or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The 2012 Elections Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The 2012 Elections Thread

post #1 of 10454
Thread Starter 
So let's look at the 2012 elections now that the midterms are over. Obviously the Presidental office is up for grabs again, but a third of the Senate is up as well.

Does Obama get challenged in the primaries, and by who? If Hillary was ten years younger.....

What about the chaotic scene over in the Republican side of things? Does Sarah Palin have enough hubris to run for the White House, virtually guaranteeing a Democratic win?

Discuss!
post #2 of 10454
Who else have the Repubs got as a 2012 canddidate at this point? I'm genuinely curious. Obama was already a major national presence by this point in proceedings prior to his run.
post #3 of 10454
TWO YEARS AWAY. Aren't you just a TAD premature on this?
post #4 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
Who else have the Repubs got as a 2012 canddidate at this point? I'm genuinely curious. Obama was already a major national presence by this point in proceedings prior to his run.
The media seems to be anointing Haley Barbour as the presumptive candidate. He's like the 2000 John McCain of 2012. Oh wait, that's not a good sign...
post #5 of 10454
You have GOT to be shitting me. They can't find anyone more dynamic than that?
post #6 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
You have GOT to be shitting me. They can't find anyone more dynamic than that?
If you saw who they were running for Congress this year, you wouldn't be asking that. HA!
post #7 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pop Zeus View Post
The media seems to be anointing Haley Barbour as the presumptive candidate. He's like the 2000 John McCain of 2012. Oh wait, that's not a good sign...
Watch out for Marco Rubio being someone's VP candidate. If he doesn't get indicted first.
post #8 of 10454
post #9 of 10454
Palin won't run. It's too much work. Why would she, when she can wield all this power just by playing kingmaker?

However, she will, probably, play a role in selecting the Republican candidate. Which means, failing the Bloomberg thing, Obama's got 2012 sewn up.
post #10 of 10454
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
TWO YEARS AWAY. Aren't you just a TAD premature on this?
No, but thanks for asking. I saw this topic on every news network already, so CHUD is behind already. Post, damnit!
post #11 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
No, but thanks for asking. I saw this topic on every news network already, so CHUD is behind already. Post, damnit!
Fine. It'll be either Huckabee or Romney for the Republicans. Either of them would be the best (and most viable) options to try and unseat Obama.
post #12 of 10454
Dr Vivisector, It is a...little early, in that no one has...Announced an intent to run for, President vs Obama. The Republicans, will take...The Senate, and The White House as well. Mike Pence (Indiana) is a potential Presidential Candidate. Obama...Will, be a one term President!
post #13 of 10454
FWIW I keep seeing Mike Pence being mentioned as a name to look out for. He's beloved in the conservative circles, but doesn't have the baggage people like Palin or Newt bring to the table. I seriously doubt Obama gets a primary challenge, but 2012 seems ripe for some third-wheel campaign to screw up everyone's idea of what's up & down.
post #14 of 10454
Wow, Fleed beat me to it (RE Pence).
post #15 of 10454
I'm still crossing my fingers for a Bloomberg run.
post #16 of 10454
You know what would be great? The Republican nominee not being a white, greying, well-fed Hogarth illustration come to life.
post #17 of 10454
Haley Barbour is too fat and too redneck to have national appeal.
post #18 of 10454
LOL Andrew. So true.

The only way I wouldn't totally back Obama would be if he were challenged by a bold, confident progressive like Bernie Sanders. But if Obama gets aggressive and makes some courageous moves in the next two years, I think he'll be hard to beat.

Palin's not running, but the continual speculation keeps her earning capacity inflated, which is what she cares about, so keep speculating.

I think Mike Pence is creepy and has no charisma. In fact, if anyone, I think Marco Rubio or someone young, ethnic and "attractive" or even female is what they're going to go for after the McCain debacle. I'm afraid Romney is going to always be a bridesmaid and never a bride.
post #19 of 10454
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
You know what would be great? The Republican nominee not being a white, greying, well-fed Hogarth illustration come to life.
So you'd prefer a Sarah Palin or a Michelle Bachman?

If race or gender is a factor for your choice, then perhaps there's a up and comer somewhere like Obama was for the Dems to draw upon.
post #20 of 10454
Not necessarily race or gender, just the fact that Mike Pence, Barbour, McCain, Huckabee, Romney and so on all look like exactly what they are - very wealthy, insulated from the world, and impossibly out-of-touch with the realities of modern life. Do you really think that they only pool of people to draw from when it comes to leaders is the rich, middle-aged white guys?
post #21 of 10454
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
Do you really think that they only pool of people to draw from when it comes to leaders is the rich, middle-aged white guys?
Of course not. But I would like to have someone with real world experience, perferably with actual management time in something besides local politics/community activism. Obama's weaknesses are the lack thereof, and it's really showing right now.
post #22 of 10454
And the vast majority of Republicans with real-world governing experience happen to be - gasp! - rich middle-aged white guys. That vicious cicle's gotta be broken at some point. I think I'd take Jindal over another pasty-faced millionnaire pretending that he gives a shit about what happens to poor kids in city centres.
post #23 of 10454
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
And the vast majority of Republicans with real-world governing experience happen to be - gasp! - rich middle-aged white guys. That vicious cicle's gotta be broken at some point. I think I'd take Jindal over another pasty-faced millionnaire pretending that he gives a shit about what happens to poor kids in city centres.
Guess George Soros and Bill Gates are fakers too, then. The only good rich guys are the Democrats--got it.

I just want someone bloody competent. Or does the process cull all of them out?
post #24 of 10454
Just needed to get this on the record on the first page: President Barack Obama will win reelection in 2012. Fact.

Additionally: "Scott Brown" will be defeated (and possibly tossed into Boston Harbor like a trunk full of tea) in 2012. Fact.

PS My track record for predictions of this sort is impeccable

EDIT Hat tip to Mr Bandu for the use of his trademark posting style
post #25 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Kate View Post
Just needed to get this on the record on the first page: President Barack Obama will win reelection in 2012. Fact.

Additionally: "Scott Brown" will be defeated (and possibly tossed into Boston Harbor like a trunk full of tea) in 2012

PS My track record for predictions of this sort is impeccable
Please PM me the Powerball numbers for Saturday. Thank you in advance.

Seriously...a LOT can happen in the next two years. Who knows what kind of scandal could erupt, war could start, or star could rise in either of the two major parties.
post #26 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
Guess George Soros and Bill Gates are fakers too, then. The only good rich guys are the Democrats--got it.
How hard is it to grasp that there's a HUGE difference between spending lots of money to benefit your own bottom line and damn the rest and spending your money to benefit the country you live in even if it hurts your bottom line?

If I own a coal mine and I spend money to get a politician elected that will relax all safety regulations and slash my corporate and personal taxes, that's an investment in my own bank account. If I own a coal mine and spend money to get a politician elected who will enforce safety regulations for the benefit of the people brave enough to risk their lives in the coal mines and raise my corporate and personal taxes so that I can pay my fair share for the infrastructure I use and the damage I do to the environment, that's an investment in the future of the country and the "general welfare" of the people, NOT an investment in my own personal fortune.

There is a difference. One is driven by short-sighted greed, the other is driven by long-term investment in the system and the country that allowed a millionaire to get rich in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
I just want someone bloody competent. Or does the process cull all of them out?
The process is corrupt. It's too expensive to mount a campaign. The media is corporate. And we have a two-party system with little choice. If we had public financing of elections and equal donated time on networks, banning of corporate money in elections and instant run-off voting, our odds of getting someone who is bloody competent would rise dramatically.
post #27 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
TWO YEARS AWAY. Aren't you just a TAD premature on this?
Shut your filthy whore mouth.
post #28 of 10454
Princess Kate, One can be confident in one's predictions yet still be...wrong. The next President's Identity will only become known, the day after Election 2012. That is when, it will be a...Fact, and not more than a few hours before. You or I may be right, it is a...50-50 proposition.
post #29 of 10454
The list so far of the non-fringe Republicans rumored to have an interest:

Mitt Romney
Sarah Palin
Mike Huckabee
Tim Pawlenty
Mike Pence
Mitch Daniels
Newt Gingrich
Haley Barbour
John Thune
Rick Perry
John Bolton
Rick Santorum


Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, and Bobby Jindal have specifically stated they will not run for the nomination.

