Political prediction #5,295

[RandomGuy]

The GOP leadership has pretty much stated:

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

and

"no comprimise"

No bipartisanship, no actually working to accomplish anything. We are now going to get at least two years of:

1) Kangaroo court-style congressional inquiries wasting our tax money for political gains
2) Republican congress that will oppose everything for the sake of opposing, even if it is worthwhile

If we got even a modicum of decent congressional oversight on the executive branch I would be fairly happy, as it is long overdue. I think the GOP congress and Bush presidency where there was none did a LOT of damage.

We all know that won't happen.

Eyuch. The Democratic leadership was bad enough when it came to bullshit partisan plays, and now we get GOP flavored crap.

In the end, I genuinely hope the TPers will get what they want.

[George Gervin's Afro]

The GOP leadership has pretty much stated:

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

and

"no comprimise"

No bipartisanship, no actually working to accomplish anything. We are now going to get at least two years of:

1) Kangaroo court-style congressional inquiries wasting our tax money for political gains
2) Republican congress that will oppose everything for the sake of opposing, even if it is worthwhile

If we got even a modicum of decent congressional oversight on the executive branch I would be fairly happy, as it is long overdue. I think the GOP congress and Bush presidency where there was none did a LOT of damage.

We all know that won't happen.

Eyuch. The Democratic leadership was bad enough when it came to bullshit partisan plays, and now we get GOP flavored crap.

In the end, I genuinely hope the TPers will get what they want.

This would actually help Obama... I would assume most independent voters want progress not hyper partisanship.. the GOP will show it's true face.... Plus now they are part owners of the economy..

I can't wait to hear about the propsed spending cuts..Obama is going to have a field day with those..

more tax cuts for the wealthy and reducing spending on those lazy poor people..

[baseline bum]

In the end, I genuinely hope the TPers will get what they want.

That we become Christian Iran and have a distribution of wealth in line with Mexico's? No thanks.

[DarrinS]

If Dems are trying to pass shit that the majority of Americans don't want, I would hope they block it.

[DarrinS]

That we become Christian Iran and have a distribution of wealth in line with Mexico's? No thanks.

:downspin:

[johnsmith]

The GOP leadership has pretty much stated:

"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."

and

"no comprimise"

No bipartisanship, no actually working to accomplish anything. We are now going to get at least two years of:

1) Kangaroo court-style congressional inquiries wasting our tax money for political gains
2) Republican congress that will oppose everything for the sake of opposing, even if it is worthwhile

If we got even a modicum of decent congressional oversight on the executive branch I would be fairly happy, as it is long overdue. I think the GOP congress and Bush presidency where there was none did a LOT of damage.

We all know that won't happen.

Eyuch. The Democratic leadership was bad enough when it came to bullshit partisan plays, and now we get GOP flavored crap.

In the end, I genuinely hope the TPers will get what they want.

Your political predictions are always so bold and far reaching.

[CosmicCowboy]

Uhhh...I believe I have already seen one area that Congress and Obama apparently SAY they agree on and thats eliminating earmarks...

We will see. I'm not holding my breath.

Actually, Obama just said he wanted a moratorium on earmarks...I guess just until the Dems get back in control...

[boutons_deux]

"Eliminating earmarks" means eliminating earmarks that don't fall in my state or district. iow, I vote for the Congressperson who transfers earmarks into my pocket.

Earmarks is another of the rabble-rousing red herrings that amounts to very tiny part of spending, MUCH smaller than the fraud and waster in DoD and Medicare.

[RandomGuy]

Your political predictions are always so bold and far reaching.

I make no representation that this was horribly shocking or unpredicted.

More of a sad acknowledgment of reality. Ah well. :depressed

[RandomGuy]

"Eliminating earmarks" means eliminating earmarks that don't fall in my state or district. iow, I vote for the Congressperson who transfers earmarks into my pocket.

Earmarks is another of the rabble-rousing red herrings that amounts to very tiny part of spending, MUCH smaller than the fraud and waster in DoD and Medicare.

Pretty much. If the Dems are smart they will keep tabs of all these little earmarks, and beat the freshmen over the head with that in 2012.

[coyotes_geek]

Uhhh...I believe I have already seen one area that Congress and Obama apparently SAY they agree on and thats eliminating earmarks...

We will see. I'm not holding my breath.

Actually, Obama just said he wanted a moratorium on earmarks...I guess just until the Dems get back in control...

I'm not holding my breath on that one either. Even if by some chance they do eliminate earmarks, something I would wholeheartedly support, it still wouldn't be much more than a symbolic gesture. Defense. Social security. Medicare/medicaid. What are we going to do with those?

[Supergirl]

If the Republicans don't come to the table and come up with some solid legislative accomplishments in the next two years, they will get hammered for it in 2012 and Obama will cruise to an easy victory. Of course, if they do the right thing and help grow the economy by actually passing some bipartisan bills designed to improve job growth, the economy will improve and Obama will still win.

Either way, Obama is likely to in in 2012. The question is whether the Republicans plan to hold the country hostage for another two years until then. But if they do, they will lose the ground they've gained and lose even bigger in 2014, in Obama's second term.

Reality is, the Republicans are still playing the game of how they can get elected and stay in office, rather than actually making decisions that might help the country.

I bet if we made all elected offices volunteer positions that would change the political landscape dramatically. Volunteer positions which are not allowed to receive donations from outside organizations.

[Winehole23]

If the Republicans don't come to the table and come up with some solid legislative accomplishments in the next two years, they will get hammered for it in 2012 and Obama will cruise to an easy victory.Disagree. Process matters very little; perceptions however are decisive.

If unemployment is still high and GDP growth is still stagnant in 2012, incumbents of every stripe will feel the wrath of voters, including, very possibly, Mr. Obama.

[MannyIsGod]

Depends a lot on who they run against him. I don't care how bad things are - if he he runs against Palin he'll win.

[Winehole23]

Palin is overexposed.

I could see her flirting with a third party run, but doubt she'd have much chance in the primaries. The other candidates and the GOP establishment would tear her to pieces.

IMhO Palin for Prez is more a DNC wet dream than a Republican one. Mitt Romney is the odds-on favorite at this early stage.

[MannyIsGod]

Palin is polling highest in places such as South Carolina. She'd carry the south over the Mormon anyday. The entire tea party movement loves Palin.

[MannyIsGod]

Gingrich is more likely than Romney, imo.

[Winehole23]

You're fantasizing. Gingrich is among the deadest of dead ducks.

[Winehole23]

No chance at all.

[coyotes_geek]

Palin isn't going to run. She's going to continue to let everyone think that she might since so much of her media appeal is fueled by the concept. But when it comes time to commit she's going to pass. Being a pundit pays better and you don't have to deal with near the bullshit that candidates do.

Now Govenor Goodhair on the other hand................

[MannyIsGod]

You're fantasizing. Gingrich is among the deadest of dead ducks.

Based on what? Not any of the polls I've seen.

Far too early to declare anyone dead.

[TeyshaBlue]

Based on what? Not any of the polls I've seen.

Far too early to declare anyone dead.

Not to be an ass, although I already am one, but what polls have you seen that refelct this? Honest question.

[MannyIsGod]

Palin strikes me as especially fueled by ego. She believes her own hype. I would be utterly and completely shocked if she didn't run.

We'll see - still a good year and a half before it really gets going (LOL continuous election cycle)

[MannyIsGod]

Not to be an ass, although I already am one, but what polls have you seen that refelct this? Honest question.

Polls like this come out all the time now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/04/cnn-poll-obama-vs-palin-in-2012/

[TeyshaBlue]

She's just narcissistic enough to try, but she would get shredded in the primaries.

[MannyIsGod]

If Romney couldn't win preObamacare how the fuck does he win now? Palin's stock has risen more than any of those guys since the previous election.

[MannyIsGod]

She's just narcissistic enough to try, but she would get shredded in the primaries.

I don't get why you think this. She survived a full on presidential campaign so I've got no reason to believe she can't survive primaries.

[TeyshaBlue]

Polls like this come out all the time now.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/11/04/cnn-poll-obama-vs-palin-in-2012/

Thx. He's ranked just behind Palin, but his undecided numbers in the area of positive/negative view are kinda high @ 28%. Might be something to that.

[TeyshaBlue]

I don't get why you think this. She survived a full on presidential campaign so I've got no reason to believe she can't survive primaries.

She'll have 10x the number of opponents in the primaries that she would face in a general election. Fellow presidential hopefuls would kill her in a debate.

[Winehole23]

Palin's stock has risen more than any of those guys since the previous election.I think just the opposite. The results of 2008 plus Palin quitting as AK governor effectively sank her chances for 2012.

[MannyIsGod]

To be fair, none of us really know shit about whats going to be the scenario. At this point in the last presidential cycle we were gearing up for Clintons part 2. A badly or well run campaign means the world.

[TeyshaBlue]

To be fair, none of us really know shit about whats going to be the scenario. At this point in the last presidential cycle we were gearing up for Clintons part 2. A badly or well run campaign means the world.

Troof. :toast

[MannyIsGod]

I think just the opposite. The results of 2008 plus Palin quitting as AK governor effectively sank her chances for 2012.

In the general I agree. Amidst the people who vote in GOP primaries? Not a chance.

[MannyIsGod]

That being said this is a political prediction thread so I'm going to go ahead and say that Palin will beat out Romney and Gingrich for the nom based on a strong showing in the SC primary after being in a tight 3 way race with those 2 in Iowa and NH.

[TeyshaBlue]

That being said this is a political prediction thread so I'm going to go ahead and say that Palin will beat out Romney and Gingrich for the nom based on a strong showing in the SC primary after being in a tight 3 way race with those 2 in Iowa and NH.

Name your beer and I'll take that bet.

[Nbadan]

That being said this is a political prediction thread so I'm going to go ahead and say that Palin will beat out Romney and Gingrich for the nom based on a strong showing in the SC primary after being in a tight 3 way race with those 2 in Iowa and NH.

Gingrich and Romney? Seriously?

I think we are looking at Rick Perry, or some other Southern Governor...

[Nbadan]

Uhhh...I believe I have already seen one area that Congress and Obama apparently SAY they agree on and thats eliminating earmarks...

We will see. I'm not holding my breath.

Actually, Obama just said he wanted a moratorium on earmarks...I guess just until the Dems get back in control...



When did the Dems lose control again? If anything the Dems are more powerful in the Senate being senior members now..

[RandomGuy]

Gingrich and Romney? Seriously?

I think we are looking at Rick Perry, or some other Southern Governor...

I think Perry is positioning himself for a run. It is rather obvious he is angling for it.

[SnakeBoy]

Pretty much. If the Dems are smart they will keep tabs of all these little earmarks, and beat the freshmen over the head with that in 2012.

Earmarks aren't an issue that people actually give a shit about. You know that right?

[EVAY]

The tea party will reject Romney just as the far-right did in 2008. They cannot get past his religion.

If Palin does run, I think Obama will win again. I mean, let's face it, if Palin is the republican nominee, I will vote for Obama. And I am an independent.

If Palin wins, I will move.

[EVAY]

I predict that someone like Haley Barber (sp?) will get the republican nomination, and that there will be a tea party type candidate, but it won't be Palin, because she is more interested in money than governance.

[EVAY]

I think Perry is positioning himself for a run. It is rather obvious he is angling for it.

I think you are right about this, RG. I can't believe that the people who voted for him actually believe that he has any intention in actually fulfilling his term in Austin.

[EVAY]

^^^I just don't think he will get the nomination. I don't think people are ready for another Texas governor as Presidential nominee.

[RandomGuy]

^^^I just don't think he will get the nomination. I don't think people are ready for another Texas governor as Presidential nominee.

Obama will be sure to get the Democratic nomination. That means, as a Democrat, I get to vote in the Republican primary, so I can pick the worst possible candidate.

I think you are right that nationally that won't happen.

My top choices would be, in order, Palin, Perry, and Romney.

Of the three it would be a toss-up as to who would be more electable between perry and romney.

Don't think that potential for Dems crossing party lines vote in Republican primaries hasn't occurred to anyone else.

The Republicans have served up a cornocopia of crappy candidates.
BUWAHAHAHAHAHA

[Nbadan]

I think you'll are forgetting Jeb Bush...that's why the wing-nut media has been trying to reshape the Bush administration legacy..

[Winehole23]

I see Jeb Bush in 2016 and after.

If RP doesn't get his chairmanship this time, a third party run in 2012 could sink the GOP, if RP lived so long and chose to run. There's gonna be a few disappointed Tea Partiers in two years.

Palin as a third party candidate could also derail GOP presidential aspirations in 2012, but then she'd have to live it down, like Ross Perot.

[Winehole23]

(Personal darkhorse-dreamboat: Indiana governor Mitch Daniels.)

[Wild Cobra]

Where's the list anyway? I'd like to look up # 4265.

[MannyIsGod]

Obama will be sure to get the Democratic nomination. That means, as a Democrat, I get to vote in the Republican primary, so I can pick the worst possible candidate.

I think you are right that nationally that won't happen.

My top choices would be, in order, Palin, Perry, and Romney.

Of the three it would be a toss-up as to who would be more electable between perry and romney.

