Who Will The Democrats Select In 2012?

[Kuciwalker]

[Ben Kenobi]

The force is not strong with this one.

The force is weak.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Carter redux.

Says the boy who predicted the blowout election of the McCain-Palin ticket, straight up until election day. Yeah, your opinion on US politics is worth something...

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Given the ****loads of money being spent on this project, why wouldn't it hurt him if it fails?

Because the GM deal is never going to be more controversial than it is right now; and, in the wake of that deal, Obama's cruising at a 63-65% approval rating, while the congressional GOP -- you know, they guys who keep pointing out how awful this deal is? -- have an approval rate approaching single digits (11% and falling, last I saw). So my money's on nobody giving a rat's ass three years from now, when the tangible effects of the deal are impossible to point out, let alone get people to feel in their daily lives. But, on top of that, Obama can (and will) spin himself to be like the heart surgeon who was called in when some 400 lb. guy who ate nothing but cheeseburgers his whole life finally had the inevitable massive heart attack: if the doctor succeeds, he's a hero, but if it fails, he's still the guy who tried valiantly to save a patient who couldn't be bothered to save himself -- so he's a good guy anyway. That won't satisfy people like you, but you're not voting for him regardless.

[DinoDoc]

That won't satisfy people like you

Would it satisfy anyone with a brain? Furthermore, in this scenario Chapter 11 is the heart surgeon and Obama is the quack peddling alternative medicine.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Would it satisfy anyone with a brain? Furthermore, in this scenario Chapter 11 is the heart surgeon and Obama is the quack peddling alternative medicine.

I'm not arguing with you about GM. I'm not even talking about GM, per se. I'm talking about how politicians spin things, and how the electorate behaves. By "people like you," above, I only meant people who care deeply about this issue. Most people don't seem to -- it's not a popular deal, but there's no marching in the streets over it, and Obama's approval rating hasn't taken a significant hit. So if the electorate -- they of the notoriously short attention span -- don't care deeply now, the chance that they're going to care deeply three years from now is pretty unlikely.

[DinoDoc]

So if the electorate -- they of the notoriously short attention span -- don't care deeply now, the chance that they're going to care deeply three years from now is pretty unlikely.

It hasn't failed yet from the PoV of the broader electorate. My problem is that I'm sceptical of it working at all, the electorate seems to have more faith than I do in the buisiness acumen of Obama. If at the end of 3 years the company is still surviving at the good graces of billions in tax money, I fail to see how Obama doesn't take a hit. This is especially true if Ford is doing well at that time too.

PS I apoligize for my reaction to the "people like you" comment. I misunderstood what you meant.

[Darius871]

Unless terrorists nuke New York in the next four years

Don't be so sure. At this point it wouldn't surprise me if the "it was Bush's fault, not mine" argument will remain viable for at least 5-6 years.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

It hasn't failed yet from the PoV of the broader electorate. My problem is that I'm sceptical of it working at all, the electorate seems to have more faith than I do in the buisiness acumen of Obama. If at the end of 3 years the company is still surviving at the good graces of billions in tax money, I fail to see how Obama doesn't take a hit. This is especially true if Ford is doing well at that time too.

The problem as I see it is that, even if it fails, the failure will be slow, and it's impact will be extremely diffuse; that means that it won't have a immediate, tangible, visceral impact on the average voter -- and immediate, tangible, visceral events are what shape elections. In some ways, the GM deal will be to the GOP base as FISA was to the Dems -- something that animates the base, but doesn't have much of a wider impact.

Now, if it can be linked to an economy that's still in the crapper and/or a really unpopular tax hike, it might have legs. But if what the GOP candidate has is "the GM deal was bad, some taxes went up, and we're talking to Iran" while Obama has "your 401k came back from the dead; so did the job and housing markets; and there have been no attacks on our soil" then Obama wins in a landslide -- even if he doesn't deserve credit for most of what went right.

PS I apoligize for my reaction to the "people like you" comment. I misunderstood what you meant.

No worries; it's obviously a loaded phrase, and I should have been clearer.

[Kuciwalker]

Rufus: if GM is forced to go back into bankruptcy around the midterms, or is forced to take another loan from Uncle Sam, I think that will be a problem for Congressional Dems.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Rufus: if GM is forced to go back into bankruptcy around the midterms, or is forced to take another loan from Uncle Sam, I think that will be a problem for Congressional Dems.

Congressional Dems, yes; I actually think they're in pretty big trouble in 2010. But Obama in 2012, no.

Again, I'm not trying to argue that the GM deal is good. I'm just saying that it's not the kind of thing on which presidential elections turn.

Think of it this way: in the last 100 years, 5 incumbent presidents have failed to get re-elected. I'd characterize those failures as follows:

Taft: doomed by popular 3rd-party cadidate with whom he split the vote.
Hoover: Perceived as creating a huge mess and not caring about the consequences for ordinary Americans; ran against one of the most charismatic politicians in US history.
Ford: Never really popular, no national base, represented GOP at one of its low ebbs.
Carter: Perceived as incompetent; ran against one of the most charismatic politicians in US history.
Bush I: Perceived as out of touch with ordinary Americans; ran against one of the most charismatic politicians in US history; possible hurt by 3rd-party candidate.

I'd suggest then, that in the last 100 years, incumbent presidents have been doomed by either (a) a strong 3rd-party challenge, (b) a challenge from an extraordinarily charismatic politician, or (c) the appearance of incompetence. Of those, only (c) seems possible in 2012, and a failed GM deal alone won't do the trick there. If things have mostly gone okay -- Dow's up, unemployment's down, troops are home from Iraq, etc. -- GM will be a black mark, but not enough to tip the election.

[GePap]

The Demographics are also in a favorable Democratic trend. The groups that vote Democratic (women, college educated or above, minorities) are on an upswing nationally and the Republicans do not seem to have any issues that they can use to make a wedge into those groups, particularly when they seem so intent on burning their bridges with Hispanics.

As for the stimulus issue: money needs to get spent to stimulate - the vast mayority of the stimulus package money hasn't been spent yet. Projects are still going through the process of applications.

If by 2012 employment is un an upswing (even if still worse than when Obama took office, much as with Reagan) then he is halfway there. The other issue that could really hurt Obama is any upswing in crime, though there is no data currently showing some vast upswing on that.

And as for GM, the only way that could really hurt Obama with the groups that would vote for Obama and re-elect him (what white males in Mississippi think is irrelevant really when it comes to Obama's reelection) is if at some point there is some corruption scandal.

[Kuciwalker]

As for the stimulus issue: money needs to get spent to stimulate - the vast mayority of the stimulus package money hasn't been spent yet. Projects are still going through the process of applications.

AND THAT IS WHY THE STIMULUS IS A FAILURE. See the other thread.

[GePap]

AND THAT IS WHY THE STIMULUS IS A FAILURE. See the other thread.

No, this is why anyone who thought the Stimulus was supposed to have any real effect this Federal fiscal year is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works.

[Kuciwalker]

No, this is why anyone who thought the Stimulus was supposed to have any real effect this Federal fiscal year is either a troll or has no ****ing clue how government works.

Thank you



Self-pwnage