Support NeoGAF

[Kosmo]

Considering the other candidates positions are almost as batshit insane as hers, what's the difference if she wins the nomination or not?

At the Presidential level, she is unelectable. Simple as that.

 

[slit]

Dave Hansen wins attempted Republican recall in Wisconsin

One recall election down.

 

[Dude Abides]

I meant to mention Obama in my asterisk but forgot. Obama didn't achieve much in the senate but already had a history of bipartisan work and had mainstream, widespread appeal. Bachman has none of that, nor is she particularly charismatic unless you're a hardcore conservative.

She can't soften up the Jesus stuff enough to win independents or women voters. She has absolutely no record on jobs, she constantly takes extremist positions, she simply is not serious. Nor are her numbers real: she'll win Iowa and some other caucuses before fading out, especially once Perry enters the race. The GOP won't let her near the nomination. Just today the Daily Caller ran a rather sexist smear on her.

This is a woman who thinks getting rid of the minimum wage is a good idea. Come on.

Why do you think a history of bipartisan work is important? It isn't, not when unemployment is 9+. Neither Reagan nor W was particularly charismatic to anyone not a hardcore conservative at first, and then they suddenly became charismatic guys you'd like to have a beer with. Bachmann is good-looking, and unlike Palin, can articulate her positions coherently. Her gender alone will be enough to get a significant number of women, particularly Republican women.

A lot of Republicans think getting rid of the minimum wage is a good idea.

This is not a 50 +1 election. This will be a referendum on Obama, and Bachmann has as good a shot as anyone in the field. She channels the GOP id, is a hard worker, and has political savvy. She's going to get all the Huckabee people, plus the hardcore teatards, plus some GOP women.

 

[gcubed]

Why do you think a history of bipartisan work is important? It isn't, not when unemployment is 9+. Neither Reagan nor W was particularly charismatic to anyone not a hardcore conservative at first, and then they suddenly became charismatic guys you'd like to have a beer with. Bachmann is good-looking, and unlike Palin, can articulate her positions coherently. Her gender alone will be enough to get a significant number of women, particularly Republican women.

A lot of Republicans think getting rid of the minimum wage is a good idea.

This is not a 50 +1 election. This will be a referendum on Obama, and Bachmann has as good a shot as anyone in the field. She channels the GOP id, is a hard worker, and has political savvy. She's going to get all the Huckabee people, plus the hardcore teatards, plus some GOP women.

which is good for... 35%? And that's being generous

 

[Tamanon]

Bachmann's problem in the general is that she can't realistically do the pivot to center.

She can certainly win the primary, but she doesn't have ANYTHING to sell as even appearing to be moderate.

 

[Vanillalite]

Why do you think a history of bipartisan work is important? It isn't, not when unemployment is 9+. Neither Reagan nor W was particularly charismatic to anyone not a hardcore conservative at first, and then they suddenly became charismatic guys you'd like to have a beer with. Bachmann is good-looking, and unlike Palin, can articulate her positions coherently. Her gender alone will be enough to get a significant number of women, particularly Republican women.

A lot of Republicans think getting rid of the minimum wage is a good idea.

This is not a 50 +1 election. This will be a referendum on Obama, and Bachmann has as good a shot as anyone in the field. She channels the GOP id, is a hard worker, and has political savvy. She's going to get all the Huckabee people, plus the hardcore teatards, plus some GOP women.

Are we listening to the same person?

Look I get your idea of the Obama referendum and all, but your Bachmann logic just seems crazy.

 

[Averon]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...-class-helps-keep-obamas-approval-afloat.html

ABC News/Washington Post Poll: Advantage on Aiding the Middle Class Helps Keep Obama’s Approval Afloat

Most Americans think the Republicans in Congress have got Wall Street and large corporations’ backs, while President Obama prevails on protecting the middle class and small businesses: an edge that helps explain his better-than-dismal job approval in the teeth of a terrible economy.

By a wide 59-26 percent, the public sees congressional Republicans as more concerned than Obama with protecting the economic interests of Wall Street financial institutions, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds. Americans even more broadly, by 67-24 percent, put the GOP ahead when it comes to looking out for the interests of large business corporations.

The tables turn – albeit with much narrower margins – on other measures. Obama leads the GOP by 18 points in looking out for middle-class Americans, 53-35 percent. He also has a 10-point advantage, 47-37 percent, as being more concerned with the economic interests of “you and your family.” And he leads by 9 points, 48-39 percent, on protecting small businesses.

People are still rightly pissed at the financial institutions.

 

[speculawyer]

Why do you think a history of bipartisan work is important? It isn't, not when unemployment is 9+. Neither Reagan nor W was particularly charismatic to anyone not a hardcore conservative at first, and then they suddenly became charismatic guys you'd like to have a beer with. Bachmann is good-looking, and unlike Palin, can articulate her positions coherently. Her gender alone will be enough to get a significant number of women, particularly Republican women.

A lot of Republicans think getting rid of the minimum wage is a good idea.

This is not a 50 +1 election. This will be a referendum on Obama, and Bachmann has as good a shot as anyone in the field. She channels the GOP id, is a hard worker, and has political savvy. She's going to get all the Huckabee people, plus the hardcore teatards, plus some GOP women.

Reagan was Charismatic. I was there. I didn't like him and thought (knew) he was a complete idiot but he did have a folksy charm. There is a reason for all the Reagan mythology about "the great communicator".

Bachmann does have some reasons why she is getting votes . . . but like Palin, once the spotlight is really shined on her she will wilt. She can be mum about Jesus from now until election but she has a long well-documented record of being a crazy Jesus freak that went to nutty religious school and has a nutty husband that tries to pray the gay away. Yes, this country has a big anti-abortion component . . . but Bachmann is anti-abortion even in cases of rape & incest. Bachmann's jihad against Planned Parenthood Express (where no abortions are performed at all) suggests she is just plain against birth control completely.

She is a true believer of the extreme kind. Reagan was just a believer. But Reagan was more rational and pragmatic. Reagan was against proposition to ban gay teachers in California.

 

[speculawyer]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/20...-class-helps-keep-obamas-approval-afloat.html

ABC News/Washington Post Poll: Advantage on Aiding the Middle Class Helps Keep Obama’s Approval Afloat



People are still rightly pissed at the financial institutions.

See Eznark . . . the people are smarter than you give them credit for.

 

[Suikoguy]

Dave Hansen wins attempted Republican recall in Wisconsin

One recall election down.

What were the expectations of this race months ago?

 

[RustyNails]

So the House democrats have been reading this thread and found an awesome way to merge two discussions that we are currently having: Ronald Reagan and Debt ceiling

 

[TacticalFox88]

See Eznark . . . the people are smarter than you give them credit for.

And then things like this prove his point.

 

[HylianTom]

And then things like this prove his point.
*gallup poll*

This kind of thing makes me think that the people don't know or understand what they want.

===============

But I've been meaning to ask PoliGaf: Is anyone else here waiting to see how this debt ceiling issue unfolds before making any huge life decisions?

The thing is, I've intended all year to sell my house here in Austin and move back home to New Orleans. I've even begun to move my stuff to a storage shed in my parents' back yard so that the house will be less cluttered when we begin to show it for sale. I've done all major repairs needed. I have this place staged to the point where even the items in the fridge and the food on the kitchen shelves is carefully selected. The house goes up on the market in just about a week.

But I'm worried. What if this thing goes nuclear and the country's economy goes into the shitter? I'm worried that finding a job in New Orleans would then become a rougher proposition. Meanwhile, the job I have now pays "incredibly well," and I have seniority to the point where if I were laid-off due to economic turmoil, then the whole hospital - one of the largest in the city - would have to close. Job security here in Austin is of absolutely no concern to me.

So I'm holding my breath, and kinda wondering if anyone else is waiting to see what happens before jumping into any sort of financial/life adventure..

 

[PantherLotus]

Matt Taibi: Obama doesn't want a progressive deficit deal.

Everyone read that.



lol, he even used exclamation points.

Yeah what the heck do you think I was talking about yesterday?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=29385995&postcount=5309

 

[Dan]

Re: Perry and the Texas miracle:



http://www.businessinsider.com/for-...-be-cuts-to-employment-and-tax-revenue-2011-7

I get the sense Rick Perry feels it's possibly now or never to seek the presidency. His 'Texas miracle' has crested and he needs to capitalize before the illusion is completely blown.

 

[Oblivion]

BBA passes the house:

In a heavily partisan vote Tuesday, the House of Representatives passed the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act -- a palatable-sounding piece of legislation that, if enacted, would slash federal programs deeply, and restrict dramatically the government's ability to do anything constructive for the country.

It also would graft those requirements into the Constitution, on the threat of a catastrophic debt default. Now leaders of both parties will have to scramble to make sure that doesn't happen.

The legislation, described in depth here, would make raising the debt limit contingent on both deep immediate spending cuts, and the passage, by supermajorities in Congress, of a Constitutional amendment that would kick federal spending down to historic lows. The so-called Balanced Budget Amendment would force the government to achieve fiscal balance by making deeper and deeper cuts -- because raising taxes would, by Constitutional fiat, require two-thirds of the members of both the House and Senate to agree to do so.

The final vote was 234-190 with nine Republicans voting no, and five Democrats voting yes. The Republicans voting with the Dems were Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Paul Broun (R-GA), Francisco Canseco (R-TX), Scott Desjarles (R-TN), Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Walter Jones (R-NC), Connie Mack (R-FL), Ron Paul (R-TX), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA). The Dems voting with the GOP were Blue Dogs Reps. Dan Boren (D-OK), Jim Cooper (D-TN), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Mike McIntyre (D-NC), and Heath Shuler (R-NC). Two Republicans and seven Democrats did not vote.

The good news is that the legislation will now die a quiet death in the Senate. The better news is that, when the ballet is finally over, the House and Senate will finally figure out how exactly they'll raise the statutory debt limit.

The bad news is that time is running out. August 2 is the drop dead date before the country defaults on its debt, and still neither of the viable options on the table -- the grand bargain, the backup plan, or anything in between -- can pass in the House, where the agenda is currently driven by hot-tempered conservatives.

But the idea behind Tuesday's vote is to placate those conservatives, and give Republicans who know the debt ceiling must be raised cover to vote for a compromise in the days ahead. If it succeeds at that, then maybe the price of posturing will have been worth it.

Wait, I must have read that wrong. Did that say:

The Republicans voting with the Dems were Reps. Michele Bachmann (R-MN)

Michele Bachmann (R-MN)

What the fuuuuuuck?

 

[TacticalFox88]

BBA passes the house:



Wait, I must have read that wrong. Did that say:





What the fuuuuuuck?

My mind is full of fuck? Is it opposite week or something?

 

[Oblivion]

Those migraines must be worse than I thought. They're causing Bachmann to think rationally!

 

[AniHawk]

the cuts probably weren't enough. they have to go deeper.

 

[jamesinclair]

the cuts probably weren't enough. they have to go deeper.

Exactly.

Why did ron paul vote no?

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

the cuts probably weren't enough. they have to go deeper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo41J7_-nWg

 

[Oblivion]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erin-gibson/michele-and-marcus-bachma_b_903509.html

lol

 

[Clevinger]

That joke is going to be run so far into the ground.

 

[DasRaven]

BBA passes the house:

What the fuuuuuuck?

Cut/Cap/Balance included a raising of the debt ceiling which Bachmann is campaigning on not voting for under any circumstances. The same reason Paul didn't vote for it, he's never voted for a debt ceiling increase.

 

[empty vessel]

And then things like this prove his point.

Part of the problem with a poll like this is that a good chunk, probably a large majority, of people who believe they follow news aren't following news at all. They are just watching entertainment programs. So, the title should read: Preferences for Debt Ceiling Vote, by Attention Paid to "News" About Debt Ceiling. Or: Preferences for Debt Ceiling Vote, by Attention Paid to What People Have Been Led to Believe Is News About Debt Ceiling. Or: Preferences for Debt Ceiling Vote, by Attention Paid to Entertainment Programs. Or: Preferences for Debt Ceiling Vote, by Products Created for Sale to Advertisers. In other words, this graph doesn't actually divide people by who has been following news and who hasn't, even though it purports to do so. It would require more detail as we would have to exclude all cable "news" and probably even all broadcast "news" viewers from the class of people who follow news.

 

[mckmas8808]

Obama Officially Backs Measure To Repeal DOMA
Susan Crabtree | July 19, 2011, 3:03PM

President Obama is officially backing legislation that would repeal the 1996 Defense Of Marriage Act, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage even for couples married under state law.

The President has "long called for a legislative appeal for the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which continues to have a real impact on families," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters at Tuesday's briefing.

The Respect for Marriage Act, sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), "would take the Defense of Marriage Act off the books for once and for all," and Obama is "proud" to support it, Carney said.

The Obama administration in February announced that the Department of Justice will no longer defend DOMA in court.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Leahy, will hold a Wedneday hearing on the bill. Advocates for pro- and anti-gay marriage groups are scheduled to testify before the panel.
​

##############

I hope this can progress to the point where it can come up for a vote in the Senate. I'm curious to see what the "moderate" republicans say about this. People like Sen. Scott Brown.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I fully expect the GOP and conservatives everywhere, including those on this board and in these threads, to abandon their standard operating procedure of invoking states rights, the 10th amendment, and strict constitutionalism in attempts to defend this discriminatory bill grounded in religion and bigotry. (referring to DOMA)

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

I fully expect the GOP and conservatives everywhere, including those on this board and in these threads, to abandon their standard operating procedure of invoking states rights, the 10th amendment, and strict constitutionalism in attempts to defend this discriminatory bill grounded in religion and bigotry. (referring to DOMA)

You won't find it from me. I support the repeal.
And I don't understand Obama's position. Hasn't he said he's against same sex marriage? Or am I wrong?

 

[Byakuya769]

You won't find it from me. I support the repeal.
And I don't understand Obama's position. Hasn't he said he's against same sex marriage? Or am I wrong?

His "position is evolving" on that issue.

 

[DasRaven]

You won't find it from me. I support the repeal.
And I don't understand Obama's position. Hasn't he said he's against same sex marriage? Or am I wrong?

He's waffled on the issue. At the Rick Warren interview during the 2008 campaign he said he defines marriage as "one man & one woman" but wouldn't support enshrining such in law.
But recently he says his views are evolving and that the issue should be handled by the people (e.g. state-by-state).

 

[RustyNails]

I fully expect the GOP and conservatives everywhere, including those on this board and in these threads, to abandon their standard operating procedure of invoking states rights, the 10th amendment, and strict constitutionalism in attempts to defend this discriminatory bill grounded in religion and bigotry. (referring to DOMA)

Actually the libertarian (gaborn) position on that issue is that neither federal government nor states should be allowed to institute laws that are discriminatory. I'm pretty sure other libertarians disagree. I remember discussing with one libertarian on this board who supported a hypothetical business that wanted to exclude non-whites from entering the establishment.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

He's waffled on the issue. At the Rick Warren interview during the 2008 campaign he said he defines marriage as "one man & one woman" but wouldn't support enshrining such in law.
But recently he says his views are evolving and that the issue should be handled by the people (e.g. state-by-state).

So Obama is taking the hands-off, State's rights position, huh. Surprising to me for a liberal/progressive. I'm sure he has a lot of people pissed off with that one. It's time to end the discrimination on the federal level.

 

[RustyNails]

So Obama is taking the hands-off, State's rights position, huh. Surprising to me for a liberal/progressive. I'm sure he has a lot of people pissed off with that one. It's time to end the discrimination on the federal level.

No wonder you're surprised. He's hardly any of that.

 

[GaimeGuy]

You won't find it from me. I support the repeal.
And I don't understand Obama's position. Hasn't he said he's against same sex marriage? Or am I wrong?

It seems ot be something he's wrestled with over the last 15 years. Personally, he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman, he has stated that, and believes in the government recognizing civil unions which provide equal protections, benefits, and recognition under the law for same sex couples. However, legally, and philosophically, he doesn't believe such a distinctioncan be enshrined in practice, as his reasons are entirely based on his faith; As a society, we must be able to justify our rules, laws, and regulations to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

That's basically a paraphrase of the most nuanced statement I've seen or heard from him. You'll find little sound bits here and there where he says he supports same-sex marriage as well as bits where he says he opposes it, but in the more nuanced, in depth discussions of the issue, I notice a pattern of him covering this dichotomy of resolving his own religious beliefs with his stance from a legal perspective. He seems to understand that his religion-inspired reasons may not be logically sound and thus is constantly wrestling with himself over his personal moral stance, but is also able to keep it isolated from what he knows is the moral stance from a legal perspective.

I'm sure you'll hear otherwise from many posters about his "true" belief, but every interview and soundbyte and transcript I've heard or read, that's the view that comes through in the most detailed discussions with Obama on the issue.

His ability to isolate his personal morals (Which he may have a hunch are not quite morally just) from what is right as official policy is one of the reasons I voted for him in the first place. He gets it.

 

[Jackson50]

The SIGAR released its audit today on both the misappropriation of U.S. aid and Afghanistan's financial sector. Their conclusions are disconcerting, although not terribly surprising. The misappropriation of U.S. aid continues. The provisions intended to ameliorate the problem have proven largely ineffective. The problem is primarily caused by a lack of interagency cooperation and coordination with Afghan officials. Have I noted that the predominant issue in Afghanistan is Afghan corruption and incompetence? Well, that continues unabated. And we are helping, albeit unwittingly, to perpetuate it.

• 
  Limited Afghan cooperation has hindered the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to strengthen controls over currency flows at Kabul International Airport. As a result of concerns over lack of controls over the significant flow of currency through the airport, DHS developed the Bulk Cash Flow Action Plan with assistance from Afghan ministries that conduct operations at the airport. DHS’s responsibilities under the Bulk Cash Flow Action Plan include supporting Afghan government efforts to strengthen controls over passengers leaving Afghanistan with bulk cash. However, DHS reports that installation of two custom-built bulk currency counters for the airport’s customs areas was delayed by seven months because of disagreements over where to place the machines.
  
  Also, as of SIGAR’s April 2011 visit to the airport, Afghan customs officials were using the machines to count declared cash – but not to record serial numbers or report financial data to FinTRACA. Other impediments to DHS efforts include the Afghan government’s practice of allowing VIPs to bypass the main security and customs screenings used by all other passengers; these VIPs are required to declare their currency, but Afghan officials reportedly have no plans to scan this cash through currency counters. Additionally, DHS officials are barred from the facility that VIPs currently use.

http://www.sigar.mil/pdf/PressRelease/PressRelease_20July2011_Audit11-13.pdf

 

[mckmas8808]

So Obama is taking the hands-off, State's rights position, huh. Surprising to me for a liberal/progressive. I'm sure he has a lot of people pissed off with that one. It's time to end the discrimination on the federal level.

When it comes to marriage yes. He's for a more states right solution, which I wish he'd move more left on.

But getting rid of DOMA is the first step to making equal marriage the law of the (federal) land. Be it through legislation or the courts.

 

[eznark]

What were the expectations of this race months ago?

The expectation was that a real challenger would at least make it competitive. The idiot didn't bother to get enough signatures to get on the ballot and was tossed.

This one was a no-doubter from that moment on.

 

[eznark]

Idiot, racist, or both?

What does he say there that is racist, even slightly?

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Obama being in favor of repealing DOMA is somewhat curious to me. After all, we're past the half way point of 2011 and heading into the election year. Perhaps its just a coincidence that his view has 'evolved' on this issue heading into the election cycle but I doubt it.

 

[eznark]

Obama being in favor of repealing DOMA is somewhat curious to me. After all, we're past the half way point of 2011 and heading into the election year. Perhaps its just a coincidence that his view has 'evolved' on this issue heading into the election cycle but I doubt it.

Hopefully the gays will offset the likely huge drop in students.

 

[Dude Abides]

which is good for... 35%? And that's being generous

I was speaking of the primary. In the general she'd peel off independents who blame Obama for the economy.

Are we listening to the same person?

Look I get your idea of the Obama referendum and all, but your Bachmann logic just seems crazy.

Presumably. She doesn't speak in incoherent word salad like Palin. She's as least as good at public speaking as GWB was.

Reagan was Charismatic. I was there. I didn't like him and thought (knew) he was a complete idiot but he did have a folksy charm. There is a reason for all the Reagan mythology about "the great communicator".

Bachmann does have some reasons why she is getting votes . . . but like Palin, once the spotlight is really shined on her she will wilt. She can be mum about Jesus from now until election but she has a long well-documented record of being a crazy Jesus freak that went to nutty religious school and has a nutty husband that tries to pray the gay away. Yes, this country has a big anti-abortion component . . . but Bachmann is anti-abortion even in cases of rape & incest. Bachmann's jihad against Planned Parenthood Express (where no abortions are performed at all) suggests she is just plain against birth control completely.

She is a true believer of the extreme kind. Reagan was just a believer. But Reagan was more rational and pragmatic. Reagan was against proposition to ban gay teachers in California.

