Quote:
Originally Posted by joshgirls
you make some good points. in particular the part about congress not working with him. congress is such a shithole i dont think they will work with anybody until 1 party has 2/3 of the senate & the house. Obama had the perfect congress until this year & the dems utterly failed him.
|
Obama was poised to do whatever he wanted and he could have done some good things for the country, but he got sidetracked and then the democrats lost their spine and would not stand up to the republicans. I'm not saying what he could have done would have been good, but he missed a golden opportunity for his party to set the table for long term dominance.
Quote:
|
i wouldnt count him out yet. the public is mad again, this is the 3rd election cycle (06, 08, 10) that the public will be going in mad about the direction of america. Everyone says the voting public is stupid but i disagree. most dumb people dont vote at all. a handful vote for who they are told to vote for. But by & large the public that makes the effort to vote, also makes the effort to make the best decision they can. Thats why there are so many independents. because they are not fooled by the shenangans of politicians & pundits.
|
As much as people say they want change they really don't. They look around at their life and they take inventory. If they have a good job, a decent house and a good outlook on the future they tend to choose the candidate who is least likely to fuck that up for them. however, when things aren't going good they vote for the person who promises the best change so long as it ins't too radical. If you say to the voters:"I'll help you get a job and get your life on track." they will listen and vote for you. If you say: "I'll make some tough decisions that are going to hurt us all in the short term, but make us stronger in the longer term and those who are willing to work hard will thrive." you are likely not going to get votes. Paul is using that second message. He wants to make some drastic changes that would be catastrophic right out the gate. Hopefully we would then rebuild from those ashes and be stronger for it, but the idea of it scares the hell out of a lot of people.
Quote:
there are so many hats in the republican ring now, the candidate who is really energizing his/her voters has a great shot. dont need 50% + to win an 8 way race. Just needs his people to show. Its clear ron paul has an energized base. At some point, this has to result in a primary victory. If he can steal the win from the establishment, he can give obama a really hard time. thats is, assuming the davos/illuminati/mossad dont assasinate him first.
|
His major issue will be how much money he can raise. Right out the gate the primaries start in bible belt. I think it is something like 8 of the first 20 states to vote (going up through Super Tuesday) are bible belt states. He likely will not win those states because they will be controlled by Perry or Bachmann who the evangelicals favor. That leaves him about 11-12 states left that he could have a shot at. If he wants to make some noise he would likely have to pick 1 or 2 of these states (like bigger states with more delegates) and focus his efforts there. If he could win one or both of those he could make some noise. It would cause others to drop out and put him in a position to raise money and force the media to consider him a legit challenger. The question is will he have the money and resources to do this? And if he does will he choose to do something like that? In the last election he had $20 million on hand. The race was down to just him, McCain and Huckabee and Huckabee was on the ropes. He could have picked a state that he had the most support in, dumped a bunch of that money into it and made some noise. If he would have won that state he could have changed the course of the election. He chose not to do that. Instead he sat on most of the money and used it for other PAC stuff after the election.