Perspective President

Ronald Reagan was the first president I remember and associating with what a president should look like. Jimmy Carter was the President of the United States when I was born in 1978, so the 1980s was my childhood and Reagan defined the United States from 1981-1989, from a political-cultural level. Carter will always be a favorite president of mine because of the association but also because he only had the best interests at heart. He would be maligned, from within his own party in 1980 and of course the Republican Party. The GOP successfully lowered Carter's patriotism and increased Reagan's stature. But Reagan had the best interests of the nation at heart as well. He always showed the good of the United States while Carter told us the truth which was bad news. Either way, the idea of perspective shapes one's own view of a political figure and Reagan is a great example of a perspective president...as is Carter.

As for me, I only knew Reagan as a president. As I learned his history, governor of California was next on the list and so I still only saw him as a politician. Reagan was a lifeguard at one point in his life. Those kids that grew up around him as swimmers under his watch, they would always see Reagan as a lifeguard. Probably whenever those former recreational swimmers saw a Reagan film, or as they might call it a picture, they saw him as that lifeguard guy in pictures. So when an actor-Reagan started showing a prospective political future, the movie going audiences as voters questioned "can a movie actor be a politician?" The swimmers were probably thinking "can a lifeguard be a politician?"

I'm sure those that only knew their State governor was Ronald Reagan and not some actor, would think "yeah, he can be president...he's the governor." So says a young Californian from between 1967-1975.

This of course goes without those above people not looking at the individuals political ideology, what they believe and have they put that into practice.

Pointless Presidential 'Pinion - Obama's a Divider, not a Uniter?

It's funny that Obama is considered the divisive politician or the reason for the divided nation when he was the one that ran on HOPE and CHANGE in '08. That hope and change was changing the divided nation of the previous 8 years. What happened...the Republicans did the opposite of what they did from 2001-2007, they took Nancy Reagan's advice and just said no to anything President Obama proposed or suggested. Anything he was for they were against, even though they were for it before they were against it (John Kerry!). Then their plan is made clear by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell declaring the GOP goal is to make Obama a one term president. How is this divided country Obama's fault? George Bush was elected with a minority of the popular vote in 2000 (oh no there's that history again) and after Gore conceded, Bush proclaimed he was a uniter not a divider. Instead of uniting the country he acted as if he had a mandate to do whatever he wanted. It took the 9/11 attacks (Obama's failure with Benghazi is much worse than Bush's failure for the original 9/11, re: sarcasm), to unite the country and then Bush fucks that up (he didn't fuck everything up) by declaring/creating the Axis of Evil which was our march to the war of choice. Blaming Obama for our problems (he's not perfect) just proves we as a nation have a short attention span. To think Bush created a mess over his 8 years and Obama was to fix it in just 4 while dealing with politicians that can't behave like professionals simply because Obama is a Democrat.

2012 Prediction

My first time voting was in 1996, and after I cast my vote I felt I was voting for the winner of the election. In the end, I was right...it was William Jefferson Clinton. I didn't predict his election, but somehow knew he'd be reelected. I was a registered Republican for a couple of months before switching to the Democratic Party just before the election. I turned 18 in July of '96 and, of course, the election was in November.

In 2000, I voted for the incumbent vice president, and somehow believed and thought he would win. I voted the day of the election and of course had no idea that the outcome would not be revealed until December 13, 2000. I don't know why I thought he'd win, even though the popular vote would support my notion that Al Gore was more popular among the electorate than the actual winner, Governor George Bush of Texas. I should've known better since only 4 incumbent vice presidents have won a presidential election. At that point in 2000, Vice President George Bush was the first incumbent vice president to win since Martin Van Buren in 1936. Notice I used the Bush's titles to differentiate them rather than their middle initials. Of course, had Gore used more of President Bill Clinton and simply won his own home state he'd have won the election.

Historically, with the exception of Samuel Tilden, the person that won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote, returned 4 years later and defeated the president elected simply by the Electoral College. Andrew Jackson had the most votes in 1824, but John Quincy Adams was eventually elected president by the House of Representatives because neither candidate had a majority in the Electoral college. President Grover Cleveland won the popular vote in 1888, but Benjamin Harrison won the Electoral College. Four years later, former president Cleveland defeated President Harrison in a rematch. In 2004, Gore joined Tilden by not running again against the man that lost the popular vote but won the presidency. Most likely, Gore didn't run in '04 because Bush was a wartime president and no Democrat was going to beat him. If you asked me on September 10, 2001, if Gore were to run in '04, I'd say he would win. But if you asked me on September 12, 2001, in a post-9/11 America, I'd tell you that Bush would win reelection. I predicted it on that tragic day and proof that Bush was unbeatable is that Gore didn't run and the other most popular Democrat, Hillary Clinton, didn't run. Sure she was a first term U.S. Senator from New York, but in 2002 she was considered a front-runner for the presidential nomination on the Democratic side. But she knew, like Gore did, that she'd lose to a popular wartime president. Called it!

