Lou Dobbs: Hey, how about Lou Dobbs for president?
posted at 4:14 pm on November 23, 2009 by Allahpundit
Two clips, one below from Politico and the other at the Corner courtesy of the Fred Thompson Show. I don’t know what he thinks he’s going to accomplish by running. If this is, by design, a five-percent candidacy aimed at pushing his signature issue — immigration — into the national debate in 2012, it’s destined to fail. Barring an amazing economic turnaround and some shocking conciliatory gestures from Iran and the Taliban, amnesty will be an afterthought in the next presidential election. If this is something more ambitious, i.e. a Perot-esque bid to win, he’s kidding himself. For all the bluster about third parties, by 2012 Republicans will be so frantic to beat Obama and so paranoid about a repeat of 1992 that all but the most alienated centrists and conservatives will hold their noses and line up for the GOP nominee. Nader won 2.7 percent of the vote in 2000, the year he helped hand the election to Bush; four years later, with the left unified against an incumbent president and horrified at the thought of another self-defeating split in the Democratic vote, he won just 0.38 percent. There’s nothing like an excruciating electoral debacle to sharpen the mind about the dangers of an independent candidacy, and the GOP already has one on the books to provide the sharpening.
If the goal isn’t to win or even to push the anti-amnesty position, then I assume the point of running would be, quite overtly, to swing the election, drawing enough votes from one party (almost certainly the GOP) to elect the other and thereby “prove” that the needs of centrist-y blue-collar independents must be addressed more forthrightly in the future. Why he thinks he’ll do any better at building a lasting independent coalition than Perot did is beyond me, but like he says, he’s getting expert advice. Exit question: Will Beck endorse him?
Related Posts:









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: « Previous 1 2
As I just posted HotairLib has their whole head up their six o clock.
hamradio on May 24, 2013 at 2:43 PM
Who wrote the speech? Or are you just praising the messenger?
mixplix on May 24, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Connect the dots: journolist meeting by invitation only at the White House on, what Tuesday?, “big”speech by Obama on Thursday, lame stream media fawning over speech on Friday. Who would have seen that coming, huh?
parke on May 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM
They need the “war on terror” in order to further erode our Constitutional freedoms and to deflect criticism from the administration’s and Federal government’s ongoing corruption.
They are just trying to massage it so that they don’t offend the Muslims, international Libtards and their own sensibilities anymore than necessary.
A few Muslim terrorists here and there are quite expendable to this Administration despite their sympathies for them. These drone attacks also do much deflect any potential criticism that the Administration is weak in dealing with such matters.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM
MSNBC is nothing but a left wing propaganda machine serving their master, Obama.
rplat on May 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM
I believe that he was officially nominated 10 days after he was sworn in. Wow! The WON really worked long hours that week and a half to earn that POS medal. During those ten days he ordered NO DRONE STRIKES to keep his peaceful record clean.
fred5678 on May 24, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Obama: Don’t worry about that Ben Ghazi guy. I killed Bin Laden, and Bush didn’t!
And Obummer still wants to close Gitmo? Good luck with that–not even Upchuck Schumer was willing to hold trials in New York!
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:24 PM
They just changed the definition of terrorist. They used to be jihadis from the Middle East–now they’re Minutemen in Arizona and Tea Partiers in Ohio.
Steve Z on May 24, 2013 at 3:29 PM
Erika, sometimes your writing shows signs of rivaling even the Master of Snark himself, Allahpundit. Good work!
KS Rex on May 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM
I love how crazy Al invoked the Nobel Peace Prize in praise of a speech that spoke about dropping bombs on people’s head. Maybe it was the “fewer” bombs than before that raised this to historic levels.
Do they even know or care that they are morons.
marnes on May 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM
His speech made less sense than Bluto’s Animal House Speech and was far less entertaining. Nothing less than base rallying time. Never thought I would say this, but Code Pink was the best part.
DDay on May 24, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Sperling posted this at the Examiner on May 23 about this “historic speech of Obysmal’s:
You see, we are just not working hard enough to “work with the Muslim American community” who are a “fundamental part of the American family.” Watch out, too, because Obysmal is again trying to limit the impact of the Internet.
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:22 PM
That Chris Hayes is a bit of a twink, isn’t he?
onlineanalyst on May 24, 2013 at 4:25 PM
Obama apparently gave two speeches yesterday and I watched the other one.
myiq2xu on May 24, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Nah. I’d detest the little pissant s.o.b. if he was white…or Asian…or any one of the myriad of made-up racial divisions.
Solaratov on May 24, 2013 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2