Hopefully all the infighting in the reps will mean that it could be clear-sailing for Obama. Although it is always more interesting when there is a viable opponent who can bring about some interesting debates, although an easy opponent and dull debates would suite me as long as Obama gets back in. I think he needs another 4 years to really leave behind a legacy.
Bachman would help him in the upper midwest, which he would need to take. And, of course, she's a woman, which might help Perry with that demographic.
Once elected, the VP doesn't do much anyway. Obama had no foreign policy experience, no executive experience (and very little other experience for that matter) before he was elected. Perry has run the third largest state in the country for ten years.
Originally Posted by 212
Don't count on it.
Besides, the way elections usually work is that the votes go into the booth, open their wallet, an count how much money they have. If they like the number, they vote for the incumbant. If they don't, they vote for the challenger. I have a feeling in 15 months from now, they're not going to like the number.
And Obama has been looking very inempt latlely. Even the left is complaining about him.
Bachmann as a running mate makes even less sense than Bachmann at the top of a ticket.
Don't be fooled by a straw poll in Iowa; she isn't nationally electable, and would be a negative on a ticket.
Which is a good thing...
Most of what Obama has going for him is that he is running against a very weak field.
I don't consider a three term governor of the third largest state a weak candidate.
Depends on the 3 term governer and the state. He is weak. I don't see that prayer session crap flying in a national forum.
Governor Goodhair
Perry does not have a wide enough polical base. Even fiscal conservatives are likely to be turned off by his stand on social issues. He'll get the Rush Limbaugh wing of the party, but he can't get close enough to the middle to appeal to moderates and blue dog dems. The only two candidates with a socially moderate enough agenda to attract broad based appeal are Romney and Huntsman, both of whom are seriously flawed for other reasons.
That's why he chose Biden, to add foreign policy experience to the ticket.
Reagan-Bush too.
You only choose a new face as veep if you've been around Washington forever, like Dole or Bush I or Mondale. So Perry-Bachmann won't happen. (Especially because Bachmann makes GOP insiders nervous.)
Perry / Huntsman? Romney / Huntsman? Can't think of anyone else in the field with foreign policy chops.
Bachman makes all but a fevered few nervous.
Perry: "Secession", "Treason" blah blah blah
Mainstreamers will quickly tire of his BS.
^ I was about to post the article from the the Atlantic Wire wherein Perry accuses Bernake of being a traitor, but your commentary beat me to it. You know you are over the edge when Karl Rove thinks you're some kind of nut job. So as far as the country knows this idiot has a stronger affinity for Texas than hye has for the US, and thinks the Chairman of the Federal Reserve is a traitor. Yeah, he'll get elected.
I'll stick with my original post on this matter. The biggest advantage Obama has in 2012 is a weak GOP field.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks