President Obama’s Re-election Hope: Divide And Conquer

Posted on | November 1, 2011 | 24 Comments

by Smitty

BHO has little hope against Generic Republican. Therefore, the Axelrod strategy has to include running BHO against Divided Republican. Dondero at Libertarian Republican quotes CNN’s Wolf Blitzer:

Earlier in the month, I asked Paul whether he could support Romney if he won the nomination.
He replied that none of the Republican candidates was advocating his positions. “So I would have to find out exactly what their positions are and what the platform is that they would be running on,” he said.
I pressed and asked whether it were possible that he would run as a third-party candidate – which he did in 1988, when he was the Libertarian Party presidential candidate. “I haven’t thought about it, and I have no plans to do that,” he said. “So, no, that wouldn’t be in the cards for me.”

This is a Good Thing. As bloggers, as citizens, as leaders, as followers, we are always in tension. Liberty and ideals are subjective, and have to bend a bit before we can get along in the family, on the job, and with the rest of the country.

Having it your way in the long run may mean eating humble pie in the short to middle run. In fact, there are no guarantees of ‘your way’ ever prevailing.

Shifting from the intellectual to the theological, it was never about ‘your way’ in any case. 🙂

For Ron Paul to maximize the good he can do for the country, letting go of any remaining Presidential ambition may be worth considering. It seems he’s hanging on in the debates to ensure that the crucial issues where he has some expertise are heard. Can’t fault the man for that.

But the country is under attack from Lefty ideologues. Thus, while I remain unbowed over the 1992 choice to vote for Ross Perot, the likelihood of placing principle pre-pragmatism has gone down to zero.

Category: Barack Obama

Comments

24 Responses to “President Obama’s Re-election Hope: Divide And Conquer”

DaveO
November 1st, 2011 @ 5:13 pm

Paul’s hanging on is only about his ego: he wants to be able to say he once again skewed the process in favor of Democrats. There’s nothing to distinguish his followers from the OWS/CAP crowd.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 5:47 pm

There are two major problems with polls of Obama vs. Generic Republican:

1) Generic Republican isn’t running; and

2) Respondents to polls who are asked to envision Generic Republican tend to actually envision (their) Ideal Republican, who is a little bit different from every other respondent’s Ideal Republican … and who probably isn’t running either.

I doubt that partisan Republicans have to worry much about as far as the effects of a Ron Paul third party campaign on their candidate’s prospects is concerned. Even if he does it, it seems unlikely that he’ll cover the margin in a single battleground state. Third parties have been pretty effectively frozen out of contention for more than a century, and the temperature on the freezer got turned down even more after Perot threatened to thaw things out.

And that’s if he even does it. If you’ve studied Ron Paul’s career history, one thing you can take to the bank is that Ron Paul always does what’s best for Ron Paul. My guess is that this time around he’ll look most intently at the interests of the Paul dynasty, which are probably fairly firmly tied to the GOP.
Joe
November 1st, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

We need an actual nominee before we can really shake out how this race will turn out. Obama has a good 45% of the vote committed to him. So he is going to be a tough candidate. Of course the GOP nominee will (barring some completely meltdown) likely end up with roughly 45% committed to him. The battle will be over that remaining 10%.
chuck coffer
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:12 pm

Never forget that Ron Paul refused to endorsed his party’s nominee against Brakabama. He’s a solipsist twat.
Tennwriter
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:18 pm

Other than many of them are largely for liberty.

I’m a Socon, okay, and a lot of the Paulistas are probably stupid and immature. A lot of them might end up voting for Obama if a real conservative got nominated because for a lot of libertarians its who do I hate most: Dad or the Socialists?

But, they ain’t the OWS.

Russell Kirke is better when he calls them mayflies.

But, I’m not just hauling on the reins on an overstatement. Smitty is wrong to trumpet unity over conservatism. Paul needs to demand some quid pro quo for his followers, for his endorsement. Otherwise, he ought to tell his followers to vote for the Rubber Duck for president, and vote their consciences down ticket.

