The Consequence of Obama going Nuclear

As Randy pointed out below, another day, another shameful lie from Team Obama.

Obama’s campaign has been one of the ugliest on record, and it is only August.  One consequence of this is that most of the Santorum or Gingrich backers who were skeptical of Romney are now on board.  Truth be told, at this point, I don’t know too many on the right who wouldn’t vote for Kelly Bundy over Obama.

I previously predicted Chris Christie would be Romney’s VP and I think that could still happen.  But what I am sure about is that Obama’s scorched earth tactics will allow Romney to pick a more centrist VP than he otherwise would have.  Mitt doesn’t need to pick a Tea Party superstar to galvanize the right.  Obama has already galvinized it.  The Christies, Condis, and Petraeuses of the world are in play to a degree I would not have expected a few months back.

I have another, more radical idea.  There’s a politican out there who would play incredibly well with moderates.  Picking him would just ooze bi-partisanship.  He would be an excellent pick from the perspective of a key constituency that the Right is trying to court.  As it happens, he will be out of a job in 2012, largely because of his independence.

It is a little crazy and some on the right would go nuts.  But it is possible, because of Obama.

Comments

  1. Randy in Richmond says:

    Sounds like another Joe to me. I need to think about this one. It would be unique.

  2. innuendos can be lies and speculation finely tuned can be lies. lies have become part of the partisan political process because there is no check and balance system or penalty for lying. But the people are not as gullible as one may think. the website has no author, no list of members of the new republican jewish coalition and the bloggers have no idea of why jews vote a certain way. this is an attempt to place the jews in the underclass of people. Shalom.

  3. Ryan Morgan says:

    “the website has no author” which website are you referring to? I’m confused both on how a website could not have no author and also why this is relevant.

    “no list of members of the new republican jewish coalition and the bloggers have no idea of why jews vote a certain way.”
    Well “Jews” are a pretty heterogeneous group, so you have a point. But “no idea?” Really? So supporting Israel has absolutely nothing to do with it?

    “this is an attempt to place the jews in the underclass of people”
    This comment is so batty, I literally have no idea how to respond. My view is that Jews, as a people, are brilliant. They achieve so much in so many fields relative to their numbers, it is scary. I have no idea on what basis you are making this extreme assertion.

  4. The Lorax says:

    Lieberman? Yes, PLEASE pick him. Hahaha. The race looks closer nationally, but when you look at the electoral math, Romney’s path to the presidency is getting smaller and smaller.

    Also, Democrats have way over-performed expectations in the Senate. There’s no way we’ll lose the Senate. I’m entertaining bets from those who disagree. If we could just shore up McCaskill in Missouri it’s literally impossible for us to lose the Senate.

    Cheers!

  5. Ryan Morgan says:

    I somewhat agree on Lorax’s second point… I think the Dems are more likely to hold the Senate than they should be at this point. And from what little I know, the results in MO last night won’t help much.

    Of course, if anyone but Thompson wins next week, we’ll be saying the same thing about Wisconsin….

  6. Ryan Morgan says:

    Unfortunately, until I get the steak dinner I am owed from betting on Romney to win the nomination way before it was cool, I’m not making any more bets on this forum. 🙂

  7. Randy in Richmond says:

    I suspect Brown will lose Massachusetts. Missouri, North Dakota and Nebraska, will be 3 pick ups for the Republicans–a net pick-up of 2. Before going to the Senate toss-up states it’s now 51–49.

    Based on polls–not hope–the following states are statistical ties:
    Florida
    Indiana
    Virginia
    Wisconsin

    Each of these states now has a Democratic Senator. I don’t see this as anywhere near settled except to say the Democrats will lose their 60 seat filibuster-proof advantage. This is a victory in itself for the Republicans. Like Cindy, it will not bother me to see 4 more years of gridlock in the nation’s Congress.

    All of this is subject to change–either way. But this is where they are now.

  8. Who owes you a steak?

  9. Race 4 2012 website.

  10. The Lorax says:

    Nice spin, Randy. But even though 2/3rds of all seats up for grabs this year are held by Democrats, and we had a number of retirements, really there are only 12 competitive seats. 7 Dem and 5 Republican. That is not a “Republican victory” in anyone’s mind but yours.

    Dems will pick up Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada. Maine is a no-brainer. We’ll prevail in MA–the math is just too difficult for Brown. And the unions + latinos will put Berkeley over in NV.

    We will retain Ohio, Florida, Montana, and Virginia. You guys are wasting tens of millions on Sherrod Brown. Connie Mack won’t win because he is a bad candidate. Tester will win only because he’s “taking on Obama” and Kaine has the advantage. George Allen is still King Macaca.

    Dems will lose Nebraska. That’s a no-brainer as well.

    Tossups are Wisconsin, Missouri, North Dakota, and Indiana. I like Tammy but she’s got an uphill battle, and McCaskill is probably going down, let’s be honest. Heitkamp is actually polling ahead in ND which is why I find it curious you’re sure she will lose.

    That right there was a complete analysis. Also, Randy, it has already been 2 years since Dems lost their 60 seat majority in the Senate in case you missed it…

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    Lorax
    No spin here. I missed Maine, you’re right. The rest are all toss ups. I have no problem still saying the Senate is up for grabs and could easily be a Republican victory-based on polls, not wishes.

  12. “jews are brilliant”. the tone is to patronize. FYI, there are jews who are not “brilliant” and there are jews who are Republicans for a long time, there are jews who do not support Israel in war with their neighbors and there are jews that are poor. the USA supports Israel because they are our only friend in the hot bed of anti-American sentiment. all Presidents have recognized that. BTW, we also support Pakistan. again, who writes that blog? Romney will still be elected President despite the lack of real compassion for people instead of their pocket book. Shalom.

  13. Ryan Morgan says:

    “jews are brilliant”. the tone is to patronize. FYI, there are jews who are not “brilliant” and there are jews who are Republicans for a long time, there are jews who do not support Israel in war with their neighbors and there are jews that are poor.

    Yes, my statement was a generalization and there are exceptions in all directions. Why is that relevant? If we can’t generalize, we literally cannot think. Everything has an exception. We can either put 17 disclaimers and 44 astericks on everything we believe, or we can just say it and trust people will understand. How many Nobel Prize winners per million people do Jews have again? How does that compare with Ukranians or Sudanese or Baptists?

    the USA supports Israel because they are our only friend in the hot bed of anti-American sentiment. all Presidents have recognized that.

    That’s a big reason. I don’t think that’s the only reason.

    ” who writes that blog? ”

    Um, bloggers? Just like any other blog?

    “Romney will still be elected President despite the lack of real compassion for people instead of their pocket book.”

    Okay, now even looking past the fact that you are just parroting the libels preached in Obama’s ads, why that relevant? I’d rather have a president whose policies helped the economy and wouldn’t turn his back on our allies around the world than a really compassionate guy who proved himself to be completely incompetent.