Skip to main content

This election cycle should be another utter disaster for the Democratic Party.

Should be.

But it doesn't look like it will turn out that way. At all.

I think that when the history books are written about campaign 2012 the common themes will be generally unkind not only to Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney and VP nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, but to the GOP and to the extremist Conservative Movement they all serve as well. I think that history will record that Mitt Romney bungled so much so often that he did as much damage to himself in the longrun as the Obama campaign did to him. But also that this was the first election where the GOP's long suicidal march to a rump party out of demographic step with America really showed up painfully for the GOP.

They are blowing this. All of them. While the Obama campaign is an excellent one, and Obama is a far superior candidate than Romney in almost every way a wonk could measure, this is bigger than Obama and the Democrats doing a better job. I believe we are witnessing a historic meeting of incompetence and unpreparedness slamming up against the political reality of undeniable demographic shifts. A mash-up of history occuring at the worst possible time for a hollow shell of a man and the equally empty movement he longs to champion into the White House.

Mitt Romney literally had years to prepare for the Bain questions. He also literally had years to fluff all of his tax returns in preparation for not only this campaign, but the last one in 2008. He also had years to come up with ways to soften his own image and to put his own fine patina of well-polished bullshit on his variation of the same old Rightwing socio-economic plans to grandly fuck everybody over but the rich, the very rich, and those rich enough to be like him.

If you gave Bill Clinton or Barack Obama weeks to prepare, let alone years to prepare, for something coming up, it would not only be handled but it might be turned into a political masterstoke.

But Romney isn't alone. The GOP, as well, has had at least two decades to prepare for the demographic changes that are threatening to turn what should be a rout into a embarassing underperformance for the ages. The rise of the woman voter, or of America becoming a majority-minority nation, those things were not secrets. They didn't happen like waves of ninja sneaking into a Shogun's castle, they were rising factors that have been carefully documented and tracked by conservative, liberal, moderate, and non-partisan political operations, think tanks, and pundits alike for decades as they evolved. Being surprised by them is like getting overrun by a turtle.  

Mitt Romney is a myth. He's a barely competent buffoon born on third with a silver spoon in his mouth cast as a self-made and ruthlessly competent shark among guppies. He's so incompetent and not-ready-for-prime-time that he thought he could pretend his inconvenient tenure as Massachusetts governor, along with it's state-level HCR effort that essentially inspired taking that effort nationally as the "hated" ACA, and his endless array of flip-flopping could all be ignored away. Hell, the man thought he could run an entire presidential campaign from start to finish without a single detail. The stealth white knight on a white horse. The vague mist of national political avatars and paladins desiring to be given command of the most powerful political office on the face of the Earth.

The Republican Party could see Romney from a mile away. They knew who he was, and they nominated him anyway because, for as much as people in the traditional media like to go on and on and on about the power of the Tea Party, it was his turn. That is how the Republican Party works. Like fellow disasters Sen. Bob Dole and Sen. John McCain before him, it was his turn.  

And he has been fucking it up royally ever since the Republican version of the  Marquess of Queensberry rules people choose not to see all aligned the stars in his favor. It's been one fuck up after cock up after another. A mistake isn't enough, no, it has to be amplified with fail until it takes your breath away.  

Not unveiling Paul Ryan at the convention in a big splash was a huge mistake. The air was out of that balloon before Tampa arrived. That alone would have been bad enough. But not bad enough for the Romney campaign. No. They went and turned the amp to eleven. By letting it leak that the nominee was Ryan, and then instead of keeping them all guessing, by doing the out and out revelation that the VP was Ryan in what amounted to a Friday newsdump far enough before the convention tha it pushed a big mistake into the gobsmacking territory of naked outright political malpractice.

Who got fired for this? Nobody.

Take Tampa. The RNC. First, overhyping a "special guest", then letting the media see it was Clint Eastwood hours and hours early, and then letting Clint Eastwood speak in such a prominent place. That was a series of mistakes. A series of mistakes wasn't good enough for Romney/Ryan 2012. No.

They had to one-up themselves. Bumping the only chance of a primetime airing of the Mitt Romney is Awesome campaign propaganda film, the only time in the entire race that they would get such an uncritical airing of unadulterated and unrebutted propaganda to sell Myth Romney to the American people, for Clint Eastwood. Only to then be treated to Clint Eastwood... talking to a chair, to a foul-mouthed fantasy of Barack Obama, the strawman Barack Obama the mob fantasizes about, Obama as 'Uncouth Negro Hooligan Who Doesn't Know His Place'. Not only do you lose the huge and uncensored moment to sell Myth Romney, you lose the 24 hour narrative for the next day. Over a piece of failed glibertarian performance art.

That clusterfuck of zipping your penis up in your pants at the urinal after peeing on your own leg moment was the entire Romney/Ryan 2012 campaign in a nutshell.

The difference between a mistake or an error and outright political malpractice.

A lot of the people at the top of the Romney/Ryan campaign shouldn't be able to get a job for a while when this is all said and done. And they won't have the ability to create a cottage industry out of Palin post-mortems like navel-gazing for fun and profit McCain mediocrity Steve Scmitt has.

But this was also a massive failure of the Movement Conservative Right meeting the GOP's problems with women and minorities as we move towards a majority minority nation finally coming onto the scene.

They should be surfing a tsunami right now.

Instead, they don't have an answer as to why they aren't surfing a tsunami right now.

The economy sucks. Citizen's United is completely unbound. The Democrats got conned into two long years of deficit fetishism that is not remotely in their or the nation's political best interests, the traditional media is still more than willing to spin for the GOP when it comes to their endless trainwrecks and bold-faced big and small lies, even overtly naked sexist implosions like the Akin debacle to undeniable racial resentment issues like the nut-tossing incident at the RNC in Tampa were bigger than Howard Kurtzism. CNN couldn't even competently fig-leaf cover one of their own employees of color getting humiliated and abused for the 'crime' of being black and a non-Conservative of Color at the RNC in Tampa for fear of being attacked as 'liberally biased'. You know you have the deck stacked when the legacy media will help the GOP cover-up a racial scandal of one of their own employees out of fear and false balance.  

This is what we have all been waiting for. The shift finally shows up at the polls.

Obama should be down by 5-10 points, and he would be if we still lived in the America that the GOP has gotten used to chasing a 50.01 majority in. Democrats should be sure that the Senate is about to go GOP with a buffer of seats beyond the outright majority to spare. Instead, the President and the Democrats are not only still in this, they could do quite well. How the hell do you pull money out of New Mexico to shore up... North Dakota? Write off Pennsylvania entirely on the party front weeks before the election?

That's America changing on the GOP right in front of its eyes.

America has changed in ways that even your massive unfair advantages, from the media to the Billionaires, to the state-level ratfucking machines, cannot guarantee you a win. Now, Romney might still find a way to win. Or the GOP might find a way to take the Senate with a bare majority. Or both. But that would actually be a surpising outcome at this point. It would be the unexpected outcome, not the pre-ordained one. This has got to be a dark time to be a Movement Conservative Republican who has half a brain, because the deck is pretty stacked against the current President and the Democratic Party out there right now. This is a moment of a confluence of dire circumstances for Democrats that is not only unlikely to happen again soon, but actually unlikely to come around again. The economy will be vastly improved in two years. Democrats will have had more than one Citizen's United and voter disenfranchisement racket cycle under their belts. Demographics have shifted, and shifted in ways that the GOP is completely unprepared to survive in let alone thrive in, and they are not going back to what they were in the bad old days of Willie Horton and the Jessie Helms 'hands' ad.  

What must be terrifying to the Right is that they might be about to blow the last national election where lazily chasing angry old white people and their racial resentments, married to a lingeringly horrible economy, and the perfect storm of Teahadi state-level Democratic voter disenfranchisement meeting Citizen's United was all aligned to put a Republican in the White House and sweep the Congress.

And it doesn't appear to be happening, not just because the Democrats have been so ruthless and brutally efficient that they have pantsed Romney and the GOP but because the changes in America are bigger that the superiority of the Obama campaign and the Democrats being right on the issues can account for.  

Barring a politically suicidal "Grand Bargain" on Social Security and Medicare (and nobody on our side should be kidding themselves about how dangerous this upcoming lameduck session could be to the social safety net, the Republicans aren't going to stay stupid about Democrats being willing to slit their own political throats forever), the Democrats will be in a much, much better place economically, politically, tactically dealing with the faux voter fraud push, but especially demographically thanks to the race-baiting Right, for years to come.

Barack Obama's heartiness in the polling was as much a warning to the Right as anything about Obama and the Democrats. If we can just get through this cycle. If we can just keep the social safety net safe along with the ACA the Right wants to kill so badly, I think we will be alright.

The Right needed to re-boot, the smart ones in their camp all knew that they needed to reboot, but they were shutdown by the crazies and the establishment alike and they all went with what worked in the past anyway.

If it is epic failing in 2012, Imagine what 2016 or 2020 will look like.

If we can just hunker down and fight like hell and get to the other side of this one, I have real hope for the first time since 2008 that we can turn the corner. Turn the corner and change a lot of really bad things many of us feared would be things we would be stuck with in the future all around and leave a better country for the generations to come after us after all. I have hope. Because I see the change.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (200+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    deep, TXdem, Dallasdoc, martini, LI Mike, bnasley, twigg, rasbobbo, skod, purplepenlady, Had Enough Right Wing BS, fou, mindara, alba, Davui, Free Jazz at High Noon, pvasileff, MartyM, rogerdaddy, rexymeteorite, uciguy30, Emerson, cyberpuggy, Wheever, Roadette, ardyess, Bob Love, Witgren, Zack from the SFV, GreenPA, DEMonrat ankle biter, rsmpdx, Ckntfld, RebeccaG, exMnLiberal, palantir, My Spin, Hanging Up My Tusks, FG, 88kathy, histOries Marko, DrWhk, thomask, blaneyboy, Trotskyrepublican, pimutant, Gowrie Gal, GenXangster, WFBMM, hungrycoyote, Shockwave, IntentionallyKind, smileycreek, Sassy, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, fhcec, Sychotic1, yawnimawke, Floande, deha, dalfireplug, BrooklynJohnny, Creosote, sockpuppet, Invictus88, David PA, ChicDemago, Jennifer Clare, LSmith, steamed rice, IreGyre, some other george, Dood Abides, DRo, chicagobleu, aarrgghh, Joy of Fishes, jeanette0605, emidesu, BB10, matrix, Melanie in IA, CA ridebalanced, chicago minx, MRA NY, golem, RandomNonviolence, LieparDestin, taiping1, stegro, Chi, kerflooey, aaraujo, spooks51, coppercelt, AreDeutz, JTinDC, Gemina13, MikePhoenix, BlogDog, UFOH1, Loquatrix, WI Deadhead, sparkysgal, nofear, waltinpa, LarisaW, oceanrain, astral66, SD Goat, NoMoreLies, karmsy, TheGreatLeapForward, HappyinNM, US Blues, Brinnon, ATFILLINOIS, Bogleg, kestrel9000, DuzT, mkor7, science nerd, TX Freethinker, statsone, Haningchadus14, Vicky, Only Needs a Beat, Mentatmark, Its a New Day, Matt Z, wasatch, mali muso, n8rboy, camlbacker, isabel, leftist vegetarian patriot, Keone Michaels, Heart n Mind, teknohed, badger1968, newpioneer, annan, Onomastic, Panacea Paola, Frank In WA, Liberal Mole, mbh1023, alnep, Bailey, PoliticalJunkessa, SmartRat, suejazz, catly, mellowinman, muddy boots, NWTerriD, Crabby Abbey, Duke1676, immigradvocate, edrie, middleagedhousewife, Siri, frsbdg, pamelabrown, Lefty Coaster, ladywithafan, Mighty Ike, Mimikatz, Steveningen, doroma, Little Lulu, devis1, Dvalkure, lineatus, RatCitySqueaker, maggiejean, ferg, miracle11, SaintC, miscanthus, SneakySnu, psnyder, AlyoshaKaramazov, Leslie in KY, Tea and Strumpets, liberte, JimWilson, wxorknot, slowbutsure, roses, liz, Deep Dark, rukidingme, Wreck Smurfy, madhaus, hulagirl, lostinamerica, virginislandsguy, davidincleveland, HCKAD

    I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

    by LeftHandedMan on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:35:18 PM PDT

    •  Excellent discussion (93+ / 0-)

      I'd like to amplify a couple of points I think deserve more discussion.

      First, the Republicans nominated a clueless upper class twit for two reasons:  the plutocratic wing of the party is still in charge, and shows it when the biggest decisions are made; and the insurgent wingnutocracy can't mount a credible candidate because it is not a credible political movement.  What lunatic-enabler can be taken seriously?  It would take a demagogue of truly historic evil to bring those two wings together and sell the crackpot party to the country in a convincing win.

      Second, Democrats are playing populists on teevee.  They haven't governed as the New Deal party, having long been more enamored of Rockefeller Republicanism.  But the Obama campaign is going against the party grain by showing an actual survival instinct, and knows what to say and how to say it.  

      The bad economy is threatening to be trumped by demographics, true.  That's an incredibly important point.  But equally important is why the economy is bad.  The middle class has been slowly strangled by decades of mostly bipartisan corporatist policy, and is now giving off death rattles.  This is not a problem for which a vulture capitalist is a plausible solution.  The Obama team knows this, and is going for the jugular on the rich-fuck-laid-you-off-and-cheats-on-his-taxes front.  This is smart tactics, but it remains to be seen if the Obama administration will be as smart strategically.

      The Occupy movement was a shot across the bow to the corporatist power structure that basically owns both parties.  This is the larger historical point that is yet to be decided.  If, after the election, there is a "responsible" budget deal that screws old folks and underwater homeowners and the 99% generally, it won't matter if a few pennies are taken from under the sofa cushions of billionaires.  If the Obama administration doesn't turn to policies to rebuild the middle class and begin to reverse the galloping increase in income inequality that is destroying the America we know, the Democrats could be almost as bad off politically as the Republicans.  Politics hasn't worked for average folks for a long time, and cynical detachment may give way to more active resentment sooner than we think.  Zuccotti Park was a warning to both parties.  Democrats, led by the president, will pay it only lip service at their peril.

      For the love of money is the root of all evil; and while some have coveted after it, they have erred from the faith and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (1 Timothy 6:10)

      by Dallasdoc on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:08:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The GOP saw 2012 as a loss all along (49+ / 0-)

        That's been my opinion for almost two years now. When no one (besides Romney) with A-Team name recognition threw their hat into the ring, I figured the professionals had written 2012 off as a probable loss.

        Mitt Romney is too old and has too slim a resume to wait to 2016. It was 2012 or never.

        for John Huntsman just wanted name recognition for 2016. Everyone else was a vanity / lunacy candidate who for various reasons have no shelf life.

        No one with a shot at 2016 wanted to be branded by a 2012 loss in the general election.  So my read across the poker table is the GOP pros have seen Mr Obama as the winner all along.

        •  I don't know who this A-team is (47+ / 0-)

          A narcissist gourmand with an anger management problem.  Yet another Bush?  An even more boring Mormon millionaire?  Another one of their menagerie of extremist governors?  Lyin' Ryan?  I don't think Republicans are going to be able to get out of the corner they've painted themselves into for quite some time to come.  What constituency do they have to replace the crayzees?  How do they win if they give in to the crayzees?  

          The only way they have any chance is if Democrats keep trying to split the difference and muddy the contrast between the parties.  In a depressionary time, unabashed plutocracy is not the ticket to national office.  But the key to killing the Republicans' chances for a generation or two is to embrace economic populism by campaigning to rebuild the middle class.  Hopefully Obama has learned from the mistakes of his first term, and understands that now.

          For the love of money is the root of all evil; and while some have coveted after it, they have erred from the faith and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (1 Timothy 6:10)

          by Dallasdoc on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:34:06 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  A-Team just internet shorthand (22+ / 0-)

            I did not see any notable Republicans throw their hat in the ring except Mitt Romney. And like all of America, I never saw him as a strong candidate. If the GOP pros really thought Mr Obama was as vulnerable as they said, every ambition-loving one of them would be chomping at the bit. That's just been my reading is all.

            As far as long-term change, IMO I honestly think what we are seeing is the pendulum at the dying end of its 30-some year swing to the right. The moment it stopped was when John Boehner blinked during the credit-rating debacle. That instant marked the high-water mark for GOP institutionalized wingnuttery.

            •  Notable Republicans? (26+ / 0-)

              What notable Republicans are there who were ready in 2012?

              Christie? What's notable about him? A resume thinner than Sarah Palin's.

              Rubio?  Ditto.

              Jeb Bush? Four years after Dubya left town? I don't think so.

              Palin could have been ready in 2012 if she'd stayed in office, spent four years traveling abroad and reading her briefing books, but she was too damned lazy to do what she needed to do to become anything but a national laughing stock.

              Pawlenty, Perry, and Newt were about the best the GOP could put up against Romney, himself an incredibly weak candidate. Former Utah governor Jon Huntsman was too sensible to be taken seriously in the GOP.

              It's a sign of how weak the GOP bench is this year that Romney had to turn to a congressman nobody but Kossites have ever heard of to round out the ticket.

              Obama's been blessed with a lot of assets in this election cycle. A half-decent GOP candidate would blow him out of the water. But instead, we get this bungler Romney running with this liar Ryan on a platform that makes manifest the GOP's contempt for women, minorities, the elderly, and working people. Obama's biggest blessing may well be the good fortune of facing such flawed and unattractive opponents.

              •  Huckleby for one (6+ / 0-)

                Did well in 2008. Does not enter 2012. Now at the RNC he's back to the political arena. Now there's talk of him running in 2016.

                Bush. Everyone knows that name. Talk he might run in 2016 too.

                Your mileage varies. So be it.

                •  You think they'll run? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Only Needs a Beat, LeftHandedMan

                  I don't. Why should they? They know what is involved, and they don't need it. Nor do they really want it.

                  Especialy huckabee. If he wanted it, he would be running NOW, while people still remember him. 4 yrs from now he'll just be another face on fox, and won't be thought of as anything other than that.

                  •  I'm sorry (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Onomastic, LeftHandedMan

                    It is impossible to undo a thought one had almost 1 1/2 years ago. Since the foundation to that thought, the GOP slate is incredibly weak, has been borne out by events, it is hard to find a reason to attempt that feat.

                    Especialy huckabee. If he wanted it, he would be running NOW, while people still remember him. 4 yrs from now he'll just be another face on fox, and won't be thought of as anything other than that.
                    Even you supports the thesis. Mike Huckabe did not run, so we know that in fact he did not calculate his odds of victory to be good. This is a man who ran a national campaign for President. Now we are to believe he had no interest in the job? If he thought he would win the job of a lifetime in 2012 he would have taken the chance.
                    •  I'm not saying he wouldn't still want it (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Quicklund, Onomastic, LeftHandedMan

                      But the longer he stays out of politics and in that pundit job, the less chance he has of being taken seriously and attracting the serious money it takes to run.

                      Has anybody ever run a serious campaign with a real shot at winning from a job as a reporter? I don't think so.

                      •  Well, he spoke at the convention (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        LeftHandedMan

                        He was given a speaking gig at the convention and those plums are fought for pretty hard. Then during the convention the chattering heads start floating the idea of a 2016 run. So on one hand my initial thoughts were like yours. when he stayed out I figured Gov Hucklby had decided to make money instead of do politics.

                        But then he shows up at the convention and trial balloons start rising. So maybe he will run in 2016.

                        At any rate my original point is reading the GOP across the poker table back in spring of 2011. I saw a GOP bluffing back then and I cannot undo what I thought then. Nor do I regret the chips I've pushed into the center of the table. Come November when the hands are laid down I expect our side will be the ones raking in the chips.

                •  It was Romney's turn (10+ / 0-)
                  "it was his turn. That is how the Republican Party works. Like fellow disasters Sen. Bob Dole and Sen. John McCain before him, it was his turn."
                  Yeah, that's how the GOP does it.  But whose turn will it be in 2016?  You can expect the usual suspects, Huckabee, Christie, Rubio, Bush, maybe Ryan, to be in the running. But I don't see anyone in that list who would fit the usual Republican procedure of being next in line.  What do they do, if there is no one who is "next in line".  The 2016 primary could be even more interesting than 2012 was.

                  "Safety and security are the result of collective consensus. We owe our children, the most vulnerable citizens in our society, a life free of violence and fear." - Nelson Mandela. Donate to TREE Climbers

                  by TX Freethinker on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:48:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  I think 2016 (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LeftHandedMan

                  belongs to Rubio. And with 4 years of seasoning, he will be a formidable opponent. That man has some talent.

                  I never saw him as a credible option even for the VP nod this year because he looks about 12 years old, is in fact only 41 years old, and is still pretty new to the national scene.

                  But he is an extremely gifted politician -- I think in the JFK, Clilnton, Obama mold. And he electrifies the base while solving the "angry old white men" problem. Give him 4 years to age a bit, to become a fixture in national politics, to get a few actual accomplishments under his belt, and we had better have a very strong candidate in 2016 if we want to beat him.

                  "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

                  by NWTerriD on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:43:58 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Next time the new faces (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LeftHandedMan

                  Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, who will pull a Romney if he thinks he can't be reelected, John Kasich, ditto, Rick Snyder, ditto, Rick Scott though maybe too extreme, and of course Christie, who could run with Ryan as the contrast ticket, but Ryan would take the top spot.

                  We will have Kirsten Gillibrand, Jeff Merkley or another Western Senator, I  suppose Andrew Cuomo, hopefully some new governors who will be elected this time around, some of Obama's cabinet who were governors etc.  I'll take our chances.

                  And we will finally have a debate about climate change given the ice-free summer in the Arctic Ocean and more drought and extreme weather.

                  The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

                  by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:35:06 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Jeb was my pick last time, but his brother has (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LeftHandedMan

                  poisoned the well for him. I lost $5 betting on Jeb! Assuming Obama wins, 2016 will be a battle between the "new talent" and Ryan. Bushes need not apply.

                  Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

                  by LongTom on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 12:46:58 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  yeah her college career was a tip off... (7+ / 0-)

                on how her life would proceed after that... dabble here, dabble there, grow bored, move on. Actually studying for longer than a week or two... actually reading the textbooks? Nah, Maybe the cliff notes and or a mentor or pal to crib from... get pointers, bullet point digests VERBALLY... none of that boring reading stuff... Girls just wanna have fun... but also get gold stars for being moral and Christian etc. And that is EZ too. The getting saved club versions of Christianity offer quick promotion to head of the class saved and special... it is homecoming queen, favored of the lord and backstage pass all rolled into one.

                So the same mindset and success formula would just naturally continue. From Mayor of Wasilla to the energy board to Governor using the same feckless, a-moral sets of shortcuts, networking with users she used in turn. "I'm special" in the nasty sense taken to its logical political extreme in shallow personality politics. No studying up on facts needed... she was both taking advantage of the candidate packaging mindset that has ruled the right since Reagan and being used by them. Hopping from one scripted love fest to another while flubbing her lines and leaking ignorance just a bit too often.

                The hubris of the string pullers and message shapers that they can take any suitable, saleable exterior and fill the  inside of a tool candidate with whatever their focus groups tell them will resonate no matter how shallow or hollow the raw material is. The controllers of the GOP have such scorn and derision for actual democracy that their coexistent underlying fear of it means that they do not understand it well enough to avoid underestimating it.

                The curtain on the naked emperor wizard gets drawn back eventually and more and more people will not ignore the lies behind the distractions of the captured media and the quadrennial flashy manifestations of the candidate marketing... That set of promotional gimmicks eventually diverges too much from reality. The all or nothing manipulators cannot or will not see or understand when they have gone too far. They know it is possible, even inevitable but like anyone in a flim flam operation scam... the ones who are raking it in and have not sufficiently cashed out will not voluntarily pull back, dial down and take some modest reductions. No, ALL or NOTHING. A big scary bet for them now.

                They did it already in the housing bubble and in the smaller bubbles before that but they just cannot take reality for an answer. Denial and doubling down "always" worked in the past and set the stage for the next larger con... the big bet is that they can make it work for this election and for just four more years of looting... and after that? just four more... just four... and then two more and two more after that??

                They are in the end revealed to be profit Junkies strung out on unsustainable financial looting saying "No really, Just one term more..." and then everything will be wonderful forever...

                But they have reached the bottom of the barrel with puppets. Palin was the nadir. they have now tried to go with people who actually had something more than a "little Bo Peep diploma" or legacy near failures propped up with family connections and what do we get? Romney and Ryan. People who did apparently get through actual solid universities and yet who apparently did not learn all that much about the world and people even so.

                Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

                by IreGyre on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 04:25:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  The ones who didn't run. (5+ / 0-)

                Daniels. Portman. Thune. And yes, Christie, though I think his outsize, um, personality is too much of a liability for him ever to win a nomination.

                These are the guys who looked at Obama a year ago, and said to themselves, "I can't beat him". I fully expect most of them to run in 2016, especially Thune, who was extremely quiet for the whole campaign season. There may be others whose names we don't yet know, though I will admit that the teabagging tendency dominant in Congress makes them less likely to be broadly acceptable.

                The ones who ran this time weren't the best the GOP could put up. They were only the best who were stupid enough to run against Obama.

                "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

                by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:48:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Oxymoron (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                blaneyboy, LeftHandedMan
                A half-decent GOP candidate would blow him out of the water.
                There is no such thing, a half-decent candidate can longer exist in the Republican Party.

                "I know that you cannot live on hope alone, but without it, life is not worth living." Harvey Milk

                by Sansouci on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:49:14 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Isn't "a half-decent GOP candidate" (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                blaneyboy, LeftHandedMan

                an oxymoron?

            •  What A-Team? They have no bench and their (19+ / 0-)

              farm team is the Tea Party, with all the unelectable crazy that implies. They are primarying anyone who might have centrist cred, forcing anyone who might be viable nationally to the sidelines. So who they gonna call? If you think their primary candidates this year were a joke, wait till 2016.

              •  THIS ^^^^^^ (8+ / 0-)

                Romney was the best, last chance for the plutocracy.

                The tea party consists of a bunch of lunatics, put one of them on the ticket and flush the gop down the toilet of political history quicker than the demographic shift will.

                "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

                by US Blues on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:02:00 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Actually John Huntsman already set himself up (8+ / 0-)

                John Juntsman refused to campaign on crazy. He looked forward to the climate change denial phase breaking between now and 2016. He is playing the Obama Card: speak truth to the nation about the colossal fuck-up while everyone else is cheering on the idiocy. Four years is a long way off but I see him well-positioned to be a formidable candidate in 2016.

                As for the A-team I am sorry I used that phrase. It seems to be a distraction. The point is, the only 2008 candidate of note who ran again in 2012 was Mr Romney. And he had no  choice. It was 2012 or never. No other nationally known or rising star took a chance. It was Romney, a couple guys building name recognition (Huntsman, Pawlenty)  and an assortment of loons and grifters.

                That is teh slate that entered the race .... after the GOP has spent every waking moment since Jan 2009 to sabotage the Obama administration? Obama was supposed to be defeatable ... yet no one with ambition wanted the gig for themselves?

                That does not sound like many politicians I've heard about. There's Cincinatus and? ? ?

            •  Seems to me there comes a point, and I'd like (7+ / 0-)

              to think 2016 is that point, where voter supression and lies are simply not enough to overcome the reality that a majority of the electorate is not interested in the GOP agenda regardless of who they run for the presidency.

              Ds see human suffering and wonder what they can do to relieve it. Rs see human suffering and wonder how they can profit from it.

              by JTinDC on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:20:51 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I agree 99% of the way (5+ / 0-)

                The only difference is, I think you are seeing that moment right now. The economy is historically bad, there is even a racial element in play, yet the people are standing behind the President. The GOP should be at a high-water mark now but instead they are dead in the water. From here on out we have the DNC plus the debates. Mitt Romney's Cannae begins.

            •  Who exactly would be doing better than Romney? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LeftHandedMan

              What A team? Huckabee? Fatso Christie? Giuliani? Perry was greeted as a sure fire lock when he entered the race, but, well, he was all Achilles heel. Romney was their gilt-edged candidate, the heir apparent, the runner up to McCain, the rich handsome smart guy. The challenges to him were from the right wing freaks, and he beat them by becoming one. He's laid an egg so far against Obama, but is still real, real close. He shook the Etch a Sketch in Tampa and is now the non-threatening, practical guy who can do a better job of job creation and saving Medicare than Obama. I would venture to say he's the best nominee the Republicans have had since Eisenhower. He identifies what he needs to do and does it without backing off and without embarrassment. Primary voters want a right wing Obama hater? He'll overturn Obamacare (the same bill he signed as governor a few short years ago!) the day he's inaugurated! He's hated abortion secretly for decades. He's not REALLY sure where Obama was born! He's loved Reagan since the day he was born!

              Casually shaking the Etch, he's now a practical experienced executive who knows how to get you what you need, save your Medicare and give your kids better jobs. His debacle of a convention conveniently shifted the conversation from the Nuremberg-style party platform to Clint Eastwood. Mitt won a nomination his background and ideology should have made unwinnable for him. We all know what his goal is now. It's not obvious at all that he'll fail to reach it.

              Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

              by LongTom on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 12:44:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  What you said is the key to the next 4 years (5+ / 0-)
            Hopefully Obama has learned from the mistakes of his first term, and understands that now.
        •  The bigger problem for the GOP is (6+ / 0-)

          Their possible a list candidates are only there for name recognition, not skill or intelligence.

          Except for huntsman, they're only there because they're loud and obnoxious or spout ridiculous ideas.

          None of them can stand any real scrutiny, and none of them appeal to many outside their own district/state.

          They do have some rising stars, but they haven't been allowed to shine, and won't be allowed for years. And by the time they ar allowed, they'll have lost their luster or decided they're really dems.

          •  We are on the same wavelength (6+ / 0-)

            But I feel change in the GOP might come sooner that you predict here. As you observed, John Huntsman refused to wallow in the denial and anti-science. To my eyes, he made a calculated decision that the GOP of 2016 will be a diferent animal than the GOP of 2012.

            There are reasons to think he is onto something. The Tea Party is old and every year more die than join. (Sorry to be brutal but there you go.) More significantly that even that is the fact the Tea Party has been spectacularly wrong at everything.

            I feel much of the reason these past few years have been so bitter, why the GOP are so willing to lie and counter-lie this year, is because the GOP Old Guard sees their world coming undone. And no established power center dies without lashing out in a death spasm.

            The younger generation is going to tire of being married to the 1950s and to a shrinking party membership. John Huntsman might be right. That change might be underway as early as 2016.

            •  I would agree with you, but (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LeftHandedMan, Dallasdoc

              I was not at all impressed with Huntsman as a candidate during the primaries.

              Yes, it was obvious that he was the only sane person on the stage, and also the most intelligent by a long shot. I remember that he was the one I was most nervous about before the debates began. And a lot of the reason he did poorly was that he was sane and intelligent (though very conservative, by my lights).

              But his stage presence was very underwhelming. Short of stature, mild-voiced, he made me think of a right-wing Michael Dukakis. It's not a wonderful thing, but a lot of Americans still vote for looks, voices, and charisma, and I don't think he'd be able to make that kind of sale.

              If I had to place a bet today on who would be the GOP nominee in 2016, with the proviso that it's someone we've already heard of (which it very well may not be), I'd choose John Thune.

              "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

              by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:59:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ryan has the Koch money and backing (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sidnora, LeftHandedMan, Dallasdoc

                If he doesn't fall on his face, he will the the next in line for 2016.  That is what the Koches were setting him up for.  And that is even if he goes back to the House for 2 years (it wouldn't be the whole 4) or takes some cushy front job.

                The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

                by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:41:02 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, he may (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  LeftHandedMan

                  fall flat on his face, the next two months will tell that story.

                  He would have to leave Congress to run for President, it's pretty much impossible to get elected President directly out of the House. The only one who ever did it was Garfield. And as to having Koch money and backing, it helps, and in an organization as hierarchical as the GOP it may be determinative, but I've worked on a campaign where the best-funded (by a factor of 3)candidate did not win. I wouldn't assume that they could buy him a presidency - not yet.

                  "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

                  by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 02:04:04 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Well, I saw zero moments of the GOP debates (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sidnora, LeftHandedMan

                So I read your depiction of John Huntsmann with interest. Actually it is good to hear he has some obvious weaknesses. ;)

          •  Another Big problem could be third party develops (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LeftHandedMan

            out of Tea Baggers and Moderate split, each blaming other for lose to Obama in 2012. This would mean Repugs should be focusing on 2020 to give them time to reinvent their party. By then Jenna Bush or the Cheney girl would be old enough to be candidates.

      •  Yeah (20+ / 0-)

        The Occupy Movement and the 99% argument had a much bigger influence on the shape of voters' thinking than the pundits recognized.

        Suddenly real people were in the street stating the obvious. The media could laugh at them, but they had to report what was said.

      •  agree, but... (11+ / 0-)

        Agreed on all points. My "but" is only a reamplification of the fact that the Obama team has had to play for the second term. I think there's a real (if not optimistic, at least not-totally-pessimistic) possibility that they have always fully intended a more progressive, activist, and hugely influential second term.

        I hope we're right!

      •  Huh (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc, Matt Z, LeftHandedMan

        Here is something I never thought I'd be telling you, but...good comment.

        You never trust a millionaire/Quoting the sermon on the mount/I used to think I was not like them/But I'm beginning to have my doubts -- The Arcade Fire

        by tomjones on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:08:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Zuccotti Park and all it represents would be (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LeftHandedMan

        just as subject to all of the factors that are part of governing.  The President has had to negotiate all of that with people that originally supported his campaign principles acting in a reactionary way instead of a steady focused one.  The united obstruction was certainly focused.  The laser racism was focused.  The moneyed interests certainly gathered their resources in a focused way to mount the most amazing lobbying storm front every seen in my lifetime.  

        The disenchanteds, the impatients, the people that felt their position of influence would be threatened by a more inclusive, empowering Democratic party, the black and white thinkers that said in their own way "my way or the highway", these folks have made it harder, like loading up an already heavy pack with rocks to carry up hill.  To me they really didn't mean what they said about respect, empower, include.  The President meant it and has governed by it.  For every activist the President's world view is something to work with.  If you help to destroy his chances of being re-elected there will be nothing to appeal to, nothing to reason with.  You'll be harassed until you stop asking if the other side wins.

      •  I don't think, as a Democrat, I can ever (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dallasdoc

        thank the Occupy Movement enough for what they did to change the national conversation. As much as they were smeared and maligned by the Village, as much as they were insulted and put down by the RW echochamber, they changed the conversation.

        If they hadn't, and we had spent the rest of Obama's term and the rest of the post-2010 aftershocks sticking to austerity and deficit fetishism, but with a little more of a human heart I guess, I think we'd be a lot worse off right now. I certainly think we'd have a Democratic Party that was running more of the same instead of the number of new progressives we have who could hopefully change the culture of the Senate significantly in a better direction if they get elected.

        Just by refusing to to along with the notion that the poor needed to suffer the most for the sins of the rich and powerful and that everything would be fine if we just trusted the "grown-ups" inside the beltway, on tv, and on Wall Street to figure out how to deal with the crash and the aftermath.

        I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

        by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:37:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The emperors have no clothes (0+ / 0-)

          The child's story is the perfect metaphor for the Occupy movement.  Their message was powerful because it was the simple truth everybody saw but nobody ever heard.  

          The Beltway nincompoops seem hell-bent on burying that message even now, unless they can use it to further their own interests.  I don't trust Obama to govern in a second term like the populist he's pretending to be for the campaign.  I'd be delighted to be wrong, but even more surprised.  I see him trying a few fitful times to try to slow the decline of the middle class, with increasing irrelevance as politics moves beyond him -- as it always does to second-term presidents.

          The real battle will be for the 2016 Democratic party.  If we can't get a candidate who wants to raise the minimum wage, promote union growth, raise taxes on capital gains and dividends and estates significantly, and take other steps to restore the middle class, then the time to abandon the Democrats as a party of the people may finally have come.

          For the love of money is the root of all evil; and while some have coveted after it, they have erred from the faith and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (1 Timothy 6:10)

          by Dallasdoc on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 04:25:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  That's just great (10+ / 0-)

      We still have a lot of work to do to keep the White House and Senate (and hopefully put Nancy Pelosi back in the Speaker's chair), but you're right. GOP should be winning this thing going away and they're not.

      Incompetence and bigotry in the face of changing demographics puts Republicans on wrong side of history.

    •  According to a recent Gallup Poll referred to (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KHKS, mkor7, wasatch, Onomastic, LeftHandedMan

      in Sam Stein's most recent article:

      Now, just a few months before the election, Obama is suffering from an engagement gap. According to a late July Gallup poll, only 39 percent of Democrats said they were “more enthusiastic” than usual about voting. That number was 61 percent at a similar time in 2008. Republicans, meanwhile, are more fired up now (51 percent) than they were in 2008 (35 percent).
      I'd love to see this updated now and once again after the Dem Convention. But I don't think it can be denied that active Obama supporters in 2008 were far more numerous, far more engaged and universally far more determined to win than they are today. There are no throngs of people cheering Yes We Can. In fact, there really not any throngs of people. At least not relative to 2008.

      While I think the Romney campaign is a train wreck, I know, from trolling Red Crowd sites, that they are adamant about taking control.

      And then you have to factor in massive voter suppression.

      I would have to say that at best it's a toss-up.

      Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of triumphalism based on some occasionally, marginally optimistic polling. Under the circumstances, I'm not convinced this is good.

      Purging predominantly minority voters and requiring them to present IDs to vote in the face of VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT VOTER FRAUD is RACISM! I hereby declare all consenting Republicans RACISTS until they stand up and object to these practices!

      by Words In Action on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:00:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm optimistic (5+ / 0-)

        because Romney's campaign so far has been a complete mess, but I will say that most Americans, imo, haven't been paying much attention yet. And I live in Kansas among diehard conservatives and will say that many of them are frighteningly dogmatic.

        Example: when the news reports came out that we'd killed Osama Bin Laden, I saw a Twitter conversation between a conservative friend and her friend that went like this: "Crap!" "He hasn't done sh*t!" "I know." "That's why I love you."

        So. Not at all happy that finally, after years, we'd found justice for the 9/11 bombings. But only anger that it wasn't one of their guys who had been in charge at the time.

        Needless to say, I'm no longer friends with these people, on Twitter or in the real world. But they and theirs are out there, still with this us and them mentality that goes far beyond what it should.

        I'm thinking that whoever does better at winning Independents will win the vote. I'm betting on Obama because I think he's just all around better equipped for the job.

      •  Enthusiasm is overrated (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LeftHandedMan

        True, it gets people to give money, make calls and knock on doors, but you still get only one vote even if it is done holding your nose.  African Americans have got Obama's back; they don't want the first AA Presidemt to fail.  Latinos know Obama is their only hope what with Mitt advocating self-deportation.  Women see the threat to control of their health and sex lives.  Liberals are practiced at holding our noses and voting, besides we loved Obama and are mature enough not to feel his shortcomings were done to personally affront us.  The real problem will be with the 18-28 year olds, the new voters in 2012  who have turned 18 since the last election, and those who were new voters in 2008, who are now about 22-28.  True, much of Obama's coalition didn't turn out in 2010, but Dem turnout always falls off in midterm elections and we saw what happened.

        I think the sleeper demographic/economic  issue is the decline in good jobs for men and the rise of women as primary breadwinner.  This has turned many men angrier, but I suspect more will just not vote.  Obama will appeal to men by promising construction and infrastructure and green tech jobs.  Still, women could be 54-55% of the electorate.   Women, particularly women under 60, are going to go huge for Obama because of so many issues, whether equal pay, family healthcare, reproductive rights, no more wars and economic fairness.  And Michelle Obama rather  than Ann Romney speaks to them.  Many pundits read male pundits have missed this incredibly important shift.

        The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

        by Mimikatz on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:57:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It would be funny if it weren't so idiotic.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LeftHandedMan, NWTerriD

      In another Kos Diary today, you find pretty convincing evidence that Obama has close to 200 different combination of state victories which would win him the Electoral votes needed for re-election, while Romney has.....zero.

      One fairly simple thing you can do to get a sense of the race is to assume that, starting with states that each candidate is guaranteed to win, work your way down the probabilities adding electoral votes as you go. So for example, Obama currently is given a 100% chance of winning nine states (go Vermont!) and Maine, district 1, followed by 11 states between 90 and 100%, ending at Pennsylvania with 91%. Assuming Obama will win all of these, we proceed through the next four states, all between 70 and 80%, ending with Ohio at 71% for a total of 275 electoral votes.

      Notice that to get to 270, using only Obama's highest probability states, we never had to use a state with lower than 70%.

      On the other hand, doing the same process for Romney, using only his highest probability states, he has to use states for which he has a less than 50% chance of winning-- in some cases, much less.  Put another way, the easiest path to 270 for Romney-- in terms of current probabilities-- runs through three states between 30 and 40%, ending with Ohio, at only a 29% chance of winning. That's gotta hurt.

      But Google "tight presidential race September" for recent stories with that meme, and you will find lots of them.

      Hardly EVER a mention of the very simple fact that the battle is for ELECTORAL votes and in that battle, Romney is steadily and effectively losing ground.

      But for the media, it is more important to (plagarizing a bit of the famed philosopher Fernando) "Look like a horserace than actually be one."

      Lot of work to be done yet and it is still two months away, but given the track record of the Romney team so far, and that of Obama, I have a fair degree of confidence that the Mittster isn't going to be able to Etch A Sketch his way to victory.

      goptube

      Free markets would be a great idea, if markets were actually free.

      by dweb8231 on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 12:39:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The reason there are no happy endings is that (13+ / 0-)

    there are no endings -- barring extinction.  If we're still alive there's still more to do

  •  well, I'm a historian (34+ / 0-)

    I don't have much to argue about here either.  This is incompetence taken to a VERY high level. I was trying to think if there was any precedent to this in American history and there really isn't (see the election of 1852, when the less incompetent candidate won in a change of parties).

    This is demographics, pure and simple, and a growing number of people who would rather vote for a yellow dog than a Republican. Whole groups of people, in fact.

    -7.75, -8.10; All it takes is security in your own civil rights to make you complacent.

    by Dave in Northridge on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 08:59:34 PM PDT

  •  I look over the whole field (8+ / 0-)

    and say to myself is this the best you have?
    Really you need to start training some folks on the art of speaking and statesmanship. Oh and fire Ann Coulter she doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground or the best of anything.

  •  the fault isn't all Rmoney's (36+ / 0-)

    the republican party has been filtering out the sanity since Goldwater.  Slowly from '64 to '80, accelerating since Reagan then ramping up to warp speed to the nth power every year since '92.  2012 is when the chickens FINALLY came home to roost in that anyone willing enough to espouse craziness that would win them the primary had to great a record of batshit insanity and inconsistencies to win the general (probably).

    I mean, fer cryin' out loud, the incumbents Bennett and Lugar freakin' lost their respective primaries for not being 'conservative' enough.  To compete (and he totally made the choice to do so), Rmoney's ambition had to accept, espouse, excel and exceed a bar of delusion, cognitive dissonance & willful ignorance the GOP has been raising since '64.

    •  Amen to that. (13+ / 0-)
      the republican party has been filtering out the sanity since Goldwater.  Slowly from '64 to '80, accelerating since Reagan then ramping up to warp speed to the nth power every year since '92.  2012 is when the chickens FINALLY came home to roost in that anyone willing enough to espouse craziness that would win them the primary had to great a record of batshit insanity and inconsistencies to win the general (probably).
      I've been watching them since the 80s when I was a kid. They've gotten crazier and crazier. I can imagine that there was a huge shift with Reagan although I can't remember much of the world before that. I remember "moral majority", "religious right", etc. It seemed like we were under siege by a new Christian regime.

      HST described the tidal wave crashing back on the momentum of the hippie movement. It sure did happen even if I couldn't fully understand it at the time.

      "It's not enough to acknowledge privilege. You have to resist." -soothsayer

      by GenXangster on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 11:48:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I thought this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bnasley, LeftHandedMan
      2012 is when the chickens FINALLY came home to roost in that anyone willing enough to espouse craziness that would win them the primary had to great a record of batshit insanity and inconsistencies to win the general (probably).
      back in 2008. I mean, how could you out-crazy Sarah Palin? Allen West? Rand Paul? And yet the chickens have flown even farther to the crazy right since then. At the risk of torturing this metaphor to death, I'm not counting any chickens any more on the movement of the GOP, whether they're hatched, roosting or doing something else.

      "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

      by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:08:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  this time around it seems the mainstream media (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sidnora, LeftHandedMan

        and its editors, publishers and producers have actually reached a point where they're tired of indulging the right's delusions, willful ignorance and continued lies or distortions.

        I think alot of it is driven by seeing undeniable effects of climate change.  The movers and shakers in the mainstream media are maybe asking themselves, "If conservative's thinking and philosophy is so incredibly wrong on climate change what else are they wrong on?"  For a few decades it was possible to think of climate change as an abstract concept that has no noticeable effect on day-to-day life but now alot of powers that be are realizing all that obscure, wonky policy stuff has actual real-life consequences.  Maybe some are even realizing they've been just as shamelessly used and complicit on climate change as they were in the run up to the Iraq war in '02.  There seems to be a certain anger on the part of some reporters and outlets that the Rmoney campaign's playbook assumes the media will just repeat lies uncritiqued no matter how brazen. (heaven knows where the campaign could have possibly gotten that idea but, whatever...)

        Due to advertising needs media outlets are also very sensitive to the moods of their viewers/demographics.  Its possible the paragraph above also applies to the general populace and the media is responding, catering.

        •  Maybe a little (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bnasley, LeftHandedMan

          but I'm not seeing enough of it yet for it to seem like a real sea change, and what you're talking about is exactly what we need: an honest, non-complicit, unintimidated media.

          I'd be extremely happy to be wrong.

          "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

          by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:45:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  At the same time (15+ / 0-)

    the republicans are looking to increase the number of govenorships, senators and maintain control of the house.

    All that is keeping this cycle from being bleak for Democrats is that the president has a good chance to hold the white house.

  •  Thanks for posting this! (24+ / 0-)
    Barring a politically suicidal "Grand Bargain" on Social Security and Medicare (and nobody on our side should be kidding themselves about how dangerous this upcoming lameduck session could be to the social safety net, the Republicans aren't going to stay stupid about Democrats being willing to slit their own political throats forever), the Democrats will be in a much, much better place economically, politically, tactically dealing with the faux voter fraud push, but especially demographically thanks to the race-baiting Right, for years to come.
    I think you're absolutely right.  Even Koch is beginning to see the writing on the wall.

    I've long maintained that the Democrats would have a real problem the second the Republicans ditch the Southern Strategy and the Religious Right, and adopt a more progressive social platform.  But so long as they're talking to invisible chairs ...

    Excellent, excellent diary.  Wholeheartedly recommended.

    Have you googled Romney today?

    by fou on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:49:23 PM PDT

    •  Koch can say whatever he pleases (5+ / 0-)

      since he holds the financial health of every GOP candidate in the country in his hands. Besides he now lives in infests New York, where it's the law already.

      But he's not running for a House seat somewhere in the South or the Midwest. I don't see a lot of Republican pols rushing to follow him down that road just yet.

      As to ditching the Southern Strategy and the Religious Right, they can't. The reason they adopted them in the first place was that the money guys knew that there would never be enough of them to win national elections all on their own. And nowadays there are even fewer of them (though they are a lot richer). They will live and die by the strategic decisions they made 50 years ago.

      "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

      by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:19:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fixed your tags! n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    palantir, sockpuppet, LeftHandedMan

    Have you googled Romney today?

    by fou on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 09:50:22 PM PDT

  •  The GOP want to go back in time. (13+ / 0-)

    Be careful what you wish for. A Democratic sweep will give us the following formula:

    White House + Senate + House = 1964

    That might not get the US all the way back to the 1950's suppressed conformity, but it can get the US back to a second Great Society.

  •  The dirty hippies have been right all along... (23+ / 0-)

    and more and more people are realizing that simple fact.
    Thank Gawd.
    Peace
    ;-)>

    "We're right in the middle of a fucking reptile zoo! And somebody's giving booze to these goddamn things!"-Hunter S. Thompson ;-)>

    by rogerdaddy on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:15:12 PM PDT

  •  riveting diary (14+ / 0-)

    hung on every word.

    Hope is in the air again. Lets keep it alive till november...

    ***********

    Squidward: The noises! How are you two making those noises?

    Patrick: Well, that's easy. All you need is a box.

    SpongeBob: And...imagi~nation!

    by rexymeteorite on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:15:44 PM PDT

  •  I think you're a little overly optimistic. (12+ / 0-)

    The Republicans had their B-level candidates out this time. They will almost certainly have a stronger candidate in 2016. Sure, they'll be extreme and crazy, but unless they make an Akin sized blunder they will likely be fine as long as the media plays along. In addition, the Democrats will no longer have the advantage of incumbency.

    That being said, 2016 will be a key election (assuming Obama wins this time, which he probably will). It will really be their last shot at winning the presidency with their current strategy. if they lose 2016, they won't be able to overcome the incumbent advantage barring some sort of disaster in 2020, and by 2024 the demographic shift will be so great that they will no longer be able to compete at all.

    Romney is a pretty terrible candidate, and I think Obama will start to stretch out his lead once the Democratic convention is over, but I think you're just a little early on calling it for the Republicans. The demographic reckoning is coming, but it isn't here quite yet.

  •  in response to this excellent part of ur diary.... (9+ / 0-)
    If you gave Bill Clinton or Barack Obama weeks to prepare, let alone years to prepare, for something coming up, it would not only be handled but it might be turned into a political masterstoke.
    that is because our guys and girls rock!

    :-)

  •  They've lived in their own bubble too long. (24+ / 0-)

    They've created a vast network of think tanks, pressure and lobbying groups, astroturfers, corporate shells, media and talking heads, and use it to create, disseminate, repeat and even fall for the same bullshit.

    They've created their own reality, and will be astonished when a known socialist from Kenya is re-elected.

    Romney is no exception. He's used to everyone agreeing with him, laughing at his jokes, and appreciating his genius for making Powerpoint presentations, hiding money and avoiding prosecution.

    After he fails, he'll shrug his shoulders and use politics solely for tax shelters. But the Republican party will be a shambles.

    The GOP will decide McCain and Rmoney both lost because they weren't crazy-feral enough, and the battle between GOP christianoids and GOP money will take them years to unscramble, if they can.

    Much of this will be fun to watch, but it's going to take reality a long time to recover from their fucked-up worldview. That's the task history has given us, though, so we'd damn well better do it.

    "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10

    by Bob Love on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 10:44:54 PM PDT

    •  It'll take a long time (16+ / 0-)
      Much of this will be fun to watch, but it's going to take reality a long time to recover from their fucked-up worldview.

      Well...then there's that climate-change thing coming on...

      While these old dinosaur "conservatives" (anti-progressives, is more like it) are in their death throes, or at least scrambling to avoid falling into the pit they've created, like orcs fleeing the collapse of Sauron and Mt. Doom (to mix metaphors), the Planet is apparently insisting on having The Last Word.  It may be too late now.  We may be past the tipping point.

      But if there's any chance left that we can stop our extinction-level slide from hubris into future fossil records, that makes this election more dire than any in my lifetime, I think.  Perhaps if the People's Party of OWS Democrats can wrest enough power back in the immediate future, we have whole species of creatures on this planet to save.  And clean air.  And clean water.

      We must insist this time around that our elected representatives in this Democracy heed the Will of the Majority of Americans.  Finally.  And I've got two words to say about that:  Single Payer.  

      In any case, I hope we have some time left to evolve some more.   May be too late.  We're becoming a failed experiment in Nature...

      Just sayin'...

  •  We'll stand our ground against corporate/media (5+ / 0-)

    attack.  Obama is on the side of the people.  He has children.

    We will regain the Presidency.  He will strengthen Supreme Court.

    We will work to regain Congress.  It won't happen overnight; but we must persevere.

    •  The conservatives on the Court are mostly young. (3+ / 0-)

      Scalia isn't young, but I'm pretty sure he would find a way to rule from the grave rather than let Obama appoint his successor.

      So I don't know that Obama will get a chance to strengthen the Court. I think we'll have to win in 16 and maybe even 20 also, in order for that to happen.

      "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

      by NWTerriD on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:06:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yep. Republicans have a chance to attract a (5+ / 0-)

    significant percentage of Latinos and at some point they may take it. If it's not going to be too late by then.

  •  Romney wanted his money more... (22+ / 0-)

    than he wanted to be president.

    that's just a little thought kernel of a letter to the editor that i anticipate writing sometime this month.  they published another letter i wrote last month so i have to wait thirty days before i can submit another one.

    I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

    by blue drop on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 11:20:19 PM PDT

    •  Excellent insight. (12+ / 0-)

      It's right there in front of everyone, then someone says something and you see it.

      There's a whole wide streak of absence in him; no humor, no eager desire; he plods. For him everything must have to be translated into dollars.

    •  Exactly right (9+ / 0-)

      Money is more important than anything. He screams it from every pore.

      If it wasn't, his tax returns from 2007 to now would be about as simple as somebody of his wealth could make them. No overseas accounts at all, no tax shelters except for some foundations that did non controversial things like provide scholarships or fund ms research, and if it cost him a couple mil more, it would be worth it.

      No problem releasing tax returns then. Nothing there to see.

      But that would have cost him money. Probably a lot of money. So that's out.

      Same with the dog on roof story. That too boils down to cheapness. Not because he didn't have the money to rent a larger vehicle, or board the dog, or fly rather than drive. But because he was CHEAP. It might cost him MONEY to do those things.

      •  precisely (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drmah, LeftHandedMan
        If it wasn't, his tax returns from 2007 to now would be about as simple as somebody of his wealth could make them.
        maybe even sooner than 2007.  once he got caught fudging on his Massachusetts tax returns he should have known to keep his tax records as clean and reasonable as possible if he had presidential ambitions.  maybe it was his plan to never release any records for his presidential run but he bowed to custom and media pressure to give us the bare minimum and even that did not look good.  it may have been "legal" but a 13% rate looks preposterous to most Americans for someone on his way to being a billionaire.  besides, if you want to run for president, it doesn't seem very patriotic to be seen as trying to shield your money from taxes from the very government you want to run.

        how much worse would it look with more tax records revealed?  did he take advantage of the tax amnesty in 2009?  did he not give the claimed 10% to the Mormon church?  did he have more involvement with Bain than he says?  did he "legally" pay less than 13% or no taxes on other returns?

        as you say, though, cleaning any of that up would have cost him money.  how many millions on top of millions does one person need?  that greed will cost him in this election.

        this contributes all the more to his "none of our business" attitude when revealing anything about his record.  voters want to know the history of a potential president.  his years at Bain?  none of our business.  Salt Lake Olympics documents sealed or destroyed?  none of our business.  documents from his term as Governor sealed or destroyed?  none of our business.  his tax records?  none of our business!

        I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

        by blue drop on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:17:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  During the convention (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blue drop, drmah, LeftHandedMan

        his own kids repeatedly and cheerfully described him as cheap.

        "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

        by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:23:57 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Cheap is one thing (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Dvalkure, LeftHandedMan

          I have no problem with somebody who's careful with his money.

          But careful isn't putting your dog on the roof of the car just so you can save a few bucks. Careful isn't skirting the edge of legality with your taxes when you know you're going to have to release those records in the future.

          There's cheap and there's cruel and stupid.

          Cheap is saving for your vacation, looking for the best deal, and not spending more than you have to while making sure everybody is comfortable and has a good time. That includes the family pets.

          Cheap is paying the fair amount of taxes, taking advantage of the customary deductions, and if you're intending on running for office, making sure that there's nothing that could be viewed as shady in your financial dealings, even if it costs you a little.

          What Romney did isn't cheap. It's cruel and stupid, and will cost him way more than it saved in the long run.

          •  I guess we have a semantic difference. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LeftHandedMan

            What you describe approvingly, I would call thrifty.

            My dear late MIL, in the last years of her life, used to make the LH walk about 1/2 mile when she needed him to make copies for her, because the place that was 1/2 mile away only charged ten cents, while the place right downstairs from her apartment charged a quarter. That's cheap, and Romney is cheap.

            "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."........ "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." (yeah, same guy.)

            by sidnora on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 02:18:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  This was a most excellent diary. Very (8+ / 0-)

    well-thought out.  Thank you!

    “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.” ― Mahatma Gandhi

    by WFBMM on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 11:39:31 PM PDT

  •  They are letting their hate for President (20+ / 0-)

    Obama consume them. Consider this:

    We live in a time and place that puts high value on emotion, and that views emotions as self-validating. To feel something is thought by many to be sufficient evidence of its truthfulness, or at least its authenticity. This is a mark of the barbarian.
    The mark of a barbarian. It might surprise you to read the rest of it and where it comes from ... a conservative blog. Another case of conservatives projecting their own behavior on to progressives?
    I understand why post-Sixties liberals make the mistake of believing that nonsense. But conservatives?

    Fox Geezer Syndrome

    The GOP is consuming itself with hate. You can't think straight when you let that happen. You make mistakes. A lot of mistakes. All you have to do is look at the Romney campaign and Clint Eastwood talking to an empty chair.

    “Mitt Romney is the only person in America who looked at the way this Congress is behaving and said, ‘I want the brains behind THAT operation.’ ” — Tom Perriello

    by hungrycoyote on Sat Sep 01, 2012 at 11:52:28 PM PDT

  •  "being surprised by them is like getting overrun.. (19+ / 0-)

    ...by a turtle." This line is pure genius, Lefthandedman.

  •  Republican Party is run by the sons of rich men (28+ / 0-)

    and the bigoted white people who idolize them.

    Competence never had anything to do with it with this generation of the GOP.

    They feel totally entitled to their simultaneous ownership of this country, and their incompetence. Make no mistake.

    They couldn't care less.

    They never built anything. They used daddy's money to buy play toys and to gamble, nothing else. The loot as a way of life, because they have the power to.

    It's mental illness as a cultural phenomenon. It's backwater British royalty and reality TV show starlet material. It embarrasses itself over and over, because it can, and because it's ignorant enough not to have any dignity - it doesn't care, because it's rich and powerful enough that it doesn't have to.

    The GOP is like Paris Hilton. They're entitled to their absurdity and they don't care. And unfortunately our system of government keeps it that way.

    But these neocon Tea Party clowns can't even take a piece of wood like Romney overseas without humiliating the country, much less run a convention. It's time to say enough is enough and make it clear they're not winning another election until they grow up.

  •  Brilliant (3+ / 0-)

    This is really effective commentary and, I think, spot-on. Highly recommended.

  •  A great diary . Thanx LHM nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Only Needs a Beat, LeftHandedMan

    I love me peektures and that is that! Cheerleaders till 2016

    by matrix on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 05:17:33 AM PDT

  •  Look to Virginia as a debunk to this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sophie Amrain, mkor7, LeftHandedMan

    VA democrats made gain after gain in the 2000 along with the democratic shift....then we ran a complete horrible state party candidates and we got smoked in 2009...

    Thus setting back the gains in  the 2000's just intime to be screwed for redistricting for the next 10 years.   Working in statewide and local politics, it's about the candidate period end!   You can show why your better, show policies that have been great for the electorate, but then if the candidate is crap, you lose!  Just saying

  •  Generally good rant, but (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FiredUpInCA, virginislandsguy
    The Democrats got conned into two long years of deficit fetishism that is not remotely in their or the nation's political best interests,
    This is not true. Although the Dems always have been better for the deficit than the Republicans, they had the public image of big spender. This is changing currently, due to the fact that Obama is sounding slightly conservative on the deficit. The 'libruls' hated that, but I am convinced that this was the way he could wedge the topic from the Republicans.

    Forgetting that risks undoing the advantage Obama.

    He who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.

    by Sophie Amrain on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 05:58:51 AM PDT

  •  All in all a great diary. One quibble: what (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    evidence is there that "The economy will be vastly improved in two years." I really hope you are right, but I don't see the reasoning for your optimism.

    If there is no accountability for those who authorized torture, we can no longer say that we are a nation of laws, not men.

    by MikePhoenix on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:17:19 AM PDT

    •  There won't be enough Republicans left in Congress (5+ / 0-)

      to keep tanking it.

    •  I think the economy is slowly improving (0+ / 0-)

      and has been since Obama took office, the depth of the hole was so great that the middle class getting crushed by the disasterous end of the Bush years didn't see much of that as relief.

      But the point where the relief is something the middle class can feel is coming. I think both Obama and Romney know it. I think one of the things that probably drives the Obama people the most crazy is the idea that Romney would get credit for Obama's heavy lifting in his first term.

      One of the things about our politics that frustrates the hell out of me is the timing of Democratic efforts to fix Republican messes. Clinton left surpluses, and George W. Bush comes in and says 'time for the biggest and most un-paid for tax cuts in history and time to win daddy's war!' I think that Romney knows full well that a lot of the things Obama did to make things better are likely to start gaining steam in 2012-2016. So. He gets in, enjoys the recovery that people can finally say they feel arriving, which RomneyNomics had nothing to do with, and he runs for re-election as the 'guy who fixed the Obama mess' in 2016.

      I think one of the the main reasons that Mitt Romney was so gung-ho to run now was that he, and I think a lot of people in both parties agree, that things are getting better, just crushingly slowly.

      That is the reason for my optimism. I think what would be Obama term two, or Romney term one, would be where the recovery was something far more tangeable than what we have been experiencing.

      Romney's own economic forecasts are pretty much counting on the Obama years to have turned the Bush mess around. He's already planning on taking credit for things he had nothing to do with, just like the GOP was always planning on blaming Obama for things he had nothing to do with.

      I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

      by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:21:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You cannot run a party whose core goal (11+ / 0-)

    is to provide a rich white male minority with an unquestioned and increasing share of power and wealth within America when that minority is ever shrinking proportionately. You cannt cling to power by bashing women, Blacks, Hispanics and at least implicitly all non-whites and gays and non-Xians when those groups comprise a rapidly shrinking three quarters of Americans. It just won't work.

    America's great challenge in the coming years is to contain the violence to which some within the decling minority are increasingly inclined and to keep it from lashing out at other nations around the world as America at the same time becomes one nation among many rather than the single dominant nation in the world.

    I believe (or at least still hope) that America is capable of adaptation like no other nation has been. It will have to be -- and this November is a very clear step along the road that must be followed if the human future is to be a good one.

    That is a little heavy for so early in the morning, but for me it is a pretty sunny view. I really think that we have survived the RNC and now merely need to stand up to a few billion dollars worth of TV ads.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:24:54 AM PDT

  •  Excellent Post!!! (6+ / 0-)

    And more of this, please:

    If we can just hunker down and fight like hell and get to the other side of this one, I have real hope for the first time since 2008 that we can turn the corner. Turn the corner and change a lot of really bad things many of us feared would be things we would be stuck with in the future all around and leave a better country for the generations to come after us after all. I have hope. Because I see the change.

    Down with False Equivalence! Truth over Balance!! Real Reporting, Please!!!

    by LarisaW on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:38:22 AM PDT

  •  The history books are written by the winners... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    US Blues, LeftHandedMan

    Either that or textbook boards in TX...

    Purging predominantly minority voters and requiring them to present IDs to vote in the face of VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT VOTER FRAUD is RACISM! I hereby declare all consenting Republicans RACISTS until they stand up and object to these practices!

    by Words In Action on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:50:51 AM PDT

  •  One thing you forgot (7+ / 0-)

    People of all stripes are seeing through the bullshit.

    "Political ends as sad remains will die." - YES 'And You and I' ; -8.88, -9.54

    by US Blues on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 06:56:37 AM PDT

    •  I agree. I did forget to emphasize that (0+ / 0-)

      and I'm sorry I didn't hit that base as strongly as the other points I made.

      I think the GOP has a problem in that they are going to the well for the America that they have known in the past, and the demographic changes factor into the GOP playbook hitting with more of a thud than a crack.

      But I don't think Mitt Romney has a prayer of winning a greater percentage of the White vote than Ronald Reagan did, and a good part of that is that there are white voters the GOP is counting on to be who they used to know and not who they are now.

      I don't think Obama is going to win the White vote, but I think he's going to win enough of the White vote to make Mitt Romney's job go from really, really hard to virtually mathmatically impossible.

      I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

      by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:24:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think Mitt Romney (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LeftHandedMan

        can win a greater percentage of the white vote than Reagan did, but I fear that hatred for Obama might be able to win a greater percentage of the white vote than Reagan did.

        "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

        by NWTerriD on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:44:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  See, this is one of those areas (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NWTerriD

          where I think Myth Romney has one of his biggest headaches, which is why I'm so heartened instead of anxious. I agree that Obama Derangement Syndrome is real, and it is driving a lot of people to the polls. No doubt. A lot of people voting for Romney aren't voting for Romney as much as they are voting against Obama.

          But Romney has to win a greater victory with white voters than Ronald Reagan did to have a realistic chance of winning the White House because of his problems with minorities and women. While I will readily admit that ODS is intense and white hot, I don't see ODS being that vast. At least, nowhere near vast enough to win.

          A good chunk of those white voters that Romney would have to win to swamp the mark Reagan set for white people would have to be white women. Looking at the polling, I think there are more than enough white women who will join with all other women who just aren't going to vote GOP this time to screw that pathway up.

          I think Romney will win the white vote overall, I just think there are too many demographic rakes hidden in the weeds and tall grass he has to navigate through to step on for him to end up with the win.

          They, meaning the GOP and not just the Romney campaign, had to change how they do things. Had to. And didn't.

          I thought this moment would arrive in 2016-2020 and that this would be potentially another painful cycle for me and my fellow travelers. I think I was not just wrong, but really wrong.

          I just don't see the math that puts Romney in the White House. Even in the states where he has the GOP trying to cheat up a storm, like Ohio and Pennsylvania, it looks grim for the GOP to get Romney to 270.

          I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

          by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:57:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The question isn't (7+ / 0-)

    "Romney was next in line."  The question should be, "Why was he in line in the first place?"

    Romney was in line because of only one thing, Money.  Speaks volumes about him and about the party.  This is the reason only the crazies, the rejects and the clueless were willing to run against him.  Everyone else knew what the primaries were going to be like.  After all, in the words of the great Queen Anne Romney, "It's our turn."

    Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world--and never will. Mark Twain

    by whoknu on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:00:02 AM PDT

  •  Nobody's giving Obama and his team any credit. (6+ / 0-)

    Once they realized that their big mistake was not tooting their own horn when they accomplished something (think the stimulus and ACA), they started to approach it differently. Their approach to this election has led the rhetoric. The Repukes have to make up lies and take Obama's words out of context which eventually just becomes a poof of air. Obama, OTOH, found all Romney's vulnerable spots and went for them. Obama's leading this, and it just looks like we got lucky. I don't think so. I think it's truly excellent card playing.

    Your left is my right---Mort Sahl

    by HappyinNM on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:06:45 AM PDT

    •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HappyinNM, NWTerriD

      The study of history is full of woulda, coulda, shoulda, analysis. What if the south had won the civil war; What if the Brits told Hitler, "Leave us alone and take what you want of Europe." But none of this happened and speculation about what might have happened is fiction. It's akin to the taxicab scene in "On the Waterfront." "I coulda been somebody, I coulda been a contender, instead of just a bum." You can dress it up by using the term "thought experiment." But IMO that exercise should be reserved for folks who work with physical systems like Einstein, Werner Heisenberg, Paul Dirac, etc.

      History and the historical sciences are contingency dependent. The Republican campaign is what it is and their candidates are who they are owing to past contingent events. There's no going back.

      Yes, one can envision more adept and "acceptable" Republican nominees, but like the "Invisible Obama" they aren't present; contingent events precluded them. And even if they were present, maybe Obama would be doing as well or better. All we know is the product of past events; what we know right now; and in the future, we will know a little more. Right now, I just want to get Obama reelected.

  •  If they win in the fall, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dvalkure, drmah, LeftHandedMan

    it will be by dirty-tricking.

    They are not doing a good job of selling their message to the masses. Really, this has been true ever since the 1980s, when their popular appeal basically peaked. The demographic composition of the electorate isn't trending in their direction, for sure. And their traditional base of aging, angry white males is dying out.

    Increasingly, we're seeing the wheels come off the machine. Ol' Sheldon Aldelstein and the Koch brothers are actually finding their way into the political coverage in the corporate media now, thanks to the blogs. And some of these super-wealthy donors--not the Kochs, who are very secretive--may have an inflated impression of their attractiveness to the public. But I'm afraid they aren't very photogenic.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:07:57 AM PDT

  •  Massive voter suppression will influence outcomes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan, NWTerriD

    of many, many seats in many, many places.

    I think it should have a significant impact on the minus side of any margin of error on just about any poll.

    Purging predominantly minority voters and requiring them to present IDs to vote in the face of VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT VOTER FRAUD is RACISM! I hereby declare all consenting Republicans RACISTS until they stand up and object to these practices!

    by Words In Action on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:08:51 AM PDT

  •  The Republicans made a choice (4+ / 0-)

    Nixon and Reagan won by chasing the "angry white men" that left the Democrats when Johnson, McGovern, and Humphrey made it clear that the Democrats were not going to tolerate segregation and unequal rights anymore, but Nixon and Reagan understood that this advantage was temporary, and that not every Republican embraced it 100%.  But they failed to pass along this last bit to their successors.

    Ford, I think, understood it, but he was quickly marginalized after losing to Carter.  Reagan understood at least the act of pretending to compromise, but being an actor he could not simply pass this off to others like a baton.  There's a reason so many Reagan voters went right back to Dukakis as soon as Ronnie was off the ballot.

    In the aftermath of Bush's pathetic 1992 loss, the Republicans were at a crossroads: should they double down on angry white men, or maybe try for one of those other demographics?  They picked the former, then felt justified in that choice after the 1994 gains in Congress and after Shrub's 2000 win.  The closeness of those races apparently didn't set off any alarm bells.  It should have.  And when McCain went down in flames in 2008, Republicans blamed everyone but themselves, never stopping to think that maybe, just maybe, there just weren't enough angry white men to go around anymore, in Lindsey Graham's inelegant but revealing phrase.

    All your vote are belong to us.

    by Harkov311 on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:32:06 AM PDT

  •  When the history books are written (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    They will talk about how 2012 was the last chance the Republicans had to elect a President from their party. Their hatred of all things non white will bring about their downfall., and much sooner in places such as Texas as they are likely to admit.

    This song will accompany the entry in the history books for the Republican Party on the 2012 Presidential Elections:

    "When we remember we are all mad, the mysteries disappear and life stands explained." - Mark Twain

    by Moon Mop on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 07:36:17 AM PDT

  •  Why are we going to lose the House? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    I don't understand that.

    "Human history is not the battle of good struggling to overcome evil. It is a battle fought by a great evil struggling to crush a small kernel of human kindness."

    - Vasily Grossman, Life and Fate

    by Tirge Caps on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 08:13:06 AM PDT

  •  LeftHandedMan, quick question (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    when you say

    the common themes will be generally unkind not only to Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney and VP nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, but to the GOP and to the extremist Conservative Movement they all serve as well.
    you actually mean Severely Conservative Movement since the party is now led by a former Severely Conservative Governor???

    My own description of the Conservative Movement includes Deceitful, Disloyal and Disgraceful.

    Appreciate the article.

    It takes time to practice generosity, but being generous is the best use of our time. - Thich Nhat Hanh.

    by Frank In WA on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:17:37 AM PDT

    •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

      Myth Romney. Lyin' Ryan.

      I still remember Romney denouncing Ted Kennedy for calling him a Reaganite and Myth Romney going on and on about how he was an independent during Reagan/Bush, I don't want to go back to Reagan/Bush.

      And he's playing Barry Goldwater and the GOP is so desperate to believe their own bullshit they gave it to him.

      I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

      by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:29:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  history written by the victors (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Olkate, LeftHandedMan

    we had better make damned sure we're the victors

    www.tapestryofbronze.com

    by chloris creator on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:32:31 AM PDT

    •  Yes, let's hope we are the victors. (0+ / 0-)

      Call me a nervous nellie...but I it makes me very worried when I hear/read that Obama has this election nailed.

      Yes, so far Romney and his handlers have made one mistake after another. But does this mean that the avg voter won't vote for Romney? Have the avg voter even been paying attention?

      I've always been wary of being overly cocky. Goes way back to my college days. A good friend of mine, Andy, who was/is very good looking, was at the local Safeway and noticed a very attractive woman giving him the come hither look. So Andy started feeling very confident....cocky even...that he was about to make a love connection. Just as he was about to make his move, a potted plant fell on his head, covering him w/ dirt.

      I've never forgotten that lesson and it's been over 30 years since Andy got dirt dropped down upon his lovely face. I do not want to happen this November. I will not get cocky about this election and I will not take for granted that this election is in the bag.

      "I'd like to find your inner child and kick it's little ass." -Don Henely

      by Olkate on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:43:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  They announced Ryan as a diversion from the (4+ / 0-)

    tax issue.  They probably did that as an "Oh shit, we gotta do something to get the attention off of his tax evasion problem," last resort.  I wouldn't be surprised if they originally planned to announce Ryan at the Convention.

    Republicans...What a nice club...of liars, cheaters, adulterers, exaggerators, hypocrites and ignoramuses. Der Spiegel -6.62, -6.92

    by CanyonWren on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 09:51:22 AM PDT

  •  It started with how the Bush got to the WH (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, LeftHandedMan

    Thanks to Rove, et al., the GOP sold its soul to win the 2000 election.  

    We know that Reagan's road to the WH depended on Southern blue collar vote, but it was Rove & Co who successfully leverage the religious fundamentalist vote to get Bush into the WH.   And to maintain that leverage, the GOP provided face of supporting fundalmentalists through things like the new WH Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnership

    OFBCI was established by President George W. Bush through executive order on January 29, 2001, representing one of the key domestic policies of Bush's campaign promise of "compassionate conservatism."
    And I can't find the quote, but there was also an acknowledgement that White House staffers were two-faced hypocrites when smoozing fundamentalist leaders.

    Later, one of the OFBCI's directors acknowledged...

    ...(Bush) allowed certain staffers...to "[steer] legislative initiatives or policy proposals as far right as possible."
    The Bush administration and the Republican Congress were clearly on a path toward totalitarian aspects (torture, domestic spying, reneging on foreign treaties, etc.) and one wondered why the moderate Republicans weren't resisting.  

    At the same time, the GOP in Congress was enforcing top-down control of the party--no dissension allowed. You're either with us or against.   Hence, how Tom Delay got his nickname.

    As Majority Whip, DeLay earned the nickname "The Hammer" for his enforcement of party discipline in close votes and his reputation for wreaking political vengeance on opponents. ....In the 104th Congress, DeLay successfully whipped 300 out of 303 bills.
    Moderates like Bob Dole were gone, and those remaining read the tea leaves and agreed to be co-opted.  John McCain is as a prime example.   He had a choice of clinging to power or clinging to his integrity, and integrity never was one of his hallmarks anyway.

    And the result is totally not surprising.  

    The result of this enforced homogeneity and dumbing-down of policy is a much weakened political party.  People who should barely be qualified to sit at a back-bench, like Cantor and Ryan, are the party's thought leaders.  And discredited pol like Gingrich and certified yahoos like Bachman, Santorum, and Romney are its leading presidential candidates.    

    So what do they do to cling to power now?  Suppress voter registration, suppress voter turnout, lie, spend immoral amounts of money, weaken grassroots efforts--even within its own party--and empower the rich and corporations to have more sway in the electoral process, etc.   Very bad stuff.

    What's disappointing is how much these same know-nothing Republicans still hold power at the state and local level.  The rot hasn't crept down to that level yet.  

    But it will.  There are always political cycles, the GOP is definitely on the downswing.

    And remember...

    In Karl Rove’s strategy for a “durable Republican majority,” as he called it, lasting at least a generation, the exurbs were a key component of his master plan.

    After a monumental housing collapse, and eight years of less-predictable changes in where Americans live, that thinking has been thrown out.

    Democrats made significant inroads in Rove’s demographic sanctuary, starting in the 2006 midterm election, which, it turns out, was the exurban population’s growth peak.

    And apparently Rove and the GOP never had a strategy  for the day when whites would become the minority.  So now they try to cling to power by increasing the anger of that white base.  Very pathetic.
  •  Thank you so much for this and the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dvalkure, LeftHandedMan

    thoughtful discussion that followed.

    Much appreciated.

    "Compassion is not weakness, and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism." Hubert H. Humphrey

    by Onomastic on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:31:15 AM PDT

  •  You know, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    I've been using the word "brilliant" a lot here in the past few days. There has been some awesome writing at this site this week, both in diaries and in comments.

    But "brilliant" doesn't do it for this diary. This is all the way to "breathtaking."

    I bow to you.

    "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

    by NWTerriD on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 10:32:40 AM PDT

    •  I bow to the commenters (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NWTerriD

      because I think you can judge a diary by the quality of the comments that show up and I feel humbled and blown away by the insights of all of you right now.

      I am from the Elizabeth Warren and Darcy Burner wing of the Democratic Party

      by LeftHandedMan on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 03:30:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hey DallasDoc! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dvalkure, LeftHandedMan

    How are you? I'm a Texan now, live in Austin.
    Anyway, to your point, because I too, have been thinking about this for the last two years, so a couple of things.

    Watching the GOP second stringers suit up for the primary led me to the same conclusion as you: that Republican smart money had already written off 2012.
    But there is another explanation which must be considered. It wasn't Obama they were afraid of - it was Romney.
    The Obama A-team had figured out it was going to be Romney way back in 2010, and they never wavered from that assumption through all the ups and downs of the primaries.
    And this, I think, explains everything you note above - The GOP candidates, just like the Obama team, didn't see any way over the mountain of Romney money and cleared the deck for him.
    You might be right about what they think of his chances to defeat Obama now, but back at the beginning of this process it can as easily be explained by a fear of Romney as a fear of Obama.
    Hope you're doing well.

    The political and commercial morals of the United States are not merely food for laughter, they are an entire banquet. Mark Twain

    by AWhitneyBrown on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:10:49 AM PDT

  •  Kharma eventually catches up. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mighty Ike, LeftHandedMan

    My son quit drinking, smoking and recreational drugs at about 30 years old but his friends kept right on.  As the years went by he would ask, "How can they get away with this behavior? Why aren't they paying some kind of health penalty?"

    It's happening now. One of his friends is in intensive care from a heart attack, and another was on chemo therapy from cancer that involved his heart until he died in a car accident. They are in their mid-forties.

    My point is that we wonder how the Republicans can get away with being so dishonest and so batshit crazy year after year.  They too will pay the price eventually and maybe we're seeing the beginning of it now.

  •  GOP will hammer on wedge issues during lameduck (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, LeftHandedMan

    session, as well as doing some grandstanding for their base.

    Democrats in congress need to proceed very cautiously to avoid alienating their natural constituencies.  

    "We don't need someone who can think. We need someone with enough digits to hold a pen." ~ Grover Norquist

    by Lefty Coaster on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:13:25 AM PDT

  •  Well, I totally agree with everything you've (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    said in this diary, but I must give some credit to the Obama campaign for responding immediately to false statements and false ads and we haven't seen the Democratic convention, nor have we watched the fabulous speech making skills and debating skills of our candidate vs. theirs.  That, combined with what you've described, will be the true, massive death knell for the Grand OLD Party.  Stick a fork in 'em.  They're done.

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:42:55 AM PDT

  •  What future historians will really wonder about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    is how Americans managed to elect, or almost elect (we'll see, a man who epitomized the powerful, self-entitled yet amazingly stupid robber baron class that almost tanked the global economy to be leader of the supposed free world. Along with a guy who promised to make the lives of the very people voting for them as destitute, hopeless and futile as possible as his #2. I suspect historians will shake their heads and roll their eyes and wonder if their ancestors really belonged to the same species as themselves.

  •  In the Historical Record there will be an entry in (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    the Obituaries Section that looks like this:

    The Deathknell of the 21st Century Republican Party
    A Man and A Chair


    #eastwooding

    "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.''
    -- SCOTUS Justice O.W. Holmes Jr
    "I like paying taxes...with them, I buy Civilization"
    -- Angie in WA State

    by Angie in WA State on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 11:51:02 AM PDT

  •  Yeah, maybe. But the Republican Party was (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    reading its own obituary in 2009, after the highly popular young president was overwhelmingly elected with huge Senate and House majorities in response to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, all of which the public quite rightly blamed on Bush and the Republicans.

    Political malpractice? How does anybody turn such a huge win over a moribund out of step party into the worst midterm defeat since 1922? We all know the answer. You ignore Republican attacks, you avoid any sort of examination of the crimes of the previous 8 years, you treat the leaders of the beaten and humiliated party like equals, you fail completely to marshall the support of the people and tell them why you need their support and how the opposition is hamstringing their recovery, and you expend a year of legislative effort on a health care bill that (1) wasn't about jobs and (2) most of which could have passed as much needed insurance reforms in a few weeks.

    The Republicans know how to play this game and the Dems don't. The fact that there's even a party left called "Republican" would have surprised many observers in early 2009.

    Two hundred million Americans, and there ain't two good catchers among 'em. --Casey Stengel

    by LongTom on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 12:22:07 PM PDT

  •  Take a 4 (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LeftHandedMan

    This alone deserves the rec.

    That clusterfuck of zipping your penis up in your pants at the urinal after peeing on your own leg moment was the
    entire Romney/Ryan 2012 campaign in a nutshell.
    Perfect. Makes my day

    Until inauguration day The USA is in the greatest danger it has ever experienced.

    by Deep Dark on Sun Sep 02, 2012 at 01:49:15 PM PDT

Angie in WA State, Mimikatz, PLS, Chi, BrooklynJohnny, ferg, Bob Love, Emerson, TheGreatLeapForward, Shockwave, ChicDemago, SanJoseLady, liz, frsbdg, WI Deadhead, expat germany, Creosote, dweb8231, Theodoric of York Medieval Liberal, JLFinch, rasbobbo, 88kathy, Babsnc, Loquatrix, blaneyboy, AlyoshaKaramazov, roses, jfinsocal, SneakySnu, edrie, psnyder, sockpuppet, Dallasdoc, virginislandsguy, JimWilson, Steven Payne, liberte, RebeccaG, BlogDog, Sembtex, Vicky, tomjones, Sassy, Gowrie Gal, davidincleveland, Duke1676, Harkov311, Ckntfld, UFOH1, LarisaW, stlawrence, aaraujo, aarrgghh, Little Lulu, littlewren, fhcec, martini, golem, Keone Michaels, hungrycoyote, 8ackgr0und N015e, Dvalkure, kestrel9000, redstatedemocrat, fou, Lefty Coaster, global citizen, philipmerrill, twigg, middleagedhousewife, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, BB10, SD Goat, Nulwee, beneldon, camlbacker, devis1, jds1978, jeanette0605, Matt Z, Dave in Northridge, suejazz, newpioneer, bnasley, mbh1023, HCKAD, US Blues, martyinsfo, Wreck Smurfy, uciguy30, skod, chicago minx, alba, paxpi, Mighty Ike, rogerdaddy, TX Freethinker, coyotebanjo, hulagirl, HappyinNM, NewDealer, LI Mike, FG, binkaroni, inHI, pamelabrown, RandomNonviolence, Hanging Up My Tusks, catly, alnep, Gemina13, My Spin, emidesu, palantir, statsone, maggiejean, lostinamerica, nofear, CanyonWren, jtraynor, Zotz, mkor7, petral, TobyRocksSoHard, NWTerriD, badger1968, Leslie in KY, histOries Marko, IreGyre, dalfireplug, PoliticalJunkessa, nancat357, astral66, purplepenlady, smileycreek, coppercelt, oceanrain, David PA, SmartRat, Tea and Strumpets, Anima, taiping1, Crabby Abbey, ATFILLINOIS, gulfgal98, DrTerwilliker, IntentionallyKind, Floande, science nerd, amazinggrace, Its a New Day, Onomastic, kerflooey, ladywithafan, WineRev, spooks51, slowbutsure, iowacaucus, ardyess, THirt, DenisL, miscanthus, cyberpuggy, thomask, Wheever, muddy boots, 1718bill, LSmith, MRA NY, marianevans, rexymeteorite, mali muso, Liberal Mole, DRo, Mentatmark, DEMonrat ankle biter, Davui, Frank In WA, joemarkowitz, blacksnake, Only Needs a Beat, GenXangster, JTinDC, Heart n Mind, Invictus88, Siri, pimutant, AreDeutz, rukidingme, Trotskyrepublican, CA ridebalanced, chicagobleu, Free Jazz at High Noon, MartyM, doroma, Had Enough Right Wing BS, wxorknot, PowWowPollock, wasatch, ForestLake, Panacea Paola, The Hamlet, mindara, General Kutuzov, ChristineM, sparkysgal, luckybill

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site