In my opinion, Mitch Daniels would be the strongest of the group. He's intelligent, conservative, and not afraid to raise taxes or make tough cuts in order to balance budgets. He's building a decent national following. Romney would get hit hard on the similarities between Obamacare and Romneycare, but it's not an insurmountable challenge. Not a Huckabee fan, but he's raised his profile considerably with his previous run and his Fox News show. Pence and Barbour would hold their own and be serious candidates. Since they lack a national profile, the race will be largely uphill for them. Palin and Gingrich would be polarizing nightmares who would have no chance in the general election. Santorum won't get any traction as he's been out of the game for too long. Thune looks the part but doesn't have much of a record to run on. Pawlenty and Perry have records to run on, but don't have the star power of the top names in the group.
post #30 of 10454
Looks like the President is particularly vulnerable right now. Two years is an eternity in politics, but this is not a good sign for Obama.

CNN Poll: GOP candidates top Obama in hypothetical 2012 race.

Obama - 45%
Romney - 50%

Obama - 44%
Huckabee - 52%

But, some good news too:

Obama - 52%
Palin - 42%

Obama - 49%
Gingrich - 47%
post #31 of 10454
I'm pretty sure Mike Pence is going to run for governor of Indiana in '12 so he'll be out of the presidential race.

In a perfect world, Palin would run and screw up the entire Republican party. Her and her Tea Party pals could fracture the entire right wing and it would be a joy to watch. Hell, maybe Christine O'Donnell would be her running mate.
post #32 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dranbon View Post
I'm pretty sure Mike Pence is going to run for governor of Indiana in '12 so he'll be out of the presidential race.

In a perfect world, Palin would run and screw up the entire Republican party. Her and her Tea Party pals could fracture the entire right wing and it would be a joy to watch. Hell, maybe Christine O'Donnell would be her running mate.
Pence is making a move somewhere, which is why he resigned his leadership position in the House. Governor makes more sense. It would also set him up nicely for a 2016 run if Obama is reelected.
post #33 of 10454
I think the presumption that the 2012 GOP nomination process is going to be sane or orderly might be a tad optimistic.
post #34 of 10454
I would not be surprised if Mitch Daniels ran. He's done a pretty good job in Indiana.
post #35 of 10454
I don't see Tim Pawlenty going for it in 2012. He may try and get on the ticket as VP, though.
post #36 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
I think the presumption that the 2012 GOP nomination process is going to be sane or orderly might be a tad optimistic.
It will be better than the '08 free-for-all when the candidates all fought over who was the most conservative, who would build the highest fence on the border, who would kill the most terrorists, and which of them was actually possessed by the ghost of Ronald Reagan. Sure, we'll have some populist Tea Party pandering from Palin or whoever rushes to fill her absence if she declines to run. But if the economy is the main issue, it will be more of a grown-ups race with Romney, Daniels, and those with budget-balancing bona fides having the upper hand.
post #37 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvc View Post
Obama - 49%
Gingrich - 47%
And that probably with people not remembering the "divorce my wife with cancer" deal.

It took two years for Gingrich to go to new leader of the republicans in 1994 to lets make certain he doesn't speak in primetime at the convention in 1996. There is no way he is running much less winning the presidency.
post #38 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvc View Post
It will be better than the '08 free-for-all when the candidates all fought over who was the most conservative, who would build the highest fence on the border, who would kill the most terrorists, and which of them was actually possessed by the ghost of Ronald Reagan. Sure, we'll have some populist Tea Party pandering from Palin or whoever rushes to fill her absence if she declines to run. But if the economy is the main issue, it will be more of a grown-ups race with Romney, Daniels, and those with budget-balancing bona fides having the upper hand.
I think '12 will be '08 on steroids. And if a grown up wins the GOP nomination, the tea party will run their own third party candidate, don't you think?
post #39 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekT View Post
And that probably with people not remembering the "divorce my wife with cancer" deal.

