President Ron Paul?
April 16th, 2010 at 1:00 pm by David FarrarFans of libertarian Ron Paul have got very excited by this Rasmussen poll:
Pit maverick Republican Congressman Ron Paul against President Obama in a hypothetical 2012 election match-up, and the race is – virtually dead even.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.
Could a 77 year old libertarian from Texas really beat Obama?
Five Thirty Eight puts it into context:
But as regular readers of this website will know, the person conducting the poll can have a profound impact on its results. Rasmussen, in particular, has had a substantial Republican-leaning house effect thus far this year. Perhaps they will turn out to be right (although their idea of trying to apply a “likely voter” model 2.5 years in advance of an election is dubious). But it would be wrong to take a Rasmussen poll (or any other) at face value without taking into account this context. …
After adjustment for house effects, Obama’s lead over Paul is not 1 point but more like 10. This result is closer to that obtained by a PPP poll in November, which had Obama ahead 46-38 against Paul (PPP’s 2012 polls have also had a very slight Republican-leaning house effect.)
Paul’s 9.9-point deficit is not awful — it’s better than of Newt Gingrich (-12.2), Jeb Bush (-13.4) or Sarah Palin (-14.4) do — but lags behind the performance of Mitt Romney, who is just 5.6 points behind, or Mike Huckabee, who is down 6.6. It also lags behind the performance of a so-called generic Republican, who is actually slightly ahead of Obama.
This is what is interesting. A generic Republican candidate beats Obama by 1.9%. But the moment you name a specific candidate, Obama leads by 5% or more. At this stage I think Obama will be re-elected – due to the lack of electable Republican candidates. But if they do find someone without serous baggage, then it is definitely game on.
Back to the Rasmussen poll, the Tea Party movement gets stronger:
Twenty-four percent (24%) of voters now consider themselves a part of the Tea Party movement, an eight-point increase from a month ago. Another 10% say they are not a part of the movement but have close friends or family members who are.
The TP movement was derided or ignored for months, but it has become the most powerful grass roots movement in recent times. It dwarves liberal counterparts such as Move On.
When it comes to major issues confronting the nation, 48% of voters now say the average Tea Party member is closer to their views than Obama is. Forty-four percent (44%) hold the opposite view and believe the president’s views are closer to their own.
Again, there may be some house bias, but that is still a powerful result.
Tags: Barack Obama, Polls, Ron Paul, Tea Party Movement, United States
April 16th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
“Could a 77 year old libertarian from Texas really beat Obama”
We hear much crowing about how popular Obama was on the internet yet “know one” seems to realize Ron Paul is even more so.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Isn’t that almost always going to happen? A generic democrat would allow voters who want an Obama, or a Clinton, or a Clinton, or whatever to project their preferences and desires on a nominee – only positives, no negatives – a generic politician can’t but be more popular than any specific politician.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:18 pm
I run into a lot of Obama voters with serious buyers’ remorse in the US these days. I reckon (hope?) he’s a one term wonder.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:32 pm
who cares
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:34 pm
At this stage I think Obama will be re-elected – due to the lack of electable Republican candidates.
Is this the John Kerry effect? Ironic that post the Bush re-election it was suggested that the Donks would never find a decent candidate and were completely at sea. Obama might not be my political cup of tea but it would be churlish not to recognise him as a decent candidate for the Donks.
The GOP just have to find the right person and get in behind them. I am thinking someone other than Sarah “I can see Russia from my window” Palin.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Banana Llama the distinguishing point was that it translated into actual support for Obama.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:43 pm
dream on there..!..kiwigreg..eh..?
..he’s nailed healthcare..has earned his nobel peace prize..
..and is about to take the big bank bastards up the alleyway..
..for a good kicking in the goolies..
..eh..?
(and he is only just getting started..eh..?..
..and..who exactly do you see defeating him..?
..nah..!..strap yrr rightwing self into yr seat..eh..?..
..it’s going to be a long/reform-littered ride for your sort/lot..
..eh..?
..a great big progressive (global) wave..is breaking over you for the/your forseeable future.
..eh..?
better just get used to the idea..eh..?..
and..
..do we now have to worry about farrar starting/promoting tea-parties’ here..?
oh no..!..hang on..that’s right..!
..the staus-quo suits just fine..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Noooo!
Sarah Palin all the way!
Just ask Redbaiter.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
The “house” effect is a polite way of saying that Rammussen’s methodology is biased towards Republicans (and a 9% bias is pretty substantial!)
In non-election years, there results tend to be at odds with more mainstream survey institutions but they tends to merge in election years. There is some thought that in the non-election years they over-sample in Republican strong-holds so that they can get pro-republican results and then go back to more equal sampling in election years (so they look credible compared to election results).
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
“I am thinking someone other than Sarah “I can see Russia from my window” Palin.”
. . . just need to try and put that left-wing progressive lie to rest one final time.
Sarah Palin actually said: “They’re our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.”
Check out the Charlie Gibson interview snippet here – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXL86v8NoGk)
From Slate –
Russia and Alaska are divided by the Bering Strait, which is about 55 miles at its narrowest point. In the middle of the Bering Strait are two small, sparsely populated islands: Big Diomede, which sits in Russian territory, and Little Diomede, which is part of the United States. At their closest, these two islands are a little less than two and a half miles apart, which means that, on a clear day, you can definitely see one from the other. The Diomede Islands are often blanketed by persistent fog, which makes visibility difficult. On a clear day, though, a person standing at sea level can see a little less than three miles across the ocean. You can see farther if you go higher—at the highest altitude on Little Diomede (919 feet), you can see for about 37 miles. (Between mid-December and mid-June, when the water between the two islands freezes, an intrepid explorer can just walk from one to the other.)
http://www.slate.com/id/2200155/
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
GPT1>I am thinking someone other than Sarah “I can see Russia from my window” Palin.
You’re confusing Sarah Palin with Tina Fey. Tina Fey has no aspirations to be a Republican presidential candidate.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 2:04 pm
> Could a 77 year old libertarian from Texas really beat Obama?
A creationist who thinks that sick people who worked hard for little reward for many years should die a preventable death because they can’t afford healthcare? Who is opposed to there being any minimum wage or social welfare at all? I suspect the only people who vote for him do so out of ignorance (probably because they are misinformed by corporatised media).
It is true that Obama has, to some extent, been controlled by corporates as well – so really, it comes down to ‘President A who does what corporations want’ vs ‘President B who does what corporations want’.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
The interesting thing is that Obama was worshipped as the Messiah by the media and they still promote him as best they can, Fox News aside.
Vote:By contrast, the Tea Party crowd, Sarah Palin and everyone else who opposes the Obamination tend to get smeared by much of the media.
Obama has done such a fantastic job in pissing off so many people.
His extreme anti-American socialism has created the shift to libertarianism that we see in the US today.
Obama is an all-round failure. He will be blamed for any problems with Obamacare, then there’s the extra taxes to pay for it, plus any added deficit too.
Despite or because of the stimulus, unemployment is still rising and real incomes are falling.
Matters are not improving either and that is before we look at foreign policy.
Obama will be a one term wonder in the mould of Jimmy Carter.
Yes, Ron Paul might well beat him come 2012. But I would prefer Sarah Palin, who is delivering a far more effective and sound message this time round.
April 16th, 2010 at 2:11 pm
Obama is toast (pun intended). I reckon Hillary will desert the Messiah to run against him for the Democrats in 2012.
Vote:With a bit of luck Obama will be a mere blip in US presidential history.
April 16th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
I’m tipping Obama will retire for a while give Hiliary a go and run when he gets into his 60s. He dosen’t strike as though he is obsessed with the power and his kids are still young.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 2:25 pm
chapman..(wtf..??..is that what passes for political analysis..in yr brain..?.)
and yes..sarah palin..!..please..!
..(tina fey needs the work..we all need the laughs..)
..and angus..who cares about the russia/porch-quote..
..palin has a full library of howlers..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
While we are discussing Mrs Palin
Vote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/from-hockey-mom-to-diva-contract-reveals-sarah-palins-taste-for-luxury-1945348.html
April 16th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting Ron Paul could win in 2012, though if the Republicans pick the wrong person he could decide to run as a spoiler.
I suspect the Republican candidate will be someone that most people haven’t heard of yet – just like Obama was in 2006.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
It is true that Obama has, to some extent, been controlled by corporates as well – so really, it comes down to ‘President A who does what corporations want’ vs ‘President B who does what corporations want’.
Frame it like that and you don’t sound too bothered by Paul at all.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Don’t think i’ve ever heard it be suggested that Paul just does what corporations want.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
At least Ron paul has the ability to garner popular support. Unlike the NZ Libertarians, lead by loons like Cresswell et al who in their earnestness and zealotry, have converted what was a great little political organisation into a mind control cult very similar to that of Ron L Hubbard and the Scientologists.
From 8000 votes to practically nothing in a few years. Anyone with any sense of responsibility, (and in this case we’re talking about the entire upper echelons of the Libertarianz) would have resigned a long time ago. If not out of responsibilty, then at least out of shame.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 4:01 pm
” just need to try and put that left-wing progressive lie to rest one final time. ”
Good try Angus, but I don’t think you’ll ever puit it to rest, and there are two reasons for this-
1) The left are too black hole stupid and politically ignorant to know that it was only ever something Tina Fey (not Sarah Palin) said, and…
2) Those that do actually know that she never said it are still happy to repeat it as a smear and a lie because that is the way they operate. Conscienceless hate filled liars.
Either way, stupid or deliberate liars, the fucked in the head commie goons will go on repeating it.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Sarah Palin for prez. Ron Paul for veep. Sounds like an unbeatable combination to me.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
didyaknow that ron paul is a vegan..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
If Mitt Romney wasn’t a Mormon I suspect he’d have a reasonable chance. Excellent record as Governor of a liberal state, and rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics when he was brought in as CEO.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
Had a quick look at the link from Richard X. It is from the Independent newspaper, which may be left-wing seeing as it features an article from Robert Fisk at the top of the page. I just thought it looks like the usual hatchet job from the left.Sarah Palin wears “expensive designer gear” type slur of the usual left-wing order.
Like which of the reporters from the Independent would investigate the cost of Michelle Obama’s wardrobe?
I have always believed that Sarah Palin is a competent and hard-working politician who is for fiscal responsibility and commonsense governance. I still think that is true and that people of the left should be a bit more civil and sensible in their discourse.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
Somebody should start the Tea Party Party. With 24% support, it would do really well.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Don’t think Palin will run in 2012, she’s playing the long game, I’m thinking 2016 or 2020. Fuckabee is deadweight. Romney could produce the big tent but the bloodsucking Dems will play the “durp Romneycare/durp Mormon” card. Guiliani possibly has a stronger case after four years of neglected national security and a few more failed terrorist attack attempts. Ron Paul is just lol. Chris Christie? Too early for him possibly. Bachmann? Palin without the media manipulation talent.
Barky may well win in 2012, then again it took Carter his full four years to fuck up hard enough to get his arse kicked by Reagan.
Phillip, go and have a few more tokes, you might be more coherent by then. “..a great big progressive (global) wave..is breaking over you,” what, like in Hungary?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
I don’t see the Tea Partiers supporting an actual libertarian, if Ron Paul really is one (I don’t know enough to comment for or against that statement). The movement seems to have grown out of a kind of hysteria about the economic problems and short-term self-interest. A proper libertarian would remove subsidies, barriers to movement of labour, etc. In principle, people might froth about government intervention, but when it comes down to it, in many cases they’re frothing about the specifics of the government intervention rather than the intervention itself: that is to say, they see it as imposing direct costs or otherwise not benefitting them and they feel entitled to their slice of the pie.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 5:46 pm
“Don’t think i’ve ever heard it be suggested that Paul just does what corporations want”
Yes, his stance on the Fed is something I would have thought gives Wall Street the shits peter. And a very good stance it is. There’s a lot of ignorance about Ron Paul, possibli due to [gasp] deliberate disassembly via the MSM.
Can anyone name any other politician that has voluntarily eshewed a payrise for as long as he has?
For that and many other reasons he deserves far more exposure than the MSM have given him. He would be great, as in transformational.
For the first time in a long time, Americans would have a President who actually cared more about them than they did about their own skin.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Where is Redbaiter, still banned?
Anyway, the Tina Fey/see Russia from my house line was inspired by Palin blathering on in an interview with Charlie Gibson of ABC when asked about the Russia-Georgia conflict:
GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state [talking about Alaska] give you?
PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.
I shit you not, that was the answer given. Just genius. Then she makes it even worse during the foreign policy section of her infamous Katie Couric interview.
With her Fox News media training she will appear on the surface as a viable candidate. Still dumb as shit, but maybe she will be better at regurgitating talking points. Ron Paul is the candidate that is most true to the traditional values of the GOP. Unfortunately the party has shifted so far to the right over the last 10 years he has been left out in the cold.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Ohhhh, there he is. Sorry Redbaiter.