Bachmann also has a folksy charm. Sure she's a Jesus freak, but she can downplay that. Ask a question about gay rights, she'll say "I think marriage should be between a man and a woman, but this election is about the job-killing agenda and record of the Obama administration."

Again, I'm not saying she would definitely win, she certainly will have some hurdles. But I think those who just dismiss her out of hand are projecting their own views of her onto the electorate without justification.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Hopefully the gays will offset the likely huge drop in students.

I have a feeling that once the election is in and the debates happen, the youth will become more interested in voting. Will Obama receive the support he did in 2008? Doubt it. But I don't think it will be as sparse has some are speculating.

 

[RustyNails]

I have a feeling that once the election is in and the debates happen, the youth will become more interested in voting. Will Obama receive the support he did in 2008? Doubt it. But I don't think it will be as sparse has some are speculating.

I don't understand where are all Obama's "youth supporters". During all my playtime on left4dead games, I've only come across kids who were vehemently anti-Obama with Obama=hitler/socialist/nope sprays. I've talked with people who spammed anti-obama messages in chat. I know it's an insignificantly small segment, but I don't think I've encountered a single Obama supporter while playing l4d2

 

[balladofwindfishes]

The GOP stole 2,000 dollars in yearly scholarships from me and lots of other IT students through defunding.

Obama has an amazing track record on student loan reform and trying to cut the costs of college down. He can easily appeal to the college crowd a lot better than the party that demonizes the "educated elite"

 

[GhaleonEB]

Obama being in favor of repealing DOMA is somewhat curious to me. After all, we're past the half way point of 2011 and heading into the election year. Perhaps its just a coincidence that his view has 'evolved' on this issue heading into the election cycle but I doubt it.

I've read some interesting takes on Obama's view of the Presidency and how it relates to his gradually shifting views on gay marriage. I think he sees his role more as presiding over the change process rather than being at the forefront of it.

Here is an analysis along those lines I mostly agree with.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I don't understand where are all Obama's "youth supporters". During all my playtime on left4dead games, I've only come across kids who were vehemently anti-Obama with Obama=hitler/socialist/nope sprays. I've talked with people who spammed anti-obama messages in chat. I know it's an insignificantly small segment, but I don't think I've encountered a single Obama supporter while playing l4d2

If you look in 2008, it was hip to vote Obama. Many of the folks voted and wanted to be part of a movement, at least IMO. Sure, many were excited by him but I am not sure how many of those who were excited actually knew about his politics. 3 years later, it still feels like a recession, these youths are paying more for their education, its possible many of them still are out of work, their parents may have lost their jobs, and the excitement is no longer there.

The GOP stole 2,000 dollars in yearly scholarships from me and lots of other IT students through defunding.

Obama has an amazing track record on student loan reform and trying to cut the costs of college down. He can easily appeal to the college crowd a lot better than the party that demonizes the "educated elite"

It's not a question of reality and what has happened, its a question of who frames the issues better and as we all know Republicans are masters of framing the message, even if its false.

 

[slit]

His "position is evolving" on that issue.

translation: "I'm not sure coming out and saying I'm definitely for it is a good political move."

 

[RustyNails]

by the way, HOLY SHIT Pervaz Musharraf was on the daily show with Jon Stewart? I gotsa watch this one.

 

[Kosmo]

I have a feeling that once the election is in and the debates happen, the youth will become more interested in voting. Will Obama receive the support he did in 2008? Doubt it. But I don't think it will be as sparse has some are speculating.

The college students that supported him in 2008 will have mostly graduated and entered into probably the toughest post graduation job market ever. Those coming into college will have the typical myopia that college students do, but they have likely seen their families have a bit of a rough time and probably won't be all gung ho for Obama.

I would expect his support to be about the same as any Democrat outside of 2008 would have - meaning about 20% of them will show up and those who were very supportive of him will likely be apathetic and not even bother.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

The college students that supported him in 2008 will have mostly graduated and entered into probably the toughest post graduation job market ever. Those coming into college will have the typical myopia that college students do, but they have likely seen their families have a bit of a rough time and probably won't be all gung ho for Obama.

I would expect his support to be about the same as any Democrat outside of 2008 would have - meaning about 20% of them will show up and those who were very supportive of him will likely be apathetic and not even bother.

Look at my previous post =P I agree but I also don't think that Republicans should be too confident in a huge turnout, especially with the candidates they have. This isn't 2010.