Someone could still challenge Obama for the democrat nomination.
No viable Democrat candidate will challenge the President for at least the reason all they have to do is wait four years and have a much better chance at getting funding.
Originally posted by moon1969 Wow. How misinformed you are.
Funny how everybody says that but gives no reason for it.
Why not give me an example like this:
People love wars deep down inside so they won't vote for Nader. War fatigue is a myth imposed on us by the liberal news media.
Nader spoke out against corporate personhood and everybody loves big corporations. They make the air clean and they are people just like us. I can hear their hearts beating from here.
He saved too many lives with those pesky automobile standards and that led to overpopulation which is causing global warming. Liberals hate him for that so he can't win.
Originally posted by Metal Brain Funny how everybody says that but gives no reason for it.
Why not give me an example like this:
People love wars deep down inside so they won't vote for Nader. War fatigue is a myth imposed on us by the liberal news media.
Nader spoke out against corporate personhood and everybody loves big corporations. They make the air clean and they are people ...[text shortened]... to overpopulation which is causing global warming. Liberals hate him for that so he can't win.
The Democrats have never forgave Nader for giving Florida (and thus the presidency) to Bush in 2000. In Florida in 2000, a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. The Democrat rank-and-file despise Nader.
Sure, many Democrats agree with some of Nader's eco-friendly, consumer-friendly, and worker-friendly positions. But he is not viewed as viable. Nader will never be president. Even in the heyday of his popularity a couple of decades ago, he could have never reached the presidency. And there is a reason that Nader ran independent. He was never capable of securing the Democrat nomination.
The main desire of Democrats, by and far, obviously is to retain the White House in 2012. Democrats know that nominating Nader would give the presidency to the Republicans in 2012. It is not even considered a rational thought. It is not even considered worth discussing. Do you seriously think that Nader could win the general election??? It would be an electroal landslide for the Republicans. He probably wouldn't even get Massachusetts if Romney were the Republican candidate.
Originally posted by moon1969 The Democrats have never forgave Nader for giving Florida (and thus the presidency) to Bush in 2000. In Florida in 2000, a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. [b]The Democrat rank-and-file despise Nader.
Sure, many Democrats agree with some of Nader's eco-friendly, consumer-friendly, and worker-friendly positions. But he is not viewed as viable. ...[text shortened]... blicans. He probably wouldn't even get Massachusetts if Romney were the Republican candidate.[/b]
The Democrats have no right to blame Nader for the lack of run off voting in this country. It is not his fault at all and it is irrational to blame him and I reject that claim altogether. Democrats don't hold a grudge with Nader. Who talked you into that nonsense?
Your claim that Nader is not a viable candidate is also silly. Name 3 positions he has taken that make him not viable. I need to get a good reason, not just a "that is how it is" non explanation. You sound like a cave man when you say stuff like you do. Democrat no like Nader, now kill boar and eat.
Monday afternoon (8/29), Les Kinsolving asking Mr. Claire Shipman (a/k/a Jay Carney) about the 2012 presidential election:
KINSOLVING: Why is the president certain that Hillary won't run against him?
CARNEY: The president's focused not on any election. He's focused right now on doing his job to grow the economy, create jobs, ensure that Americans who were in the path of this hurricane are taken care of --
KINSOLVING: I understand, but --
CARNEY: -- so that's what he's focused on.
KINSOLVING: -- you're running way from this question. I mean, can you guarantee that -- I mean are, you sure that Hillary is not gonna run?
CARNEY: You'd have to ask her. We're fairly confident.
[i]While no republican presidential candidate yet makes Obama's team "shake in [their] shoes...," President Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, tells the U.S. News and World Report that Governor Jon Hu ou're curious:
So basically, the entire lamestream media, the White House and the entire Democrat party are putting everything they have into trying to destroy Perry, Romney and Bachmann, even though they have no chance against Obama and he's not afraid of them at all...and Huntsman actually scares them (the White House) at least a little bit? Plouffe actually expects us to believe that Huntsman is the guy that they think could beat Obama? (not sure why this is italicized)
Originally posted by moon1969 The left may be unhappy with the President but they have no where else to go.
That situation generally leads to lots of people sitting it out, and Obama didn't win on overwhelming support from the left. Independents who where supposed to fall into McCain's camp went for Obama.
This time the "Yes we can.....and Hope and Change" will be looked at a bit more realistically. Slogans can't explain away incompetance and impotence.
Originally posted by moon1969 The Democrats have never forgave Nader for giving Florida (and thus the presidency) to Bush in 2000. In Florida in 2000, a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. [b]The Democrat rank-and-file despise Nader.
Sure, many Democrats agree with some of Nader's eco-friendly, consumer-friendly, and worker-friendly positions. But he is not viewed as viable. ...[text shortened]... blicans. He probably wouldn't even get Massachusetts if Romney were the Republican candidate.[/b]
" The Democrat rank-and-file despise Nader."
People are forgetful, and most lefties like Nader rhetoric. He may not be as "unelectable" as you think.
The problem for Democrats, and for any party with an unpopular incumbent President, is that the incumbent takes all the air out of the room. The VP and High cabinet people are not likely to run. What's left is a contender from the past, with charisma, or a young lion.
Gore or Kerry, no charisma. Nader at least has that.
Originally posted by FMF I think Nader wouldn't stand a chance against Obama.
Not so sure. Remember that in American primaries only a small percentage of the electorate votes, usually the most engaged and most firmly ideological.
Originally posted by normbenign Hillary Clinton, but she lost last time.
Pressure Grows on Hillary to Challenge Sinking Obama
but she would beat him this time, it would be a nasty fight, but Obama has done nothing like the "hope and promise" he ran on.....
now lets see him deport his Uncle?
President Obama’s accused drunken-driving uncle — who was busted after a near collision with a Framingham cop — has had a valid Social Security number for at least 19 years, despite being an illegal immigrant ordered to be deported back to Kenya, the Herald has learned.
Mike Rogers, a spokesman for Cleveland immigration attorney Margaret Wong, who is representing Onyango, said he “wouldn’t know how” Onyango obtained a Social Security number. Wong is the same lawyer who represented the president’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango, in her fight to win asylum last year. Reached at her apartment in a South Boston public housing complex yesterday, Zeituni Onyango said of her brother’s arrest: “Why don’t you go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D.C., and ask your president? Not me.” She then hung up on a reporter.
Asked about the issue yesterday, Gov. Deval Patrick said: “You know my stance: Illegal is illegal. We need comprehensive immigration reform.”
so it is illegal to have a s.s. card when you are not a resident of the USA right? federal crime right? Does Obama give his relatives special consideration?
2012 here we come....
30 Aug '11 16:01
1 in 4 want to dump Obama
Back to Top