• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Obama will lose in a Landslide

DirkTheDeac

DirkTheDeac

Lord of the Board
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
8,892
Reaction score
345
I'm making the call now.

Miami, $44 dollars a ticket and he draws 900 people. He's heckled by a gay activist and he tells us shovel ready jobs weren't exactly shovel ready. And laughs it off.

This is fill in the blank versus Mondale.

And I know I'm talking to the 22% here. But you better start getting your ducks in a row. The man is going down hard. And watch, gentle readers, how many Dem senators and representatives up for reelection jump off the bandwagon by December.
 
DirkTheDeac said:
I'm making the call now.

Miami, $44 dollars a ticket and he draws 900 people. He's heckled by a gay activist and he tells us shovel ready jobs weren't exactly shovel ready. And laughs it off.

This is fill in the blank versus Mondale.

And I know I'm talking to the 22% here. But you better start getting your ducks in a row. The man is going down hard. And watch, gentle readers, how many Dem senators and representatives up for reelection jump off the bandwagon by December.
Click to expand...

I'm a gambling man, define landslide.
 
Let's get some action here! Start throwing out some numbers! Put your money where your mouth is boy!
 
I'd say he's poised to win in a landslide unless the Pubs can come up with a legitimate candidate. Hint: As of now there isn't one in the field.
 
Please PM the amount you would like to wager on your prediction. It's already accepted.

Voters love to blow off steam about how an incumbent has disappointed them by not following through with a special interest promise. This happens right before they vote for that same candidate again do to a lack of viable alternatives. Obama is not running against a vote of no confidence. He's running against a GOP candidate.

Cna we archive this prediction? This has a "North Carolina is not in play!" or "Was Palin the smartest VP choice of all time?" vibe to it.
 
wfumike02 said:
I'd say he's poised to win in a landslide unless the Pubs can come up with a legitimate candidate. Hint: As of now there isn't one in the field.
Click to expand...

I see two candidates o nthe GOP siode who could have won. One isn't running-John Thune. The other can't run -Jeb Bush.
 
couple random thoughts:

it will be up to the obama campaign to disqualify the alternative.

naturally, the worse conditions are economically, the more important it becomes to disqualify him/her.

i think most incumbent reelections start as referendums on the incumbent. if the incumbent is broadly popular and perceived as successful, he wins. if not, then it's up to the voters to decide if the alternative is viable.

2004 is a perfect example. Bush's numbers were in very, very dangerous territory for an incumbent. (if you had looked at the numbers in late-October without names attached, you would have said that "incumbent x" was heading for defeat.) but Bush managed to disqualify Kerry enough to win.

i think you can argue that Obama will face a tougher climate than did Bush, and i think there are people in this field, such as a wmr, who can present themselves as a viable alt. voters don't need to be inspired by an alternative, they just need to think "i'm not better off than i was 4 years ago, and i can imagine this other guy being president." it's really not such a leap.

Obama's advantage is that his 2008 win was truly impressive in scope and depth, and he can cede a lot of ground and still win. for example, if the gop nominee wins: IN, VA, FL, OH, NC, he still loses--barely.

most of all, i think this thread is really dumb because anyone willing to make a prediction with any claims of certitude (kudos to Weiner for bringing that word back) is foolish. alot can happen, and probably will.
 
Prediction: dirkthedeac will disappear lectro style when this actually goes down.
 
This election will boil down to whether or not Obama can get the same people who would not have otherwise voted at all but who came out and voted for him previously to come out and vote for him again. They went out to vote because of the hope and change all that garbage, and really nothing else. Now, after seeing minimal hope and detrimental change, will they turn out in droves again to support him, or will they return to their usual apathy and not vote at all? If they turn out again, he wins. If they stay home as per usual, he loses.
 
TheShot said:
couple random thoughts:

it will be up to the obama campaign to disqualify the alternative.

naturally, the worse conditions are economically, the more important it becomes to disqualify him/her.

i think most incumbent reelections start as referendums on the incumbent. if the incumbent is broadly popular and perceived as successful, he wins. if not, then it's up to the voters to decide if the alternative is viable.

2004 is a perfect example. Bush's numbers were in very, very dangerous territory for an incumbent. (if you had looked at the numbers in late-October without names attached, you would have said that "incumbent x" was heading for defeat.) but Bush managed to disqualify Kerry enough to win.

i think you can argue that Obama will face a tougher climate than did Bush, and i think there are people in this field, such as a wmr, who can present themselves as a viable alt. voters don't need to be inspired by an alternative, they just need to think "i'm not better off than i was 4 years ago, and i can imagine this other guy being president." it's really not such a leap.

Obama's advantage is that his 2008 win was truly impressive in scope and depth, and he can cede a lot of ground and still win. for example, if the gop nominee wins: IN, VA, FL, OH, NC, he still loses--barely.

most of all, i think this thread is really dumb because anyone willing to make a prediction with any claims of certitude (kudos to Weiner for bringing that word back) is foolish. alot can happen, and probably will.
Click to expand...


It's about demograhics. Obama will get 95+% of the black vote. He'll get about 67-72% of the Hispanic vote. he'll get close to 60% of the under thirty vote.

It'll take a meltdown for him to lose.

Plus as the campaign goes on, here are three ideas that will be used agaisnt Romney if he's the candidate:

As Gov of MA, the state was #46 in job creation. MA has highly educated people and an affluent society. That really sucks.

At Bain Capital, his typical methodology was to buy a company, fire people, then sell off the pieces. There will be lots of issue ads about this. "Will Romney be for you or will he cut your job?"

Then there's the flip flopping. What does he really believe?
 
RJKarl said:
It's about demograhics. Obama will get 95+% of the black vote. He'll get about 67-72% of the Hispanic vote. he'll get close to 60% of the under thirty vote.

It'll take a meltdown for him to lose.
Click to expand...

Am interested in your source for the Hispanic stat or if it is an educated guess. I am too lazy at the moment to look up what he took in Hispanic vote in 2008, but an interesting theory that pops up once in a while is naming Marco Rubio as the VP candidate on the Pub ticket (might get more press here in FL than elsewhere). Might draw some of the Hispanic population away from Obama.

And I agree, Obama will lose Oklahoma in an electoral landslide.
 
RJKarl said:
It's about demograhics. Obama will get 95+% of the black vote. He'll get about 67-72% of the Hispanic vote. he'll get close to 60% of the under thirty vote.

It'll take a meltdown for him to lose.

Plus as the campaign goes on, here are three ideas that will be used agaisnt Romney if he's the candidate:

As Gov of MA, the state was #46 in job creation. MA has highly educated people and an affluent society. That really sucks.

At Bain Capital, his typical methodology was to buy a company, fire people, then sell off the pieces. There will be lots of issue ads about this. "Will Romney be for you or will he cut your job?"

Then there's the flip flopping. What does he really believe?
Click to expand...

yeah, romney will get attacked. but it's not like Obama doesn't have a record filled with vulnerabilities.

i agree it will take a meltdown for Obama to lose. which is why the current economic meltdown makes him vulnerable.

look, MTP ran the figures the other day. since January 2009, unemployment is up, the debt is up, and gas prices are up.

we both understand that the reasons why are complex and not attributable to any one political figure or even party. but those are really "bad facts" for an incumbent to be running with, and insisting otherwise won't change it.

on top of it all, voters basically like the guy and want him to succeed. so that helps him a lot--maybe decisively.

i don't think Obama is dead in the water or a shoo-in. i think we're headed for a very competitive race. on that, i would wage $$.
 
WPDeac said:
Am interested in your source for the Hispanic stat or if it is an educated guess. I am too lazy at the moment to look up what he took in Hispanic vote in 2008, but an interesting theory that pops up once in a while is naming Marco Rubio as the VP candidate on the Pub ticket (might get more press here in FL than elsewhere). Might draw some of the Hispanic population away from Obama.

And I agree, Obama will lose Oklahoma in an electoral landslide.
Click to expand...

Obama got 67& of Hispanic vote on 2008, which was a major increase for Democrats from 2004, when Bush got 44%.

I am a firm believer that the VP doesn't matter to the result in modern politics. (I know, I know, "but it mattered in 1960" -- that was fifty years ago, get over it) Not sure whether that holds true for selections that might have particular appeal to certain groups. (hasn't really been tested except maybe Ferraro in '84) Hispanics are far from a unified voting block.
 
one more note before i shut up. part of the reason that 67% Hispanic vote was so high is because OBAMA WON IN A LANDSLIDE. He won big--or increased traditional Dem voting shares--basically across the board.

he was the much stronger candidate in an election favoring his party, and won decisively. so a lot of numbers look fantastic.

it doesn't work to simply extrapolate to 2012 because this is not a re-run of the 2008 election, under 2008 conditions.

The Hispanic vote is diverse, and while Obama may again perform well there, it's wrong to say "he got 67 last time and so that's the baseline." Just like everyone else, hispanics have been hurt my unemployment, bad mortgages, etc.
 
You can't run as a "businessman/job creator" when you have a track record that proves you don't create jobs.
 
RJKarl said:
You can't run as a "businessman/job creator" when you have a track record that proves you don't create jobs.
Click to expand...

right, that would be bad. so i suspect wmr will point to hundreds of thousands of jobs created by businesses in which his companies were involved.

he will concede there were some failures in that mix--free market and all--and others instances in which people flat lost their jobs.

yes, there will be ads like kennedy '94, where they go to Indiana and shoot someone who lost their job.

with US unemployment at 9%, i suspect there will be lots of ads featuring Americans out of work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top