Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

2011 is very similar to 1983

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 02:19 AM
Original message
2011 is very similar to 1983
Edited on Fri May-20-11 02:20 AM by scheming daemons
We had just come out of a period in which unemployment had hit 10% and was gradually starting to trend back downward.

The economic stagflation of the late 70s led to a pretty severe recession in '81-'82. Everyone was talking about how an Asian country was about to become the next economic superpower and surpass the United States. (in 1983, it was Japan instead of China).

A President that absolutely drove the opposition party bonkers was in office, but for some reason the population still really liked the guy - even those that disagreed with his policies. Except for a rabid few who considered him the anti-christ.

The best the opposition party could come up with to run against the President was a retread has-been that the general voting public never really warmed up to.

As 1983 turned to 1984, the economic recovery continued. Unemployment came down to about 7.5% and the sitting President ran on a platform of "Morning in America" again.



Obama is going to win in a landslide in 2012, and the reasons are thus:

- In their hearts, the American people generally like the guy. Even those that are disappointed in his policy decisions have a fondness for him personally.

- The economic calamity that we were experiencing when he came into office has begun to subside. Companies are hiring... last month, 23 states saw their unemployment rate go down and only 3 saw it go up (the rest stayed the same).

- The opposition party doesn't have a single candidate running that the people would consider "presidential". When it is all said and done, they will settle on a retread has-been that nobody really loves - Mitt Romney.

- Constituencies that stay home during midterm elections, but who turn out for presidential elections, are overwhelmingly pro-Obama. African-Americans, Latinos, young people. They stayed home in 2010, but they'll vote in 2012.

- The demographics of the country has continued to get browner every day.



Obama is going to win nearly 400 electoral votes. He'll win 35 states. It won't be close. The popular vote will be about 54% to 46%.


The country had nowhere to go but up when he stepped into office. The Dow Jones was at 7900 on inauguration day. We were hemorraging 700,000 jobs a month. Our banking system was in shambles, and two of our three big automakers were about to go under.

Now the Dow sits at 12600. We're gaining over 200,000 jobs per month... and Chrysler and GM are thriving.



There'll be a deal concerning the debt ceiling... just like there was a deal to "save social security" during Reagan's term. And by this time next year, the question will be not whether Obama will win... but by how much and will he have coattails.


2016 is a different story... who knows who will be running for each side then. But 2012 is going to be a landslide for Obama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mahina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 02:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Still, this is the only time the left has a voice, so we need to use it to move the conversation.
Universal single payer- health care is a human right. We are paying now, just not benefitting.

Free education K-college- invest in our capacity

Corporations are not people

Campaign finance reform

We would have a permanent majority, where now it looks like the corporations control everything and we've become something less than we used to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, yeah, only a "rabid few" disliked Reagan
He was so warm and wonderful, how could anyone except a "rabid few" not like him?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 02:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I guess I am a proud member of the Rabid Few.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sirveri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. This must be an echo chamber since I also am a member.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-22-11 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. I hated that mofo Reagan. He turned me into a young liberal. Proud to be among the rabid few.
Edited on Sun May-22-11 07:14 PM by Arugula Latte
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 03:52 AM
Response to Original message
5. Maybe, but 2012 won't be 1984
Obama will only win 40 states, not 49. Only about 450 Electoral Votes too, not 525. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. RNC rules change could, and probably will, put forward a more
moderate Republican candidate. The Republican nominating process is no longer winner take all, delegates are parceled out equal to the percent of support.

A candidate could consistantly win 2nd place and win the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. That doesn't preclude an extremist from winning. In fact, it may make it more likely.
Given the strength of the tea party wing nuts, a tea party candidate will win delegates even moderate states. Then all it would take is a couple of moderate candidates consistently splitting the moderate vote in more conservative states and a tea party type could be positioned to actually win the nomination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Tea party candidates are either going to win big, or lose big. There's nothing inbetween for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 04:18 AM
Response to Original message
6. Great for Obama. What about Democrats in general?
I'm pretty worried about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
7. I love happy talk.
There are a number of important differences between 2011 and 1983 too, but perhaps they won't interfere with business as usual before the 2012 election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GSLevel9 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
8. Landslide... No
Edited on Fri May-20-11 10:45 AM by GSLevel9
This pug candidate will do better than McCain. I foresee a 2008 electoral map with Virginia and Florida and Indiana and Ohio flipping pug. Add in the extra electoral votes from the census and it'll be approx 290-295 ev for obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ileus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
10. I see Obama maybe losing 3 states total.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
southernyankeebelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
11. You paint a wonderful picture. I hope your right. I think dems are going to win big. Rep over
reached.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
14. Considering that Reagan started this mess, there are, and were, a LOT more than
a "rabid few" who hated him. Anyone with a brain and logical reasoning skills hated his guts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Well, to quote Adelai Stevenson
Edited on Fri May-20-11 09:56 PM by Wednesdays
When someone once told him, "You'll have the vote of every thinking American," Stevenson replied, "Thank you, but I need a majority."

I'm sure Fritz Mondale could sympathize.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-11 10:14 PM
Response to Original message
16. Morning in America...
Obama-stylie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidpdx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
17. I was just in a meeting of people who are expats in South Korea
and we were discussing changes of leadership that may happen around the world (and here in Korea) and the consensus seemed to be that Obama would pretty easily win reelection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 06:28 AM
Response to Original message
18. Yeah, I just hope "Members Only" jackets don't come back in style! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-21-11 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
19. The demographics not only grow "browner," they grow younger every year.
That also bodes well for Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-11 12:16 AM
Response to Original message
21. I think it's foolish to be making these predictions a year and a half out
I think if the election were held today Obama would win marginally because of Bin Laden and because it appears that the economy is moving in the right direction. But the economy could just as easily get worse as it could get better. And if that happens we will be praying that Obama and his team can get our constituencies out to vote and convince Americans that Romney, T-Paw, Newt, Bachmann or whoever the GOP decides to nominate are not presidential material.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-11 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
22. I think you are correct.
If the Dems get their acts together, there also should be positive movement in Congress and the Senate, but I'm less certain of this occurring. Repugs are sponsoring such disastrous programs, in the States at the moment, in particular, we should be able to undo their House majority, but we've got to challenge their changes in voter eligibility (poll taxes etc.) Rover+ will run with this, and seek to steal more elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LetTimmySmoke Donating Member (970 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-11 01:30 AM
Response to Original message
23. When I first read your post, I thought it said "retard has-been...Romney"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-23-11 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
24. I think there are similarities but major differences as well
Edited on Mon May-23-11 09:58 PM by fujiyama
Overall demographic trends do favor Obama as does the economic recovery, as tenuous and shaky as it may be.

But race still plays a factor, as does the constant talking points machine. Trust me, there are plenty of people out there that can easily be convinced that Mitt Romney is a smart and savvy business man that can turn around the economy. It's bullshit, but it has sold plenty well in the past and can just as likely sell next year. The same goes with Pawlenty or Huntsmann (the remaining half way sane candidates or potential candidates). The rest are batshit fucking nuts. And I have some confidence that Bachmann, Palin, and Santorum will never be president.

I can see Obama losing several states he won in '08. Indiana is the first on that list, followed by NC, FL, OH, and VA. PA is another remote possibility. Unfortunately, I don't see any real potential pick ups. I think Obama will get the states he needs especially in the SW like CO, NM, and NV. But he needs a few of the rust belt states, like a few mentioned above. And I don't think anyone should be complacent about the tough fight for those that lies ahead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 12th 2024, 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC