So I've missed quite a bit of stuff during my self-imposed exile from teh interwebz. Stuff like Romney putting on the tinfoil hat about Obama and gas prices. Or the whole Etch-A-Sketch deal. So let's continue our discussion about Presidential politics.
Well, I think 538 has summed this up well. This isn't Romney vs Santorum or anything like that. It's Romney vs Romney. If he can not screw up, he's got it. I expect Santorum to have a few more notable wins, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania for a start.... but nothing nearly enough to actually compete for the nomination. Romney's in "dead girl or live boy" territory for the nomination. I'm less certain as to what to expect come November, though. Outside factors would be a part of it, and then it will also come down to what happens when it becomes less about the Republican candidates, and more about strictly Romney and Obama. There might be some people that have forgotten their issues with Obama.... but I doubt those are enough that it could give Romney the win on it's own.
Hey Merk! We already have a politics thread, here, though it keeps falling behind (And I just know this because my US Politics thread was locked)
Welcome back, Merc! Santorum, now that I've heard more about him, scares the daylights out of me!! I don't see how anyone with even a high school education could vote for someone so anti-science, even in just a primary.
Well, it is now all but official. With Rick Santorum dropping out of the race, Newt Gingrich over $4 million in the hole, and Ron Paul still irrelevant, Romney is the Republican nominee.
Let's see, Romney is the very symbol of rich over non-rich. Cut medicaid and medicare, slash anything that benefits the non-rich, then expect to beat Obama? Trickle down is nonsense, "job creators" is nonsense, deregulation ****** this economy for non-rich. Obama will see 4 more years.
I think economic demographics are slightly more complicated than there being two neat and tidy groups: "the rich"(presumably evil) and "the non-rich". Why the usage of the term "suspend" with respect to ending Presidential campaigns? It makes it sound like they're just going on a short break.
Santorum is out? What did I miss at work today? On the one hand I hope his sick child isn't worse. I don't wish that on anyone. On the other hand I'm ready to throw a party over him being out. I can fear for my country a little less now.
It's all but official - Romney is the sacrificial GOP lamb. Just waiting on GinGrinch to hang it up, he's only delaying the inevitable. Obama getting re-elected only signifies how weak the Republican field truly was this go-around, and not how impressive his first term was. It would be one of the biggest upsets in recent memory if Obama is ousted.
He may yet be the Vice Presidential nominee, which I actually think would give him a better chance of becoming President, anyway. He wouldn't have a chance in hell as the Presidential candidate the general election. However, I do think Romney has an outside(very outside) chance at beating Obama if the economy remains stagnant, any one of his campaign's inevitable nasty smear campaigns manages to catch on, and if Obama utters a foolish sound-byte or two a la McCain and Gerald Ford that becomes ubiquitous. Even then, I have my doubts, but I don't think it's impossible.
I wonder what 2016 will be like when Obama leaves office. Will the ones saying he wants to be a dictator have an aneurysm and die off?
It depends on whether a Republican becomes President or not. If so, they'll just fade into the background and not be heard from even as the new President continues policies they once complained about under Obama, content with their partisan victory and abandoning all pretense of principle. If not, they'll recast Obama who was actually a "moderate" all along but insist that the new Democrat President is the real deal: An Evil Socialist Who Must Be Stopped, albeit not as vitriolically, as (presuming he's white) he won't have that "Other-ness" that Obama had.
Expect Gingrich to drop out pretty soon here, I'm fairly certain he was playing the good soldier to sap Santorum. Hoping for a cabinet nod, probably.
Can I point out how completely absurd it is to have two threads about exactly the same thing, discussed by exactly the same people, in exactly the same fashion not only on the same forum, but quite literally right next to each other? Why can't we just merge threads?
Honestly, I wasn't even sure there were two threads until I noticed the "Senate" one was much shorter.
I agree. I created a Senate thread for US politics on the first day, and it was locked because there was already a JCC thread on US politics.
Your logic may be sound, but it doesn't account for all the middle-class and poor people out there who seem to be in denial about the fact that they're not rich and never will be. Not to mention there's no one telling them the whole story about "job creators" and deregulation. Politics is dumbed down to one-liners and "feelings" and that's how a large section of voters will make their decision and that's why Obama is not just a shoe-in. And I think all these kinds of threads should have the Senate tag. If we're after a real discussion, people should feel welcome to contribute. Of course, this means Senate folk will have to save some of their historic merciless derision...
