Journal Roblimo's Journal: I Stand By My "One-Term President" Prediction 8
Back in August, 2008, I wrote an essay titled Voting For a One-Term President. At the time we didn't know whether Barack Obama or John McCain would be our next president. My contention was that we had so many contentious problems that neither contender could successfully contend with all of them.
I haven't changed my mind. I don't think Barack Obama will be re-elected in 2012. But I suspect this would be true if John McCain or Hillary Clinton or Mike Huckabee or Ralph the Wonder Dog had become president instead of Obama.
Our country's problems are too severe, and have been building far too long, for any one person to solve in four years. Indeed, I don't believe they can be solved within four decades unless a majority of elected officials from both major political parties decide to work together instead of playing stupid "gotya" games with each other all the time. Yes, I know your political party is straight and clean and tells the truth, and that the other one is full of corrupt liars. Well, too damn bad. You'd better figure out a way to work with those corrupt liars whose policies are (in your opinion) sure to ruin our country.
But you -- and most of our political leaders -- are not going to start doing that by 2012 unless we get attacked by space aliens or a major plague kills off 60% of our population or we have some other equivalent disaster. So I don't expect Obama to be re-elected in 2012.
I have no idea whether his replacement will be a Republican, a Democrat or someone nominated by a political party that hasn't formed yet. I have no idea whether our next president will be a "liberal" or "conservative" or "libertarian" or "socialist." A lot will depend on what happens to the economy between now and then.
And, you know, it's even barely possibly that enough people will be back to work by 2012 that Obama will be re-elected. But I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen. And if you are, I strongly recommend that you resume breathing, because you have no more idea than I have what will happen in the world (and in American politics) between now and then.
-------------------------
This essay also appears @ Roblimo.com
Eh (Score:2)
Even if people get back to work, Obama's chances are slight, because this country simply isn't nearly as far to the left as he is. It's not about which party is "straight and clean and honest," it's not about parties at all: many Democrats are close to where the voters are on the issues, but Obama is not. Most people do not want what Obama wants: gun bans, abortion on demand, govt control of health care, massive stimulus, cap and trade, and all the rest.
And he will be the Dem nominee: the party wouldn't n
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, to win, the GOP needs to nominate someone who is not so far right he can be easily demonized.
Believing this sort of lie is what got the GOP into the situation it’s found itself in currently. Nobody wants liberalism-lite; the conservatives want conservatism, and the liberals want liberalism. Getting either one of them to vote for a moderate is just not a viable strategy. Swinging to the middle, if you’re the GOP, is an all-around stupid move: the conservatives will just desert you in disgust, the liberals were never on your side to begin with, and the few moderates you may gain are not w
Re: (Score:2)
Believing this sort of lie
There wasn't any lie there. Try again!
Re: (Score:2)
That’s your opinion, and it comes with a [Citation needed].
My evidence is the 2008 election. The Republicans tried to go moderate and got creamed as a result. Hell, the best thing that happened to the Republicans in ’08 was the nomination of Sarah Palin because it at least temporarily energized the conservative base. If the Republicans want to win, they’re going to have to find candidates who conservatives can vote for without holding their noses.
What evidence do you have?
Re: (Score:2)
That’s your opinion
Shrug. You made an assertion and didn't back it up.
My evidence is the 2008 election. The Republicans tried to go moderate and got creamed as a result.
First, that's not true. They did not get creamed because they "tried to go moderate." I defy you to name a single GOP candidate that could have beaten Obama ... or even come much closer.
Second, McCain is actually very conservative, by any objective standard. He is more conservative than Bush on almost every issue where they differ (not that this is saying much).
Third -- and most importantly -- this says nothing about the quote you said was a "lie."
What evidence do you have?
As yo
Re: (Score:2)
Second, McCain is actually very conservative, by any objective standard. He is more conservative than Bush on almost every issue where they differ (not that this is saying much).
Bush was no shining example of conservatism, either, and he seemed less and less to be one as his presidencies wore on. He was still much better than his opponents would have been, but in the end he might have hurt the Republican party.
You took that quote to mean I was saying the GOP should nominate a moderate. It didn't say that, and it didn't mean that. I was thinking more along the lines of a Fred Thompson, as opposed to a Tancredo or Paul. Someone who is very conservative, but not far right. (There's a difference.)
I’m willing to accept that statement, then.
Re: (Score:2)
Bush was no shining example of conservatism, either
Yes, and I would have seriously considered voting for someone else in 2004, if there were a reasonable option.
That said, while McCain is not a "shining example of conservatism," he is undoubtedly conservative. We can name off the top of our heads a half dozen or more examples where he violates conservative principles in our estimation, but there's scores more where he holds to them firmly, and consistently, throughout the years.
Re: (Score:2)
And add to that the fact that Obama -- worse than putting the President above the Constitution -- has now put INTERPOL above the Constitution [patriotroom.com].