The fact that Alaska is near to Russia does not make it an acceptable answer from a potential VP to a foreign policy question.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
Fuck that dumb bitch Couric and that dick sucker Gibson. They can enjoy their less than 20 million viewing figures and continuing irrelevance.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
“..I still think that is true and that people of the left should be a bit more civil and sensible in their discourse…”
much as the right here were to clark..?
..who can forget ‘bilious-bitch’..as just one of the tamer insults consistantly used..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
The tea party movement is fashionable, not realistic. Of course it’s fashionable to be a small govt. glibertarian in times like this, but obama has won by passing health care and shifting the policitcal landscape. The republicans can only whinge as they failed to stop him
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
oh look..!..there is hurf..with another of his insightful/erudite/intellectual critiques..!
..aren’t we blessed..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Shifting the political landscape in causing his approvals to plummet even harder.
I wonder if Paul Holmes has acknowledged that yet. My guess is no.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
can anyone make any sense of what hurf said at 7.03..?
translations welcomed..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
btw hurf..’dick-sucker couric’..and ‘dumb bitch gibson’ are more potent/nastier..
..and that is the effect you seek..eh..?
(you’re welcome..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
Obama’s approval ratings have continued to fall since his party’s healfcaer legislation was passed.
Paul Holmes has yet to publicly acknowledge this fact.
Anything else?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
“But if they do find someone without serous baggage, then it is definitely game on.”
Typical!, the right have to find somebody who is squeaky clean while the dirty, stinking, crooked left put up a un-veted Kenyan with links to terrorists, racists and communists.
Just watch as the pinko media go after whoever the republicans select, the only chance the GOP really have is to find a black candidate who is not afraid to challenge the media and one who is not afraid to go after the Kenyan, one thing is for sure, no white man will be allowed to do so by the politically correct wankers in the MSM.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
” Still dumb as shit”
Sure, she ain’t no brain surgeon, however, she is twice as smart as that fucking idiot Biden and on a par with the Kenyan.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Palin for Prez. Ron Paul for Veep. Please, please, please!
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
Isn’t there tarpaulin you should be slashing, Little Miss Bryan?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:06 pm
Palin may improve enough over the next couple of years but I doubt it. I think peteremcc is mostly likely right, the GOP candidate is someone who isn’t a well known contender yet.
The Tea Party is a significant protest phenomenon but the problem is that it isn’t a party, it’s a number of diverse groups that have had one umbrella painted over them. When it comes to candidate support they are as likely to be all over the place as they are to be united. And united-ish they would have a “too far right” problem that could scare of the more moderate sympathisers.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
More Teabonics
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
Most likely one of those frothing leftists at work, cha. Similar style of poster.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
Most likely HD but back to Ron Paul, heck, he’s such a nice guy even the lovely folk at Stormfront like him.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:36 pm
What’s new on Ron Paul’s website?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm
That Cha is the obvious that this post ignores Israel would never let anyone who questions the relationship between US and Israel.
This is the main reason Ron Paul never gets traction. That and no-one would accept his economics.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Prawn Haul has quite the eclectic power base.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
Move On are *not* liberal, they are socialist.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
It’s not the economic nuttery that rankles kiki it’s Pauls admiration of a bloke called Eustace Mullins.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 9:42 pm
He liked the books he wrote on the federal reserve so what’s the problem Cha?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Whats the problem?
Mullins was accused of antisemitism by the Anti-Defamation League. In 1968, Mullins authored a tract, The Biological Jew (Staunton, Va., Faith and Service Books, Aryan League of America, 1968), which includes the following statement about Nazi antisemitism: “Nazism is simply this — a proposal that the German people rid themselves of the parasitic Jews. The gentile host dared to protest against the continued presence of the parasite, and attempted to throw it off.” The book also claims that Jews “drink the blood of innocent gentile children” in religious ceremonies, and that this practice represents the essence of Judaism.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 10:03 pm
So what dose that have to do with his books on the Federal Reserve?
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
Ron Paul is a bigot with a long history BL.
The bigoted past of Ron Paul.
They were published under a banner containing Paul’s name, and the articles (except for one special edition of a newsletter that contained the byline of another writer) seem designed to create the impression that they were written by him–and reflected his views. What they reveal are decades worth of obsession with conspiracies, sympathy for the right-wing militia movement, and deeply held bigotry against blacks, Jews, and gays. In short, they suggest that Ron Paul is not the plain-speaking antiwar activist his supporters believe they are backing–but rather a member in good standing of some of the oldest and ugliest traditions in American politics.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
“Could a 77 year old libertarian from Texas really beat Obama?”
well, a retarded
Vote:frat boy from texas became
pres so why not eh?
April 16th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Yeah, fuck Couric and Gibson with their “gotcha journalism!” Since when did journalists ask straightforward questions that any politician, let alone a VP candidate, should be able to answer??
I also agree with the idea that the next Republican candidate is still relatively unknown. A fresh face could be the ticket to rebuilding the party.
I’ve also decided that Big Bruv must be taking the piss, much like Stephen Colbert does. Surely nobody in NZ can call Obama “the Kenyan” and be serious hahaha. I salute you.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 11:07 pm
Yah Yah, yet strangely he dose the opposite as a congressmen to that of which he is accused, i understand that to some social liberals it must look like the Hunnic hordes are at the gates but the reality is you both have alot more in common than you think.
Vote:April 16th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Is this comment from philu the greatest irony of the day?
Vote:can anyone make any sense of what hurf said at 7.03..? ,/i>
This from a chap who refuses to use any known form of grammar and simply spews words forth for no apparent reason other than to cause delay scrolling through to the next comment. Gold.
April 16th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
kieran – i like
Vote:it even more when bruv says
‘hussein obama’
April 16th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
At the Southern Republican Leadership Conference Ron Paul supporters boo Mike Pence for saying “America stands with Israel” and when Ron Paul gets going with his isolationist lunacy the anti Paul conservatives hoot and scream at him. Watch and weep BL.
Vote:
April 16th, 2010 at 11:49 pm
Okay thats great Cha, i like turtles.
Vote:
April 17th, 2010 at 8:17 am
Ron Paul is the local congressman of the coastal area of Texas just north of here. He is one of those guys whom I admire very much, but wouldn’t trust anywhere near the big red button. Not that he would ever nuke anyone, but he’d probably sell the weapons to the Iranians and buy gold with the proceeds!
Interesting that nobody so far has actually mentioned the most likely contenders for the Republican nomination in 2012 – Tim Pawlenty and Bobby Jindal. It’ll be one of those guys if it’s anyone. Romney is yesterday’s news.
Vote:April 17th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
This poll reflects more the current voter anxiety with Obama than any real attraction to Paul. He’s a libertarian with very limited electoral appeal. Aside from his quirky policies, his media persona is weak and his speaking style offputting.
I am going to go on the record and say that, baring Obama crashing into the mid 30′s in approval by middle of 2011, I do not believe that Palin will run for the 2012 nomination. There is much to admire about her and she absolutely has SOME electoral appeal but mostly to the GOP base. Her best bet is to the do hard academic and policy understanding yards that Reagan did in the 76-80 period that made him much more prepared to take on Carter and beat him easily.
I was a Romney guy – still like him enormously and know people who worked with him in Boston in the private sector and speak extremely highly of his acumen. His crucial role in Romneycare in MA is a supperating wound that gets worse as the electoral popularity of Obamacare continues to sink after its passage. It could be the kiss of death for him in the Republican primary. He is the putative front runner at the moment on paper. He has the $$ and he is next in line and that is the GOP way – to pick no 2 from the last election. Finally there is the Mormon factor – wont be an issue in the primary as his religion was thrashed to death in and amongst the GOP electorate – could be more of an issue for Independents in the general.
Gringrich is too old and Huckabee too fiscally wet and too evangelical for the general. Plus he pardoned a felon who brutally killed cops in Seattle – those ads will be played by his GOP opponents relentlessly.
Obama was a dark horse in 2006 – a possibility talked about but not a top tier candidate until the primaries got underway proper in 2007. Im with Blair – Pawlenty has some attractiveness as does Jindal. I believe a real dark horse is IN Governor Mitch Daniels. V successful in this role – one of the few states running a surplus, was a Office of Budget Management Director under Bush 43 and quite articulate.
Its very early days yet. But things do look better for the Repubs as nicely summarised by the guys at Powerline:
“The latest Gallup polling contains plenty of bad news for Democrats. First, Americans’ favorable rating of the Democratic Party has dropped to 41 percent, the lowest point in the 18-year history of this measure.
Second, only 28 percent of registered voters say that most members of Congress deserve to be re-elected. Similarly, 65 percent of registered voters say most members of Congress do not deserve re-election. These numbers are, respectively, a new low and a new high.
Third, only 49 percent of registered voters think their own member of Congress deserves to be re-elected. This approaches an all-time low, and is lower than the corresponding numbers in 2006 and 2008.
As Bill Otis says, “it has taken Obama less than 15 months to do for the Democrats what it took Bush eight years to do for the Republicans.”
Vote:April 17th, 2010 at 10:01 pm
KKKiwiInAmerikkka: “Obama was a dark horse in 2006″ – RACIST!
Seriously, some interesting observations there. What do you think of Paul Ryan?
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Paul+Ryan&aq=f
Vote:April 18th, 2010 at 1:04 am
I expect Obama to win in 2012, mostly because the Republicans don’t have anyone ready yet.
It looks like there will be quite a bit of talent looking at the 2016 election and it’s a much more attractive target too because you don’t have to run against an incumbent.
Highly likely candidates are Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.
Possible candidates are Mike Pence and Rudy Guiliani.
Of those I think Huckabee or Guiliani would have the best shot at winning the nomination though Guiliani would do much better in the general election than Huckabee. Romney’s chances have kinda drifted away. His creation of the Massachusetts health scheme used to be seen as a positive by many, but now it’s been used as a model for Obamacare it’s a huge negative, especially given how big of an issue healthcare is bound to be in the election now.
Someone who could potentially shake things up if he decides to run, and who probably can’t wait until 2016 is Newt Gingrich. Hugely popular among Republicans and probably the only one with a decent chance against Obama realistically. Hayley Barbour is another along the same line as Gingrich but probably not quite good enough.
As for possible 2016 candidates (who might also think about a VP run in 2012),
I expect Sarah Palin won’t run in 2012 and wait until 2016 to start with a clean slate and not have to run against Obama again.
Bobby Jindal blew his chance for 2012 in his reply to Obama’s first State of the Union but he’ll be ready by 2016.
Luis Fortuño might be an outside option too. From Puerto Rico he can’t vote in Presidential elections but he can stand and is the first Republican governor in Puerto Rico for a long time and his work so far has been highly regarded.
Six years is a long time though and there might be many others interested by then too.
Vote:April 18th, 2010 at 3:44 am
IseeRed
Paul Ryan is awesome and I actually forgot him. His dissection of the health care legislation and his clear enunciation of conservative principles is very Reaganesque. Frankly though-he’s too young and inexperienced (only in his 5th 2 year term as a Congressman). Being electable as President means you need to have been good Governors (Roosevelt, Reagan, Clinton, Bush 43) reasonable private sector experience (Bush 43), some Federal Executive branch experience (Bush 41) and if a Congressman best to have served in the House AND Senate (Kennedy and Johnson,) or have had some substantive military service (Eisenhower, Kennedy, Bush 41).
Peteremcc
Mike Pence is very unlikely to run for the same reasons cited earlier about Paul Ryan. Guiliani bombed in 08 and is highly unlikely to run again. His pro-choice stance was the killer in the 08 Primary and he’s not going to flip flop on that.
Hayley Barbor has pretty much announced he won’t be running-he’s a good Governor but of too small a state plus age is against him. I share your admiration for Newt but he is considered as damaged and used goods. He left Congress under a hail of controversy much of it manufactured by the Dems for sure but there were enough ethics violations to stick and his opponents will just endlessly repeat the video loops of all that drama and then there’s the serial affairs which dont play well here in the US. I believe he will run but won’t win the nomination.
Bobby Jindal did himself no favours with that SOTU reply but it is not a fatal blow to his chances. He is very media savvy and eloquent in interviews and does pretty well in debates. The canned address reply especially in contrast with Obama’s rhetorical skills in full flight made for an unflattering comparison. A couple of grunty well received stump speeches would erase that memory. You are right though, he’s not quite seasoned enough for 2012 and he would have to show a stunning turnaround in LA to make his case. He has done very very well in changing decades of corruption in LA and were it not for the sandbag of the nasty recession, I believe he could be able to show some pretty amazing state level results.
Fortuno is a good operator but most Americans do not consider Puerto Rico to yet be part of America proper plus he likely does not meet the Article 2 Constitutional requirements to be President (ie natural born citizen).
