You can't run on 8%-10% unemployment and win. Small business owners cannot hire and have uncertain prospects for future hiring. This election will be about economics, the housing market, and jobs. Obama has nothing. Contrasting from Obama equals change. I don't believe Obama is worthy to be re-elected. And people I know who voted for him last time seem to share that sentiment.

After reading through this thread and some of the thoughts presented here in opposition to my own, it has occurred to me that it's probably a good thing Democrats are comfortable and confident in Obama's re-election.

Cheers. :woot:

I think it's funny that you think I'm a Democrat.

The answer to that is not to present a religious right candidate who offers the same neoconservative ideas that drove people to elect Obama in the first place. I think the Kerry analogy is very fitting here.

The real political power in this country rests with its legislatures, not it's executive. So IMO the Republicans would do far better by getting control of Congress.

As a "Recovering Republican", this is what I find most disheartening. The RNC is telling me that these guys are the best of the best of the best that the GOP has to offer.

Really? These are the best?

I just hope that the RNC has already written off 2012 as it is hard to unseat an incumbent, and they are concentrating on 2016, when the office is truly up for grabs.

I submit that the best thing that could happen in American politics is to somehow get away from the current 24/7/365 election cycle. The day after the election, the runs for the following November start to form.

The requirement for non-stop electioneering causes the nut bars to rise to the top just so that they can stay in the news. Only someone from the lunatic fringe or who is desperate for office can maintain the rhetoric long enough to remain in the front pages until the inevitable skeleton's in their closets causes them to stand down so the next bozo can take their place. This crosses party lines and pretty much excludes the best and brightest from elected office.

The entire process should take 4-months or less and with the election dates fixed years in advance it should be easy to do. National politics should not vie with Comedy Central as an entertainment circus.

That along with ending gerrymandering electoral districts and the election of the President by the electoral collage rather than by popular vote.

Never happen though...

Funny when some of the most insightful and balanced political news is broadcast on Comedy Central's The Daily Show

Agreed. But the circus act should involve what the clowns in office are doing rather than the annual 364-day zoo dominated by the wanna-be's.

I think you miss the point about your severe lack of thoughts.

I blame the 24 hour news cycle. With the rise of cable news, they have hours and hours of programming time to fill. Pundits muse on the most mundane details, they infer meaning to every word, every action, and the politicians realize this. They've found that they've become a brand, and they need to manage their message and their image needs to be as carefully crafted as any shoe or car brand. In order to resonate with people, they've become marketers who cater to the lowest common denominator and as a result we have the ridiculous antics that we see from career politicians.

There's a whole industry built around the concept of political entertainment, and the people lap it up. FOX News and MSNBC are raking it in.

It's hard to follow your point when you intentionally abuse the quote function. Who were you quoting?

You really need to take a reality check mate. You comments on housing and infrastructure are laughable when compared to world standards. A vist to Mumbai, India's Manhattan might open your narrowed vision a little:
http://assets0.seabetter.com/images/..._image9260.jpg

I believe he was referring to Sea Demon, Steve.

In my view Obama should be the easiest Democrat President to unseat since Jimmy Carter. If the Republicans cannot organise themselves enough to manage to do that, then they deserve to lose.

To be fair TJ, the American people have lived in relative prosperity since the later 1930s early 1940s. They have enjoyed economic success, freedom from enemy bombing campaigns, infrastructure that remained undamaged throughout the Second world war, and a post-war boom from helping Europe rebuild, as well as financial gains from the various loans.
This is the biggest crisis since 1929 for the US...heck...it might well be the biggest economic crisis in American history, and the standards of living that America has enjoyed for the past several decades is slipping, it's still marvellous compared to most of the world, but compared to what they have been used to, yes, it's crumbling. We'll have the same problems over here...but we have a generation that went through worse and came through it alright, unfortunately they're not the generation in charge at the moment, but I hope that their lessons will ring true...but...looking at the riots of last year...I do fear for what is to come...

That's as may be Oberon, but its not excuse for being blinkered to what the rest of the world is like. The US' blinkers need to come off sooner rather than later.

Another layer of cross-cultural irony: in much of the rest of the world, neoconservative economics are in fact called neo-liberal.

Otherwise, I think the bottom line that a few people in this thread have hinted at: why do we need dogmatic religious social conservatism mixed with neo-liberal economics when the US has a perfectly good, functional tradition of constitutional, secular, reasonable libertarian conservatism? Do you really need Jesus and corporate interests in DC, or just a minimally-intrusive government that works and protects citizens from others' spiritual and economic schemes?

Actually, most polls show Gingrich gets a good chunk of the "tea party" vote. The majority of people see the Karl Rove type power players all backing Romney, and doing their best to harm Newt. How many senior republican politicians have been negatice about Newt running? The establishment fears Newt.

Best thing we could do is get rid of the letter by people's names. If people had to run on issues vs what party they were in - then the electorate would be more educated on the candidate stances on the issues. It wouldn't be "left vs right", it would be about the issues and the ways to solve them. THAT would be the best thing for this country.

Campaign finance reform would be the next.....

:har: Now that's entertainment.

Yes, the legislative controls the purse strings. So yes, it's imperative the Republicans need to solidify their hold of the House for sure. And retain balance in the Senate, if not take a slim majority. The thing that concerns me regarding the executive is that it appoints judges. A power I don't want liberals to retain for the long term.

It's all relative wherever you live. And I'm definitely not going to shoot for a living standard like the slums of Mumbai, India. :O: The facts remain that our economy is still performing poorly, jobs are lacking as unemployment is still a huge factor, our deficit is running in the Trillions and the current administration thinks we need to add more to it, government waste and fraud is ramapant with tax withholdings, and overall national debt is increasing and will negatively impact future generations. Obama simply can't escape HIS economy. That's reality.....mate.

Well here's where we can find common ground mookie. I'm sick of 24 hour cable news. But that also goes to the "out of context" propaganda articles coming from places like Daily Kos, Free Republic, gateway pundit, CNN opinion and others (like the one posted by the OP about "Santorum and Sharia";).

You've got to be kidding me. This is where we part company. This show is not balanced news or insightful in any way. It's supposedly a comedy show but acts as platform to bash conservatives(and the token liberal from time to time for pretend balance...but we know where he leans). There is nothing insightful about it at all. Even Fox News typically has someone on the Right and someone on the Left to argue their points against one another and present their views. They offer retractions. That's balance. The Daily show does not have anything like it.

Actually they reserve that label for Mitt...LOL. At least the establishment GOP does. You know, I'm not convinced that any of these candidates are the best America or the GOP has to offer. But IMO, all of them (except Ron Paul) are a much better option than Obama. As a taxpayer with an actual tax liability, I stand firm on that.