The American Politics thread

[Spark]

Huntsman Huntsman Huntsman Huntsman Huntsman

I don't care if he's Mormon, I'd vote for him over anyone else I see in the American scene atm. If I was American ofc.

Originally Posted by Fusion

Rick Perry. OH. MY. GOD. He had a catastrophic moment in tonight's GOP debate. It's already being called the worst debate moment of all time. I can't think of a worst political moment myself. I can't stand the guy and I actually felt bad for him.

Watch Rick Perry's Campaign End Before Your Eyes

it's bizarre, every remotely competent politician or politically leaning gop member should be lining up to take a tilt at obama but their field is dire by their own admission.

[Fusion]

I know Obama's outlook for reelection look grim, but I firmly believe it would be a HUGE upset if he lost. There are a variety of reasons for that. The weak Republican field and the fact that the Republican nominee will be catering to the crazy Tea Party platform, the experience and talent of Obama's campaign team, and lastly, simple electoral math. To wit:

Why it would take a herculean effort to defeat Obama

[Cevno]

Originally Posted by Fusion

Rick Perry. OH. MY. GOD. He had a catastrophic moment in tonight's GOP debate. It's already being called the worst debate moment of all time. I can't think of a worst political moment myself. I can't stand the guy and I actually felt bad for him.

Watch Rick Perry's Campaign End Before Your Eyes

[Cevno]

Originally Posted by Spark

it's bizarre, every remotely competent politician or politically leaning gop member should be lining up to take a tilt at obama but their field is dire by their own admission.

Yeah, don't know why the younger Republican lot haven't taken a tilt.

The likes of Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio etc.... were being tipped a while back and have a pretty good record at a young age to back them up.

Also watching the Republican Debates Ron Paul is a lot smarter than what the mainstream media gives him credit for. His policies can be questionable and he is a gamble, but feel he is hard done by sometimes.

[Spark]

On the flipside he is horrendously overrated in the blogosphere etc.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by LongHopCassidy

Question, SS - if the Democrats started a crackdown on gun control, would you cross the aisle?


Yours in ideological ambiguity,

LongHopCassidy

No. First, it wouldn't get anywhere while the 2nd amendment is still around. And second, most of the issues that the democrats are usually against are more restrictions of handguns (which, considering the state of the inner cities, makes sense) and people owning a whole arsenal of semi-automatic weapons and such (which I think needs to be curtailed too). Very few democrats really care about stopping people from owning a rifle and things like that.

Plus, even with things like handguns, what they are against is not private ownership - they just want things like background checks and waiting periods, which do not seem like onerous requirements to me (even if it does to the NRA).

There's no chance whatsoever that democrats would actually push hard on this mind you, considering a large percentage of democrats are also gun owners (especially the blue collar workers in swing states), so I don't see gun restrictions as a plausible political platform anytime soon.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Cevno

Yeah, don't know why the younger Republican lot haven't taken a tilt.

The likes of Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio etc.... were being tipped a while back and have a pretty good record at a young age to back them up.

Also watching the Republican Debates Ron Paul is a lot smarter than what the mainstream media gives him credit for. His policies can be questionable and he is a gamble, but feel he is hard done by sometimes.

He is also bat**** insane - so blinded by his idealogy that he automatically rejects anything that doesn't neatly fit into it. And he truly believes it. To me that's a lot more dangerous than someone like a Mitt Romney who'll flip flop on whether the Sun rises in the east if it'll get him elected.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by Fusion

I know Obama's outlook for reelection look grim, but I firmly believe it would be a HUGE upset if he lost. There are a variety of reasons for that. The weak Republican field and the fact that the Republican nominee will be catering to the crazy Tea Party platform, the experience and talent of Obama's campaign team, and lastly, simple electoral math. To wit:

Why it would take a herculean effort to defeat Obama

Disagree. I feel that if Romney is the nominee, Obama will lose. EVERYBODY caters to their base during the primary. They'll come back to the center during the general election. Who else are the tea party members gonna vote for? Obama? I don't think so. Basically they need to win Ohio and Florida. Obama is taking an absolute beating in Ohio due to the economic downturn, and to win Florida all the republicans need to do is select Rubio as the VP candidate. Welcome to Romney 2012.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/ma...tion.html?_r=1

The only person I listen to about these things is Nate Silver (FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right). Deadset, without a doubt, and by far the best and most accurate political predictions on the internet.

[Fusion]

Ah but if Romney is the nominee, Ohio is going to be a very hard State for him to win. Romney supported the anti-labor union law which was just defeated at the ballots. There’s going to be a lot of resentment against him about that. Also, Ohio is one of the few States in the Union that actually supported the auto bailouts – as they obviously benefited a lot from it. As the article below points out, while Obama can win without Ohio, the Republican nominee can’t. By the way, a Romney nomination is certainly not going to excite the Tea Party base. They obviously will not be voting for Obama, but their turnout may dampen with Romney on the ballot. There’s also a chance that a third party nutto like Donald Trump may yet come in, taking further votes away from the Republican nominee. Things can obviously change, but as of right now I’m very confident of an Obama reelection.

Ohio back on President Obama's dance card

[silentstriker]

Yes he supported the anti union law, but the same night that the anti union law was defeated....so was the insurance mandate for Obama. It's a wash on that issue, at best. Obama's approval rating in Ohio is pretty bad (lower than his overall mid forties rating).

I don't see him winning Ohio at all.

[Agent Nationaux]

Fusion, the article said that the maths is wrong if Obama loses any of the states that voted for Kerry and him. Can you confidently say that those states will still back him in 2012.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Yes he supported the anti union law, but the same night that the anti union law was defeated....so was the insurance mandate for Obama. It's a wash on that issue, at best. Obama's approval rating in Ohio is pretty bad (lower than his overall mid forties rating).

I don't see him winning Ohio at all.

There's a massive difference between not supporting the individual mandate and not supporting labor though. If you are part of a union, which plays a huge part in Ohio, the resentment towards Romney for attacking your livelihood would be much greater than an unpopular aspect of the health care law. I think the negative for Romney is far greater than for Obama in Ohio. Unless the local economy completely tanks, I just don’t see Obama losing to Mitt in Ohio.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

Fusion, the article said that the maths is wrong if Obama loses any of the states that voted for Kerry and him. Can you confidently say that those states will still back him in 2012.

He has several paths to victory. He doesn’t have to win all of the same states he won before. From the first article I linked to:

Obama won three states — Indiana, North Carolina and Virginia — that no Democrat had carried at the presidential level in at least two decades, and he scored victories in six other states (Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio) that George W. Bush had won in 2004. Those nine states will account for 112 electoral votes in 2012 and stand at the center of the fight for the presidency.

If Obama loses every one of them but holds on to the others he won, he will drop to 247 electoral votes and Republicans will win the White House. (The decennial reapportionment of congressional districts after the 2010 Census subtracts six electoral votes from states Obama won in 2008.)

But with the exception of Indiana and its 11 electoral votes, Obama is very much in the game in those states. In several, even Republicans acknowledge that he is favored.

[Agent Nationaux]

Who are you voting for anyway Fusion?

[silentstriker]

Virginia and NC? Seen his approval ratings in NC lately?