You see, the only reason why you did so well in the first place is that as a person, you seemed way cooler than most other politicians. Wayy more cool than John McCain, even with his heroism and long record of public service. Most of those who voted for you didn't even really care about the details of your platform. They were willing to let any serious discussions of the impacts of what you were proposing slide, or perhaps even give it a try. After all, Bush and the Republicans had at it for eight years; eight tough years. Years during which the media continuously told us how bad things were, how bad Bush was, how terrible the wars were and so on. So everyone agreed it was time for a change. And as the very candidate running on change, you beat the milquetoast John McCain handily. Fine.
But it's been 4 years now. And I'm pretty sure that when you said change, most people thought you meant a change from Bush. I'm pretty sure they didn't think you meant a change from the greatness and freedom of America. And 2010 was proof of that: one of the first big opportunities the people had to rebuke your power. Which they did, overwhelmingly, or to use your term, "shellack"-ingly. Is that a word? In any case, there was also the stream of newly elected blue state Republican governors, such as Chris Christie, and Scott Walker, and the failed recall and so on.
But never mind all that, you thought. "I'm LeBron, baby." Seriously, you said that about yourself back in 2004 and it goes to your over-sized ego and state of mind. I've worked in my career for 20 years, and I believe I am excellent at it. But I've never boasted about my skills like that, ever, and would laugh at anyone who did. Even LeBron doesn't go around saying, "I'm LeBron baby." But that's actually the type of guy you are. In all of your wisdom, you kept on. Forget Clintonian centrism; faced with popular backlash, you just knew your wonderfulness would just smooth it all over, is that right?
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Alexander J Smith III
Interesting piece.
Lots of claims in this one, the one I'm most interested in is what straw-man you believe Obama is 'attacking'. Most of what I've seen are pretty accurate constructions of his opposition, and while I agree that he does spend a little more time than he should on the economic crisis that his administration walked into, that doesn't actually change the fact that he was faced with a crisis that we hadn't seen anything like since Black Monday 87.
2 - Dr Dreadful
It's going to be close, but I haven't seen any good, reliable poll analyses, even conservative ones, that predict Romney will win. He needs at least two or three of the marginal states that aren't already in his column, and Obama's slim lead in most of those has been holding steady.
It does depend who actually turns up and votes, of course. Romney has a chance if the Republicans do a better job of mobilizing their base. But I think Obama will hold on by 20-30 EC votes - without any more obvious "massive fraud" than has been at play in any of the last three or four elections.
You're welcome to dream on, though, Obnox. We'll see who's right in a couple of weeks.
3 - The Obnoxious American
What "claims" would you like me to talk about?
4 - Dr Dreadful
Well, Obonox, you make a number of "claims" (I would call them assertions) in your article. The unsubstantiated ones are:
- that Obama won in '08 on style, not substance
- that he is an egotist
- that he blames everything on the Bush administration
- that he plays the rich off against the middle class and the poor
- that the election of a Republican administration will not have an adverse effect on women's rights
- that Obama is unique in relaxing the enforcement of selected federal laws
- that he is unique in playing political games to help himself get re-elected
- that he has singlehandedly changed the "national attitude"
- that he has damaged American foreign policy
- that if he wins re-election, it can only be because of mass hysteria or fraud
- that Mitt Romney loves his country the way it is (in which case, why is he running for President? :-) )
I get that your piece is rhetorical, but you did ask.
5 - The Obnoxious American
These are hardly claims, but feel free to dispute them if you'd like.
6 - Igor
Actually, OA, the way it works is that you are supposed to support your original assertions, NOT that people are to accept them until someone refutes them.
That's why you take on the responsibility of writing an article.
Tough, isn't it?
7 - Fletch
There has been one, and only one actual objective poll that has been conducted. Albeit, none of the media, pundits, analysts, and many, many conservatives for that matter, have actually seen this "poll" as a true marker. This election?? It's going to be Chik-Fil-A times a million....(think about it....)
Now I know that the above is anecdotal, but imho History will look back and "see" that moment in time as the watershed.
8 - Dr Dreadful
Obnox, this started with Alexander disputing your "Obama strawman" claim. You then asked what claims he would like you to talk about. I thought he'd already said which ones, so I decided to clarify things with a list. I agree that they are not claims - they're assertions - but Igor is right. Ball's in your court.
By constantly kicking the question back to the asker, you're either being evasive or lazy, both of which are most unlike you.
9 - The Obnoxious American
Igor,
I'm simply not going to argue in favor of the obvious facts, which Doc so kindly laid out for all of us.
If you think Obama won in 2008 on substance, or that he hasn't blamed Bush for everything, fine - believe that all you like.
10 - The Obnoxious American
Doc, see my reply to Igor - not lazy but it gets tired arguing whether water is wet.
11 - Dr Dreadful
Then why write an article stating that water is wet?
12 - The Obnoxious American
That Obama is all of the things you've mentioned in your comment #4 is merely the impetus for the article and not in dispute by anyone save the most died in the wool Obama sycophants. This is an open letter of farewell to him as a failed president.
13 - Dr Dreadful
Yes, Obnox, I know that's what it is. I'd have been content to leave it at that if it hadn't been for your refusal to engage with Alexander's perfectly reasonable question.
BTW, that the assertions on my list are "not in dispute by anyone save the most died in the wool Obama sycophants" is another unsubstantiated assertion.
I'm of a mind that you should get cracking now, so as to save time later when Glenn comes along with his usual lengthy sermon about Bush having done the same or worse.
14 - Jet Gardner
Jet’s Electoral Prediction: boiling down and averaging every news source/poll/political climate, I get this result…
Obama 316
Romney 222
I predict Fla will go to Obama, but just for fun I gave it to Romney. My home state of Ohio would’ve thrown our GOP gov out if he was up for reelection-as evidenced by the landslide opposition to his trying to screw public worker and teachers unions in the 2010 mid-term referendum.
Alabama-9 Romney
Alaska-3 Romney
Arizona-11 Obama
Arkansas-6 Romney
California-55 Obama
Colorado-9 Romney
Connecticut-7 Obama
Delaware-3 Obama
Florida-29 Romney
Georgia-16 Romney
Hawaii-4 Obama
Idaho-4 Romney
Indiana-11 Romney
Iowa-6 Obama
Illinois-20 Obama
Kansas-6 Romney
Kentucky-8 Romney
Louisiana-8 Romney
Maine-4 Obama
Maryland-10 Obama
Massachusetts-11 Obama
Michigan-16 Obama
Ohio-18 Obama
Oklahoma-7 Romney
Nebraska-5 Romney
Nevada-6 Obama
New Hampshire-4 Obama
New Jersey-14 Obama
New Mexico-5 Obama
New York-29 Obama
Minnesota-10 Obama
Mississippi-6 Romney
Missouri-10 Romney
Montana-3 Romney
North Carolina-15 Romney
North Dakota-3 Romney
Oregon-7 Obama
Pennsylvania-20 Obama
Rhode Island-4 Obama
South Carolina-9 Romney
South Dakota-3 Romney
Tennessee-11 Romney
Texas-38 Romney
Utah-6 Romney
Vermont-3 Obama
Virginia-13 Obama
Washington-12 Obama
Washington, D.C.-3 Obama
West Virginia-5 Romney
Wisconsin-10 Obama
Wyoming-3 Romney
15 - The Obnoxious American
Doc, thanks for the advice, which i won't take. I'll let his comments stand in all their ignorant glory.
16 - Clavos
Glenn comes along with his usual lengthy sermon about Bush having done the same or worse.
And, of course, his second most favorite preachment regarding the US' unfavorable ranking among the First World nations in almost any category by which one can take the measure of a nation, all of which sorry rankings are due to the infinite deficiencies of not only Mr. Bush, but of all of the other GOP presidents and their administrations as well.
17 - Baronius
Jet - You give Arizona, Ohio, and Virginia to Obama. Switch them and it's Obama 274 to Romney 264. Neither candidate can feel comfortable with the numbers that tight.
18 - Dr Dreadful
Jet gave Arizona to Obama? Not gonna happen, at least not this time round. Nate Silver's Five Thirty Eight blog has a good explanation of why.
19 - Jet Gardner
It's based on Arizona likley democratic election of democratic house and senate seats
20 - The Obnoxious American
I have a feeling quite a few states in the Dem category might surprise. Could be wrong, but even here in liberal land, no Obama stickers or signs, but quite a few for Romney.
21 - Jet Gardner
We'll see... we'll see
22 - Baronius
There aren't many things I'd say "not gonna happen" to. A rainstorm can drop voter turnout 1% in the right state and change American history.
23 - Dr Dreadful
San Diego is fairly conservative, but I reckon I've seen about equal numbers of stickers and signs for both candidates.
24 - Baronius
The pollsters have finally figured out how important voter turnout is, but they're still ironing out their measures of enthusiasm. The polls didn't do that great a job in 2000 or 2004, and 2008 may have been an outlier in terms of voter enthusiasm. The problem ultimately is that people act unpredictably.
25 - The Obnoxious American
Agreed, there is no question that they are heavily underestimating GOP enthusiasm. And the GOP is more enthused right now than I've ever seen it.