About Scott Brown his reelection chances have improved from a few months ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... etts,_2012

Its going to be a hell of a race.


A populist vs a Harvard Professor...


Also based off elections here in Canada, being "the smarter, more qualified" candidate does not mean anything these days.

Its more about how you appear on TV, how you react with people and that youu do not look awkward.

Why is Elizabeth Warren more qualified to be a Senator than Scott Brown, a sitting Senator with legislative expirence?

By God, you're right! Strom Thurmond must have been the greatest Senator ever! He was there for so long! Once you're elected, there is no way anyone who has not been elected could ever compete with you, because you've got experience, and that is the only thing that matters!

Not my argument. I am only positing that Scott Brown has more qualifications to be Senator than Elizabeth Warren. I am not saying that Elizabeth Warren would or would not turn out to be a better Senator for Massachusetts than Scott Brown. Just like President Obama will be more qualified to be President than Romney or Santorum or whoever else the GOP nominates.

I am sure you would agree that Peyton Manning has more qualifications to be the starting quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts than Andrew Luck, but Andrew Luck looks to be the better pick over the next decade and he is who the Colts are most likely to go with.

In politics though "experience" isn't just how long you've been in office. It's what experiences you've had in life, too.

I mean, I know Republicans criticize Obama for being a "community organizer" but I think that gave him more experience for being a better President than someone who went from law school to some big firm and never had to deal with the problems of ordinary average people.

I don't know why I ever even had the slightest doubt about PR. 628-623 to go depending on the tally. By my count Romney's about 35 delegates within the margin of error from sealing it.

Obama's lack of experience cost him.

Executive experience is a unique kind of experience...

Obama went from a few years as a State Senator and 2 years in Washington and became President.

I think for at least a year+, the lack of experience cost him and cost him a lot of goodwill.
Obama I believe is mediocre at best and is fortunate that he is not facing any real opponents.


Also I would pick Scott over Warren any day. Scott is more of an everyday man...

Plus his comment about Santorum was genuinely funny.

a) I don't get that. Obama had plenty of good will going in and through 2009, but his handling of the health care debacle cost him political capital. It's not like he was elected without people knowing he was green. Unless you mean HCR's handling showed a lack of experience, because I could see that.

b) How? Warren had a difficult upbringing too. They both worked hard to become successful attorneys too. I don't dislike Scott Brown, though.

However, you could name a lot of presidents who had no real experience Lincoln comes to mind. There are other good examples in our nation's history. I don't think that problem has cost Obama at all. I think he has done a good job considering what he has faced.
As for Brown, his big problem will be his state. Massachusetts is very liberal and he made a huge mistake backing that contraception amendment. I think that could cost him in the election.

Lincoln is Lincoln my friend...

There is a reason why he is so well respected ^^^

"I don't think that problem has cost Obama at all. I think he has done a good job considering what he has faced."

His low approval ratings for 2 years are just randomly occurring? Not because of his lack of attention on the economy before the midterms? Low ratings are normal for Presidents, but Obama's ratings have stayed low for some time and that is something we have not seen often with Presidents.

"a) I don't get that. Obama had plenty of good will going in and through 2009, but his handling of the health care debacle cost him political capital. It's not like he was elected without people knowing he was green. Unless you mean HCR's handling showed a lack of experience, because I could see that.

b) How? Warren had a difficult upbringing too. They both worked hard to become successful attorneys too. I don't dislike Scott Brown, though.

"


Yes Obama put health care ahead of the economy in 2009 and 2010 and that hurt him badly. His assumption was that a stimulus plan would kick start the economy and all it did was simply stop the Unemployment rate from going well past 10%. He thought it was then clear sailing, that the economy will improve and he could bring in health care reform.
I think that him being Green meant he was really training on the job for at least 1-2 years. Many Presidents have gone through that but usually not during tough times.
That is one point I really criticize Obama, the economy should have been his focus from day 1 till now.

Also with Scott, I am talking about current image not upbringing. Its the man with his pickup truck vs a Harvard Professor, who really gives out the image of the "everyday person".

With approval ratings, it is really a modern thing they didn't exist before the 1950s. I have a feeling that Lincoln's were low during most of his presidency. I know he was hated in Boston and NY and only won because the democrats ran the moron McClellan. The approval ratings have been weird for Obama, I have seen them all over the map like the most recent ones range from 41-50 depending on which one you look at.

Sure we have. Obama's ratings are pretty comparable to Reagan's, actually.

Here's a good link where you can compare ratings of the Presidents.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/presi ... enter.aspx

Well it is true that Lincoln was quite disliked as President and so was Truman.

Yeah you do have a point with Reagan.
Legacies are hard to base on approval ratings.

Obama entire Presidency now rides with the reelection.
If he wins big he can do well for himself, meaning a big victory will increase his power and his ability to get things done even over his opponents. If he barley wins then I think he will have another tough four years.

I think as of now his presidency can be declared as a disappointment. Likely rank him around 15-20th place as Presidents.
I think Obama was more of a centrist then a Idealistic liberal, he would have done way better.

I think we must all admit his fixation on health care was a big mistake. He ignored the economy and it cost us badly. Also I am not a person who expects govt to literally create jobs, but it is the job of govt to create a sense of stability and calm. He only refocused on that after the midterms...

Heh! He's no liberal. The right want to paint him as one, but he's about as moderate as you can get. His health care plan is to the right of Nixon's, he hasn't done much to change our unprogressive tax system, he's hardly cut the military, he doesn't support gay marriage, he supports the Patriot Act... seriously, the problem is that the conservatives have moved so far to the right that the middle now looks like the left.

To anyone in Canada or Europe, he looks practically conservative.

Yeah his foreign policy shows he is no liberal. There really aren't too many liberal politicians in Washington. Bernie Sanders is and there are probably a few others. The Democrats are really a center left party.

Isn't Manny Canadian?

Obama would be right of centre in Canada apart from his environmental policies...Plus he actually wishes to radically change the tax system and that is a discussion that occurs with only the left wing parties in Canada.

I think Obama is left wing because of his obsession with health care over the economy. That was just pure ideology on his part..


"Yeah his foreign policy shows he is no liberal."

That is why he gets most praise from people and from myself in that area . He has done well there. Launching drone strikes against our enemies has been super effective.
There is a reason why Hillary is now so well respected by centrists and the GOP.

Obama is center right, no doubt about it. And I would say so are the Democrats in Washington (not necessarily Democrats in state legislative bodies).

We don't truly have a real left wing in American politics, other than a few people like Bernie Sanders who is a socialist. Maybe on the state level you see more of it, but on the national level the Democrats are more in the center.

Its hard to place things because someones view of the spectrum is based on where they sit on it.

If someone is actually a centrist you think he is liberal if he somewhat left of you... and a conservative if he is to the right of you.

I think they're going by international standards.

I was going by the academic standard. There is this political spectrum chart somewhere and places different political parties on it. I have seen several that have taken the views and legislation on major political figures and put them on the chart. Usually the democrats are either in the center or center right.

The political compass, yes.