Sarah Palin stepping down as Governor of Alaska

[Redblade]

It's what a maverick would do.

[telkanuru]

I've got a better one that I expect you've seen, telk, but it's NWS enough that I won't post it on the boards!

lulz.

[Sins of the Fleche]

Obama is in a perfect position; things are bad at the beginning of his administration.

Odds are good that things will rebound nicely in time for him to get re-elected.

While I agree with you that's the most likely outcome, Carter also inherited a similar position. He too was following an unpopular Republican president who was criticized for turning a blind eye to corruption, and Carter also had a reputation as a reformer who would shake up the business-as-usual Beltway.

While I think Obama has a certain savvy and charisma that Carter lacked, the winds of political fortune can change alot in 4 years. But maybe I'm just projecting my political leanings into my analysis a bit too much.

But as I said earlier, I agree that if Obama maintains his popularity and the economy picks up, he's got no problem for re-election.

[Inquartata]

I've said it before: I see more similarities with Johnson. Landslide win, Congressional majority, got a lot done his way in the beginning---then continuing an unpopular war and inability to handle some domestic unrest dragged him under...

[Hauptman]

I've said it before: I see more similarities with Johnson. Landslide win, Congressional majority, got a lot done his way in the beginning---then continuing an unpopular war and inability to handle some domestic unrest dragged him under...

Johnson? Really? Didn't Johnson dramatically expand the war? I thought there was hardly more than military advisors in Vietnam while Kennedy was alive? Obama clearly wants to withdraw from Iraq. There may be some similarity with Afghanistan, but it's not nearly as unpopular as Iraq.

But surely there's no similarity between the economic situations, is there? Of course, I was barely out of diapers when Johnson left office.

[rsy]

Boy, you have got to hand it to Letterman. Turns out the reason she is resigning is she is pregnant and A-Rod's the father.

-r

[treehugginfencer]

Good! She is evil! She doesn't believe in evolution! How can you not believe a theory?!

[erooMynohtnA]

Good! She is evil! She doesn't believe in evolution! How can you not believe a theory?!

That one was pretty good.

[Inquartata]

Johnson? Really? Didn't Johnson dramatically expand the war? I thought there was hardly more than military advisors in Vietnam while Kennedy was alive?

Yep.

There may be some similarity with Afghanistan, but it's not nearly as unpopular as Iraq.

Yet.

But surely there's no similarity between the economic situations, is there?

But his willingness to expand government programs and spending was the greatest of any President since Roosevelt and until Obama. It was one of the things that eroded his popularity: Overreaching economically.

[Hauptman]

Yep.




Yet.



But his willingness to expand government programs and spending was the greatest of any President since Roosevelt and until Obama. It was one of the things that eroded his popularity: Overreaching economically.

Yep... so no similarity there.

Yet... is so much speculation.

And finally, economically the country is in a completely different situation. From what I've read, Johnson's lack of popularity was almost entirely related to the war. Social spending was was not an overreach since he was spending a significant surplus. Now Nixon and Carter had an economic mess, and maybe Johnson was partially responsible for that, although the decline of American economic hegemony in general was the primary cause.

Again, while you can dig for similarities between Obama and Johnson, I see it as somewhat of a stretch. Obama has far more in common with FDR, and possibly others, than he does with Johnson. (Didn't Reagan and GWB have the largest deficits?)

[Inquartata]

And finally, economically the country is in a completely different situation.

The spending, however, is the same ( only worse ).

From what I've read, Johnson's lack of popularity was almost entirely related to the war.

Nope. He was also blamed, justly or not, for his inability to stop the race rioting of the second half of the 1960s...

Of course, Obama is unlikely to face that. Unless disgruntled white people start burning and looting in the cities or something.

Social spending was was not an overreach since he was spending a significant surplus.

I don't think there's been a surplus of any sort since the 19th century...

From his Wiki article ( forgive me! ):

"By year's end, the Democratic governor of Missouri warned that Johnson would lose the state by 100,000 votes, despite a half-million margin in 1964. 'Frustration over Vietnam; too much federal spending and... taxation; no great public support for your Great Society programs; and ... public disenchantment with the civil rights programs' had eroded the President's standing, the governor reported."

[jeff]

I know that memory can be faulty - but I remember those days pretty vividly (I wasn't a drug user, so I can remember the '60s ) and the tumult that brought LBJ down was Vietnam, not the Great Society.

While we're speculating uselessly: I just read an article claiming that Carter got nailed for faults of his predecessors: Eisenhower for going along with the Brits to kick out Mossadeq (Jeez, it wasn't even our oil company, for goodness sake!) and Nixon for amok economic policies that Carter's administration had to put down. I can't speak to the 2nd, but the 1st seems clear.

[Inquartata]

I'll agree with the second, too: Nixon and his stupid wage and price controls!

But you know, this is the lot of all Presidents, to some extent: Cleaning up the messes of their predecessors. Carter was still pretty incompetent with that mop.

Anyway, I too remember that time. "Hey, Hey, LBJ" was national news, but the riots were local and made more of an impression on me. Obviously I wasn't a voter at the time. And of course I was too young to know or care about economics; you can't have been that old, either. But that doesn't mean they were inconsequential. That you and I don't remember the overspending and overtaxing of Johnson's attempt to be the next FDR doesn't mean that adults at the time ignored it or that it wasn't a factor in Johnson's fall. If a fellow Democrat publicly attributed it partially to that, it's doubtful that he was just a lone voice in the wilderness.

[jeff]

I'll agree with the second, too: Nixon and his stupid wage and price controls!

But you know, this is the lot of all Presidents, to some extent: Cleaning up the messes of their predecessors. Carter was still pretty incompetent with that mop.

I always thought he was a turkey...

But, since all presidents have to push that mop, and have other aspects in common, one must be somewhat specific when likening one to another, or it's generalities that could apply to most of them. Maybe Obama is more like Reagan than LBJ. Both Obama and Reagan were elected by large margins, popular and populist with excellent communications skills, picking up after very unpopular predecessors. I find analogies like this to be at best suspect.

(snip) I was too young to know or care about economics

What!?!? I thought you developed that inclination in utero

(snip) But that doesn't mean they were inconsequential. That you and I don't remember the overspending and overtaxing of Johnson's attempt to be the next FDR doesn't mean that adults at the time ignored it or that it wasn't a factor in Johnson's fall. If a fellow Democrat publicly attributed it partially to that, it's doubtful that he was just a lone voice in the wilderness.

I'm sure it was a contributing factor - but IMO the big ticket item was the war and protest over it. In fact, the Wiki article you quoted said so, and spending only comes up after the Vietnam war in the very line you quoted

Look at what happened at the Dem national convention in '68, where the stage was set by LBJ's administration. The unpopularity of what was seen as "his war" ("hey hey, LBJ how many kids did you kill today?" chant) lost him the left and center and probably lost him the right for not pursuing the war more aggressively. Lose both sides of the political spectrum and you're not going to succeed...

Vietnam was followed in importance by the social upheaval of the Civil Rights movement and his part in pushing civil rights legislation - which lost him the south and social conservatives, yet not enough to satisfy the left/progressives. Whammy again. In 1968 there was wide spread rioting You can't easily run for reelection with cities on fire (but not with rock and roll, as would be prescribed by Blue Oyster Cult).

I am sure that a deeply unpopular war with casualties coming to every part of the country, and riots in the street, cut a bigger hole in LBJ's popularity than deficit spending.

[OROD]

Watch out, Sarah Palin's going rogue again.

.

[Inquartata]

Maybe Obama is more like Reagan than LBJ. Both Obama and Reagan were elected by large margins,

6% for Obama, 9% for Reagan...22% for Johnson. Were I an optimist I might think that that showed that voters have been getting less gullible. Instead I suspect they've just been getting more partisan.

I find analogies like this to be at best suspect.

Jeff, the Diogenes of analogies...

And I'll bet you quarrel with that one, too!

Watch out, Sarah Palin's going rogue again.

.

I thought she was going rouge...

[lindajdunn]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...lin-poll_N.htm

Palin's decision to resign as Governor of Alaska has IMPROVED her standing among GOP voters.

Republicans by 71%-27% say they'd be likely to vote for her if she ran for president.

Let me see if I understand this correctly. A woman who was mayor of a small town for two terms (and was nearly kicked out of office in the first term but they simply hired a town manager to do her work and kept her in office); who quit her appointed job, blaming her supervisor's corruption versus filing charges through normal channels; and who then became governor with papproval ratings that soared with the price of oil and fell with the price of oil, then quit saying she was doing it for the good of Alaska... is a good candidate for President.

Have I got that right?

If I ever had any doubts about leaving the Republican party last election, this poll just eliminated them. Obviously, the Republicans don't give a damn about KSAs (Knowledge, skills, and abilities).

[I_luv_saber]

Meh... come join the world of DTS .

[Sins of the Fleche]

If I ever had any doubts about leaving the Republican party last election, this poll just eliminated them. Obviously, the Republicans don't give a damn about KSAs (Knowledge, skills, and abilities).

Ah, but you see the Republicans, still reeling from that ass-kicking last November, have decided to forgo candidates with KSA, and just go for the ones with T&A.

Zing.

[jeff]

6% for Obama, 9% for Reagan...22% for Johnson. Were I an optimist I might think that that showed that voters have been getting less gullible. Instead I suspect they've just been getting more partisan.

Well, since you're not an optimist it must be the partisanship... (and those were popular vote stats, not electoral college, right?)

Jeff, the Diogenes of analogies...

Find an honest man? I can barely find the frickin' lantern.

And I'll bet you quarrel with that one, too!

Nah, I'm cool with it.

I like analogies just fine for explanation, when they fit the case. But when they only arguably fit, then they're a distraction. And analogies are useless as methods of proof.