bit:

Romney never worked from any particular “macro theme,” any philosophy of how the economy was moving. What he employed instead was an exhausting habit of playing devil’s advocate, proposing sequential objections to a particular project or idea, until eventually, through a kind of Darwinian process, consensus was reached. “I never viewed Mitt as very decisive,” says one of his Bain Capital colleagues. “The idea was that if there’s enough argument around an issue by bright people, ultimately the data will prevail.”

Hmm. A politician who considers himself driven more by case-by-case pragmatism than any overarching philosophy, who likes to get all the smartest people in the room to hash out an issue, probing each side with questions and counters to arrive at some kind of workable middle ground. Does that sound familiar? Barack Obama has managed to avoid the flip-flopper label; his harshest critics on the other side, after all, argue that there is a very clear conviction within him, that of an ardent redistributionist; his sympathetic critics on the left, meanwhile, chalk up his equivocations more to his conciliatory instincts than to mere political trimming. Still, it's striking that for all the talk of next year's election representing a grand clash of political visions, a Romney-Obama race would also represent a contest between two men who are, despite their sharply contrasting backgrounds, perhaps not as dissimilar as they would like to believe in some aspects of leadership and decision-making.


 


__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 660
Date: Nov 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

I don't think that Obama will have as hard a time as some are predicting.  He will be running against a party of morons who their hero - Reagan wouldn't recognize.



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
Date: Nov 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

It's predicted to be even uglier.

http://news.yahoo.com/2012-race-likely-close-tough-maybe-brutal-132752405.html

2012 race likely to be close, tough, maybe brutal

WASHINGTON (AP) — One year to go until Election Day and the Republican presidential field is deeply unsettled, leaving President Barack Obama only to guess who his opponent will be. But the race's contours are starting to come into view.

It's virtually certain that the campaign will be a close, grinding affair, markedly different from the 2008 race. It will play out amid widespread economic anxiety and heightened public resentment of government and politicians.

Americans who were drawn to the drama of Obama's barrier-breaking battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton, and the up-and-down fortunes of John McCain and Sarah Palin, are likely to see a more partisan contest this time, with Ohio and Florida playing crucial roles as they did in 2000 and 2004.

Republicans have their script; they just need to pick the person to deliver it. It will portray Obama as a failed leader who backs away when challenged and who doesn't understand what it takes to create jobs and spur business investment.

Obama will highlight his opponent's ties to the tea party and its priorities. He will say Republicans are obsessed with protecting millionaires' tax cuts while the federal debt soars and working people struggle.

On several issues, voters will see a more distinct contrast between the nominees than in 2008. Even the most moderate Republican candidates have staked out more rigidly conservative views on immigration, taxes and spending than did Arizona Sen. McCain.

Democrats say Obama has little control over the two biggest impediments to his re-election: unemployment and congressional gridlock.

The jobless rate will stand at levels that have not led to a president's re-election since the Great Depression. Largely because of that, Obama will run a much more negative campaign, his aides acknowledge, even if it threatens to demoralize some supporters who were inspired by his 2008 message of hope.

The tea party, one of the modern era's most intriguing and effective political movements, will play its first role in a presidential race. After helping Republicans win huge victories in last year's congressional elections, activists may push the GOP presidential contenders so far right that the eventual nominee will struggle to appeal to independents.

"It's going to be extremely different, with much more hand-to-hand combat, from one foxhole to another, targeted to key states," said Chris Lehane, who helped run Democrat Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign.

Republican consultant Terry Holt agreed. "You can expect a very negative campaign," he said. "In 2008, Barack Obama was peddling hope and change. Now he's peddling fear and poverty."

Obama and his aides reject that characterization, of course. They say the Republican candidates are under the tea party's spell, noting that all of them said they would reject a deficit-reduction plan even if it included $10 in spending cuts for every dollar in new taxes.

Both parties agree that jobs will be the main issue. The White House predicts unemployment will hover around 9 percent for at least a year, a frighteningly high level for a president seeking a second term.

GOP lawmakers, who control the House and have filibuster power in the Senate, have blocked Obama's job proposals, mainly because they would raise taxes on the wealthy. The candidates, echoing their Republican colleagues in Congress, say new jobs will follow cuts in taxes, regulation and federal spending.

With the economy struggling and Obama hemmed in legislatively, his advisers sometimes say the election will be a choice between the president and his challenger, rather than a referendum on the administration's performance.

"That's a very genteel way of saying 'Were going to rip your face off,'" said Dan Schnur, a former aide to McCain and other Republicans, and now a politics professor at the University of Southern California. Obama has little choice but to try to portray the GOP alternative as worse than his own disappointing record, Schnur said.

Some Republican candidates would be tougher targets than others. Texas Gov. Rick Perry promotes his state's significant job growth, leaving Democrats to grouse that he was a lucky bystander rather than the cause.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney says his years in the private sector make him best suited to lead an economic expansion. But Obama's allies have gathered details of jobs that were eliminated when Bain Capital, a takeover firm that Romney headed, restructured several companies.

Obama can't fine-tune his strategy until Republicans pick their nominee, and that may take months. So he's spending part of this year traveling to some of the most contested states, telling disappointed liberals he still deserves their strong backing and trying to convince centrists that he can revive the economy.

Obama's overall job-approval rating was 46 percent in an Associated Press-GfK poll from October. Only 36 percent of adults approved of his handling of the economy, a worrisome number for any incumbent.

Yet 78 percent said he's a likeable person, which forces Republicans to be careful. It's possible Obama will run a more cut-throat campaign than will his challenger. For now, anyway, Romney calls Obama "is a nice guy" who doesn't know how to lead.

Republican insiders see Romney as their most plausible nominee. He has run the steadiest and best-financed campaign thus far, relying on lessons and friends picked up in his 2008 bid.

But the GOP race has been unpredictable, and Romney has struggled to exceed one-fourth of the support in Republican polls. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota emerged as his main challenger last summer, only to be supplanted by Perry. A few halting debate performances hurt Perry, and former pizza company executive Herman Cain replaced him at or near the top of the polls, along with Romney.

Last week, Cain tried to swat down allegations of sex harassment from the 1990s. Party activists are waiting for the impact. Some, however, think Cain's lack of political experience and his unorthodox style, which includes largely ignoring Iowa and New Hampshire, are more likely to bring him down.

Two schools of thought run through Republican circles. One holds that Romney is the logical nominee and will consolidate the party's somewhat grudging support after conservatives stop flirting with longshots such as Bachmann and Cain. Republicans have a history of nominating the runner-up from previous primaries, and Romney fits that bill.

The competing theory holds that Americans are angrier at government and the two parties than political pros realize, and the tea party is just the start of a potent, long-lasting movement. Under this scenario, Romney can never placate conservative voters because of his establishment ties and the more liberal positions he once held on abortion, gay rights and gun control.

If this view is right, the shifting support for Bachmann, Perry and Cain is more than a flirtation, and someone will emerge as the "non-Romney" who wins the nomination.

Veterans of past presidential campaigns tend to doubt this outcome. But even with Obama's economic woes, plenty of Republican insiders worry that Romney's inconsistency on important issues and voters' doubts about his authenticity could let the president slip away.

Romney should have put his GOP rivals "in the rear-view mirror" by now, said Mike McKenna, a Republican lobbyist who has tracked focus groups and polls in various states. "The problem is, a huge part of the party views him as a third Bush term."

McKenna said pundits don't realize that the tea party movement was as much a rejection of the high-spending, high-deficit practices of President George W. Bush and Republican lawmakers as it was a reaction against Obama's health care plan. With his ties to New England and the party establishment, Romney "looks like the lineal descendant of Bush," McKenna said.

He said he fears that a lot of conservatives will sit out the 2012 election if Romney is the nominee.

Plenty of strategists reject that view. They think conservatives' deep antipathy toward Obama will cause them to overcome their misgivings and fully back Romney.

David Axelrod, Obama's top political adviser, points to issues Obama can cite success on, from health care and undermining al-Qaida to reviving the auto industry and ending the Iraq war.

"We're going to have a very robust debate," he said. "The Republicans say if we just cut taxes and spending and regulations, we will grow. And I think the American people understand it's more complicated than that."



-- Edited by SamuraiLandshark on Saturday 5th of November 2011 08:07:07 AM

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard