|
0 registered members (),
1,061
guests, and 21
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums21
Topics43,335
Posts1,085,981
Members10,381
| |
Most Online1,100
Jun 10th, 2024
|
|
|
Election 2012
#591786
01/22/11 11:23 PM
01/22/11 11:23 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Oh quit groaning.
We may've just gotten over the mid-terms and the next Presidential election is only 653 days away, but let's face reality. '12 started the day after Obama got elected, and with how the modern presidential campaign is now conducted, a candidate basicaly campaigns for two straight years from announcement to inauguration.
So very soon around this spring, we'll see all the contenders for the Republican presidential nomination throw their hats into the ring, grab gloves and start duking it out. With the survivor becoming the #1 contender for the title against Barry "The Barbarian" Obama. See, politics is just like pro wrestling.
I'll post relevant news, thoughts, analysis on this thread, whether my own two cents or from the pundits. I'll try to stay away from needless "Obama whoring" since we have a topic just for that but I'll try to stay relevant to this thread topic. Anyway let's start with real substance.
The New Hampshire GOP today issued their first '12 "Straw Poll," a good year before the real important (open) primary in the Granite State. Not a scientific poll, but none the less a clue in seeing how NH party members think of the potential presidential field. The Top 10:
Mitt Romney 35.14%
Ron Paul 10.51%
Tim Pawlenty 7.61%
Sarah Palin 6.88%
Michele Bachmann 5.07%
Jim DeMint 5.07%
Herman Cain 3.99%
Chris Christie 3.26%
Rick Santorum 3.26%
Mitch Daniels 2.90%
Thoughts:
(1) Mitt Romney winning is new surprise. He was governor of bordering-Massachusetts and owns a house in New Hampshire. TPM revealed recently that Romney' strategy to win the nomination in spite of potential allergies the base has with him (RomneyCare, Mormonism) is to cruise centrist, don't pander directly to the Tea Party base, and let those Teabagger candidates cancel each other out while Romney wins by default.
(2) Notice anything wrong with that list? Mike Huckabee is missing. He went 12th with only 2%. He should have done better. Interesting.
(3) Maybe its because the NH GOP leadership just got taken over by the Tea Party, so that might explain their heavy eagerness for people like Bachman. Or consider if you combine Bachman and Palin, that would have ranked a strong second.
(4) Again no serious GOP candidate has officially announced a run yet. There are rumors that Ron Paul wants instead to take a shot at the Texas Senate seat being vacated by the retiring Kay Hutchinson. Bachman allegedly said that she won't run if Palin runs, and Rudy Giuliani says he would run if Palin does. More elaborated thoughts on that later.
(5) How the hell did Pawlenty do that well?
(6) In the end this poll means nothing. And everything. But nothing really.
Last edited by ronnierocketAGO; 01/22/11 11:24 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: AppleOnYa]
#591810
01/23/11 11:09 AM
01/23/11 11:09 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Right now, the more GOP contenders the better as it gives the Party a chance to hear more views and GRADUALLY determine who the best candidate is to beat Obama. You know what's interesting? At this point in the last election (1-2007), you know how many GOPers had openly declared Presidential bids? 7.How many now? Zero. Of course the fact that '08 was the first election since '52 when both parties didn't have incumbent President/Vice-President running certainly played a big reason for that. But I think there is another factor. Let me elaborate on it in another posting, but lets just say I think many folks are waiting to see if a certain possible candidate does run. Or not. Notice I didn't mention the gender of said candidate.
Several on your list will disappear early in the process and Chris Christie won't even be on it, unlike others who do not give a straight yes or now answer, he has stated several times he will NOT run for President in 2012.
True but knowing politicians when it comes time and he's not there, then I'll believe it. Cynical I know, but if he gets enough popular support in polling (and proper ego stroking), he might not be able to resist that urge to answer this "draft call." And as unlikely it may be, Christie wouldn't even be the first New Jersey Governor to run for President while in his first term. That would be Woodrow Wilson in '12. And he won both nomination and Presidency.
Last edited by ronnierocketAGO; 01/23/11 11:10 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: AppleOnYa]
#591835
01/23/11 03:25 PM
01/23/11 03:25 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
News a few days old, but none the less pertinent for this thread: Obama to run Re-Election campaign from ChicagoThe decision bucks recent history. Every two-term president in the last 30 years — George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan — set up his re-election campaign offices near the White House or in suburban Virginia.
A Chicago base offers plenty of advantages: The city is loaded with longtime loyalists, many with fundraising muscle. It also provides easy access to Midwestern battleground states that Obama must court: Iowa, Ohio, Missouri, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.
And it's far enough from Washington to avoid those unwelcome political consultants who, as one Democratic strategist put it, are "trying to get a piece of the ad money and always in your ear offering their two cents."http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-...d-campaign-base
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#591938
01/24/11 07:37 AM
01/24/11 07:37 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Reported on friday to little to no fanfare, but this has national ramifications for the GOP primaries. -------------------------------------------------- Arizona may kick off primary scrambleErin McPike reports that the Arizona GOP is expected to pass a resolution this weekend asking the governor to move the state's presidential primary to early February. The resolution says that Arizona voters "have a distinguished history of representing the best of Republican values" and "deserves to play a meaningful role in the selection of the Republican Party's nominee in 2012." The date change would leapfrog the expected dates of the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. According to a party source, the Arizona GOP is acting with full awareness that such a move would push Iowa and New Hampshire to also alter their primaries -- and that the RNC could punish Arizona for violating the calendar set by the national committee."I don’t know if the idea is necessarily to go first," the source tells POLITICO. A call to the New Hampshire secretary of state, who is responsible for ensuring that his state's primary happens at least seven days before any other contest, was not immediately returned. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0111/Arizona_may_kick_off_primary_scramble.html?showall
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: The Italian Stallionette]
#591975
01/24/11 02:07 PM
01/24/11 02:07 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,468
With Geary in Fredo's Brothel
dontomasso
Consigliere to the Stars
|
Consigliere to the Stars
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,468
With Geary in Fredo's Brothel
|
In politics two weeks is eternity.
Between now and November 2012 there is no telling what could happen.
A wise person once told me the one constant in politics is that the conventional wisdom is usually wrong. Three months ago Obama looked like a slam dunk one termer. Then along comes the lame duck congress, Obama moves to the center and is
shuffling his staff, and now I have to listen to the geniuses on Meet the Press yesterday talking about whether Hillary will run in 2016 after Obama's second term. MARONE!
Conventional wisodm is that if umemployment stays at 9% Obama
loses, and if it is at 8 or less he is re-elected. IMHO this is nonsense. There is a lot more to it than that.
It is safe to say that Obama will win the big States on the East and West Coasts, and whomever the GOP nominates will
take the south and most border states along with most of the
western states.
Obama won easily in 2008 because in retrospect McCain ran a terrible campaign and Obama generated more exitement than any candidate since JFK. He wont have that kind of enthusiasm in 2012 and it will make it harder for him to win states like Virginia, N. Carolina and Florida which he previously carried.
The GOP has a problem with the tea party people if they are unhappy with Boehner et al. and they splinter off. If that
happens I think Obama wins by default. Assuming it doesn't,
all bets are off, and it comes down to who the G.O.P. nominates.
I think their strongest candidate would be Jeb Bush who says he isn't running, but let's wait and see.
Right now I don't see any of the G.O.P. hopefuls able to unseat him, but if we have a second wave of economic downturn, or major setbacks overseas, then he could be in trouble.
Bottom line is the presidency is for the incumbent to lose. If a sitting president is strong enough to make independents so much and shrug and say, "No point in changing horses," then the incumbent wins. It is only when the incumbent is seen as
incompetent (Carter) or totally out of touch (Bush I) that he
loses. In '72 everyone who followed politics knew Nixon was up to his neck in dragging the Vietnam War out, Watergate and a lot of other bad stuff, but the Dems went off and nominated McGovern who was not acceptable to the mainstream, who held their noses and gave Nixon the landslide he got.
Its more of a "no confidence" vote, and I don't know if it can be quantified. If more people have no confidence in Obama in 2012 than not, he loses. If not, he wins. It is that simple.
"Io sono stanco, sono imbigliato, and I wan't everyone here to know, there ain't gonna be no trouble from me..Don Corleone..Cicc' a port!"
"I stood in the courtroom like a fool."
"I am Constanza: Lord of the idiots."
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592117
01/25/11 05:37 AM
01/25/11 05:37 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Could this snowball into an important, unexpected development for the '12 primaries/election? GOP Lawmakers Planning Meeting To Explore "Alternatives" In Afghan War Three Republican lawmakers who have been outspoken on the war in Afghanistan are trying to push their party to start debating alternative policies and will be convening a meeting next month to start the debate. Reps. Walter Jones (N.C.), Ron Paul (Texas) and Jimmy Duncan (Tenn.) sent a letter to every Republican House member on Monday inviting them them to a Feb. 16 briefing with Council on Foreign Relations President Richard Haass, retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste and Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist -- all of whom have been critical of the direction of the war. The vast majority of Republican freshmen remain committed to the war in Afghanistan, based on their past public statements. But the Tea Party -- which helped elect many of these new lawmakers -- seems to be increasingly skeptical and concerned about the increasing cost of the war. A recent poll by the Afghanistan Study Group found that two-thirds of conservatives support a troop reduction in Afghanistan. Seventy-one percent of conservatives overall and 67 percent of Tea Party supporters worry that the cost of the war "will make it more difficult for the United States to reduce the deficit this year and balance the federal budget by the end of this decade." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/24/afghanistan-republican-alternatives-meeting_n_813281.htmlA few believe it won't. Election 2012: Republicans the Anti-War Party? No So Fast
It seems that Norquist is calling on Republicans to consider an Afghan withdrawal simply because it will be politically expedient in 2012. That is, it might manage to garner the Republicans a few more votes for their presidential candidate. Disaffected Democratic voters, however, are smart enough not to take the bait, and won’t be voting for any Republican candidate in 2012 (they’ll return, predictably, to the Democratic Party). But Republicans aren’t angling for these disaffected Democrats. They’re aiming for Independents and swing voters. It seems that he and other Republicans are hoping for an anti-war candidate to challenge Obama on the economic and national security merits of the war. But who do the Republicans have that could honestly carry out this task? Clever, but ultimately futile. http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/44292/election-2012-republicans-the-anti-war-party-no-so-fast/
On Afghanistan, they were either for continuing the war, against it, skeptical about it, or had no position. There is no "isolationist" wing of the GOP. Of the Republicans' 47 senators and 242 representatives, only 5 percent (15 members) expressed support for cutting defense spending. Adding those in the "ambiguously for" category makes it 13 percent. Forty-one percent are against cutting defense spending; with those ambiguously against, it's 60 percent. Only 10 Republicans, or 4 percent, are against the war in Afghanistan, and none are senators. Including the skeptical members, 10 percent are somewhat antiwar. Eighty percent support the war. The tea party is not mellowing Republican militarism. If it were, freshman Republicans, who mostly proclaim allegiance to the movement, should be more dovish than the rest. That's not the case. Five of the 101 Republican freshmen and 10 of the 184 who aren't newcomers support cutting defense spending. That's about 5 percent of each group. No new Republican opposes the war in Afghanistan outright. Including skeptics, 9 percent of freshmen and 11 percent of the rest are against the war. Fewer new Republicans have defined positions on these issues. Veteran Republicans are more likely to be in the clearly "against cuts" and "for the war" categories; freshmen are more likely to be ambiguous or have no position. This ambiguity is a silver lining for advocates of military restraint: Many tea-party Republicans were elected without saying much about foreign policy and may yet emerge as non-interventionists. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/why-republicans-will-stay-hawkish-4767
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592182
01/25/11 04:37 PM
01/25/11 04:37 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Poll: Optimism About State Of The Country Hits Highest Point Since 2007In a CNN poll released today, 43% of Americans said things in the country were going either "very" or "fairly" well, the highest level of confidence CNN has measured since April 2007. That result also represents a 14-point increase from just one month ago, when only 29% of Americans said the country was in good shape. Despite the surge in optimism, the majority of Americans are still generally pessimistic about the state of the nation. Fifty-six percent of respondents said the country was faring "very" or "pretty" badly. Still, that's down from 71% one month ago, and significantly lower than the record high of 83% that CNN measured in November 2008. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/...007.php?ref=fpaIn 2008, President Obama became the first Democratic presidential nominee to carry North Carolina in 32 years. A new PPP poll now shows him gaining momentum toward taking that state again in 2012, with the President posting a positive approval rating there for the first time in a year and for the first time leading in hypothetical matchups with all four of the frontrunners for the GOP nomination. In the poll, 49% of respondents said they approved of Obama's job performance, while 47% said they disapproved of the job he was doing. That's a five-point swing from last month, when North Carolinians disapproved of Obama by a 46% to 49% split, and it's the first time since December 2009 that Obama has held a net positive approval rating in the state. In head-to-head matchups, Obama led four GOP candidates by margins of three to nine points. Mitt Romney polled closest to Obama, trailing the President 47% to 44%. Mike Huckabee--who led Obama by four points in November, and by one point in December--saw his lead erode entirely so that he now trails Obama by four points, 49% to 45%. Obama also led Newt Gingrich 50% to 44%, and topped Sarah Palin 50% to 41%. In 2008, Obama barely slipped past McCain to win North Carolina by about 14,000 votes, or 0.4%. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/...s.php?ref=dcblt
Last edited by ronnierocketAGO; 01/25/11 04:42 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592241
01/25/11 09:16 PM
01/25/11 09:16 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
 On election day 2008, just 16% of the country thought things were "going well." Today that number stands at 43%.Of course the "Pretty/Very Badly" still runs in the 50s.
Last edited by ronnierocketAGO; 01/25/11 09:17 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592413
01/27/11 01:04 AM
01/27/11 01:04 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
FEC report: Palin's PAC has $1.3M in cashThe disclosures filed with the Federal Election Commission show Sarah PAC raised more than $275,000 in the last six weeks of 2010. Those donations, mostly smaller amounts, came from 607 donors scattered across the country. The PAC raised more than $3.5 million in 2010, and handed out $463,500 to candidates and political causes. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ap_on_go_ot/us_palin_pacEDIT - I found this later elsewhere:
Mitt Romney has put together an establishment, blue-chip operation, locking in top donors and banking more than $9 million through a network of political action committees. Sarah Palin is driving white-hot media attention and fervent grass-roots support through her Facebook posts and Fox News appearances.
Last edited by ronnierocketAGO; 01/27/11 03:31 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592482
01/27/11 06:49 PM
01/27/11 06:49 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Indiana Rep. Mike Pence NOT Running for PresidentRep. Mike Pence (R-IN), who has become something of a dream presidential candidate for many conservative bloggers and activists, appears to be about to say that he will not run for president.
Fmr. House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), now head of FreedomWorks, said that Pence could potentially be a second coming of Reagan.
"In the choice between seeking national office and serving Indiana in some capacity, we choose Indiana," Pence, R-Columbus, said of himself and wife Karen in a letter being sent to supporters. "We will not seek the Republican nomination for president in 2012."
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592534
01/28/11 02:56 PM
01/28/11 02:56 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
If not for Cairo, the White House would be jumping for joy at this news: GOP heavyweights hesitant about backing Romney '12An array of Republican heavyweights who backed Mitt Romney’s 2008 presidential bid are not yet committed to - and in some cases, downright skeptical of - the former Massachusetts governor’s all-but-certain 2012 campaign.
In each of the traditional early states, top Romney supporters from the last campaign tell POLITICO that they’re hesitant to get behind the nearest thing the GOP has to a frontrunner. His difficulties are particularly acute in Iowa and South Carolina, where his former enthusiasts say they have not heard from him, believe he may be intent on downplaying the states in his second White House run and are openly flirting with his potential rivals.
And this is just pathetic: Asked specifically what Romney needed to do to earn his support again, Fmr. Sen. Judd Gregg (NH), who was a national co-chair of the Bay Stater’s bid in 2008, said flatly: “I haven’t made any decision.”
|
|
|
Re: Election 2012
[Re: ronnierocketAGO]
#592582
01/29/11 07:23 AM
01/29/11 07:23 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
ronnierocketAGO
OP
|
OP
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 13,145
East Tennessee
|
Primaries a year away, these recent PPP polls (last 5 days) won't matter 6 months from now (much less 12 months later) but do they do give a glimpse of how state GOP voters view the field. Also an excuse to give a shout out to NJ. PPP: North Carolina - GOP rents I HEART HUCKABEESHuckabee 27% Gingrich 18% Palin 16% Romney 11% Pawlenty 7% Paul 6% Daniels 3% Thune 1% PPP New Jersey: State GOP can't Decide (Can They have Both?)Huckabee: 18% Romney: 18% Gingrich: 15% Palin: 14% Paul: 8% Pawlenty: 4% Daniels: 3% Thune: 2% Attached PPP Commentary:
If there's anywhere that Romney should really be strong it's the northeast but he's polling ten points behind the 28% he got there in 2008. Huckabee's peformance meanwhile shows strength for him outside his home base in the South and it's ten points better than the 8% he got there last time around.
In addition to its geography New Jersey also ought to be a good state for Romney because it has one of the more moderate Republican electorates in the country. In most states we've been polling more than 70% of GOP primary voters describe themselves as conservatives but it's only 60% in New Jersey. But Romney can't take advantage of that because he's in fourth place with conservatives at 14% behind Huckabee's 21%, Gingrich's 17%, and Palin's 16%. Romney is indeed way up with moderates at 24% with no one else doing any better than 13%. But that's only enough to balance out his poor performance with conservatives relative to Huckabee.
Gingrich 38/44 Huckabee 51/30 Palin 42/53 Romney 40/37 Approval/DisaprovalObama 42/55 Match-UpsGingrich 48% Obama 43% Huckabee 55% Obama 39% Palin 47% Obama 46% Romney 49% Obama 42% TX Gov Rick Perry 45% Obama 45% PPP West Virginia: Huckabee leading GOP Field, Obama approval at 34%Huckabee 28% Palin 25% Gingrich 17% Romney 10% Paul 6% Pawlenty 5% Daniels 2% Favorables/UnfavorablesHuckabee: 48/27 Romney: 34/37 Palin: 41/47 Gingrich: 33/43 Approval/DisaprovalObama: 34/58 Match-upsHuckabee: 54 Obama: 36 Romney: 50 Obama: 37 Gingrich: 49 Obama: 39 Palin: 46 Obama: 42
|
|
|
|
