U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-18-2010, 03:26 PM
 
31,371 posts, read 33,892,042 times
Reputation: 14934

Advertisements

I am constantly reading some thread about Obama's polls, predictions of being a one term president, of all sorts of soothsaying, tea leaf reading, and other attempts at prognostication of incipient conservative electoral victories.

A few words of caution. In the run up the 2004 presidential election, with two wars going nowhere, the economy barely limping along, you couldn't find a Democrat who believed that it would be possible for President George W. Bush to win reelection. Well we all know how that turned out.

Folks who make a living at electoral politics will tell you that the 2010 elections in political years is a life time, 2012 might has well be in the next millennium. So, let's hold off on the poll watching electoral prognostication until at least Labor Day. It could be as important to your health and sanity as healthcare.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-18-2010, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
680 posts, read 1,254,638 times
Reputation: 508
Agreed on the 2012 election, but it's hard to make a case for anything but a repeat of what happened to Clinton after his first 2 years in office. I firmly believe that the GOP will enjoy quite a landslide in this year's elections.

After that, it's anyone's guess. You gave the example of Bush being reelected. Same thing with Clinton. Even though Gingrich helped sweep the GOP into power with his Contract With America, Clinton won reelection two years later.

It's impossible to predict what will happen. It will depend a lot on what happens with the economy, which is almost entirely out of the control of the president. Clinton got lucky with the dot com boom. Perhaps Obama will get bailed out by some unforeseen cause of a recovery, for which he will receive credit.

Obama gives good speeches, he's a moderate (in spite of all the irrational screaming about Socialism coming from the millions of racists who are terrified of losing a majority White America), and he's very likable. These qualities give him a leg-up on any competition as long as there are no major factors that work against him, such as new terror attacks or a worsening economy.

In summation, we have no clue who will be elected president in 2012.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Southeast
4,296 posts, read 6,533,820 times
Reputation: 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
A few words of caution. In the run up the 2004 presidential election, with two wars going nowhere, the economy barely limping along, you couldn't find a Democrat who believed that it would be possible for President George W. Bush to win reelection. Well we all know how that turned out.
Just FYI, the economy was doing reasonably well in 2004, unemployment was at 5.4% and quarterly growth one year prior was 3.6% 2.8% 2.9% and 3.0% respectively (4Q '03 - 3Q '04). By comparison to previous incumbents; in November of 1996 the unemployment rate was also at 5.4%, growth for the previous year was 2.8% 2.8% 7.1% and 3.5% respectively (4Q '95 - 3Q '96). At Reagan's re-election in 1984, unemployment stood at 7.2% with previous year quarterly growth being 8.5% 8.0% 7.1% and 3.9% respectively (4Q '83 - 3Q '84).

The economy is important to re-election of a president or the incumbent party, although it did not seem to help Gore in 2000.. Indeed 2012 is a long way off politically speaking, anything can happen between now and then..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Land of debt and Corruption
7,544 posts, read 7,635,567 times
Reputation: 2883
Well 2012 IS indeed a long ways off. I think the strengths and the weaknesses of the challenger have just as much to do with the incumbent's re-election as the strengths of the incumbent himself. People will often settle for status quo rather than an unknown (speaking in general terms, not referring to any particular presidential race). Kerry was as much of a poor candidate as people were complacent with the job Bush was doing at the time during the 2004 elections.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:10 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
680 posts, read 1,254,638 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
Well 2012 IS indeed a long ways off. I think the strengths and the weaknesses of the challenger have just as much to do with the incumbent's re-election as the strengths of the incumbent himself.
That is SO true. While the Democrats were likely to win big in 2008 no matter who was at the top of the ticket, Obama probably won the nomination due to his excellence in campaigning and the fact that he brought millions into the voting booths who ordinarily would stay home. As always, the GOP candidate (McCain) won the white vote. No Democratic presidential candidate has won the white vote since Kennedy (if I have my facts straight... maybe even he didn't cut it.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay View Post
Kerry was as much of a poor candidate as people were complacent with the job Bush was doing at the time during the 2004 elections.
No kidding. Democrats have fielded some of the worst candidates imaginable over the past few decades. Dukakis? Mondale? Kerry? In the immortal words of John McEnroe, "You cannot be serious!!!" Al Gore wasn't much better. He was so arrogant during debates, he probably shot himself in the foot just with that one gesture where he got all macho on Bush by walking out from behind his podium. Even though I agree with Gore on a lot of issues, I find him to be an insufferable egotistical blowhard. Maybe he reminds me too much of myself...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:14 PM
 
