Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Clevelander17

Michelle Bachmann

Recommended Posts

No. I think she'll draw some curiosity by the media, much like Palin did. But Palin was running along McCain who already had established creds, which helped establish her. If Palin had come on the scene by herself, she wouldn't have nearly as much 'credibility'. In the end, I think she's too fringy to draw in enough mainstream repubs.

 

Plus we all know that all Republicans are misogynists.

[that's sarcasm, right there, in case you were wondering]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She can't win the general.  But can she win the primary?

 

Really?  A little early to be calling your shot, isn't it?  Still sticking to your guns that Obama is unbeatable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying she'll win anything either, but from the little I've seen of her, she knows how to speak intelligently (unlike Palin) and has a good grasp of the major issues.  I think when the Republican herd starts to thin, I predict she'll be in the final 3 and at that point it could be anyone's race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She can't win the general.  But can she win the primary?

 

Really?  A little early to be calling your shot, isn't it?  Still sticking to your guns that Obama is unbeatable?

 

Against Bachmann, Obama is unbeatable.  Anthony Sowell is unbeatable against Bachmann (not intended as a factual statement).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^yep

 

I'm not saying she'll win anything either, but from the little I've seen of her, she knows how to speak intelligently (unlike Palin) and has a good grasp of the major issues. 

 

Have you heard her talk about the issues?  Id say she knows how to regurgitate common talking points, but Obama (or any other legitimate candidate) would wipe the floor with her in a debate.

 

And I never said Obama was unbeatable.  Those are your words.  I said he is going to be unbeatable once the GOP primary is over and done with because, to get the nomination, these candidates are going to have to make such a surge to the right that they won't be able to sufficiently backtrack from those stances in time for the general.  The key to this primary will be winning, as the GOP itself termed it, the 'visceral' and 'reactionary' voters from the right wing.  Huntsman the only one who really scares the administration, but I doubt he gets the nomination because he won't do what neeeds to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The GOP primary will be a feeding frenzy of course, but much the same it was a vicious battle between Hillary & Obama in 2008.  All that is quickly forgotten however once it is narrowed.  Back to the topic of Michelle Bachman, I'm still not so quick to dismiss her.  She speaks in a manner that attracts alot of middle class people and doesn't have the baggage of a career politician like Romney.  Regardless of who makes it through the GOP primary, I think the selection of VP candidate will be key.  As we all saw in 2008, Palin tanked that campaign rather than boosting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama and Hillary was not a race to the left.  If anything, Obama went right of Hillary on several key issues.  But the mud that was slung in that race did indeed stick around during the general.

 

Yes, Bachmann knows how to speak to Real Amurcans

 

Warning, you are going to draw the wrath of EVD for that 'tanked' comment.  He gets very defensive of his girlfriend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Bachmann knows how to speak to Real Amurcans

 

See, there you go, showing your true colors.  Like you're superior to people from the south... or she only appeals to those with accents...  I thought racism wasn't tolerated on this board...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Bachmann knows how to speak to Real Amurcans

 

See, there you go, showing your true colors.  Like you're superior to people from the south... or she only appeals to those with accents...  I thought racism wasn't tolerated on this board...

 

Racism?  Ah, nevermind...  out of curiosity though, which true colors am I showing.... blue, orange, magenta?

 

Regardless, I thought Real Americans (happy now?) Also clung to their guns and bibles in western Pa.  I don't believe they are limited to the south, but I could be wrong.  I usually just call it "Kentucky USA"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bachmann has a real chance to win the Republican primary.  She is essentially Palin but is not disliked by as many people and comes off as a little smarter in debates and public speaking in general.  There aren't as many traditional centrists in the Republican party anymore so with the Republicans that are left I think she stands a chance. I think she would be obliterated in the general election though as bad as Ken Blackwell was beat in Ohio in 2006.  She has said too many crazy things that would be used against her in the general election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Bachmann knows how to speak to Real Amurcans

 

See, there you go, showing your true colors.  Like you're superior to people from the south... or she only appeals to those with accents...  I thought racism wasn't tolerated on this board...

gottaplan, it's just the sameold-sameold elitist bigotry. nothing to be alarmed about. if you stay on this website long enough you get used to it. they can't help it, it's like being on autopilot and as predictable as the change of seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey..... what do you have against 'American elitism'?  Just because you live in the East Village does not mean you have to be a pinko commie.

 

I do suppose this notion of anti-elitism you see coming from the right brings us back on topic because Bachmann is anything but elite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the economy is strong in November of next year, then Bachmann cannot win.  On the other hand, neither can Romney or Pawlenty.

 

If the economy is weak next year, then Bachmann has a chance.  Does she have a better chance than Romney?  Maybe, actually.  During times of economic hardship, fiscal and economic issues rise to the forefront of debates and social issues recede.  Bachmann's largest deviations from the national center appear to be on social issues, though she's obviously right-of-center economically as well.  The kind of climate that could produce any Republican winner could therefore minimize Bachmann's worst liabilities.  If the economy is strong, however, then Obama will have both the luxury of a strong economy (always a blessing to the incumbent) and a public mood likely more willing to delve into the social-issue backgrounds of candidates, which would most likely result in Bachmann's annihilation at the polls.

 

Bachmann has a chance at winning the primary primarily due to weak competition.  Mitt Romney, the "frontrunner," just feels like a vulnerable frontrunner.  He does not inspire either social conservative or the economic conservative bases of the GOP.  Bachmann is the darling of the former and is fairly acceptable to the latter.

 

As for Bachmann in the general election, I agree with the general sentiment that she is not the GOP's strongest general election contender.  She is a long, long way from their weakest, however, and if the economy worsens between now and 2012, she would have a chance.  Keep in mind that the average voter spends significantly less time following blogs and delving into whatever dirt can be dug up on a given candidate than most of us reading this thread.  By all accounts, she did *not* come off as too crazy to be electable in the recent GOP primary debate.  She will need good, temperate answers to the inevitable questions about statements she has made in the past.  However, that was basically Ronald Reagan's path to the presidency in 1980: speak calmly and maturely enough during the nationally televised debates to appear presidential, and let the economy do the rest of the work of sinking Carter.

 

She is also a <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/06/27/michele-bachmann-for-president-2012-tea-party-favorite-is-no-joke.html">fundraising machine</a>, with a national apparatus already (though not what it would need to become for a presidential run) because there simply isn't that much money in Minnesota.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Social conservatism shows up in the darndest places so I don't think that would hurt Bachmann much in the general.  There are plenty of Democrats in the lunchpail wing who could be drawn away from Obama on that alone.  Some of them are practically looking for a reason.  Her biggest problem would be defending economic theories that even Greenspan has disowned.  Joe Teamster is a democrat on economic grounds.  He might be a righty on social issues and foreign policy.  And running a female candidate could draw down another core Democratic bloc.

 

I think that's why it's been tough for Democrats in presidential races since the Great Racist Crossover of the 1960s.  Watergate should have sunk the Republicans for a generation.  Nope.  W should have sunk them for another.  Nope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

538 is saying Romney, Bachman, Pawlenty, and I think that Texas gov(?), are going to be the top tier for the GOP primaries and the others will be also-rans. 

 

that was basically Ronald Reagan's path to the presidency in 1980: speak calmly and maturely enough during the nationally televised debates to appear presidential, and let the economy do the rest of the work of sinking Carter

 

....i recall in the 1970s Reagan was considered "too conservative".  He was even defeated by Gerald Ford as 'too conservative' for the GOP, in the Republican primaries back then.  But did come back as part of the Movement Conservative surge in the later 1970s to do exactley what you said.  The economy and the Iran Hostage thing sank Carter for good (Carter was sort of "W" near the end, with the same low approvals that "W" was getting).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has a member of the HOR ever been elected to be President?..... or even nominated to run on their party's ticket?  Usually, it is either a Senator or a Governor.  I can't remember any HOR members.

 

A couple things to remember about Bachmann:

 

1) She is a member of the Tea Party Express, which is the more visceral and reactionary of the Tea Party factions.... or at least it is compared to the more moderate Tea Party Patriots

 

2) She told the nation on live TV in a pre-prepared speech that medical malpractice tort reform was a "free market reform"  :|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that's why it's been tough for Democrats in presidential races since the Great Racist Crossover of the 1960s.  Watergate should have sunk the Republicans for a generation.  Nope.  W should have sunk them for another.  Nope.

 

Watergate might have sunk the GOP for a generation had Carter been a stronger president.  Carter's weakness rapidly reminded the country of why a smart crook might sometimes have an advantage as a leader over an honest but bumbling everyman.  (Obviously, neither is ideal.)

 

I don't think W is even in the same league.  He may have sunk McCain, but I think Palin did far more damage to McCain's campaign than Bush Jr. did.  I certainly wouldn't expect W to have any long-term ripple effects the way one might have reasonably expected Watergate to have at the time, during the time between when Nixon resigned and when Carter took over (i.e., the whole Ford presidency).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has a member of the HOR ever been elected to be President?..... or even nominated to run on their party's ticket?  Usually, it is either a Senator or a Governor.  I can't remember any HOR members.

 

Garfield, I think.

 

That said, it's a lot easier for a member of the House to increase their public profile now than it would have been in 1950.  Modern technology may have altered the landscape in that regard.  Maybe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sure know alot about Tea Party factions...  you learn all that watching Rachel Maddow?

 

Shit like this isn't necessary on this forum. You should keep your posts constructive or at least informative, or you'll get the attention of the mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Civvik is correct.  You probably will get the attention of the moderators.  I have never seen a political forum that is more oppresively moderated than the political forums on this board.  Ironic considering the whole internet/freedom of speech thing.

 

Anyway, Bachmann is a flash in the pan.  No Republican heavy hitter is going to run this cycle because no one wants to be the captian of the Titanic  when the U.S. currency hits the iceburg.  Probably in one to two years.

 

Tedolph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I have never seen a political forum that is more oppresively moderated than the political forums on this board."

 

Probably because the Admins understand that forumers will want to have political discussions and we try to accomodate, but at the same time, we don't get paid to clean up the aftermath of politically-charged fights. This isn't a politics forum at heart, and on plenty of other city-focused forums comparable to UrbanOhio - this type of discussion wouldn't even be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably because the Admins understand that forumers will want to have political discussions and we try to accomodate, but at the same time, we don't get paid to clean up the aftermath of politically-charged fights. This isn't a politics forum at heart, and on plenty of other city-focused forums comparable to UrbanOhio - this type of discussion wouldn't even be allowed.

 

It wasnt allowed here either at first.  There was a subforum that was limited to 'Ohio Only' politics, and even that was too much of a temptation for certain politics-on-the-brain jerky boys, who eventually got themselves banned. 

 

So it was a bit of a suprise to see this more 'general politics' subforum get set up.   

 

Yet, guys like gottaplan need to understand this is a fairly sophisticated forum with most forumers pretty well informed, so you'd expect discussion to rise about snarky one-shots and retailing recieved spin.  We may discuss spin here, but we do it knowing its spin, and maybe consider how much truth there is in it or how it plays out.

 

Its more of an inside-baseball political discussion here, which is what youd expect from informed people whove been posting togther for years, and who have little tolerance for BS. 

 

I mean, don't waste my time with BS spin and low-grade snark.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because the Admins understand that forumers will want to have political discussions and we try to accomodate, but at the same time, we don't get paid to clean up the aftermath of politically-charged fights. This isn't a politics forum at heart, and on plenty of other city-focused forums comparable to UrbanOhio - this type of discussion wouldn't even be allowed.

 

It wasnt allowed here either at first.  There was a subforum that was limited to 'Ohio Only' politics, and even that was too much of a temptation for certain politics-on-the-brain jerky boys, who eventually got themselves banned. 

 

So it was a bit of a suprise to see this more 'general politics' subforum get set up.   

 

Yet, guys like gottaplan need to understand this is a fairly sophisticated forum with most forumers pretty well informed, so you'd expect discussion to rise about snarky one-shots and retailing recieved spin.  We may discuss spin here, but we do it knowing its spin, and maybe consider how much truth there is in it or how it plays out.

 

Its more of an inside-baseball political discussion here, which is what youd expect from informed people whove been posting togther for years, and who have little tolerance for BS. 

 

I mean, don't waste my time with BS spin and low-grade snark.

 

 

Like when someone makes a comment like "She really is a loathsome human"? I too hope we can put an end to these kinds of remarks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sure know alot about Tea Party factions...  you learn all that watching Rachel Maddow?

 

sh!t like this isn't necessary on this forum. You should keep your posts constructive or at least informative, or you'll get the attention of the mods.

 

 

Considering Maddow's liberal bias, and anti-Tea Party views I found this very informative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without thinking this trough, I wonder about all the comparisons between Bachman and Palin and how much of them are purely because of their gender, which is really just a soft form of sexism.  I don't particularly care for either of them, but Bachman inspires a lot less cynicism, IMHO.  My feelings about her are purely based on her well articulated and seemingly genuine views, some of which I find reprehensible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without thinking this trough, I wonder about all the comparisons between Bachman and Palin and how much of them are purely because of their gender, which is really just a soft form of sexism.  I don't particularly care for either of them, but Bachman inspires a lot less cynicism, IMHO.  My feelings about her are purely based on her well articulated and seemingly genuine views, some of which I find reprehensible.

 

I can respect your views!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sure know alot about Tea Party factions...  you learn all that watching Rachel Maddow?

 

sh!t like this isn't necessary on this forum. You should keep your posts constructive or at least informative, or you'll get the attention of the mods.

 

 

Considering Maddow's liberal bias, and anti-Tea Party views I found this very informative.

 

Uhm...what?? What is the information you got from this? A list, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without thinking this trough, I wonder about all the comparisons between Bachman and Palin and how much of them are purely because of their gender, which is really just a soft form of sexism.  I don't particularly care for either of them, but Bachman inspires a lot less cynicism, IMHO.  My feelings about her are purely based on her well articulated and seemingly genuine views, some of which I find reprehensible.

 

The more she talks, and the more that comes out about her past, the more I can see how the Palin comparisons make a lot of sense.  Bachmann is way out of touch with reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This "woman" (she barely qualifies as human IMO) is a wonderful representation of the many things that are wrong with America today. Her views on homosexuality are disgusting and would be laughable if she and her Westboro Minister-type followers didn't take them so seriously. She clearly has no understanding of what Planned Parenhood is or what this group does. Her views on religion are pretty much what you think, as she has no comprehension of church vs state or our country's origins. Her hypocrisy with entitlements, specifically Medicaid in which she and her husband are beneficiaries of over six figures, is appalling. She was more concerned with Obama's connections to Bill Ayers than say the fact that our country was facing economic holocaust back in '08. She is a politician of the lowest common denominator and she appeals to those who share such hatred for our country, despite claiming to be patriots. Remember that armed and dangerous quote? Wonderful.

 

The only difference between her and Sarah Palin is that she probably has some intelligence behind all that ugliness. I mean, I assume she passed the bar if she practiced as a tax attorney those years. Otherwise, she is, or should be, an embarrassment to women, to conservatives, and to people with an IQ over 60.

 

F her!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...