Gallup: It’s a little odd not to have a frontrunner by now

posted at 1:36 pm on March 7, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Is it really?  We’re ten months away from the first meaningful caucuses and twenty months away from the general election in 2012 to challenge Barack Obama for the presidency.  Gallup looks at the polling among potential Republican nominees since Eisenhower, which emphasizes the point:

The wide-open battle for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination — with nearly a three-way tie among Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and Mitt Romney — is quite different from the typical pattern observed in past Republican nomination contests. In Gallup polling since 1952, Republican Party nomination races always featured a clear front-runner at this stage of the campaign, and in almost all cases, that front-runner ultimately won the nomination.

Between 1952 and 2008, there were nine open races for the Republican presidential nomination — that is, years when a sitting Republican president was not seeking re-election. Additionally, in 1976, incumbent President Gerald Ford faced a strong challenge from Ronald Reagan. Thus, since 1952, the Republicans have had 10 competitive races for the presidential nomination.

Across these 10 elections, 2008 is the only year in which the eventual nominee, John McCain, achieved front-runner status relatively late in the campaign cycle. In the other nine, the nominee rose to the top of the pack in the year prior to the election, and in eight of those elections, the nominee was the front-runner by March.

Interestingly, the sequence has two anomalies.  John McCain trailed Rudy Giuliani by 17 points in Gallup polling at this point in 2007, but ended up outlasting everyone to get the nomination.  In 1979, Reagan only had a five-point lead over Gerald Ford, which recalls the discomfort of the GOP establishment with Reagan even after Ford’s futile attempts to hold office in 1976.

Otherwise, the history of the GOP in open cycles is to give the nomination to the candidate perceived to be next it line.  But in this year, that could describe all three of the candidates leading the polling so far.  Huckabee and Romney finished second and third in 2008′s primaries in delegates, and Palin ran on the ticket.  However, more and more people wonder whether Huckabee or Palin will actually run — and whether Romney will suffer as a result:

Huckabee has insisted that he be taken seriously as a contender in interviews, but he appears to bedoing little to prepare for a run. Politico’s Mike Allen recently noted that neither Palin “nor anyone on her behalf, is courting top donors, early-state activists or experienced operatives — all of whom are getting locked down, day by day.” That leaves her entry far from a sure thing. …

After months of polling showing Romney, Huckabee, and Palin each drawing the largest chunks of national Republicans, any dropouts would have strong implications for the second tier of possible candidates who do not have previous experience from 2008, such as Pawlenty, Haley Barbour, and Rick Santorum. Huckabee or Palin’s absence would free up a large chunk of socially conservative and evangelical voters, who are a key demographic in Iowa and who Romney struggled to court in 2008. If doubts from the previous election linger in 2012, these voters could prove a force by consolidating behind one of the less established candidates, elevating one of them into a two-man race with Rommey.

The past few weeks have offered a solid preview of how this dynamic might look against Romney, especially for Pawlenty. The Minnesota governor slammed the health care reform law’s individual mandate in his keynote speech at CPAC last month, which many interpreted as a dig at Romney’s similarly crafted health care law in Massachusetts. Pawlenty is going out of his way to court Tea Party activists, speaking at a national convention in Arizona recently while local activists say his are aides aggressively courting the grassroots in Iowa. He’s also made religion a major theme in speeches and with Mike Pence out of the race, a candidate many considered especially well-suited to court Iowa evangelicals, there’s an even greater opening for him to woo social conservatives unsure about Romney.

I’ve heard similar analyses from conservatives as well, who think Romney will end up getting shellacked in the primaries if both Huckabee and Palin pass on 2012.  David Brooks recently wrote about it as well.  The lack of ground action by Huckabee certainly seems indicative of at least some hesitation.  In Palin’s case, it’s probably less indicative, as she can tap into the Tea Party organizing efforts that Palin routinely conducts and assists; she can afford to wait longer to jump in, too, because of her already-high name recognition and draw.  Romney will still have considerable resources, but will find it more difficult to position himself as the conservative choice in a field dominated by sitting or recent governors without a RomneyCare on their records.  The same is true of Newt Gingrich — and Gingrich’s entry might have both men competing for similar voters.

Meanwhile, even Romney is delaying his entry into the Iowa sweepstakes, so all of this may be a little premature anyway:

The race to the White House begins in Iowa this week. Five possible presidential contenders will be in Iowa Monday to grab the support of caucus-goers.

Three of the five have already made several visits. Those include former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum.

The two other potential candidates include businessman Herman Cain, best know as the former Godfathers Pizza CEO, and former Louisiana Gov. Buddy Roemer.

Actually, the analysis of Gallup misses the important context of the present cycle.  Conservatives are less focused on the 2012 cycle at the moment than they are on Congress and the budget.  Usually an off-year doesn’t provide much in the way of political fireworks, but the biggest issues on the conservative agenda are ObamaCare and stopping the massive deficit spending that has us on the road to our big, fat Greek default.  The 2012 election is still a sideshow at the moment, and most of the grassroots activity now focuses on keeping Republicans in Congress on track to honor their campaign pledges and conduct serious spending reforms.

Otherwise, Gallup’s analysis is mostly good news.  The last thing the GOP needs now is another anointing as we saw in 1996 and arguably in 2008.  If the potential candidates have to work hard for support, then we’re much more likely to get a better candidate out of the process.


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

It’s my belief that Obama does not hate America

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

then you have not been paying attention. Obama hates everything about America pre 2008….

unseen on March 7, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Something is rotten at Oregon State University

On Nov. 4, 2010, as soon as the election results were in and they were sure their candidate had won, faculty administrators at Oregon State University gave new meaning to the term “political payback.”
J_Crater on March 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM

This is outrageous…so now the Democrats will destroy anyone and any of their famly members if they dare oppose them?

CCRWM on March 7, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Most of the morons who voted for Barack Hussein Obama don’t have the slightest clue what a radical nutcase he is — and a lot of them STILL don’t.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Exhibit A?

It’s my belief that Obama does not hate America…he simply has a nuanced vision of our nation.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Palin is the only candidate that does not have to run to the right. She can play the center from the start.

faraway on March 7, 2011 at 2:45 PM

@Freelancer…wheneer you get here…Herman Cain all the way baby! Paul Ryan or Jindal For VP…both have shown leadership leaps and bound beyond the current oval office squater.

RedLizard64 on March 7, 2011 at 2:48 PM

I refer to John McCain as the Republican version of John Kerry: Everybody on HIS side assumed the OTHER side would eat him up with a spoon. That’s a guaranteed recipe for failure.

People respect someone who stands his ground even if they may disagree with what they believe.

It’s folly to expect your avowed enemies to join your side. And if the diehard fans aren’t excited about their own candidate, then how in the Hell will they rally the bleachers?

Milquetoast Republicans everywhere are aghast at your heresy.

Most of the morons who voted for Barack Hussein Obama don’t have the slightest clue what a radical nutcase he is — and a lot of them STILL don’t. All the dimbulbs knew is that a lot of people were really, really jazzed about Obama – but John McCain didn’t even seem particularly enthused about himself.

And a lot of them don’t care. They vote based on little to nothing as we have seen with silly comments about Palin’s hair or voice. The majority aren’t going to put much thought into their vote and some idiot gabbling on about accounting or trying to suck up to them turns everyone off.

And that gigantic wave of “moderate support” he was expecting didn’t come through at the final hour – or at any hour before or after the final hour. Or, come to think of it, EVER in the entire history of political elections. And guess what? It never, ever will.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 2:36 PM

That whole moderate thing is a load of crap. The Hispanics didn’t vote for McCain the way they promised and the moderates didn’t either. Playing pandering politics is a game best left to Democrats because conservatives can’t outbid the left and if we could we wouldn’t be conservatives anymore.

sharrukin on March 7, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 2:43 PM

I most certainly did not vote for Obama. I was a huge McCain supporter…and I tried to warn everyone of the ramifications of an Obama presidency. Don’t blame me.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:54 PM

The wails are getting stronger-

they need a Republican to attack to distract the American public and the world from Obama’s ME non-policy, the gas prices, the still high unemployment numbers, and the deficit.

Don’t give in. Let Soros temper flare and his money burn in his pocket that he can’t spend on attacking the front runner.

And let Obama’s mess hang out for all to see for as long as we can.

journeyintothewhirlwind on March 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM

I most certainly did not vote for Obama. I was a huge McCain supporter…and I tried to warn everyone of the ramifications of an Obama presidency. Don’t blame me.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Jetboy, I know you didn’t vote for Obama. I like to give you a hard time because you sound like Michael Medved on a lot of these threads. You and I don’t agree on some things but you are a pretty good sport most of the time.

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Good grief, Gallup. That’s like complaining about not finding a PHD holder in the staff of a slapstick act.

Dark-Star on March 7, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Next guy in line/doorknob ’12 !!!!!!!!!

darwin on March 7, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Because Romney is an empty suite, mostly. He’d be a great figure head though.

And Palin is too scary since she isn’t intimidated by the normal political machine.

Lawrence on March 7, 2011 at 3:03 PM

Jetboy, I know you didn’t vote for Obama. I like to give you a hard time because you sound like Michael Medved on a lot of these threads. You and I don’t agree on some things but you are a pretty good sport most of the time.

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Ouch…heh heh heh-Michael Medved. Such a nice-sounding guy, but oh so weak-kneed. Sadly he’s another one with O’Reilly syndrome (ignore the nose on your face to appease the left), along with Beck lately.

dave_ross on March 7, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Use the Tea Party as an example, and it can be said that a viable candidate list will not be known until 31 DEC 2011.

That means that you pin no hopes on anyone, for any reason, until then, and wait for the field to self-nominate.

Then come the primaries, and while NH and IA are places one must at least show up and do decently, you don’t have to ‘win’ either of them… because after that come SC and FL. In a highly competative field taking a place in the top 5 in NH and IA means some recognition and that the field is not awarding a ‘front runner’ no matter who wins. If the leader of the pack isn’t taking in anything over 35-40% in either, then they have not ‘picked’ a ‘front runner’: it is anyone’s game at that point.

A ‘front runner’ must GET and WIN both IA and NH with a 50%+ and that won’t happen with a deep field. Reagan did not drop out after SC, even, and nearly took it all in ’76 and that was WITH an anointed ‘front runner’. Do not forget the lesson of 1976: the ‘winner’ early on is not invulnerable, not a world beater and may not even be all that electable. The first two can and do pick clunkers.

Force the candidates to slug it out over the long haul and you will get a winner at the end, but only because they want to campaign and fight for the nomination and will not stop fighting until the very last vote is counted. That worked for Obama and nearly got Reagan into the top slot in ’76 and Obama only did that with the un-elected ‘superdelegates’. That means not knowning WHO is the ‘winner’ of the primaries until AUG 2012.

Field not known until 31 DEC 2011.

Candidate not known until the last day of the convention.

Which means getting into the district level offices to help winnow out representatives is vital before any of that happens in 2011. If you are a Republican, then replacing the old guard, now, will help to change the outcome in AUG 2012 because that is where the primaries are won and lost… a strong Tea Party replacing the ‘same old, same old’ will make the entir process competative and get rid of any who can’t stand a long campaign. Grind out a ground game because that is where its won. McCain didn’t do that – he left the ground game mostly untouched and ceded major States before the election.

Cede nothing in the primaries and the general.

Cede not a single vote.

That starts today, but not in the polls.

Screw the polls as they don’t reflect what is happening at the lowest possible level of the Republican party.

And if you are a Democrat and want real, and for true, change at the top, then the bottom is where you want to go… better watch out… you may become a Tea Partier if you do because the National structure will obstruct you at every turn.

ajacksonian on March 7, 2011 at 3:04 PM

pugwriter on March 7, 2011 at 2:03 PM
No one is clearly jumping ahead because a particular potential candidate hasn’t committed yet. The rest are scared to throw money and time into a serious campaign until this particular potential candidate announces one way or the other.

HAHAHA.

Point!

davisbr on March 7, 2011 at 3:07 PM

I’d say India knows who the frontrunner is and they invited her to do the keynote address.

debg on March 7, 2011 at 3:10 PM

There’s no front runner, because the public is refusing to accept every squish the BLM throw at us, in their attempt to pick the Republican nominee again.

kingsjester on March 7, 2011 at 3:12 PM

People can chatter all they want about who can win, who won’t win, etc.

BUT …

It’s going to come down to the debates. If Mitt Romney thinks he’s going to play to whichever direction he thinks the wind is blowing, the way he’s been doing for the past two years – he’s SUNK. He’s also sunk if he doesn’t condemn the socialist healthcare system which is named after him.

And … if he doesn’t put Palin’s lights out in the first debate – he’s SUNK.

The one who will WIN – is NOT the one with the most political clout. It’s not going to be the one who picks his or her positions carefully.

The winner of the GOP nomination is going to be the person who comes off looking the most genuine and “real” in the debates.

And that’s where Mittens has no chance.

HondaV65 on March 7, 2011 at 3:21 PM

I’m glad we don’t have a clear frontrunner and I hope it stays that way until we have seen the candidates on stage together in the debates and on the campaign trail making their case to the voters. We have plenty of time before we vote.

While Huckabee and Romney both ran a campaign in the last presidential primary, it’s a little deceiving to put Palin in that same category. We have yet to see Palin run a campaign where she was making the case for her own policy positions and vision for the country.

Palin might have ran as McCain’s VP, but she was promoting and defending McCain’s ridiculous record and policy positions over his years as a senator. Also, as the VP nominee she was placed in the role of attack dog, which left liberals and many of our own more enlightened moderates horrified at the way, well, the way she actually attacked Obama.

I look forward to a hard fought primary where hopefully any hurt feelings and crushed egos can be mended in time for the general election to defeat President Obama. I don’t care how we might feel about a certain candidate or how much we may dislike another, if we can’t come together to support the eventual GOP nominee then we deserve another four years of Obama.

Also, it would help if the libertarians that are always demanding what issues should and shouldn’t be important to the GOP actually vote GOP for a change. That five or six percent that the obligatory libertarian candidate always receives might make the difference in a few key states.

Let the battle begin, well in a few more months. Not yet.

chief on March 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM

Because Romney is an empty suite, mostly. He’d be a great figure head though.

You aren’t required to like the guy, but it says a lot about you and/or your agenda that you decide that someone who is arguably more accomplished in more realms than any actual or potential President in memory is “an empty suit.”

One other reason there may not be a frontrunner: improved access to information makes information about everyone easier to obtain; the playing field is thus flatter.

ParisParamus on March 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM

I will be voting for John McCain,
because I believe our party hasn’t suffered enough.

CABE on March 7, 2011 at 3:24 PM

I will be writing in Lisa Murkowski :)

faraway on March 7, 2011 at 3:32 PM

This is simple. Palin is the only one with the cojones tto destroy Obama.

She’s been out there on every issue.

Anyone who saw her on David Asman and Jeanine Pirro’s two shows knows that she’s loaded for bear.

She hammered Obama on energy, foreign policy, and fiscal policy.

Said this about Gaddafi, and how she would have handled it:

“…..….Gaddafi…If you touch a hair on one American citizen’s head, we’re gonna hit you…we’re gonna hit you hard, and you’re not gonna be left standing!”

That was when she was asked about Scooter’s reluctance to act knowing Americans were still there. Not that he did anything anyhow!

She tried to talk entitlement reform with that idiot O’Reilly, but he wouldn’t STFU long enough.

When gas is over $5 a gallon, and rice & beans is considered a splurge of a meal, Palin’s common sense approach is going to resonate with the entire nation.

No one has started campaigning yet, but when she does it will be full throttle. Obama and the GOP show ponies won’t know what the hell happened to them.

gary4205 on March 7, 2011 at 3:33 PM

It’s my belief that Obama does not hate America
JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

then you have not been paying attention. Obama hates everything about America pre 2008….
unseen on March 7, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Never argue with a religious fanatic.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 3:35 PM

It’s my belief that Obama does not hate America
JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 2:32 PM

You would be wrong sir.

Obama marinated in hatred for America from the time he was born!

His mother and father were anti-American Communists, as were his grandparents. His white grandfather worked helping the Soviet Union against the United States.

Deciding he needed a “black influence” his grandparents hooked him up with Frank Marshall Davis, a radical anti-American communist who was kicked out of the NAACP for being such a radical loon.

Then there is his preacher of 20 years.

If I was in a charitable mood (and I’m not) I’d say I actually feel sorry for Obama. That slug never learned about American greatness, American exceptionalism. All he was ever taught was America is bad.

So yeah, Obama hates America.

It’s how he was raised.

gary4205 on March 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Time to get busy. If you have a candidate you particularly like, now’s the time to get started working on their behalf. If you prefer to sit on the sidelines while the rest of us work for our preferred choices, fine.

For me and many others here at HA the choice is clear, Palin/West for 2012 and to help them along, go to organize4palin.com and sign up to do your part.

shmendrick on March 7, 2011 at 3:46 PM

Something is rotten at Oregon State University

On Nov. 4, 2010, as soon as the election results were in and they were sure their candidate had won, faculty administrators at Oregon State University gave new meaning to the term “political payback.”
J_Crater on March 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM

This is outrageous…so now the Democrats will destroy anyone and any of their famly members if they dare oppose them?

CCRWM on March 7, 2011 at 2:42 PM

One of Ace’s guys pointed out something I’d missed before.

Guess who the basketball coach is at OSU? Michelle O’s brother, one of Barry’s best friends.

It may be a coincidence, but between DeFazio throwing earmarks at the school and the Obamas having personal ties to the school, it sure seems dirty.

teke184 on March 7, 2011 at 3:52 PM

There is always a frontrunner and polling won’t always tell you who that is, in this case it’s the person all the other candidates fear and are trying to keep out of the race. The one their RINO advisors and pundits trash on their behalf;

Palin is the obvious frontrunner. If she gets in, she wins.

Done That on March 7, 2011 at 4:00 PM

By summer gas will be $5, and what has Palin’s message been all along?

darwin on March 7, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Energy Independence Day!

Drill, Baby, Drill!

Fallon on March 7, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Imagine standing out by or near gas stations sign waving for a soon to be President Palin with signs that say “Drill Baby Drill” and her campaign logo “Palin 2012″. The support would be overwhelming. I look forward to doing that!

rslancer14 on March 7, 2011 at 4:02 PM

gary4205 on March 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM

Yeah, yeah, we get it. It’s all black and white. PBHO isn’t just wrong or incompetent. He is evil and out to destroy America.

Palin is the only person who can save us. She can single-handedly defeat the forces of chaos, invent a perpetual motion machine and kick Khadafi’s butt in a cage match all while breast feeding Trig.

MJBrutus on March 7, 2011 at 4:04 PM

I agree with JetBoy: Obama does not necessarily hate America. He has a vision of America that most on this web site would consider anathema. He thinks he’s doing the best for America according to his vision.

There’s an old adage: your enemy or opponent is never wrong in his own eyes.

Something to consider. Not that it does a lot of good…

karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM

It’s how he was raised.

gary4205 on March 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM

True enough, but it might need some clarification.
Obama was taught to hate the virtues of the US, and cherish it’s flaws, while being more or less neutral on the physical land and peoples.

Count to 10 on March 7, 2011 at 4:15 PM

I agree with JetBoy:

*faints*

Somehow, I don’t hear that line very often around HA… ;)

Obama does not necessarily hate America. He has a vision of America that most on this web site would consider anathema. He thinks he’s doing the best for America according to his vision.

There’s an old adage: your enemy or opponent is never wrong in his own eyes.

Something to consider. Not that it does a lot of good…

karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Bingo. If the man truly, or in any way, harbored “hatred” for America, he probably would have moved to Europe or somewhere after college…or prior.

He’s like most on the opposite side of the aisle…not hating America, but having an entirely different view of the US than us on the right. We may “hate” each other’s views on this, but neither hates this country.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 4:23 PM

gryphon202 on March 7, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Heresy!!1!!!!11

NY Conservative on March 7, 2011 at 4:27 PM

He’s like most on the opposite side of the aisle…not hating America, but having an entirely different view of the US than us on the right. We may “hate” each other’s views on this, but neither hates this country.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 4:23 PM

All right, I’ll bite. Let’s assume for a moment that you are correct and that Obama is full of America lovin’ goodness but just inadvertantly chooses to embrace a path that is rapidly bringing about it’s demise.

Hypothecially, if someone who truly did hate America somehow got in the oval office, what would they do differently than what Obama has done?

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Perot/Ferarro 2012 FTW!!1!1!1

NY Conservative on March 7, 2011 at 4:32 PM

All right, I’ll bite. Let’s assume for a moment that you are correct and that Obama is full of America lovin’ goodness but just inadvertantly chooses to embrace a path that is rapidly bringing about it’s demise.

Hypothecially, if someone who truly did hate America somehow got in the oval office, what would they do differently than what Obama has done?

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 4:31 PM

Just off the top of my head, he might pull a “Ron Paul” and order all overseas troops home. All of them. He probably wouldn’t have continued Bush-era policies like extending the Patriot Act, and increasing drone strikes in Pakistan. Sure, he’s for socialized medicine and corporate buyouts and Porkulus…but none of that implies he hates this nation.

Again, it’s boiled down to a vision of what America was, is, and should be. As I stated earlier, The One does not see the US as exceptional. He certainly has differing views than Reagan put forth concerning freedom and America’s place in the world as that “shining city on a hill”.

Quid pro quo…what has Obama done to suggest he has hatred for this country? *shudder* It really feels dirty trying to defend BHO here…not quite right. But the man does not hate America.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 4:42 PM

I don’t’ care about past years… There is still so much up in the air and we have people with different specialties.

I think if we are going to beat the odds and beat an incumbent we need a different kind of campaign this year.

The stakes are so very very high, we can’t afford to make stupid mistakes. We must win.

petunia on March 7, 2011 at 4:46 PM

Bingo. If the man truly, or in any way, harbored “hatred” for America, he probably would have moved to Europe or somewhere after college…or prior.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Do you think Saul Alinsky loved the country? How about the editorial board of The Nation? How about Van Jones? The CPUSA?

ddrintn on March 7, 2011 at 4:50 PM

^ Does Jeremiah Wright love the country? Does his continued residence here prove his love?

ddrintn on March 7, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Throw every model, assumption and paradigm out the window. 2012 will be a year like no other.

rrpjr on March 7, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Quid pro quo…what has Obama done to suggest he has hatred for this country? *shudder* It really feels dirty trying to defend BHO here…not quite right. But the man does not hate America.

JetBoy on March 7, 2011 at 4:42 PM

I will cede that neither of us knows what goes on inside the man’s head, but here is what I base my hypothesis on:

-I have read both of his books and done other research on his background and I don’t know that there has ever been a time in his life that he wasn’t surrounded by America hating Marxists. I understand the guilt by association counter-arguments, but really: no one seems to have come forward with any anecdotes about how young Barry explained to Frank Marshall Davis that Communism really wasn’t the answer. Nor have I heard about the time he took Jeremiah Wright under his wing and said “really, the US of KKKA? Our chickens are coming home to roost? God Damn this place?”

-He coddles our enemies (bows to Hu Jintao, lets Putin run roughshod over our nukes)

-He antagonizes our allies (returns bust of Churhill to England, disses Bibi & Sarkozy, the list goes on)

-He is not a dumb guy. There is no math, fuzzy or otherwise where the fiscal track that he is on doesn’t bankrupt us. He has pointed to Bush’s spending which was a travesty, but Bush was a piker next to Obama. And for him to be simultaneously supporting unions and seeing much of the stiumulous funds wasted, Occam’s razor would say insolvency is the desired outcome.

I understand your point about his continuation of the patriot act, etc. which is valid, but I’m not taking the position that he doesn’t want something left to be the dictator of when the dust settles. In my opinion his feelings for America go far beyond just not buying the idea of American exceptionalism. I think he is offended by what America was prior to November 2008 and has set out to, in his words, fundamentally transmorm it into something else. Something that you and I will hate.

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 5:11 PM

looks like ddrintn stole my thunder on a couple of the above points (which happens often I might add, lol)

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Most Repubs that could run don’t want to be the Bob Dole of 2012.

What’s left after this is mostly fantasyland candidates like Gingrich, Palin and Bachmann that would be lucky just to win their home state.

Moesart on March 7, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Amen to that, Ed! They need to WORK for our support! Time will tell.

Minorcan Maven on March 7, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Obama does not necessarily hate America. He has a vision of America that most on this web site would consider anathema. He thinks he’s doing the best for America according to his vision.
karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Exactly. Obama only hates everything that America is and always has been. On the other hand, he dearly loves absolutely everything that he would like to transform America into.

But, of course, a much better way of saying the exact same thing is to simply say: “Obama hates America.”

Same thing with the Constitution. Liberals hate with every fiber of their being the actual WORDS, as they are written, because they provide for an extremely limited central government which has no authority to do 90% of the things liberals want to do. But liberals love the Communist Utopian “interpretation” of what they believe the U.S. Constitution SHOULD say.

There’s an old adage: your enemy or opponent is never wrong in his own eyes.
karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 4:08 PM

No. Only a moral relativist can never be wrong in his own eyes. And that is why liberals are the ultimate fanatics.

For all you know, Osama bin Ladin may be utterly disgusted with himself for beheading one of his victims with the wrong hand; or on the wrong day of the month; or in some other way that violated some incredibly psychotic belief he has.

But, by definition, it is only possible for moral relativists to be SELF-righteous. And they are always perfectly so. Ergo they can always justify absolutely anything they ever do – no matter what.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Scott Walker For President!!!!

Speaking Loudly and Wielding a Huge Stick!!!

Roy Rogers on March 7, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Because Romney is an empty suite, mostly. He’d be a great figure head though.

You aren’t required to like the guy, but it says a lot about you and/or your agenda that you decide that someone who is arguably more accomplished in more realms than any actual or potential President in memory is “an empty suit.”

One other reason there may not be a frontrunner: improved access to information makes information about everyone easier to obtain; the playing field is thus flatter.

ParisParamus on March 7, 2011 at 3:22 PM

I second that.

scotash on March 7, 2011 at 5:54 PM

But, of course, a much better way of saying the exact same thing is to simply say: “Obama hates America.”

OK, I see what you’re getting at. The problem I see with that approach is that it clouds your thinking. It encourages an emotional response rather than a rational response. Anger at the hatred rather than reasoned disgust. The anger can be used against you. But it is your choice.

For all you know, Osama bin Ladin may be utterly disgusted with himself for beheading one of his victims with the wrong hand; or on the wrong day of the month; or in some other way that violated some incredibly psychotic belief he has.

That’s not really important. We’re talking wrong in an absolute sense regarding the murder, not how it’s done. For sure, Bin Laden isn’t wrong in his own eyes for murdering infidels. That’s absolutely right in his morality and absolutely wrong in ours. We don’t care if he’s “wrong” in some relative religious sense. He may, but it doesn’t mean anything.

But, by definition, it is only possible for moral relativists to be SELF-righteous. And they are always perfectly so. Ergo they can always justify absolutely anything they ever do – no matter what.

No argument there. But I’m not sure what you’re getting at.

karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Kataklysmic on March 7, 2011 at 5:11 PM

Just to address one point that has come up often, his knowledge is extremely limited. That is to say that he has deep knowledge of some subjects (politics and some areas of law) but is remarkably ignorant about so many others.

As I see it, his knowledge in scientific and economic pursuits is non-existent. What he thinks he knows in these areas are the product of agenda-driven influences throughout his life. What he thinks he knows is centered on the fables he was taught by his socialist and liberation mentors. It is clear that he is remarkably incurious about these fields and thus never bothered to learn enough about them to verify or evaluate what he was told. His political interests were well-served by the lore he was infused with. It is why he could take some radical fool like Van Jones seriously enough to invite him to take part in his administration in an economic role. It is why he buys in to the ridiculous solar and wind fantasies that so many vested interests are so eager to sell him.

It isn’t because he wants America to fail. It is because he possesses breathtaking ignorance on such a wide range of subjects that are so important to governing. It is also because he is so willing to believe that which he can reconcile with the aggrieved social stories he was fed all of his life.

MJBrutus on March 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM

What’s left after this is mostly fantasyland candidates like Gingrich, Palin and Bachmann that would be lucky just to win their home state.

Moesart on March 7, 2011 at 5:32 PM

B.s. Any of the above would win just about the entire south and a good chunk of the midwest at a bare minimum. The others “don’t want to be Bob Dole” because they know that’s exactly what they are.

ddrintn on March 7, 2011 at 6:17 PM

But, of course, a much better way of saying the exact same thing is to simply say: “Obama hates America.”

OK, I see what you’re getting at. But…..
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….
…………………………………….

karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 6:03 PM

Talking in circles never fed a hungry child.

As for the massive amounts of time you spend worrying about “clouding” your mind: trust me, it ain’t helping one little bit.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Is there anybody who people would crawl bare legged for ten miles over broken glass for?

callingallcomets on March 7, 2011 at 6:34 PM

It isn’t because [Obama] wants America to fail. It is because he possesses breathtaking ignorance on such a wide range of subjects that are so important to governing. It is also because he is so willing to believe that which he can reconcile with the aggrieved social stories he was fed all of his life.
MJBrutus on March 7, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Barack Hussein Obama knows everything he needs to know. He has been groomed, literally, his entire life to do PRECISELY what he is doing right now.

Reading a few more books on science and economics won’t change a damned thing. He hasn’t been “fed stories” about social studies. He has spent his entire life being INDOCTRINATED into a radical belief system that has at its core the destruction the American way of life.

This is crazy talk. You know perfectly well that these people exist. You know perfectly well that Obama’s family, and all the people he chooses to be in his inner circle ARE those people.

…But, somehow, Barack Hussein Obama himself can’t REALLY be one of them deep down inside his heart of hearts.

There is no rational explanation for anyone to hold that belief. But people keep talking about it like it makes absolutely perfect sense.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 6:45 PM

Is there anybody who people would crawl bare legged for ten miles over broken glass for?
callingallcomets on March 7, 2011 at 6:34 PM

So far, only one.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Talking in circles never fed a hungry child.

What the heck is that supposed to mean? If you want to insert extraneous points, that your prerogative. I didn’t think that was your style or purpose.

As for the massive amounts of time you spend worrying about “clouding” your mind: trust me, it ain’t helping one little bit.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 6:31 PM

Blowing off a response never did much either. I thought the discussion was about “Obama hating” vs something more subtle. I’ve seen too much energy wasted on this “hating” which feeds an emotional need in the observer but does nothing for a rational response to what Obama is doing. The argument degenerates into oblivion. It ain’t helping one bit.

But if it’s your bag, go for it.

karl9000 on March 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM

The liberals are anxious to focus their attacks on a single isolated target as soon as possible. It’s too bad that Gallup had to join the Democrat Party so early this year.

RJL on March 7, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Another thing about Palin I like is that her financial support is almost entirely from small donations. She hasn’t sought out or tried to curry favor with the special interest groups but continues to rely on her “people”, her fans to fund her efforts using at first SarahPAC back when she was making endorsements and now Organize4Palin.com for her dedicated volunteers efforts at setting up a support base in the key primary states and eventually all 57 50 states.

I read with some amusement the articles in Politico and elsewhere saying that she is not mounting any effort in IA or NH but that’s not true. It’s just that it’s below the radar and hasn’t really involved the GOP establishment types. It’s a totally grass roots, Tea Party type effort, and we’re making good progress. If you want to help or contribute $$ go to organize4palin.com. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

shmendrick on March 7, 2011 at 8:29 PM

Is there anybody who people would crawl bare legged for ten miles over broken glass for?
callingallcomets on March 7, 2011 at 6:34 PM
So far, only one.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Amen to that. +100

shmendrick on March 7, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Is there anybody who people would crawl bare legged for ten miles over broken glass for?

callingallcomets on March 7, 2011 at 6:34 PM

Add West as her VP, this mobility challenged woman here (me) would add another 10 miles over more broken glass. period.

karenhasfreedom on March 7, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Add West as her VP, this mobility challenged woman here (me) would add another 10 miles over more broken glass. period.

karenhasfreedom on March 7, 2011 at 8:37 PM

I’m with you 100%. Palin/West for 2012, an unbeatable combo.

shmendrick on March 7, 2011 at 8:46 PM

OUr illustrious press corps is just chomping at the bit to vet Republicans, like they did last election. I hope the candidates don’t declare until November and once they do they’re truly prepared for the onslaught of bad publicity and negative stories that will come out.

I won’t believe any LSM outlet until I see some criticism of Obama from them. They certainly didn’t vet him last election and if they don’t criticize him this election, they’re not worth soldiers dying so they can be a free press.

bflat879 on March 7, 2011 at 8:55 PM

Add West as her VP, this mobility challenged woman here (me) would add another 10 miles over more broken glass. period.
karenhasfreedom on March 7, 2011 at 8:37 PM

That would be worth braving broken glass and machine guns.

And I don’t just mean that figuratively either. People have actually DONE that for him.

logis on March 7, 2011 at 11:57 PM

Who could possibly oppose all the good and wonderful things that the Wrecking Ball and his Administration are doing for America?

The GOP should just concentrate on the Congress and state houses and just cede the election now.

PappyD61 on March 8, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Did anyone else notice that, with the word ‘focus’ under the threadline picture, that Romney’s picture was just slightly out of focus, while Palin’s picture was clear and bright?

Siddhartha Vicious on March 8, 2011 at 3:36 PM

She can single-handedly defeat the forces of chaos, invent a perpetual motion machine and kick Khadafi’s butt in a cage match all while breast feeding Trig.

MJBrutus on March 7, 2011 at 4:04 PM

That’s a mental image we could have done without…

Dark-Star on March 9, 2011 at 9:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 2