Economy will probably be the deciding factor. If it goes up from where it is now, it'll be hard for Obama to lose a second term, I think. 

It'll also depend on who the Republicans run. If it involves Palin, then Obama's chances go way up. 

 

Of course, if that doesn't happen, then I hope he's beaten in 2012. But I honestly don't see that happening. It takes a pretty mediocre presidency or a very vivid campaign by the opposition to interrupt a president's two term run these days.

 

I mean, Bush made it. That speaks volumes.

From what I've seen, most presidents drop the ball during their second term, regardless of party.  Didn't he already say that he wouldn't seek reelection anyway?

FALSE! 

Don't you remember the thread with FE?!? 

The political parties have NEVER altered! It's a liberal BIG EDUCATION conspiracy. 

 

I know a girl that I graduated high school with and she was the biggest Obama supporter in the school. She actually understand and knew everything about the elections that year, she was quite smart. Hard to argue with because she would just shoot you down instantly.

 

Over me bringing up a point to "rub in" something over facebook, she brought up that she no longer supports him or views him in the same way.

I dont know if this makes any sense, but ill try to explain my view of things.

Just a suggestion.

 

Two opposing viewpoints pull at each other and meet in the center. It's when one party has a pocket full of blank checks that things get hairy.

 

The problem is that this is a scenario that's been playing out for over a decade now.

 

As for the political machine...well, it was built, oiled, and maintained by the people who complain about it. There's no magical force that keeps a third party from becoming prominent...it's the lack of support from voters.

 

When it works ideally

 

I'm talking about the system itself, not the circus we see. A two party system can work, and well at that, but what we have is just an entertainment / ratings game in the name of politics.

Barely.

 

Course the left is doing what they do, now that they realize what a huge threat he is...

 

Send in the "brilliant journOlist" Paul Krugman to do a hit piece before he takes off!

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=paul%20krugman&st=cse - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=paul%20krugman&st=cse

 

As we have learned in our study of "journalism".

We want the facts in an article. If you are going to talk about something... LINK IT. If you don't link it, it is because you are going to make up what it is about. As krugman does...

 

Here is what he is talking about

 

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/ - http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/

 

Course he doesn't link it... he just builds up false arguments and demeans the intelligence of Ryan, and any of you... As surely you aren't dumb enough to fall for those "bush" ideas... (notice he is calling them that...without actually saying "bush".That is liberals... always "classy".)

 

See

 

"But it’s the audacity of dopes. Mr. Ryan isn’t offering fresh food for thought; he’s serving up leftovers from the 1990s, drenched in flimflam sauce. "

 

 

wow... character assasination, this is such a new and "fresh" approach. oh wait, you would think after using the same tactic for the past decade... it would start to wilt... Kind of like a piece of lettuce out in the sun.

 

 

Sadly for Krugman... Ryan is no dolt, and proves it with this response...

 

http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/100160259.html - http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/100160259.html

 

 

 

And this is the classy way to destroy a political hack like krugman

 

"By dismissing credible proposals as "flimflam," critics such as Krugman contribute nothing to the debate. Standing on the sidelines shouting "boo" amounts to condemning our people to a future of managed decline. Absent serious reform, spending on entitlement programs and interest on government debt will consume more and more of the federal budget, resulting in falling standards of living and higher taxes as we try to sustain an ever larger social welfare state.

The American people deserve a serious and civil discussion about how to reduce our exploding debt and deficit. By relying on ad-hominem attacks and discredited claims, Krugman and others are missing an opportunity to contribute to this discussion and are only polarizing and paralyzing attempts to solve our nation's fiscal problems.

I reject the notion that these problems are too big or too difficult to tackle or that it is acceptable to leave future generations of Americans an inferior standard of living than we enjoy. The "Roadmap" shows that a European-style social welfare state is not inevitable, that it is not too late for our nation to choose a different path and that we can do so in a way that preserves our freedoms and traditions."

 

Aaaand as usual... When destroyed, the liberal mind will latch on to some obscure fact, that they think they have won, and drive it into the ground. With more demeaning language and attempts to discredit anyone who would think Ryan was going in the correct direction...

 

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/ryan-predictions/ - http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/ryan-predictions/

 

 

 

krugman, krugman, krugman... will you never learn. Have you no shame?...

 

Guess not. But, Ryan is one of the new breed. Instead of allowing baseless accusations and slander to stand, he responds with the facts, and destroys the liberal mouthpiece.

 

http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/paul-ryan-krugmans-attack-intellectually-lazy - http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/paul-ryan-krugmans-attack-intellectually-lazy

 

"While Ryan focused on the nitty-gritty policy aspects of his Roadmap this afternoon, he suggested that the underlying argument is about principles, not facts. “At the core of this is a big ideological fight between those who believe in the Founding principles and the sense of limited government—the American idea—and those who believe in the progressivist welfare state,” Ryan said.

“The Roadmap is designed to maintain a limited government in the 21st century, and it is the antithesis of the progressivist vision which [Krugman] subscribes to. That’s fine. I understand it violates his vision for a progressivist society,” Ryan continued. "What I think is rather bizarre is his strange personal attack and ad hominem attacks based upon his confusion surrounding the scoring process, which could have been easily clarified with a simple phone call or email."

"I'm not going to descend into the mudpit with Krugman on this stuff," Ryan said. "I want to stay on policy and ideas.""

 

 

headshot.

 

Krugman is such a petty ideologue.

 

you're a teacher?... wow.

 

 

One question.

 

If there is a government body that rations healthcare, would that group or individual be considered a death panel?...

 

 

Or, if you can't follow that logic. Say you invented a drug that extends the life of a patient with breast cancer... The FDA approves this drug as safe, and effective... But, oh, wait. Obamacare just passed, and the FDA doesn't care if stuff is "safe or not"... It now judges things based on a new "Obamacare" standard... This standard is called "clinically meaningful"...

 

Meaning that the FDA now determines if a drug (example Avastin) is too expensive to extend stage 4 nancy schmuck's life... It may only extend her life by 6 months... And at that cost... The drug is not "clinically meaningful" for her...

 

just die already, says the FDA ________ panel.

 

Call it what you want. But, that is a death panel, making decisions not for the health of the patient but the cost of the treatment...

 

http://www.boston.com/news/health/blog/2010/07/avastin_vote_ha.html - http://www.boston.com/news/health/blog/2010/07/avastin_vote_ha.html http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/news/20100720/fda-panel-avastin-not-for-breast-cancer -

 

 

 

Thank you for proving my point.

 

As I will agree the left is guilty of the previously mentioned debate tactic...so is the right.

And this is different than the current insurance system how exactly? 

Saving this for prosperity. 

You said: 

I see a Hillary for President movement

 

And the headline from your linked article is: 

I should also point out that just because you get a journalism degree, it doesn't mean that a Matrix-like brain hookup forms where every page from every news website ever begins automaticly streaming into to frontal lobe. 

Please link me to said talks and articles on the movement? Is it anything beside the same HillaryIs44/PUMA clubs from before Obama's nomination? 

Second link: Blogger talking about Republican Pierre du Pont's comments that Hillary might challenge. 

Third link: Speculative opinions entry on the U.S. News & World Report website from January 27, includes Hillary's quote that she is "Absolutely not interested" in running for president again. 

Fourth link: A conservative blogger calling for Hillary to run, has a lovely quote of "As much as I almost violently dislike wheeling on the road to Communism USA with a brief rest stop at Socialism, USA, I need to tell you that I prefer the Messiah over Hillary." 

Who were the authors? 

I thought I finally found someone from the left on Real Clear Politics, but it was a conservative blogger for them. 

Mayhap, just mayhap, it's actually just a false talking point being used as a tactic. One of those things you throw out there hoping nobody will really call you on and fact check.