I think you're right his campaign would be stronger. And I think he's made great strides as a candidate just since this race has started. He's acquitting himself well at the debates. The similarity I see with Kerry is the disconnect with the common man. Romney (and Kerry) are rich guys. In every single way, down to the golden marrow in their bones, they are rich guys. Both Romney and Kerry also have a problem inspiring passion in their supporters. Obama can run as an authentic populist. He can talk about how his mother died because she couldn't afford better treatment. He can connect and inspire. And his arguments also have the benefit of not being in favor of the policies that got us into this mess in the first place. They have the benefit of favoring assistance to the struggling middle class rather than the doing just fine rich. And a rich guy arguing for policies that benefit the rich (Romney's not even on record for the payroll tax extension) at the expense of the less than rich isn't going to play that well. Not to mention the fact that he takes health care off the table as an issue in the general, unless Obama wants it there. The fact of Romney as the nominee gives that issue to Obama to do with what he pleases. The GOP could have and should have done better than Romney, but there's no doubt now that he's the best they've got. I'm glad. In this economy I'll take my chances against an awkward, flip-flopping, rich guy who made a lot of his living laying people off.
Interesting post. Obama and Romney are a lot a like. They both will tack in virtual any direction seeking votes and seem to lack any strong beliefs. However, as you say Obama is more believable as a friend of the middle class, when he isn't pandering to the Wall Street elite, which he has done most of his time in office, to get his $ one billion. .
I cheated. Boulogne was hevily influenced by Caravaggio and his style is really Caravaggio's for the work in this thread. I just wanted to bring up the violent male prostitute because it is more fun than the short-lived Frenchman.
Because of how much the public loathes our current state of affairs, both guys also will score more points with their constituents by saying nasty things about the other. This is a big advantage for Romney because nasty campaigning comes more natural to him and his party. Obama can't run on "change" anymore; that theme will be Romney's if he wants it. He can't just talk about himself. Obama will have to highlight Romney's negatives to win. Not sure he can do that well. It isn't the way he caught and beat Hillary and it isn't how he beat McCain. Romney has major flaws both with his party and the general public but Obama (by himself) will motivate and unite the GOP enough to overcome those. It's very early but those are my ideas about an Obama vs. Romney general election. A lot can happen and so much depends on the economy, a possible foreign flareup, how Romney morphs during the nomination process, etc.
Heh.... <iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/LRfTvbYbTW4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaahah Oh, Mitt!!!!!! Priceless. The question made him nervous. On second view. Romney is getting slicker. It was almost like he gave a damn and it might be enough to fool people once more if the Occupy Wall Street movement can't continue go gain strength.
You what is interesting in the Kerry vs Romney debate? Kerry was a candidate that the base liked that had a hard time appealing to the moderates and independents where Romney is a guy the base doesn't really like but is fairly well liked by moderates and independents.
You guys keep making fun of Mitt. Let's see if you're still laughing next November. He will surprise you. To clarify: I would NEVER vote for him.
LOL, meme type response to Cain's conservative, common sense Jesus. http://commonsensejesus.tumblr.com/
The post-script is that about 2 hours before this he denounced the rabble in Occupy Wall street as a bunch of class warfare losers. He does this kind of thing a lot, the blatant kowtow/flipflop, it's as bad or worse than anythign Kerry did, and way harder to get away with in the General when you're not going up against a court jester like Herman Cain or an idiot like Perry. Wrong. Howard Dean was the "extreme liberal", Kerry was the "bipartisan" compromise. EDIT: should also say, John Edwards was considered to be on the left/base with the "unelectable" Dean. Kerry, and late entrant Wesley Clark, were the "centrist" candidates.
Man, this primary's going to be telling about the GOP right now. If they pick Romeny, they understand how to win an election, and that the average joe just wants a sane person who can give them a job. If they pick Cain, then they clearly don't kow how to win an election, and would rather push backwards policies and stubborn insanity through.
Are you saying that John Kerry is not well liked by the Democratic base? This would be news to me. I thought he was generally well liked by the base. I never said he was an extremist. I said liked. Romney is not liked by his base.
It's okay, Herman. A lot of Christians don't understand Christ, either. (Of course, he's just finding a way to court the fundamentalist vote.)
Disliked? No. Tolerated? Sure. Liked? Sure.... Well-liked? Wrong. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x56849 He was a compromise candidate. A good second-option. Basically a Condorcet paradox-winner.
The liberal court Cain was referring to was the Sanhedrin Court, the Jewish court system. They trumped up the charges and then convicted Jesus under false pretense and then asked the Romans, who were their captors and rulers, to do away with Jesus for them. The Romans couldn't find Him guilty of anything, so they washed their hands of His judgment, claiming they were doing a favor to their captives, the Jews, who had convicted Jesus, to keep them mellowed out and maintain the peace. It was convenient for Rome to complete the sentence pronounced by the Sanhedrin. The Jews were captives of Rome and the Sanhedrin was their political arm to the Roman system much like the Liberals have been held captive by their political leadership and ideology. They'd rather take handout scraps as slaves than to fight for freedom and independence. Cain is right. Thankfully, somebody is in this race. 9-9-9 all the way baby!
