Equal time for the Democrats? Sure, why not.
See previous: Blazing Republicans
There are still some people that don’t like any of the Republicans that are running. Or, at least, don’t like the ones polling the best.
Currently leading the pack is Atlanta businessman Herman Cain. He’s the guy who has no chance whatsoever, despite leading the polls. Some people don’t like him because he has no experience in politics, except for losing a Senate race (2nd in a 3-man primary). He’s too conservative for moderates. He’s too black (color) for some liberals and not black (racial stereotype) enough for other liberals. And he has too much testosterone for Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann fans. He’s trending up.
Then there’s Mitt Romney, who everybody hates and the media and GOP establishment has declared the frontrunner, even though he currently polls in second place. Front-runner must not mean what I thought it meant. He’s too liberal for anyone who’s not a liberal. He’s trending neither up nor down.
Rick Perry was the great hope before he ran. Once he declared he was running, suddenly nobody liked him any more. His being a former Democrat hurts him with conservatives. Supporting some benefits for illegals hurts him too. After briefly leading the polls, he’s now third or fourth, depending on the poll. But he’s trending down.
There’s Newt Gingrich, who was written off months ago but is in 3rd or 4th place, depending on the poll, and trending up. He lead the conservative takeover of Congress back in the Clinton years, but committed the unforgivable sins of sitting on a couch with Nancy Pelosi and supporting a RINO over a TEA Party candidate in New York in 2010. Plus, he pisses people off by being smarter than them. I can relate.
Then there’s Ron Paul, who’s been nuts for years and keeps getting nuts following him. Including two children that share my DNA. Kids. What are you gonna do? Anyway, Ron Paul has really crazy followers who either take too much drugs or not enough medication. He’s got like 3 really good ideas and 800 really nutty ones. His followers focus on the 3 good ones when they argue, then slip up and tell you how evil Jews are and how the Twin Towers were blown up by George Bush. Like I said, crazy. He’s trending up.
Michele Bachmann is trending down. She’s like the hot chick you wanted to date, then while sitting in the restaurant, you realize that she talks to the silverware. She’s still hot, but you keep thinking she’s going to go all Glenn Close on you and you’ll find your rabbit in the kitchen.
Jon Huntsman is still hanging around because some libertarians — and a bunch of liberaltarians — like him. Probably because he thinks pot should be given out instead of condoms. Or something. I was never quite sure what he was saying. Philosophically, he’s what you get if you cross Ron Paul and Mitt Romney. Now, go get that image out of your head.
Sarah Palin and Chris Christie aren’t running this year, though they still have fans thinking they will.
Now, despite the things I listed about the candidates that different people don’t like, there are groups that like each of these candidates, and like them a lot. Way too much, for some.
There are some Ron Paul or Rick Perry or Sarah Palin or Michele Bachman fans that say they won’t vote for anyone but their candidate. They focus on the things about the candidates that they don’t like (can you count to 999?) and say how unqualified that makes that candidate.
“I’ll never vote for Newt Gingrich!” or “If they nominate Herman Cain, I won’t vote” or “RONPAUL!!!1!!!” or the like.
Honestly, there are things about each candidate that I don’t like. Been that way since the 1976 election, the first where I was old enough to vote.
There are some candidates I really like (though, like I said, not everything they say), some I like okay, and some that I really don’t like. But, come November 2012, I’m going to vote.
Over the last several months, and again Thursday, someone said to me that if the election came down to a certain candidate (rhymes with Sherman Payne) against Obama, he wouldn’t vote. Others have said something similar in the past.
I couldn’t do that. I couldn’t not vote.
You see, if we end up with a candidate that we don’t really like — I won’t name names, but say his name rhymes with Ritt Momney — I still can’t sit the election out.
Think about it. Who will vote for those candidates? People that really like them. What kind of people would really like Barack Obama or some polarizing Republican? You already think the people that support those candidates are nuts. Well, yeah, they might be. And they’ll vote.
I may have two crazy candidates from which to choose, but I would rather choose than let a bunch of crazies choose between the crazies. I’ll vote for the least worst, and I’m responsible if that candidate wins. Plus, I’ll know I did everything I could to prevent the most worst candidate from winning.
I can’t not vote. I may not like the final choices, but I’m not going to go off crying like a little tittie baby who got his toy took from him.
I can deal with it.
Why aren’t you watching the news?
This is more real.
I like the news.
What can we do for you, Mr. President?
Poll numbers are down, unemployment’s up, and it looks like I’m going to have to go back to Chicago after next year.
You need to give a speech!
Speech! Give a speech!
Hey, that’s a great idea! I haven’t given a speech in — gosh — it seems like days.
A while back, we dropped cable. Didn’t go for satellite. Instead, we decided to rely on the Internet for our television content. And, it’s worked well. Except for one thing.
My Internet devices I use to receive TV content — Windows 7 Media Center, Roku, Apple TV, Xbox — none of them had last night’s debate.
I wanted to watch the debate, so I feel like I missed something. Except I’ve already picked a candidate, so I wouldn’t be watching to change my mind. I’d be watching to see who’s going to drop out next.
So, I missed out on what all happened. Reports about who “won” the debate depends on who the person telling me who won was supporting before the debate. In other words, everyone’s candidate won. But, since I didn’t see it, I can’t call BS on what people are telling me.
What all this means is I need someone I trust telling me who won, and why. That’s where you come in.
Do you know anyone I can trust? Send them here to tell me who won the debate.
Sometimes, the things people do are so obviously nuts, even my cat recognizes it.
I just don’t understand some people. Last week, actor George Clooney took the time during a news conference about his new movie to say some nice things about Barack Obama.
George Clooney: There’s a guy in office right now who is smarter than almost anybody you know, who has more compassion than almost anybody you know, and he’s having an almost impossible time governing.
That’s not the first time we’ve heard someone from the entertainment industry say nice things about Obama. Like how smart he is.
Joy Behar: But I think you have a point. He’s a little too smart for the country in a certain way…
You know what all that reminds me of?
CPL Allen Melvin: Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.
In the movie “The Manchurian Candidate,” those that were singing the praises of Raymond Shaw were brainwashed by communists.
That’s not the case with Hollywood. Those singing the praises of Barack Obama? They’re brainwashing themselves.
I just don’t understand some people.
I think my cat has a point.
As Obama’s approval rating continues to sink, things are looking better and better for whoever gets the Republican nomination in 2012.
In some head-to-head polls, some Republicans beat Obama, while others are within the margin of error, statistically tied with the president.
Things are looking good for Obama being a one-termer, right?
Well, not so fast.
Obama has an Ace in the Hole. And it just might be you.
You see, Obama and the Democrats are counting on you sitting this election out. Why would you do that? Because you aren’t happy with the eventual GOP candidate.
Now, sure, it’s about a year until the GOP convention. But the process to pick the candidate is already underway. In fact, Tim Pawlenty has already dropped out of the race.
The leading candidates, if you believe the polls, are Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, and Ron Paul. And, then there’s Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Thaddeus McCotter, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Buddy Roemer, and Gary Johnson.
Then there’s about Fred Karger, Andy Martin, Tom Miller and Vern Weunsche.
Oh, and don’t forget The Rent Is Too Damn High Guy, Jimmy McMillan.
And still maybe Sarah Palin and John Bolton.
Some of the candidates don’t draw much attention. But some that do draw a lot of passion. Several of the Gary Johnson or Ron Paul (RONPAUL!!1!!!11!!!) supporters will not vote for anyone else NOMATTERWHAT!!!1!!
And others say there’s no way they’d vote for someone like Newt Gingrich or Jon Huntsman. Or Sarah Palin.
Well, unless the Republicans nominate a committee to run in 2012, only one of these will be the nominee. And there will be some very unhappy Republicans and some very unhappy conservatives. And some unhappy libertarians. And some unhappy liberaltarians.
And that’s Obama’s Ace In The Hole: Republican-leaning voters feeling they have a bad hand.
Look at it like a poker game. Say, five-card stud. Sure, nobody plays that anymore, but it’s one of the simplest to use as an analogy, so there you go.
After the cards are dealt, Obama is holding this hand:
Ace of Clubs
Jack of Clubs
Three of Hearts
Two of Diamonds
You have this hand:
Seven of Diamonds
Eight of Diamonds
Nine of Diamonds
Ten of Diamonds
And your hole card: 10 of Spades
You’ve got a pair of tens. Not a great hand, but potentially a winning hand. If Obama has an Ace in the hole — or a Jack in the hole — he wins. Anything else, and you win.
What Obama is counting on is you being unhappy with the GOP candidate and not showing up at the polls. That’s his Ace in the Hole. Or Jack in the Hole.
Now, a lot of you are going to bitch, moan, and complain about whoever gets the nomination. Like I have several times in my life. But, I went out and voted for the guy, because the alternative was worse. And, each time, history has proven me right. That is, since I’ve been voting (1976) the Republican who won was better than the Democrat who lost. And the Republican who lost would have been better than the Democrat who won.
Don’t be Obama’s Ace in the Hole. Or Jack in the Hole.
Prevent that situation by working like the Dickens for your candidate. Then, whoever wins, work like the Dickens for that candidate, too.
Don’t let a bunch of Ace-Holes … or Jack-Holes … mess up the next election, like they did in 2008.
Don’t be an Ace-Hole.
The good news for Republicans recently has been that polls have shown that a generic Republican beats Obama. The bad news is that when “generic Republican” is replaced with an actual Republican, Obama wins.
Not any more.
Latest polling shows that some actual Republicans beat, tie, or are within the poll’s margin of error, according to ABC News:
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney leads Obama by a 48 percent to 46 percent margin, while Texas Gov. Rick Perry ties the president at 47 percent. Obama bests Ron Paul by a 47-45 divide and Michele Bachmann by 48-44 split. All results are within a 4-point margin of error.
What does this mean?
I dunno. Does anyone know what Americans’ political thought processes are? I mean, a majority of voters actually elected Obama in 2008. So you can’t depend on most American voters to do anything that makes sense. So I’m not sure we can make any sense out of this poll.
But I’m not going to let that stop me from trying.
Maybe this means that Mitt Romney, Rick Perry, Ron Paul (RONPAUL!!!1!!1!!!!), and Michele Bachmann are actually generic Republicans.
All this time, I thought Tim Pawlenty was. But, since T-PAW decided to drop out of the race, theres an opening for a generic Republican. And, it’s being filled by fake conservative (but good-for-business) Mitt Romney, almost conservative (but plays one on TV) Rick Perry, speaks right when facts aren’t involved (John Wayne/John Wayne Gacy, Elvis’ birthday/death day) Michele Bachmann, or sh*t-house rat crazy Ron Paul (RONPAUL!!!1!!1!!!!).
What about the other Republicans? For example, my guy, Herman Cain?
They didn’t ask. At least, when I read the full poll, I didn’t see where they paired up Cain and Obama. But, among Republicans, Cain and Perry has the smallest “unfavorable/strongly unfavorable” totals. As for favorable, Cain and Romney came in second in “favorable/strongly favorable” to Rudy Guiliani, who’s not running.
What all this means is that a lot of Republicans can beat Obama. Maybe even more than they poll.
This shows what the Republican strategy for 2012 will be: don’t be Obama.
Which sort of screws it up for Huntsman, who worked for the guy. But maybe not. Remember Romneycare and Obamacare? Mostly a matter of scale. But Romney beats Obama. So, maybe not even Jon “Obama’s a remarkable leader” Huntsman should be counted out.
Still, not being Obama looks like a winning strategy. Particularly since Obama appears to be still blaming Bush for everything.
“I’m not Obama” beats “I’m not Bush” hands down.
Earlier this week, I suggested that letting Obama win reelection was a bad idea. Turns out I was wrong. At least, that’s what some of you seem to think. Some of you think letting a less-than-perfect Republican get your vote is much, much worse.
So that got me to thinking: what else is worse than letting Obama win?
For starters, keeping Eric Holder off the Supreme Court. If Obama loses in 2012, there’s no way his successor would ever nominate Holder or anyone like him to the High Court. Imagine the tragedy of denying Holder — or someone like Holder — the chance to legislate from the bench for 20-30 years. And if we don’t let Obama win, we’ll be responsible for keeping left-wing activist nuts off the Supreme Court.
Then there’s repealing Obamacare. If the GOP takes the Senate, Congress would repeal Obamacare. If we don’t let Obama win, he won’t be able to veto the repeal. And repealing Obamacare would be so much worse than letting Obama win.
Don’t forget tears. Imagine the flow of tears from Chis Mathews, Keith Olbermann, and the rest of the left-wing media. We can’t make them cry. And if we don’t let Obama win, they’ll cry. And that’s so much worse.
Puppies. Way worse than letting Obama win.
An unemployment rate below 4%.
All these things — and more (leave examples in the comments) — will befall this great nation if we don’t let Obama win.
So we need to be a bunch of little tittie babies and not vote for the Republican candidate. That way, we can let Obama win.
Ron White is famous for his “You can’t fix stupid” routine.
Maybe he’s wrong. Maybe you can fix stupid.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: everyone who voted for Barack Obama is a dumbass. But dumbass isn’t always fatal. And it’s not always permanent.
Gene Simmons, for instance.
I’ve never considered him a dumbass. He’s a successful musician and businessman. But he did vote for Obama. And, well, you know what I’ve said about voting for Obama.
However… he’s said it more than once: he’d take back his vote for Obama:
What does this mean? Well, perhaps more and more people are coming to their senses. Maybe they now realize what we were saying back n 2008 when we said that Obama was an incompetent buffoon who’d lead the country down the road to ruin.
And maybe, just maybe, we can get them on our side, the right side, America’s side.
In the last few weeks, I’ve had some online conversations with some people that are conservative — along with some that claim to be conservative or libertarian — that are determined to let Obama win the 2012 election.
Now, to be honest, they didn’t actually say they were planning on letting Obama win. But what they did say … well, the effect of it will be to let Obama win.
And, here’s the thing: some of you are planning on letting Obama win, too. You say you don’t, but that’s what you’re going to do.
Some have decided that “there’s no way in hell” they’d ever vote for Mitt Romney. Or Herman Cain. Or Sarah Palin. Or Jon Huntsman. Or Michele Bachmann. Or RONPAUL!!!1!! Or Newt Gingrich. Or Gary Johnson. Or Tim Pawlenty. Or Rick Santorum. Or … okay, I’ve made my point: some have said they’d vote 3rd party before they’d vote for a particular candidate.
Why? Because that particular candidate is nuts (think RONPAUL!!!1!! or Gary Johnson) or is way too inexperienced (Cain, Bachmann) or not a real conservative (Newt, Romney) or boring (Pawlenty, Huntsman) some undefined reason (Palin, Santorum) or something (pick ’em).
You want examples? You’ll probably see them in the comments of this post by the very ones I’m talking about. And, if you look back at comments on earlier posts, you’ll see a lot of what I’m talking about.
This happened in 2008. I was all gung-ho for Fred Thompson while a friend of mine was all about Huckabee. (Remember, this was 2008.) As the GOP race narrowed, he was complaining about Romney and McCain, saying he’d never vote for either. And, of course, McCain ended up winning the nomination. And losing the election.
So, if you’re one of those that will never vote for MItt Romney/Herman Cain/Sarah Palin/Jon Huntsman/Michele Bachman/RONPAUL!!!1!!/Newt Gingrich/Gary Johnson/Tim Pawlenty/Rick Santorum … and if you hold to it … then Obama wins.
And America loses.
Sure, go ahead. Give me all your excuses.
I’m not going to let the GOP nominate just anybody and automatically get my vote. I’m going to send a message.
What message is that? “I’d rather America go to hell than vote for someone I can’t stand?” That message?
Don’t misunderstand me. You should send the GOP a message. It’s just that the timing is all wrong. November 2012 is not the time to send a message to the GOP. The time is now.
Let me say that again: now.
Get involved. Support the candidate you like. Do get involved. Let the Republicans know that, they way they’ve been doing things, you’re mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. And keep at it.
If, after all that, they still end up nominating another John McCain, I don’t see that I have any choice but to vote for the 2012 version of John McCain. But I’m going to give ’em hell about it.
Because, as bad as I’d hate voting for a candidate I don’t like, I’d hate letting Obama win even more.
It’s called making the hard choices. You’ll learn about that when you grow up.
Should we forgive Anthony Weiner?
He hasn’t asked for forgiveness.
Really, he hasn’t.
Oh, I know why you’re confused. You’re thinking about this whole texting pics of his tallywhacker. Forget that silliness. We should be angry with Weiner for other stuff.
Remember this from a couple of months ago?
Frank posted it a couple of months ago. It deserves a rerun.
IMAO regular reader and commenter Iowa Jim made an observation the other day. With all the coverage of Anthony Weiner and his face (and other parts) in the news, he thought the Congresscritter looked … like a Congresscritter:
I noticed that Anthony Weiner, in some photographs, bears an amazing resemblance to ostriches, emus, and cassowaries.
He’s got a point:
Is he right?
And is Weiner the only critter-like critter in Congress? What other critters to other members of Congress look like?
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.