Dems alarmed as Independents bolt party

[Doc Savage Fan]

Is that the best you got? The last election is my proof and you have an opinion piece? LOL at all the tightie rightie sore losers.

Wow...I must say that you're quite the character.

Back on topic...since taking office, Obama's 'Strongly Approve' numbers have declined 14% and his 'Strongly Disapprove' numbers have increase 25% among Independents.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...demographic_notes_barack_obama_approval_index
Rasmussen Reports (Demographic Notes - Barack Obama Approval Index)

"January 19, 2009: Obama, the first African-American elected President, earns a +73 rating from Democrats and a -18 among Republicans. As for voters not affiliated with either major party, 34% Strongly Approve and 22% Strongly Disapprove to give the President-elect a +12 rating on the day before his inauguration."

"November 15, 2009: Fifty-six percent (56%) of Democrats Strongly Approve while 66% of Republicans Strongly Disapprove. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 20% Strongly Approve and 47% Strongly Disapprove."

These Rasmussen numbers clearly indicate that Independents have increasingly shifted away from the Democratic party. You have stated the exact opposite...and all I'm asking of you is that you back up your statement. Here's your big chance to prove to the world that your way smarter than those "tightie rightie sore losers" and "butthurt righties". Please forgive me if I don't hold my breath.

 

[Red Dawn]

Wow...I must say that you're quite the character.

Back on topic...since taking office, Obama's 'Strongly Approve' numbers have declined 14% and his 'Strongly Disapprove' numbers have increase 25% among Independents.

That's because he's not being compared to any of the Republicans who might run for office in 2012.

 

[nobodyknows]

The "proof" is in the pudding, and that's the next election. Until then you're just another butthurt rightie grasping at straws to try and tear down and/or obstruct serious, needed change. After the way Bush fucked up things to expect any kind of serious change in a year is nothing short of ridiculous tightie rightie spin.

You quote Harry Truman in your sig. Well, Bush was sure as hell no Harry Truman, all he did was pass the buck. Obama MIGHT be a Harry Truman though? I guess time will tell?

As far as your "numbers" go they don't prove squat, except in your limited (I think delusional) view. The next election is a year away and just because someone says the "strongly disapporve" doesn't indicate whether they will vote for him or not as being the lesser of two evils.

You lose.... again.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The "proof" is in the pudding, and that's the next election. Until then you're just another butthurt rightie grasping at straws to try and tear down and/or obstruct serious, needed change. After the way Bush fucked up things to expect any kind of serious change in a year is nothing short of ridiculous tightie rightie spin.

You quote Harry Truman in your sig. Well, Bush was sure as hell no Harry Truman, all he did was pass the buck. Obama MIGHT be a Harry Truman though? I guess time will tell?

As far as your "numbers" go they don't prove squat, except in your limited (I think delusional) view. The next election is a year away and just because someone says the "strongly disapporve" doesn't indicate whether they will vote for him or not as being the lesser of two evils.

You lose.... again.

Sigh. I can see now that I'm totally outclassed by your pristine logic and undeniable reasoning. I should know better. *shakes head* I should really, really know better.

 

[OCGuy]

This is what this sub-forum is coming to? Someone posts an OP/ED, along with personal commentary, and polls to back up their opinion....

And they are called a "butthurt loser"?

Can we get some age verification before posting privelages are given out?

 

[nobodyknows]

Sigh. I can see now that I'm totally outclassed by your pristine logic and undeniable reasoning. I should know better. *shakes head* I should really, really know better.

LOL, you were expecting serious discussion in a troll thread backed up by an opinion piece??

 

[werepossum]

The Republicans, independents and tea partiers are still looking for a national voice. There is no consensus as to whom might speak for the center right.

Huckabee, with his TV show, has a forum and a serious advantage there. Palin is unlikely to run, but she has the country's ear right now and is a massive energizer and inspirer, and is unlike anyone the Democrat Party can hope to field. The intellectuals, like Jindal and Romney, are in the background, but are unlikely to stir sufficient ground roots support as they are not built for TV and are thus more likely to be first choices for VP nods. Gingrich is an architect and he might be more of a player again once the game is seriously afoot.

I am going to go out on a limb here and predict that women and minorities are going to be leading the Republicans to victory. It will be strong and intellectual women like Liz Cheney that will put them over the top and someone like her is likely to be at the top of the Republican ticket. Whoever emerges will be likely nominated by the wholesale switchover by Asians from Democrat to Republican, as they come to realize the American economic dream they want is not possible with the heavy weight of big government around their necks. The Black vote will still be majority Democrat, but the Republicans are going to make significant inroads even there as the economic issues peel off working black families from the welfare state expectations of the "progressive" Democrats.

Yeah, if I were a Democrat strategist I'd be plenty worried.

Man, you went WAY out on a limb! I can't imagine the Republicans making any significant headway among blacks after only two years, probably not after four either. For that matter I can't see too much of a switch in Hispanics and Latins either, not in just two years. Asians I could see, but their numbers aren't that high compared to blacks and Hispanics/Latins.

I love Liz Cheney and Sarah Palin both, but neither have any appreciable experience in government. (I discount Palin's governorship because she served only half of one term, between running for veep and then quitting.) If independents jump ship from Obama, the polite reason will be his inexperience - I just don't see the media saying his (and Pelosi's and Reid's) Marxist views cost the Democrats the 2010 or 2012 election. Given that narrative I can't imagine the people who voted in Obama then electing Cheney or Palin, in effect saying that an inexperienced black man was a disaster but an inexperienced white woman will probably be okay. I'm betting that if Obama flops, his successor will be an older white male with a buttload of experience in government. (Not that I find experience in government to necessarily be a good thing. LOL)

One thing to keep in mind for 2010 is that most of the stimulus money is still waiting for the 2010 election cycle. Cash for Clunkers alone put us in positive growth for a quarter; the Dems might well be able to build up enough momentum in the months running up to the election to woo back these wayward independents. I'm expecting tons of news stories about how the economy is finally picking up, together with lots of stories about racism in America and how it is making Obama's job harder. Maybe another amnesty for illegals as well, making them eligible to vote. The conventional wisdom of November 2010 might well look completely different from the conventional wisdom of November 2009.

 

[nobodyknows]

This is what this sub-forum is coming to? Someone posts an OP/ED, along with personal commentary, and polls to back up their opinion....

And they are called a "butthurt loser"?

Can we get some age verification before posting privelages are given out?

Where will you go?

 

[PJABBER]

Man, you went WAY out on a limb! I can't imagine the Republicans making any significant headway among blacks after only two years, probably not after four either. For that matter I can't see too much of a switch in Hispanics and Latins either, not in just two years. Asians I could see, but their numbers aren't that high compared to blacks and Hispanics/Latins.

I love Liz Cheney and Sarah Palin both, but neither have any appreciable experience in government. (I discount Palin's governorship because she served only half of one term, between running for veep and then quitting.) If independents jump ship from Obama, the polite reason will be his inexperience - I just don't see the media saying his (and Pelosi's and Reid's) Marxist views cost the Democrats the 2010 or 2012 election. Given that narrative I can't imagine the people who voted in Obama then electing Cheney or Palin, in effect saying that an inexperienced black man was a disaster but an inexperienced white woman will probably be okay. I'm betting that if Obama flops, his successor will be an older white male with a buttload of experience in government. (Not that I find experience in government to necessarily be a good thing. LOL)

One thing to keep in mind for 2010 is that most of the stimulus money is still waiting for the 2010 election cycle. Cash for Clunkers alone put us in positive growth for a quarter; the Dems might well be able to build up enough momentum in the months running up to the election to woo back these wayward independents. I'm expecting tons of news stories about how the economy is finally picking up, together with lots of stories about racism in America and how it is making Obama's job harder. Maybe another amnesty for illegals as well, making them eligible to vote. The conventional wisdom of November 2010 might well look completely different from the conventional wisdom of November 2009.

I don't expect either Palin or Cheney to be at the top of any ticket in 2012, but look at how far Obama came from an undistinguished background. The person that captures the country's imagination in spite of obvious shortcomings will go far.

It will not take much to swing a national election with the divide being quite close. If the Republicans erode any of the solid Democrat voting blocs, Black, Latino, Asian, etc. they have a good chance to take it all. I don't think Democrats have any more groups that they can buy off other than the illegal immigrants. If they can get them on the voting rolls they will continue to dominate but will they be able to do so in the next 1 - 3 years?

I also think that the level of frustration with government is not being taken seriously in the discussions here. This frustration has been a factor before, but the allure of incumbency and thus familiarity has made for serious inertia. This does leave the door open for someone with charisma, deep pockets and less rather than more experience in government to step into the fray. The wood chipper effect of the process is highly dissuasive, but who knows?

I would hazard that economic turmoil will get many people to vote with the

 

[CADsortaGUY]

LOL, you were expecting serious discussion in a troll thread backed up by an opinion piece??

"troll thread"? I guess the meaning of troll thread is now "a thread where leftists don't agree with the opinion presented".


Meh, I'm hoping most of you leftists don't read/comprehend the current situation so that '10 and '12 will bring the pendulum back from the left. Just remember to load up your excuses for '10 like "we didn't get our message out" lol

 

[WHAMPOM]

Can I blame the country's problems on the fifth column obstructionists that make up the present day Republicant party??

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It seems that neither party wants us. The Reps have a turnip as their standard bearer, and the Dems have Smoke'N'Mirrors cost shifting which is somehow health care reform.

Neither is worth a damn, in spite of what their apologists spew. There are no quality candidates at the national level.

 

[JKing106]

Probably older then you, Doc Savage and the OP combined. Yes, I'm over 18.

Not if you're using words like "butthurt," you're not. LOOLloloLLLOlOloOlllOllllLLLLLoloLlOL!!!!!11!!!1 Lollols! RoftLlLlollo!

 

[JKing106]

Where will you go?

Overclock his CPU 10 more mhz, I guess.

 

[nobodyknows]

"troll thread"? I guess the meaning of troll thread is now "a thread where leftists don't agree with the opinion presented".


Meh, I'm hoping most of you leftists don't read/comprehend the current situation so that '10 and '12 will bring the pendulum back from the left. Just remember to load up your excuses for '10 like "we didn't get our message out" lol

Such big talk from such a little mind. What's your excuse for losing the last election then?

If you think you the people of this country are going to forget what a disater the GOP was under Bush the last 8 years and is stupoid enough to put them back in power anytime soon you have a big surprise coming.

 

[nobodyknows]

Not if you're using words like "butthurt," you're not. LOOLloloLLLOlOloOlllOllllLLLLLoloLlOL!!!!!11!!!1 Lollols! RoftLlLlollo!

LOL, I think young??

 

[Double Trouble]

The fact is that we're all better off when there is gridlock. Checks and balances are a good thing, and it prevents the zealots on either side of the isle from doing stupid things. Right now, the left wing has solid control of government, and seeing some of the nasty results of that (cap and trade, socialist health care etc etc) is starting to make average centrists (independents) very nervous.

 

[werepossum]

The fact is that we're all better off when there is gridlock. Checks and balances are a good thing, and it prevents the zealots on either side of the isle from doing stupid things. Right now, the left wing has solid control of government, and seeing some of the nasty results of that (cap and trade, socialist health care etc etc) is starting to make average centrists (independents) very nervous.

Amen for gridlock, no matter which party is in charge. No one's life, liberty or property is safe when Congress is in session.

 

[Double Trouble]

It's not a coincidence that the country as a whole generally does better in terms of the economy when there is some form of gridlock where the president is from a different party than the house and/or senate etc. See Clinton with a republican congress, Reagan with a democrat congress etc. When one party has control, there's trouble (like the first six years of Bush, and now Obama).

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Such big talk from such a little mind. What's your excuse for losing the last election then?

If you think you the people of this country are going to forget what a disater the GOP was under Bush the last 8 years and is stupoid enough to put them back in power anytime soon you have a big surprise coming.

Uh, well it sure isn't the old D line about not "getting out our message". It's because they had no message except to be a D-lite which turned many like me off and thus lost them our votes.
You leftists can try to run against Bush again in 2010 but if you really think that's going to work...then "you have a big surprise coming".