yea sure obama will get re-elected......RIGHT !

Godfather.

With all this mess in Washington I don't see how Obama (his fault or not)will get re-elected.

(CNN) -- Tired of the partisan paralysis in Washington? Well, get used to it. The same extremist forces that brought our country to the brink of a historic default are going to get a few more chances before this year is over to show how dysfunctional our political system has become.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/05/n ... ?hpt=hp_c1




Godfather.

Who Princess

I don't know whether it will affect Obama or not. I'm not saying that out of either support for him or disagreement with him, I just can't tell yet how much people are blaming him. I didn't get any sense of that one way or the other from the article you linked either.

I DO get the feeling that people are pretty pissed with Congress. No surprise there.

Republican-held Congress shut down the government multiple times in 1995 and it came back to bite them on the ass. Clinton was still re-elected. I know, that was then and this is now, but at the moment people seem more angry with Congress than the Prez.

bootlegger10

The wake up call was coming whether it happened now or later. Now, when will all the old people wake up and realize that there isn't enough cash for Medicare and Social Security.

usamamasan1

One term occupant for sure.
Bub Bye

gimmesometruth27

bootlegger10 wrote:

The wake up call was coming whether it happened now or later. Now, when will all the old people wake up and realize that there isn't enough cash for Medicare and Social Security.

I seriously doubt that old people are ever going to vote against their own interests. And it is long established that old people are the only voting bloc to ever turn out at the polls consistently.

markin ball

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

bootlegger10 wrote:

The wake up call was coming whether it happened now or later. Now, when will all the old people wake up and realize that there isn't enough cash for Medicare and Social Security.

I seriously doubt that old people are ever going to vote against their own interests. And it is long established that old people are the only voting bloc to ever turn out at the polls consistently.

People vote against their "best interests" all the time. It's a popularity contest. McCain won the 65+ vote in 2008.

inlet13

I've said it all along. If unemployment is above 8%, he literally has ZERO change of winning. He could run against a mule and he'd lose unless a miracle occurs with the economy.

Jason P

The GOP has yet to have a serious candidate emerge ... at least one the unites the fractured base. Until they do, Obama has the advantage.

Go Beavers

The ones that took a hit in the opinion polls are the tea party people and congress. Obama's approval rating is more or less the same. Conservatives want to get there hopes up when Obama is running against a no-named candidate that they can idealize, but once a real Republican is in there, forget it. Bachmann=nuts, Romney=Mormon. Who else is a likely candidate?

keeponrockin

Jason P wrote:

The GOP has yet to have a serious candidate emerge ... at least one the unites the fractured base. Until they do, Obama has the advantage.

This.

Bachmann will get the tea party but will scare away the independents, Romney will do the opposite. The GOP is fractured right now, and one of those bases will be alienated. They tried to get both in 2008 but still scared away the independents.

unsung

Obama will get far less votes than what he got in 2008.

Prince Of Dorkness

I'm quite sure he'll get re-elected. To be honest, Republicans haven't been able to put forward anything other than insane, paranoid freaks, Christianazi fools, fruitcakes, extreme right-wing zealots and a possible child molesting serial foster parent with a gay husband who takes government money to brain butcher gay people.

And Ron Paul. Who speaks a good game but he's just another Ross Perot. Annoying little twit who will siphon off enough Republicans who don't want to vote for turd-brains to give Obama a win.

I still think we should have gone with Hillary Clinton.

usamamasan1

Yep.
Lots of fruitcakes and gays

usamamasan1

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

bootlegger10 wrote:

The wake up call was coming whether it happened now or later. Now, when will all the old people wake up and realize that there isn't enough cash for Medicare and Social Security.

I seriously doubt that old people are ever going to vote against their own interests. And it is long established that old people are the only voting bloc to ever turn out at the polls consistently.

What about all the morons who showed up last time because it was "cool".
All that hope, progress and change banter?

Hahahahahaha

FiveB247x

Does it really matter? People are enamored with what party our leaders come from instead of the cluster f' our government does regardless of partisan nonsense. Our "progressives" aren't really progressive and our "conservatives" aren't really conservative. The Green Party rules America - and no not the 3rd party, but the almighty dollar.

Who wields power is not important, provided that the same hierarchical structure remains always the same. - George Orwell

LikeAnOcean

usamamasan1 wrote:

One term occupant for sure.
Bub Bye

While I agree, given the circumstances he shouldn't be re-elected... but WHO the hell is going to beat him? Not a republican.

LikeAnOcean

usamamasan1 wrote:

Yep.
Lots of fruitcakes and gays

:?:

Go Beavers

FiveB247x wrote:

Does it really matter? People are enamored with what party our leaders come from instead of the cluster f' our government does regardless of partisan nonsense. Our "progressives" aren't really progressive and our "conservatives" aren't really conservative. The Green Party rules America - and no not the 3rd party, but the almighty dollar.

Who wields power is not important, provided that the same hierarchical structure remains always the same. - George Orwell

I can think of one thing that would be different if Gore was in office instead of Bush. We wouldn't be in Iraq. That would probably matter to the family and friends of soldiers that have been killed. The 1 trillion would be nice to have, too. (not to mention all the other f'ups from Bush)

Prince Of Dorkness

Gob wrote:

usamamasan1 wrote:

Yep.
Lots of fruitcakes and gays

:?:

He's upset with me. So he tries to take pot shots. Poorly.

Seems I got someone else's panties in a bunch.

number1PJfan

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

I'm quite sure he'll get re-elected. To be honest, Republicans haven't been able to put forward anything other than insane, paranoid freaks, Christianazi fools, fruitcakes, extreme right-wing zealots and a possible child molesting serial foster parent with a gay husband who takes government money to brain butcher gay people.

And Ron Paul. Who speaks a good game but he's just another Ross Perot. Annoying little twit who will siphon off enough Republicans who don't want to vote for turd-brains to give Obama a win.

I still think we should have gone with Hillary Clinton.

But is is scary to me how many people out there eat that shit up. Look how close we came to having Palin as a VP. They loved her. Common people love the idea of a common leader. They don't want the person who is smarter than them.

RFTC

this thread is hilarious, i hope it has legs, like 'play the south' type popularity.

some bipartisan observations;

1. obama is raising $ at a strong pace, if still 3-1 vs closest gop, not sure. he beat mcain by 380mm in 2008.
2. if his campaign is managed as well as previous, he has a chance no matter the conditions. even gop pundits applauded his 1st campaign and labeled him clintonesque in that regard.
3. the battleground states may not go his way next time, got serious doubts about PA, OH, FL. unemployment at 9%+, not good for obama.
4. the PAC's & corporate campaing contributions, the gop will win $ flow here imo.

in other words, like most things in our blessed USA, follow the $.

markin ball

We are a year out before anything serious goes down election wise. A lot can happen in a year. My point being that it is pretty much useless to make any predictions right now in my opinion.

gimmesometruth27

RFTC wrote:

this thread is hilarious, i hope it has legs, like 'play the south' type popularity.

some bipartisan observations;

1. obama is raising $ at a strong pace, if still 3-1 vs closest gop, not sure. he beat mcain by 380mm in 2008.
2. if his campaign is managed as well as previous, he has a chance no matter the conditions. even gop pundits applauded his 1st campaign and labeled him clintonesque in that regard.
3. the battleground states may not go his way next time, got serious doubts about PA, OH, FL. unemployment at 9%+, not good for obama.
4. the PAC's & corporate campaing contributions, the gop will win $ flow here imo.

in other words, like most things in our blessed USA, follow the $.

i agree with a lot of what you say here, but much like in wisconsin and indiania,i don't think ohio will support any republicans with all of the union busting going on there.

brianlux

I have to agree with what some of the others are saying here- that the GOP is so splintered and confused right now there's no way a Republican will be elected and no third party either- not even close. Obama has been a bit of a disappointment to me but not hugely so. Think about it- how much power does one man really have? It seems so weird to me that people blame OR credit one man or woman for so much. That's just not reality. And no matter what you think of Obama, we survived two terms of Bush-- so what's the fuss? I think all the Obama bashing is just people using the man as a scape goat for much bigger, more wide spread conditions and behaviors that over several years have led to our current economic and environmental problems. It's an easy way to blame someone and not look at the big picture. America seems to be having a difficult time in a big way with facing reality.

The Waiting Trophy Man

Godfather. wrote:

With all this mess in Washington I don't see how Obama (his fault or not)will get re-elected.

This is exactly what they were saying about Bush in 2004 and he won in a landslide. I expect the same for Obama. Then the republicans will win the white house in 2016 and the cycle will continue....

Godfather.

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

I'm quite sure he'll get re-elected. To be honest, Republicans haven't been able to put forward anything other than insane, paranoid freaks, Christianazi fools, fruitcakes, extreme right-wing zealots and a possible child molesting serial foster parent with a gay husband who takes government money to brain butcher gay people.

And Ron Paul. Who speaks a good game but he's just another Ross Perot. Annoying little twit who will siphon off enough Republicans who don't want to vote for turd-brains to give Obama a win.

I still think we should have gone with Hillary Clinton.

fruitcakes ? interesting choice of word's just messin with ya man.

Godfather.

Go Beavers

The Waiting Trophy Man wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

With all this mess in Washington I don't see how Obama (his fault or not)will get re-elected.

This is exactly what they were saying about Bush in 2004 and he won in a landslide. I expect the same for Obama. Then the republicans will win the white house in 2016 and the cycle will continue....

286 Electoral votes to Kerry's 251 isn't really a landslide.

Godfather.

brianlux wrote:

I have to agree with what some of the others are saying here- that the GOP is so splintered and confused right now there's no way a Republican will be elected and no third party either- not even close. Obama has been a bit of a disappointment to me but not hugely so. Think about it- how much power does one man really have? It seems so weird to me that people blame OR credit one man or woman for so much. That's just not reality. And no matter what you think of Obama, we survived two terms of Bush-- so what's the fuss? I think all the Obama bashing is just people using the man as a scape goat for much bigger, more wide spread conditions and behaviors that over several years have led to our current economic and environmental problems. It's an easy way to blame someone and not look at the big picture. America seems to be having a difficult time in a big way with facing reality.

it just seems to me that Reagen Clinton(just to name a few) and Bush seemed to have more control in the whitehouse than Obama has,I am probably wrong but it just looks that way to me.

Godfather.

pandora

He gives a damn fine speech... this sways voters

ed243421

pandora wrote:

He gives a damn fine speech... this sways voters

this is why the government and polititians and most voters in this country suck ass

someone writes some bullshit on a teleprompter for a president to read

and the sheep fall head over heels for a wolf

stop believing everything that people tell you

brianlux

Godfather. wrote:

brianlux wrote:

I have to agree with what some of the others are saying here- that the GOP is so splintered and confused right now there's no way a Republican will be elected and no third party either- not even close. Obama has been a bit of a disappointment to me but not hugely so. Think about it- how much power does one man really have? It seems so weird to me that people blame OR credit one man or woman for so much. That's just not reality. And no matter what you think of Obama, we survived two terms of Bush-- so what's the fuss? I think all the Obama bashing is just people using the man as a scape goat for much bigger, more wide spread conditions and behaviors that over several years have led to our current economic and environmental problems. It's an easy way to blame someone and not look at the big picture. America seems to be having a difficult time in a big way with facing reality.

it just seems to me that Reagen Clinton(just to name a few) and Bush seemed to have more control in the whitehouse than Obama has,I am probably wrong but it just looks that way to me.

Godfather.

I agree. That's one of the things that disappoints many people about Obama- he doesn't seem to have that "in charge" character that other presidents had. Of course neither did our last president. But I can't help wonder if a) that's because Obama has his hands tied so-to-speak and b) goes back to my premise of should one man or woman really have that much power? I sort of joke when I say we should have a king or queen instead of a president- just someone to represent us as a nation and stand up there and look good and make the executive branch a commitee rather a single person- but maybe that's not such a rediculous idea after all.