69,360 posts, read 58,703,104 times
Reputation: 9373
Quote:
Originally Posted by tongpa-nyi View Post
That is SO true. While the Democrats were likely to win big in 2008 no matter who was at the top of the ticket, Obama probably won the nomination due to his excellence in campaigning and the fact that he brought millions into the voting booths who ordinarily would stay home. As always, the GOP candidate (McCain) won the white vote. No Democratic presidential candidate has won the white vote since Kennedy (if I have my facts straight... maybe even he didn't cut it.)No kidding.
With so much going for Obama, one would have thought he would have won by a much higher margin, especially considering he was running against "Bushs 3rd term"...

Most of america gave the man a chance because they didnt support Bush at that point, and because they thought the opponents exagerated Obamas positions on issues. I doubt americans will make the same mistake twice.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:22 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,416 posts, read 18,130,284 times
Reputation: 8942
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
I am constantly reading some thread about Obama's polls, predictions of being a one term president, of all sorts of soothsaying, tea leaf reading, and other attempts at prognostication of incipient conservative electoral victories.

A few words of caution. In the run up the 2004 presidential election, with two wars going nowhere,
"Going nowhere"? I think we were pretty successful in Iraq. Successful enough that Biden claims it for the Obama administration as one of "their" accomplishments!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
the economy barely limping along,
"Limping along"? According to whom? You? Things were damn good for most of the Bush years. Record low unemployment, included. Look at us now, after only one year of this ass.

As a matter of fact, it wasn't till Bush's last year that things started going south, and this was largely attributable to Democrat policies from the past, such as the CRA (Carter, and greately expanded under Clinton — that house of cards had to come crashing down sooner or later, as the Republicans warned)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
you couldn't find a Democrat who believed that it would be possible for President George W. Bush to win reelection. Well we all know how that turned out.

Folks who make a living at electoral politics will tell you that the 2010 elections in political years is a life time, 2012 might has well be in the next millennium. So, let's hold off on the poll watching electoral prognostication until at least Labor Day. It could be as important to your health and sanity as healthcare.
Your wishful thinking for your corrupt party is duly noted. Good luck, chump.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:40 PM
 
5,165 posts, read 5,575,173 times
Reputation: 1067
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
I am constantly reading some thread about Obama's polls, predictions of being a one term president, of all sorts of soothsaying, tea leaf reading, and other attempts at prognostication of incipient conservative electoral victories.

A few words of caution. In the run up the 2004 presidential election, with two wars going nowhere, the economy barely limping along, you couldn't find a Democrat who believed that it would be possible for President George W. Bush to win reelection. Well we all know how that turned out.

Folks who make a living at electoral politics will tell you that the 2010 elections in political years is a life time, 2012 might has well be in the next millennium. So, let's hold off on the poll watching electoral prognostication until at least Labor Day. It could be as important to your health and sanity as healthcare.
I absolutely agree. That is a lifetime in political time. I mean Who knows what news will have taken place by then. We may find out Barack pulled a Tiger and has been sleeping with Oprah!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:43 PM
 
4,047 posts, read 4,673,431 times
Reputation: 1326
I agree, polls mean nothing if the candidate cheats the election, a la 2000 and 2004.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2010, 05:58 PM
 
69,360 posts, read 58,703,104 times
Reputation: 9373
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend View Post
I agree, polls mean nothing if the candidate cheats the election, a la 2000 and 2004.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:rihLxSzJ8Ws5TM:http://hurleysashimi.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/crying-baby-party-56800676.jpg (broken link)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top