Quote:
Originally Posted by djplong
Donna, you're proving my point. You said they "will show up and vote against Barry".
Who could they possibly vote for? I asked who could be a viable 2012 challenger.
I'll grant you there's a lot of anger out there - there wouldn't be even a SHADOW of a Tea Party movement if there wasn't. But who can step into that void where the opposition is supposed to be. There's a lot of "we're against <fillintheblank>" but nothing in FAVOR of anything.
This is where the '94 GOP had a masterstroke. The Contract With America gave 10 simple principles that someone could sign their name to. There was a lot of publicity over it - the Democrats initially ridiculed it and that ridicule made voters even angrier.
We need another one of those. There isn't another Ronald Reagan out there, not that I can see anyway. But a declaration of principles might be a good second choice.
|
I still disagree with you. What did Obama run on? Hope and change? No taxes for people making under $250,000? Ending the Iraq war? Closing Gitmo?
I don't think it will take a Ronald Reagan to beat Obama. Obama won because he didn't have a track record. Well, he has that record now and they wil;l throw every promise he made against him. Voters did not want McGovern or Dukakus, they do not want a socialist in the white House. Period.