danivon wrote:Steve, I did say, in reference to the 'Obama v named Republican' polls that there's a long time to go. It just looks to me like the GOP have a problem in that none of the main challengers for the nomination are doing better than 'generic Republican' against Obama. Sure they will build profile over the next year. But they could also generate more antipathy along the way.

And yes, I suspect there will be a very negative campaign. Obama's guys are doing it. But looking at clips of the debate last week, it was pretty much a given that the Republicans will run a negative campaign too. Oh well.


Yes, the Republicans are very negative. They keep citing Obama's record and his leadership.

That is downright cruel.

You haven't 'explained' why the Tea Party approvals have fallen. You've rationalised why it doesn't matter to you. But that's not the same thing. Sure, they are not responsible for the government, but they were partly responsible for the way that the whole debate went on in Congress.


Oh, I think I have. The Tea Party was NEVER a majority party. "Taxed Enough Already" does not apply to many who pay no taxes.

Furthermore, the poll I saw (CNN) was of "adults." And, even in that poll, the TP had an unfavorable rating of 51%. That's right in the ballpark of Obama's, so what's the problem?

I don't know how the next election will go. Obama has a tough fight (as it appeared that Bush II did in 2004, and Reagan did a year before his re-election), but I don't know that it's going to be so easy to call.


I don't know that Bush was at 39% yet. He didn't have a cratering economy and no plan.