2012 Is About Barack Obama: This Cannot Be Over-Emphasized

Posted on | December 3, 2011 | 28 Comments

by Smitty

What happened to Herman Cain is what the Democrats intend to do to whoever the Republican nominee turns out to be. They know they can’t win a debate on the economy or on President Obama’s record, so they will do everything they can to distract the voters’ attention from those matters, which should be decisive, and instead turn the focus to the GOP candidate and his or her alleged foibles. If Republican voters allow that to happen by nominating a candidate with baggage that permits the Democrats to turn him into the next Herman Cain, it is all too likely that President Obama will be re-elected, with consequences that can hardly be overestimated.

Spot on. When accusation is: “GOP candidate X flip/flopped on Y” the reply is: “Was Obama a greater domestic, or foreign policy disaster?”

Category: Barack Obama, Power Line

Comments

28 Responses to “2012 Is About Barack Obama: This Cannot Be Over-Emphasized”

richard mcenroe
December 3rd, 2011 @ 4:22 pm

Nice to know the Democrats have a tactic we’ll help work.
Joe
December 3rd, 2011 @ 4:23 pm

Yes that is true. And if Mitt is the nominee, we will have a litany of how LDS is a cult and if Newt is the nominee, it will be all Newt scandals all the time. That is all they got.

I hope Herman proves these allegations to be false. And I hope we can focus on the questions about Barack Obama (not lies mind you, real questions) like his involvement in fast and furious, Democratic insider trading, etc., etc. And his crappy record of suckdom.
Adjoran
December 3rd, 2011 @ 4:26 pm

Yup. In the best of all possible worlds, we would have a strong conservative with solid experience who never had a hint of scandal or ever changed his mind on an issue. If we could stitch together Newt’s wonky knowledge of policy details, Cain’s philosophy of economics, Santorum’s personal integrity, Bachmann’s passion, Trump’s money, Perry’s job record and appeal to Hispanics, Romney’s hair and experience laying off workers, Huntsman’s dental work, and Ron Paul’s army of mind-numbed robots, we might be able to field FrankenReagan and scare the heck out of Obama.

Unfortunately we can’t do that (although my experiments continue: give your spare money to the Tip Jar and send any spare body parts you happen across to me), so we will have a candidate with flaws.

But assuming we don’t don’t nominate a spineless Marxist AmeriKKKa-hating corrupt and incompetent weasel, our candidate will be far superior to the incumbent.

Most of us will have to hold our noses, but that seems a small sacrifice to save the country from four more years of this disaster.
Anonymous
December 3rd, 2011 @ 4:40 pm

If the “inappropriate conduct” and affair accusations never surfaced, would Cain still be flying high in the polls? IMHO, the answer is no; it was Cain’s serial cluelessness – best captured in the interview where he floundered in that question on Libya – which was the main factor causing his decline. There’s some evidence for this proposition in the polls, as Cain’s most marked decline occurred not immediately after the first Politico story on 10/31, but upon the release of the video of Cain’s interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial board 11/14:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html#polls

And this suggests that the forthcoming billion-dollar negative campaign against Romney or Gingrich may not be so decisive. Maybe the years of The Great Recession have shocked the voters into seriousness; maybe the voters will remain focused on substance.
Quartermaster
December 3rd, 2011 @ 5:05 pm

It’s going to depend on what that “substance” is. The US voter wants someone to tell him they are going to fix the problem with no inconvenience to them. When they hear that, they relax and go back to their couch and remotes because someone that said what they want to hear, told them what they wanted to hear.

I’m not betting on the intelligence of the US voter. Obama may well be elected because of the sheer incompetence of the GOP. Frankly, I expect Obama to be re-elected.
JeffS
December 3rd, 2011 @ 5:28 pm

I’m already in training for the November 2012 vote –I’m practicing holding my nose whilst I pen my ballot.
Kitty Myers
December 3rd, 2011 @ 5:31 pm

Everyone has some baggage. I’d like to see the remaining candidates ignore the MSM spin and all the talking buttheads. My advice to them is, if something pops up, address it quickly and honestly. Do NOT equivocate.
ThePaganTemple
December 3rd, 2011 @ 5:36 pm

Bachmann has more than just passion, though she indeed has that in spades. She is also blessed with Santorum’s personal integrity, an abundance of general and specific knowledge that might not rival Newt’s but is certainly up there with most anyone else’s, and her economic philosophy is superior to Cain’s by a mile. And by the way, she also has better hair than prick Romney. Now all I need to do is amass an army of fellow “mind numbed robots” for her and there should be no stopping her, if I can just get you all to get over the fact she’s a woman not named Palin.
ThePaganTemple
December 3rd, 2011 @ 5:37 pm

Just because the 2012 election is about Obama doesn’t mean we can run any old prick against him and expect to win.
Subguy
December 3rd, 2011 @ 6:02 pm

Why are there Re-elect Alan Grayson ads on this site?
Jack Okie
December 3rd, 2011 @ 6:13 pm

I work with a guy whose knowledge of our discipline is almost scary, whose integrity is without peer, and who works well with others. He would be an absolute disaster as a department head. Leadership is a separate skill. Let’s not make the same mistake that countless companies have made: promote their star salesman to sales manager.

Newt is no paragon, but his combination of knowledge and leadership experience is pretty persuasive. If we focus on electing the most conservative Congress we can, things would probably work out. I see him being the most successfully agressive President among the available candidates.
ThePaganTemple
December 3rd, 2011 @ 6:49 pm

That’s the kind of thing you have to put up with when you have Google ads.
ThePaganTemple
December 3rd, 2011 @ 6:52 pm

Bachmann is also a leader, she founded the Tea Party caucus in the House. But yeah, I could support Newt under the scenario you laid out. Bear in mind if the GOP ran a stinking pile of horse shit for President and made its running mate a gallon bucket full of cat piss I’d vote for them too over Obama.
Garym
December 3rd, 2011 @ 7:28 pm

ummm …. well stated?
Garym
December 3rd, 2011 @ 7:51 pm

I’ve resigned to voting for whoever gets the nom. I personally can not afford another 4 years of Obarstard.
Steve in TN
December 3rd, 2011 @ 8:04 pm

Click on it and make Grayson pay @rsmccain. It’s happening over at Legal Insurrection, too.
Jacob
December 3rd, 2011 @ 10:09 pm

It’s obvious Powerline’s comments are regarding Newt Gingrich.

If he gets the nod, his sex life will become the focus of the general election instead of Obama’s failure as President. We’ll lose in a landslide, and he’ll probably hand the House over to the Democrats because many Republican-leaning voters simply won’t show up at the polls because they’ll know it’s over.

I would be willing to bet my house that there are more “Ginger Whites” in Newt’s past that we don’t know about yet. And don’t even get me started on how female voters are going to respond to a potential First Lady being a homewrecking bimbo intern around 30 years younger than wife #2.

Here are the rules of the game: you don’t nominate candidates with messy personal lives, especially in matters of infidelity. Period.
Adjoran
December 4th, 2011 @ 1:45 am

Well, the fact that she’s not named Palin, never ran any operation larger than her congressional staff, and in her limited experiences in the Congress and Minnesota legislature has never been known for any leadership at all, even in opposition to bad bills.

She gives a rousing speech and throws plenty of red meat. That can make for a helluva tent meeting, but doesn’t qualify her to run the world’s largest enterprise with millions of employees and a budget larger than the total economy of any nation on earth except Japan and China.

Not to mention her crass attempt to demagogue vaccination policy, which could endanger public health when broadened to other vaccines, all for pure political gain.
Adjoran
December 4th, 2011 @ 1:46 am

How many members in her Tea Party Caucus? Surely this will show her great leadership, right?
Adjoran
December 4th, 2011 @ 1:54 am

Newt’s marital infidelity and other problems may be old enough to make them less effective arguments against than they once would have been, especially after Clinton. But that is only one small section of his weakness as a candidate.

His arrogance guarantees that he will, without warning, say something that will anger a lot of people. It’s a long held habit, part of his personality.

His history of backstabbing conservatives and rubbing it in their faces resembles John McCain’s rather closely. Republican voters should remember he was driven from the Speaker’s chair not by Democrats or Ethics Committees, but by his own Republican Caucus which would not have reelected him.
M. Thompson
December 4th, 2011 @ 3:02 am

Obama must be dismissed.
ThePaganTemple
December 4th, 2011 @ 8:20 am

I guess you do have somewhat of a point. A short career in the House of Representatives couldn’t possible prepare someone for such an important job. Why that would be almost as bad as having as President some old hick country lawyer from a backwater like Springfield Illinois who say only served one term in the House.
ThePaganTemple
December 4th, 2011 @ 8:24 am

So do I. In fact, I might even bet on it.
ThePaganTemple
December 4th, 2011 @ 8:33 am

I’m sorry you feel so badly about both Newt and Bachmann as our potential presidential candidates, because I’ve got some news for you that will be a bitter pill for you to swallow. Those two candidates, Bachmann and Newt, are the only two that have a snowballs chance in hell of beating Obama. I watched them all on Huckabee last night, they were all asked probing, tough questions by current state AGs. They were all given an equal amount of time. And despite what you might have heard, assuming you didn’t watch it, the only two that did worth a rats ass were Bachmann and Gingrich. Santorum, who I like to a point, came across as too spastic. Perry came across with his typical shit in mouth stumblebum persona. Paul came across as nuttier than hell even on areas which should be his stronger suits. And even Romney came across as grasping and almost confused. We are toast. I’m almost to the point of betting on it.
ThePaganTemple
December 4th, 2011 @ 8:51 am

And now for the good news. You don’t have to take my word for any of this. Huckabee always reruns his Saturday night show on Sundays, 8:00 pm. So you can watch the carnage for yourself, and you’ll see who comes out looking best. Bachmann is the only one who even begins to look presidential, and yes, that means more so than Romney in his wildest dreams.
serfer62
December 4th, 2011 @ 1:25 pm

Its about 50. Considering that the House elected Boehner; thats a lot
serfer62
December 4th, 2011 @ 1:28 pm

Why are the candidates attacking each other? They should be trying to outdo each other attacking The Won…thats how The Donald made a big splash as in The Lizard.
They should glory in MFM attacks not defend themselves
Teeing it up: A Round at the LINKs | SENTRY JOURNAL
December 4th, 2011 @ 3:14 pm

[…] THE OTHER McCAIN: 2012 Is About Barack Obama: This Cannot Be Over-Emphasized […]