Don't think that potential for Dems crossing party lines vote in Republican primaries hasn't occurred to anyone else.

The Republicans have served up a cornocopia of crappy candidates.
BUWAHAHAHAHAHA

I think thats a shitty thing to do, to be quite honest. I think its completely undermining of open primary systems and I think you should rethink your intentions to do so. If you want to do anything vote in a 3rd party primary in an effort to get them more ballot exposure.

[MannyIsGod]

Anyone think Bloomberg runs?

[RandomGuy]

Where's the list anyway? I'd like to look up # 4265.

Yikes! Is this actually an attempt at humor? :lol

Let's see, that would have been, um, "the mets will win the world series".. no wait that was sports prediction #4,265

[admiralsnackbar]

Anyone think Bloomberg runs?

Shit... if Perry is going to run, I hope to God Bloomberg does, too. Beyond his experiential and fiscal qualifications, the guy came to politics from a ridiculously successful career in business, whereas Perry is a lifelong capital-building bullshitter without a clue.

[Wild Cobra]

Yikes! Is this actually an attempt at humor? :lol

And mine wasn't?

[MannyIsGod]

English is hard.

[RandomGuy]

And mine wasn't?

um, yes it was. That was what I was trying to say. It was an acknowledgement of my recognition of the attempt.

[Wild Cobra]

um, yes it was. That was what I was trying to say. It was an acknowledgment of my recognition of the attempt.
Oh... Sorry, went back and reread it. Shitty thing about text, easy to miss inflections, sarcasm, etc.

[Winehole23]

Anyone think Bloomberg runs?Bloomberg's reelection as NYC mayor has got to give him pause. He ended up spending something like $30 million dollars to beat a nobody by less than five points.

Also, there's a question of what he'd run as. Bloomberg was a Democrat until the early 1990's. If people don't recall that, they'll quickly be reminded.

The RINO tag will be hard to avoid. As well as the <I bought the election> tag. Bloomberg is probably rich enough to float his own presidential campaign. That's something to consider.

There's no way the Dems would take him back anytime before 2016 and if they did, the electorate would reject him.

DEM -> GOP -> DEM? No way.

Bloomberg would almost have to run as a third party candidate, and to do so successfully he needs to ride the high-tide of anti-system voting. When the people who don't usually vote in the US (about half) start to get activated, the results could be interesting.

OTOH, Bloomberg is 68 years old. But the high tide of anti-system voting might not be in 2012. It could be in 2016 or thereafter, but by then, Bloomberg will be (at least) 74 years old.




Has Bloomberg been making noises, Manny? Would the GOP really take Bloomberg?

That seems unthinkable to me.

[TeyshaBlue]

Bloomberg's reelection as NYC mayor has got to give him pause. He ended up spending something like $30 million dollars to beat a nobody by less than five points.

Also, there's a question of what he'd run as. Bloomberg was a Democrat until the early 1990's. If people don't recall that, they'll quickly be reminded.

The RINO tag will be hard to avoid. As well as the <I bought the election> tag. Bloomberg is probably rich enough to float his own presidential campaign. That's something to consider.

There's no way the Dems would take him back anytime before 2016 and if they did, the electorate would reject him.

DEM -> GOP -> DEM? No way.

Bloomberg would almost have to run as a third party candidate, and to do so successfully he needs to ride the high-tide of anti-system voting. When the people who don't usually vote in the US (about half) start to get activated, the results could be interesting.

OTOH, Bloomberg is 68 years old. But the high tide of anti-system voting might not be in 2012. It could be in 2016 or thereafter, but by then, Bloomberg will be (at least) 74 years old.




Has Bloomberg been making noises, Manny? Would the GOP really take Bloomberg?

That seems unthinkable to me.

I'm still not convinced that Hillary won't try to run in 2012. If the economy is still underperfoming at that point, I can see her taking a good, hard look at it. That alone would keep Bloomberg out of the race on the Dem ticket.

[Winehole23]

I could totally see Bloomberg forcing himself on the GOP in the primaries, but I've heard nothing to suggest that is even a possibility.

[Winehole23]

I'm still not convinced that Hillary won't try to run in 2012.People keep saying so.


If the economy is still underperfoming at that point, I can see her taking a good, hard look at it. That alone would keep Bloomberg out of the race on the Dem ticket.<Cabinet member> running against the President? Tricky.

How many times has this happened in US history?

[Winehole23]

(James Buchanan was the last Sec'y of State to become President.)

[Winehole23]

VP and Sec'y of State. (http://www.historycentral.com/elections/1796.html)