I always figured that the inevitable overreach by the GOP Tea Party (and the resulting backlash) would end up being a perfect set up for President Obama (and hopefully the Dems in general) winning in 2012

The only thing that slightly worries me (that might make things closer) is the spate of voter ID laws passed by states and other means that the Republicans have been busily implementing to disenfranchise Democratic-leaning voters in advance of 2012. All things being equal, I would heartily agree with you that none of the GOP Presidential roster are going to fare particularly well against President Obama- though the right-wing machine, Fox News, GPS Crossroads (i.e. Rove) will throw the kitchen sink at President Obama during the campaign to bring down his numbers and make the race more competitive. Of course, unlike 2008 when Obama was largely an "unknown quantity", it was easier to smear him and raise questions about his leadership experience and ability to step up to the plate. Now that he is well-known and has a proven record of accomplishments and leadership, it will be harder for them to find something to really attack him over. The fact that they already spend so much time flailin' and failin' to find something to really attack him over shows how little criticism of substance they actually have on him.

The only real *argument* they can make is that the economy sucks and that President Obama hasn't been able to successfully fix the problem during his first 4 years and that the public should vote in a Republican POTUS to fix things (oh, they'll "fix" things, of course ). Of course, the counter-argument that President Obama and the Democratic Party makes is that the problem was so big that it was never going to be totally fixed within 4 years (not by him or anybody else), the stimulus and other actions by the administration helped make things better (or at least staunched the bleeding) and, to the extent that things could have been made even better, the Republicans share some blame for obstructing additional stimulative measures/progress.

he won't win all of the states he won then but I believe he will still win. The question that I always keep coming back to is this, is it more likely that President Obama will win a second term or is it more likely that will the Republicans putting up a credible challenge to his re-election? The answer I always keep coming back to is that it is far more likely an outcome for President Obama to win a second term. Despite the drag that the economy has been on President Obama's approval ratings, there is no evidence to support an assertion that the public thinks well of the Republicans in general and/or seriously wants to try their *solutions* (again) and, historically, the incumbent tends to have the advantage over the challenger absent an extraordinarily compelling message and/or candidate. So far, I see none of that emanating from poison gas filled swamp otherwise known as the RNC. Absent changed circumstances (and, yes, I do realize that things can and do change quickly in politics), I just can't envision a scenario where the Republicans "run the tables" next year and capturing the WH and Senate and holding the House. I'm worried, however, about them possibly winning the Senate due to the wave of Democratic retirements in red states and holding the House, however, which is something that we'll need to make sure that we GOTV for. Having Obama on the ticket should help with the down ticket races should help though to some extent.

the case must be made by President Obama and the Democratic Party next year that the kind of obstructionism that has been perpetuated by the Republicans in Congress needs to be repudiated and that in order to get things done President Obama needs the public to also deliver a Congress to work with that isn't allowed to simply throw sand in the gears of government at every turn. I know that that's a lot to hope for maybe but our federal government has become virtually paralyzed by unprecedented levels of Republican obstructionism. I think that everybody needs to come to some kind of understanding that Congress was created for the express purpose of allowing issues to be debated and voted on and for nominees for cabinet offices and judiciary need to be allowed to be debated on voted on. I'm not of the mind to totally eliminate filibusters but there needs to be some reform of the measure so that it doesn't become a permanent logjam to getting things done that need to be done. I realize that, whenever a Democrat is President, not getting things done is pretty much the point but we need to argue back that they are public servants that have a job to do and that they need to do their damn job and not play games like what they have been done since Obama was elected POTUS!

cause it sounds like he is just talking out of his butt. I hope this bill dies a painful death in the Senate. If Congress is given this kind of authority (which I'm not even sure is constitutional) then nobody should be expecting Congress to do anything, certainly not THIS useless one.

And yes, I fully agree that if Hillary were POTUS, we'd be seeing the same stuff from the Repubs and anybody who believes different is delusional IMHO

that it's sort of pointless to worry about exactly WHO will be GOP nominee next year when whoever it is is going to be beholden to the GOP Tea Party no matter what. The race will be about whether the public wants President Obama running the country or the GOP Tea Party. If it's framed like that, then I don't see how we can lose IMHO.

Medicare, private health insurance, private retirement plans (i.e. 401K). They keep demanding that the rest of us pay private companies for x,y, and z all the while enjoying their taxpayer subsidized plans. If they all had to live under the same system as the rest of us, maybe things might change for the better. At the very least, the anti-government/rabid "free marketers" wouldn't look so damned hypocritical.

the results that other people would like. Who knew?

is that, whoever the GOP nominates, is going to be in thrall to the Tea Party one way or another, particularly if we wind up with a GOP WH, Senate, and House, which we likely would if the Republicans run strong enough to win the WH. Which Republican of the lot will stand up and point-blank reject the kinds of legislation that the GOP Tea Party has already tried to pass? Even the "moderate" Huntsman has embraced the draconian Ryan budget and Mitt will twist himself into whatever shape he needs to be in order to be POTUS. The only thing that could possibly save us in the event of GOP "trifecta", ironically, would be the filibuster in the Senate because the Republicans won't be able to win a filibuster-proof Senate in 2012 even if they run the tables.

The choice in 2012 needs to be framed IMHO between President Obama and the GOP Tea Party because that's really what's it's going to come down to.

that grab people's attention but have little or no relevance to their long term health, security, and overall well being while they enact their own agenda which, *coincidentally*, doesn't have any relevance to any of those things.

How are they going to actually find employment (so that they don't have to continue receiving unemployment) if they are busy "volunteering"? I can understand requiring people receiving unemployment to demonstrate that they are attempting to locate new employment but if we're trying to get people back to work, it seems to me like making them fill up their schedule with other activities would be counterproductive. Also, who's going to be providing childcare for young non-school age children?

Just as an aside, states have also really going to have to start cracking down on employers whom are prohibiting unemployed persons from applying for jobs. That's just insane!

you know, like, good Christian virtues? Now, they're part of a left-wing conspiracy? So, what would a good "right" wing type message for a movie be?

and people like Mitt and his own party are consciously trying to slow down/obstruct the economic recovery. Who's kidding who here?

I simply can't wrap my head around this concept of businesses refusing to hire people whom are unemployed.

of everything they would do starting in 2013 if they hold the House, win the Senate and WH next year. We should all be paying close attention IMHO.

The fact that a Democratic Senate and/or President Obama is not going to approve much, if anything of their *agenda* should serve to highlight some stark differences between the two parties IMHO.