obama ignores france, heads to saudi arabia

[JustinM]

Some of your are commenting as if the Republican/Conservative landslide in 2014 didn't happen.  Obama was not re-elected in 2012 with a mandate to continue doing what he was doing.  He got about 6 million fewer votes than in 2008.

 

Unfortunately in the 2008 and 2012 campaigns, the Republicans submitted equally weak/moderate candidates that got about the same amount of votes in both elections.  These were establishment candidates and the Republican party wrongfully believed that lukewarm candidates were what the country wanted.

 

With our limited attention spans and addiction to sensationalism, the Republican party needs to find candidates that aren't just a flash in the pan, but a grease fire, that will ignite the passions of the better half of the country that didn't bother to participate in the 2008/2012 elections.

 

Way off topic, I know.  I don't know why the President chose to go to Saudi Arabia to meet the new King instead of attending the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz. 

 

A modern day holocaust is occurring against Christians throughout the world.  This would have been a great time for the President to call out the Islamic supremacists for their Nazi like extermination of a religious group.

 

But, the silence from the world is deafening.  Ideologically, the atheists and muslims aren't opposed to what is happening to the Jews and Christians around the world.  The atheists have long marginalized, abused and persecuted Christians and Jews, and now they have an unexpected ally willing to do what they don't have the courage to do.  The muslims are living out the progressives fantasies of killing every last one of us.

 

Some of you may ask why the West says nothing.  It says nothing because it silently agrees with what the muslims are doing.

[Guest shiloh357]

I don' think the demographic issues are enough to help the Democrats overcome the dismal record they have got at this point.   I mean, unless there is some kind of miracle,  I don't think they can get the popular vote in the general election.

 

Obama was voted in because he was the cool candidate to vote for.  Everything and everyone was handily moved out of the way for him to sweep in as president.   Those demographics that voted for him then before his policy record was such a dismal failure,   won't be voting for Hillary this time around.   She is too old for them and she has too much baggage and more is coming out on her even now on the whole Ben Ghazi thing. She doesn't have the goods.  

 

I think more people  will start voting on issues when they discover they have a stake in those issues.   If it is going to cost you something, you suddenly start paying attention.  Most young people didn't care about Obamacare until they found out what they were going to end up paying and found out that they were required to get covered, but can't find a job they need to pay for such huge deductibles.

 

If the Republicans play this right, they can win.   There just too much for the Dems to defend and explain. Too many questions.   Too much bad has happened that people are not wanting more of the same for the next 4 years after Obama.   I don't think the country wants an Obama 2.0.

[Steve_S]

I don' think the demographic issues are enough to help the Democrats overcome the dismal record they have got at this point.   I mean, unless there is some kind of miracle,  I don't think they can get the popular vote in the general election.

 

Obama was voted in because he was the cool candidate to vote for.  Everything and everyone was handily moved out of the way for him to sweep in as president.   Those demographics that voted for him then before his policy record was such a dismal failure,   won't be voting for Hillary this time around.   She is too old for them and she has too much baggage and more is coming out on her even now on the whole Ben Ghazi thing. She doesn't have the goods.  

 

I think more people  will start voting on issues when they discover they have a stake in those issues.   If it is going to cost you something, you suddenly start paying attention.  Most young people didn't care about Obamacare until they found out what they were going to end up paying and found out that they were required to get covered, but can't find a job they need to pay for such huge deductibles.

 

If the Republicans play this right, they can win.   There just too much for the Dems to defend and explain. Too many questions.   Too much bad has happened that people are not wanting more of the same for the next 4 years after Obama.   I don't think the country wants an Obama 2.0.

 

I don't disagree at all with the assertion that if the republicans play this right they can win. I think that if they play it even 75 percent right they will still win. I am just not convinced that they are going to do that at this point. McCain was an obviously bad choice. Romney was a bad choice. McCain came out of an incredibly weak field (one in which romney finished second, for example) However, in 2012 especially, there were guys in like Santorum who would've provided a very stark contrast to what Obama's policies were at the time and have been since he was elected. Something like that could've turned the election then. I agree, it would've taken a juggernaut type candidate to beat obama in 2008, but he was exposed and weakened in 2012 and the republicans did not rise to the occasion, they just sort of meandered around in the corner at the after party. My contention is not that the republicans will necessarily lose or even should lose with the politics in the country being how they are, it is that I have zero confidence whatsoever in the republican leadership not to mess up in a colossal fashion.

[ayin jade]

 

If the Republicans play this right, they can win.   

 

Thats a really big if. The last presidential election convinced me the republicans wanted to lose. And the candidates tossing their hat in the ring so far are the same ones who lost before. Not impressing me at all.

[Guest shiloh357]

If they mess this up and lose this election, we are sunk.  If we get another far left candidate that ends up carrying on with Obama's policies and has the same reckless disregard for the constitution, it's over.  Our country can't take another four years of this miserable liberal morass.

[Steve_S]

If they mess this up and lose this election, we are sunk.  If we get another far left candidate that ends up carrying on with Obama's policies and has the same reckless disregard for the constitution, it's over.  Our country can't take another four years of this miserable liberal morass.

 

In my mind I see it as a slow, 75 year decline into the liberal morass that it appears to be now. Obama only built upon the ideas of predecessors, pushed the ball a little farther down the field, etc. It is just becoming more stark now because we are starting to see the financial and social consequences of socialism. Lest we not forget when obama took office the republican president that preceded him had added more money to the deficit than any other. Another 8 years of bush if you go by the averages and we would be at about 15.5 trillion dollars in debt right now instead of 18. It's not much better when you think of it in that way. I am happy that it was not a better politician than obama who ended up being president in this period. If it were we'd likely have full out single payer healthcare and I'd not be shocked if parts of the first amendment would've been amended by now. Obama's ineffectiveness as a politician has been one aspect of the situation that cannot be ignored. If someone who was a true ace politician and had obama's ideology had come along, what we have right now would look quite happy in comparison.

[JustinM]

I don't think the establishment Republicans will nominate anymore lukewarm candidates.  They tried it twice and lost badly, so I am sure they have learned from their miscalculations.

 

I think Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney are just names being thrown around to generate publicity and get the conversation going.  We still have a year before the campaign kicks off.  Since those two men are being discussed so early in the campaign I believe they aren't serious candidates and are being used as kindling to ignite the Republican base. 

 

If Rick Perry is acquitted of the indictment against him, he will walk away a battle hardened Republican veteran and will get the support of the Republican base.  He admits the reason he did so poorly in the debates in 2012, was because he was recovering from back surgery and wasn't adequately prepared for the campaign.

 

Hillary Clinton will not get the nomination.  Her only chance was in 2008 and she knows that.  She has made too many mistakes since then to be seriously considered for the nomination.  Working as Barack Obama's Secretary of State destroyed whatever chance she had of becoming President.  She is now expendable and is being used to generate interest in the upcoming campaign.  No doubt she is already grooming a protégé, it might be Elisabeth Warren or Wendy Davis.  However, I think that Wendy Davis will be the Vice Presidential candidate, she is a political martyr on the left because of her stance against Texas's pro-life bill and is just the person they would want to represent their party.

[Guest shiloh357]

Romney has just announced that he will not run for Pres.

[JustinM]

 Thanks Shiloh!  I didn't know he had withdrawn from consideration when I wrote that.  I didn't think he'd be a serious candidate, I'm just surprised that it happened already.

[Sam Adams]

Shiloh:

Best news in awhile.

Justin:

The wins by the GOP in 2014 were historically consistent with any 2nd term president. It is nothing to bet your house on.

For anyone:

Are there any true conservative candidates in the large field of GOPers right now?