Obama Could Lose The Way Carter Did.

Yahoo News ^ | Feb 23 2012 | John A. Tures

[johnatures]

The talk among college professors, students and those in the conservative southern community I live in, is that Barack Obama is going to win big, whether one wants it to happen or not. The other day, someone said it could be as big a victory as FDR's overwhelming reelection in 1936.

I pointed out that Democrats would do well to remember the lessons of the 1980 election. Others in the conversation dismissed such talk. After all, Obama's got a big lead in the polls. According to realclearpolitics.com polls, Obama is opening up big leads in Associated Press polls and even in Rasmussen Tracking surveys, which always favor Republicans. A Franklin & Marshall poll had Obama winning the battleground state of Pennsylvania, even thumping native son Rick Santorum!

But we have a lot of myths about the 1980 election. According to Will Rogers, the Larry the Cable Guy of the 1930s, said a myth is "what we know, that ain't necessarily so!"

Sure Reagan took 44 states and 489 electoral votes in 1980, compared to 49 for President Jimmy Carter. But Reagan only won 50.7 percent of the vote, while Carter got 41 percent and John B. Anderson picked up the rest. As recently as October 26, a Gallup poll had Carter ahead 47 percent to Reagan's 39 percent. Reagan's comeback was so remarkable that Gallup had seen nothing like it since they began polling in 1936.

[Mr. K]

we need a green party candidate to run
someone to take votes away from Obama

[Mr. K]

we need a green party candidate to run
someone to take votes away from Obama

[SumProVita]

ONE problem: the media of Carter’s time reported the truth a LOT more evenly than now.

[WashingtonSource]

The media were universally liberal in 1980. There was no Fox News. There was no Rush Limbaugh. There was no Internet. They had a complete monopoly on what messages go out. They were relentlessly liberal. I think surveys at the time found liberals at 85 percent of the media. Today, of course, it’s 99 percent and they are further left than they were in 1980. But, they were pretty far left then. They would do anything to get Carter re-elected.

[X-spurt]

We must have lived through differnet carter-eras. Lib MSM was no different, they pimped Jimah right til the end.

[PeachyKeen]

Exactly and also our culture wasn’t at an all time low like it is today with so many receiving welfare and embracing the “ghetto” way of life

[hoosiermama]

OTOH we have the Internet and all the social media connections we didn't have back them. PP>EX: Did you listen to Newt speaking at the California State Republican meeting today. Besides the people that were there, there were at least two streams running and CNN (one of them) will have it posted later on their website.

The speech was right on target and is spreading like wild fire. Can Obama, Romney spend enough on negative advertising to contradict TRUTH?

[butterdezillion]

If Obama is even still in the running at this point it means we deserve even worse than what Sodom and Gomorrah got. There’s no way to salvage a country that is that depraved.

[re_nortex]

I foresee a sweep of Tea Party Patriots this coming November.

Obama fatigue is an undeniable reality because of his job-killing regulations and socialist programs that have sent the economy into a sharp nosedive. His defeat can be reassured if genuine Conservative Americans such as the Koch Brothers, Sheldon Adelson and other job creators plaster the airwaves and other media with this chart:

When Newt Gingrich's Contract with America was in effect, Clinton and his ilk were neutralized. And thus, with Conservative principles triumphing, began the era of 4.2% unemployment, gasoline for less than a dollar and yearly budget surpluses. I think that Americans are ready to embrace a President Gingrich since it means a return to prosperity and plentiful, inexpensive energy.

[gaijin]

Driven by tech, the secular trend is towards more and more sources of media —the activist Presstitutes KNOW their days as Gatekeepers are numbered.

They believe this is their last stand as media dominators —the leverage they have now will soon go away. The MSM won’t disappear completely, no, but they know that going forward (with 5 or 10 Drudges, and not just one, as now) coverage will be more balanced, whether they like it or not —THAT is the power of an efficient infoMarket.

THIS TIME, the MSM will jettison ANY semblance of even-handedness and shoot EVERYTHING in their arsenal against the opponent of the Muslim Bisexual.

“USE it or lose it”, is their thinking.

Midway was fought by them and lost, and now we’re coming up on Guadacanal, I’d say...

[hinckley buzzard]

According to Will Rogers, the Larry the Cable Guy of the 1930s, said a myth is "what we know, that ain't necessarily so!"

That's pretty insulting to Will Rogers, comparing him to the cable guy. But let that pass. I have a better definition of Myth: "What never was true, and always will be."

[nhwingut]

This moonbat writer is so full of it. The only poll at real clear that shows Obama with a so-called “big lead” is AP. Even that is only 8 points. All others show Obama tied or within margin.

Gallup has a daily tracker with Obama facing off against Romney and Santorum. Yesterday’s showed Obama losing to Romney by 4. And is up on Santorum by 1 (not exactly “big”).

Secondly he forgets to mention that Obama should be leading as the GOP candidates are in middle of nomination which splits support. Whereas Dems are fully behind Obama.

He tries to suggest that even in conservative circles Obama is inevitable. LOL... I don’t know anyone who thinks Obama is on his way to a romp.

Not with $16 trillion in debt, $5 gas, ZERO net jobs created. Etc.

This piece is laughable.

[Lazamataz]

According to realclearpolitics.com polls, Obama is opening up big leads in Associated Press polls and even in Rasmussen Tracking surveys, which always favor Republicans. A Franklin & Marshall poll had Obama winning the battleground state of Pennsylvania, even thumping native son Rick Santorum!

Expected. During a bloody primary, the opposing incumbant gets a temporary boost. The attention is off the incumbant's performance, especially a miserably-performing one.

Once a candidate is selected, it will be a much more accurate telling, since the focus will be, not on the damage intrafighing is doing, but instead, on the true contenders in the race.

[gaijin]

Your nay-saying is deplorable:

I KNOW you know that algae and chicken-fat gas is going to turn everything around....

/sarc

[Paperdoll]

Shoa! Coonsider this: Would Caarter have lost had he been black?

[Paperdoll]

Whoa! Coonsider this: Would Caarter have lost had he been black?

[Joe Boucher]

At this point in time George H.W.Bush was far ahead in the polls.
Punk ass marxist, magic negro is going down.

[Joe Boucher]

At this point in time George H.W.Bush was far ahead in the polls.
Punk ass marxist, magic negro is going down.

[proxy_user]

Many voters who said they were voting for Carter probably were undecided or leaning towards Reagan. Who wants to admit supporting an evil conservative?

The same thing is even more true of Obama. Those who privately believe is incompetent are being quiet about it, but will turn up to vote in droves.