Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
soulflower

Who can beat Obama in 2012?

109 posts in this topic

Sunday talk shows were mentioning Jeb Bush. 'Course that started a conversation on whether another Bush is acceptable to today's Republican party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If things are the same then as today, then it will be abbo

 

Based on recent polls, if things are the same Nov 2012 as today, Obama wins in a landslide...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on recent polls, if things are the same Nov 2012 as today, Obama wins in a landslide...

 

If things are the way they are today, his poll numbers won't be where they are today unless he can kill bin laden again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If things are the way they are today, his poll numbers won't be where they are today unless he can kill bin laden again.

They should have went down by now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should have went down by now

 

They are all over the place right now. They will continue their slide into Bush territory before you know it if things don't change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sunday talk shows were mentioning Jeb Bush. 'Course that started a conversation on whether another Bush is acceptable to today's Republican party.

 

Probably better than W, but hell no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such polls are largely meaningless at this stage in the game because they're really just reflecting current name recognition. If you took the polls this far before the 2008 election, McCain would have crushed Obama - and he wasn't even the incumbent.

 

Or look at 2003. Even by November, the best Democratic candidate against Bush (Gephardt) couldn't get within 5% of him. If you used such polls as the basis for your prediction, you would have expected a 50-state wipeout by Bush over Kerry. Instead, there was a 2% margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 posts and no one has attempted to answer the thread question...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who can beat Obama in 2012?

 

1) Rodney King

 

2) Barry Bonds

 

3) Wayne Williams

 

4) Serena Williams

 

5) O.J. Simpson

 

6) Felicia "Snoop" Pearson

 

Any of the above could easily beat Barry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It certainly favors him right now. But then it favored Bush Sr. in 1991 as well. So much so that prominent democrats such as Gore and Mario Cuomo decided it wasn't worth it. Bill Clinton decided to run against the impossible odds, and won. Many things that will happen between now and November of 2012 will help decide the race. I still believe Romney and/or Pawlenty could mount a challenge. But most of it depends on the economy. Gas prices go down, inflation goes down, unemployment goes down....nobody beating Obama. Gas prices go up, inflation goes up, unemployment remains a problem....people will take it out on the president at the polls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With unemployment being WELL OVER 12% realistically speaking nearly anyone will overthrow the president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 posts and no one has attempted to answer the thread question...

 

Whoever heard of Obama at this stage of the game in 2007?

 

The economy is not going to recover under Obama as he simply does not have the experience or business acument to be able to support growth.

 

Having said that, I believe that Romney will beat him in 2012. Your Obama man crush aside, economics will "trump" the politics of the liberal messiah in 2012.

 

Does that answer your question?

 

Go stare at your Obama life sized cut out and feel "tingles" up and down your spine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on recent polls, if things are the same Nov 2012 as today, Obama wins in a landslide...

 

That and a dollar won't get you a cup of coffee at McDonalds anymore. The fact that he will win says more about the incredible sad state of affairs of political leadership in our country then it does Obama. He has been a weak to average leader on all fronts, domestic foreign and international. His accomplishments are Healthcare which a large portion of the country does not want and an even larger portion of the country that has absolutely no idea what the hell it will do for them, and killing a washed up terrorist whose own self image was bigger then reality. The fact that the unemployment figures are higher now and probably will still be at his next inauguration then the day he took office says volumes about where we are as a country, and it ain't good. I know it was Bushes fault.

 

Oh and to whoever said in 2007 Obama was not known, clearly you have not been paying attention to politics for long. Time had him on the cover for the first time in October of 2006.

 

To answer your question Christie could, but he still thinks he can't win or more then likely does not want to win because the country is still going to be in the ****hole for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is Obama's to lose. I have been saying that for months. I don't need a poll to tell me that.

 

No one other than Ron Paul is willing to make bold statements and the establishment Rs would NEVER get behind him. They are too busy supporting their brand of big government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 posts and no one has attempted to answer the thread question...

 

Gee, wonder why?

 

Maybe because it's a dumb question right now with chaos among the Rs. By the way, pre-primary and primary times are meant to be chaotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is interesting is that we still have this idea that there will be some drastic change or improvement if the White House changes party.

 

I'd say the local and state races are more important. We need more states nullifying and attempting to nullify national tyranny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is interesting is that we still have this idea that there will be some drastic change or improvement if the White House changes party.

 

I'd say the local and state races are more important. We need more states nullifying and attempting to nullify national tyranny.

 

What, other then the residents of the White House changed from the previous administration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So? Maher is a moron with a tiny following of like-minded morons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What, other then the residents of the White House changed from the previous administration?

 

Exactly.

Little to nothing.

 

Both national parties grow the Warfare/Welfare State.

The only difference is the priority. The 60/40 Warfare to Welfare is the only change that seems to occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0