Assuming Palin runs, how likely is it that she could win?

Politics & Elections
61

Absolutely.

Are we to conclude that you believe that the Republicans, who caused unemployment to skyrocket in the first place, would do any better? Every elected Republican I have heard is clinging to the canard that tax cuts will create jobs; yet the Bush administration, after eight years of tax cuts, had the weakest job creation record in 50 years, weaker even than Obama. The clusterfuck caused by eight years of Republicans cannot be undone by three years of Democrats, and that certainly is not a reason to go back to the policies that ran the economy into the ditch in the first place.

62

I’m not arguing who is right or wrong, Democrat or Republican.

But questioning someone’s motives on the basis that they share an opinion different than yours? You’re a stand-up guy.

63

When you are ready to take a position, get back to me.

On what basis would you have me argue a political position, if not a difference of opinion?

64

Oh, so I need a candidate in mind in order to call you on your comment? Outstanding logic there! In that case, C’Thulhu it is.

It’s not that you’re taking a different stance or arguing your point against his/hers. It’s that you made an effort to undermine his/her position by questioning his/her reasoning.

It’s as if you find people of differing opinions incapable of making rational choices.

65

People who want C’Thulhu for Prez might be capable of a rational thought?

66

Tired of choosing the lesser of two evils?

67

No, FDR. The unemployment rate in 1936 was 16.9% Cite.. Notice that the GOP did not exactly win that election. And you should bump your tone arm - you are sounding like a broken record.

68

It was a legitimate question. Just because there had been a serious problem during a Presidential administration doesn’t mean voters automatically switch to the other party.

There’s a general perception that each party has its strengths and weaknesses. For example, the Republicans are perceived as strong on national defense so when voters feel national defense is a concern, they tend to swing towards the Republicans. The voters didn’t reject the Republicans in 2004 because there had been a terrorist attack in 2001.

And the Democrats are widely perceived as the party that’s better during economic hard times. So rather than get blame a Democratic administration for high employment and voting Republican, voters might swing towards the Democrats as a response to high employment.

69

Sure, but Palin is untouchable to those people. The problem is that she’s toxic to the other ~70% of the population, including lots of Republicans. I think Palin could plausibly win the Republican nomination, assuming Romney has a Howard Dean moment. It’s utterly implausible that she could win the general election.

70

Well, how about, "When Republicans are in, Unemployment is usually NOT at 9%+ for three years. "

In fact, other than a peak under Reagan, unemployment under Republican presidents has rarely been that high.

Now, I’ll give the devil his due. I’d LOVE to have Bill Clinton’s economy back, and I wouldn’t care how many interns he was diddling in the process.

As the man said, “It’s the Economy, Stupid!”

71

Because you have to go back to Hoover to find a bigger boob than Obama…

72

If the truth hurts… Frankly, I’m waiting for the June numbers to come out, where I’ll get to say, “9.3%” unemployment.

To the point, FDR brought unemployment down from 25% to 16%. That actually is pretty impressive.

Obama can brag that he found an economy with a 6.7% unemployment rate and got it up to 10% before bringing it down to a mere 9%.

Like I said, I’m disillusioned with the Republican Party, but I have serious doubts Obama can win a second term. So I’m looking at this like “Who can I live with?”

73

It’s true that unemployment under Republican presidents is rarely as high as 9%+. But it’s also true the that unemployment under Democratic presidents is rarely as high as 9%+.

The last time we had unemployment this high was, as you noted, 1982 and 1983 - and Reagan was re-elected by a landslide. So all we can say is that there is too little evidence to make a clear prediction. Will the voters in 2012 blame Obama and vote him out? Or will they say “Screw those conservatives. I’ve been out of work for two years and I want some free cheese. I’m voting for those reckless spending liberals.”

74

And of course, the one time that unemployment was consistently higher, was under a president who did exactly what the current Republicans are saying government should do.

75

The problem is, the liberals don’t have anything to spend at this point. I guess they still have a pretty good supply of free cheese, tho’.

Incidently, it was Reagan who gave away the cheese. Carter was happy to let it rot in warehouses.

The point was, at this point in 1983, unemploymet dropped pretty rapidly. It went from a high of 10.8 in December of 82 to 8.3 in December of 83 to 7.2 by the time the president stood for re-election. In short, what you had there was a classic “V” shaped recession.

This one is looking more like a “U” or a “L” And honestly, the image of Obama with an L on his forehead seems kind of fitting…

There’s really nothing to indicate we are going to have a substatial drop any time soon. Oh, companies are hiring- IN CHINA.

Which brings me back to my point. If we are going to be stuck with a Republican, which one can we live with. Which one is not going to make us grind our teeth every day?

Personally, I don’t think Palin is running. Bachmann is going to probably win the TeaParty vote, and the establishment is getting behind Romney.

Perry is looking a lot better.

76

Bush took over with a full employment economy . He fought hard to gut the tax structure for the rich and run 2 wars off the books. He led a crash that put us in a depression. That is what you think is a good Republican administration that we should hope to return to?
He oversaw a world economic crash of his parties making. He trashed regulation. He started 2 wars.
The Repubs control the messaging ,but I don’t see how they can erase their fingerprints from the scene of that crime. Only somehow if a Den cannot fix the mess in a couple years, it must be because they are incompetent. I guess you were not alive when the Repubs filibustered every program Obama offered. They fought like hell to keep him from fixing the mess and they still are. They cut the stimulus and forced another damn tax cut for the rich and corporations.
Sure, its Obama’s fault. He had 2 years to fix an 8 year mess and had to fight a filibustering right wing Republican party every step of the way.

77

you know what, Gonzo, I did okay in the Bush years. So did a lot of people I know. Yeah, there were periods I found myself unemployed (late 2001 after 9/11, and a couple weeks in 2008). But there were years in there that I made pretty awesome money.

I don’t know anyone who is doing so well now.

Blaming the last guy only gets you so far. It gets you nowhere when you’ve been on the job for two years, and things have gotten worse than when the last guy was there.

78

I don’t think Palin will run. I think her whole obective is to influence voters to vote Obama out, and she can do that without throwing her hat in the ring.

79

Uh oh. Sounds like he’s having a relapse.

80

No, guy, it’s not a relapse, it’s an analysis.

In 1980, (the first election I voted in), Ronald Reagan asked a very simple question.

“Are you better off now than you were four years ago?”

In 2004, I could say, yes. Despite a breif period of unemployment in 2001, in 2004, I was making about $7,000 more a year than I was making in 2000. I was in a good job I liked, I just bought a new home.

In 2012, unless something drastically changes, I would probably have to say “no”. I am making less than I did in 2008. I’m burdened with more bills. I’m nervous about whether my company will relocate my job to Asia. My home is only worth about 70% of what I paid for it.

So if I were voting on that basis and that basis only yeah, I’d have to give the GOP candidate a serious look.

Of course, it really depends on who they nominate. I won’t ever vote for Ron Paul, Palin, Romney or Huntsman. I’d be reluctant to vote for Bachmann, Gingrich, or Cain, but if the economy goes on the way it has, I’d have to give them a look. I would like to see Pawlenty win, or perhaps Rudy Guiliani jump into the race.

Frankly, I looked at Obama’s presser on Wednesday, where he wasn’t offering solutions, he was looking for people to blame. This is never a good sign. It should worry you more than it does me. I don’t have any emotional investment in Obama, I didn’t vote for him.