• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Majority expects Obama to lose re-election

j-mac

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
NEW YORK (WLS) - A majority of Americans expect Barack Obama to be a one-term president, an assessment on which, in past elections, the public has more often been right than wrong.


Just 37 percent of people in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll say they expect Obama to win re-election in November 2012; 55 percent instead expect the eventual Republican nominee to win.

WLS 890AM
Click to expand...


Let's hope the people are right once again.


j-mac
 
Depends on whether these people polled are actually going to vote for the Republican, or are just pessimistic Democrats who are worrying about losing next year. Notice how the poll asks what people expect to see and not necessarily who they will vote for when the time comes.
 
I think Obama is vulnerable, but a lot depends on who the Republican nominee is. I just can't see anyone currently in the field pulling it off. This might be an opportunity for an independent to make a Perot-esque run considering the weakness of the major party candidates. Bloomberg could make a run at it, for example.
 
I think Romney represents the best chance the Republicans have to make Obama a one term President. He is a much stronger candidate than he was in 2008 and also is benefited by the fact that the economy is such a strong issue this year. He has done so much in the private sector, he knows how jobs are created and has effective plans for job creation.

Romney dismantles Obama next year in the debates that are centered around the economy. Obama will appear in over his head and horribly inexperienced.
 
the man was a senator for 30 minutes. michelle bachmann has more experience at the national level than he did.
 
cpwill said:
the man was a senator for 30 minutes. michelle bachmann has more experience at the national level than he did.
Click to expand...

But she's a nutter. No chance she wins anything. Of course, if you want Obama to beat the odds, select Bachmann. :coffeepap
 
Live Free said:
I think Romney represents the best chance the Republicans have to make Obama a one term President. He is a much stronger candidate than he was in 2008 and also is benefited by the fact that the economy is such a strong issue this year. He has done so much in the private sector, he knows how jobs are created and has effective plans for job creation.

Romney dismantles Obama next year in the debates that are centered around the economy. Obama will appear in over his head and horribly inexperienced.
Click to expand...

I think you're right that Romney would present the biggest challenge to Obama, but I think he will have trouble firing up his base to vote for him. If they stay home, he's in trouble. I think the "anybody but Obama" vote won't get it done.
 
How in the hell will Obama NOT get elected? Seriously, who are the american people going to vote for instead? ROMNEY? Good god, Obama's a shoe in if that's what people think, lol. People say sure, vote 3rd party, but in many states, those 3rd party members don't even show up on the ballet. And beside, the american people vote on TV commercials. Who's going to have the best ads, Romney, or the current sitting president? Please. It's gonna be 4 more years of Obama, folks, sorry to say. And to be honest, it's not going to make any difference, anyway. Seriously. When was the last time a presidential election actually made a difference in american politics? This mountain of crap hasn't really changed since the 50s.
 
cpwill said:
the man was a senator for 30 minutes. michelle bachmann has more experience at the national level than he did.
Click to expand...

Obviously... Governor "experience" did nothing for GWB.....look at the mess that he created.
 
American said:
Americans hate to be called racists.
Click to expand...

More the weak republican field. That's why there is the constantly changing leader board with continuous calls for someone else.

But don't waste a good delusion if it helps you. :coffeepap
 
Obama did make a lot of promises to those who elected him, and did not keep them, while knuckling under to a Republican MINORITY. Obama is toast. As a matter of fact, that 2008 Obama juggernaut has now come to a stop, and has no place left to go.

306854_286967724663317_260962080597215_1188757_405295909_n.jpg
 
disneydude said:
Obviously... Governor "experience" did nothing for GWB.....look at the mess that he created.
Click to expand...

True, Bush created the mess, but Obama has wallowed in that mess, making him no better than Bush.
 
KevinKohler said:
How in the hell will Obama NOT get elected? Seriously, who are the american people going to vote for instead? ROMNEY? Good god, Obama's a shoe in if that's what people think, lol. People say sure, vote 3rd party, but in many states, those 3rd party members don't even show up on the ballet. And beside, the american people vote on TV commercials. Who's going to have the best ads, Romney, or the current sitting president? Please. It's gonna be 4 more years of Obama, folks, sorry to say. And to be honest, it's not going to make any difference, anyway. Seriously. When was the last time a presidential election actually made a difference in american politics? This mountain of crap hasn't really changed since the 50s.
Click to expand...

The 1980 election resulted in a magnificent change in American politics. The 1992 election likewise changed the American political landscape. And the 2000 election resulted in America going firmly in one direction, where if it ended differently it would be going in a much different direction.

The 1984 election resulted in a second term (obviously no political change) as did the 1988 election (effectively keeping the policies similar as Bush went from VP to POTUS and the 1996 election also resulted in a second term.

Whenever an incumbent is defeated or a new President wins an equal contest there is a change in the United States.
 
j-mac said:
Let's hope the people are right once again.


j-mac
Click to expand...


Yup I read this earlier and I believe it....its all about perception and the media has been all about doom and gloom and obama being in a bad position...how could the mass's think anything else...but that can still change and the whole dynamics of this race changes the day his actual republican oppnent is chosen....then the real game starts
 
One can only hope...and vote to ensure the outcome.
 
KevinKohler said:
How in the hell will Obama NOT get elected? Seriously, who are the american people going to vote for instead? ROMNEY? Good god, Obama's a shoe in if that's what people think, lol. People say sure, vote 3rd party, but in many states, those 3rd party members don't even show up on the ballet. And beside, the american people vote on TV commercials. Who's going to have the best ads, Romney, or the current sitting president? Please. It's gonna be 4 more years of Obama, folks, sorry to say. And to be honest, it's not going to make any difference, anyway. Seriously. When was the last time a presidential election actually made a difference in american politics? This mountain of crap hasn't really changed since the 50s.
Click to expand...

I'd vote for a drunk crossing guard before voting for Obama...and Obama's Wall Street monies have all but dried-up.
 
j-mac said:
Let's hope the people are right once again.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Well people thought the Bills would beat the Bengals, that's why we play the game.
 
I think there are two things to keep in mind:

1. The economy is awful, and chances are it isn't going to get any better in the next year. In fact, if the eurozone undergoes a full-fledged meltdown it will undoubtedly send the US back into recession. This will surely harm Obama's chances of being reelected.

2. Despite the dismal state of the economy, Obama is actually holding up surprisingly well. Although approval ratings in the low-40s are not good, Obama seems to at least be holding his own in most head-to-head polls against the likely Republican nominees. I point this out not because I think the polls themselves are especially relevant at this stage in the election cycle, but merely because voters don't seem to be blaming Obama for the state of the economy...at least not as much as they could be.

As to whether or not he'll get reelected, I really have no idea. I would say the odds are slightly, although not overwhelmingly, in the Republican candidate's favor. A lot can happen in a year. Keep in mind that Obama's approval rating was only about 5 points higher than it is now, when people were talking last winter about how he was practically assured reelection.
 
Live Free said:
The 1980 election resulted in a magnificent change in American politics. The 1992 election likewise changed the American political landscape. And the 2000 election resulted in America going firmly in one direction, where if it ended differently it would be going in a much different direction.

The 1984 election resulted in a second term (obviously no political change) as did the 1988 election (effectively keeping the policies similar as Bush went from VP to POTUS and the 1996 election also resulted in a second term.

Whenever an incumbent is defeated or a new President wins an equal contest there is a change in the United States.
Click to expand...

No there isn't. The major gears keep on turn, just as they always have. We went from Bush to Obama, and yet, we are STILL fighting numerous engagements in the middle east, still have a government hiding behind the walls of secrecy and censorship, the dripping fangs of the Patriot act are still exposed, etc etc. We went from Clinton to Bush, and yet we still had the same basic amount of tax money taken out of the majority of our paychecks, unless, of course, you made more than 125,000 for those years, still out of control spending, and still kept growing and growing and growing the size of the federal government, exponentially increasing it's cost. We went from Bush to Clinton, and the only real change there was we had a brief moment of economic windfall, which we are paying for now. We went from Reagan to Bush, and frankly, this goes a little before my time, but according to the history books, things stayed more or less the same.
 
KevinKohler said:
No there isn't. The major gears keep on turn, just as they always have. We went from Bush to Obama, and yet, we are STILL fighting numerous engagements in the middle east, still have a government hiding behind the walls of secrecy and censorship, the dripping fangs of the Patriot act are still exposed, etc etc. We went from Clinton to Bush, and yet we still had the same basic amount of tax money taken out of the majority of our paychecks, unless, of course, you made more than 125,000 for those years, still out of control spending, and still kept growing and growing and growing the size of the federal government, exponentially increasing it's cost. We went from Bush to Clinton, and the only real change there was we had a brief moment of economic windfall, which we are paying for now. We went from Reagan to Bush, and frankly, this goes a little before my time, but according to the history books, things stayed more or less the same.
Click to expand...

I will agree there is not a major difference between the parties. I wish the difference was as stark as many like to pretend it is. Sadly, it isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom