Beck: I think a third party’s going to win in 2012

posted at 6:11 pm on November 3, 2009 by Allahpundit

I missed this a few days ago but an eagle-eyed Freeper didn’t. Skip ahead to 3:45 for the key section. Technically he says that a third party will win unless the Democrats and GOP get their acts together, but that caveat is meaningless: Does anyone seriously think GB’s going to pronounce either party “cured” and therefore not in need of challenging before 2012? It’s also no mystery who he has in mind to lead the third party that shall save us all. I’ve been droning at you lately about how this is a dangerous idea that’ll end up with a split Republican vote and Democratic victory a la 1992 so I won’t belabor the point; follow that last link for more or read Ace’s recent thoughts about it, including another long post today about how big to make the tent. Sample quote:

To the extent the positions of each respective side get parodized and turned into straw-men, let us have less of that. The maximalists have to stop, stop treating anyone who mentions a legitimate practical-world concern to a maximalist slate of candidates as some sort of sell-out “without principle” and “without integrity.” (Having been on the receiving end of that sort of thing, I can tell you: Insults are not persuasive, and actually only harden one’s position against you.)

And on the pragmatist side of things, we can stop with the bait-ish expressions like “fantasy world” and other statements that imply the maximalist is less than lucid.

More on that later, though: I do think that some of the maximalists are in fact simply dismissing electoral reality as an inconvenience easily ignored, and almost as easily overcome, and we do need to discuss that. But we need more constructive manners of expressing that, I guess, as “fantasy” is taken as offensive.

Further to that boldfaced part, watch to the end here as Beck dismisses Romney as a guy who’ll make deals on spending rather than just cut, cut, cut. How he expects a Republican president to cut, cut, cut when the Democrats will almost certainly have enough Senate seats for a filibuster is beyond me, but that’s one of the things that makes me a “hated RINO” in Ace’s (mock) description.

While we’re talking 2012, John Ziegler’s piece on the likelihood that The One will be reelected is also worth reading. Writes JZ, “For Obama to be really hurt by a poor economy things would have be at least as bad three years from now as they are today. The reality is that, unless this is an unusually long recession, there is almost no chance that there won’t be at least some improvement that his friends in the fourth estate can of course give him all the credit for.” Fair enough, but based on historical trends, so long as unemployment is trending in the right direction on Election Day, reelection is almost assured. The One’s got three years to make that happen; if he does, even the media won’t have to do much pushing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Steveangell on November 4, 2009 at 12:40 AM

The courts never got to proof, of any kind. All of the cases are either in limbo, or were rejected for standing or process. No case has gotten past that preliminary step, which is a really bad joke. Civil rights cases with no proof of individual harm, beyond some ridiculous probabilistic arguments, are accepted but all courts have said that individual voters don’t have the right to either know that The Constitutional proscriptions are being officially checked and verified, or know that the candidates in a state election process are actually eligible for the positions they have run for, or the COmmander-in-Chief … It’s crazy.

progressoverpeace on November 4, 2009 at 12:54 AM

Either the GOP nominates an ACTUAL STRONG CONSERVATIVE,(NO Romney, No Rudy, NO McShamnesty, NO Newt, No Huckabee), or Obama will win in 2012, Third party or not.
Actually, with Obama having the census in his pocket and ACORN/SEIU defrauding the vote, there may not BE free and open elections in 2012 maybe not even 2010.

nelsonknows on November 4, 2009 at 12:58 AM

The last case dismissed did get to the point of a trial date being set. Judge Carter promised discovery. But then was somehow forced to hire a law clerk from Obama’s lawyers law firm. He backtracked and used the Birth announcements and internet image as proof Obama was a citizen. Never allowing any discovery. He broke rule after rule to dismiss the case. It may well be appealed but could stretch out for years. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

Steveangell on November 4, 2009 at 1:06 AM

As much as I admire Glenn on his delivery of the message night after night, he is DEAD WRONG on this issue. A third party is not the way to go in a national election, and a third party candidate will only seal the deal for a Hussein Obama second term. God. Perish the thought. Sorry Glenn, you’re wrong. Hope you read this.

long_cat on November 4, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Allahpundit: Fair enough, but based on historical trends, so long as unemployment is trending in the right direction on Election Day, reelection is almost assured. The One’s got three years to make that happen; if he does, even the media won’t have to do much pushing.

Agreed. Based on history, Obama has a very strong likelihood of winning re-election. This is why it is so important to remain focused on 2010, retaking the House and reducing the Democrats majority in the Senate so we can sustain filibusters. With such victories in 2010, Obama’s worst dreams for our country will not be put into law, at least for the rest of this term.

As to a third party run in 2012. I believe that would guarantee an Obama victory and more Democrats in Congress. We could end up back where we are now, or worse, regardless of how well we do in 2010. A third party strategy may be good for pundit ratings and book sales, but it won’t be good for our country.

Loxodonta on November 4, 2009 at 5:30 AM

As hard as I try I can’t find any Republican to get me excited. I hate that Obama will probably be re-elected! He is just not Presidential material. And he can do way too much damage with all his unvetted appointments.

I too think Beck is wrong about the third Party. If we can’t even field one exciting candidate how can we find two?

I know many think Sarah is the one. And maybe so if she gets some real national leadership–I just don’t like the idea of such a thin resume in the Whitehouse. Of course I’d vote for her over Obama but I wouldn’t be happy about it.

It is going to take enthusiasm to beat Obama. Where are we going to find it?

petunia on November 4, 2009 at 7:16 AM

When both party’s are taking you on the road to ruin, the only disagreement being how fast you get there, why not support a third party.

MarkTheGreat on November 4, 2009 at 7:47 AM

Would this be the Republican party that picked Scozzafava, supported her with $900K, all the while trashing the true conservative in the race, even after it became apparent that the voters had rejected the insiders choice?

MarkTheGreat on November 4, 2009 at 7:48 AM

Beck is wrong (what else is new?), he will squirm and say that a conservative Rebublican candidate is basically a third party.
Beck, stay with your chalk board, and leave the real reporting to experts like Brit Hume…your large audience doesn’t make you “brilliant” except in marketing your product. Obama has a large audience also…

right2bright on November 4, 2009 at 7:58 AM

Beck is doing heroic work with his TV show. However, the idea that a third party President is possible is wishfull thinking. Where would the candidate get electors for the electoral college?

davod on November 4, 2009 at 9:01 AM

eh maybe. I am pretty sure ACORN won’t rig the next one.

johnnyU on November 4, 2009 at 9:22 AM

Allah-
I have to agree and disagree with you. If the GOP did not learn it’s lesson with the 2008 election. Than we need to demonstrate for them again in 2012 the need to obey our desires. Do you see (today) a better GOP candidate than McCain? I won’t vote Huckabee, I won’t vote McCain, i will consider Romney… Pawlenty sounds conservative today but a quick glance at his RECORD shows many signs of RINOism. Do we have candidates like Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan or Jeff Flake or Bobby Jindal at a national level? Not yet…
I think that if i vote Republican in 2012 it will be hesitantly and with many worries. Unless someone pops on the stage before then with some serious conservative cred.

therambler on November 4, 2009 at 10:46 AM

Glen really truly believes America is in serious trouble. He believes the Constitution is being trampled and is on life support with the clock running out. He understands Barack is an Illegal Alien Manchurian President Hell Bent to make America the new Russia. He believes with every inch of his body Obama hates all Whites and hates the Constitution even more. He believes Obama was raised in Marxist totalitarianism from his infancy and as a Muslim as well and that those two go hand in hand. He understands that Obama prays for the death of Christianity. Obama drank the Wright Koolaid and honestly believes that if Christ was white (and he was) we should kill him. Beck understands this. Beck also understands that the Rockefeller Republicans believe Marxism is the way to go.

Beck will never support a “Big Tent” Republican Party. None of us should after the Bush/McCain debacle. Regan Conservatism or bust.

Steveangell on November 4, 2009 at 12:02 AM

I’m not sure if this is meant to be tongue-in-cheek or not. I was with you up until the “illegal alien” subject. Believing something is not the same as understanding how presidential politics works

Fed45 on November 4, 2009 at 11:22 AM

I agree with those who like Beck and respect his work, which is extremely important and helpful, but that we need to make the change within the republican party. As others have said, a significant third party challenge from the right would ensure an Obama victory, which would be the final nail in the coffin for our great country.

GaltBlvnAtty on November 4, 2009 at 11:31 AM

Agree with your premise on the dangers of the third party, but not on Ziegler’s piece. That was a speculative and weakly supported essay.

rrpjr on November 4, 2009 at 11:33 AM

Agree with Rush on this one. Third party is big mistake.

jeanie on November 4, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Sometimes Glenn Beck shows he is a retard.

Mr. Joe on November 4, 2009 at 12:45 PM

I was all for Hoffman’s candidacy and I am sorry he did not win. There are times third parties make sense–especially when the so called Republican is far worse than the Democrat running. But it is rare. Beck is either stupid or intentionally dishonest with this nonsense.

Mr. Joe on November 4, 2009 at 12:47 PM

“The One’s got three years to make that happen; if he does, even the media won’t have to do much pushing.” -AP

Can you give us even one example of anything that the jug-eared one is doing that moves the unemployment numbers, or the economy in general, in the right direction? I assert that any improvement, however transitory, in any economic indicator is despite of his efforts, not because of. You are still deluding yourself with the belief that Obamao wants improvement in the economy to insure his reelection. He has something else in mind.

SKYFOX on November 4, 2009 at 12:58 PM

I agree with Rush that a third party ensures continued Democratic control.

However, I disagree with the big tent idea that we have to dump our conservative principles in order to get our guy or gal elected. Reagan didn’t compromise his principles and he remains the best presidential candidate of my lifetime.

If I am presented with 2 candidates that are pretty much identical in philosophy and the only real difference is a D or an R next to their name, I will continue to write in my vote each and every election until I get a conservative choice.

In Hoffman’s case if the national Republican leaders and Newt et al. had actually possessed a backbone and not backed a Dem in Republican clothing (to get a win in name only) from the start there would have probably been a much different outcome last night.

SimplyKimberly on November 4, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Beck is crazy to push this 3rd party thing, and it pisses me off. First time I’ve ever agreed with AP, and probably the last.

rlwo2008 on November 4, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Glen really truly believes America is in serious trouble. He believes the Constitution is being trampled and is on life support with the clock running out. He understands Barack is an Illegal Alien Manchurian President Hell Bent to make America the new Russia. He believes with every inch of his body Obama hates all Whites and hates the Constitution even more. He believes Obama was raised in Marxist totalitarianism from his infancy and as a Muslim as well and that those two go hand in hand. He understands that Obama prays for the death of Christianity. Obama drank the Wright Koolaid and honestly believes that if Christ was white (and he was) we should kill him. Beck understands this. Beck also understands that the Rockefeller Republicans believe Marxism is the way to go.

Beck will never support a “Big Tent” Republican Party. None of us should after the Bush/McCain debacle. Regan Conservatism or bust. in attempting to get huge ratings by playing off of the hard core conservatives. FIFY.
Steveangell on November 4, 2009 at 12:02 AM

Jimbo3 on November 4, 2009 at 1:36 PM

Glenn is wrong, Rush is right. NY-23 was a loss BUT BY A VERY SMALL MARGIN. Considering Hoffman came from nowhere to 45% of the vote based on conservative grassroots support, the lesson is clear. We must continue to power-support conservatives, repeatedly, until we wound the RINO party into returning to its right-wing roots. AND NO MONEY TO THE RNC. Starve them back to conservativism.

Yephora on November 4, 2009 at 4:01 PM

such a thin resume in the Whitehouse.

petunia on November 4, 2009 at 7:16 AM

Okay, I’ll play along with you for exactly one point. Name a conservative politician [currently in office or not] that has a THICKER resume.
 
Just one, that’s all I’m asking.

Blacksmith8 on November 4, 2009 at 9:24 PM

The people are tired and hungry. They need old school, Reagan Conservatism. That is the path we should take.

Blacksmith8 on November 4, 2009 at 9:29 PM

Beck is nuts if he thinks a 3rd party will win a presidential elecition. Hoffman (NY 23) proved the point, yesterday.

BottomLine5 on November 4, 2009 at 9:34 PM

Sorry Glenn, bad move

scotash on November 4, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Why can’t the the federal, state or local governments set up a “preferential voting system” aka instant run-off. This is where we rank some or all of the candidates in order of preference with a “1″ being the most desirable choice. And if there is no majority winner, then the candidate with the least number of “1″ votes is dropped and an automatic, or instant, runoff recount is completed.
.
This way, a third party candidate could win because the citizens would not be afraid to “waste” their vote on that candidate, as it would pass onto their 2nd most preferred choice if the third party candidate lost.

JeffVader on November 5, 2009 at 12:19 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3