Why 2012 will be a GOP bloodbath

We have seen this all before, the Tea Party purification and the party in opposition moving further to ideological purity. This is not new to those who have studied and followed political history. We have seen this in virtually every election where a new president is elected. Let's start in 1960.

1952-1960 Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower held the presidency and in 1960 the GOP put out a moderate Republican Richard Nixon to run for president against John F. Kennedy, Nixon lost in one of the closest elections ever. Within 4 years a new Republican was running for president and this time he was a hard-line Conservative who passed the Ideological purity test for sure, he was defeated in one of the largest vote gaps in American history.

1968 Richard Nixon ran as a Moderate against a Moderate Hubert Humphrey and Nixon won with a 3% advantage. This led the Democrats to purify their party on ideological lines and in 1972 the Liberal darling George McGovern (the most left-wing candidate to ever run for president) was nominated, he was crushed with just 38% of the popular vote. In 1976 the Democrats nominated the Moderate Jimmy Carter and won the election with a 2% advantage.

In 1980 the Republicans nominated a Conservative darling Ronald Reagan and won that election, this led the Democrats to nominate the very Liberal former Vice-President Walter Mondale who lost the election in 1984 by 18% of the vote. In 1988 the Democratic Party was drastically changed after the DLCC came in to move the party to Neoliberalism and the right, this led to a Moderate Liberal Michael Dukakis to be defeated by Vice-President George H. W. Bush.

In 1992 the Moderate Bill Clinton was elected president over Moderate George H. W. Bush. In 2000 the Republican Party put out the Moderate Conservative George W. Bush against the Moderate Al Gore and the Republican won. In 2004 the Democrats put out the Liberal John Kerry and he lost miserably to Bush so in 2008 the Democrats put out Moderate Barack Obama against Moderate John McCain and Obama won.

So what is my point?? After every election the losing party usually goes into ideological purification. After 2008 the same occured as almost every change election it followed the same path. So this means that in 2012 it will not be the year of Moderate Republicans and with the Tea Party screaming for 'true conservatives' they will get another Goldwater like the Democrats had McGovern. When this candidate runs against the Moderate incumbent Obama (forced into the center by a presumed GOP House and/or Senate) the Republican will lose by at least 15% against Obama.

This means that 2012 will be a landslide election for Obama (like him or not) this is just history repeating itself. So don't 'kill the messenger' I am just making a connection!!

Here is an article by 'The Daily Beast' which backs up my claims:

www.thedailybeast.com...

reply to post by Misoir

This means that 2012 will be a landslide election for Obama (like him or not) this is just history repeating itself

aint going to happen

reply to post by neo96


First off we are no longer allowed to have one line post which contribute no material to the topic, yours obviously fits that category.

Second off I would like you to disprove my theory with factual evidence, please present the case for your argument.

Please don't waste my time.

reply to post by Misoir


your theory is based on just what just exactly?

past events of different eras of history in this country and with time people and their values change.

i can link any article much like you did and twist the contents to mean anything i wanted.

but what you are discounting and the author is the past 8 years of george w. bush and the past 2 years of obama

people have reached their limits with politicians.

your theory is a just a theory YOU SIR cannot prove that obama will conclusivley win in 2012.

you are discounting the next two years and future actions of the left and obama and any outside events to this country and its people.

that comment and post is rich DISPROVE SOMETHING WHICH YOU CAN NOT PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT TO ANYONE IN THIS THREAD.

and yeah theses threads are a waste of time in this persons opinion.


OBAMA WINNING IN 2012 BY A LANDSLIDE

can not be proven and its nothing but wishful thinking

Originally posted by Misoir
Moderate Liberal Michael Dukakis

the Moderate Bill Clinton

Moderate Al Gore

Liberal John Kerry

Moderate Barack Obama against Moderate John McCain and Obama won.

Moderate Dukakis? Are you serious?

Bill Clinton was forced to be moderate after the GOP took control of both houses of Congress in 1994.

Moderate Algore?...once again are you serious.

And the biggest "What the Heck" is Moderate Barack Obama. Where have you been the last two years?

Clinton pulled it off in 1996 because he checked his liberalism at the door in 1994 in fear of major backlash. Combine this with the fact that the OLD (Pre TEA Party) GOP seemed to have a tenure system for its Presidential candidates which nominated Bob Dole. Bob Dole? Come on. Do you expect Obama to moderate one iota even with the aftermath of the Republican takeover in 2010? Clinton did and survived, if Obama doesn't he will be toast. Clinton can thank the GOP for righting the ship in 1994, all Clinton did was get out of the way. Obama will not, and is not smart enough to do that.

