Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

...a new poll shows indicates the American people would give us some change...

A significant majority of Americans are considering voting against President Obama in the 2012 election, expressing deep skepticism about his ability to create jobs and grow the sluggish economy, according to the latest POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42737.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Health care is another negative for the President...54 per cent of those polled do not favor the recently enacted health care legislation...only 41 per cent support the President on the controversial issue...

I would vote third party. I've held my fire but I'm pretty disappointed in what is not happening on the restoring-our-civil-liberties front. Like a boa constrictor taking up the slack when its prey exhales, the oppressor government continues to slowly strangle the American people. Next up - a permanent wiretap for the nation, (thanks a lot Barack W. Bush), under the guise of keeping us safe from "terror", of course. I've seen enough since 2000 to convince me that the United States, as people my age knew them, are gone forever. RIP USA, it was a great idea and I'm sad for my kids that didn't get to know ya...

I think the republicans may benefit from the tea party enthusiasm during the mid terms but assuming the atmosphere remains the same in 2012 the republicans are going to have a tough time fielding a candidate that works. the establishment isn't going to give up easily and Romney would probably be their pick. Once conservatives look at Romney's record, they are going to have heartburn for months with him. On the other hand, most of the tea party type candidates just don't look like serious presidential contenders and the conservative candidates that seem serious have little presidential pizzazz. 2012 is a long time off.

houndawg wrote:I would vote third party. I've held my fire but I'm pretty disappointed in what is not happening on the restoring-our-civil-liberties front. Like a boa constrictor taking up the slack when its prey exhales, the oppressor government continues to slowly strangle the American people. Next up - a permanent wiretap for the nation, (thanks a lot Barack W. Bush), under the guise of keeping us safe from "terror", of course. I've seen enough since 2000 to convince me that the United States, as people my age knew them, are gone forever. RIP USA, it was a great idea and I'm sad for my kids that didn't get to know ya...

What good will civil liberties do you when the country will be broke anyway? You're right about the USA as we knew them being gone, but we'll be GONE if something doesn't change pretty rapidly in the current "spend-like-a-drunken-sailor" mentality that exists in Washington.

OL FU wrote:I think the republicans may benefit from the tea party enthusiasm during the mid terms but assuming the atmosphere remains the same in 2012 the republicans are going to have a tough time fielding a candidate that works. the establishment isn't going to give up easily and Romney would probably be their pick. Once conservatives look at Romney's record, they are going to have heartburn for months with him. On the other hand, most of the tea party type candidates just don't look like serious presidential contenders and the conservative candidates that seem serious have little presidential pizzazz. 2012 is a long time off.

Christie.

Rob Iola wrote:

OL FU wrote:I think the republicans may benefit from the tea party enthusiasm during the mid terms but assuming the atmosphere remains the same in 2012 the republicans are going to have a tough time fielding a candidate that works. the establishment isn't going to give up easily and Romney would probably be their pick. Once conservatives look at Romney's record, they are going to have heartburn for months with him. On the other hand, most of the tea party type candidates just don't look like serious presidential contenders and the conservative candidates that seem serious have little presidential pizzazz. 2012 is a long time off.

Christie.

Mitch Daniels

A super majority is always a bad thing.

clenz wrote:A super majority is always a bad thing.

+1

The Democrats need to forcefully remind the American public that is was the Republicans FAILED economic policies that created this mess. More of the same from the Republicans will only make things worse.

dbackjon wrote:The Democrats need to forcefully remind the American public that is was the Republicans FAILED economic policies that created this mess. More of the same from the Republicans will only make things worse.

I think Obama does a good job with that. He is VERY good at blaming Bush every time he opens his mouth.

Col Hogan wrote:

clenz wrote:A super majority is always a bad thing.

+1

+1

dbackjon wrote:The Democrats need to forcefully remind the American public that is was the Republicans FAILED economic policies that created this mess. More of the same from the Republicans will only make things worse.

The problem with that, however, is that the Dems were all too happy to go along with those economic policies. I didn't see a lot of opposition to them in the '02-'06 timeframe when the GOP held both Houses (I haven't fact checked, just trying to remember when the GOP did hold control of both Houses of Congress). So for 4 years, when the GOP majority was razor thin, the Dems couldn't stop anything. Yet somehow, even with a super majority for all of '08, the Dems couldn't get by a Republican minority that could so No all they want, but they had no power to stop anything. What gives?

And ultimately, too, the problem with that position is that from '06 onward, when the Dems won control in Congress, is that they've simply repeated the same mistakes the GOP made - excessive government spending. That's where the real rub is - the Republican failed economic policies at the time (i.e. large government spending) have just been repeated and in many ways made worse by the current Dems in power. How do you say what they did was wrong when you're doing the same thing?

Oh, and the only way Obama doesn't win re-election in '12 is a two fold scenario - 1) the economy needs to continue to be bad, especially in terms of growth and unemployment. If it looks like it does today, that would be bad - and 2) the GOP needs to find someone who could actually win a Presedential election. I'm not sure they have a candidate today who could do that (Romney, Palin, Gingrigh, et al won't get it done). It's very, very hard to unseat an incumbent - but if the economy continues to be this bad and this badly managed, it gets a lot more realistic. Heck, Obama might face a challenge from inside the party (Hillary???).

GannonFan wrote:Oh, and the only way Obama doesn't win re-election in '12 is a two fold scenario - 1) the economy needs to continue to be bad, especially in terms of growth and unemployment. If it looks like it does today, that would be bad - and 2) the GOP needs to find someone who could actually win a Presedential election. I'm not sure they have a candidate today who could do that (Romney, Palin, Gingrigh, et al won't get it done). It's very, very hard to unseat an incumbent - but if the economy continues to be this bad and this badly managed, it gets a lot more realistic. Heck, Obama might face a challenge from inside the party (Hillary???).

Christie.

Christie and Daniels may be possibilities. I, unfortunately, know little of either. I just know Romney will split the party. He might have been a possible choice in 2008 but the mood of the right and the country, is in no mood for someone who is one thing when he governs Mass and something else when he runs for president.

dbackjon wrote:The Democrats need to forcefully remind the American public that is was the Republicans FAILED economic policies that created this mess. More of the same from the Republicans will only make things worse.

So they've taken failed economic policies and put them on fucking STEROIDS and we're supposed to just enjoy the ride?

Obama in a landslide, man. Straight up!

Unless the economy stays completely in the tank for the next two years Obama wins re-election. The republicans don't have a good candidate at this point and it will be the same thing that happened in 2008. All the blacks that won't vote this year will come out and vote for Barry in 2012 which will allow him to squeak out a win.

HI54UNI wrote:Unless the economy stays completely in the tank for the next two years Obama wins re-election. The republicans don't have a good candidate at this point and it will be the same thing that happened in 2008. All the blacks that won't vote this year will come out and vote for Barry in 2012 which will allow him to squeak out a win.

It IS nice for him that he's got a 15,000,000 vote head start REGARDLESS of how incompetent he is.

AZGrizFan wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:Unless the economy stays completely in the tank for the next two years Obama wins re-election. The republicans don't have a good candidate at this point and it will be the same thing that happened in 2008. All the blacks that won't vote this year will come out and vote for Barry in 2012 which will allow him to squeak out a win.

It IS nice for him that he's got a 15,000,000 vote head start REGARDLESS of how incompetent he is.

It will be quite interesting to see how many black voters there are in this cycle compared to the presidential election last cycle and what their turnout is like next cycle.

clenz wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
It IS nice for him that he's got a 15,000,000 vote head start REGARDLESS of how incompetent he is.

It will be quite interesting to see how many black voters there are in this cycle compared to the presidential election last cycle and what their turnout is like next cycle.

D1B wrote:

clenz wrote: It will be quite interesting to see how many black voters there are in this cycle compared to the presidential election last cycle and what their turnout is like next cycle.

Shake your head all you want. If the black voters don't come out this year, but come out again in record numbers when Obama is up for election it is pretty clear that there is "reverse racism" going on.

clenz wrote:

D1B wrote:

Shake your head all you want. If the black voters don't come out this year, but come out again in record numbers when Obama is up for election it is pretty clear that there is "reverse racism" going on.

Why are you wasting your youth on this bullshit? Z's a paranoid blockhead who solely votes with his checkbook. He'd elect Hitler if he ran a "No New Taxes" campaign.

Let old fucks like Z, Hogan and Tman waste their little precious time they have left on this crap and go live your life for god's sake.

I would have missed it.

D1B wrote:

clenz wrote: Shake your head all you want. If the black voters don't come out this year, but come out again in record numbers when Obama is up for election it is pretty clear that there is "reverse racism" going on.

Why are you wasting your youth on this bullshit? Z's a paranoid blockhead who solely votes with his checkbook. He'd elect Hitler if he ran a "No New Taxes" campaign.

Let old fucks like Z, Hogan and Tman waste their little precious time they have left on this crap and go live your life for god's sake.

I vote with the little black marker they give me to fill in the line.

And I believe we're just about the same age there, whippersnapper.