11 replies to this topic

[FuturePriest387]

It just seems as if the Obama campaign can't find a good slogan, and even now with their new "Forward" they are still having trouble. Conan speaks about this:

[kujo]

The lack of a great slogan is the least of the president's problems heading into this campaign

[i<3franciscans]

The lack of a great slogan is the least of the president's problems heading into this campaign

I WANNA PROP THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thessalonian]

Ya they can't use the word change any more because they are the subject of what needs to be changed.

[Winchester]

It doesn't matter. He has his following, and if the GOP is dumb enough to put up Romney, he's got a great shot at winning.

[i<3franciscans]

Way to be a johnny rain cloud. *sighs*

[Jesus_lol]

yup, remember how everyone thought for sure george bush would lose his second election? and then the democrats threw out the useless Kerry to challenge and he won?

[Brother Adam]

It's like I have said, when Hasan and I actually agree on something, it is indisputably true. Like that Obama will win a second term.

[Odin]

The lack of a great slogan is the least of the president's problems heading into this campaign

Obama has a good shot yes, but history is not on his side. When economic conditions are like this there is usually a change in party. Also it still hinges on how things are in November and the results of a couple of Supreme Court cases. It's hardly a predictable election. Plus the VP choice could also have an effect. Many variables at play.

[kujo]

Plus the VP choice could also have an effect. Many variables at play.

There have been many studies done on this topic, and let me tell you--beyond a short term "bump," there hasn't been a single quantitatively verified case of a VP putting any presidential candidate over the hump. Turns out that the guessing game we do leading up to this announcement every cycle is just that--a game, a media ploy intended to drive up ratings and fill the narrative void in the period of time after the primaries and before the conventions.

[Odin]

There have been many studies done on this topic, and let me tell you--beyond a short term "bump," there hasn't been a single quantitatively verified case of a VP putting any presidential candidate over the hump. Turns out that the guessing game we do leading up to this announcement every cycle is just that--a game, a media ploy intended to drive up ratings and fill the narrative void in the period of time after the primaries and before the conventions.

Totally agree. BUT if say you have a well liked politician from Florida (Rubio) in a swing state that COULD give enough push to win the electoral votes. Popular votes I will agree with you that the studies show a VP has little effect BUT if the VP is from a swing state which is within a couple of points to begin with it could indeed have an effect.

But yea everything you hear now is pure speculation. We won't know anything until the presidential debates start and even then we won't know much until we see how the economic conditions, etc. are in November. I am as sick as anyone else of what politics has become in this country which is why I am likely to vote third party (pending on what Paul does or who he endorses, etc.)

[Jesus_lol]

There have been many studies done on this topic, and let me tell you--beyond a short term "bump," there hasn't been a single quantitatively verified case of a VP putting any presidential candidate over the hump. Turns out that the guessing game we do leading up to this announcement every cycle is just that--a game, a media ploy intended to drive up ratings and fill the narrative void in the period of time after the primaries and before the conventions.

on the other hand, its pretty easy to make a case for Sarah Palin losing the election for McCain