I got a kick out of a recent article headlined "Historians see little chance for McCain"
It reminded me of an article in 2000 headlined "Academics Say It's Elementary: Gore Wins"
As prognosticators, I'm not sure that I'd trust either group.
Are Historians Smarter Than Political Scientists?
Posted June 16th, 2008 at 01:14 PM by Mark Shelden
They have the handicap of assuming that elections are still free and fair. (Relatively.)
One wonders if the historians are counting all of the black votes in Florida or whichever swing state is up for grabs this election...
Sorry, it's snarky, but no more snarky than the original post.
These historical analyses try to do so on the basis of patterns. Although Reagan indeed had his detractors, and his 2nd term much less stellar than the 1st, he was still quite popular after his second term, and indeed popular enough to draw the much less popular GHWBush into office.
As I noted before and some cartoonists illustrated, the Vacuity of Obama and the Vile Stupidity of McCain make this election more like 1976 than any other year in recent memory.
Except for the occasional hard-core hawks and the deeply entranced neocons, there are few among GOP voters who can be pleased with McCain as a candidate. McCain is neither particularly bright nor is he principled. McCain is neither pleasant nor inspiring. McCain hails from a family that knew nothing but war, and brings only a knowledge of war to a country that is weary of a illegal immoral unpopular war that reeks of deceit, corruption, imperialistic and capitalistic ambition, and failure or worse. McCain promises no solutions to our problems other than the tired and ineffectual and disastrous policies of GWBush. And the people have been frightfully deceived by this GWBush, in whom many trusted because he seemed to be a nice guy, like one of us, at a time when many were stricken with fear and anger in the post - 911 shock and hysteria.
If it were not that some GOPers perceive in B. "Hussein" Obama the prospect of another Jimmy Carter-like figure in the White House, and in fact a evil and black, maybe even Islamic, certainly not Christian, Jimmy Carter --- no one would be voting for John McCain other than Sidney's mother and the Yellow Dog crowd.
McCain brings a "yuck factor" much greater than that of Gerald Ford. At least Ford seemed dull and stupid in a good-natured & wholesome sort of way, while McCain is woefully bankrupt and clueless in the wholesomeness department. The spectre of Nixon haunted Ford right out of the White House, but Dick Nixon looks like Ronald Reagan as compared with Bush and Cheney. At a time when something really different than Bush&Cheney is needed, McCain promises more of the same, only worse, in a way that only McCain could provide.
So this is the best that the party of TR and Reagan can offer us? At least the cats have the decency to kick some dirt over it when they make a mess like this.
Even though Obama is the genuine fake incarnate and even the jackasses balk at him, it seems like nothing will stop that giant sucking sound of votes going to the Dems in this election cycle. And the Democrats dont deserve any of the credit for it. The RNC has worked diligently behind the scenes for this reward.
LOL! Gotta love the Paultard rants!
A more concise response to the title question:
Yes.