Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind
though both Reagan and Clinton recovered in time to win a second term as president.

I know. The thing is though that Reagan was implementing an agenda that improved the economy, and Clinton adapted and moved "right" with welfare reform. Also, the country supported the "contract with America" and was not as unhappy by 2006. I don't see that sort of thing coming together this time. Obama will never track right and there is not a unified coherent strategy being articulated the Republicans this time around. I think the electorate will still be angry in 2012.

11 posted on 07/07/2010 7:43:45 AM PDT by outofstyle (Anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: outofstyle

I think the electorate will still be angry in 2012.


Yes, they will still be angry because 2011 is going to be an ugly year.


16 posted on 07/07/2010 7:47:41 AM PDT by unkus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: outofstyle
The other thing to remember is the economy had significantly improved by 1996. We hit a 5.5% unemployment number in, I think, May of that year. People were feeling a lot more hopeful in 1996 then they were in 1994 so there was a “Don't rock the boat” mood with many voters.

Obama will have no such boost this his numbers since everything they are doing in DC these days is designed to be a jobs killer.

35 posted on 07/07/2010 8:06:34 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (The problem with Socialism is eventually you run our of other peoples money. Lady Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: outofstyle

Obama has another problem with 2012 that Reagan and Clinton didn’t have.

On the international scene, nobody screwed with Reagan because they were fearful of US military might, and believed that Reagan would use it.

Clinton came around at a very lucky time; China was not yet a world power, the USSR had collapsed and the “2nd World” that opposed us in the Cold War had vanished. The Moslems were not yet the problem they are now. Plus, Clinton’s predecessor had just put on such an overwhelming display of military superiority in the Gulf War that no one dared challenge us. So on the international scene, he wasn’t tested.

This is different. The world’s leaders know 0bama is weak and won’t fight them. They also question American power as being weakened by our economic status as the world’s #1 beggar state. 0bama is going to be challenged. While that challenge will give him a temporary spike in his approval as Americans always rally around their leader in time of crisis, we all know that handling a real crisis is above his pay grade. The only thing he can do is use his toadies in Congress to ram through socialist legislation. When a real crisis comes (I mean a really bad one, not just an oil leak), he’s going to fail worse than Jimmuh Carter. And the American people will dump him, just like Carter.


46 posted on 07/07/2010 8:18:35 AM PDT by henkster (A broken government does not merit full faith and credit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: outofstyle
They may be angry, but they still need someone to vote for. Unfortunately, we can't put "Unnamed Republican" on the ballot, and Obama is still polling fairly well against just about every Republican with a name and a face who is being talked about as a candidate.
50 posted on 07/07/2010 8:29:22 AM PDT by The Pack Knight (Duty, Honor, Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson