Who thinks Bachmann has a good chance?

[Anonymous]

There are two very qualified Republicans who have led huge states in successful multiple terms, have good credentials outside of government too (military, business), good academic backgrounds and not much in the way of immediate scandal.

Unfortunately, Jeb Bush has "Bush" as a last name. He would be the dream candidate. Two term popular governor of Florida with a latina wife and a firm grasp of policy details.

And Rick Perry is a governor of texas, wears cowboy boots and has a texas twang. Not going to play in the upper midwest swing states.

[Anonymous]

She IS dumb and doesn't know basic US history. I guess most of her tea bag supporters don't know their history either.

[Anonymous]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/28/michele-bachmann-john-quincy-adams_n_885868.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She IS dumb and doesn't know basic US history. I guess most of her tea bag supporters don't know their history either.

Right, the problem is that Republican primary voters are, generally speaking, unhinged lunatics. So it's not inconceivable (though unlikely) that she'll win the nomination. And in a two-party system, once you win the nomination of one of the major parties, anything is possible. After all, we just elected a Kenyan socialist named Barack Hussein Obama.

Like I said, anything's possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She IS dumb and doesn't know basic US history. I guess most of her tea bag supporters don't know their history either.

Political advisers, from the early days through Atwater and Rove, could tell you that facts are not as important as perceptions. I think Palin has probably succeeded in convincing many, if not most, Americans that Paul Revere went out riding to protect the (then non-existent) Second Amendment. Bachmann is concerned not with history, but with her story, which is all about conservative dogma.

[Anonymous]

I could see her taking Romney down. The primaries line up nicely for her. If she can make it a two person race after S. Carolina, she has a good chance. As for the general, it is hard to beat a sitting president. But like 43% say they will not vote for O. How that stacks up by state, who knows. She could win!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If unemployment is still running at 8-10%, folks in the middle will start thinking "May as well give the GOP a chance."

Of course, the GOP may alienate the "Get government out of my Medicare" crowd that got them victory in 2010 (back when they opposed Obamacare to save Medicare).

And Bachmann is prone to gaffes, not as bad as "Revere warned the British" Palin though.

She did give a speech in Concord NH about how it was where the revolutionary war began.

She also told the people of Waterloo, Ohio, that she was just like John Wayne, who was born in Waterloo...except she got the wrong John Wayne. John Wayne Gacy is the one who was born in Waterloo.

Oops. Unless of course she didn't get it wrong and meant it...

LOL - that would be IOWA - lots of vowels I know. Seems mistakes are both blue and red.

[Anonymous]

She could win the nomination (but likely not), but not the general election. The general election is decided by independents, not the partisans in either party.

[Anonymous]

It's unfortunate that most of the electorate never looks beyond the superficial in making voting decisions. Most don't care that she got her facts wrong. They just want someone they like and that speaks to issues they care about. We got 8 years of W because of that. Bachmann is speaking about the economy, and that's what people care about. She's pulling out her "tax attorney" bio and saying she knows something about it. It means she actually has a chance if people trust her and therefore vote for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that most of the electorate never looks beyond the superficial in making voting decisions. Most don't care that she got her facts wrong. They just want someone they like and that speaks to issues they care about. We got 8 years of W because of that. Bachmann is speaking about the economy, and that's what people care about. She's pulling out her "tax attorney" bio and saying she knows something about it. It means she actually has a chance if people trust her and therefore vote for her.

Are you including Democratic candidates, even President Obama, with your statements?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that most of the electorate never looks beyond the superficial in making voting decisions. Most don't care that she got her facts wrong. They just want someone they like and that speaks to issues they care about. We got 8 years of W because of that. Bachmann is speaking about the economy, and that's what people care about. She's pulling out her "tax attorney" bio and saying she knows something about it. It means she actually has a chance if people trust her and therefore vote for her.

Are you including Democratic candidates, even President Obama, with your statements?

I did not write the earlier statement, but I'm an Obama supporter who would include him and every politician. As an example, recall when Hillary had her NH comeback. The apparent cause was not a sudden realization of her superior experience or her stands on the issues, but the fact that she teared up at a news conference in a way that made her appear more human and sympathetic. Emotion plays a large part in many voters' decisions. People are not purely rational creatures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that most of the electorate never looks beyond the superficial in making voting decisions. Most don't care that she got her facts wrong. They just want someone they like and that speaks to issues they care about. We got 8 years of W because of that. Bachmann is speaking about the economy, and that's what people care about. She's pulling out her "tax attorney" bio and saying she knows something about it. It means she actually has a chance if people trust her and therefore vote for her.

Are you including Democratic candidates, even President Obama, with your statements?

I did not write the earlier statement, but I'm an Obama supporter who would include him and every politician. As an example, recall when Hillary had her NH comeback. The apparent cause was not a sudden realization of her superior experience or her stands on the issues, but the fact that she teared up at a news conference in a way that made her appear more human and sympathetic. Emotion plays a large part in many voters' decisions. People are not purely rational creatures.

I agree with your response to my question. It's just that the poster (and others with similar views about Republican candidates) was referencing only GWB and MB as examples.

[Anonymous]

Americans want presidents to have been governors or senators, not congresspersons. Bachmann is NOT dumb, but she's not viable because she's not attractive to enough voters. She has very good press people working for her directing her message, so that's in her favor. But, ultimately, they have only the candidate to sell, and she is not going to get far with her credentials and her point of view, which is too narrow for the majority of voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that most of the electorate never looks beyond the superficial in making voting decisions. Most don't care that she got her facts wrong. They just want someone they like and that speaks to issues they care about. We got 8 years of W because of that. Bachmann is speaking about the economy, and that's what people care about. She's pulling out her "tax attorney" bio and saying she knows something about it. It means she actually has a chance if people trust her and therefore vote for her.

Are you including Democratic candidates, even President Obama, with your statements?

I did not write the earlier statement, but I'm an Obama supporter who would include him and every politician. As an example, recall when Hillary had her NH comeback. The apparent cause was not a sudden realization of her superior experience or her stands on the issues, but the fact that she teared up at a news conference in a way that made her appear more human and sympathetic. Emotion plays a large part in many voters' decisions. People are not purely rational creatures.

I agree with your response to my question. It's just that the poster (and others with similar views about Republican candidates) was referencing only GWB and MB as examples.

I'm the earlier poster, and I agree that in most cases, the American electorage never looks beyond the superficial in making decisions. This thread is dealing with Bachman, so I gave W as an example. With Obama, I think so many people just wanted the W years over, that they ran to "change". I'm pretty much a voter in the middle and cannot find a candidate I want to follow, this year or in the past 10. I still vote, but I hold my nose. The problem is that most of those who are vocal at this point in the presidential race are extremist - left or right - and the candidates will say whatever they think will ring in the ears of the primary voters. Couple that with pundits on 24/7 feeding to the uninformed electorate, purporting to inform them, and we end up with candidates without much substance, or those with substance get lost because they are just too boring or dry.

[Anonymous]

Americans vote their feelings, not their interests