In a post that Glenn linked yesterday, the fetching Stephen Green asks a question every American should ponder:
If the GOP nominates one of its Unwinnables, Obama could very well take the election next year — but to what purpose?
To what purpose, indeed.
Contrast the ideas underlying Ronald Reagan’s unsuccessful bid for the White House in 1976 and his successful one in 1980 with those underlying Obama’s one bid for the White House. That good and great man had a vision of the change he wanted, a vision remarkably consistent from the moment he first articulated it to a national audience in 1964 until his political swan song twenty-eight years later.
Obama just offered the hope of change.
What purpose would his reelection serve? What kind of changes would his reelection effect?
We haven’t even started cleaning up the messes of his first two years, but the recent debt deal, for all its flaws, at least prevents Democrats from making their mess much worse.
Dan, as of late, I’m a big fan of Marco Rubio and Chris Christie, and remain hopeful that either makes the decision to run, in which case, I would hardly call them “unwinnable.” 🙂
Rationality will prevail in the primaries. It is much easier to pick the strongest candidate when there is no incumbent in the White House
Come winter the real head to head debates begin, the most optimistic, visionary candidate will emerge and be ready to kick ass next summer and fall.
Let liberals make absurd comparisons of Tea Partiers to Al Qaeda.
The Republican Party is about to have the most serious debate about America in 30 years. The electorate will be engaged and in no mood for nonsense.
“What purpose would his reelection serve? What kind of changes would his reelection effect?”
Nothing, if we can get the Senate.
“What purpose would his reelection serve?”
It would spite all the people lefties hold grudges against.
We could run Elmer Fudd against Duh Won and he’d win in a “wandswide.”
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Regards,
Peter H.
We need a solid candidate not just to win, but to save America.
I want to prosper and be free in 2013, not just watch a map turn Red on November 6th, 2012.
I’m still on the Palin bandwagon, girls.
Hate me if you like, but I don’t see anyone else who (a) has the cojones to lead the country and (b) can be the most conservative president to lead since Reagan, and at the same time (c) throw the libtard left into a tizzy every time her name is mentioned.
And besides, I want to see the State-Run Media go into meltdown every time they have to say “President Palin.” Especially Chris Matthews. 😉
Regards,
Peter H.
The Palin record is too short to get a reading.
We saw with Obama rhetoric and no record is empty, dangerous.
Reagan HAD a RECORD and RHETORIC.
No Rookie Quarterbacks in 2012.
Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of the United States of America into the Euro-States of America is not complete; furthermore, he has not squashed the Tea Party yet & become the sole ruler of America. He still needs to time to destroy the Constitution.