Sunday, March 04, 2012

Party like its 1996?

Which the presidential election year does it seem most like this time around? Obama's team seems to think it is 2004, where the opposition was very motivated to beat the incumbent, but nominated an uncharismatic guy from Massachusetts.

Many have said it could be like 1984, where the economy sucked up until it mattered for Reagan's reelection. Others have said 1988, where none of the Democratic candidates were strong enough to clear the field...and they nominated another dud from Massachusetts. Or maybe 1996, where Bill Clinton looked oh so beatable in 1993, 1994 and 1995, but utterly untouchable in 1996. Especially against a guy who refers to himself in third person and seems ancient.

But it sure doesn't feel like 1992 this time does it? Back then, a popular war president lost because the economy when south and that incumbent literally said "message: I care." The voters, however sent him a message that they thought he didn't. Perhaps if the Republicans had someone, any one, to run as their nominee who had a personality and was not an extremist, it would been 1992 in 2012.

Unless Mitt Romney suddenly changes his phony stripes and stops trying too hard like Al Gore in 2000, I really do not see Willard getting 270+ electoral college votes.

No comments: