Somebody Up There Loves Obama

After Gingrich’s disastrously strong win in South Carolina, I can only repeat what I wrote over on NRO as one of my predictions for 2012:

Let’s start with a prediction that will make me as miserable as it might make you mad: Barack Obama will win thoroughly undeserved reelection, because none of the possible GOP candidates has what it takes (politically) to beat him. The Republicans should, however, hang on to the House and grab hold of the Senate. They will not, however, achieve the latter if the GOP’s presidential nominee is someone whom a large number of voters will go out of their way to vote against. My second prediction is that most NRO readers will know to whom it is that I am referring.

This entry was posted in politics and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Somebody Up There Loves Obama

  1. RandyB says:

    Super Tuesday in March 6, so for about six more weeks the retail politics phase of the primary season will generate marginally interesting news. Then, superior funding and organization will roll to easy victories, and we’ll realize everything else was just noise by the media who didn’t want to write “Romney Keeps Rolling to Inevitable Nomination” for 1.5 years.

    That said, the totality of this Republican crop was remarkably poor, as evidence by how often new or long-ignored candidates suddenly jumped to the top of polls. It’s my opinion, that the Republican party will re-align significantly soon. There’s just no way to reconcile defending Social Security/Medicare, military spending, and the Tea Party. The inherent contradictions of its platform are too great.

  2. Conrad says:

    The “someone up there who loves Obama” is in the company of millions of someones down here who feel similarly.

  3. John says:

    “There’s just no way to reconcile defending Social Security/Medicare, military spending, and the Tea Party. The inherent contradictions of its platform are too great.”

    You’re right, which is why Social Security and Medicare need to be cut now. I don’t see Romney having the stones to do it, but Gingrich will.

    I totally don’t buy that the GOP needs to nominate a moderate to win. How did McCain work out? Or Dole? Or Bush 41? Meanwhile, the 2 more conservative candidates, Reagan and Bush 43 both won 2 terms.

    This election will be determined mostly be events, including whatever the unemployment rate is in 8 months. We have a chance to nominate a real small-government, cost cutting conservative, or a rudderless Wall Streeter who is the absolute Democrat caricature of the GOP villain. I know what my choice is.

  4. Mark says:

    Tea Party–what a joke. Where are they now? Old white people who had a panic attack over a someone with a “foreign” name–born in Kenya, no less. The sooner the GOP is over the “Tea Party” illusion the better.

    There would be one virtue of Newt as the GOP standard bearer: seeing the “family values”, “sanctity of marriage” crowd gagging as they are forced gobble the knob of this disgusting pig, ala Callista.

    Andrew, if Newt makes it–PLEASE report back from NRO Central on the ashen faces of Lopez and Gallagher. They will have a candidate who cannot even dare open his mouth on their most cherished issues.

  5. D says:

    Bush 43 was not especially conservative compared to rest of the field in 2000. He was establishment all the way and scared most opponent off by raising a ton of money. His re-election was more about uncertainty about the war than a core set of conservative principles.

  6. Jeeves says:

    So, Andrew, I gather that if “a large number of people…go out of their way to vote against” Romney, leaving him a damaged nominee, the GOP loses a golden opportunity to take the Senate. I agree that that would be more consequential–no matter who wins the presidency.

    Worst case, holding the House and getting at least 41 GOP loyalists (i.e., not counting Scott Brown and the Girls From Maine) in the Senate is the best that can be hoped for. But adding to that total might be possible with 21 Dem seats up in 2012. Unless Gingrich’s “unfavorables” change dramatically, Romney remains the one who looks more likely to do that.

Comments are closed.