Vote:April 18th, 2010 at 7:18 am
I guess it’s a reflection of modern politics where someones ability to speak in public is rated as so important – but the real work is done behind the scenes. Image rules!
Aren’t those writing Obama off now being premature? Or just wishful thinking? It’s likely the Dems will lose a lot of ground in this year’s elections, but that’s only halfway through his term.
What if the economy has recovered reasonably well by 2012 (it should have, otherwise he deserves to go)? And what if the horror stories on his healthcare have proven to be overblown scare tactic bullshit and it does look to many people that they are getting a bit better coverage for a bit less? The US will be mostly out of Iraq (which may or may not have turned to custard but that is a possibility no matter when the US exit). And there’s a good chance Afghanistan won’t be any worse than it has been for the last decade. And the US looks no more communist than it has done for yonks (another overblown scare tactic).
And the Tea Party – it is as likely to be a millstone for the GOP as it is a milestone.
There are a lot of other unknowns. What if Icelandic volcanoes keep spewing ash over Europe? Some predictions are that it could keep it up for a couple of years. That would have huge economic repercussions. What if the wind turns and it grounds aircraft in the US for an extended period?
What if? Two and a half years is a long time in politics, internally and internationally.
Vote:April 18th, 2010 at 10:57 am
Peter George
Image sadly does rule. After all we have as President a good looking and eloquent man whom the media fell for but who had run nothing of substance (excepting the Harvard Law Revue-permanent staff of 3 and the Annenberg Challenge Foundation- dispensed grants to lefty education causes with no measureable results ), had spent 50% of his Senate term campaigning for President and still holds the IL State Senate record for voting Present but hey he gives great speeches.
You are right-it is way too early to write off Obama. I think there is a strong consensus that the Democrats in Congress are going to get spanked in Nov 2010. How Obama reacts to that will be one of the largest determinants of the likelihood of his re-election. A Clinton style tack to the centre (where Obama actually campaigned from but instead governed as a card carrying lefty) where he works with a GOP dominated Congress to pass bi-partisan law could work. Remeber though that Clinton’s re-election was helped by Ross Perot who still in 1996 siphoned off about 5% of the support from Dole-more than Clinton’s winning margin of 4%.
What if the huge Obamacare tax increases induce a double dip recession? I don’t know how your scenario of “people getting better coverage” comes from. If you’d been reading the actual legislation, the Dems were forced to load the taxes in the front end but delay the implimentation of the lion’s share of the benefits until 2014. This is because the only way the OBM could score the thing as remotely close to deficit neutral was to have 10 years of taxes paying for 8 years of benefits. Whilst this slight of hand was sufficient to bamboozle wavering Democrat Congressmen, it means that the worse aspects of the legislation will hit home BEFORE 2012 and the benefits not hit home AFTER 2012.
The US will not be out of Iraq except a few token troop returns so that won’t provide any electoral tail wind.
No one reputable says the US is becoming Communist. However exploding deficits and government take overs of the auto industry, health care and massive bailouts and the TARP funds have a much more socialist edge than mainstream Americna is comfortable with. If you believe the Tea Party is a millstone aroud the GOP necks you clearly dont read polls. When Gallup polls 44% of all adults (not registered voters who trend more Republican) who say the Tea party policies are closer to them vs only 40% saying Obama is closest to them then the Dems are in deep doggy doo doo. The split for the vital Independents who actually were the group that elected Obama is 50/34% then the Tea party is in reality a millstone around Obama’s neck.
There are plenty of unknowns for sure but one thing is for sure, Obama breaks the cardinal rule of successful elections-that of not straying too far from the political centre of the country. The US is a centre right leaning country – when Gallup polls people’s self confessed ideological leaning, consistently for the last 30 years an average of 60% of Americans describe themselves as conservative vs a maximum of 40% who describe themselves as liberal. Obama is avowedly centre left. Whilst that excites fellow travellers like you on the left in NZ it places him outside the mainstream of US political thinking hence his declining political ratings across all policy categories and all polling organisations.
Vote:April 20th, 2010 at 7:44 am
Bobby Jindal blew his chance for 2012 in his reply to Obama’s first State of the Union but he’ll be ready by 2016.
Bill Clinton’s 1988 convention speech was universally regarded as awful. Four years later he was President. Jindal will have no problem bouncing into contention should he decide to run.
Vote: