ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, September 07, 2012

Disengaged

I told you last year that Obama doesn't really want to win the election. I'll bet he's now wishing he'd gone with his original impulse, which was to find some excuse to gracefully evade the nomination and go on the international speech circuit.

Obama at the DNC: That’s it? It would have been better had he not spoken. Seriously. Like an aging rock star, President Obama, in a downsized venue, with downsized proposal and spewing downsized rhetoric only reminded us how far he has fallen from the heady days of 2008. The man, the agenda and the aura are faint imitations of their 2008 incarnations.
- Jennifer Rubin

I was stunned. This is a man who gave one of the great speeches of our time in 2004. And he gave one of the emptiest speeches I’ve ever heard on a national stage… There was nothing in it…
- Charles Krauthammer

The president’s aides understood they could never re-create the power of the past but hoped to convince voters that more has been done than commonly recognized. The “promises kept” theme was intended to address the same swing voters Mr. Romney sought last week to win over. Mr. Obama directly acknowledged the disappointments.... The president appeared to become emotional toward the end of his speech as he spoke of wounded veterans who somehow managed to walk and run and bike on prosthetic legs. He said he did not know if they would vote for him, but added that they nonetheless gave him hope that difficulties could be overcome.
- The New York Times

the president often felt flat, rote, and unconvincing — almost as though he wasn’t quite convinced by his own arguments and promises, and felt a little awkward selling them to us.... I think that while this convention helped the Democrats overall, the president himself delivered one of the weakest major performances of his career.
- Ross Douthat, The New York Times

Rubin, Krauthammer, and Douthat could be dismissed as Republicans simply looking to criticize the rival presidential candidate were it not for the New York Times article saying essentially the same things between the lines. The striking thing about the NYT's summary of Obama's speech is the complete lack of superlatives that characterizes their normal coverage of Obama. If they could have found something, anything, to inflate and praise in his speech, they would have done so. But they didn't, because Obama gave them nothing.

Obama is disengaged and he is too much of a narcissist to throw himself into a campaign that he doesn't even want to win. All he wants at this point is to avoid an embarrassing landslide in the presidential vote; one potentially informative metric might be to compare how many Democratic candidates for other offices appear on stage with him during the last three months compared to past presidential campaigns. I'll bet Obama doesn't appear with half as many candidates this fall as he did in 2008 or George W. Bush did in 2004.

Labels:

80 Comments:

Blogger finndistan September 07, 2012 5:54 AM  

"I was stunned. This is a man who gave one of the great speeches of our time in 2004. And he gave one of the emptiest speeches I’ve ever heard on a national stage… There was nothing in it…
- Charles Krauthammer"

Wrong. He never gave a good speech in a sense that could be considered great. "Change bla, change bla". To African Americans, he sounded great because he was darker than other candidates, to women he sounded great, well because media said he sounded great, to other guys he sounded great, maybe because they hate themselves, the west, their history, whatever?

In some comment I found a putin-obama comparison in pictures.

Yes, the US has elected a president who covers his balls when witnessing a throwdown in Judo.

Would you trust your president to keep your back if you would encounter trouble?

Anonymous re allow anonymous comments September 07, 2012 5:59 AM  

Vox don't you know, Bill Clinton's speech that was watched only by leftist partisans and a handful of GOPers who were more interested in "know your enemy" than the NFL opener had already sealed his re-election. The most liked president in history used facts and logic to destroy the Republican platform point by point!

Anonymous Roundtine September 07, 2012 6:02 AM  

My favorite line: I worked with Republicans to cut $1 billion in spending.

Blogger Shimshon September 07, 2012 6:46 AM  

As far as I can see it, the only possible benefit to a Romney win would be to perhaps restrain Israel from attacking Iran (this is only based on current analysis that the idiots in charge here will attack before the elections because Obama might win again). But then there's a real danger that America would actually do that instead (with Romney at the helm). Otherwise, it seems pretty clear that even if Obama wins, his heart is just not in it anymore and that seems preferable to someone who craves the job like Romney.

Anonymous Rosalys September 07, 2012 6:54 AM  

I especially liked when he three or four times said, "You did that!" This is supposed to effectively counteract his now infamous, "You didn't build that!" speech. Done with such finesse that none of us will even know that we have been manipulated into loving him again - NOT.

I disagree that Obama doesn't want to be re-elected. It's an easy job (for him because like every other responsibility he's ever had he's been able to get others to do the work for him) and the perks are great. What's not to like?