EDIT.......you got the liberal John Kerry right...1 out of 5 isn't too good.

reply to post by Misoir


an interesting theory, although i suspect you are leaving out a lot of factors, including the way election results are manipulated, and the direction the GOP seems to be heading in terms of more and more 'pure' social conservatsm.

i also predict many will enter this thread and call you an obamabot.

reply to post by Misoir


Sorry to say this but Obama will be a one time president and congress will change hands next mid term elections

People have no many choices but they know to hold grudges and vote for anybody else but the political candidates that they have learned to hate.

reply to post by Carseller4


your notions of 'moderate' and 'liberal' appear to not be based in reality. to claim Clinton was 'far left' is absurd. The guy signed NAFTA. So much of the debate in the us has shifted to the so-called Right that anything actual 'moderate' like Bush or Obama, is extreme left' by the pro-corporate agenda that favors extreme right ideology.

reply to post by Misoir


Interesting theory and will take a bit to analyze.

In the mean time, one of my favorite quotes:

"Do not associate my name with anything you do [Modern day Republicans]. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have." - Barry Goldwater

I think though overall in regards to this pattern, we must also include what else is/was going on in the country. Separating and only looking at the data to support an idea doesn't prove to be effective in my opinion.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Misoir

 

your theory is based on just what just exactly?



OBAMA WINNING IN 2012 BY A LANDSLIDE

can not be proven and its nothing but wishful thinking

edit on 23-10-2010 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

As usual, you miss the point by a mile. He's not saying he WANTS obama to win. He's proposing a teory, and giving some reasons WHY he has formed said theory.

You coming here and sayin "Aint gonna happen" really doesnt contribute much to the conversation, other than to solidify the impression that you are against anything with obama in the headline,a nd dont read much beyond that.

reply to post by Misoir


Excellent analyses . . . . Though Kerry’s race with Bush II I thtink was close.

Also remember with Obama he might break that pattern because of the color of his skin which puts the pattern in a new dimension outside of statistics.

reply to post by Misoir


Hopefully, 2012 will be a bloodbath for BOTH parties.

With any luck, people will start to wake up, create some real 3rd way parties and boot out both establishment political parties.

Wouldn't that be a great change for once, political parties that represent the people instead of some corporate master?

One can always hope...

reply to post by justadood


and you missed this point by a mile there are other factors to be considering in that theory

man i dont need to write 4 paragraphs to convey one simple message.

the saying big words small minds comes into play on this website


there are way to many people on this website who all try to sound smarter than they are.

i just love people who sit there and tell me what i do in my own home they know just exactly what im doing and what im thinking.

yeah i am anti obama its my right to be and i am anti obama for good reason beyond that personal observations about me are not relevant to the topic at hand

reply to post by FortAnthem


Continue that logic completely though. Would we not just be creating another cycle of the same with the inclusion of a 3rd Party?

The situation we are residing within today has more to do with the engineering of politics in the early 1900s than it does with the 2-Party system, which, in our election system is inherent.

Obama is finished. Period.
There is no left, and no right. There ARE con men who say whatever they need to say to get elected.

Straddle the fence, with your ear on the ground and your finger in the wind.

Or something like that.

Anyway, these "labels", like moderate, extremist, liberal, conservative....don't mean anything because the electorate is simply not educated in that regard. They do not vote ideology, or at least, they haven't in a long while.
They vote "persona", pure animal magnetism, sexual energy, based upon grand multi-million dollar lies called campaign promises.

Time is speeding up. What used to happen in four years, or even eight, is happening in one or two. Obama is through.

Originally posted by Stewie
Obama is finished. Period.
.... Obama is through.

Well, at least the OP gave some solid reasoning behind why he made his prediction.

Cant you do the same?

reply to post by justadood

The reasoning was between the first line and the last line.

It is late here, maybe I will elaborate more in the a.m.

I suspect you're right.
I don't know about the landslide for Obama,
I think his actions will be remembered.

That being said, maybe if the Dems get a good spanking,
Obama will be spurred to think ahead, forcing him to represent the people.

I said MAYBE!

I do believe, thought, the Repubs are only going to be successful because of the Dems failure.

They're all the same anyway.

reply to post by Misoir

Originally posted by Misoir
so in 2008 the Democrats put out Moderate Barack Obama against Moderate John McCain and Obama won.

When I read this part, I had to laugh. Since when has Obama ever been a Moderate? From the very beginning of his political career, he's never stepped foot this side a extreme far-left.

Obama is the new poster child of Far-Left. Besides, it doesn't matter to me who gets into Congress any more as long as they are smart enough and courageous enough and determined to get this nation back on the right track (I hope I didn't sound to much like Stuart Smalley).

What the American people want to see in Washington is people willing to work and not view their jobs as a 2-6 year, free-ride luxurious vacation.

Originally posted by Intelearthling
reply to post by Misoir

 

Originally posted by Misoirso in 2008 the Democrats put out Moderate Barack Obama against Moderate John McCain and Obama won.

When I read this part, I had to laugh. Since when has Obama ever been a Moderate? From the very beginning of his political career, he's never stepped foot this side a extreme far-left.

Obama is the new poster child of Far-Left.

Actually, no.

Not at all. Obama s a centrist, at best.
Dennis Kucinich is a leftist.
w need a terminology primer here for those who believe the 'liberal media' myth.