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

If we have another Ross Perot election, it will mean another four years of Obama. I pray he is wrong.

bopbottle on November 3, 2009 at 6:15 PM

We don’t need a third party.

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

No, a 3rd party can’t win. But Sarah sure can scare the beejeezus out of them up until then.

Punditpawn on November 3, 2009 at 6:17 PM

I seriously doubt a third party candidate can win the white house without a serious and significant showing in House and Senate elections first (and a track record of serious performance). Outside of that, a third party candidate is going to have to dole out some serious koolaid–or the electoral circumstances (war, catastrophe, collapsed economy) have to be extraordinarily unusual.

ted c on November 3, 2009 at 6:18 PM

We need Ron Paul…

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

No.

Enoxo on November 3, 2009 at 6:18 PM

I think it’s not as crazy as it might’ve sounded a year ago.

Jim Treacher on November 3, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Allahpundits optimism didn’t last long. Heh.

Look, Beck is hugely entertaining, but he’s going to have to get past Jeri Thompson and Sarah Palin. Good luck with that. Besides, chances are that Beck will have an on-air breakdown before the 2010 election. Why worry?

Terrie on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

How about we not listen to the 5 PMer and take the Republican party back to Reagan Conservatism?

YoungAmerican on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

I don’t agree. I think (hope) that the Republicans are getting a clue. I’ve seen a lot of wild changes in the last couple of years but so far not enough to buy into this idea.

Cindy Munford on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

I don’t think even an improved economy is going to save Obama.

John the Libertarian on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

If the GOP selects another John McCain type, then there is always the Constitution Party and Libertarian parties or sitting out again.

Try to defeat neocons in the primary first though. Voting third party is only a last resort like when McCain-Palin wins the primary.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Lets find out who our candidates are before getting serious about third parties.

fourdeucer on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

If voting for the best candidate rather then the political party is what Beck considers third party…. ahh okay then.

upinak on November 3, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Terrie on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

And Liz Cheney!

John the Libertarian on November 3, 2009 at 6:20 PM

It’s also no mystery who he has in mind to lead the third party that shall save us all.

It’s a mystery to me and I watch him almost daily. Someone enlighten me.

Monica on November 3, 2009 at 6:20 PM

As much as a third party is desirable, you’ll only spell doom for any right-of-center candidates. The votes just aren’t there when you split the right side of the spectrum in half.

KellyBomelly on November 3, 2009 at 6:20 PM

AP, yep, you’re right, nothing’s changed and everything will turn out the way it always has.

Just like NY23, you won’t see the pushback coming when it happens again.

True_King on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

The 2 party system is on the verge of complete destruction. A fiscal conservative/socially libertarian 3rd party candidate could defeat the 2 party system. You betcha.

portlandon on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

It’s a mystery to me and I watch him almost daily. Someone enlighten me.

It’s Palin. Did you watch the clip. He specifically says, right before he talks about a third party winning in 2012 here, that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Can someone point to one Odumbass policy that makes you think the economy will turn around?

txag92 on November 3, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Romney is voteable, but is he the reformer?

Will he cut, cut, cut?

Maybe not. Would Palin? Could she? I know Ron Paul would. Whoever it is… We do need a reformer.

iamse7en on November 3, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Lets find out who our candidates are before getting serious about third parties.

fourdeucer on November 3, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Yes. I hope the GOP puts up some bona fide conservative candidates in 2012.

NebCon on November 3, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Seemed more like a threat than a prediction.

Ronnie on November 3, 2009 at 6:23 PM

that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Beck can think all he wants. But do you really think so?

I sure don’t. But I don’t see the problem in picking the right candidate for the job.

upinak on November 3, 2009 at 6:24 PM

I think the press has actually fueled the end of partisanship. I can’t imagine reading a bunch of junk about how this or that affects this or that party in this or that way.

It’s over. Nobody gives a flip. It doesn’t matter what the label is. What matters is ONLY that the person isn’t beholden to the insiders.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 6:24 PM

It’s Palin. Did you watch the clip. He specifically says, right before he talks about a third party winning in 2012 here, that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

If she goes 3rd party, the Republican candidate better offer her a VP spot or the GOP can kiss their chances goodbye.

portlandon on November 3, 2009 at 6:25 PM

No, we don’t need Ron Paul.

And no, even a reviving economy/better unemployment figures won’t get Ogabe re-elected: Ogabe has a bigger problem: The Marxist ideology that pervades everything he does.
He’s surrounded himself with Marxist czars and his mentor, Rev. Jeremiah “God d*mn Amerikkka!” Wright just gave us another fine speech extolling Socialism and Marxism.
Cap & trade, NancyBama Care, Porkulus, his seizure of banks and car companies, etc.–these are all the actions of a committed Marxist and practitioner of Black Liberation “Theology.”

Jenfidel on November 3, 2009 at 6:25 PM

We don’t need a third party.

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

I’m listening…

We also need to support Mendina for Texas governor. That’s going to be the most important race before the Presidential election. 2012 will be interesting. This movement started from basically nothing (or at least very little) 3 years ago and I can see double digits for our candidate in 2012 after discontent with both parties reaches its zenith.

The Dean on November 3, 2009 at 6:25 PM

It’s Palin. Did you watch the clip. He specifically says, right before he talks about a third party winning in 2012 here, that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Thanks! No, I didn’t watch it yet- punish me with a new set of computer speakers please. I have to watch it from my laptop later.

Monica on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

If we are lucky, that ‘third party’ will simply be the massive replacement of existing hacks from both parties with new and hopefully more honest and less self serving folk. They may come from the old parties but will reflect a new philosophy or fiscal responsibility and also pay some slight attention to the voters for a long overdue change.

Perhaps the ranks of unemployed politicians will finally grow.

Today I voted against every sitting politician in my towns elections.

JIMV on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I’m too young to remember the Ross Perot run. Can anyone say whether or not 1989 looked anything like 2009 has looked so far? Would anybody have predicted Perot three years out from the 1992 election?

warrenmr on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I think it’s not as crazy as it might’ve sounded a year ago.

Jim Treacher on November 3, 2009 at 6:18 PM

I agree. The GOP still seems hesitant to reform. Conservatives, independents, and disenchanted democrats will go third party if there is a candidate like Sarah Palin running.
However, I think Sarah might go the Reagan route and clean up the crap of the GOP.

cubachi on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I can’t see this happening simply because of money. The GOP and DNC have so much money to spend during election it drowns out everyone else.

If the money problem can be solved then I could see a 3rd party making a run for it.

Ampersand on November 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM

It looks like a 3rd party candidate is winning in NY at least

orfannkyl on November 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Either it’s libertarians or a new party—maybe the “T” party

ted c on November 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

That’s cute.

Esthier on November 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

A third party is a silly idea and she would never go for it.

TimeTraveler on November 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM

No Glenn WE DON’T NEED ANOTHER PEROT!

lanesmerge on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM

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.

I disageee. If malaise and hyperinflation sets in, as is very likely, 0 may well end up just like Carter!

glennbo on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM

The continued existence of this nation is going to be determined long before 2012. It will be known before 2010 more than likely. But, one thing is perfectly clear, if The Precedent is still in office in 2011, the US isn’t making it to 2012.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM

I wish the Libertarian wasn’t so freaking nuts. On paper I am a Libertarian, but even want to be seen with the people they pick to run.

Ampersand on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

That would be the Ron Paul that won one precinct in Iowa, one in New Hampshire, and ended the primary season with a whopping 35 delegates, right? He couldn’t kick Perez Hilton’s ass.

ElectricPhase on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Where the heck are all the Paulians are coming from? I figured they crawled back into their mommy’s basements after the only man who could save America failed to win anything beyond non-scientific online polls.

Rogue on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

I wasn’t very old at the time, so my memory is hazy on this, but I recall Perot having a significant lead, and then dropping out. So the problem there was probably Ross Perot, rather than the general viability of a third party candidate.

RINO in Name Only on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Unless a third party also takes Congress, having a third party President is useless!

GFW on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

It’s far too early to even discuss 2012, but between tonight and 2010, there’s time for the Republican Party to get it’s act together and realign it’s ass as the true conservative party, which would be the preferred route.

If it doesn’t, a third party will be inevitable.

TXUS on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

I am not sure he really wants a third party, maybe he is gravitating that way more and more but he originally was asking for the people to wake up and get involved. I think if he were to see a resurgent conservative base take back the Republican Party he would be ok with that. We just have to make sure conservative candidates stay conservative.

bluemarlin on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

It will be known before 2010 more than likely.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:28 PM

“Before the 2010 elections,” is what I meant.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:29 PM

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

World of Warcraft offline again?

Aristotle on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

I’m too young to remember the Ross Perot run.

warrenmr on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I’m young enough to remember him as an Animaniacs skit. I don’t remember them even mentioning any other politician, but I distinctly remember them parodying him with big ears and saying he’ll run, won’t run, run, won’t run…

Esthier on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Lets get the 2010 election behind us. I hate thinking that far ahead. I don’t even buy green bananas. Glenn should stick to dismantling the Obama administration.

fourdeucer on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

There won’t have to be a 3rd party… If the Republican party wants to survive, it will have to adopt the Reagan Conservative theme. And rightly so. A pure conservative will run with or without the RNC and they will either come along or lose what organization they have left.

It is always the same… Follow the money, and I can tell you now, the money is in the Conservative movement.

The Dead Terrorist on November 3, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Barry won’t change. He might pretend to move to the center like Clinton, BUT that’s just to set up an all out assault on our constitution. When we dismantle the lib majority in 2010, we’d better get busy dismantling the Obama presidency in hearing after hearing after hearing. Throw the kitchen sink at these radical freaks and their Liar-in-Chief.

marklmail on November 3, 2009 at 6:31 PM

World of Warcraft offline again?

Aristotle on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Careful. You catch a lot of friendlies with that one.

Esthier on November 3, 2009 at 6:32 PM

I’m too young to remember the Ross Perot run.

warrenmr on November 3, 2009 at 6:26 PM

He ran against NAFTA and for fiscal responsibility. He was pretty kooky and pulled out of the race, claiming that Bush Sr. had tried to screw up his daughter’s wedding. Then he got back in the election and still won close to 20%. Clinton got in because of Perot, as Clinton only got 43% of the vote.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:32 PM

Beck has been really pushing Palin. And he has been pushing for a third party. I noticed the other day that Beck was mocking Romneycare and had a funny smile on his face when he announced he would be interviewing Pawlenty on his radio show. Seems he only likes on person: Palin.

My only concern with Palin is her lack of governing experience. After the Obama debacle, the voters are going to want someone with a lot of governing experience. And Palin quit her governing position.

texasconserv on November 3, 2009 at 6:32 PM

Democratic victory a la 1992

Don’t quote history unless you quote it fairly. In June of 1992, Ross Perot had a plurality of the vote, AP. He had 39%, more than either Bush or Clinton. It was only after he quit the race over some paranoia with his daughter’s wedding, that he lost that support overnight. So when he came back to the race, it was gone. It was only then that he split the vote and gave Clinton the White House.

Had he not dropped out, he would have won. That is what the polls were showing. So the third Party idea has already been tried and proven to work.

keep the change on November 3, 2009 at 6:33 PM

He specifically says, right before he talks about a third party winning in 2012 here, that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Beck has some good ideas, but I suspect that reading Sarah Palin’s mind is above his pay grade.

ElectricPhase on November 3, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Sarah’s not going 3rd party!
Right after her endorsement of Hoffman, she wrote a Facebook post asking Fans to support Christie and McDonnell using Republican Governors’ Association.

This past weekend, she directed everyone to watch and listen to Republican John Boehner’s health care message as Minority Leader in the House, calling it a “game changer.”

Sarah Palin has a record of taking on corrupt Republicans in Alaska and defeating them, yet remaining a Republican.

I’ve thought Glenn Beck was wrong to keep hitting his “Both parties are terrible” mantra for the last 2 years, but he doesn’t listen to me.
Pity.

Jenfidel on November 3, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Palin/Hoffman 2012!!!!

Fundamental Fred on November 3, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Can we please stop taking about that Big Tent? Its just plain garbage. Just WHO is in this tent? For those of you to whom a “Big Tent” means anything (and I thinks its a substitute for nothing else big) why does it seem to matter NOT AT ALL who else is in that tent with you, just as long as you’ve got a bunch of people in there?

You want a BIG tent and nothing else? Go join the Dems, they’ll take anyone. Or how about the Chi-Com Party, that’s got to be a bigger tent than anyone else’s . . . if its the size of the tent that is all that’s important.

For me, it matters whose in that tent, and what their VALUES are.

seanrobins on November 3, 2009 at 6:34 PM

It’s Palin. Did you watch the clip. He specifically says, right before he talks about a third party winning in 2012 here, that he thinks she’s going third-party.

Allahpundit on November 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM

He also suggested he wasn’t sure if Palin would demonstrate gravitas. So while I think he sees potential in Palin, he is probably making a more general prediction.

RINO in Name Only on November 3, 2009 at 6:34 PM

No need for a third party, just a tea party takeover of the Republican party! Do you know what a conservative calls a RINO or a moderate?

A DEMOCRAT!

libertylady on November 3, 2009 at 6:34 PM

I don’t think there is going to be a 3rd party. I think that these elections pretty much seal one thing. The GOP traditionals need to either get to work, for real, and knock off thinking that their base doesn’t matter, or they’ll end up irrelevant.

Who cares about the RNC, anyway? These are the same turkeys who raised money for the Palins and clothes and then turned it into a fiasco. Have they actually ever donated those clothes as promised?

They are the ones who are to be avoided, frankly. I laugh when I read the articles about how people are avoiding Palin. It’s the other way around.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 6:35 PM

.

Glenn should stick to dismantling the Obama administration.

fourdeucer on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Yes, he is doing a great job and service there. As many have said above, 2012 is a long way away and there are the 2010 elections to pay attention to. I think everyone figures it will not be done overnight but the horn has been sounded and the fight to bring back core values to GOP is on. I think considering a third party is a bit premature at this particular time.

bluemarlin on November 3, 2009 at 6:35 PM

If the party nominee is someone more like Ronald Reagan than Ron Reagan, Beck won’t be a problem. He’s just sick of the McCains and Doles and Crists and Grahams and Scuzzyfavabeans of the world. Those are the people who have done their best to ruin the GOP, not the conservatives.

flyfisher on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Beck and a 3rd party… a bridge too far.

SeattleJohn on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

I missed this a few days ago but an eagle-eyed Freeper didn’t.

Old news, Allah. You gotta keep up, man.

Christian Conservative on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Dude Allah , get behind in Beck news much? Slow.

rinohumper on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

My only concern with Palin is her lack of governing experience. After the Obama debacle, the voters are going to want someone with a lot of governing experience. And Palin quit her governing position.

texasconserv on November 3, 2009 at 6:32 PM

And at the same time I think people will be tired of the people who have been governing so that could hurt people who have governing experience. Maybe someone who has ran a successful business, but right now there is a lot of demonizing of people who have made it rich in the private sector.

It seems like a big catch 22. I don’t know what the right answer will be.

Ampersand on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Why should any one care what this unstable mental midget clown says on his freak show?

greggish on November 3, 2009 at 6:36 PM

What Beck doesn’t talk about (at least so far) is that it’d be better to take over the party than to start a new one. I think he’s trying to tap into the disaffected Dems, who still can’t pull the lever for a Repub.

Iblis on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Beck drives me nuts. Thank God for him but he drives me nuts.
No third party. Whoever said it is spot on. Wait to see who shakes out of this and then re evaluate.
2010 will have to happen first. No 2 fricking year campaign either!
Predictions right now are crazy. We are all waiting for Reagan and it is, right now, like waiting for Santa clause. In the meantime, let Beck do what he does, he is part of the shake out.

ORconservative on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

A third party conservative will merely repeat the Ross Perot effect from 1992…Perot effectively shouted down supporters of Bush senior. If you remember, President Bush had astronomical approval ratings following the Gulf War. It was all gone after the Texas Chihuahua chewed on his leg for a year…And, we got the Clintons as a result. And, we still got em…The dysfunctional duo are still at it with their combined pathological need for attention and power. No, god help us if we run a third party conservative. It will guarantee four more years of Obama-mao.

Nozzle on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

I think it’s not as crazy as it might’ve sounded a year ago.

Jim Treacher

Unfortunately you are.

Grow Fins on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Fred Thompson has been more active than Palin in NY-23. Is he going third party? Ich don’t think so.

The Tea Parties were easier for non-believers to marginalize. Today’s election is a warning shot that the Blue Dogs and the GOP establishment ignore at their own peril.

Terrie on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

I think if the Republicans are able to retake congress in 2010 then Obama will be reelected because people will feel that he won’t be able to do too much more damage, but if the Democrats still control congress people will be afraid of what else he will try and do in another term. Therefor, they will be more likely to vote against him.

Rose on November 3, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Beck has been really pushing Palin. And he has been pushing for a third party.

I don’t think that Glenn is in the pay of Obama, but if he is pushing a third party, he might as well be.

Realist on November 3, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Grow Fins on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Still here? Go away, already.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Hmmm..third party? That’s what the Whigs said about the Republicans.

Jeff from WI on November 3, 2009 at 6:38 PM

I think the Republican Party is a lost cause and it’s becoming more obvious every day. The last deal, the $900K spent to try and put a flaming liberal in office speak volumes about how clueless and useless the GOP is.

Jeff from WI on November 3, 2009 at 6:40 PM

“I have to say I cannot agree with some of my friends—perhaps including some of you here tonight—who have answered that question by saying this nation needs a new political party.

I respect that view and I know that those who have reached it have done so after long hours of study. But I believe that political success of the principles we believe in can best be achieved in the Republican Party. I believe the Republican Party can hold and should provide the political mechanism through which the goals of the majority of Americans can be achieved.”

runner on November 3, 2009 at 6:41 PM

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.”

By this thinking, Obama’s toast in 2012, as we’re currently in the early stages of the next Great Depression.

The ever-rising numbers of bank failures and the commercial real estate collapse will finally overcome the artificially-inflated GDP numbers and political accounting manipulations. I would be greatly surprised if November 2012 arrived after 3 years of consistent economic improvement. 1-2 years, tops, before a massive collapse.

Harpazo on November 3, 2009 at 6:41 PM

Just redefine the GOP. Frankly, the current batch of GOP can’t be faulted too much. They are holding firm on healthcare, and it’s been pretty darn ugly to do so. It can’t be fun to constantly be asked why you only seem to vote “NO.”

And, yes, Beck drives me nuts, too.

AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 6:41 PM

What Beck is driving at – that seems to elude many – is that this nation has been put at such risk by the incompetence and stupidity of the GOP that conservatives have now been put on death ground. There is no more compromising left, since there will be nothing left to compromise about. That is the story and why talk of a third party Presidency is not an unheard of option. Also, the way things are with communication these days, a third party candidate could be viable and up and running in an instant, unlike before. But, as I said, I think things will shake out one way or another long before the 2012 elections. Long before.

progressoverpeace on November 3, 2009 at 6:41 PM

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16

Or even better, some guy who thinks an apple is talking to him.

ThePrez on November 3, 2009 at 6:41 PM

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Oh Please! I would not vote for Ron Paul anymore than I would vote for the filthy lying coward in the White House. Paul has no more ethics, morals, vision, or ability to lead than Obama.

highhopes on November 3, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Ziegler clearly has not been paying attention to economic forecasts from folks like PIMCO’s Gross and El-Erian who predict the ‘new normal GDP at 1-2%’which will not be enough to maintain our standard of living

it WILL be this bad in 3 years, it may be worse if we get hit with hyperinflation

based on how TOTUS has olcker in a bunker unable to speak to anyone, I am starting to be concerned that maybe Gentle Ben cut a deal when he got reappointed and they may wait even longer than the usual ‘too long’ that the Fed waits to tighten liquidity

their plan is CLEARLY the devaluation of the dollar to lower the debt and boost exports and to spread govt money around to boost GDP

they WILL let the Bush tax cuts expire next year, there WILL be a double dip

absolutely no sign of growth as far as the eye can see

no reason to think he will be re elected, he is no Big Dawg, he wont moderate

ginaswo on November 3, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Who cares about the RNC, anyway? These are the same turkeys who raised money for the Palins and clothes and then turned it into a fiasco.

The MSM turned it into a fiasco.
Meanwhile, have the NObamas had to account for the $1 BILLION his campaign spent?
And who paid for the Halloween party at the WhiteOrange House?
Oh, I know…We, the American taxpaying public, did.
But we weren’t invited to the party.

Have they actually ever donated those clothes as promised?
AnninCA on November 3, 2009 at 6:35 PM

Yes.

Jenfidel on November 3, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Unfortunately you are.

Grow Fins on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

why bother, you get it all the way around.

Or do you like the abuse and see it as some type of happy place?

upinak on November 3, 2009 at 6:43 PM

..a third party is a crock: Perot, Jon anderson, even Teddy Roosevelt.

Next year, Sarah Palin or some one will emerge as the standard bearer for conservative princitples a la Reagan and become the focus of attention. The huge vacuum in conservative leadership will be filled and that person will appropriate the GOP machine and set them straight like what happened in NY-23 this year.

Frankly, I hope Palinwins because it would be marvelous to see all of these “HopenChanger” Beatific idiots get a dose of what they inflicted on us with that jerkwad in the White House now.

VoyskaPVO on November 3, 2009 at 6:43 PM

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Don’t fret you can do all the drugs you want without Ron Paul.

heshtesh on November 3, 2009 at 6:43 PM

Unfortunately you are.

Grow Fins on November 3, 2009 at 6:37 PM

As famous last words go, I’ve seen worse. Best of luck to you, wherever you end up going.

Jim Treacher on November 3, 2009 at 6:44 PM

After all that Obama has done to this country I cannot even fathom that people are still hung up on Sarah Palin’s clothes! Are you kidding me?

libertylady on November 3, 2009 at 6:45 PM

I’ve thought Glenn Beck was wrong to keep hitting his “Both parties are terrible” mantra for the last 2 years, but he doesn’t listen to me.
Pity.

Jenfidel on November 3, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Good thing he doesn’t, ’cause you ain’t talking sense.

I’m sure you’ll agree that the Dimmocrat Party is just no good…

But what would you base the belief that there is something good left in the GOP at the moment? Can you say …. now read my lips, and repeat after me …

S . C . O . Z . Z . A . F . A . V . A .

And don’t tell me that, gee it was just a piddly little local election in NY-23. Look what ostensibly rational (what a joke) GOPers reflexively gave their nod to her without any principled consideration. Are you happy with Newt? If he’s not a reliable conservative, who is? Well guess what? Newt is NOT a reliable conservative. He’s a reliable Party Guy: GOP. There is a big difference.

I don’t know how far the “purging” needs to go to get the GOP back on track…but its a lot further than where we are now. Bambi’s win last November for President was not the result of Hopenchange. He never could have done it without real conservatives…. Real conservatives finding John McCain too pusillanimous to stomach. A win by John McCain would have been the final nail in the coffin of conservatism. Even though I voted for him, that goodness he lost.

Strong, definitive steps such as the rejection of Scuzzifava in NY-23, and forcing a real conservative into the breach is but one more step along the way. Will it go as far as Glenn Beck postulates? I dunno. But if it has to, it has to. This is too important to leave to some of the morons that allege to represent GOP/conservatism. They don’t.

seanrobins on November 3, 2009 at 6:45 PM

We don’t need a third party.

We need Ron Paul to get organized early and kick some neocon ass.

Spathi on November 3, 2009 at 6:16 PM

she just wanted to say “ass”

runner on November 3, 2009 at 6:45 PM

If we have another Ross Perot election, it will mean another four years of Obama. I pray he is wrong.
bopbottle on November 3, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Perot was a cautionary tale to the Republicans that they have failed to learn from. A few key facts from Perot:

1) Perot rose to prominence because Bush 41 refused to engage on economic issues and supported a large tax increase. Had Bush done a better job pressuring Congressional Democrats on spending, and not simply been the “Democrat-lite,” Perot would have been irrelevant.

True, there are only so many things a Republican President can do with a Democratic Congress. The Republicans forced a government shutdown in 1995 over spending and, with the help of the MSM, Clinton outmaneuvered them and they suffered politically. So to a point, AP is right, and you have to compromise. But part of being President is applying political pressure to move the goal posts. The general feeling was that Bush 41 basically rolled over on taxing & spending.

2) Perot was leading in the polls until he went squirrely and inexplicably dropped out of the race, only to re-enter. Once he did that, his credibility was shot and he became a side player. Still, he got 19% of the vote.

Outlander on November 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM

World of Warcraft offline again?

Aristotle on November 3, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Hey! Watch it!

lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Brit Hume just called Hoffman a “schleppy, nerdy guy”

John the Libertarian on November 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Trends researcher Celente forecasts the same.

so long as unemployment is trending in the right direction

Unless our ruling class has a come to Free Market moment and massively cut taxes, spending and regulations across the board, and re-industrialize the U.S., the only upward trend in employment will be more bureaucrats and/or men in foxholes.

The Keynesians are economic ignoramuses. Ogabe and Co. are killing more jobs than they could ever hope to “save or create.”

Welcome to the Second Great Depression, courtesy your “friendly” government.

Rae on November 3, 2009 at 6:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3