General Discussion

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)

40. It's not a silly analogy because it's not an analogy. It's just a warning against complacency.

Fri Nov 23, 2012, 10:09 PM

Nov 2012

I'm certainly not saying that every re-election of an incumbent President foretells a loss by his party four years later. (Reagan was re-elected in 1984 and the Republicans won again in 1988.) All I'm saying is that such a reversal can happen. Not since 1988 has one party won three presidential races in a row. (Before that, 1948 was the last time such a streak was continued.)

In particular, if anyone says that we've found the secret to winning and if we just keep repeating the same method we'll keep winning, I get nervous. The Republicans have more money, fewer scruples, superior access to the media, control of more state governments (for purposes of gerrymandering or voter suppression), and a working majority on the Supreme Court on most issues. We cannot rest on our laurels.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

89 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

David Carr-NY Times "For One Night at Fox, News tops Agenda"- article & MY RANT against CTers. [View all] graham4anything Nov 2012 OP

David Carr-the media equation "For One Night at Fox, News tops Agenda"- graham4anything Nov 2012 #1

Good read n/t malaise Nov 2012 #3

Fox's part in the apparatus began long before the election JHB Nov 2012 #10

News my as* --- they just didn't want to be permanently associated with THE LOSER!! nt Tigress DEM Nov 2012 #58

Thank you OKNancy Nov 2012 #2

I don't think there are any people who would glowing Nov 2012 #4

+1 DeeDeeNY Nov 2012 #6

+2 bahrbearian Nov 2012 #21

Without all that hard work by the Obama team, Obama would never have won but.... fasttense Nov 2012 #5

i think so too barbtries Nov 2012 #7

I must disagree with you about 2016 and 2020. Jim Lane Nov 2012 #8

Those who forget history nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #9

Those who are confined by history are trapped into repeating it. randome Nov 2012 #12

Well, barring little things like, say alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #11

SO you think the GOP is done nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #13

No, I think using 1964 and 1972 is just plain silly alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #17

It's not a silly analogy because it's not an analogy. It's just a warning against complacency. Jim Lane Nov 2012 #40

1968 was the democrats fault for tossing the 3rd greatest president ever in the river graham4anything Nov 2012 #16

"Vietnam was a stupid wedge issue distraction..." alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #18

That stood out to me also and gave me a sort of nasty feeling in the pit sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #24

I see your strategy but I am not biting. graham4anything Nov 2012 #28

Isn't life itself performance art? (referencing the response above) graham4anything Nov 2012 #38

Life is indeed a work of art alcibiades_mystery Nov 2012 #64

add my 80,000 plus posts at CGCS with the 3000s more Kerry board,& 1000s more on Gore boards graham4anything Nov 2012 #70

We must stay aggressive. Obama's OFA is still active, just go to it's website. The organization bluestate10 Nov 2012 #19

Yes President Obama won fair and square nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #14

Nader and the 97,000 people that voted for him in Florida put Bush in office. The sooner that bluestate10 Nov 2012 #20

Wrong , Nader was right. bahrbearian Nov 2012 #22

Problem is, and this is puzzling, well not really... nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #23

THE SUPREME COURT- you mean the one that Nader lied and said Bush/Gore were the same? graham4anything Nov 2012 #29

Escuse me, but NADER had nothing to do with taht decision nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #30

Again, if Gore won NH, the US Supreme Court would never have been called in. Election over in NH graham4anything Nov 2012 #31

What I do not understand is your hate for the democratic system nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #34

So sad to see you trying so hard to make a crime out of something sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #35

You lost your own point. Gore/Kerry did not have the community organization Obama did. graham4anything Nov 2012 #37

Wrong, but keep on thinking that. Thankfully a majority of Dems sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #25

Blaming Nader stops Democrats from wasting their vote again in any new election graham4anything Nov 2012 #27

Are you that ingnorant of history? nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #33

I have nothing against that. 50% should be required though. with a runoff. graham4anything Nov 2012 #36

We have 52 states? zappaman Nov 2012 #81

I don't know what to say to you if you think that blaming Nader sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #39

Before you call people names, let me ask you-were you on the street protesting in 2000 in Fl or DC? graham4anything Nov 2012 #42

They will never admit it. One of the 99 Nov 2012 #54

The persistent claim that Anonymous somehow... bvar22 Nov 2012 #15

"WE WON FAIR AND SQUARE and nobody could have or would have stolen it because WE WON..." Snarkoleptic Nov 2012 #26

Al Gore didn't get to say it because of Ralph Nader. graham4anything Nov 2012 #32

Nader was a factor, but if all votes had been counted we'd never had to suffer Bewsh. Snarkoleptic Nov 2012 #41

SHh, already mentioned that, but nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #43

If one believes Nader, then one agrees Bush and Gore were the same & Bush&Kerry the same graham4anything Nov 2012 #44

I'm a Gore fan RobertEarl Nov 2012 #45

as President Obama says FORWARD. Gore won NH without Nader. graham4anything Nov 2012 #46

Go to bed RobertEarl Nov 2012 #48

This thread is about how President Obama won with no help from a hacker graham4anything Nov 2012 #50

I've always wondered if this 'blame Nader' was meant sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #78

I see Nader blamers as authoritarians RobertEarl Nov 2012 #80

While you prattle on Nader nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #60

This thread is being hijacked by Ralph Nader fans. A terrorist hacker did not help President Obama graham4anything Nov 2012 #47

You have Nader on the brain? RobertEarl Nov 2012 #49

stop with the conspiracy theories. Terrorist hackers belong in jail. Anarchy is not democracy. graham4anything Nov 2012 #51

Right E-vote is anarchy RobertEarl Nov 2012 #52

So do you believe Nader's line that Bush and Gore were one and the same? graham4anything Nov 2012 #53

Get Nader off your head RobertEarl Nov 2012 #55

Funny you and the 2 others do not answer that question. Backing Nader means believing his lies. graham4anything Nov 2012 #57

Vote for Hillary in 2016 and make sure Jeb doesn't win. Then there is no problem. graham4anything Nov 2012 #56

What if...perish the though, Hillary don't run? nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #59

Vote for Michelle. And keep Chicago together.Remember, Chicago wins elections and is a good word graham4anything Nov 2012 #62

And Michelle is running? nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #65

2025-2032. Michelle46, followed by Chelsea47 after Hillary45 and President Obama44 retire graham4anything Nov 2012 #69

We call that a coronation, not an election nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #73

What do you mean it's been proven false?? reusrename Nov 2012 #61

It was proven false above on this thread by someone living in Ohio. I trust they would know graham4anything Nov 2012 #63

I agree with everything you say, especially the part about Wellstone. reusrename Nov 2012 #66

RUUUNNNN. COMIES UNDER MY BED!!! nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #68

152 electoral votes. And they would all be Dem votes. Very simple, once you understand graham4anything Nov 2012 #71

No, there is no brain freeze here nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #72

If you believe in an anarchist who cowardly doesn't reveal their name(the hacker) then admit it. graham4anything Nov 2012 #74

Lead a horse to water comes at this point nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #75

What you are saying is...(I think) that... graham4anything Nov 2012 #76

No, that is what you are saying nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #77

No, that is what you are saying. If we both are saying it, then we are in agreement. graham4anything Nov 2012 #79

Ah red baiting again nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #82

the only red I bait is redstates. I love socialists & Communists. Especially REAL ones. graham4anything Nov 2012 #83

Are you saying the 2000 and 2004 elections were not stolen? sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #84

Dirty tricks changed 2000, yes. But dirty tricks have been part of many an election. graham4anything Nov 2012 #87

So you don't believe the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen. That's all I wanted sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #88

No one mentioned any terrorist hacker. Can you link to that information please? sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #85

the guy/woman with no name. Whom you have credited with stopping Karl Rove. graham4anything Nov 2012 #86

You're not making any sense. Maybe you thought you were talking sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #89

It was a great GOTV effort, but it doesn't deny the fact that an election can easily be joeybee12 Nov 2012 #67