Tuesday, October 11, 2011

Soon there will be plenty of time for golf - James Taranto: "The Left's nervous breakdown"  "Not only does Obama's re-election look to be in serious jeopardy, but his presidency has been an almost unmitigated disaster for progressive liberalism, nearly every tenet of which has been revealed to be untenable either practically, politically or both."

When it comes to economic policy, Patterico has it right: either the Obama administration stinks at making predictions or its policies are making things worse.  So it's no surprise "Stimulus Jr." is going nowhere.


Mm hmm. said...

Somebody really needs to compile these "Doom! DOOOOOM!!!!" columns so we can enjoy a good laugh during the cold, cold winter after next.

Several polls from 1995 and early 1996 had Dole beating Clinton. In January 2004, polls showed that a little over a third of voters wanted Bush reelected.

If President Obama's margin of victory is shaved from 7% to just 3-4%, the GOP will have done well.

Anonymous said...

James Taranto, Wall Street Journal:
nearly every tenet of [progressive liberalism] has been revealed to be untenable either practically, politically or both."

Quoted for truth! The people have spoken, and nobody has a surer understanding of the reality of the marketplace than the Wall Street Journal.


Eric said...

Mm hmm, and how was the unemployment rate when Clinton and Bush were re-elected?

I'm sure America will be clamoring for four more years of "somebody else's fault."

Mm hmm. said...

Different elections have ways in which they differ. This is checkmate?

As for this election, President Obama has most of the advantages, including the central circumstance that's not going away. Clinton and Bush, both "losing" one year out, handily defeated candidates who were stronger than any currently available opponent. The 2012 GOP would kill to end up with a candidate with the appeal and electability of Bob Dole or John Kerry. But until that dream is realized, perhaps Trump/Bachmann/Perry/Christie/Cain/Spider-Man will swoop in and save the day!

Obama is going to be reelected. The Republicans' goal is to cut down the margin to the point where they can retain the House. The Senate will be flipping.

Anonymous said...

I'm old enough to remember the Carter Administration. This has much the same feel - maybe worse. Sure Carter was bad, but he was a former businessman who started the deregulation ball rolling.

Even before Reagan was the nominee, you could see the landslide coming. Failed Presidents don't win re-elections.

Anonymous said...

1. Obama = Carter
2. Romney = Reagan
3. ?

Anonymous said...

Yep. Obama is a lock. Heck, I wouldn't even bother to vote for him, he is such a lock....

Anonymous said...

Obama's a lock like the 18-0 New England Patriots were a lock going into the Super Bowl. Greatly favored, and with very good reason. Play the game 100 times and they go 90-10 or 95-5.

But if, as happened in the game, the GOP makes a one-handed catch on the back of its helmet? Then yes, the Republicans will win.

Anonymous said...

Yep. A lock. I mean, who wouldn't want four more years of this?

Anonymous said...

Anyone who remembers eight years of that? Which every poll says two-thirds of voters still do? Good luck convincing them that "blaming Bush" was soooo 2007.

Your main problem was encapsulated by a headline from the Onion: Handmade Anti-Obama Sign Currently Frontrunner For Republican Presidential Nomination

Anonymous said...

Obama's problem is, the more people learn about him, the less they like what they see. Most observers would acknowledge that he was a bit of a "blank slate" back in 2008. That blank slate has been filled in with actual performance, and most people find that performance lacking. Most disturbing for his reelection efforts, is the significant fall off in support from independents. That change among independent voters appears to be hardening, and he will be hard-pressed to win them back, and, more likely, it will continue to erode--unless something dramatic occurs. But--your thoughts are apparently different.

Anonymous said...

Obama's weakness must be why all the A-list Republican options decided to sit it out and keep their powder dry for 2016.

Look out, Obama. Upcoming-Opponent-We-Desperately-Tried-To-Replace-With-Chris-Christie-Five-Minutes-Ago is gonna crush you!

Getting back to the first post of this thread, incumbent G.W. Bush "bounced back" from the numbers he had a year away from the actual election. So did Clinton before him. So did Reagan. So did Jimmy Freakin' Carter and Gerald Razzinfrazzin' Ford, both of whom surged into unexpected ties at the next-to-last minute before losing. It's what incumbents do.

So, if as we're hearing, Obama only has a 50/50 shot in 2012 - a dubious proposition, but let's go with it - what do you think happens when he "bounces back" from those numbers? Especially since he won't exactly be facing a Reagan/Clinton-caliber opponent.