Attempting prescience, 2008

Can Mitt win against Obama?

The thing is… just about any of them could maybe win against Hillary. Or lose against Hillary. But winning against Obama is more problematic. People *like* Obama.

And is Mitt really that much better than Obama? Would it *matter* who won?

Giuliani or Thompson, as different as they are, could probably win against Obama. Huckabee? Not so much. Not because he’s a former pastor but because he’d be running against Obama’s strong points. Personality and likableness. Giuliani or Thompson would be running against Obama’s weakness, which is his lack of experience and lack of grown-up solutions to real world problems. Talk policy and Rudy or Fred can get into details and application (like them or not) and Obama really *can’t*.

McCain? Maybe he could pull the center away from Obama. Maybe he’d be the best to win against Hillary. Or maybe not.

Every little internet quiz I take comes up Mitt. But I’ll say this. I try to *not* pay attention and… well, it works for Mitt. He’s easier to not pay attention to than any other candidate still running on either side.

I think he’d be easiest to ignore on election day as well.

Comments

Some times some people.

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it. This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice. If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...

Synova

Search This Blog