The Man Who Could Defeat Obama In 2012?

Email Print posted by ihavenobias 12/01/2008 08:52:12 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
As you may have already heard, there is a "rising star" in the Republican party named Bobby Jindal. Some Republicans seem to think he gives them the best chance to defeat Obama in 2012.

There's just one small problem with this: Bobby Jindal is a little crazy, or if you prefer more polite language, he's a radical right Christian with extreme beliefs that *should* be unelectable to 2/3 of the country.

I'm not sure what's more disturbing, Jindal's beliefs or the many people trying to defend him in the youtube comments. Which reminds me, if you have a second make sure you rate that video up.

I know it's too early to be talking about 2012, but I will say that Cenk was exactly right when he said that the Republican party has learned all the wrong lessons from their crushing defeats in 2006/2008.

How much further right can they go with their candidates?  And BTW, I think Obama would completely destroy Jindal for the record.
< No Country For Old Hags | Open Thread >
 Display:
The Man Who Could Defeat Obama In 2012? | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden)
Isnt it odd (none / 0)
Or stupid or stubborn or narrow minded or something. That the conservatives think the way to win is to turn to the same sort of people that got them tossed out to begin with.

Palin and Jindal are both prime examples

I guess they are in denial

by Chinese Democracy on 12/01/2008 09:31:58 PM EST

Denial (none / 0)
and delusional, those two words seem to fit.

by ihavenobias on 12/01/2008 09:50:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Most YouTube commenters are idiots (none / 0)
YouTube comments aren't exactly an accurate gauge of the attitude of people who actually participate in the democratic process.  If they were, we'd be a few weeks away from the inauguration of President Ron Paul.

by OneHitKill on 12/01/2008 09:36:47 PM EST

True (none / 0)
But it's still obnoxious.


And you reminded me, how did most Paul fans vote in the general? Was there any polling on that question?

by ihavenobias on 12/01/2008 09:49:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Republicans are simple organisms (none / 0)
I was curious about that, too.  But I never saw any data, so I'm forced to assume thus:

Supposedly despising both McCain and Obama + Supporting a republican (Ron Paul) = Voting for McCain

by OneHitKill on 12/01/2008 10:04:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Of the two (none / 0)
I think you're right.

Although a decent chunk probably didn't vote and or they voted for Bob Barr, etc.  But yes, I'm guessing more went for McCain overall.

by ihavenobias on 12/01/2008 10:06:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
my brother was a Paul fan... (none / 0)
and he voted for Nader.

by alienufo on 12/01/2008 10:15:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The lesser of two nothings (none / 0)
Ha ha ha!  So, at least he showed some level of discerning opinion about which trash can he tossed his vote into.

by OneHitKill on 12/01/2008 10:21:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
By all accounts I've read, (none / 0)
Jindal's been incredibly ineffectual during his brief tenure as governor.

by jarett on 12/01/2008 10:19:21 PM EST

Well (none / 0)
Some think he's the next Reagan.

by ihavenobias on 12/01/2008 10:30:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No Way (none / 0)
If the Republican party nominates a former Hindu for President over Palin, I'll take the sloppy seconds on bobo's tree.

Palin in 2012? Bitch, please! No, really, please run in 2012, bitch. ;)

by richardshort2001 on 12/01/2008 11:42:33 PM EST

I know but (none / 0)
he's so over the type Christian zealot that he appeals to many conservatives.

Still, it's true that the general racism in the party could make him a weak primary opponent.

by ihavenobias on 12/01/2008 11:53:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
They are already selling Palin 2012 merchandise (none / 0)

at Republican gatherings.

I'm calling it.  Short of some tremendous controversy, if the GOP can't or don't talk Palin out of running, she will be the 2012 nominee, and nothing makes me happier.

The country as a whole strongly dislikes her, but Republicans can't get enough.  

Palin in 2012? Bitch, please! No, really, please run in 2012, bitch. ;)

by richardshort2001 on 12/02/2008 12:51:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
all the wrong lessons (none / 0)
The conservatives have learned all the wrong lessons from this election, and I'm LOVING their idiocy.  The intellectual Right is getting behind Jindal for the same reason they got behind Palin - he's a minority to politics (he's got brown skin) and he plays well to the base.  As more of a plus, however, he presents a calmer image than Palin.  But the point is, they're picking him because he has the potential for star power, not because he's the best and brightest in the Republican party, nor because he has the potential to unite the country.

All these clowns think about is the next election.  But for the average American, life is more than just a series of elections.  That's why the Republican party is failing.  They just don't get it.  They're just trying to manufacture images to sell, rather than rethink their philosophies to see where they went wrong and how they can make it right.

Thank God the era of Reagans and Dubyas is over, thanks to the rapid rise of the Internet.  A multitude of images and information trumps any manufactured image.  I have hope for the future.

by marlonm on 12/01/2008 11:55:51 PM EST

Obama's real opponent (none / 0)

Obama's real opponent is economic mess he is being handed.  

No one will stand a chance against Obama IF he succeeds at turning this disaster into something at least better.

By the way, Jindal's actual name is Piyush Jindal.  Wow.  Even exotic foreigners can be right wing nutters.

Regardless, (on the positive side) he would be the second consecutive non-white in the office of president.  Which would be kind of cool.

 

by ronito6b on 12/02/2008 09:01:03 AM EST

Okay, well (none / 0)
his name pretty much means he's not a viable *Republican* primary candidate.

They didn't like "Barack" but "Piyush" will just push them over the edge, even though the evangelicals will enjoy his insane exorcism experience.

by ihavenobias on 12/02/2008 12:26:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You're wrong (none / 0)
All they care about is ideology.  I don't know if he is enough of an ideologue to fill the bill for them.  They won't give a damn about his name if his mind is "right".

by bfaul on 12/02/2008 04:52:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Worst subject line ever (none / 0)
"You're wrong".

Lucky for you I'm not a defensive guy you son of a...

;)

by ihavenobias on 12/02/2008 05:34:46 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I concede see your point (none / 0)
It's just that after hearing them defend Palin's foreign policy credentials because she "lives next to Russia", and  her status as an "energy expert" because she comes from an oil producing state I can't imagine that something as simple as an unusual name would deter them from voting for a party hack.  It was that which I meant to emphasize.

by bfaul on 12/02/2008 10:24:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
bfaul is 100% correct (none / 0)
If a GOP presidential candidate is named JC Watts or Bobby Jindahl or Michael Steele or Lynn Swann or Sarah Palin or even Barack Obama, that candidate will receive 100% support from the base as long as he/she is a fire breathing, right wing conservative.

We really don't care about names or gender or skin color. We only care about ideology.

Give me a candidate who sounds like Darius Rucker and looks like Earl Campbell, and he can have the keys to the entire Republican Party.

by KenTX on 12/02/2008 06:53:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
bad link (none / 0)
Earl looks like this.
tyler rose

by KenTX on 12/02/2008 07:01:15 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Ok great (none / 0)
I know a hard right wing conservative named Muhammed McMuslim.

I guess he can run as an R in 2012!

by ihavenobias on 12/02/2008 09:51:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
That's all I'm saying (none / 0)

"If a GOP presidential candidate is named JC Watts or Bobby Jindahl or Michael Steele or Lynn Swann or Sarah Palin or even Barack Obama, that candidate will receive 100% support from the base as long as he/she is a fire breathing, right wing conservative."

True, and they don't even need to know geography or science or foreign affairs or civics or economics or any of those other boring book things either.  The base loves them anyway.  No competence required.

by bfaul on 12/02/2008 10:37:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
my two cents (none / 0)

As a resident of Louisiana I can tell you that Jindal is no Palin.  You won't catch him speaking as though his thoughts are garbled the way Palin does.  He has not shown a strong ideology so far as governor.  He even refused to endorse candidates in other state runoff races after he won in the primary.  He did endorse the Republican senate candidate this year, much to nobody's surprise.  It didn't change the outcome though.

I am not too impressed with his performance so far because he hasn't done all that much yet.  The main thing he's done at this point is to initiate some much needed state ethics reforms, but that was long overdue.  People had been talking about it for a long time and it was coming no matter what.  Still, it happened as soon as he got in so I give him credit for that.  He's trying to reform the state healthcare system, which is a mess.  He's wanting to do it through private insurers.  I no longer believe we can fix healthcare by allowing private firms to skim 20-30% off the top so I don't expect this to help much but I'm willing to wait and see.

If you're at all familiar with my commentary you probably know I don't try to hide a severe bias against Republican politicians.  I didn't used to be that way but it turns out that they value ideology over good government so they generally suck at governing.  That being said Jindal comes off as intelligent and intellectual.   The wierd excorcism thing has been a source of much snickering in various circles but it was a long time ago and there has been no indication of a strong religious bias that I'm aware of.  He isn't preachy about "family values" the way that others in his party have been.  He doesn't seem like a religious zealot.  It is a mistake to lump him with Palin, they are not at all alike.  Palin is nothing but a walking, talking wad of  far-right conservative ideology bundled in an attractive package.  They love her for the way she believes.  They don't give a shit whether or not she is competent, she's a "babe" who "has her mind right".  That's more reminiscent of Bush than Jindal. 

Would I vote for him over Obama?  No way, unless Obama really, seriously blows it as president by doing something phenomenally stupid.  The other main thing Jindal is known for around here is job hopping.  He's never held a position for more than a couple of years.  I have a problem with that and so do a lot of other people. 

I can tell you from hearing him speak in person a few times and speaking with him personally a couple of times he is no dummy and he comes across as personable and friendly and not at all arrogant.  That's about all I can really say about the man at this point. 

by bfaul on 12/02/2008 04:45:59 PM EST

Isn't he for chemical castration (none / 0)
Also, he has a 100% pro-life voting record according to some nutty right wing group.

Apparently all of that personable intellect isn't doing him much good when it counts.

by ihavenobias on 12/02/2008 06:16:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Heck (none / 0)
That sounds like all Louisiana Republicans to me.  I have no idea if those two statements are true or not.  My point still stands though, he is no Sarah Palin style dumbass.  I'm just keeping it real.

by bfaul on 12/02/2008 10:29:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The Man Who Could Defeat Obama In 2012? | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: