The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

If political scientists wrote the news
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3146
Page 1 of 1

Author:  RangerDave [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:53 am ]
Post subject:  If political scientists wrote the news

Slate wrote:
A powerful thunderstorm forced President Obama to cancel his Memorial Day speech near Chicago on Monday—an arbitrary event that had no affect on the trajectory of American politics. Obama now faces some of the most difficult challenges of his young presidency: the ongoing oil spill, the Gaza flotilla disaster, and revelations about possibly inappropriate conversations between the White House and candidates for federal office. But while these narratives may affect fleeting public perceptions, Americans will ultimately judge Obama on the crude economic fundamentals of jobs numbers and GDP.

Chief among the criticisms of Obama was his response to the spill. Pundits argued that he needed to show more emotion. Their analysis, however, should be viewed in light of the economic pressures on the journalism industry combined with a 24-hour news environment and a lack of new information about the spill itself. Republicans, meanwhile, complained that the administration has not been sufficiently involved in the day-to-day cleanup. Their analysis, of course, is colored by their minority status in America's two-party system, which creates a strong structural incentive to criticize the party in power, whatever the merits.

At the same time, Obama's job approval rating fell to 48 percent. This isn't really news, though. Studies have shown that the biggest factor in a president's rating is economic performance. Connecting the minute blip in the polls with Obama's reluctance to emote or alleged failure to send enough boom to the Gulf is, frankly, absurd. Democrats have also slipped in their standing among "independent voters." That phrase, by the way, is meaningless. Voters may self-identify as "independent" but in almost all cases they lean toward one party. Poll numbers also confirmed that Americans are in an anti-incumbent mood. … Ha! Just kidding. The anti-Washington narrative was concocted by dominant media outlets based on the outcomes of a statistically insignificant handful of largely unrelated races. Sorry.

Still, Democrats hope that passing health care and financial regulatory reform will give them enough momentum to win in November. Unfortunately, there's little relationship between legislative victories and electoral victories. Also, what the hell is "momentum"? Prospects for an energy bill, meanwhile, are looking grim, since Obama has spent all his political capital. He used to have a lot. Now it's gone. Why winning legislative battles builds momentum but saps political capital, I have no idea. Just go with it. Possible "game changers" for Obama include plugging the oil leak, peace between the Palestinians and Israelis, and World War III, although these events would be almost entirely outside Obama's control.

Looking ahead to 2012, Republicans need a candidate who can shake up the electoral map, which currently consists of "red states" and "blue states," even though there's not much difference. The GOP—a stupid acronym we use only so we don't have to keep repeating the word Republican—will have to decide between a moderate "establishment" pick and a more conservative Tea Party favorite. In reality, both candidates would embrace similar policies in the general election. That candidate will then face off against Obama, whose charisma, compelling personal story, and professional political operation will prove formidable. Actually, Obama will probably win because he's the incumbent. And because voters always go with the guy who's taller.


:D

Author:  Lydiaa [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

He cancelled two trips over here so he could deal with the oil spill. Last time he did that was to push the health care bill through, this shows you how much that spill means to his political career.

Author:  Rorinthas [ Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

It's a long way to 2012. If he's smart or rather if his handlers are smart, he'll not run. If I were a democratic strategist (*shudder*), I'd have Hillary have a falling out with our President sometime next year and not seek reelection. Then she gets to run in 2012 distanced from our President while simultaneously beating bright eager republicians over the head with her foreign policy experience. Additionally I'd convince our President that he doesn't want to end his career by being primaried and should just resign and be the new Bill Clinton instead of the next James Carter.

Author:  Taskiss [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Rorinthas wrote:
... Additionally I'd convince our President that he doesn't want to end his career by being primaried and should just resign and be the new Bill Clinton instead of the next James Carter.

I think it may be too late.

Obama seems to be a victim of his own attempts to be everything to everyone. For instance, I don't see how he could have avoided undeserved criticism about the BP disaster but his actions seem to be always addressing last week's media attacks. Had he decided a course of action at the onset and stuck to that he'd have still been the targets of the attacks, but he wouldn't have given as much ammunition to those who criticize his leadership abilities.

I remember a cartoon from half a century ago - an archer shoots an arrow down field and a character runs back and forth with the target, trying to position things so that the arrow scores in the gold ring.

Unfortunately, Obama's advisers have him carrying the clout rather than the bow.

Author:  Khross [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: If political scientists wrote the news

Too many people believe he's done substantive "things" for him to not run for re-election.

Author:  Ladas [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:39 am ]
Post subject: 

Even money says within 5 years of his retirement, someone suggests changing one of our forms of money to include his portrait or profile.

Author:  Hopwin [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Ladas wrote:
Even money says within 5 years of his retirement, someone suggests changing one of our forms of money to include his portrait or profile.

Ladas, you are such an idiot! Everyone knows they'll want to add him to Mt. Rushmore :lol:

Author:  Kaffis Mark V [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 7:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Ladas wrote:
Even money says within 5 years of his retirement, someone suggests changing one of our forms of money to include his portrait or profile.

Hmm. So, you're saying we should mint IOU's?

Author:  Taskiss [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re:

Ladas wrote:
Even money says within 5 years of his retirement, someone suggests changing one of our forms of money to include his portrait or profile.

Probably on the $100 coin. Should be tons of them and probably need 5 or 6 for a loaf of bread.

Author:  Rynar [ Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: If political scientists wrote the news

Kaffis Mark V wrote:
Ladas wrote:
Even money says within 5 years of his retirement, someone suggests changing one of our forms of money to include his portrait or profile.

Hmm. So, you're saying we should mint IOU's?


Heh, what sweet irony it would be to see his likeness placed on something he help make worthless.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/