For my friends on the Left: Who do you feel is Obama's most formidable opponent among - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-20-2011, 10:47 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,255
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner El Guapo View Post

Romney hasn't hit a ceiling. Nobody has. And if we're drawing comparisons to 2007 (you said 2003, I am assuming you meant 2007) then let's look at the frontrunners in October of 2003. Fred Thompson, Rudy, hell maybe even Mitt himself. And they fell back to McCain. 1996 was also kind of a strange year. I would analogize this year to the Dems in 2004. Dean and Edwards were out front, Wes Clark jumped in as the darling of the moment and everyone turned on him when he couldn't debate. Lots of things can happen.
No, I was referring to 2003, just for the comparison of running against an incumbent. If you go back and look at the polls, whether it's Kerry or Dean or Edwards or Clark, few polls had anybody topping 25% at this time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner El Guapo View Post
Answer that one for me. What is the basic argument (that Romney would make) for contrast in imploring a voter to exchange Obama for Romney, - something that will appeal to moderates and Independents, who decide all of these national elections? His argument now is for Republicans, while he's trying to be slippery and retain his 'middle'. I'm saying those voters aren't that stupid. He's got archives of himself in the media taking every position.
In my opinion, it could be any number of things. I know a number of people who voted for Obama but have said they won't again, and Romney seems like a reasonable alternative. He's the best guy to attack Obama in a reasonable, legitimate way while offering solutions on how he would create jobs and cut spending. While Obama has spent his life in the public sector, Romney has spent his in the private sector. I think that's a stark contrast. If you want a more detailed explanation, maybe go spend some time in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, or any handful of states that have the likelihood of switching blue to red and see what they say.

When you look at the "Obama vs. generic Republican" polls and you see "generic" up by 4, 5, 6 points, what that says to me is that independents are, at the very least, open to listening to the other guy. Other polls have more than half saying they expect Obama to lose. Other polls have more than half saying that Obama deserves to lose. Whoever those independents are that are pushing that number over 50 percent, I don't think there's any doubt that of the eight people on stage Romney has the smarts and savvy to pull them in for good.
__________________

__________________
2861U2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2011, 10:53 AM   #32
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 11:41 AM
It amazes me than anyone with a reasonable independent slant would vote a Republican into the Executive branch as their compatriots in the Legislative branch have been busy wilfully, actively trying to run the country into the ground to prevent Obama`s reelection.
__________________

__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 02:42 AM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:41 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
None of the above, really. Mitt is the strongest contender simply because he's the most polished and can raise a lot of money, but seeing as how the base so far has tried to create support around anyone-but-Mitt, I see him having real issues getting the kind of support needed to win an election. Not to mention his lack of a strong position on... well, anything.

Cogent sensible posts are appreciated in this thread.

Thanks to:

Diemen
2861
C1131
deep
Irvis

etc.

thanks

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 12:22 PM   #34
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
Cogent sensible posts are appreciated in this thread.
So you're the decider as to what is cogent and sensible? Gotcha.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 01:15 PM   #35
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,460
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen
None of the above, really. Mitt is the strongest contender simply because he's the most polished and can raise a lot of money, but seeing as how the base so far has tried to create support around anyone-but-Mitt, I see him having real issues getting the kind of support needed to win an election. Not to mention his lack of a strong position on... well, anything.
I think the "anyone but Mitt" crowd will become the "anyone but obama" crowd by 2012.

The best candidate the republicans could offer is chris christie, but he wants no part in running. can't blame him
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 01:19 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I think the "anyone but Mitt" crowd will become the "anyone but obama" crowd by 2012.

The best candidate the republicans could offer is chris christie, but he wants no part in running. can't blame him
And Christie has thrown his weight behind Mitt.

and you are right the margin of victory will be the same people as in 2008, they will vote for anybody but more of the same,
that got avid Hillary supporters to go to the polls for Obama however, reluctantly.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 01:26 PM   #37
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

So you're the decider as to what is cogent and sensible? Gotcha.
If not diamond than who? Is there anyone more qualified?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 03:40 PM   #38
War Child
 
Inner El Guapo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 609
Local Time: 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2861U2 View Post
No, I was referring to 2003, just for the comparison of running against an incumbent. If you go back and look at the polls, whether it's Kerry or Dean or Edwards or Clark, few polls had anybody topping 25% at this time.
Ok, gotcha. I see where you were coming from.
And I do think there is definitely an analogue to 2003 here.
For instance - in December of 2003, Dean had (for one example) 23% in the CBS poll and Kerry was way behind in 6th place.

I didn't bother to Google any 2008 polls but IIRC, I am sure we could find polls where McCain was dragging serious ass that late in the game.

There's historical precedent...and then there is current conventional wisdom.
Could Romney win the nomination? Absolutely. But as I said, polls this early are indicative of very little.

Quote:
In my opinion, it could be any number of things. I know a number of people who voted for Obama but have said they won't again, and Romney seems like a reasonable alternative. He's the best guy to attack Obama in a reasonable, legitimate way while offering solutions on how he would create jobs and cut spending. While Obama has spent his life in the public sector, Romney has spent his in the private sector. I think that's a stark contrast. If you want a more detailed explanation, maybe go spend some time in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Ohio, or any handful of states that have the likelihood of switching blue to red and see what they say.

When you look at the "Obama vs. generic Republican" polls and you see "generic" up by 4, 5, 6 points, what that says to me is that independents are, at the very least, open to listening to the other guy. Other polls have more than half saying they expect Obama to lose. Other polls have more than half saying that Obama deserves to lose. Whoever those independents are that are pushing that number over 50 percent, I don't think there's any doubt that of the eight people on stage Romney has the smarts and savvy to pull them in for good.
I don't need to tap into a disaffected Obama-supporter vein, I am one myself. But I don't live in a Purple State. I live in a Red State, surrounded by Tea Partiers and Republicans. Obama has zero chance to win my state. But living here tells you at least one thing - what real base-Republicans are looking for. Go back and see who was the first to mention Rick Perry last December. Sure, he might not get the nomination but that attraction to the idea of him was pretty obvious to me. Probably because I am not detached from the Republican base...like even conservatives that live in Blue and Purple States. No, I haven't agreed with that Republican base in a good 15 years, but I still have some conservative values that don't involve 'Jesus issues'.

I'm not talking about "generic Republican" anyway, I'm talking specifically about Romney. The stack of negative-attack fodder against him is a mile high, much higher against Romney than any of the others. You'll see this from the Republicans over the next two months and it will cause him to bleed, politically. He's already at a tedious support as the frontrunner. Do people learn nothing from history? Ask John McCain about South Carolina in 2000. And that was completely manufactured. You don't need to manufacture anything against Romney, he's a walking, talking negative fodder-generator. And Rick Perry has a boatload of money to spend to remind people of it.

Regardless of whether Romney wins the nomination (and it seems I am about the only person around here that actually doubts it) my main point is that Romney is not going to be seen (by the majority of the middle 20%) as an alternative to Obama. And I know you disagree. We shall see.
__________________
Inner El Guapo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2011, 04:57 PM   #39
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,460
Local Time: 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep

And Christie has thrown his weight behind Mitt.

and you are right the margin of victory will be the same people as in 2008, they will vote for anybody but more of the same,
that got avid Hillary supporters to go to the polls for Obama however, reluctantly.
Indeed.

I don't think there's any doubt that the right will come out in force for the "anyone but obama" vote.

It will come down to the unaffiliated. If the economy still stinks, obama may be sunk, just like GHW.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 03:19 AM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 08:41 AM

Republican Newt Gingrich tops Mitt Romney, President Obama in new polls - NY Daily News




The former House speaker has also opened up a slim lead in a hypothetical matchup with the man whose job he wants. Gingrich leads President Obama 45%-43%, according to another Rasmussen national poll.

Read more: Republican Newt Gingrich tops Mitt Romney, President Obama in new polls - NY Daily News
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 12:16 PM   #41
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 10:41 AM
i'm sorry Mittens as crashed and burned again.

(and i wish the GOP had time for that other Mormon, you know, the smartest, most accomplished guy in the GOP field)
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2011, 11:07 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 08:41 AM
Polls are so useless right now. I want to see how Newt will pick a VP and how he will handle personal attacks on his three marriages.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2011, 02:25 AM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,890
Local Time: 10:41 AM
I think his defense will be that three marriages make for even greater sanctity over gay marriage. Three times the sanctity!
__________________

__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com