Search This Blog

Friday, July 10, 2015

How We are Predicting the Next President..

Right now, we are a little under 16 months before we elect the man or woman to be our next President, and all the candidates on both sides are scurrying about trying to seek attention, donations or both..

And for us at least, its too far away from ballot box day for us to really get too involved with all the daily 'this candidate said This, then waffled on That' exercise

Wake us up during the New Hampshire primary debates later this fall, then push the snooze bar

But we believe there is a near-perfect way to predict ahead of time who the next leader of the free world will be detached from personal and political biases that plague all pundits and prognosticators.
And the theory goes like this..

Every person who has been elected President, regardless of political affiliation possessed some major quality that his predecessor sorely lacked and thus was at least on a subliminal level, made to be more attractive than normal.

For instance, think of it in terms of sports team managers or coaches..

Someone is running a team in a very player-friendly, relaxed clubhouse manner and then that team finds itself in last place, meaning the person is fired..
So who usually replaces him?

Someone with a fiery personality who is gruff and doesn't care what others think..

And if that brings success, he gets accolades and a contract extension.  And if he fails, guess what?  Yep..  the Next hire will be less intense and more player-friendly..

So let's analyze the Presidents from Jimmy Carter (1977-81) up to the Obama since Carter's predecessor Gerald Ford only was President due to Nixon's resignation.
Carter was elected in 1977 because he appeared to many to be the antithesis to Nixon - someone who appeared to be modest, sincere in his faith and ethical.

And by the end of his Presidency, the opinion of most was that Carter was extremely detached from the suffering of his people.

He seemed not to care about the hostages held in Iran, at least not to the point he spoke with any passion, resolution or anger.  And when it came to economic malaise or gas shortages, he blamed the people rather than empathized.

So who beat Carter handily, winning 48 out of 50 state electorates?
Ronald Reagan

Why?  Because whether true or not, he gave the impression he would be tough on our enemies and he genuinely and openly cared about people, and always knew the right thing to say.

So lets fast forward eight years to the election of 1988 which George H.W. Bush ultimately wins and is the first VP to successfully win office on his own immediately after in over 150 years..

How did Bush 41 do it?
By Reagan's second term, the Alzheimer's that ultimately took his life was beginning to set in and he appeared often to be forgetful or in some sort of fog or daze.

Bush gave off the impression of being someone very organized, methodical, bookish and administrative.

He didn't win on his charm or people believing Bush was tough for he spent the campaign and first year in office trying to fight the label he was a wimp.

The American people wanted someone dependable and reliable even if deeply boring to contrast a Presidency that they felt in the last year at least was really run by Reagan's staff, not him directly.
So we move to 1992.. How did Clinton win (besides Ross Perot splitting up the Rep vote)?

Bill Clinton felt your pain.. He'd bite his lower lip, stick out his thumb and say so repeatedly..

George Bush was incredibly detached, so much so that during one Presidential debate he is at one point repeatedly staring at his watch as if he had a more important place he needed to be vs fighting for his political life.

So people wanted kindness over coldness.
~ Clinton/Gore 1992 Campaign button

Next we move to 2000 when Clinton finished his second term and the race was between 'W' Bush and the deeply boring Al Gore

People can talk all they want about Florida and hanging chads and Supreme Court but what lost Gore the election was being Clinton's VP and not distancing himself on issues of sexual morality.

Most people did not want Clinton convicted or impeached for a sexual act and his constant dalliances throughout his political career were no secret to anyone..

But by 2000, people decided they wanted their next President to be sexually monogamous and without even the remote possibility of indiscretion being a national distraction.
So both Bush and Gore fit that bill (though Gore did ultimately cheat on Tipper years later leading to their divorce) and as we said, the difference was to us at least, candidate Gore was VP and that was too close a daily reminder

So moving on to 2008..

Bush possessed a lot of good qualities but right or wrong, fair or not, he also was observed as an illiterate backwards moron who if not handed everything to him on a silver plate, would be working at an Arby's in Midland Tx.

So in Obama they chose an academic; a law school professor who thought before he spoke with lots of intelligent sounding 'uh' pauses.

To voters, Hillary was smart but Obama was the learned one, and especially compared to McCain who was the war hero who really wasn't that academically bright, Obama just shined.

Of course being black helped A Lot...

But even with 99.9999999% of every black voting 3 or 4 times for the man (we make a jokey), if Obama acted even remotely like Bush in his outward personality, Hillary would have won the primaries then we'd be counting the days now until her good riddance..

So we're at the present..  What is Obama devoid in that some other candidate(s) possess to make him or her more likely than others to win the Presidency next year?
~ "Where the Confederate Flag still flies, we have built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans .. Re-Elect Obama 2012"

Obama has always been emotionally detached from it all; rarely if ever gets outwardly angry or puts up any kind of overt fight for anything he believes in; its all secretive and covert

'I smoke my Kools.. Not going to play the fool, I keep it Cool...'

And even loyalists find great fault in that aloofness and lack of outward passion or willingness to engage both with the 'enemy' and members of his own party in a social way
And that's why we believe when all is said and done, people in November 2016 will vote for Trump as President even if they don't fully agree or even like him personally,

Trump is combative.. He gets in others' faces literally and figuratively..  He takes shots and dishes them back immediately..

Trump can be a real asshole at times..

And we believe people want that..
Someone aggressive who will Fight for them when dealing with our political enemies and allies abroad; a person you don't have to guess 'What does he Really think?'

In this bullshit Politically Correct repressed culture we believe ultimately people will seek someone who directly or indirectly lead a forward march to break down those suffocating walls of social control

And that is why barring some Major economic or military event to perhaps alter the priorities of the American people, we predict based on nothing else but our earlier assertion that Presidents replace qualities sorely lacking in predecessors...

That ultimately tough talking Trump will be the next President, even if some people voting for him may for one reason or another hold their noses while doing so