If you follow President Bush's ratings from 9/11, you'll see he has the highest approval rating since his father after the Gulf War. But if you follow those numbers they go down, and a chart would show that if the election of 2004 were in December the president would probably lose. And his poll numbers just kept going down from there. So by 2008, there was no way a Republican could win the presidency. The presidential election of 2008 was pretty much determined during the 2008 Democratic primary/caucus elections between then-senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Once Obama won the nomination it was clear that he'd be winner in November.

As I write this and explain my justifications for the '04 an '08 election predictions, the evidence for reelection was so clear. Since Obama's election in 2008, I've predicted his reelection. As Election Day approaches, it looks like 2012 will be another 2004, 1976, or a 1968 to name a few close elections. But I've always thought that he was unbeatable, maybe it's like my vote for Clinton in '96 and Gore in '00, but the evidence for his reelection is there. The Republicans in 2012 nominated Mitt Romney out of a field that included fringe candidates and the lone logical candidate in Jon Huntsman, and he got no love whereas all those others scared Romney at least once by out polling him. In 2012, the Republicans had to choose a candidate out of the B-team (I don't think B-team is right, maybe Z-team), the no-love-candidate Jon Huntsman, and Etch A Sketch Mitt Romney. The A-Team of the Republican Party didn't show up, Haley Barbour, Mitch Daniels, and Jeb Bush, to name a few. Jeb Bush at least had his last name as a reason not run.

My prediction of Obama's '12 victory was confirmed by the A-Team GOPers skipping the race because they knew they couldn't defeat a popular president like Obama, just like Gore and Hillary skipping '04. Now if I am wrong, I'll admit it and those A-Team GOPers will be upset that they didn't step up. If I am wrong, I'll still predict that a President Romney will win reelection in 2016, because the economy will be better in the 2013-2017 presidential term and that president will get the credit. Meaning a President Romney will win reelection or President Obama will be able anoint his successor whether that's Vice President Joe Biden, probably-by-then former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, or some other popular Democrat in four years, just like President Theodore Roosevelt did with William Howard Taft in 1908 or Ronald Reagan with Vice President Bush in 1988. Had Gore relied more on the popular Clinton, he too would have received the love of a popular outgoing incumbent. But Gore felt the Lewinsky scandal should not touch him, even though Clinton was popular post-impeachment and more so as an outgoing POTUS.

I don't see my 2012 prediction being wrong, although in the days leading up to election night I'm reminded of the days before 2000. I'm probably questioning myself because of all the articles I read that say how close the election is, or how friends or comments-online-people declaring a Romney landslide victory. I just wonder where are they getting their info since they bash any poll that says Obama will win. Obama's reelection will not just be the first for someone of African ancestry, but also the first time that 3 presidents have been reelected back-to-back since James Monroe succeeded James Madison in 1816 and Madison succeeded Thomas Jefferson in 1808. I'm sure the 57th U.S. Presidential Election will result in the reelection of the 44th President of the United States and 47th Vice President. Why is it the 57th election and 44th POTUS and 47 VPOTUS? That sounds like that can be a pointless presidential pfact, which is probably better than this pointless presidential 'pinion.

Bush Again

After wonderful 8 years of President George W. Bush (and Vice President Richard Cheney) it was a given that Jeb Bush the Bush prodigy that should've been president, wouldn't be POTUS anytime soon after January 20, 2009.

It sometimes feels that the election of a Bush after President George (H.W.) Bush's reelection loss to William Jefferson Clinton in 1992 seemed a certainty and those responsible for Bush 41's defeat will get their comeuppance. Bush Junior has always been protective of his father and for the popular wartime POTUS to be defeated by Clinton and a third-party candidate, H. Ross Perot, a man from the era of first initials. With Bush 41 not pulling a Grover Cleveland, the 1990s became the path the younger Bushes needed to build credibility to eventually run for president.

Jeb seemed the likely one with the intellectual curiosity, his brother George lacked. Junior was an outdoor westerner, not an indoor thinker. And just to note, people in the West think indoors and outdoors...speaking as someone from the American West. But Junior wanted it more or he was a better politician than Jeb...or because he had a desire for revenge against those that humiliated his father with defeat.

While they both ran for governorships in 1994, Junior in Texas and Jeb in Florida, Junior was the victory. He defeated Ann Richards who famously insulted then Vice President Bush, who was seeking the 1988 GOP presidential nomination, with her line in the keynote speech: "Poor George, he can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth". With his victory Governor George W. Bush had a shot for the GOP nomination, but not in 1996.

The GOP would nominate Bob Dole, senator from Kansas and 1976 GOP vice presidential nominee, because it was his turn and his challengers weren't going to prevent that. While Clinton's presidency started going downhill from the start in 1993 and the citizens confirmed it by the disastrous Democratic loss in the 1994 mid-term elections, the Newt Gingrich (House of Representatives) - Bob Dole (the Senate) led Congress only helped to turn Bill Clinton's fortunes around. By the spring of 1995, Clinton started to look unbeatable the following year. Those two factors probably contributed to Governor Bush abstaining from the 1996 Presidential Election. Just as Dole turn came, so too would Governor Bush's.

In 1998 both Bush Brothers were on ballots again for governor in their respective states and this time both celebrated election night victories. The time for Texas-Bush to run is ASAP. He was now a governor elected to two terms and by the start of the next presidential administration on January 20, 2001, he would have served six years as the chief executive of the nations second largest state. By that next presidential inauguration date from 1998, Florida-Bush would only be governor for two years and while he may be more wonky than Texas-Bush it wouldn't be his turn.

So Texas-Bush's turn for the GOP nomination would be 2000 and John McCain would be the one with the most to disagree with that idea, although it would help him become the next-in-line because of his opposition to Bush in 2000. Bush would go on to win the needed electoral votes to become POTUS, but would lose the popular vote to Vice President Al Gore in a ruling by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore. Bush won the presidency with a federal court decision over turning a state court ruling in the Florida recount, and Gore accepted the Court's decision no matter how much he disagreed with it. Defeating Gore was an extension of Bush 43 seeking revenge on those that defeated Bush 41, since Gore is a product of the Clinton administration Bush's victory is a jab at Clinton. Of course Clinton and Bush 41 would eventually become super friends in the first decade of the 21st Century, going on missions for Bush 43 and Clinton too became friends with his successor. But the 2000 election and the aftermath is another topic altogether.

Bush 43 goes on to becoming a wartime POTUS, at first not by choice but when he does the neo-conservatives that filled the administration continued to spend money and enlarge the size of the government, which had been reduced during the Democratic Clinton/Gore administration. After reelection in 2004, Bush 43 slowly but surely starts to see the light and after the mid-term defeats in 2006 starts to take control away from the neo-cons. But by then we were in two wars and spending like crazy ensuring a Democratic victory in 2008. Ten years after being elected governor of Florida and reelected as well, Jeb Bush was ready to be POTUS...but not after 8 years of an unsuccessful presidency not just an administration of your own political party, but your brother was the chief executive. No Bush would be elected in 2008.

By 2008, the Tea Party group came on to the political scene decrying the big government overreach and big spending. The opposition to Bush 43 would say where have you been since 2002 (the State of the Union Address which coined the term "Axis of Evil" and started us on this path of multiple wars on the credit card). But the group is here. By 2010 they have successfully influenced elections, supported and endorsed candidates. The Tea Party faction of the Republican Party was taking over. Factions within political parties come and go, they win seats when they come and lose seats big time on their way out. The Democrats have had the Copperheads, Dixiecrats, and Blue Dogs to name a few. While the Republicans have had Half-Breeds, Stalwarts, and Neo-Cons. The Tea Party and Christian Right have seized dominance over the rest of the party...the faction of the party that Jeb Bush and more than likely Bush 41, 43 and Dick Cheney belong to which is to show the diversity in this small faction alone.

Jeb stood up recently denouncing those that oppose compromise...namely those that have taken control of the GOP which Jeb feels is not the same as the days of Ronald Reagan and George (H.W.) Bush or even his own. Democrats ran against Herbert Hoover for a generation and Bush 43 will be no different. Jeb's chances at running might not occur. However with his recent statement on the divisiveness in our politics, brought on by those in constant opposition to compromise like the current GOP, Jeb has an opportunity to become the uniter that Bush 43 failed to accomplish in 2000 after the divided election and Barack Obama was unable to achieve with his hope and change in 2008, no thanks to the GOP's lack of trying. Jeb just needs to stand up to those that took over the Grand Old Party.

Imagine a faction taking control of the party and that faction's choice would mean certain electoral defeat, so the only thing to do would be to stand up to that faction with your own campaign for electoral...well defeat. This is essentially the election of 1912. Theodore Roosevelt was upset with how his successor William Howard Taft did nothing to main the legacy TR created in the two previous presidential terms. So TR and his progressive constituents bolted the party in response to the conservatives support of the incumbent, Taft. With TR in the race on the Progressive Party ticket, or the Bull Moose Party, he would divide the GOP vote in 1912 ensuring the victory of the Democratic progressive Woodrow Wilson. That election would be the last election a former president runs for the presidency again but also the first and only time a third-party came in second. A similar scenario can occur in 2016...assuming President Obama is reelected.

Now if Mitt Romney wins in 2012 then this is just political fantasy. If the A-Team that sat out this last GOP primary/caucus season sits out the 2016 because the crazy B-Team thinks it's A-Team material because they went through the cycle once before or more unqualified individuals think they can do it too, then someone should bolt the party. Jeb could be that person. It would certainly split the vote, but those that have taken over the party won't appeal to the Democratic opposition anyway, but Jeb could appeal to the crucial independents that determine the elections as well as the remaining sane-thinking Republicans now called RINOs (Republican In Name Only), the Reagans, Bushes, Cheneys. But of course if Jeb pulled a TR, he would more than likely give the election to the Democratic candidate just like Perot did in 1992 and the opposite with Ralph Nader in 2000. Especially if the economic fortunes turn around in a second Obama administration...surely guaranteeing a Hillary Clinton victory in 2016. Remember this is just political fantasy.