It took two years for Gingrich to go to new leader of the republicans in 1994 to lets make certain he doesn't speak in primetime at the convention in 1996. There is no way he is running much less winning the presidency.
He's got the ego to run and his recent conversion to Catholicism to explain away (in his mind) his previous infidelity and douchebaggery. He'll hopefully be smacked down early in the primary.

These early polls are more about name recognition and party affiliation. The Republicans are at a high right now, especially with independents. The best candidate against Obama at the moment is Generic Republican (which might perfectly describe Mitt Romney). Some of these less-known candidates will have their chance to gain some traction. Interestingly, SurveyUSA actually did a poll in October '06 pitting McCain against Obama, long before most of the country knew anything about him.

Quote:
Hypothetically pitting him against John McCain, before either senator had announced their intention to run for the White House, the poll predicted a devastating defeat for Mr Obama, then less than two years into his first term as the junior senator for Illinois.

The poll, which questioned 30,000 voters around the country, forecast that the Democrat would win just two states – Illinois and his birth state Hawaii – and the District of Columbia, where Washington insiders had marked him as a rising star. Mr McCain was predicted to take all 48 remaining states, chalking up an electoral college victory of 510 to 28.

By contrast, in 2008, with the last few votes left to be counted, Mr Obama looks set to take 364 electoral college votes, with only 174 falling to the vanquished Mr McCain. In the end, he claimed 28 states compared to Mr McCain's 22, in what some analysts are calling the most decisive victory for a Democrat since the 1960s.
post #40 of 10454
yt, The Tea Party, will...not run their own candidate. They want the Republicans to be more conservative. A...3rd party would split the Republican vote, and guarrentee....Obama's re-election.
post #41 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by yt View Post
I think '12 will be '08 on steroids. And if a grown up wins the GOP nomination, the tea party will run their own third party candidate, don't you think?
It depends. Huckabee and Daniels have raised taxes on occasion. They might not be ideal for the Tea Party, but they could probably live with them. Romney might be the most likely to stir up a third party challenge. The rest of the bunch are fiscally conservative enough to endear them to the Tea Party candidates. Hopefully, the Tea Party learned its lesson with O'Donnell, Angle, and Buck. You have to pick good candidates. Palin ain't it.
post #42 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvc View Post
It depends. Huckabee and Daniels have raised taxes on occasion. They might not be ideal for the Tea Party, but they could probably live with them. Romney might be the most likely to stir up a third party challenge. The rest of the bunch are fiscally conservative enough to endear them to the Tea Party candidates. Hopefully, the Tea Party learned its lesson with O'Donnell, Angle, and Buck. You have to pick good candidates. Palin ain't it.
Maybe you're right but I don't think so. They think they're right. They're not cowed. Their ego has been fully massaged by the GOP, Dick Armey and the media. And they think they're a formidable force in the country. If the eventual GOP nominee doesn't meet their purity test I'm willing to bet green money that they run their own third party candidate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duke fleed View Post
yt, The Tea Party, will...not run their own candidate. They want the Republicans to be more conservative. A...3rd party would split the Republican vote, and guarrentee....Obama's re-election.
So, rationality demands a compromise on their convictions. I don't think they'll look at it that way, but that's just my opinion after what I saw two nights ago.
post #43 of 10454
Their purity test is fiscal conservatism. That seems to be the mood of Republicans and most independents right now. I doubt a nominee will get through the Republican primaries who is not a fiscal conservative. There is no room for a McCain or a Rudy at the top of the ticket. That is the type of candidate who would invite a Tea Party challenge, not the conservative group expected to contend this time around. One thing to remember is that Tea Party candidates who lost Republican primaries this year almost uniformly endorsed the Republican nominee. There will need to be a major falling out with the Republican Establishment between now and 2012 for the Tea Party to rise up and play spoiler. Another consideration is that the Tea Party financial backers are likely the same people who have been backing Republicans for years. I doubt they will be that willing to throw good money away on a candidate who will do nothing more than ensure Obama's reelection.
post #44 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvc View Post
Their purity test is fiscal conservatism. That seems to be the mood of Republicans and most independents right now. I doubt a nominee will get through the Republican primaries who is not a fiscal conservative. There is no room for a McCain or a Rudy at the top of the ticket. That is the type of candidate who would invite a Tea Party challenge, not the conservative group expected to contend this time around. One thing to remember is that Tea Party candidates who lost Republican primaries this year almost uniformly endorsed the Republican nominee. There will need to be a major falling out with the Republican Establishment between now and 2012 for the Tea Party to rise up and play spoiler. Another consideration is that the Tea Party financial backers are likely the same people who have been backing Republicans for years. I doubt they will be that willing to throw good money away on a candidate who will do nothing more than ensure Obama's reelection.
You make a very sensible, well though-out argument, jvc. I'm just not sure they will be as sensible and well thought-out as you. They got some really interesting people into office; they're emboldened. So, if the ultimate nominee doesn't meet their litmus test, even if he/she is a "fiscal conservative" or purports to be, I still say they'll get mad and run a third party candidate. That is, unless the cameras turn away from the Tea Party now that it has served its purpose, or if any of the Tea Partiers in Congress somehow embarrass themselves so thoroughly that they sully the entire thing. But I agree with you that the money behind them is the same old money and will want what's best for them ultimately, but that didn't stop them from holding their noses and embracing Sharon Angle or Christine O'Donnell when push came to shove.
post #45 of 10454
God, the Republican nominee at this point is basically impossible to predict. Many of the candidates who have expressed interest are totally awful, and would never be considered electable. Huckabee is likable, but the Tea Party won't support him because he's not in any sense a libertarian. Romney won't get support for two reasons. One, he's Mormon. Two, he's clearly in actuality a moderate, and no amount of pretending will make him not.
I don't think the Tea Party will get their chosen candidate all the way, but they WILL sink candidates. Every single candidate running for the nomination will pander to the wingnuts. They'll have to.
post #46 of 10454
Watch for John Thune. He killed Daschle here in South Dakota because he pulled some dirty politics while keeping up a solid Christian front image. In a fundamentalist state like this one, that was enough to rile up the Republicans. He ran for reelection unopposed this year and has been able to gather more funding. If he's nominated, the synergy with Palin would make the tea parties look like ACORN.
post #47 of 10454
I could see either Huckabee or Rubio being the GOP candidate in 2012. Problem the GOP faces is they now have a rigid Loyalty test for candidates. Huckebee got washed out in 2008 because he raised taxes in Arkansas for filthy School children. McCain wasn't anti-Illegal immigrant enough etc. We should see quite the bloodbath in the Primaries.

For the Dems, if someone were to challenge Obama in the Primaries it would probably mean a loss at the polls. History supports this (Carter, Ford, Johnson all had significant primary challengers and all lost or withdrew from the race)


Re Obama's Status: I recall a book that came out in 1982 declaring Ronald Reagan a guaranteed one term President. Obama has been talking up "Obama 2.0" for a few months now. He'll come back (hopefully he'll realize he needs to fight and co-opt the Republicans at every turn, for starters), as will the economy.
post #48 of 10454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas Booth View Post
TWO YEARS AWAY. Aren't you just a TAD premature on this?
I agree. Far too early for a thread like this.
post #49 of 10454
If only there wasn't a permanent campaign in DC. The Senate Minority Leader is already talking about 2012. It's a huge part of what's wrong about Washington (it's easier to campaign than it is to govern) and it's depressing but there ya go.
post #50 of 10454
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ Dylan View Post
I agree. Far too early for a thread like this.
And yet, we're already up to fifty posts. What else are we going to talk about, the eminent demise of the dollar or at the very least beginning of rampant inflation thanks to printing an extra five hundred billions bucks? I wish I could do that with my bills.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › The 2012 Elections Thread