Lou Dobbs 2012

[Governor PiT]

What do you think. He declined interest in 2012 but if Obama scews up and the Republicans nominate another looser I could see him jumping in and winning ih wanted it. Or he could seek the GOP nomination but that would go against his principles of being an independent.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

[True Democrat]

Fcuk you.

[Governor PiT]

Lou Dobbs in 2012?
As the GOP implodes, the financial crisis may present a white-hot moment for a third-party voice to enter the fray
By STEVEN STARK  |  October 16, 2008  |  Recommended By 5 People
 
On November 4, the United States will elect a new president. And, on November 5, in this era of the permanent campaign, the Road to the White House 2012 will begin in earnest. 
Depending on what happens on Election Day, of course, there are two distinctly different narratives that are likely to unfold. If Barack Obama somehow stumbles, it’s fairly clear that Hillary Clinton will step in to pick up the pieces and resume her status as the Democratic front-runner and leader in opposition.

If, however, Obama ends up winning — perhaps decisively — the way forward for the Republicans is much less clear. And, frankly, if you’re a GOP voter, it’s looking gloomy.

Barack Obama•Barack Obama•John McCain•more >>

The Pachyderm Party will face a situation where the only voices they’ll be hearing in the proverbial wilderness are from talk radio. They’ll have a scattered minority in Congress, and no discernible national or intellectual leaders pointing the way to a new future. Most of the “heavyweights” from the 2008 campaign face a cloudy future. Mitt Romney still hasn’t proved he can appeal to the masses; Mike Huckabee will find it hard to become a national figure hosting a lackluster weekend TV show for Fox News. And as for Sarah Palin, four more years of gubernatorial experience will help, but it will be significantly harder for this hockey mom to survive a grueling primary campaign (when her opponents will have plenty of time to do their opposition research on her) than it is to make it through a protected, honeymoon-ish eight-week general-election campaign. Really.

But the GOP might well face two historical problems that are even more formidable. The first is that parties decisively thrown out of power usually spend the next campaign turning to their fringe, on the theory that “if we had only stuck to our principles, instead of compromising, we would have won.” Already we can see numerous Republicans mouthing that mantra. If followed to its conclusion, the result in 2012 will be the same as it was in 1936 when the Republicans nominated Alf Landon after the FDR landslide in 1932, and in 1972 when the Democrats nominated George McGovern after the GOP won the White House in 1968.

They’ll lose in a landslide even worse than in 2008.

Populism contest
But beyond that, the Republicans could face an even greater challenge. In times of economic turmoil, American history teaches us that voters usually seek out a populist alternative. The greatest political threat to FDR in the early ’30s came not from the Republicans but from his own party’s Huey Long, with his “share the wealth” economics. Likewise, the downturns of the 1890s produced populist William Jennings Bryan, whom the Democrats actually nominated as their candidate three times (he lost each time).

Outside of figure-from-the-past Pat Buchanan — who could always mount a comeback — the Republicans have no one credible to speak to working-class voters. Their efforts at populism over the past 40 years have focused almost entirely on social issues, not economic ones. Besides, Newt Gingrich’s efforts notwithstanding, the GOP’s fingerprints are not only all over the current economic swoon, their president, their 2008 candidate, and a large number of their members voted for the Wall Street bailout.

An Obama presidency would undoubtedly try to co-opt the populist economic argument, in much the same way FDR did in the early ’30s. But it’s not at all clear he will be successful. (To be fair, had Long not been removed from the scene in 1935, it’s unclear how successful FDR’s political future would have been, either.) Sure, an eventual recovery will go a long way to solving President Obama’s problem with working-class voters, but his hands will be tied politically, to some extent, since most of the Democratic Party has been in bed with the investment bankers and the deregulators just as much as have the Republicans. Isn’t Bob Rubin just Hank Paulsen in a different suit?

This suggests that if Obama wins, the real political energy in the country over the next several years may come from a new populist political force. Would someone challenge Obama from the left? Unlikely. But already there are arguments from such political theorists as Michael Barone and Steve Sailer that the cheap mortgages, which led to the housing crisis, which precipitated the financial crisis, were directly related to the immigration boom. Such arguments are made-to-order for someone like CNN’s Lou Dobbs, who has recently been railing against the lackluster efforts to solve the financial crisis with gusto, much as he attacks the government’s failures to enforce immigration laws.

In other words, Dobbs — or a counterpart — is likely to be a “third party” political force to watch after November 4. That’s not politics as usual. But neither is the era we’re now facing.

To read the “Presidential Tote Board” blog, go to thePhoenix.com/blogs/toteboard. Steven Stark can be reached at sds@starkwriting.com.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Lou Dobbs a political force? Hilarious.

Also, Mr. Stark, why did you create such a thread when you know that Mr. Dobbs is going to decline interest in 2012? I mean you did say that yourself in the second line of your post. But then again, why should I be asking? This is Robert Stark we are talking about folks.

[MK]

Lou Dobbs = There goes NM, AZ, TX, CA, CO .. you get the picture.

[Governor PiT]

Lou Dobbs = There goes NM, AZ, TX, CA, CO .. you get the picture.

depends if he is an independent of Republican. He would'nt get California any way but I don't see why he wouldn't get Colorado. Assuming he runs as an independent he would get the most votes in the midwest, mountain states, and Alaska.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

[Governor PiT]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

A Populist Libertarian?

[Associate Justice PiT]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

A Populist Libertarian?

     Maybe, though as ideologies, they are pretty contradictory. Then again, there's such a thing as a liberal conservative, so maybe.

[Governor PiT]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

A Populist Libertarian?

     Maybe, though as ideologies, they are pretty contradictory. Then again, there's such a thing as a liberal conservative, so maybe.

There are liberal Republicans but I havn't heard of Liberal Conservatives. It depends how you define Populist. Some define it as beign for big government or some define it as for being for the average person opposed to the elites. In that sense Ron Paul is a Populist Libertarian and he is hated by the elites.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

A Populist Libertarian?

     Maybe, though as ideologies, they are pretty contradictory. Then again, there's such a thing as a liberal conservative, so maybe.

There are liberal Republicans but I havn't heard of Liberal Conservatives. It depends how you define Populist. Some define it as beign for big government or some define it as for being for the average person opposed to the elites. In that sense Ron Paul is a Populist Libertarian and he is hated by the elites.

     It's not a term that's used in the United States, though a liberal conservative is basically a libertarian who doesn't have a strong ideological leaning towards liberalism or conservatism. They can however be affiliated with either conservative or liberal groups. David Cameron is an excellent example of a liberal conservative.

[Eraserhead]

How is Stark posting again?

[Stranger in a strange land]

Dobbs would be a spoiler for the Republicans. That's about it.

[big bad fab]

Who would be Dobbs' running mate ?

His teeth maybe...

[Ronnie]

Lou Dobbs is a clown, stop posting about him, this is not nationalibertarian fantasyland.

     Dobbs is in any way, shape, or form libertarian? That's news to me.

A Populist Libertarian?

     Maybe, though as ideologies, they are pretty contradictory. Then again, there's such a thing as a liberal conservative, so maybe.

Exactly, I see Wikipedia articles on things like "libertarian communism" and I'm like wtf.

[phk]

Dobbs would be a spoiler for the Republicans. That's about it.

[Governor PiT]

Dobbs would be a spoiler for the Republicans. That's about it.

I remember seeing a poll of his viewers and there were surprisingly more Dem's than Rep's but its probably because its CNN opposed to FOX.

[Matt Damon™]

dobbs would actually be decent as a president but his supporters tend to be terrible people who support him for all the wrong reasons

[Psychic Octopus]

Dobbs or O'Reilly could win.

I HATE KEITH OLBERMANN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

He won't run.

[Хahar 🤔]

Dobbs or O'Reilly could win.

I HATE KEITH OLBERMANN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL...

[Governor PiT]

If Obama screws up(which he probably will) and the GOP can't come up with a decent candidate(which they probably won't) it looks like LOU DOBBSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Governor PiT]

We really need you Lou but he has not expressed interest in running. Is there anyone else who could carry his mantle?

[Nixon in '80]

We really need you Lou but he has not expressed interest in running. Is there anyone else who could carry his mantle?

Samuel Wurzelbacher?