The Next President?

Mid-terms tonight in the States with the Democrats virtually certain to lose control of the House anyway.

In reality the question is how much damage will be done to the Democrats, the two main indicators being the size of the GOP majority in the House and whether they can keep the Senate. The Republicans need 39 to retake control of the House, but if we see a real 1994-style "wave" (not beyond the bounds of possibility by any means) they could take upwards of 55-60 seats.*

I had a chunk on the Democrats retaining control of the Senate at 2.4 last night. I will probably know my fate relatively early in the night as the Senate race in West Virginia is key. If Joe Manchin can withstand the recent GOP onslaught (and all polling/models I have got my hands on suggests things are breaking in his favour) there I make the Dems 1.1 or 1.2 to retain as the GOP would then have to take both Washington (possible though I would make Patty Murray favourite there) and in California (very highly unlikely) as well as winning the toss-ups in Nevada, Colorado and Illinois (GOP favourites - though not certainties by any means - in the three affairs).

I actually think the preferred outcome for much of the Republican party establishment would be a solid GOP showing with defeat for the "tea party" candidates. A weak showing from the "tea party" would negate their potential effect in the lead-up to 2012 and, most significantly, deal a serious (probably fatal) blow to any ambitions Sarah Palin may have on going for the presidency. On the other hand if Angle wins in Nevada or Joe Miller in Alaska (likely) or even O'Donnell in Connecticut (a woman who I think may actually be seriously deranged) Palin could begin to build serious grass-roots momentum to combat the inevitable establishment attacks to come.

The fun starts around midnight and I will probably be up most of the night.
 
Last edited:
That is deep stuff trackside. I have to say I do not understand a lot of what you are saying but I do like politics and the amount of markets now available is massive.
 
Obamas bubble bursting,

he has plenty of scope to be an even worse president than Carter.


What is dissapoiting is that Sarah Palin can have chances to be president, there should be people in the republican party with higher level and sack the inept Obama.
 
Obama simply hasnt connected with the electorate. Ever the lawyer maybe. There is also a world of difference between rousing speeches and that certain something that grabs the electorate. Clinton had it in spades, so did Reagan as did Roosevelt and Ike. Johnson probably didnt, Carter definately not and maybe not Bush senior

Its not as if hes done a lot wrong (although healthcare bill timing at this stage is a bit odd given bigger concerns) but maybe not a lot inspiring either

Its true that the GOP will want the nutters in the Tea party hit hard whereas the democrats will want Palin momentum because shes surely unelectable if she got the nomination

I think it should also be remebered that Obama won not for the reasons Guardian reading europhiles want to believe, but because the opposition imploded a bit. America is still far from being a left leaning country in any sense and they have woken up to the fact that he maybe a little more urbane/educated/liberal than they really feel comfortable with
 
I dont know a great deal about Glenn beck and dont wish to, but what i do now is that he certainly doesnt push an openly racist agenda. Hes no nick griffin

Gearoid. The assumption that they were electing a "black president" rather than simply the best candidate and that the country had turned drmatically leftwards
 
clivex said:
I dont know a great deal about Glenn beck and dont wish to, but what i do now is that he certainly doesnt push an openly racist agenda. Hes no nick griffin

Gearoid. The assumption that they were electing a "black president" rather than simply the best candidate and that the country had turned drmatically leftwards
Click to expand...

Thanks
 
clivex said:
Obama simply hasnt connected with the electorate. Ever the lawyer maybe. There is also a world of difference between rousing speeches and that certain something that grabs the electorate. Clinton had it in spades, so did Reagan as did Roosevelt and Ike. Johnson probably didnt, Carter definately not and maybe not Bush senior

Its not as if hes done a lot wrong (although healthcare bill timing at this stage is a bit odd given bigger concerns) but maybe not a lot inspiring either

Its true that the GOP will want the nutters in the Tea party hit hard whereas the democrats will want Palin momentum because shes surely unelectable if she got the nomination

I think it should also be remebered that Obama won not for the reasons Guardian reading europhiles want to believe, but because the opposition imploded a bit. America is still far from being a left leaning country in any sense and they have woken up to the fact that he maybe a little more urbane/educated/liberal than they really feel comfortable with
Click to expand...

I think you're over-estimating the role of Obama's personality, Clive. What most Americans see isn't someone too educated or liberal (or black) for them but rather a man who has failed to turn the economy around (unemployment remains at 9.6% most significantly) and has devoted a huge amount of time ramming an unpopular health care reform package down their throats.*

Bill Clinton may have had a deeper connection to the American electorate but, more importantly, he had a booming economy and a budget surplus.

*The electoral significance of the debate over health care shouldn't be under-estimated by the way ~ it's almost certain to have a hugely detrimental impact on Blue Dog Democrats (conservative Democrats in republican-leaning districts southern states) as well as states where Obama is particularly unpopular - notably Pennsylvania.
 
Trackside. Some of the polling (i think) said opposite. The word "aloof" comes up a bit. I suspect he will bounce back nicely myself. Having seen the list of GOP possible candidates for next time around, he doesnt have anyone obvious to fear (Newt gringrich? ...vile ) on the face of it
 
I dont see Obama as a black poor man, he is a harvard man, he has a beautifull voice and reads very well but you need much more to rule a country like USA.

It is very dificult to know why some powers wanted him , being so inept and inexperienced man rather than Hillary to be president.
 
Question for those who have a distate for Obama:

Let's say the next Presedential race is between Obama and Palin. How would you vote?
 
Agree.

that berk Grasshopper misses the point again entirely. rather like saying who would you vote for between Brown and Hitler
 
clivex said:
Trackside. Some of the polling (i think) said opposite. The word "aloof" comes up a bit. I suspect he will bounce back nicely myself. Having seen the list of GOP possible candidates for next time around, he doesnt have anyone obvious to fear (Newt gringrich? ...vile ) on the face of it
Click to expand...

My point was merely that personal factors - though certainly significant - take a back seat to the economy at times like this.

I would tend to agree that the GOP will derail Palin ~ the two most obvious candidates being Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty.
 
clivex said:
Agree.

that berk Grasshopper misses the point again entirely. rather like saying who would you vote for between Brown and Hitler
Click to expand...

Stop being para, you donut. I was just asking the question to see whether the real choice of Prez is largely based on personality rather than policy (as alluded to in Tracks' post).

It's self-evident that pro-Obama supporters would have no truck with Palin under any circumstances, hence the only logical people to pitch the question to, was those who tend to dislike Obama (for whatever reason).
 
On a slightly separate note, I think anything over evens on the Democrats holding the Senate is worth taking.

Early exit polls suggest Boxer has won California relatively comfortably.
 
I can't believe that there is a slight chance that Sarah Palin could become the most powerful woman in the world [or even in the history of the world]. And to think I sometimes question my own sanity.
 
Good call TS.

Fair dues to you, you make US Politics sound interesting and analyze it on a different level to most. I see it as x-factor politics, and devoid of any substance, or debating of policies.
 
Back
Top