The problem we have is not enough conservatism. Its not that there is too much.

We have to break the death grip of the RINOs from the steering wheel of the party. If that requires another four years of Obama for them to get it….then so be it. Think long-term, my friends. If the Same Old Scum are able once again to use our fears of the Big Bad Democrat to keep from reforming, then when will they ever reform?
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:23 pm

Is the Libertarian Party running a candidate this cycle? I assume it takes considerably more time to get their candidate on the ballots.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:36 pm

The Libertarian Party’s presidential nominating convention is next May in Las Vegas.

In theory, “None of the Above” could capture the convention, in which case the party would not nominate, but that’s never happened before and seems unlikely to happen this time around.The LP has “automatic” ballot access in a number of states, and usually ends up on 45-50 state ballots including those they have to petition for and such.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:41 pm

Endorsing McCain would have effectively been saying to his supporters “you know all that stuff I’ve been talking about? Forget about it. I was just yanking your chain.” So while self-interest or even solipsism are certainly plausible explanations, just about any other route would have taken him to the same place. To steal the old Democrat saw, endorsing McCain is like the Special Olympics. Even if he wins, it’s still retarded.
DaveO
November 1st, 2011 @ 7:44 pm

A few points:

First, I agree that Cultural Democrats (RINO), have a death-grip on the GOP. I’m ready for the Party to die.

Ronulans are comparable to OWS in several ways:

Ronulans have historically conducted a scorched-earth policy in terms of their dealings with conservatives. Not ‘probably’ or ‘possibly.’ Their use of DDOS, spam, and robots to seek out and shut down any site and commentary contrary to their view puts them on the same moral plane as OWS. They want what they want and damn the rest of humanity.

The Ronulans are using the straw polls to justify the mischief they already intend to do. They are as blatant as old Hillary when she bussed in volunteers from New York to vote in New Hampshire’s poll in 2008. When the nomination goes to anyone but Paul, the Ronulans will proclaim their moral justification in undermining the GOP campaigns. For the OWS crowd, they are proclaiming they are part of the 99%. If They don’t get their way, and Obama doesn’t get re-elected, they have their moral justification to undermine the Nation.

Both Ronulans and OWS preach Revolution. They puts them square in the fold of being Domestic Enemies of our Nation.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 8:06 pm

So Ron Paul would have to decide about the time of the NC primary or ask someone else to step aside later on the Libertarian ticket. Don’t see how that could work.
McGehee
November 1st, 2011 @ 8:11 pm

I didn’t endorse McCain either. When I voted for the GOP ticket in 2008 it wasn’t for the guy running for president.
LeftCoastRed
November 1st, 2011 @ 8:12 pm

Off topic — I just saw Herman Cain on Bret Baier’s ‘Center Seat’ segment where the candidate takes questions from the Panel, surrounded by them.

Painful to watch. Regardless of not answering the actual question asked, Cain just rolls out his boilerplate answer on that particular issue. Example: How would he stop/respond to domestic terrorism traced to Iran. Answer: defensive Aegis cruisers off their coast to shoot down their nuke missiles. One has nothing to do with the other! Every single question was like this, to one degree or another. I have the sneaking feeling I’m still trying to wrap my arms around 9-9-9……because Herman is still trying to wrap his arms around 9-9-9!

I was a Cainiac cause I thought he’d wipe the floor with Obama. Wrong. Cain will get crucified — it’ll be a surgery lesson on national TV.
Tom Callow
November 1st, 2011 @ 8:27 pm

I am worry in advance if I miss taking out any of my cussing on this post that I left at Ace’s place for Ace, but it goes here also

Perry getting weird
Herman talkin stupidly
Mitt behind the allegations ?
If the Mitt Romney campaign is “behind the breaking story” THEN will your sorry misogynist cracker asses assent to writing in the name PALIN on the voting slips ?
If the above 3 statements are true, would Palin be be the best choice ? Would Newt be the one ? Santorum? Bachmann ? Tell me how good Cain can handle the next year if he can not handle the last 24 hours or the last week? Tell me that Perry is not in a youtube video seeming drunk in NH. Tell me that Bachmnn does not have a worse speaking voice than Palin and that her begging for money and picking Ed Rollins are both indicative of how badly she chooses things. Tell me Santorum can speak in front of a group of people and not break into a social warfare warrior involving GOD.
If Mitt campaign is behind the Cain story pushing for all they are worth, tell me how THAT is good for the country. GO ahead, tell me
Pussy hating/fearing fuckwads kept Palin out of the campaign, how is THAT any good for the country ? or how is her being out any better than what ever the *uck is going on right now today ?
GAHCindy
November 1st, 2011 @ 8:56 pm

I don’t really think Ron Paul has ever wanted to be president. Not the way the rest of them seem to. He’d take the job if he could get it, and he’d cling to his principles, and it would make him one heck of an interesting leader. But I’ve always gotten the feeling he runs for president because it’s the best way to get the word out about what he really believes in, not because he thinks he can or even should be the man in the Oval Office. In the end, it always comes down to him trying to do what (he thinks) is best for the country. Or maybe I’m just very tired and seeing it all wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time. ;0)
chuck coffer
November 1st, 2011 @ 9:52 pm

Yeah. Better to say, “remember all that stuff I said about being a republican and how I actually gave a shit about the future of my country? Turns out it was all bullshit. It’s all about me.”
Tennwriter
November 1st, 2011 @ 10:18 pm

Well, seeing as how our relationship or lack thereof with God is the key problem with us, Santorum just might have a point.

And Mr. Callow, I suspect most of those who write here would jump up and down for joy, or even jump in the pool, fully clothed, with a bottle of champagne in one hand, and a tulip glass in the other if Palin were nominated.

I like Cain. I like Santorum and Bachmann better. But I really, really would love to say ‘President Sarah Palin’.
Tennwriter
November 1st, 2011 @ 10:21 pm

Interesting. I know one female blogger complained about being threatened, and I think maybe harrassed by some Ronulans. And that is distinctly uncool of them.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 10:36 pm

Knowing one wont be president isn’t the same as thinking one shouldn’t be. I’ve no doubt Ron Paul thinks he is just the right person to be president in these times. If it weren’t for his policies on security I would agree. But knowing that he wont win, tho he may believe that somehow there is a remote chance, he runs to support his principals if not out of patriotism. Whatever one thinks of Ron Paul, he is fighting for what he believes in and probably doesn’t get as much respect as he deserves for that.
Anonymous
November 1st, 2011 @ 11:50 pm

If Paul walks into the LP convention on the day of the vote and asks for the nomination, he’ll win it in a landslide. They’ve been suckers for him over there for 20-odd years.
Adjoran
November 2nd, 2011 @ 12:27 am

If any so-called conservative wants to behave like a bratty toddler and take his toys home and refuse to play the minute he doesn’t get his way, he must bear responsibility for the damage done by a second Obama term, which the nation may not be able to recover from in our lifetimes. The man has already seated two Justices and over a 100 other federal judges to life terms, and a second term would likely see him nominate 2-3 more to SCOTUS and 200-300 other judicial openings.

That’s damage that will persist for DECADES.

The winner of the Republican nomination will be the one who wins the most delegates in primaries and caucuses. If conservatives fail to unite behind one candidate or can’t find a good enough candidate to win the REPUBLICAN primaries, that isn’t the fault of center-right voters. Look in the damn mirror.

Suck it up and do the right thing if you lose, you RINOs!
Bob Belvedere
November 2nd, 2011 @ 8:36 am

Excellent point: I believe the future of his son will weigh heavily in his decision making.
Bob Belvedere
November 2nd, 2011 @ 8:38 am

She’s the 900lb moose in the room.
Bob Belvedere
November 2nd, 2011 @ 8:39 am

Hear, hear!
McGehee
November 2nd, 2011 @ 2:28 pm

Ah, shut up.