If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Obama is using the same political strategy that lost Bush the election against Clinton in 1992   (foxnews.com) divider line 144
    More: Obvious, President Obama, George H. W. Bush, Mitt Romney, Bill Clinton, GOP, human beings, anti-war, Brian Schweitzer  
•       •       •

3863 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Apr 2012 at 1:58 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-24 04:14:32 PM  
By making it clear there's a million things you'd rather be doing than earning everyone's votes??? Oh, dear. Look at the time...

ww1.hdnux.com

I can't remember if it was that debate or a later one when his answer to a reporter's question showed that Bush's spirit was broken. It went something like this --

"Mr. President, do you think your performance tonight may have convinced any undecided voters?"
"<sigh> ... ohhh, I don't know..." <stares at floor>
 
2012-04-24 04:16:01 PM  
An excellent article on the 1992 election and the apparently successful Republican re-writing of history.
 
2012-04-24 04:16:52 PM  

WombatControl: If you look beyond the left-wing pro-Obama echo chamber, the facts on the ground tell a very different story from what the political spin coming from Obama's team would have everyone believe.


By all means, run with that. Your concern is noted.
 
2012-04-24 04:22:46 PM  

enry: violentsalvation: Romney is using the same political strategy that lost Kerry the election against W in 2004.

The common theme I'm seeing from the righties is "Anyone but Obama" which was what Kerry used. It'll work about as well for Romney, though probably worse since things are better than they were 4 years ago.

/Obama 2012
//Warren 2016


I agree with this entire post, including the guess as to who will become President on January 20th, 2017.
 
2012-04-24 04:24:13 PM  
who was widely respected as a thoughtful, qualified leader



I read enough right there.

Bush the elder was a whining little pissant, only a couple of steps above his son.
 
2012-04-24 04:25:34 PM  
soporific:

Do I think that repealing ObamaCare will be bad for the Republicans? No. ObamaCare remains massively unpopular, a clear majority favor its repeal. The benefits of ObamaCare have not materialized in the way its advocates think, and many of its provisions don't even hit until 2014 anyway.

The middle class is taking a bath right now because the US economy is swirling the toilet. More government spending is not the answer. We need to grow the economy and get the private sector moving again. Obama keeps pushing the same old failed ideas, when what we need is not "stimulus," but growth.

The idea that if we just spend more money to "create jobs" is a myth. If Romney's smart (and he is), the image of those government jobs will be the bureaucrats at the GSA blowing thousands upon thousands of dollars in taxpayer money. Even though that's not representative of all government workers, the fact is that growing the public sector at the expense of the private sector is not an economically sustainable practice.

We haven't seen much of Romney's plans - but we haven't seen anything from Obama or the Democrats. The Senate Democrats refuse to even pass a budget. Meanwhile the GOP has had a vigorous campaign of ideas about how to fix the economy from the Ryan budget to the RSC budget to other budget proposals.

All the Democrats have are the same class-warfare attacks. Again, how many jobs will the "Buffett Rule" create? None - it's political theater designed expressly for the Democratic base.

The whole "war on women" meme is a distraction from the issues - again, the polls show that Obama has lost on the issue, the Obama campaign is running away from it, and it's eroding Obama's Catholic support. Obama isn't an idiot - he's not going to push an issue that gets him negative political traction.

Romney is setting himself up to run a smart campaign - now, he could completely fail to follow through with it. He could fail to connect with the American people. There are a million ways that he could screw this up, but so far he's doing what he needs to do. He's miles ahead of where McCain was - read Game Change if you want to get a look at how immeasurably screwed up the McCain campaign was.
 
2012-04-24 04:26:42 PM  

phaseolus: By making it clear there's a million things you'd rather be doing than earning everyone's votes??? Oh, dear. Look at the time...

[ww1.hdnux.com image 318x471]

I can't remember if it was that debate or a later one when his answer to a reporter's question showed that Bush's spirit was broken. It went something like this --

"Mr. President, do you think your performance tonight may have convinced any undecided voters?"
"<sigh> ... ohhh, I don't know..." <stares at floor>


Rule #1 of debates-don't wear a watch, you idiot.
 
x23
2012-04-24 04:29:36 PM  

WombatControl: I know Fark Liberals™ think it's terribly clever


you know what else isn't terribly clever? this nonsensical "Fark Liberals™" thing you are trying so so so very desperately hard to make be a thing.

you really have absolutely no idea why "Fark Independents™" works as a meme do you? if you did you would realize "Fark Liberals™" is incredibly painfully inane.

basically i can't tell if you are just ignorant or simply humorless.

i really wish my arms were long enough to make as exaggerated a head-whoosh action that is needed to fully convey my thoughts on this matter.
 
2012-04-24 04:35:28 PM  

Liberal_With_a_Gun: violentsalvation: Romney is using the same political strategy that lost Kerry the election against W in 2004.

No, see, back then it was a stern, uncharismatic Republican incumbent going up against a relatable, charismatic Democrat. Now it's a relatable, charismatic Democratic incumbent going up against an uncharismatic, unrelatable Republican! THEY'RE EXACTLY THE SAME!!


Wait, did you just call John freaking Kerry charismatic and relatable? Bwahahahahahaahahah. I know you're not serious, but I almost swallowed my gum when I read that.
 
2012-04-24 04:36:13 PM  

x23: you know what else isn't terribly clever? this nonsensical "Fark Liberals™" thing you are trying so so so very desperately hard to make be a thing.

you really have absolutely no idea why "Fark Independents™" works as a meme do you? if you did you would realize "Fark Liberals™" is incredibly painfully inane.

basically i can't tell if you are just ignorant or simply humorless.

i really wish my arms were long enough to make as exaggerated a head-whoosh action that is needed to fully convey my thoughts on this matter.


That's the point - the whole "Fark Independent™" meme was painfully stupid to begin with - and the fact that using the term "Fark Liberal™" drives some people crazy is an added benefit.

Although, one could argue that it does fit with the theme of the earlier meme. A classical liberal believes in individual rights over collective rights, in the free exchange of ideas and goods over coersion, and in limited government over the expansive power of the state. A "Fark Liberal™" tends to believe in quite the opposite. But that's perhaps overthinking it.

Again, the term "Fark Liberal™" is intended to mean exactly what it says. No more and no less.
 
2012-04-24 04:37:49 PM  

x23: basically i can't tell if you are just ignorant or simply humorless.


He can be two things.
 
2012-04-24 04:40:19 PM  

jcooli09: who was widely respected as a thoughtful, qualified leader

I read enough right there.

Bush the elder was a whining little pissant, only a couple of steps above his son.


Bush Sr. was an aristocrat, a guy who liked living in a big White House and meeting royalty and playing tennis and the like. He had no particular diehard policy stances and, as a President, was, IMHO, mostly benign.
 
2012-04-24 04:50:27 PM  
Liberal revisionists are liberal....

..and did I mention sad?
 
2012-04-24 04:50:35 PM  
WombatControl:

First, Obama is way more popular among women, especially independant women, than Romney. That's probably not going to change, and if Obama's not bringing up the issue, you'll notice that the Romney camp isn't either. As memory of the comment fades, people will still remember actual legislation and women will recognize which side is pushing which legislation.

Obama's health care bill isn't as unpopular as you think. True, it has a higher unfavorable rating, but not by much, and again, when people are polled about the actual specifics, they like it. That's where Obama can make it work, if he and his party figure out how to sell the specifics. If they can get Romney to either endorse the popular parts of he bill, or better yet oppose the parts people like, it can work in Obama's favor.

As for government spending, of course it creates jobs. Millions of teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other public servants have built lives and supported their communities thanks to the government. Add to that Republicans who fear having military bases in their districts shut down because of the boon to the local economy. They know that government spending creates jobs, which is why they love loading bills with pork for their districts. They just don't want to admit it.

Too many austerity measures can kill a community, but I can see how people can be easily convinced to vote against their self-interest. Obama and his team have never been good at selling the idea that spending can help the economy.

Obama isn't the strongest candidate, I get that. But right now Romney is not even close to overtaking Obama. This is Obama's race to lose, but Obama's good at winning elections and turning the tables on his opponents. Romney could win by being a centrist, but doing so would alienate his base and might cause them to sit this one out or even try a third party run of a far-right candidate.

Obama's best strategy is to divide Romney's support,and the best way is to make Romney appeal to the middle, to the independants. That's the only way to win this race, but the independants aren't fans of Romney, and the base hates the idea of Romney going even an inch toward the center. (If they don't outright hate him and aren't going to get over Santorum not getting the nom.)
 
2012-04-24 04:52:35 PM  
What, Clinton ran against a super-rich and out-of-touch waffler whose own base couldn't decide what they wanted so finally said "Ugh, okay, if we *have* to", combined with a Congress that's been obstructivist and hasn't allowed the passing of a single decent bill in the last two years to help benefit the economy?

I did not know that.
 
2012-04-24 05:08:33 PM  
Am I better off than I was four years ago.

Yes.

Am I better of than I was 10 minutes ago? HELLS YES!

Good performance review and raise, with a coded but obvious rebuke to use Fark less.

//5 years straight of raises. I must be doing something right. Not Obama's direct doing obviously, but what am I going to do, vote Republican?
 
2012-04-24 05:10:57 PM  

Unstoppable Romney vs Obama: Gallup: Obama +7, WSJ:Obama +6,CNN: Obama+9, PEW: Obama+4, Reuters: Obama +4, ABC: Obama +7, IBD: Obama +8 #p2

- Claude Gauvin (@JeffersonObama) April 24, 2012


Obama is doooooooooooooomed
 
2012-04-24 05:11:58 PM  
From TFA:

First was the indispensable Ross Perot, the Texas billionaire whose independent candidacy -- a crusade against deficit spending and in favor of more government transparency and accountability -- tipped the race to Clinton. Consider Ohio, where Bush lost to Clinton by less than 2 points. Perot took more than 20 percent of the vote in Ohio, surely harming Republican incumbent George H. W. Bush more than Democrat challenger Clinton.

Problem is, that will be reversed this time. If Libertarian Gary Johnson can nab the Ron Paul vote, and gain some momentum, then Romney has no chance. Even if Johnson only takes something like 5% of the vote, it's hard to see how Romney can win.
 
2012-04-24 05:16:54 PM  
I think in the end, what we really care about is the fact that Romney drives a Cadillac (american made car) and once put a pet carrier on the roof of his car 30 years ago.

These issues are paramount to our success as a republic.
 
2012-04-24 05:42:07 PM  

WombatControl: x23: you know what else isn't terribly clever? this nonsensical "Fark Liberals™" thing you are trying so so so very desperately hard to make be a thing.

you really have absolutely no idea why "Fark Independents™" works as a meme do you? if you did you would realize "Fark Liberals™" is incredibly painfully inane.

basically i can't tell if you are just ignorant or simply humorless.

i really wish my arms were long enough to make as exaggerated a head-whoosh action that is needed to fully convey my thoughts on this matter.

That's the point - the whole "Fark Independent™" meme was painfully stupid to begin with - and the fact that using the term "Fark Liberal™" drives some people crazy is an added benefit.

Although, one could argue that it does fit with the theme of the earlier meme. A classical liberal believes in individual rights over collective rights, in the free exchange of ideas and goods over coersion, and in limited government over the expansive power of the state. A "Fark Liberal™" tends to believe in quite the opposite. But that's perhaps overthinking it.

Again, the term "Fark Liberal™" is intended to mean exactly what it says. No more and no less.


I'm going with ignorant.

/protip: put the projector down
 
2012-04-24 05:42:28 PM  
What does Bill Clinton have that Mitt Romney doesn't?
Hm...
 
2012-04-24 05:55:44 PM  

WombatControl: Romney is being very smart. He's not falling into the GOP's temptation to attack Obama personally. He's smart to know that independents still like Obama as a person. They see his Presidency as a failure though, and Romney is hititng him on the substance of his policies.



Recent polls show independents favoring Obama...having your thumb lodged up your own ass isn't the same as having your finger on the pulse of the people.

WombatControl: Running on repealing [Obamacare] is a winning issue for Republicans.



For a generic Republican, maybe...but Romney can hardly argue against something he himself pioneered at the state level with any amount of sincerity. Not that it's stopped him before...a loud fart is enough to spook him into changing his stance on any given issue.

WombatControl: The argument that Obama is going to stand up for the little guy against big business is laughable. His cabinet meetings could double as a board of directors meeting for Goldman Sachs. The financial regulations bill is full of loopholes that benefit the power players in the financial sector - because financial industry lobbyists wrote the bill. The rules in Dodd-Frank have made it more expensive for Americans to get credit and haven't produced any concrete benefits.



Again, it's only laughable when he's not juxtaposed with a face that epitomizes big business farking over the little guy.

WombatControl: Yes, Obama's approval ratings have consistently "hovered near" 50%. And unless Obama outperforms his approval ratings, he'll lose. An incumbent President who can barely break 50% approval is in trouble.



Obama approval on pace with previous incumbents who won reelection
 
2012-04-24 06:17:11 PM  
Obama is using the same political strategy that lost Cleveland the election against Harrison in 1888.

FTFS
 
2012-04-24 06:30:57 PM  
Bush Sr. was also hiding away in his Maine estate much of the time away from the hordes of media.
 
2012-04-24 06:42:52 PM  
 
2012-04-24 06:43:51 PM  
So who's the 3rd party guy with deep pockets they're letting into the debates?
 
2012-04-24 06:52:08 PM  
So Fox News was on the TV at the sports bar we went to lunch at. It was a full hour and a half of how Obama is destroying the country. I'm amazed that any organization could could keep that pacing up 24 hours a day without getting somewhat stale. Best part was a segment on how Obama is destroying the country by not letting the free market works it's wonders, followed by segment where they showed a graph of the average housing value before the housing bubble and where it's at now, and wondering why Obama hasn't done anything to fix that.
 
2012-04-24 07:02:27 PM  
I'm pretty sure Perot and getting primaried cost Bush the 1992 election.
 
2012-04-24 07:15:26 PM  
i see obama winning if lush rimjob and mittens represent the retard party, as i will vote for obama if mitt the moroni is the candidate... mitt should join the clam bake over at the cos...
 
2012-04-24 08:14:19 PM  
So what 3rd party candidate is coming in to take votes from Obama?
 
2012-04-24 08:29:25 PM  

Contrabulous Flabtraption: No, no - Romney is far more similar to Winfield Scott's failed campaign of 1852 while Obama's strategy mirrors that of Rutherford B. Hayes.


I ell-O-elled. Thank you.

/history geekish
//plus, Hayes graduated from same college I did.
 
2012-04-24 08:47:33 PM  

1derful:

Obama ran as an anti-war game changer who was going to revolutionize out political system. Of course he didn't, and he'll loose some independent votes because of that, but his base acts like a bunch of battered wives and will vote for him again despite the fact that he disappointed them.

.


Actually, Dennis Kucinich was the anti-war candidate. Obama was just the anti-Iraq war candidate. Before becoming president Obama said he was going to increase troop strength in Afghanistan as that was where Al-Qaeda was, and he held to his word. Capturing Osama Bin-Laden will make that decision pretty unassailable in terms of public opinion as well.

Anyway, there are too many people addicted to defense money and it is too easy to play into nebulous fears and patriotism for a true anti-military-industrial-complex candidate to win. The real anti-war liberals may not be happy with Obama, but their other choice is Mitt Romney who is as much a neo-con as Bush was, and Romney has even hired many of Bush's neo-con clowns for his staff.
 
2012-04-24 09:53:31 PM  
This is a huge stretch. I can't think of two presidential candidates less similar than Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney. Not to mention 1992 was a very weird year because it had the strongest 3rd party candidate in the last 50 years. The election that has a lot more parallels to this one is 1984.
 
2012-04-24 09:58:42 PM  

balloot: This is a huge stretch. I can't think of two presidential candidates less similar than Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney. Not to mention 1992 was a very weird year because it had the strongest 3rd party candidate in the last 50 years. The election that has a lot more parallels to this one is 1984.


Except that doesn't fit the narrative of Mitt Romney winning the election. The only parallels that Fox News wants to hear about are ones in which the incumbent loses the election. They've done Carter and Bush Sr. already, I guess the next comparison is with Gerald Ford.
 
2012-04-24 10:16:02 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: WombatControl: First, look at the polls

Okay.

Rasmussen is the only pollster that puts Romney out front, and with their +4 Republican bias that translates to Obama being tied with Romney there. You're a nimrod.


How dare you insult that fine aircraft by attempting to tie it to that handle. Bastard.

www.naval-technology.com

/What a nimrod might look like
 
2012-04-24 10:27:08 PM  
If a third party candidate comes out it will be a tea party candidate to go against Romney.
 
2012-04-24 10:38:03 PM  
Current GOP: "THIS ARE SERIOUS ELECTION. ROMNEY ARE SERIOUS CANDYDATE!"
 
2012-04-25 12:42:13 AM  

balloot: This is a huge stretch. I can't think of two presidential candidates less similar than Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney. Not to mention 1992 was a very weird year because it had the strongest 3rd party candidate in the last 50 years. The election that has a lot more parallels to this one is 1984.


It depends on the perception of the economy come November, if people see it as improving it will be very much like the recession during Reagen's early term when his popularity was low and the recovery/land slide victory in '84
The difficulty for Obama is that recoveries after a major financial crisis are historically much slower than recoveries from normal business cycles.
The other is that the corporate media oligarchy knows that the GOP is protective of the interests of the very wealthy and therefore the media ownership and management has a vested interest in painting the most negative picture possible
 
2012-04-25 02:51:55 AM  
Obama is no GHWB and Romney is sure as hell no Bill Clinton.
 
2012-04-25 02:55:07 AM  
mr romney, you're no clinton.

www.antiquiet.com
 
2012-04-25 07:58:16 AM  

AnEvilGuest: The other is that the corporate media oligarchy knows that the GOP is protective of the interests of the very wealthy and therefore the media ownership and management has a vested interest in painting the most negative picture possible


No president is more in bed with wall street than this one.

When you trade democrat for republican, you trade one corporate whore for another.
 
2012-04-25 09:03:40 AM  

Gwyrddu: The only parallels that Fox News wants to hear about are ones in which the incumbent loses the election.


The problem with this is that Obama wasn't primaried. You know how many times an incumbent president has lost the general election without being primaried? Six. The last time was Herbert Hoover, and the last time before that was Benjamin Harrison.
 
2012-04-25 12:52:13 PM  

colon_pow: Pilikia: Obama's doing what he's always done - rope-a-dope, and Romney's the dope. We'll get to a point in mid-August or so when everyone starts thinking Obama's on the ropes, and then BOOM! devastating uppercut out of nowhere. You heard it here first.

that BOOM! will be obamacare getting shot down.

you heard THAT here first.


I'm talking about the election, not some piece of legislation. Romney might be a successful businessman, but Obama is the better politician. You don't survive, let alone thrive in The Combine (i.e. Chicago politics) without being a stone cold sonuvabiatch. Utah and Massachusetts are like grade school playgrounds in comparison. Romney won't even know what hit him.
 
2012-04-25 04:48:39 PM  
subby: derp derp derp concern

Bush lost because Clinton was a powerfully compelling needed political change that everyone wanted to vote for.

Romney, not so much. Sorry you butt hurts.
 
Displayed 44 of 144 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report