Althouse: As it becomes apparent — is it apparent? — that Obama is likely to lose — going to lose?

October 24, 2012

As it becomes apparent — is it apparent? — that Obama is likely to lose — going to lose? — the election...

... what should we expect to see?

1. Desperate attacks, material that otherwise would not have been dumped into the public discourse.

2. Liberals distancing themselves, saying things like "He hasn't presented us with a comprehensive plan for his second term," to preserve their ability to say, after the election, that the American people did not choose conservatism and they don't want conservatism; they merely selected what seemed to be a plan over the absence of a plan; they wanted change and we have a new plan for change.

3. ???

219 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 219 of 219

CWJ said...: Inga @2:04

Name one person wishing for riots.

I'll repeat that. Name one person wishing for riots.

I'll help you out, expecting riots is not the same as wishing for riots.

I am so sick of your mischaracterizations of the people on this blog, usually followed with a lame I didn't say that, quickly followed by a get in line to kiss my ass.; 10/24/12, 7:04 PM
CWJ said...: Inga @2:04

Name one person wishing for riots.

I'll repeat that. Name one person wishing for riots.

I'll help you out, expecting riots is not the same as wishing for riots.

I am so sick of your mischaracterizations of the people on this blog, usually followed with a lame I didn't say that, quickly followed by a get in line to kiss my ass.; 10/24/12, 7:11 PM
yashu said...: In answer to Althouse's question, here's a very surprising #3, proposed by Matt Bai at the New York Times: Blame Bill Clinton!; 10/24/12, 7:22 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/24/12, 7:55 PM
Anonymous said...: CWJ,
There are those apocalypse types who long for it to come, they've said as much, they want to see the tree of Liberty watered with blood. I've read it here on this blog several times. Perhaps you are one of them?

You come across as quite naive.

So go out and get those 50 pound bags of rice and beans and run to Walmart for the bullets, hurry now!; 10/24/12, 7:56 PM
gk1 said...: I'm kind of torn, on one hand I would like to see President Passive aggressive ASSHOLE win re-election so he can watch obamacare slowly flayed before his eyes. It will be the democrats trying to stay afloat who will kill it. On the other I don't think we can afford to have the sequestering go through. It will play out just like the credit downgrade. Obama is a shitty poker player and he doesn't see he's responsible for anything.; 10/24/12, 8:02 PM
yashu said...: There are those apocalypse types who long for it to come, they've said as much, they want to see the tree of Liberty watered with blood. I've read it here on this blog several times.

I call bullshit.; 10/24/12, 8:15 PM
Anonymous said...: I call TRUTH! Whores of the Internet said it several times, as well as others.; 10/24/12, 8:17 PM
Henry said...: Ask and ye shall receive. The New York Times pitches in with an article by Matt Bai that blames ... Bill Clinton!

3. Blame Bill Clinton.

Here's the lede:

It was Mr. Clinton who advised attacking Mitt Romney as too conservative, rather than inconstant and inauthentic.

You went to the well and the well was dry. Try again, fellas.; 10/24/12, 8:35 PM
Henry said...: Damn you, Yashu, I'm reading upwards now and you beat me too it. Credit goes to you.; 10/24/12, 8:36 PM
CWJ said...: Typical Inga. Say "perhaps you are one of them," and then assume that I am - telling me to hurry now to buy my 50lb bag of rice. You don't know me from Adam.

You're big on the assumptions and speculations since that's all you've got.

Citing "Whores" as your example? That's it? Really "Whores?"

Stockpiling staples only says what you expect, not what you wish. I'll say it again, expecting riots is not the same as wishing for them.; 10/24/12, 8:51 PM
Anonymous said...: This has to be the most bizarre election as far as reports coming in. Each side seems to truly believe they are going to win. In general, I keep hearing Obama in states, Romney in national... so Obama.; 10/24/12, 9:05 PM
yashu said...: "Whores of the internet"???

Everyone on this blog despises that troll; it's disingenuous to offer it as an example, as typical or comparable to anyone else on this blog. (And as despicable and repulsive as "whores" is, I don't recall any apocalyptic blood-watering-liberty comments from it.)

"As well as others": such as?

And your "Perhaps you are one of them?" directed at CWJ: ugh.

You're usually better than that. Not always, unfortunately.; 10/24/12, 9:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Yashu, seriously? Go back and reread the John Roberts threads.; 10/24/12, 9:23 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: One thing to keep in mind here is that President Obama never built bridges with Congress, and that really includes the Dems there. And, politicians in general, and Dems seemingly in particular, are, in the end, out for themselves first, and the party and the cause second.

The result of this is that there is likely little personal loyalty to Obama outside the Black community. This means, I think, that the long knives are going to come out, and he and his are likely to be the victims. If he loses, he essentially took a strong Dem majority in Congress and decent amount of political power in the states, and squandered it with his ineptitude and maybe even his progressive causes. The Dems are going to take a decade to truly recover from such a loss, and by then, he will be treated more like Carter than like Clinton, by a lot of the Dem pols around the country.

On the flip side, it may be much better long term for the Dems if he loses, than if he wins. If he wins, I expect that a lot of his 2nd term will be dealing with scandals. Fast and Furious was punted beyond the election by a spurious claim of executive privilege, and more lately an even more spurious claim that the investigation was a political question. These might have worked - except that Nixon tried them and failed. I just don't see the courts finding no right of Congressional oversight.

And, now we have the Administration caught in outright lies as to what happened in Benghazi, when they knew it (very quickly), and why Obama went to bed that night, and then to LA the next day to fund raise, with much of his White House knowing what had really happened. Maybe not impeachable, since no one seems to have lied under oath, but...; 10/25/12, 3:21 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: As for violence, I truly do expect some inner city violence if Obama loses. Unemployment is rampant there, and, yes, Obama is responsible for much of it. But, cognitive dissonance being what it is, that won't be acknowledged. The problem with unemployment and the like is that it predisposes people, esp. minority youth, to riot. And, of course, those very same minority youth are the biggest victims of Obama's economic failures. But, that doesn't matter. The only saving grace here is that the election isn't in August, but rather, in November.

And, maybe a bit of rioting in university towns, for somewhat the same reasons - riots are kinda fun, esp. for the young. A perceived wrong, combined with all the emotion of this election, may be sufficient.

The violence won't extend though outside of the inner cities and college campuses. It won't be tolerated. Somewhat like Occupy - it will happen where tolerated, and not where it isn't.

Violence on the right, if Obama wins, is a more interesting prospect. The problem is that a lot of people are getting desperate, and the Dems have cheated their rear ends off this election cycle. We have Eric Holder working hard to facilitate voter fraud, though his attacks on voter ID laws, and the President appearing to raise millions through illegal campaign contributions. Combine this with the MSM running cover for Obama, making sure that any potential scandals are actively suppressed, and fake scandals and charges against Romney and the Republicans are pushed, and you have a somewhat volatile mixture.

But, the right doesn't do rioting. That is a leftist thing. What I think that you might see are some deranged people decide that assassination is the only solution (and, realistically, that their own lives are forfeit for their attempts). Primary targets of this would likely be Dem politicians and their staffs (which is why Valerie Jarrett having more security than our ambassador to Libya might be justified), along, maybe, with major MSM figures and other prominent Dems (e.g. Gloria Allred, etc.)

Hope I am wrong here, but right now a lot of people (with guns) are likely to believe that if Obama wins, it will only because of rampant cheating, that the country can't afford another 4 years of his reign, because he is determined to destroy the America they grew up loving, in order to follow his father's dreams of destroying the imperialists.; 10/25/12, 3:46 AM
Anonymous said...: The only possibility I see for riots is if the election is so close that it is settled in the courts in favor of Romney.

Assuming that Obama loses, as I do, I believe we will see a growing silence from most Democrats as the election approaches and likewise afterward. They will be confused and in mourning.

The 20% hardcore base, such as the Kos folks, will be bitter and vituperative, but not violent.

I suspect we will see an uptick in political vandalism from the left, however.

When Occupy emerged last year, I figured that they would be provide the Weather-style shock troops for disruptions this summer, but they melted away leaving no more than bad smells and a mess. Occupy tried to resurrect to no avail -- the cities had no patience or money for the bother and Democrats realized Occupy was hurting Obama's chances.

I'm not sure where we are these days. In many ways it feels like the sixties, but with regards to violence and rioting, no.; 10/25/12, 5:55 AM
Nichevo said...: Inga let me get this straight, you are touching for whores as the voice of truth? After all the things he's said about you? Wow, just wow.

...............

Inga said...

I call TRUTH! Whores of the Internet said it several times, as well as others.

10/24/12 8:17 PM; 10/25/12, 6:50 AM
TennLion said...: 3. Finding someone to blame.; 10/25/12, 2:10 PM