Conservative Republicans claim that if Jeb Bush gets the nomination for President, he will lose because he's not conservative enough. They say that he and Hillary Clinton might as well run on the same ticket because there is no difference between the two of them. But what scares Conservatives about Jeb Bush isn't that he's too liberal. What scares them is that he's willing to run as a moderate without trying to appease the conservative base to get the nomination and can win without kissing their butts to win the Presidency. They fear that he's right.
For seven years, Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingram have been saying that the reason John McCain and Mitt Romney both lost to Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 is because they were too moderate. I disagree. I think the problem they both had was that instead of sticking to their guns, both McCain and Romney (especially Romney) ran for over a year trying to appease the conservative base and then made a pivot to the middle during the general election. Voters recognized this and we're confused by who they were getting.
The truth is, the 2008 election would've gone badly for Republicans regardless of who was their candidate. A Republican President, Geore W. Bush was residing over two seemingly endless and unpopular wars and both the house market and general economy began to crash in a scope not seen since the Grest Depression. Add to that, a young Barack Obama was touting hope and change, promising a better tomorrow in a way that energized and united Americans not seen in decades. John McCain was probably the only Repuvlican who not only would've done as well as he did but who had an actual shot at winning. Anyone else would've been in for an epic shallaking not seen since Reagan's re-election in 1984. Yet after McCain lost, Conservatives asserted that a "True Conservative" would've won instead of admitting that it was just going to be a brutal election for them.
2012, however, was different. The economy was in a sluggish recovery with most Americans still dissatisfied with the state of the country. Division in Washington was at it's worst, going contrary to Obama's campaign promise of uniting the country and setting aside politics. Obama was weak and Republicans had a shot at unseating him. Yet the Republican primary proved a circus with a revolving door of front runners who each couldn't justify their campaign for President besides "anyone but Obama". The eventual nominee, Mitt Romney, was a moderate Republican who served as governor in a very liberal state. He struggled throughout the primaries to win Conservatives who warned that he wasn't conservative enough. But to get the nomination, he took up far right positions which he then tried to turn back in the general election. He also faile to define himself and his candidacy and sell it to the American people. Through it all, Conservatives weren't sold on his candidacy either. Only when Romney obliterated Obama in the first Presidential debate did Conservatives fully embrace and accept him. Alas, come election night they were all disappointed once again. Obama handily own and the attack dogs were immediately turned on Romney as the same-old line of "a True Conservative would've won" was brushed off and used. The problem with Romney was the perception people had that he was an ultra-rich elitist with elevators for his cars who enjoyed firing people and who wrote off 47% of the country as never voting for Republicans because they enjoy their government hand outs. Ironically, Romney received roughly 47% of the vote. He could've and should've own but didn't not because he wasn't Conservative enough but because he tried having one foot in Conservative ground while also trying to claim the middle. People didn't buy it.
Which brings us to today. Another election is upon us and another Bush is ready to run for President. So far it appears that Jeb Bush doesn't plan to play to the Conservative base by taking up all their positions but instead intends to keep positions which are more moderate. This has led Conservative radio hosts to say that he's no better than Hillary Clinton and that he will lose if nominated. Truth be told, of the possible Republican candidates out there, Jeb Bush is the likeliest to win without pivoting to the right to get the party's nomination. And that frightens Conservatives.
If Bush loses, Conservatives will declare victory that they were right and that 2020 needs a True Conservative. But if Bush wins, he'll prove that a moderate Republican can win without playing to the Conservative base and thus render people like Limbaugh obsolete. Of course, in all likelihood if Bush wins then Conservatives will say they carried him over the finish line by rallying behind him. It was the line they had prepared on Election Day 2012.
The only way Conservatives will learn that their approach is detrimental to this country and ony increasing the divide within our government is for a True Conservative (someone like Ted Cruz) to lose the general election. This will prove them wrong and force the party back to the middle and hopefully help our government to work again.
Of course, chances are that if someone like Ted Cruz does lose, Conservatives won't learn a thing and will continue their pattern of insanity by doing the same thin over and over again to the same results.
I don't know how many people are aware of it or not, but during the 2008 Presidential election, there were groups of people on both sides of the political spectrum who tried to disprove that either John McCain and Barack Obama were not eligible to be President of the United States. For anyone not familiar with the American Constitution, Article Two lays out the role of the executive branch of the U.S. government, which includes the requirements to be President:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Basically, the Constitution says that in order to be President, you need to be 35-years-old, lived in the United States for fourteen years, and have been born on American soil, making you a natural born citizen.
I'm not an expert on elections of the past, but I believe this past election of 2008 was a first for Presidential politics; where neither candidate was born on the mainland of the United States. John McCain was born at the Naval Air Station in the Panama Canal Zone, Panama, which was considered United States territory. This made him a natural born citizen. Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.
However, there are people at both extremes of both parties who claimed and some who continue to claim that neither McCain or Obama are natural born citizens. The argument for McCain was that he was not born inside the United States. The argument for Obama is much slimmer; that he was born, I believe, in Kenya, meaning that he is a natural born citizen.
Even though Obama produced a Hawaiian birth certificate during last year's election, his critics claim that it is either a fake or has been altered. If you ask me, this is a little extreme. It got to the point where these critics took their argument all the way to the Supreme Court. The Court did not hear the challenge. Even after Obama has served six months as President, there are stil those who claim he is not legitimate!
It has gotten to the point where I recently discovered this news story!
Whether this is an attempt to question Obama's citizenship or not, if this law were to be passed (and I doubt it) you can bet that there will be people in 3 years who will argue that Barack Obama is not eligible to run for re-election. Yes, that's right. The President is not eligible to be President!
I find this bill unnecessary. In fact, I find it redundant since the Constitution of the United States already lays out the requirements for this bill. Shouldn't proof that one meets those requirements be implied already? Why go through the process of writing a bill and passing it into a law when the things it requires are already required in the Constitution?
To be honest, I believe Obama's citizenship is legit. And I believe that those in Congress who are trying to get this bill passed are only fanning the flames, with the unlikely (but not impossible) intention of challenging Obama's right to run for re-election in 2012! It's more evidence of the various methods that those on both political extremes will take to win.
I'm disgusted at how increasingly divided this country has become, especially over the last 8 years. When you have Republicans saying that they hope health care reform fails so that it will sink Obama, when you have people hoping that the President fails at his job just because he's not of your party, it's a sign that more and more politicians and biased political pundits are putting political victory ahead of the well-being of everybody.
I was not a fan of George W. Bush. I didn't think he was a very good President, and I'll never understand how he could be re-elected, let alone elected as President, but the matter of the fact is that for 8 years he was the President. Like it or not, he was. But I never wanted the man to fail, because I knew that if he failed, the nation and its citizens would suffer. I didn't agree with Bush on a lot of things, but I never wanted him to fail at doing his job to defend the citizens of this country.
I want Barack Obama to succeed. If he fails, the nation suffers, and during these tough economic times, can we afford his failure? His failure is our failure. In 2012, I will do more then just look at whether or not Barack Obama was able to keep his word. I will take a look at why he failed. If it was his own doing, I will certainly voted against him. However, if it was the fault of others, then Obama will earn my vote and I will vote against those who are responsible for his failure.
It's time for everyone, whether Democrat or Republican, to set aside differences and try to work together for the improvement of the country and its citizens. Nothing else should matter.
And to those who continue to ride the Obama-is-not-a-citizen bandwagon; wake up! He's the President!
In an interview with PEOPLE, Sarah Palin informed the interviewer that her oldest daughter and her fiance are "hard at work and keeping up with school". Palin's oldest daughter, Bristol, gave birth to her baby, Tripp, on Saturday and said that she intends to finish high school and get her diploma, even though she is now a teenage mother.
I congratulate Bristol and her fiance on the birth of their newborn baby and wish them all the best as they strive to raise him, and that Bristol intends to finish high school. This will surely be a daunting task for her as I can only imagine how the new few years will be as she tries to raise a baby and finish high school!
However, this is not the point of my post. What I found curious about the article is what Governor Palin (former Republican vice-presidential candidate) said to the interviewer. "You need to know that both Levi and Bristol are working their butts off to parent and going to school and working at the same time." She goes on to say that she wants to make sure that is made clear because "any suggestion otherwise 'harms Bristol's reputation and Levi's reputation and their chances for good work opportunities."
First of all, I don't need to know. I haven't given the subject of Palin's pregnant teen daughter any thought in a couple of months, especially since it's been out of the news. There's just no need for Palin to raise it once again, especially when I don't remember seeing any articles this past week (outside of the linked PEOPLE article) announcing the birth of her grandson. There is not much of a desire in the public to know about this aspect of the governor's life, or there shouldn't be anyway, unless you're a die-hard Palin fan or a die-hard Palin critic. Everyone else in between could care less. Me? I could care less. But it's that statement that we "need to know" that assumes that everyone must know.
Second, while apparently Levi has left high school to pursuit training to become an electrician, Bristol is continuing high school. Governor Palin seems to think that if Bristol's intentions aren't made clear, her chances for future opportunities will be damaged. I don't know where Bristol is at in her high school career, but given she is 17 or 18, I assume that she is a senior and due to graduate this spring. If that's the case, when she finishes school this year she will receive her high school diploma. Thus, where is the damage to her reputation? If anything, it will show that she has the strength and determination and the willingness to not only work hard to finish school, but do so while raising a newborn baby. If anything, that will help Bristol's reputation! Bristol probably should not be looking for work anytime soon anyway if she's both raising a newborn and finishing high school. So how will it hurt her chances for future opportunities? Bristol shouldn't need her mother to go out there and assure the public that she is going to work hard so that her opportunities won't be hindered. Bristol's work and own personal accomplishments should speak for themselves.
Truth be told, I view it nothing more than Sarah Palin's continuing quest to repair her reputation and to start preparing for the 2012 election. The reason we "need" to know is because Palin wants to assure the public that family values are a high priority in her family. While as uncovered as it was, the birth of a grandson out of wedlock for Governor Palin would have people scoffing and shaking their heads and criticizing her as a parent, so Governor Palin wants people to know and she wants to change so that people say, "Oh, that's good of them to do!"
The way I see it, it's all about damage control, even though I thought the baby had been born weeks ago, to be honest! While I think it's great that Bristol is working hard at school (though I find the way the statement is worded puzzling; would Bristol already be back in school and don't Alaskan schools have Christmas break?), Governor Palin really doesn't need to get out there and be the voice for her daughter. Politican and future Presidential candidate or not, Governor Palin should still be a mother first and recognize that she doesn't need to discuss her family's personal lives in the public domain, even if it is to help prevent "damage" to their reptuations.
Governor Palin, just let your daughter work hard the way she says she's going to. Have faith that she will be able to handle the responsibilities of parenting and high school education at the same time without needing mom to vouch for her. I think you'll find that, in the end, if she finishes high school while being a teenage mother, she should have plenty of opportunities on her own. Besides, she will still have the advantage of being the daughter of Sarah Palin's daughter. That couldn't hurt too much either, couldn't it?
On Tuesday, the long and grueling 2-year U.S. 2008 election will finally come to an end, and on Wednesday the next one will begin. Or at least, if we're lucky it'll wait that long before it starts. But the big question that will be voiced by all the pundits after the results are declared Tuesday will be: What went wrong for the loser?
What if John McCain Wins? Political polling will never be the same again. In 2004, the polls should John Kerry beating George W. Bush by several points, and yet George W. Bush won by 3% of the vote. Pollsters stopped and took a look at the way they did polls and tried to revamp their system. While polling will never be perfect nor entirely accurate, it gives a general idea of the way the election is going. Or so we're lead to believe. Ever since this economic crisis began, polls have shown Barack OBama to be as much as 10 points ahead of John McCain. While that number has shrunk in recent days, he still has a small but somewhat distinct lead of McCain. So if McCain is elected 44th President of the United States, many pollsters will probably find themselves without a job.
Many people, especially Obama supporters, will turn their blame to the Clintons. The Democratic Primaries went on endlessly and it was a brutal fight in which many harsh feelings arose, particularly between Obama and the Clintons. While Hillary Clinton was quick to jump aboard the Obama Express, Bill Clinton was slow to climb aboard. It wasn't until the Democratic National Convention that Bill Clinton finally threw his full, public support behind Barack Obama, and it hasn't been until recent weeks that Clinton has finally been seen on the campaign trail. In one interview, Clinton called John McCain a "good and honorable person", but was hesitant to say the same about Obama. Even though Hillary Clinton was been campaigning hard in key swing states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia and others in declaring her support of Obama, many people will stay ask the question, "Was it enough?"
People will also looked to the list of Barack Obama's associations. Reverend Wright was a major issue in the primaries, and I believe that he will be an issue once again in the closing 2 days of the election as the ultimate McCain Trump card. Associations with William Ayers could also be viewed as an issue, because such associations will have raised questions about Obama's judgement.
Experience will also be a factor. Obama was only elected to the United States senate in 2004, and he announced his candidacy in February 2007 after spending just over 2 years in the Senate. He has indeed spent nearly half of his term-to-date in the Senate campaigning for President. Is Barack Obama simply too inexperienced?
Then there will be the ultimate question of race. Is America just not ready for an African American to be President? Could people be telling pollsters they will vote for Obama simply because they don't want to say they're going to vote against a black man? Is racism and prejudice stil so prevalant in American culture that we are still not ready to accept a minority our national leader? A co-worker of mine said a year ago that, even though she is African American, she wasn't sure if she would vote for Obama because she would be afraid that he would be assassinated. Could this also be a factor for some people? Could it be more then just an issue of racial prejudice but also fear of the prejudices and racial animosity of others to the point where they fear for the life of Barack Obama should he be elected President?
In a year where Democrats should have the election in the bag, especially with the recent economic upheaval, the question will remain for years to come as to how Democrats could have blown their best and clearest opportunity since Franklin Delano Roosevelt ousted Herbert Hoover in 1932 in the midst of an economic depression. The political climate is ripe for Democrats to grab victory. A lose now would be utterly devastating for the party.
What if Barack Obama Wins? Needless to say, John McCain has done better then any candidate the Republican party could have hoped for. Ever since 2000, McCain has been a national figure who has earned the reputation of being an Independent Republican. Bill Clinton said it best when he said that if any Republican had any chance of winning in this political climate, it was John McCain. So if McCain loses, some of the contributing factors will be quite obvious.
It's hard to be the Presidential candidate of the incumbant party when the sitting President has approval ratings in the 20s, the lowest since Harry Truman. Americans are increasingly unhappy with the way George W. Bush has run the country over the last 8 years, and for 4 of those years Republicans held majorities in both the House and Senate, meaning that they view Republicans in general as being the ones to run the U.S. into the ground. Hence why Democrats swept back into power in 2006. And despite best efforts to place blame on Democrats who have controlled both House and Senate for 2 years, it's hard to keep the blame off the Republican President. Indeed George W. Bush has rarely been seen on the campaign trail, only publicly attending fund-raisers. Outside of his endorsement of John McCain back in March, neither McCain nor Bush have been seen publicly together during the course of the campaign. It says quite a lot when Bush didn't even show up at the Republican National Convention, and addressed the delegates via satellite for only a matter of minutes. And it has only in recent weeks that John McCain has really come out swinging at Bush, trying to really define himself separately from his colleague. But it's hard to say you're different from George W. Bush when you vote in line with him 90% of the time. If he loses, will it be because John McCain simply could not distance himself enough from the sitting President.
Barack Obama has shattered campaign fund-raising levels. He has been outspending John McCain dramaticly, and it is only in recent days where McCain has been able to match Obama's television ad spending dollar-for-dollar. For years McCain was an advocate for campaign finance reform and agreed to accept Public Financing, while Obama chose not to. Consider it ironic if it's McCain's own finance limitations that contribute to his defeat.
There will always be the question of the way McCain has run his campaign. McCain has been all over the map for nearly the entire campaign. At one point a year ago, his campaign was nearly bankrupt. If not for a vital win in New Hampshire, McCain would not have been able to continue forward in his campaign to be President. He has changed the staffing of his campaign many times, had to dismiss many because of public gaffes, and he has been unable to keep a clear, consistent message for longer then a few days. A campaign staffer even admitted that as far back as June 2008, they could not find a reason to elect John McCain. And the campaign has even had trouble laying out one clear strategy. McCain's campaign has become more well-known for its tactical plays (the Palin pick, the "suspension" of his campaign) instead of strategic plays. It hasn't been until recent weeks that the campaign has been able to stay on-message and consistent with their new mascot Joe the Plumber. If Joe the Plumber did anything, it was bring focus to an unfocused campaign. But was it too little too late?
McCain has been known for his temper, and often during the debates he came across as rude, stand-offish, and even angry and annoyed whenever Obama spoke. There are numerous clips from the third debate of McCain rolling his eyes and overreacting whenever Obama spoke. Is this the kind of temperament Americans want their President to have when he's sitting face-to-face with international leaders?
McCain's age could also be a factor. If he elected, he will be the oldest man to ever be elected President. Many questions have arisen over his health and judgment. He has had a couple fights with cancer in recent years, raising concerns amongst many voters. And his handling of the recent economic crisis also brings doubt to his judgment. While McCain might have trouble keeping his own campaign on message, it doesn't help that McCain had trouble keeping himself on message during that awful week in September. McCain was literally all over the map during that week.
In the spring of 2008, McCain vowed to run a "clean and honorable" campaign. This campaign has been anything but. I was disgusted by the Republican convention and how ugly and negative the tone was. And things just kept on getting worse. This has become one of the worst campaigns for smear tactics that I ever recall. I thought 2004 was bad, but 2008 was worse. Indeed, McCain broke one of his first campaign promises in favor of Karl Rove (or Rovian) tactics, the same tactics that sank his 2000 campaign against G.W. Bush. Ironic, though, that those same tactics that were used against him then could also sink him now, but not because they are used against him, but because he is the one using them! Rovian tactics might have worked in 2000 and 2004, but the climate in 2008 is different. Now you have instant-fact checks and numerous websites that fact check every claim that is made. Even YouTube has numerous videos showing candidates (especially McCain) contradicting themselves. The simple matter is, not only are Americans tired of these smear tactics that brought us 8 years of Bush presidency, but they simple are not falling for them anymore because a claim can be fact-checked or google-ed in a matter of minutes. The Rovian tactics worked once, but not anymore.
One of the most appealing aspects of John McCain had always been his ability to appeal to independent voters and even many Democrats because he was not afraid to take on his own party. There were in fact many issues that McCain disagreed with his own party about. But over the last year, those positions have gradually shifted so that McCain could align himself more with the party base. While this may have helped him to gain the Republican nomination, it may have ended up hurting him in the general election. McCain always appealed to independents, and it has been no secret that many base Republicans have not been enthused by the McCain candidacy. When McCain was trying to shore up the base, he should have been trying to continue to appeal to moderates and independents because of how much disgust there is right now with the Republican brand. McCain had for a long time been running away from his maverick label so that he could appeal to the base. But in doing so, McCain has lost his appeal with the very people he needed to win the election. While running a base campaign might have worked for George W. Bush in 2004, the Republican base has shrunk quite a bit over the last few years to the point where no Republican can win without winning over independents. Unfortunately, in running a campaign to try to appeal to his own party, McCain has disenfranchised the very independents and conservative Democrats that he needs to win the presidency.
To go hand-in-hand with my last point, I turn to his selection of Vice-President. McCain has had trouble shoring up the Republican base from the beginning. Republicans simply were not enthused by John McCain's candidacy for president. I recently heard a poll that stated that over 70% over Obama supporters are enthusastic about him, while around 23% of McCain supporters can say the same about him. Ouch! I firmly believe that McCain's best bet to win the presidency would've been to run away from the Republican party and go as far to the middle as he could. Indeed, there are many rumors that this indeed was what McCain's instincts were telling him when he was wanting to ask Independent Senator (and former 2000 Vice-Presidential candidate) Joe Lieberman to be his running mate. What a blow that would have been! In fact, I was expecting this to happen, because I knew that this would be a difficult ticket for Obama to beat. In fact, I believe this would've been McCain's best chance to win. But instead of running to the center, McCain chose to run to the right to not only avoid a floor fight at the convention, but to also shore up his own base. In doing so, McCain pulled another tactical maneuver (one that came out of nowhere) and picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. This was a blatant attempt to try to pick off Hillary Clinton voters, especially after Democrats appeared united at their own convention despite a long and brutal primary fight. Many Clinton supporters saw through it and ran even further for Obama. While the maneuver failed at grabbining many Clinton supporters, it did help McCain reinforce the Republican base.
But this was probably his biggest mistake. While Palin might have energized the base and even grabbed independents, the more we learned about Palin, the more people were turned off by her. Claims that she has more executive experience then Obama and Biden combined because of her being a mayor for 6 years and being governor for just under 2 have come across as ridiculous. It should be noted that if you use that argument, she should be at the top of the Republican ticket because she indeed also has more executive experience then John McCain! Claims that she has foreign policy experience because she can see Russia are laughable! That should mean that governors of states that border Canada and Mexico can make the same claims! And now polls show Palin to be the biggest factor that is pulling down the McCain campaign. From botched interviews to contradictory remarks, the Palin candidacy has been a disaster for the McCain campaign. And in recent weeks, it has looked like Palin has even been trying to distance herself from McCain to set herself up for 2012 Presidential bid should they lose. While Palin may have energized the Republican base for McCain, it also turned off everyone else, the very same people who used to respect and admire John McCain and might have voted for him.
Indeed, that will probably be one of the iceberg that sank McCain's ship; instead of trying to appeal to the middle of the country, John McCain worked too hard to appeal to his own party.
Pundits will spending days, even weeks if not months interviewing "experts" and strategists trying to determine what went wrong for the candidate who loses. Indeed, there will be many contributing factors if Obama loses, whether it be racism or his "inexperience" or even the Clintons not trying hard enough. The same can be said of McCain if he loses, from age to a poorly run campaign, to a bad climate for Republicans to even his own running mate.
In the end, all we can do is hope that the media will be too caught up in trying to figure out what went wrong to even start figuring out who is next for 2012. Oh, wait, too late!
