LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 11:51 AM
Original message |
The 2012 elections don't scare me - it's the 2016 ones that do! |
|
Rewind back to 1992 and the election of Bill Clinton. Clinton stopped the Reagan Political Machine and brought a new agenda to Washington DC. Problem was, the republican party was devoid of leaders who could be viable candidates in 1996 to go up against Clinton.
What I saw transpire the next 8 years was a plotted effort to set themselves up for a primetime takeover of Washington DC - all the right-wing bigwigs needed was a few primetime names they could make as viable candidates AND an agenda to takeover congress again. I could see that happening again over the next 8 years if we don't pay attention.
First, in 1994, the midterm election brought a major swing to the right with 54 new republican representatives and 8 new republican senators. Fortunately for us 54 new representatives and 8 new senators would still give the democrats the majority but it would bring us to pretty close of a deadlock. And remember, after the 1994 mid-term elections, 2 democrats (Richard Shelby and Ben Nighthorse Campbell) switched parties giving the republicans 2 extra seats. 10 lost seats would be a deadlock.
In the mean time the republican parties didn't need another Ronald Reagan to run for president. They needed a name that would be easily recognizable to build them for the 2000 presidential election. Being that none of the Reagan offsprings were viable candidates, the right-wing machine turned to George Bush's children and figured that Jeb and George could be the best names for viable presidential candidates. All they had to do was get them some experience and then start prepping them for 2000. I have always believed that Jeb was the first choice for their 2000 candidate but since Jeb lost in 1994 for the governor's bid, they had to groom George instead. Fortunately the governor's job in Texas is more for show than actual work (That's the Lt. Governor's job).
I honestly think there isn't one viable candidate out there for the republican party in 2012 and honestly, I could see them tossing in another Bob Dole and giving that election away until 2016 when they'll have their next "George Bush" ready to run. Republicans would be smart in going after Congress instead and start gaining back some of their losses in hopes of getting a complete takeover in 6-8 years. Republican strongpoint has always been longterm planning! Their weakness - suprise candidates that pop up out of nowhere (Clinton in 92 and Obama in 08)
|
Guy Whitey Corngood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 11:54 AM
Response to Original message |
1. That's true. I'm not one to make predictions but I think by 12 the pukes |
|
will throw anybody out there just to say the ran. Knowing how these people are by 16 they'll have another shitty figurehead they'll want to shove down our throats. And I'll be damned if that darn "liberal media" doesn't go along again.
|
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. I think that's why Palin was picked as VP |
|
The republicans realized they were doomed with John McCain and figured they didn't want to waste a good candidate on the VP position.
Honestly, how many recent VPs of losing presidents/presidential candidates have gone on to have successful runs for president
|
Guy Whitey Corngood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. I can't think of one. nt |
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 11:57 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I just told my wife last night that I am a little saddened that we won't get |
|
much surprise of nail biting in 2012. Obama should win a decisive re-election. The numbers won't be as critical.
|
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. The only thing I truly believe that could hurt Obama is something like the Iranian Hostage thing |
|
I realize there was more to it that cost Jimmy Carter his election but that really did take a bite out of his presidency.
|
tekisui
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Initially Carter got a big bump. But, then it really wore his presidency down.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Isn't that pretty much the way history says it always goes? |
|
The American people are a fickle bunch. They sometimes give one party an 8 year shot but then decide they want something different.
NONE of us know what it the world the topic will be in 2016!
|
Guy Whitey Corngood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-24-09 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Pregnant gay muslims who want to have abortions? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:00 PM
Response to Original message |