If (and only if) the Republican Primary voters pick the wrong person to represent the GOP in the general election again (the way they did in 2008 and also 1996) then I would agree with you. I certainly hope the GOP does not fuck this one up. Pawlenty dropping out today (and the outragously huge margin Romney currently has in New Hampshire polling) gives me a glimmer of hope that the GOP primary voters will NOT fuck this one up....Jungle Rat wrote:IB, the Repubs have no chance, zero of winning the white house. Stock up on tissues.
Truth be told Rat, President Obama's re-election is entirely predicated on the GOP Primary. That (in and of itself) is the only thing that matters, the only thing that will determine if Obama gets just 4 years or the full 8. You see, you don't need to have a PhD in Political Science to understand the most basic, absolute truth, about US Presidential politics: the moderates play kingmaker. Then Senator Obama had the over-whelming majority of the moderates in 2008 (much like Governor Carter did in 1976.) Much has changed since 2008. The moderates do not get that tingling-up-the-leg the way they did just 3 years ago. The honeymoon is largely over. That said, moderates are darn picky about which GOP candidates are worthy of their vote. In that sense, a Michelle Bachman, a Ron Paul, a Herman Cain, a Rick Santorum, a Newt Gingrich, or a Sarah Palin GOP Presidential candidacy would certainly guarantee Obama's re-election. A Willard Mitt Romney (or perhaps, a Rick Perry) candidacy, would assure a GOP victory.
It's all in who New Hampshire picks. Whoever they pick, generally wins the GOP nomination. It wasn't that way in 1996 (when Pat Buchanan won the state) but that was an isolated, incident. So I would have to say that the February 2012 GOP Primary voting residents of New Hampshire largely control the Presidential fate of our nation from January 20th 2013 to January 2017 at least.