Anonymous Josh September 07, 2012 6:57 AM  

Romney isn't going to restrain Israel. He's much more likely than Obama to launch another war.

Blogger Rantor September 07, 2012 6:57 AM  

Daily Beast calling Obama's speech, "pedestrian and overconfident." Bill's was better...

Anonymous Kickass September 07, 2012 7:14 AM  

Bill was weird though. What was that "your gonna feel it" crap about. Is he threatening us?

Anonymous Heh September 07, 2012 7:26 AM  

"Obama is disengaged and he is too much of a narcissist to throw himself into a campaign that he doesn't even want to win."

Or, he is such a narcissist that he thinks he will win no matter what he does, even if he doesn't try, because it is so obvious that he's the best candidate that he doesn't even have to explain it.

Anonymous VD September 07, 2012 7:28 AM  

Or, he is such a narcissist that he thinks he will win no matter what he does, even if he doesn't try, because it is so obvious that he's the best candidate that he doesn't even have to explain it.

No. Consider his behavior in 2008.

Anonymous Mr Green Man September 07, 2012 7:37 AM  

He really did work hard in 2008 -- one might crassly say it is the only time he worked hard, except maybe in his lawsuit to bring sub prime loans to minorities who had no credit in Chicago.

The Big O has been in non-stop campaign mode since 2004 - or at least, his machine has been. It really does seem like he's tired of being the new face of the NWO. You can only repeat the same lines so many times and expect them to resonate.

Anonymous DT September 07, 2012 7:52 AM  

I was quite frankly surprised by Michelle Obama's "change takes time" approach. This is as close to admitting that the first term was a disaster as you can get from a president's wife.

Then again, if Vox is right then the lackluster slogans and performances by both of them makes perfect sense.

Blogger Bandit September 07, 2012 8:22 AM  

He should have said nothing since he has nothing to say

Blogger Doom September 07, 2012 8:24 AM  

I actually do believe he wants to win. I also think he has burned so many bridges than what created the illusion of him before is simply not available to him now. He is self-destructive, I keep wondering if he will be the first president, in or out of office, who commits suicide. It wouldn't surprise me to one day learn that his handlers had to spoon-feed him through the whole term with whatever... and I mean making what Kennedy did and used look downright over-the-counter and g-rated. He typifies the left, thin skin to the bone, no backbone, no real functional ideas, no heart or soul, and a will to fight that would land a MMF fighter on the mat to a little girl. It's all theory, or something.

Someday I might even tell you what I REALLY think.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 September 07, 2012 8:34 AM  

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Obama will probably win re-election, not because of his lackluster campaign strategy, but because the Republicans have effectively shut out a huge portion of their vote.

If they had at the very least acknowledged Ron Paul's victories at the RNC rather than changing rules acting like a bunch of totalitarians, then the Republicans might have had a shot at winning.

Anonymous MeMyselfI September 07, 2012 8:39 AM  

It serves the raccisss narrative to lose.

Heads he wins, tails we lose.

This is *exactly* what he wanted. He's kicking back and enjoying the endgame...

Anonymous Hood September 07, 2012 8:41 AM  

did anyone else notice how eerily Joe Biden impersonated Goebbels last night? The propaganda was stifling.

Anonymous RC September 07, 2012 8:47 AM  

OT: The Bernanke still has the power. Announce likely QE and gold spikes $30 within minutes.

Blogger Shimshon September 07, 2012 8:50 AM  

Josh, it's not that Romney would restrain Israel. It's that the Israeli government expects Romney to do its dirty work so it doesn't have to. Not that I agree with the sentiment at all. But that seems to be the basic situation.

Anonymous dh September 07, 2012 8:51 AM  

> I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Obama will probably win re-election,
> not because of his lackluster campaign strategy, but because the Republicans have
> effectively shut out a huge portion of their vote.

Close, but the answer is demographics.

This is most likely the last Presidential campaign where a Republican has a chance to win soley by consolidating the white vote. Vice Pres. George HW Bush won about 60% of the white vote, and had a large electoral win. Mitt Romney, on the hand, needs to claim at least 65% of the white vote in order to squeak out a 2004-sized win.

Whatever happens this year, it will be the last year it's a possible strategy for Republicans. Next time around, they will need to do something else to be competitive. The demographics are not forgiving, and it's only going to get worse.

Anonymous Curlytop September 07, 2012 8:55 AM  

While I agree that Obama seems to be "phoning it in" badly and probably doesn't really want to win the election, I don't think Mittens appears to be any more motivated. He isn't actually throwing in the towel like McCain did... yet, but listening to both candidates is the perfect remedy for insomnia. Neither one can manage to pump out that hot air in a heartfelt manner anymore.

Or maybe I've been hanging around here too long, so my BS meter has been fine-tuned to the point that nothing coming out of the mouth of a politician is going to leave an impression on me anymore?

And yeah, Clinton's "you gonna' feel it" speech was creepy; the counterpoint to Eastwood's from the Republican Convention.

Anonymous dh September 07, 2012 8:58 AM  

VD--

Once again you just make stuff up.

> I'll bet he's now wishing he'd gone with his original impulse, which was to find
> some excuse to gracefully evade the nomination and go on the international speech
> circuit.

Zero. There is zero backing up your naked assertion.

Anonymous Salt September 07, 2012 8:59 AM  

I saw some of Biden's speech. He ended with "God bless you all". I'm sure that went over well with around half the attendees.

Obama was lackluster but you'd not know that watching some of the people there. The anointed one was on stage.

I think Obama's numbers in the election could be only those of the far left hardcore socialists. I really can't see moderate democrats giving him the nod.
Perhaps the change from a 70K to 20K venue is shades of things to come?

Anonymous aero September 07, 2012 9:01 AM  

Obama and the DNC are like a star falling into a black hole. They can talk about forward all they want. They are still being sucked into the black hole.


Anonymous HardReturn¶ September 07, 2012 9:01 AM  

He doesn't seem to want the job but has to go through the motions. Maybe it's better that Obama gets reelected so that this creepy cult of personality nonsense can totally unravel and he would reap the usual lame duck term of disappointment and mockery. Republicans deserve to languish in failure as lessons about running another establishment statist candidate were not learned. The lose/lose scenario may yield the most Schadenfreude.

Anonymous dB September 07, 2012 9:03 AM  

Obama is completely disengaged. He is running on autopilot. I don't think this is a matter of him not wanting to win the election, it is a matter of others hyping it around him that compels him. He is doing it for the people after all. I watched a couple moments of the speech but then I turned it off because it really doesn't matter what he says, it what he actually does that counts. And the people there are just hyped because he is their messiah but yet they do not realize that obama and romney are just about the same. If obama had a white mormon child, it would look like Romney.

Anonymous joe doakes September 07, 2012 9:09 AM  

I feel sorry for President Obama. He has been an affirmative action hire his entire life. College, law school, lecturing, community outreach, state and national Senate - they all had one thing in common: nobody expected anything of you, nobody demanded results, they were happy to have you there filling a quota and not doing anything to embarass them. Joe Biden nailed it: an articulate, bright, clean, nice-looking Black-ish guy; that's all we want.

President sounds like a cool gig and there are awesome perks, but it's no fun. People bitch and complain about everything you do, or don't do, and that's a tough adjustment to a coddled kid.

Think of the Ghost-Busters scene: "You've never been out of college. I've worked in the private sector. They expect results!" Surprise, Bar, so does the voting public who hired you as President.

The Greek columns, stadiums of worshippers and Nobel Prize were cool. But three years later, vacations to everywhere and free golf aren't enough to outweigh the annoyance of everyone demanding decisive actions and then bitching about them.

Vox is right - he's going through the motions because he doesn't know what else to do. But his heart isn't in it.

Anonymous E. PERLINE September 07, 2012 9:22 AM  

If Obama wins the election it will illustrate the triumph of emotion over reason. Some of the rapt close-ups at the convention reminded me of newsreels of 1930 era Germans listening to Hitler.

There is one interesting anomaly. I heard Obama is looking to sell his Chicago home that he got a deal on, and is bidding to buy a 35 million dollar home in Hawaii. Is he also considering that he might lose the election?

Anonymous JP (real one) September 07, 2012 9:30 AM  

While I agree with the disengagement, I still think Obama will win. I wish it weren't the case, as I see Romney as the slightly lesser of two evils, but the stock market continues to predict Obama.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout/obama-election-odds-better-think-says-hirsch-181506895.html

Scroll to the chart in this article. Note how the Dow is following the usual "Party in Power Wins" scenario. This year as been a textbook example so far, bottoming out in late May then going straight up.

Also, as stated in the article below, "Obama had the benefit of entering office several weeks before stocks bottomed in March 2009 following the financial crisis. Bounces off major market bottoms are quite common, which Obama benefited from." So longer-term stock market performance (since early 2009) is also in his favor.

http://stream.marketwatch.com/story/dev-test-stream/SS-4-666/SS-4-10858/

Of course, no one is saying how oil/gas prices have also skyrocketed since Obama's inauguration. That's never been used to predict elections, however.

All of this is more objective than trying to impugn someone's motives or guessing how voters will be swayed in the final weeks before the vote.

Anonymous Sissy-boy September 07, 2012 9:36 AM  

Yes, the US has elected a president who covers his balls when witnessing a throwdown in Judo.

http://www.tomatobubble.com/putin_obama.html

Blogger IM2L844 September 07, 2012 9:37 AM  

No. Consider his behavior in 2008.

It makes perfect sense that the financial elite want to install one of their own, as you mentioned on the radio yesterday, but this is the strangest presidential election cycle I have ever witnessed. We all agree that Obama appears to be indifferent and just going through the motions, but so does Romney to a certain extent.

The Republicans have clearly been pulling their punches while the Democrats, with the help of the MSM, are swinging like mad, but not really landing anything. It's almost like both candidates know something we don't. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something is off kilter. The whole thing just seems a little weird. I can't totally discount the possibility that one of them has this in the bag and they both already know who it is.

I'm leaning toward Obama sewing things up with the old assassination attempt gag, but we'll see.

Anonymous joe doakes September 07, 2012 9:52 AM  

The Obama campaign has Romney's tax returns (of course they do, they got Joe The Plumber's and he was a nobody, a mosquito compared to Romney). That's their October Surprise, not a fake assassination ploy.

Blogger RobertT September 07, 2012 9:54 AM  

Disengagement? I don't follow follow politics closely enough to give a detailed list of examples, but from a disengaged perspective, (mine), I don't see the disengagement. His big accomplishments like Obamacare are all in the past, that's true, but what big steps are left to do? Now it's just grinding down the economic machine and biding your time.

All politicians are narcissistic A holes. I'm not even sure that's such a bad trait, but I've never seen another President with such an obvious goal of what he wanted to accomplish in office. And he still has that zeal. Every thing he does makes us weaker.

Blogger The Deuce September 07, 2012 10:02 AM  

Imo, Obama's laziness is a large part of the reason he's such a tyrant who simply tramples over the rule of law wherever convenient. Actually dealing with political opponents, forming agreements, and pursuing his agenda the hard way through the correct legal channels is hard - so much easier to just issue an executive order and decline to enforce laws he doesn't like and be done with it.

Blogger RobertT September 07, 2012 10:02 AM  

Maybe the disengagement idea comes from a basic misunderstanding of the guy. He didn't have that much substance when he was elected, but everyone seemed to think he did. Nothing has changed except our impression of him. He does seem disengaged. But that is nothing new. For instance, I don't believe he had any input into the heath care bill that bears his name. He doesn't care much about the details, just about the outcome, and maybe that's what makes him seem disengaged. I personally dread a second term. After four more years we'll be a mere husk of what we were when McClain lost his race with Obama.

Anonymous Stilicho September 07, 2012 10:07 AM  

Or, he is such a narcissist that he thinks he will win no matter what he does, even if he doesn't try, because it is so obvious that he's the best candidate that he doesn't even have to explain it.

No. Consider his behavior in 2008.


Obama always has the get-out-of-performance-free card that will excuse any failures on his part: "They did not re-elect me because they raciss! Now, who wants to pay me to give a speech?"

Anonymous dh September 07, 2012 10:31 AM  

> For instance, I don't believe he had any input into the heath care bill that bears his name. He
> doesn't care much about the details, just about the outcome, and maybe that's what makes him seem
> disengaged

This is pretty much confirmed fact. Pres. Obama and his team went of their way to let Congress write the bill, to avoid a repeat of the "Hillary-care" fiasco, where both sides of Congress decided to scrap the bill.

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 07, 2012 10:31 AM  

Maybe Obama's not so energetic about re-election because he knows a second term doesn't matter, his life's work is already done: America is now on an autopilot trajectory to be destroyed, and that's all he's wanted, all along. Set the controls for the heart of the sun.

Actually he's really only completing the work begun by Jorge W. "Ninth Circle of Hell Welcoming Committee Now Taking Applications" Bush. Given Obama's makeup and background and on and on and on, I can totally understand why he hates America and wants to see it ground into the dirt. But Bush's tireless efforts to destroy his own country puzzle me. I can only assume that he was an even more compliant marionette than I already suspected.

Blogger CR106 September 07, 2012 10:39 AM  

"I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that Obama will probably win re-election, not because of his lackluster campaign strategy, but because the Republicans have effectively shut out a huge portion of their vote.

If they had at the very least acknowledged Ron Paul's victories at the RNC rather than changing rules acting like a bunch of totalitarians, then the Republicans might have had a shot at winning."


Exactly. I'm not voting for president for the first time in my life. I was a Reagan conservative back in the day. Now I know better. I'm really upset with the Republican party over what they did to Ron Paul and his supporters.

Anonymous George September 07, 2012 11:23 AM  

VD is right...we should dismiss the dismal appraisals of the partisans.

It's also noteworthy that VD did not include any glowing reviews of the speech.

But the absolute most hilarious thing about this post is the discovery that VD is not only a mind reader but a practiced psychologist:

"Obama is disengaged and he is too much of a narcissist to throw himself into a campaign that he doesn't even want to win. All he wants at this point is to avoid an embarrassing landslide in the presidential vote..."

There is another interpretation to Obama's speech. His campaign is so confident that there was no reason to take any risks with last night's speech.

VD is notorious for getting his political predictions wrong. (we are still waiting for Hillary to win the nomination and for Joe Biden to resign). If you are a betting person, it's best to keenly observe VD's political commentary then use to make counter bets.

As for Obama, his problem is that as a speaker and political rhetoritician he is so far beyond any of contemporaries as well as most of his predecessors that expectations are extraordinarily high for him.

Even in talking mode, vs speaker mode, he tends to wipe the floor with others. Recall the healthcare roundtable he held in advance of the healthcare debate when he brought republicans around a large table and wiped the floor with them. It's revealing that Romney is reported to be in debate prep so early on.

He better be.

This contest is over.

Anonymous Stilicho September 07, 2012 11:32 AM  

There is another interpretation to Obama's speech. His campaign is so confident that there was no reason to take any risks with last night's speech.

Do you really believe that?

As for Obama, his problem is that as a speaker and political rhetoritician he is so far beyond any of contemporaries as well as most of his predecessors that expectations are extraordinarily high for him.

Now that's just funny. The soft bigotry of high expectations? For a dancing bear? The way I hear it, his contemporaries are just glad that he is clean and articulate.

Anonymous Stilicho September 07, 2012 11:37 AM  

The best part of Obama's speech was where he promised to end the wars and reduce the debt just like he promised to do in 2008. Of course, in 2012, he is referring to the pointless war in Afghanistan that he has continued and to the outstanding national debt that has doubled under his administration. The man only has one speech which he delivers over and over.

Anonymous JP (real one) September 07, 2012 11:43 AM  

A clear example of someone who can't distinguish a genuinely good speaker/debater from a smooth-talking sophist. Especially a sophist specializing in B-grade class warfare remarks. Don't worry--the ignorant masses are in the same boat.

Obama's intelligence is highly overrated, as are his non-telepromptered speaking skills. He's a pretty good actor. That's about it.

I'm no fan of Newt, but he would've handed Obama his head in a debate. The MSM may not grade it that way, nor the masses who confuse slickness with substance. But Newt is on another level it terms of intelligence and debates. Too bad he's just another neocon jerk.

Anonymous JP (real one) September 07, 2012 11:44 AM  

Oops, I forgot to include the quote to which I was responding. It was the following from Boy George:

"As for Obama, his problem is that as a speaker and political rhetoritician he is so far beyond any of contemporaries as well as most of his predecessors that expectations are extraordinarily high for him."

Anonymous scoobius dubious September 07, 2012 11:45 AM  

"as a speaker and political rhetoritician [Obama] is so far beyond any of [his] contemporaries as well as most of his predecessors"

I've never seen any evidence of this. I see a race-man, socialist, white-hating hack with a built-in base and an automated cheering section in the MSM. And I know more about this sort of thing than you suspect.

Strictly on rhetorical grounds, I can't think of a single memorable phrase of his that wasn't fatuous bullshit. This is a man who professes to be a Christian, who consistently used the phrase "my brother's keeper" in a way that was howlingly incorrect, and nobody told him to his face that he was full of shit, because he had the radioactive double-secret media armor of being The First Black Man In The History of American Politics Who Wasn't A Complete Embarrassment. He's an alleged 'professor' of constitutional law who mysteriously doesn't know the correct meaning of the phrase "a more perfect union" -- who used it in a racially-charged sense, and again, no one had the nerve to correct him. This isn't mastery, it's just knowing where the cowardice resides in this culture.

He's not persuasive to the skeptical. I don't agree that he wiped the floor with his opponents at the healthcare debate, and I seem to recall Paul Ryan kicking his skinny ass up and down the hallway when he got on the mic.

The man has gotten a pass his entire life. Nobody's ever told him that he's full of shit. The worst of it is, he's never even wondered himself whether he's full of shit, which is a thing that all intellectual grown-ups must do at some time in their lives, or else never become somebody worth talking to.

And Obama isn't worth talking to.

Anonymous John-GT September 07, 2012 11:48 AM  

Obama's phoning it in because he can. I was checking out the electoral college count over at Rasmussen and He's got 247 solid votes to Romney's 196. Of the toss up states there's Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, and Colorado for a total of 95 votes. Romney is going to have to be nearly perfect in all those states to win the election. If Florida goes for Obama, he wins. If Ohio and one of the other toss ups goes for Obama he wins. His team has done the math and know it's his election to lose.

Anonymous David September 07, 2012 12:16 PM  

"As for Obama, his problem is that as a speaker and political rhetoritician he is so far beyond any of contemporaries as well as most of his predecessors that expectations are extraordinarily high for him."

Translation: Obama can read from a teleprompter using proper grammar and without mispronouncing common English words.

And when he goes off the teleprompter, we get classics like "You didn't build that."

Anonymous cheddarman September 07, 2012 12:30 PM  

In my opinion, Obama knows he is going to get re-elected. Mid October, the Israelis attack an American ship in the Persian Gulf, and make it look like the Iranians did it...Bombs are falling on Tehran by election day, Obama wins all of the 9 states up for grabs.

Sincerely

Cheddarman

Anonymous dh September 07, 2012 12:31 PM  

> His team has done the math and know it's his election to lose.

Gov. Romney's only real chance to change the course of the election is the debates.

All the advertising that's about to hit the airwaves is going to show why millions doesn't do much. The narrative is set, and all of the advertising already this year has done almost nothing to move the needle, on either side.

The number of undecided voters is very small, maybe 2-4%. Chances are most of them won't vote at all.

Anonymous Ferd September 07, 2012 12:43 PM  

I do hope Vox and other Bloggers are correct about O's lack of drive to stay in the White House. I have heard many pundits talk of his competitiveness. All I desire is for Mr. Sissypants NOT to return.

Hit the road Barack and don't ya come back no more!

Anonymous George September 07, 2012 12:49 PM  

John wrote:

" September 07, 2012 11:48 AM

Obama's phoning it in because he can. I was checking out the electoral college count over at Rasmussen and He's got 247 solid votes to Romney's 196. Of the toss up states there's Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, and Colorado for a total of 95 votes."

Obama is indeed going to win. The reasons are many, not the least of which is the electoral math that John brings up. The fact is, everything hinges on Florida. If Obama wins Florida, he is highly likely to win other swing states.

Additionally, he is a far better campaigner than Romney. Furthermore, "That other guy sucks", the message at the heart of the Romney campaign is far too negative for enough Americans to be effective. Add to this the fact that during the debates Obama's superior rhetorical skills will win the day. And, it's during those debates that Romney is going to learn the consequences of having taken a variety of positions on a variety of issues based on who he is talking to.

It may not be blood in the water, but there is going to be scarring, bumps and bruises.

Anonymous JCclimber September 07, 2012 1:23 PM  

Reminds me of the 1988 election. Dukakis vs George HW Bush. What a choice.
A socialist vs a liberal-moderate. Sound familiar?
Clinton vs Bush.
Clinton vs Dole.
Gore vs Bush.
Kerry vs Bush.
Obama vs (who was the Repub candidate in 2008?) Totally blanking on this one, but I'm certain it was a liberal-moderate.

See the pattern?

Anonymous JCclimber September 07, 2012 1:25 PM  

McCain. And Sarah Palin. How could I possibly forget that marriage from hell?

Blogger Galt-in-Da-Box September 07, 2012 1:34 PM  

This is good news for Romney, who's cardboard-flavored, "Curb Your Enthusiasm" campaign can use all the help it can get.
What did anyone expect after John "Agent Orange" Kerry sucked all the air out of the room!?

Blogger Galt-in-Da-Box September 07, 2012 1:41 PM  

Has either of the Establishment parties clued into the fact that a non-Geritol-fuelled candidate who doesn't need to wear Depends could only improve their chances?

Anonymous Daniel September 07, 2012 1:50 PM  

So, are the conventions coming up pretty soon? I just want to make sure they don't screw up my DVR.

Anonymous Daniel September 07, 2012 2:01 PM  

Wouldn't it be funny if they tied in the electoral college and the House elected Romney President and the Senate, in a show of good bipartisan faith, offered to elect Obama Vice President? Of course then they'd realize they were directly violating the 12th amendment by offering to elect a non-eligible person to the office of V.P.

Come on Electors. Only you can bring home Romney - Clinton 2012!

Anonymous George September 07, 2012 2:45 PM  

Daniel wrote:

"Wouldn't it be funny if they tied in the electoral college..."

There actually is a reasonable scenario by which this happens.

Here is a fun site to play with:

http://www.270towin.com/

Anonymous redsash September 07, 2012 2:58 PM  

Poor, poor Obama. He didn't even have his ballons.

Anonymous redsash September 07, 2012 3:03 PM  

Balloons! Damn cyclobenzaprine.

Anonymous MendoScot September 07, 2012 3:26 PM  

The Daily Mash isn't exactly right-wing, but seems to have come to same conclusion - expressed sarcastically, of course.

Anonymous Idle Spectator September 07, 2012 3:38 PM  

I'm just hoping this is affirmative action's high water mark.

Now we've "done good," elected a semiblack man, and now the tide can start to receed back to actual talent.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, PharmD September 07, 2012 3:43 PM  

Balloons! Damn cyclobenzaprine.

Are you experiencing dry mouth, dizziness, or general central nervous system overstimulation? It's a muscle relaxant, but I can still administer an enema.

Anonymous George September 07, 2012 4:49 PM  

Idle Spectator wrote:

"I'm just hoping this is affirmative action's high water mark.

Now we've "done good," elected a semiblack man, and now the tide can start to receed back to actual talent."

And for many of us, we are just hoping this is when racist tantrums like Idle's start to recede from troubled minds.

Anonymous Idle Spectator September 07, 2012 5:33 PM  

And for many of us, we are just hoping this is when racist tantrums like Idle's start to recede from troubled minds.

But affirmative action has nothing to do with race! It's all about righting historical wrongs and making people feel good about themselves by unlocking their true potential.


YOU'RE FUCKING BLOWING THE COVER MAN!
//runs out screaming

Blogger James Dixon September 07, 2012 10:00 PM  

> And for many of us, we are just hoping this is when racist tantrums

What's racist about being color blind when it comes to hiring? Isn't that what MLK, Jr. claimed to want?

Anonymous FREEDOM LOVER! Om Shanti Om September 07, 2012 10:04 PM  

The O-man lost his swagger? He's still one of the best looking presidents this nation's ever had.

Not that that's saying much.

Idris Elba for presidential tingles!

Women the world over would welcome American Expansionism and we could go buck wild with foreign policy if that mocha hottie was at the healm.

mmmmmmm....hmmmmmm....goooooood


Anonymous Outlaw X September 08, 2012 12:42 AM  

Vox, He doesn't need to win.

Anonymous tiredofitall September 08, 2012 1:02 AM  

"Furthermore, "That other guy sucks", the message at the heart of the Romney campaign is far too negative for enough Americans to be effective.

Add to this the fact that during the debates Obama's superior rhetorical skills will win the day.
" George

1.) Are you kidding me?
2.) Are you high?

Anonymous E. PERLINE September 08, 2012 12:18 PM  

Obama isn't taking a dive. He's just doing the best he can with what he's got. If the contest remains close it means MPAI.

Maybe there's a genius streak in some Jews, the kind that advances medicine or invents the flash drive, but most Jews are political idiots too.

Anonymous Anonymous September 08, 2012 12:23 PM  

Those of you who live in Battleground states, would you campaign and vote for Romney? This is what happened last time and how Obama won. Conservatives wanted to teach the R's a lesson and stayed home and did not vote for McCain. There were more PUMA's and Ex Democrats trying to get out the vote. I'm not excited about Romney, but I don't want a second term for Obama.

Anonymous DonReynolds September 08, 2012 1:59 PM  

Conservatives have never been reluctant to be very clear with the Republican party. They have made their points in a variety of ways, many times already. There are no strangers in the room. Unfortunately, the Republicans have no intention of giving the conservatives anything more than empty promises (and veiled threats, and fear mongering). Conservatives would probably get a better deal from the DEMOCRATS for their votes!

Conservatives are taken for granted by the Republican party in the same way that blacks and hispanics are taken for granted by the Democrats. In return for their votes, they will get nothing. Same as always. Verbal pandering in return for votes is as old as politics in this country, but in order to actually get something for your votes, you have to have something to horse-trade. The problem with conservatives is.....they have no place else to go, but the Republican party. Same with the blacks and hispanics. Democrats correctly figure, they have no place else to go either. Hispanics like to tease the Republicans with their votes to get some deals, but the truth is....the Republicans and Democrats suffer from amnesia right after the election and the hispanics cannot deliver their own votes.

Anonymous Anonymous September 08, 2012 3:26 PM  

I agree with you Don and I respect the support here for Ron Paul. The sad thing is that the national media will never ALLOW him a chance. A majority of voters are low information emotion obsessed people. No one wants to sit and listen to a politician actually make an intelligent point, it's all about the horse race and partisan hackery. I'm not excited about Romney but I believe there is a better chance for the opportunity for my ideology to be respected when drafting legislation.

Anonymous George September 08, 2012 5:14 PM  

Tiredofitall:

1. No
2. No

Romney won't say what taxes will be lowered. He won't say what deductions will go away. He won't say how how wants to reduce the deficit. He won't release the same number of years of taxes as Obama.

All he has at this point is "the other guy sucks". Not enough.

And anyone who watched the Republican debates should know that Romney's rhetorical skills don't compare to Obama's.

It's over.

Anonymous George September 08, 2012 5:25 PM  

Anonymous...

There's no point to it. Romney's done. The only thing left is the scorecard.

Just imagine the debates..

Romney won't say what taxes he'll lower

He won't say what deductions he'll stop

He wont say what he's going to cut.

He's saddled with a position on medicare that no one wants

He has to explain why he's pro life now after being pro choice

He has to explain why he was for obamacare in MA, now he's not.

He has to explain why catholics shouldn't have to follow the law, but everyone else must....Unless he's set to argue that anyone with a principled objection to a law doesn't need to follow it.

He has to explain how he'd handle Iran differently and explain if he would have bombed by now or....what...do the same?

And he has to do this all without the help of FoxNews to throw him softballs as well as against Obama, who is a far better debater.

It's over.

Anonymous Anonymous September 08, 2012 5:25 PM  

George I think you're over inflating Obama's skills, but you're free to do as you wish. From my view most modern presidential elections have all been "the other guy sucks."

I remember the Bush/Kerry DNC and it was all about "Anybody But Bush." Sounds like you want Obama to win, and you may get your wish.

Anonymous tiredofitall September 08, 2012 8:02 PM  

@ George

You keep praising Obama's "rhetorical skills" I gotta know, you do realize without someone feeding him the answers on a teleprompter he sounds much like a first time high school debater with a string of "uhs", and "ums", and "well".

The man is an empty suit that was sold to people desperate enough to buy the hype.

Yay we got to elect a black guy, aren't we enlightened!

Now that the shine is off the apple as it were, we're seeing that we bought a false sale of goods. It's the morning after a four year bender, and that 10 we went to bed with has somehow transformed into a troll.

Blogger James Dixon September 09, 2012 9:47 AM  

> All he has at this point is "the other guy sucks". Not enough.

Are you certain it won't be enough? There are times it has been.

Anonymous Anonymous September 09, 2012 10:24 PM  

@James

Sure it's enough.
Next year the president will be Romney or Obama, it's up to you which do you prefer. The current occupant has spent his tenure blaming Bush and neglecting important issues.

Blogger James Dixon September 10, 2012 11:09 AM  

> Next year the president will be Romney or Obama, it's up to you which do you prefer.

Eh, I'll have to go with none of the above in that case. Not that it matters, since my state is a lock for Romney, mostly thanks to Obama's idiotic war on coal.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts