Home / Culture and Society / Politics: Obama Will Beat Romney

Politics: Obama Will Beat Romney

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I am beyond tired of this false right versus left crap – or red state vs. blue state idiocy. I do not even live in the so-called “fly-over” states – because no flight has any business flying over Seattle, WA. Nope, I am just a chump with nothing but an opinion to offer.

My guess is that 98% of the United States population does not give one s**t about the fringe stories we are offered on the nightly news. A friend of mine (whose opinion I usually respect) offered this little nugget recently; “Kermit the Frog could beat Obama.” Sure, you bet. At that point in time Newt Gingrich was the “leader” in Republican polls.

Does anyone remember how Bill Clinton absolutely kicked the Newt’s ass in 1995? For all intents and purposes, it ended his career. But wait, there is more fun. How about Donald Trump as President? The only smart one in the whole party is Sarah Palin – who decided to go for the bucks instead of the power.

So who is it? Mitt Romney, who the Repubs hate almost as much as they did John McCain. Stupid, stupid, stupid – and yet I am convinced he will be the nominee in 2012.

I’ll tell you flat out that I hate the Republicans, because I think they have cloaked themselves in the flag – while being as anti-American as possible. They are about dollars for donors – no matter what the lies are. I don’t think the Dems are much better, but at least they are not as obvious. And not a single person died over Bill Clinton getting a BJ in the Oval Office. Republicans wrap themselves in God and the flag – yet their Presidents make people die.

So yes, my 2012 prediction is that Obama will win. You Repubs simply have nobody who is even a choice. The fact that you hate Romney as much as you hated McCain is a pretty clear indication of what I am talking about.

Give us “fly-overs” even a remote reason to consider you, other than you think we are stupid hayseeds who actually believe your baloney.

Powered by

About Greg Barbrick

  • Carol

    Probably right. Obama will beat Romney. Mormons actually believe they will become gods, ruling over their own planets, eternally procreating spirit children (with their harem of female goddesses). I’m not kidding. Go to CARM if you don’t believe me. Those who go thru the Temple promise everything to the “Kingdom of God,” which in Mormonese means the Mormon Church. Okay, so who wants a guy in the White House who has made this promise and who thinks he’s a “god in embryo” as they call themselves. Not me, and I’m a Repbulican.

  • Greg Barbrick

    Ok- I will say it. I think the Bush “team” was about fascism, and “light” Repubs are about the same thing

    If that is the only alternative then yes – I vote Obama.

  • Justin

    In my honest opinion, I think Obama will win another term, yes some promises weren’t kept, but wow you have to give credit where its due and Obama did deliver

  • MarkL

    I think we can see Obama’s true color here in Orlando a few weeks ago, kissing John Morgan’s ass and vice versa. Now we know why Mr. Obama doesn’t think tort reform is effective. They are all crooks.

  • You’re absolutely right, Greg, the two parties have become so alike as to be almost indistinguishable.

    Seems like what we need is a complete reset; if only we could find the button!

  • Greg Barbrick

    The economy is an absolute mess as we all know. And does anyone think that either the Republicans or Obama can fix it?

    It feels like the “malaise” years of 1979 to me, and even though I was pretty young at the time, I have looked back through historical documents to understand how for the first time in decades the population of the U.S. thought that there was “no hope.”

    Like I said before, I wish there was a candidate I could vote for who offered what I consider to be real hope for the economy.

    Blame, blame, blame — that’s what so much of these things come down to. But through Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II – we have managed to allow Corporate America to absolutely rule this country.

    And I don’t care which party is elected – I do not believe that state of affairs is going to change —

    Rhetoric aside, the misguided (and generally stoned) Occupiers are trying to put this message out. At least that is how I interpret their intentions.

    I honestly do not think Ronald Reagan in all of his “John Wayne glory” (which is meant as a compliment by the way) could even pull the nation out of the morass it is in.

    I am one of the first to laugh at NWO conspiracy types. But name any candidate, (or your write in) who you think could honestly pull us out of the massive mess we are in right now?

    I have no idea what The Great Depression was actually like, as I was born a good 30 years later. But I really do wonder if it felt like this.

    My comments about FDR were based on my hearing of how he created programs that actually helped people. I do know that industrialists hated him.

    But you tell me — again, rhetoric aside, what will it take to get this nation back on track? We’re not facing the Cold War anymore, and random terrorist attacks may be scary, but they are not Mutually Assured Destruction as was going on the year I was born.

    This is internal – and if the NWO types ever had sufficient “proof” of a conspiracy — then damn, this is it.

  • tom

    I hope Obama does not get reelected the economy is a mess and the real unemployment numbers are 15% and in obamaland hicago it is 25 to 35%

  • Greg Barbrick

    And yes, I do understand that by my logic, the Occupiers should lose it for Obama in 2012 – but they will be gone by then.

    The Tea Party is only getting stronger, and more (for some insane reason) important in the Republican party. If you truly believe in the conservative ideals (which in may ways, and in theory, I understand and respect) then kick the wing-nuts out.

  • Greg Barbrick

    And yet, as “Identity Politics” as you so eloquently put it get ALL of he media attention.

    The Dems are who? Not really Obama, but right now the “Occupiers.” Like it was said years ago, the hippies won Nixon’s election in ’68.

    The Tea Party will lose for the Repubs in 2012.

    This isn’t even a “right or wrong” It simply is the way that most of the country – “the silent majority” sees it.

    Like it or not, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and both of these squeaky wheels – whether nearly 50 years apart, still are pretty repellent to most of America.

    There, I said it.

  • Cannonshop

    #31 Glenn, when you let “race” or “Gender” or religion, or ethnicity determine your political choices, you’re GIVING these jokers the power they want, and buying into their conspiracy theory view of the world.

    even if it’s only passively. I picked the groups I picked because they’re public and well-known, not because they are “mainstream” or not-a-joke.

    People like that BECOME the “Mainstream” if they aren’t resisted-ask the Germans. the National Socialist German Workers Party was a fringe element and a bit of a joke in 1919, by 1939 they had burned half of Europe and kicked off a campaign of racial and ethnic genocide.

    Division by Demographic is DANGEROUS. The former Yugoslavia should’ve taught people that (it is, after all, fairly recent that Bosnians and Serbs were killing each other in job-lots over ethnicity and weird conspiracy theories-didn’t happen that long ago, y’know…)

    People become extremely capable of committing the worst horrors if they can dehumanize their opponent, and that doing so is “Social Justice” for percieved slights and insults to their Identity Group. All they need to accomplish this, most of the time, is to have someone agreeing that their misery is someone else’s fault, and that they’re entitled to “Justice” even for things that did not happen to them personally.

    Cross-burnings and the LA riots are both fascinating examples of what happens under “Identity Politics”. YOu grew up in the South, you know about the Klan probably better than most posters here, they’re on the same level as the men who dragged that truck-driver out of his rig and bashed his brains out on national television with a brick.

    The violent and the destructive are the natural outgrowth of “Identity Politics”, their insanity and evil justified by the culture it creates.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Cannonshop –

    Um, no, you’re buying into a false equivalency.

    La Raza doesn’t preach racial superiority, nor do they agitate for segregation or preach violence. La Raza is a civil rights and advocacy organization just like the NAACP is. They have their faults like ANY organization that is comprised of human beings…but to compare them to Stormfront is, well, insulting. What many conservatives do is try to link them with MEChA, that is more like Stormfront…but to try to claim that La Raza and MEChA are somehow close allies (as this conservative article tries to do) is every bit as wrong as claiming that the Republican Party and Stormfront are closely allied.

    And the Black Panthers? Seriously, Cannonshop? They’ve been a standing joke since the 1970’s! There’s a few who parade around claiming to be BP’s, but anymore that’s right up there with Yoda-worship! You might see one or two of them milling around spouting nonsense…and the only thing they do is attract conservative (read: Fox) pundits who use them to Show All The World how violent and terrible the black man is!

  • thanks for stopping by, Steve. wouldn’t want Arch to be the only one slinging nonsense around here

  • For all our sakes, I hope that Obama doesn’t have an additional 4 years to increase the debt and not provide businesses any reason to expand or create new jobs.

  • zingzing

    goes both ways, archie…

  • Arch Conservative

    I guess it never occurred to all the moonbats speculating that the reason Obama will win is because “conservatives hate Romney” that the level of hatred we feel toward Obama and the Democratic party in general is exponentially more passionate than any misgivings we may have about Romney.

  • Cannonshop

    No, Igor, Race IS irrelevant-or should be. It’s fundamental to what Rev. Dr. King’s movement was about-they weren’t asking for special treatment, they wanted the Civil Rights that, as CITIZENS, they had every right to-the same ones every OTHER citizen has (at least, in theory).

    You’ve got to be wary of anyone telling you you’re “Special” or that you’re part of a demographic that need/deserves special treatment-that’s the SOB that thinks you’re either an idiot, or a lever to use on someone else. The tactic is called “Divide and Conquer”, and it’s as old in politics as warfare. As people, we’re factional and fractious enough without basing decisions on purely cosmetic things like skin, hair, or eye colour, Or eye-shape, or what scratch of hell supplied the ancestors. Race=BAD, all races. Spend some time researching into actual racists, and you rapidly discover that the blathering of groups like Stormfront and N.O.F.E.A.R. are, minus specific qualifiers, interchangeable with La Raza or the Black Panthers. It’s because Race politics is all about self-pity and hate, regardless of the race involved.

    This makes it, if you’re actually interested in a better world, fundamentally irrelevant where it is not outright destructively evil.

  • Cannonshop

    #19 Yes. Exactly like that.

  • Igor

    The rallying cry of a racist: “Race is IRRELEVANT”.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Greg and El B –

    Don’t you know that Dubya also had the economy fixed before Obama took office? All the work was already done!

  • Greg Barbrick

    #10 comment by Dave —

    Do you really buy any of the far-right stuff of Hannity, Rush or Medved? I don’t think you would be reading or commenting on this it if you actually took any of it seriously.

    Too bad, but I see through you.

  • Greg Barbrick

    No s**t Bicho- if there were ever to be an “October Surprise” – that would have been the moment.

  • if all the work was done before Obama got into office, why didn’t Bush pull the trigger?

  • Greg Barbrick

    You mean like George Bush Sr. “won” The Cold War?

  • Cannonshop

    #15 “Obama got Osama” is like “Nixon got the Moon.” All the work was done before he got into office, a lot of it was stuff he openly opposed-he was simply fortunate enough to be POTUS when the work was complete-like Nixon was in 1969 with Apollo 11.

  • Cannonshop

    #11, Greg, it’s because Race is IRRELEVANT. Obama’s a Political Hack from Chicago, with all the baggage that implies. Only those who’s foremost concern is skin colour really bother caring about his, or anyone else’s. It’s not that there aren’t bigots-’cause there are, and a lot of them, it’s that in the mainstream, race is irrelevant as a measure of success or failure.

  • Greg Barbrick

    I like that slogan a lot!

  • Dino S.

    Yes Obama WILL be reelected this year. A great slogan “Obama got Osama”!!!

  • Greg Barbrick

    10 months time is a significant period of time, without a doubt. But in my opinion, it is Obama’s race to lose.

  • I don’t see what Romney offers, and if I was going to put money on it, I would anxiously bet on Obama, but anyone certain of anything 10 months out, no matter who they are picking, is kidding themselves

  • Greg Barbrick

    And yes Dave, you are quite correct – it is the economy as James Carville originally put it in 1992.

    But in the 20 years since that very true statement, things have changed quite a bit. The economy problem is huge, but the social factors have become far bigger concerns than they were in ’92.

    I don’t think Obama’s failures in getting us back on the right track economically are enough for him to lose. I know a lot of people disagree with me on this. But the weirdness (and outright fear) that the Tea Party invokes in people is (I think) and even deeper concern.

  • Greg Barbrick

    On a more conciliatory note, on this Martin Luther King holiday, nobody has once mentioned Obama’s race.

    I think that is a real plus for us as a nation. While it has nothing to do with policies or whatever – being the first African-American President in our nation’s history is an achievement we we should all be proud of.

    But I will end with what is probably a snide, (yet true) comment. If Herman Cain could have “kept it in his pants” the face-off between two African-Americans for the Presidency would have been quite intriguing.

    I never would have voted for Cain, but it really would have been something to see those two debate this fall.

  • Dave

    mark my words, Obama will lost in 2012, your falling for the lies of mainstream media that loves Obama. The fact is Obama won because of the younger voters and that will not happen again. You can only lie so much for so long before people catch on. It’s the economy stupid!…

  • Greg Barbrick

    “Throttle back the venom” Please. Being considered “wimps” as Democrats pisses me off – as it should anyone who cares.

    Obama’s attempts at bi-partisanship have been a joke thanks to the Republicans – and that has a lot more to do with all the noise the wing-nuts who make up the Tea Party make.

    Yeah, I’ve had it with the depiction of Democrats being presented as mealy-mouthed big-government types.

    I was one of the perhaps 10 people in the nation who voted for Mondale in ’84, because I thought Reagan was too far right – and dangerous with all of the “Star Wars” rhetoric.

    Right now I would give my left you-know-what to have a candidate like Reagan in the field. I’m not a huge Obama fan, but the Republican party in general scares the hell out of me. And this Tea Party business is just making it a complete joke.

    Romney will be the candidate because they have nobody else. Who else is there that has even a prayer?

    Frankly, I expected a lot more out of Obama than what he has shown since his election. But he hasn’t done anything that is actually frightening, as so many of the Tea Party-led Republicans are actually proposing.

    Why neither party is able to field a candidate that actually appeals to the vast majority of what I called the “fly overs” – the basic middle class of this nation – is beyond me.

    Oh, and by the way: “Tough guy” W. could never get Osama now could he? Obama did, yet gets zero credit for something that big.

    Yup, I’m an angry, proud Democrat. And I think a few more of our types are in order. “Working together” with the Republicans is clearly never going to happen.

    There was a great line in the movie Recount which said something to the effect of “Gore brought a knife to a gunfight.”

    I may be just a voice in the wilderness, but this article and its so-called “venom” is exactly what the Democrats need to embrace.

    Who is going to win a gunfight with a knife? This is serious business, and the Democrats need to realize it, and stop trying to be “nice.” That attitude is just plain stupid.

  • Cannonshop

    #6 Glenn, we need to check the temp in hell-we’re agreeing WAY too often. at least we still have disagreements on some definitions, as reflected in your Post #4.

    Y’see, by my interpretation, “Liberal” equals “Statist/Corporatist”, which includes fundamental ideas like massive Corporate Bailouts with money we don’t have, massive expansion of the Entitlement State, Bread and Circus politics, and “Security Theatre” laws like SOPA and NDAA-which makes much of the GOP, as well as the bulk of “Democrats” basically indistinguishably leftist in the modern sense.

    Conservative would mean letting Malinvestment and corrupt bankers fail, letting General Motors take the hit from decades of mismanagement and internal corruption, and NOT tossing constitutional protections for individuals in the name of “Security”. It’s indefensible for a CONSERVATIVE to support, for instance, no-charges-no-trial detentions of American Citizens in Military facilities off of something as nebulous as “Terrorism”-a thing that has no fixed legal definition.

    Being “Conservative” is supposed to be about protecting those things that make American unique, and exceptional. It’s NOT about adopting the things (in a watered down, gradualist form) that made the Soviet Union a hell on earth, or the economic policies of the Fascisti or NASDAP.

    (nevermind the banana-republic “Security” apparatus, including warrantless searches, indefinite detention without trial, etc directed at citizens…)

    IMHO, there isn’t a genuine conservative in the race-bible-baiting isn’t conservative, it’s opportunistic and outdated opportunism at that. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t really mind wacky religious types, so long as they don’t have the ability to impose said wacky religious ideas on the rest of us with the power of law and the gun.

    I’m just saying that this election, it’s going to be a choice of the lesser of evils, and, unfortunately, we have a broad selection of lesser evils to choose from, all of whom style themselves “Great”, yet none of whom have much justification for their greek temple panoramas.

  • Igor

    It’ll be an Obama landslide over Romney in November.

    Here’s one reason that even republicans find Romney distasteful: Sullivan

  • Glenn Contrarian

    That said, I think Cannonshop was absolutely right when he said the author of this article needs to throttle back the venom…and I think it’s because the author is sounding too much like the flip side of certain conservative pundits. We don’t need people saying such things on the liberal side.

  • Deano

    Right now I thik it is difficult to tell who might pull off an election win. I think the odds favor Obama as he, as was indicated in a previous comment, is a very centalist, mainstream “big tent” politicion, no matter what the shrill hyperbole of Fox News claims and its adherents claim.

    Romney’s problem is that he garners only luke-warm support from the right-wing republican base and is unlikely to steal much of the centralist vote from Obama as I suspect his wealth and background may not be positive for him and may provide prime fodder for making him squirm.

    Be that as it may, a continued stalled economic downturn may do more to Obama than anything Romney can muster. Alternatively an econmic recovery may bolster Obama in the polls, as will his continued positioning himself as a supporter of “the 99%” vs. the “1%” Romney.

    Say what you will about him, but Obama is good on the campaign trail and I suspect, that once he starts putting the boots to Romney, Romney’s support will slide enough to make Obama move onto a second term.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Cannonshop says Obama’s a liberal, Chris says Obama’s pretty much a Republican anyway…

    …and Chris is right – Obama’s much closer to being a Reagan Republican than any of the current crop the GOP is offering up. The total federal tax burden under Obama is the lowest since before Eisenhower, but like Reagan, Obama realizes the need for more tax revenue and – like Reagan – isn’t afraid to raise taxes (as Reagan adviser David Stockman recently pointed out).

    Obama bailed out the car companies – like Reagan did for Chrysler – and saved over two million jobs (whereas Reagan’s bailout saved several hundred thousand).

    Reagan didn’t slash the military, but Bush 41 certainly did – and raised taxes to boot. Both Obama and Reagan (but none of the current crop of GOP candidates) support the START treaty process. Reagan would have deplored ending don’t-ask-don’t-tell, but then Obama is publicly not for gay marriage (like Reagan) – we all know that’s just a political position that will change as soon as he feels he can get away with it.

    Obama’s actually much tougher on illegal immigrants than Reagan ever was, since he is deporting a record number of illegal immigrants. America under Obama is much more of a free-trade nation – which he has continued to increase with three free-trade agreements during his administration. Reagan, on the other hand, had zero free trade agreements IIRC, and I read an article by the very conservative Cato institute from that time griping about how Reagan said he was for free trade, but in reality didn’t support it at all.

    For the past twenty-odd months, the only monthly job loss has been in the public sector – and unlike Reagan who talked the talk, Obama’s actually walked the walk when it comes to trying to shrink government, as is evinced by Obama’s proposal to merge government agencies. Then there’s the fact that Reagan raised taxes. There was the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, then criticized as the largest tax increase in history, scaled back corporate tax breaks, increased unemployment-insurance levies, and raised excise taxes on cigarettes, among other changes, the Highway Revenue Act of 1982, which temporarily doubled the gasoline tax, and the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 raised the estate tax, cut more business tax breaks and boosted taxes on distilled spirits, among other items.

