Yes, you read that right. Let me explain.
Chris Christie is my dream politician. He is one of the few politicians for whom I would give up a Saturday to campaign or for whom I would donate money. He says all of the things that I say to my friends, except that he says them out loud in front of the very people that most Republican politicans would be too afraid to offend. More importantly, he has actually cut government. Google 2008 NJ state budget and 2013 NJ state budget and see which is bigger. Then google the federal budget the year before Reagan came to town and the federal budget the year he left. Tell me who is more conservative (hint: Christie cut the budget in liberal NJ, Reagan increase the budget in a more conservative United States). Unlike many of his potential senator rivals (Paul, Cruz, Rubio), Christie has actually cut government in a very liberal state as opposed to just talking really loud about it. And he seems to be interested in doing his job (Sandra Recovery) more than politicking. But he is awesome at politicking, by the way!
Ted Cruz is a demagogue. He is no doubt a very smart man. However, he has insisted on lying to the base that it is possible for the House Republicans to get Obama to defund is only legacy achievement by threatening to shut down the government. The Republicans won´t attempt what Cruz is pining for and Cruz knows it. Such a manuever would cause the Republicans to lose support thus making it harder for a future government (one where Republicans controlled more than just the HoR) to repeal Obamacare. If Cruz really wanted to repeal Obamacare, he wouldn´t force a government shutdown. But Cruz is much more concerned about becoming the Tea Party/Talk Radio candidate. His policy positions are literally not that much different than those of Christie, so he has to distinguish himself from the rest of the pack by being the brave conservative willing to march into battle to fight his Democratic foes. He is a fool and he will never become President so long as he continues his current strategy.
So Cruz or Christie?
Actually whoever the Republicans send, it will be extremely difficult to beat Hillary Clinton. She will be well funded with favorable media coverage, a social media advanatage, and goal of making history by being the first female president. While Christie could beat her, should he lose we would be subjected to a stronger and more ferocious conservative base who will continously be lied to that what could have been successful was a "real conservative." Yes, talk radio will try to argue that had the nominee been Cruz or Paul, Clinton would have been vanquished. Make sense? Nothing they say ever makes sense, but it will resonate with their listeners.
So why not let the Tea Party and Talk Radio have what they want. Let´s call this election "Do everything that Rush Limbaugh says" time. Let´s nominate a "real conservative." Let´s give America a "real choice" with "bright colors." Let´s give them Cruz. And when he gets slaughtered, maybe, just maybe, enough Republicans will start to question the lies that they have heard over the past few years from a bunch of men who wanted nothing more than to get rich. Perhaps then we can once again have a united party focused on addressing the problems of today. We are too divided now. The establishment just needs to relinquish power for a bit. Things may very well need to get worse before it gets better.
And Cruz is just the man to make things worse.
Chris Christie is my dream politician. He is one of the few politicians for whom I would give up a Saturday to campaign or for whom I would donate money. He says all of the things that I say to my friends, except that he says them out loud in front of the very people that most Republican politicans would be too afraid to offend. More importantly, he has actually cut government. Google 2008 NJ state budget and 2013 NJ state budget and see which is bigger. Then google the federal budget the year before Reagan came to town and the federal budget the year he left. Tell me who is more conservative (hint: Christie cut the budget in liberal NJ, Reagan increase the budget in a more conservative United States). Unlike many of his potential senator rivals (Paul, Cruz, Rubio), Christie has actually cut government in a very liberal state as opposed to just talking really loud about it. And he seems to be interested in doing his job (Sandra Recovery) more than politicking. But he is awesome at politicking, by the way!
Ted Cruz is a demagogue. He is no doubt a very smart man. However, he has insisted on lying to the base that it is possible for the House Republicans to get Obama to defund is only legacy achievement by threatening to shut down the government. The Republicans won´t attempt what Cruz is pining for and Cruz knows it. Such a manuever would cause the Republicans to lose support thus making it harder for a future government (one where Republicans controlled more than just the HoR) to repeal Obamacare. If Cruz really wanted to repeal Obamacare, he wouldn´t force a government shutdown. But Cruz is much more concerned about becoming the Tea Party/Talk Radio candidate. His policy positions are literally not that much different than those of Christie, so he has to distinguish himself from the rest of the pack by being the brave conservative willing to march into battle to fight his Democratic foes. He is a fool and he will never become President so long as he continues his current strategy.
So Cruz or Christie?
Actually whoever the Republicans send, it will be extremely difficult to beat Hillary Clinton. She will be well funded with favorable media coverage, a social media advanatage, and goal of making history by being the first female president. While Christie could beat her, should he lose we would be subjected to a stronger and more ferocious conservative base who will continously be lied to that what could have been successful was a "real conservative." Yes, talk radio will try to argue that had the nominee been Cruz or Paul, Clinton would have been vanquished. Make sense? Nothing they say ever makes sense, but it will resonate with their listeners.
So why not let the Tea Party and Talk Radio have what they want. Let´s call this election "Do everything that Rush Limbaugh says" time. Let´s nominate a "real conservative." Let´s give America a "real choice" with "bright colors." Let´s give them Cruz. And when he gets slaughtered, maybe, just maybe, enough Republicans will start to question the lies that they have heard over the past few years from a bunch of men who wanted nothing more than to get rich. Perhaps then we can once again have a united party focused on addressing the problems of today. We are too divided now. The establishment just needs to relinquish power for a bit. Things may very well need to get worse before it gets better.
And Cruz is just the man to make things worse.
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
60 comments:
Well, we let you have what you want in 2012 and you lost Pablo!
Took the words right out of my mouth, OJ. Sadly, he will likely get what he wants in 2016 too. It won't be Christie, but most likely some other milquetoast moderate like Jeb bush. Or, perhaps Rubio secured the establishment support with his promotion of amnesty. Of course, he supports defunding ObamaCare in the CR too, so what's a Pablo to do with that?
Psst....it would be Obama shutting down the govt over an unpopular program, not The GOP. And the people disproportionately affected would be those who receive govermerment services. Who did they vote for? Ding, ding! You got it! Shut it down, Barack!
OJ, the internet universe is filled with blog posts written by me concerning my complaints regarding Romney. However, winning a national election is difficult and the answer was not that we needed somebody more conservative. In fact, Romney had no trouble with the conservative vote. The missing white vote from the Northeast were turned off by his rich demeanor and minorities, well we all know thoses woes. I think Pawlenty might have done slightly better, but the rest of those clowns would have gotten smoked.
RW, Rubio had the chance of winning my vote until the whole shutting down the government gambit came about, so the reality is that Rubio is way to "conservative" to win a natinoal election and threatening to shut down the government is not going to help him. And I say, let em shut down the government as well and we will see who gets the blame. It won´t be Obama. Shutting down the government is the best way of ensuring that Obamacare never goes away. Obamacare is unpopular (and Republicans have a chance to win elections promising to repeal it) but the same polls show that the American people don´t want the government shutdown over it. Plus, the media will be solidly supporting the President and the GOP will certainly look like the bad guys. Ask New Gingrich about that.
If you believed, like I do, that ObamaCare will never get repealed if its allowed to be implemented without serious resistance, then you would agree that it's a fight worth having. The American people do not support this law that is about to destroy our economy and health care system from within. And as I said, Obama would be the one cutting off food stamps in a hypothetical govt shutdown. In a worse case scenario, I'm not concerned that some may blame the Republicans for not getting their food stamps for a few weeks, but its up to Republicans to make the case. Democrats don't seem to have a problem taking their unpopular policies to the airwaves to sell them to the American people.
Even if this action doesn't completely defund the law, it's a battle worth waging, because it shines a light on what's taking place as employers try to prepare for the "train wreck."
"on. She will be well funded with favorable media coverage, a social media advanatage, and goal of making history by being the first female president. While Christie could beat her, should he lose we would be subjected to a stronger and more ferocious conservative base who will continuously be lied to that what could have been successful was a "real conservative." Yes, talk radio will try to argue that had the nominee been Cruz or Paul, Clinton would have been vanquished. Make sense? Nothing they say ever makes sense, but it will resonate with their listeners. "
Unfortunately for this thread, you happen to talk sense.
However, the tools that pervade here can't see this sort of 'common sense'. You are dealing with people who can't see the wood from the trees.
" The missing white vote from the Northeast were turned off by his rich demeanor and minorities,"
Didn't really matter in the NE, as with the possible exception of NH, liberals take the NE and coast all day long.
Your comment is relevant in other swings though, to which the OB campaign capitalized (no pun) on a treat.
" Let´s give them Cruz. And when he gets slaughtered, maybe, just maybe, enough Republicans will start to question the lies that they have heard over the past few years from a bunch of men who wanted nothing more than to get rich. Perhaps then we can once again have a united party focused on addressing the problems of today. We are too divided now. The establishment just needs to relinquish power for a bit. Things may very well need to get worse before it gets better. "
Very ironic but true.
No surprise that Pablo and the resident Democrat are in agreement.
I find it troubling that we can elect the most liberal Democrat in the US Senate, yet half the field needs to be dismissed out of hand as "too conservative." It's even more puzzling considering that self identified conservatives historically have outnumbered liberals by roughly 2-1. I expect that from a Democrat like RomneyMan, but in the end he won't vote for the Republican regardless of who it is.
" I expect that from a Democrat like RomneyMan, but in the end he won't vote for the Republican regardless of who it is. " Incorrect-again. RomneyMan is a conservative, but can see the wood from the trees. Love how those that haven't got a clue play the 'dem card' whenever one don't agree with them lol
A conservative who earlier suggested (in the chat box) to go to the whitehouse.gov to get the accurate economic numbers. Really? Thanks for the laugh!
RW, There is an inconvient fact that you are leaving out when you call me a Democrat. I am on the record as saying that my dream candidate is a man who literally cut his state goverment spending in a very liberal state. He doesn´t just talk about really loud (Cruz, Paul, talk radio). He has actually done it. Not like the mythical Reagan, who increase government spending and left with an awful deficit. I am talking about Christie. To insinuate that he is some kind of liberal is to insuate that Reagan was a socialist. Facts are facts. You support candidates who cut government (in contrast to you) and who can do it in a way that can appeal to a majority of Americans through bipartisianship. Cruz will never cut government in his life because he cares more about looking good with the talk radio crowd.
Again Pablo your comments ring true.
You need to understand that you're trying to convince the likes of people who cite Sarah Palin as their #1 candidate. Yes, I put that in writing again : you're trying to convince the likes of people who cite Sarah Palin as their #1 candidate
Who, be honest, could really envisage Palin as the president of the USA, having her nail varnish on the football lol
"A conservative who earlier suggested (in the chat box) to go to the whitehouse.gov to get the accurate economic numbers. Really? Thanks for the laugh!"
:-)
I won't vote for any first term senator, no 1/2 term former govs, or anyone else I consider to be nuts, crazy, loud, obnoxious. I'll vote Christie. Hands down. or write in Romney.
Pablo, I did not say you were a Democrat. You need to read my comment again.
I think we need to pace ourselves here. There will be plenty of time for this down the road. It's far too early for this.
Anon at xx:53,
Christie is the loudest, most obnoxious of the bunch. Have you been paying attention for the past 4 years?
"You need to understand that you're trying to convince the likes of people who cite Sarah Palin as their #1 candidate. Yes, I put that in writing again : you're trying to convince the likes of people who cite Sarah Palin as their #1 candidate"
With all due respect to Ohio Joe and RW, and I do geniuely respect anyone who cares enough to have an opinion, I would very much like to enter the brain of someone who honestly still thinks that Palin would be a viable candidate. I am world traveler (currently in Morocco learning Arabic) and such a place inside said brain would be an exotic land to me. The ability to shield your brain from the Palinisms for the past five years and to only see virtue in her is a testimony to human fortitude and commitment. And to actually believe that Palin could do well as a national candidate -- wow, it just takes my breath away.
"I think we need to pace ourselves here. There will be plenty of time for this down the road. It's far too early for this."
I definitely agree with that! Fortunately I have no time to blog anymore so it will probably be few more months before I get sucked back into this. I just have no confidence the GOP is going to make it. We are more divided than ever.
"With all due respect to Ohio Joe and RW, and I do geniuely respect anyone who cares enough to have an opinion, I would very much like to enter the brain of someone who honestly still thinks that Palin would be a viable candidate. I am world traveler (currently in Morocco learning Arabic) and such a place inside said brain would be an exotic land to me. The ability to shield your brain from the Palinisms for the past five years and to only see virtue in her is a testimony to human fortitude and commitment. And to actually believe that Palin could do well as a national candidate -- wow, it just takes my breath away. "
LMAO
Keep laughing, RomneyMan. That gem that has you all cracked up came from a guy who spent four years convincing everyone to nominate the guy who lost to the worst president in modern times.
We don't know the results of a Palin-Obama matchup, but we DO know how Pablo's preferred contest worked out.
RW,
I really do enjoy reading your input, disagree I may. But I think that your statement reveals the brain-washing powers of the conservative media. The base was in shock that Obama could win reelection because they really do think he is the worst president in modern times. However, I converse with the outside world and I often read polls as well the opinions of those who are not in the conservative media. And, no, a majority of Americans did not think that President Obama is the worst president in modern times. This is the disservice that the Conservative Entertainment Complex does to the Republican Party. The make money off of appealing to your worst fears about the "socialist" in the White House who is "trying to destroy America." I have voted against Obama twice (I support conservative causes) but I also understand how a majority of Americans might not think the way that Limbaugh has trained you all to think. You folks need to get out more and talk to people who don´t agree with you. You need to look at the polls which are usually accurate (much to our dismay in 2012). You folks need to read a more diverse array of blogs. Trapping yourself in a bubble and chanting to yourselves how evil everyone outside the bubble is will not reduce the national debt, will not protect our country, will help middle class families get by. You also fail to mention, RW, how often I criticized Romney in the past four years. Shall I do a quick search on here and at the old Rightosphere blog to prove my point?
Pablo,
Rush and the rest of the conservative media does not form my opinions for me. What you see is what you get. And I do read the liberal press from time to time.
We are a 50-50 nation, and the only difference between the two campaigns, is that Obama did a better job turning out his base in the swing states. Some think the vote was rigged, but I don't contribute to that line of thought.
I know you were critical of Romney, but more often than not, your critiques were from a left wing point of view.
Obama will go down as the worst president in modern times before it's all said and done. Jimmy Carter can be rest assured that he won;t die with that title hanging over his head.
Oh...by the way. I don't really care what people in Monaco think. On that note, have you noticed how his leadership is being received in Egypt lately?
That's all I have for now. I'll be offline for a while.
See ya.
Of course, the IRS was actively involved in making sure that grassroots groups that were likely to raise money and get out the vote for Romney didn't get tax exempt or donor protected status. Nothing like a lot of cheating BY OUR OWN GOVT BUREAUCRACIES to help a bad President out of a tight spot in an election.
AZ
Thank goodness I am not torn between the two candidates mentioned in this article. As far as I am concerned neither has what it takes to be our next presidential candidate. As for the recent loss by a candidate who should have won handily against the worst president of our time, all I can say is that if it's true millions from our side stayed home rather than voted, we have no one else to blame but ourselves for the loss. While it's convenient to blame Romney for the loss, if it's true that conservatives stayed home rather than vote, then these same conservatives are to blame more than our past candidate for the loss. Lastly it's time to address the false hope by these same individuals that a super conservative will save the party this next election. It's not going to happen because no ultra right wing conservative has any chance of winning a general election. None. But thank you for giving us four more years of grief under the leadership of this administration. How this was supposed to be a better option than a Romney administration is beyond logic.
*Morocco not Monaco
Lol
Attention everyone: Conservatives did not stay home in 2012 in swing states or anywhere for that matter. They went to the polls in masses. The problem was not conservative turnout. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/11/23/gop-turnout-myths-and-reality/
RW, unfortunately I try to keep my online reading to a minimum so I focus more on learning Arabic so I have read very little about Egypt other than the Egyptian general is very dissapointed in the United States. But I really haven´t formed an opinion on what is going on.
As for the comments in defense of the present occupant in the oval office, one cannot imagine how difficult it must be for some to base one's opinions on the actual record of a politician instead of basing ones decisions on their likability, etc. If you want to share the past accomplishments of this individual to validate your points, then cite these past accomplishments. Don't waste our time using generalities in telling us about how our viewpoints are wrong, etc. It isn't enough to tell us that this president is well liked and respected, instead, why not tell us why our viewpoints are incorrect? If an illiterate society elects a president despite his lack of accomplishments, tell us why it happened? I do not need to be educated on why those on the left feel this president and administration are on the right track, why should I care? I see the record and I see the results of his policies, etc. Nevertheless, you stated you understood why the majority of citizens might not think he's one of the worse, if not the worst president's of all time. Well here's your chance, tell us why he's not. We're waiting. And don't forget to do your best because after all, we're all brainwashed so you have your work cut out for you, right?
Pablo,
OK. Maybe we should have waited for the vote totals to be finalized. Romney received about 1,000,000 more votes than McCain.
http://www.270towin.com/
However, the US population increased by approximately 10 million from 2008-2012.
https://www.google.com/#bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=81a8a24fe9757c8c&q=us+population
127 million, or about 41% of the population voted in the past election, with roughly 47% pulling the lever for Romney.
A simple math problem illustrates that nearly 2,000,000 2008 McCain voters stayed home.
10,000,000 * .41 * .47 = 1,927,000
(rough numbers)
I may not speak Arabic, but I've always been good at math.
Even the author of the article (a professed Romney fan) acknowledges that Obama turned out his base in swing states, but she fails to mention that Romney did not. Perhaps she should have waited for the final vote totals before writing the article. ;)
It seems as though Strassel was attempting to advance the argument that the Hispanic vote cost Romney the election.
Pablo -
Your comparison of New Jersey's budget under Governor Christie with the federal government's budget under President Reagan is total nonsense.
Governor Christie is REQUIRED by the New Jersey Constitution to have a balanced budget, whereas President Reagan was not required to do so by the U.S. Constitution.
Governor Christie has LINE ITEM VETO POWER, whereas President Reagan did not.
Governor Christie CANNOT PRINT MONEY, whereas President Reagan, through the Federal Reserve Bank, certainly could.
You're comparing apples and oranges, Pablo. Nice try. Try again.
As for Ted Cruz, his positions and beliefs are FAR MORE IN SYNC with those of the American people than Hillary Clinton's are, and he has the communication skills and courage to back it up, just like another "right-wing extremist" presidential candidate did 3 decades ago on his way to TWO LANDSLIDE VICTORIES in November.
He's also comparing 8 years of a Reagan Admin with less than 4 years of a Christie admin, but any idiot can see that.
Romney lost because he did not, for whatever reason, defend himself against the character assassination smear campaign of Team Obama.
The first debate was Romney's only good day of the entire campaign. The rest was a total disaster.
Ok, let me give a few responses to some of the comments made since last night.
1. I do not know Arabic, I am learning Arabic -- Big difference! Lol.
2. RW, I don´t follow your logic. Romney won a higher percent of the conservative vote than McCain, and McCain didn´t do that bad (thanks to Sarah Palin actually). Are suggesting that because the population grew by 10 million that there were 10 million new voters? I apologize but I just don´t get it. Romney´s problems were not conservative turnout. Overall turnout was down, not conservative turnout. His problems were the missing white vote in the north (not conservatives, but rather Ross Perot voters as Realclearpolitics author calls them), minorities, women. You can certainly make the argument that Romney´s wealth drove away some of the white vote, but it wasn´t because he was too moderate.
3. Joel, I doubt very seriously that historians will call Obama the worst President in modern times. In fact, they are more likely to say that about his predecesser. Can I list Obama´s successes? Hmmm. Well he inherited a complete and utter disaster and he made slight improvements over it ( or at least he was President when those improvements were made). The recovery has been slow, weak, but steady. It is too early to judge his health care law, though I suspect it may turn out rotten. His foreign policy has been steady and he has avoided risk. He hasn´t done a whole lot really, but he also hasn´t wrecked the place. So best? Of course not, not even close. Worst? Not so either.
4. I do agree that comparing Reagan and Christie may be comparing apples to oranges. But my point is that Republicans rarely cut government. Rarely. And I am talking about in conservative states. I would be interested to see what Rick Perry has done in Texas. My guess is that the budgets have grown. So when the Conservative Entertainment Complex latches onto the idea that Christie is some kind of liberal despite the fact that he has cut government (in a very liberal state) in contrast to their preferred politicians, it just seems a bit much for me. How can somebody call Christie big government, when literally, I repeat literally, the government in NJ is smaller than it was before he got there. I have yet to talk to Christie hater who can answer that. All they know is that he is a big government Republicans, facts be damned. It was just like what Rand Paul said the other day about NJ being a give me state. Christie was dead on when he said that his state is a donor state and Kentucky is a taker. These are the kinds of the things that the Conservative Entertainment Complex just doesn´t want to admit.
5. Ted Cruz´s stances are not in sync with the American people and certainly not more so than Hillary Clinton. Don´t believe me, I beg everyone to go vote for Cruz so we can find out. That was the point of my poiint.
"But I think that your statement reveals the brain-washing powers of the conservative media." So it is better to be brain-washed by the left wing media? Really???
"Ted Cruz´s stances are not in sync with the American people" I guess the American people just love ObamaCare and they hate capitalism. Who would havr thought it?
What are you going on about 41% voted??121.75 million of a VOTING AGE POPULATION of 211.75 million = 57.5% turnout. Which happened to be the 3rd largest in US presidential election(s) history.
10 mill increae i population don't say how much was voter aged too. In case you're not aware, 6 month olds can't vote. Even the dems can't do their majic tricks and register them!
"As for Ted Cruz, his positions and beliefs are FAR MORE IN SYNC with those of the American people than Hillary Clinton's are"
lol
Pablo,
No, 4.1 million new voters.
Bottom line is some did stay home in 2012, and some stayed home in 2008. By 2012, everyone knew what we had in Barack Obama. No more "Hope and Change." The conservative turnout should have been massive. It didn't work out that way.
Maximizing turnout should be the focus of the party going forward, because the current strategy of going after Democrats and Independents isn't working.
McCain actually did better among Democrats than Romney.
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#USP00p1
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president
Most Independents lean one way or another, but don't wish to associate with one of the major parties. I am an independent. Those who are truly in the middle are few, and will vote for the candidate with the most compelling message. "Bold colors, not pale pastels." It should have been easy for Romney to offer a stark contrast, but he did not try, other than in the first debate. I was actually excited about Mitt after the first debate. Then he blew it.
I guess you missed the memo about GWB's approval ratings increasing since he has left office? I also missed the list of actual accomplishments, but did catch the usual nonsense when it comes to talking about this president's record. For someone who showered so much praise in defending his record, you didn't give us very much substance.
RomneyMan, while the 6 month old cant vote, the citizens who were 14 in 2008 certainly could in 2012. In addition, many Hopenchange voters from 2008, were disenfranchised. They chose to stay home too.
I should give credit to Romney in one area. He did do better than McCain among Indies. Although many Obama voters stayed home in 2012, some did cross over to vote for Romney. However, since they are included in the vote totals, it points to even more missing McCain voters.
"For someone who showered so much praise in defending his record, you didn't give us very much substance."
Really, I showered President Obama with praise? I think you mean that I said he probably isn´t the worst president in modern time. Not exactly showering someone with praise. I think he has largely been ineffective, but I sympathize with him since he inherited a complete disaster. I have never once said he was a good president, just not the devil reincarnate that some of you paint him as.
RW,
I do not agree that the way to go is to concentrate on the base, however, I do admit that it is debatable. That certainly was Rove´s strategy in Bush´s reelection, however, Bush had the luxury of being the incumbant and all that comes with it. He was also in the middle of two wars and was able to effectively paint his opponent as a flip flopping coward. He also would have been primaried in today´s Republican Party, since libertarian and anti-immigrant he was not. The real question is are there a mass of conservative voters in swing states who stayed home in 2012 but who otherwise would have gone to the polls had somebody like Perry or Santorum been the nominee. I just don´t think the evidence suggests that. In fact, I just don´t agree that Romney had a conservative problem. Perhaps, his ability to get out the vote was no where near that of Obama´s, but that is a technology problem that the GOP has. The answer is not to get Talk Radioish all over the American People and think we can then start whening elections.
What we need is sensible conservative policies and a sensible approach to government without the rhetoric of the talk radio/tea party base. I think Obamacare should be repealed. But we should control more than one third of the federal government in order to do it. Let´s win some elections. Then we can repeal Obamacare. But I digress.
By the way, Joel, with respect to Bush, you can choose to ignore the recession that began at the end of 2008 and the disasters that have been the Iraq war and Afghanistan war and inept response to Hurrican Katrina and the massive deficit spending but historians will not. Every president sees a rise in their approval rating when they leave office. That has nothing do with how effective a President was. And by the way, I like Bush. He had many good qualities that are missing from today´s GOP. However, it´s just hard for me to say that Obama is the worst president in modern time, when Bush did a lot (more?)of things wrongly.
"I am an independent."
lol, this is to funny. The 'RightwingNut' who's an independent?
Closet Dem more like.
I'm still scratching my head over that one.
"Perhaps, his ability to get out the vote was no where near that of Obama´s, but that is a technology problem that the GOP has"
Very, very true. And how long has talk been of this?? Every election.
W was a nightmare. OB is poor, but W was horrendous too.
ignore the typos. Haha
"Apparently, you've been to busy learning Arabic to follow the 1/2 dozen or so scandals that have popped up in the past few months." Best line of the season!
The typos were embarrassing, so I deleted the original comment to correct...
Apparently, you've been to busy learning Arabic to follow the 1/2 dozen or so scandals that have popped up in the past few months.
Benghazi
IRS targeting of conservatives
NSA
Targeting reporters
There are more, but with so many balls in the air, I can't think of them all right now.
It depends on how you measure success. He's certainly effective at eliminating opposition, but much of that is through corruption. Furthermore, he's attained his stated goal of a "fundamental transformation of America." So there is that.
I do also agree with the various posters that have tipped their hat regarding Romney's first debate performance. He was a complete monster that night, a totally superb outing. As good a debate performance as any I've ever seen, for what that's worth.
It it was the best debate performance I've seen at the presidential level. He was very Reagan-like that night. For some reason, he was advised to back off from that point on. Just plain dumb.
"For some reason, he was advised to back off from that point on." Yup! the moderates never learn!
They never learn, and ALWAYS blame conservatives when their strategies fail.
Pablo, you said,
"However, it´s just hard for me to say that Obama is the worst president in modern time, when Bush did a lot (more?)of things wrongly."
I have to strongly disagree. I'm not here to say Bush didn't do anything wrong, but he did not instigate a culture of lawbreaking or corruption throughout government the way Obama has. It's actually staggering what Obama has been able to get away with. And it is setting a terrible and dangerous precedent.
Bush was a decent man, Obama is not. And he's about to completely wreck our economy with ObamaCare as a final blow. I've never been so disgusted with a president in my life, and that inlcudes Clinton.
-Martha
Amen, Martha. Obama and his people use gov't like the Chicago machine does. The country cannot survive abuse of the powers of gov't like this. Bush is a decent man. I despise Obama more than I have ever despised anyone before. Just listening to him spew his racial drivel after Zimmerman was found not guilty pushed me past the point of no return on that. I also couldn't stand Clinton.
AZ
AZ, too bad there are not more of us who can actually see.
-Martha
Post a Comment