    We can’t even say that Reagan would have been against Obamacare since the “individual mandate” was very popular among Republicans in the nineties (starting with Newt Gingrich) when Reagan’s influence was still strong within the GOP…and the individual mandate was even supported by some Republicans (like Gingrich) as late as 2007!

    Obama is willing to compromise – and anyone who remembers Reagan’s relationship with Tip O’Neill would have to agree that Reagan had no problem with compromising, either…but today, compromising even on the smallest matters is heresy within the GOP.

    Reagan had no qualms sending our military to get things done, and neither does Obama. Reagan wasn’t saddled with two hot wars when he took office…but Obama didn’t have to deal with the Cold War and the very real possibility of a large-scale thermonuclear exchange, either.

    So the way I see it, though there are certainly differences between the two, Obama’s much closer to being a Reagan Republican – not a Reagan Democrat, but a Republican – than any of the current crop of GOP candidates.

  • rob

    I have watched Romney for a long time. He’s far, far better than most know. He’s very wise, honest and morally upright. He easily takes the shine off Obama. Besides, Obama is not poplular among the people right now. His policies are ruining America. Romney will win the race for president of this country. He’s far better than many are making him out to be. Maybe he didn’t win against Kennedy, but Kennedy was very popular in a very liberal state. Overall, Obama just is not well liked. Stack Romney and Obama together in a debate and you’ll see Obama look like a cocky child. Americans, at least the majority, will see and sense the difference in character. Romney will beat Obama, and afterwards will be a far, far better president.

  • The GOP doesn’t have to field a candidate in the US 2012 Presidential elections because Obama is pretty much a Republican anyway.

    The last straw for me is the current round of security and internet bills which close the loop on turning the USA into somewhere far more akin to the USSR at its worst.

    It breaks my heart to think that only 15 years ago I was seriously thinking about emigrating to the USA. Now, I wouldn’t even go there for a holiday or to visit friends and family, never mind on business. I’m avoiding the place like the plague.

  • Cannonshop

    Throttle back the venom, dude, you’re partisan, but your final analysis IS correct-the GOP field this time around couldn’t win a race for dog-catcher. It’s about offering an actual choice-and the GOP front-dumber this time around is maybe the guy who could’ve beaten Bush in 2004 as a democrat, but as a Republican in 2008?

    Why on earth, would the voters pick a phoney conservative with a liberal record, over an outright actual Liberal? Answer is: They won’t.

    Gingrich was never a serious candidate, despite name-recognition, he doesn’t have the organizational chops and his record is, bluntly put, not one that has wide appeal after his getting tossed from the Speakership in ’98.

    Ron Paul’s run in most every contested election since…what? 1996? and as a Libertarian before that. He inspires fanatic loyalty in a tiny fraction of voters, but has demonstrated repeatedly no ability to motivate a larger audience.

    Mitt Romney is, politically, John McCain with hair this time around, and he was BEATEN by McCain last time-and McCain pretty much walked into the 2008 election without a chance in hell-after trying in primaries going back to the 1980’s.

    Perry’s a clown…maybe a Rodeo Clown, but he isn’t someone to be taken seriously after his strings of gaffes last year, and I would suggest MOST people find his religious-cultural “Conservative” brand distasteful…and with good reason. The “Moral Majority” is a MINORITY even among Republicans, forget the general electorate.

    Obama’s not going to win on his merits, he’s going to win, because his opposition is just that flaky. The Corporations know it, that’s why he’s drawing in the bigger money-esp. from Banking interests and Wall Street.

    Watch the money, the GOP doesn’t have a prayer…and it’s their own damn fault.