The Republicans are setting themselves up for failure having nurtured such division within the party. The less conservative, centrist members will vote for Romney, the more extreme right wingers will vote for Santorum/Gingrich/flavor of the week. Worst case scenario (for the GOP) is a brokered convention and a strong third party candidacy for the loser. Best case scenario is that the party "settles" for Romney and nominates him because he is the least objectionable, much like the Democrats did with John Kerry in 2004.

Either way, I think Obama will win this election, barring an attractive liberal third party candidacy coming to prominence in the next few months.

I think he'll tight.

I voted for Republicans up until the last election. The Republican party isn't conservative anymore. It's right-wing radicals.

Na. Obama will lose the election.
Look what he promised at the time he become President.
What did he do????
Nothing.
Everything went worse.

"The Republican party isn't conservative anymore. It's right-wing radicals."

THANK YOU...completely agree...

And that's why they won't win in 2012.

Romney is going to get this nomination, and if by some chance it's not Romney it'll be some flavor-of-the-month candidate (see: Perry, Cain, Gingrich) that will never capture the middle and will lose...

And as for Romney, he's not dynamic enough to win, Obama vs. Romney= Who Can Compromise And Appear Polite And Non-Confrontational The Most?

Tie goes to the incumbent, Obama sits in the WH four more years...

And THEN, hopefully, we can have Hillary 2016.

Hilary 2016? Think again. Andrew Cuomo is already a lock for the nomination.

See the problem with contemporary american politics is whoever you vote for, corporations win.

I support Nader myself he just will never get enough support as an Independent.

Wait, Patriot... everything went WORSE? Now I'll be the first to admit that things don't seem any better, but they don't seem worse than they did 3 years ago. Best back that claim up with some facts partner.

Things are worse now than before?? Unemployment is down, the stock market is up, the troops are out of Iraq... please Patriot, tell us that you were trying to be satirical.

BTW, Obama should win the next election.
Newt has more skeletons in his life than a graveyard, Romney is a chameleon flip-flopper (saying anything to get votes) and Santorum is a part of the ideological religious-right.

Hilary already said she will not run in 2016. Do you doubt her sincerity?

Yes.

She is the Secretary of State my friend, any Diplomacy player should thus know she is the Liar-in-Chief

Diplomat, I've voted for Nader in the past two elections, and I'm still convinced he is the best choice. I doubt he will run again, unfortunately.

@AWB - Perfectly said.

She'll be 69 in 2016. That's the same age as John McCain when he ran, when he was lampooned for being too old.

Didn't TC explain to everyone somewhere why Obama will definitely lose....

Sarg I think they won't make that complaint about Hillary or the Dems will spin it as being sexist. Like Obama, you'll have to debate Hillary on the issues alone. I think :)

2ndWL- Great! Nader would make a better president easily than Bush or Obama and I feel would be in the top ten all time of presidents.

""The Republican party isn't conservative anymore. It's right-wing radicals."
THANK YOU...completely agree...
And that's why they won't win in 2012.
Romney is going to get this nomination"

If Romney is a Right Wing Radical, then Obi is a Monkey's Uncle...

Obama is so damaged....he's not liberal enough for the Liberals because he only spent trillions in stimulus, and he's still waging war in Afghanistan, despite the liberal media's refusal to cover the fact that we are still killing soldiers for a pointless cause. Oh...and, despite today's "job growth" in December....that was all SEASONAL WORK...and come January, February, the unemployment numbers will jump again.

Obama is a failed President by most anyone's measure.

Romney (the likely nominee, I agree) is a slick talkin' politician who will convince the masses that he is a business man with a business plan....

Romney, like it or not, will take the White House in 2012. Oh....and the Republipukes will gain in the House and take over the Senate, giving Romney *almost* a free hand for his first two years....except that the demented Senate has implemented such a fucked up set of rules that ANY legislation now takes a 2/3rds majority to leave committee and make it to the floor for a vote....which is a disgraceful slap in the face to the Constituion.

It's PATHETIC that the Republican MINORITY in the Senate has been able to filibusterer Obama's nominees to various positions forcing him to recess appoint them (despite the lame "we are still in session" protestation of the Republicans) Filibuster??? really???? Where have the continuous speaches on the floor, 24/7, of the Republicans been? Our government has become such a fucking joke!

That being said....government....joke....Romney will win in 2012. And....let the pancakes be served, because the flip-flopper is comin' to town...

Very logical and insightful as always Krellin, thanks :)

Not Romney, so much. More the other guys.

That was an almost coherent and not crazy or unbalanced post from krellin. I'm impressed. I do have a few objections though.
To say Obama is a failed president is ridiculous. He hasn't been a roaring success but like, dude, Hoover was a failed president. Carter was a failed president. William Henry Harrison was a failed president, (in that he failed quite early on to be president). Obama is not the unequivocal failure that right wingers love to point to.

Also, about the trillions spent on stimulus, obviously that's ridiculous. As everyone knows you can actually pull the worlds largest economy from the brink of total meltdown, on a budget of $12. Now, I've been facetious with krellin, which is always dangerous, because he'll latch onto the obviously ridiculous part of this post and treat that as the meat of my argument, so I'm going to make my meaning quite plain. My point is this: "It's very easy to talk about trillions of dollars spent and stuff and it becomes very difficult to put that in the context of the amount of money that exists in the American economy that was saved ultimately by the stimulus.

Anyway in answer to the OP I think the question is very difficult to decide now. I think it's fair to say the Republican nominee will almost certainly be Romney. And its easy to say that a lot of the Republican base is not excited about him, but remember a lot of the Republican base was not especially enthused by John McCain either. And I think Romney is on the ball enough to avoid the bizarre missteps that ultimately doomed McCain's campaign, (chief among them choosing Sarah Palin as a running mate). Couple that with the fact that all the excitement for Obama has completely evaporated now that it's become clear he is not the messiah, and just another man, and I think the election is still very much at issue. I'm not saying it's Romney's election by any means, but it really could go either way at this point. We'll have to see once the two start campaigning against each other.

The election will be entirely dependent on how the average American feels the economy is doing next October/November. Please come again in about 9 months.

to be honest, If Obama wins, we may be living in china by 2016. Don't kill me for saying that, but really, you can argue whatever you want, but he knows nothing of the military.

Im pretty sure China has no plans on invading the country that is supplying their economy...

Some cents from Friendly Sword;

To preface, I'm a leftist from a mysterious foreign country who dislikes Obama.

That being said, my wager would 7-1 for Obama assuming that Romney takes the nomination. If any of the outfielders get it, say Gingrich, Santorum, Paul, then my bet would be more like 20-1.

Why? Three big reasons.

#1- 'Centrist' American voters tend to hate change, and for Presidential elections especially, there is a pattern of centrists swings to the incumbent nearly every election. Statistically the incumbency advantage is huge and bipartisan in nature. Look at how few President's have been one-term Presidents. It has generally required a combination of a poor economy, extreme personal weaknesses, and a dynamic opponent. While Obama certainly has the first, I'd say he isn't facing the same kind of opposition that, for example, Jimmy did.

#2- The Federal Republican Party is still wandering in the wilderness. Don't get me wrong, America is still a helluva Conservative Party and in both Congress and most states the Republicans are either in control or could be in a few years. No, it is specifically the federal Republican party that has gotten hijacked by it's lazy but effective propagandizing. At a certain point, the spin got out of control, and until Republicans can succeed in the primaries without being a) crazy like Bachmann or b) sane like Romney but momentarily pretending to be crazy they will be hampered either by their disconnect with wider American society or their hypocrisy. I say this, because there is absolutely no way any of the Republican candidates can win the federal election with the rhetoric they use in the primaries. This problem exists in the Democratic Party too, but the Republicans have it waaaaaay worse, and until it is rectified, they will be hard to win in 2016, much less 2012.

#3- Obama isn't a failure, he isn't a Marxist, and he isn't even much of a Leftist. Most attacks against Obama fall into two paradoxical categories. Either he's a radical with an insidious agenda, or he's an incompetent buffoon who doesn't deserve to be in office. The contradictory nature of these criticisms belies a boring truth. Obama doesn't really believe in advancing progressivism (at least the politician Obama doesn't) and hasn't been that successful in pushing leftist agenda's. You could argue that he's been moderately successful in increasing Executive power (ordering drone strikes, directly controlling stimulus) but I wouldn't say that increased executive power n there ways is either a leftist or a rightist project. Otherwise though, he's been competent at doing what American Presidents are expected to do these days; the economy isn't great but hasn't collapsed perhaps in part due to his management, he has avoided personal scandals, and he's aggressively pursued American foreign policy interests, threatened fake enemies, exercised muscles etc. In reality, he's little different from Bush, and like Bush, I think he'll get re-elected.

But what do I know.... my country just elected a robot to a majority government last year... maybe American's will do the same. :D

@ FS
A robot, you're Canadian too? :D

The only important power block Obama has really pissed off is the Likud Lobby (at least, of those who could've gone either way (that I can think of)). He's apparently still in the good graces of the mega-capitalists (judging by the campaign contributions) and the military-industrial complex, and the dissident left doesn't seem to be rallying around anyone in particular (Ron Paul has only one degree of separation from racist thoughts - can't have that! [rolls eyes]). It will be interesting to see if the Israel Lobby alone is enough to swing the balance of power against an incumbent president.

No, swords aren't granted jus soli citizenship.

Also, I must say FS, your assumption that the American voter's memory is longer than three weeks and that a politician can really be hampered by "their hypocrisy" is sort of sadly amusing. Maybe in Canada lol. At the end of the day, people throw those words around, but voters have basically never punished a politician for being a hypocrite or lying, even if they pretend to decry it.

My theory on why?

1) Normal Americans don't actually care about politics, they just vote reflexively for whoever they feel like that day.
2) Those that do care about politics assume all politicians are liars and hypocrites, and rightly so because all people all liars and hypocrites, therefore nothing is changed.

Huntsman could beat Obama because he would probably take him apart in debates.

The others are not very convincing. People don't like Romney, he's too conservative for regular Americans, not conservative enough for wingnuts.

The rest can't win, because they're largely considered marginally insane by most.

What you have is a power vacuum. It's mostly up to chance now as to who will fill it, be that Obama or someone else.

Flip. Oh. Congratulations Mr. President.

Obama's been poor, but he'll be reelected for sure.

The US historically always reelects an incumbent president, unless there is a third-party candidate or something weird happens. Barring an Iranian embassy-style disaster for Obama between now and November, he'll win easily.

It doesn't matter whom the Republicans nominate, although some of them will be closer than others. The press, currently making Romney look like a centrist, will turn against him, as will the popular feeling (led by entertainers like Stewart and his ilk). That will turn those muddled voters in the middle who have any chance of switching from one party to the other.

The thing you have to remember is that 40% of the US electorate would vote for Satan against Obama, and another 40% would vote for Satan over Romney or any other Republican. 80% of all voters are totally partisan (including everyone intelligent enough to be on Webdip). The presidency is determined by that other 20%, and those people are mostly morons who switch back and forth based on a candidate's performance on Oprah or whatever. Those people are very impressed by presidential speeches and State of the Union addresses and that kind of thing, which is why a sitting president has such an advantage and almost always wins.

I think ombama is going to win unfortunately, for several reasons... #1 His competition from the republican party has been less than impressive. None of the candidates offered by the republicans have stood out, and none of them are likely to be strong enough to beat Obama this election. All they talk about is each others shortcomings, making each others and the republican party look bad, when they should be telling the public about their plan to save America! Look at the facts, we've had one accused sex abuser, a radical morman, and what the heck is the story behind those stupid racial newsletters that keep haunting Ron Paul?! I mean he has to say he didn't read them and that he disowned them at least 2 times each interview! I keen move on people! #2 our news media is very liberal and likes Obama. Everytime someone interviews the republican candidates they seem to be constantly bashing them! Questions are repediatly asked to Ron Paul about those newsletters that were published 20 years ago! Every time he is interviewed!!! Move on people, shouldn't we be asking more important questions, oh maybe about what his plan is to tackle our 14 trillion dollar debt? When he was asked like 5 times about the newsletters, and answered them calmly each time, Ron calmly removed his mic and walked out of the room after thanking the reporter politly. Guess what the video title was on yahoo... Ron Paul storms out of interview about racial comments... Biaist?! Another example of this is when a reporter was interviewing Obama. The reporter asked about a topic and then asked if Obama thought that the republicans were mistaken, wrong, or stupid... Obama was even embarrased by this question... I wish you could just turn on the news and get the whole unbiased truth. #3 Obama is a good talker. He knows what the people want and says that he can deliver. He knows what the issues are, the debt, jobs, economy, health care, and talks about fixing them, and says he will if you just reelect him, but he won't... He made himself the friend of the not so minor minorities, talking about class warfare. I'm not saying this isn't sometimes the case, but rich people are not always selfish greedy snobs. Just cause he got off his butt and got a job and was sucseseful in life, doesn't make him a jerk. Obama has turned the rich man into an enemy. Welfare should not be an income, I respect the rich businessman. So overall obama will win the election and get nothing done the rest of his turn because he's busy trying to get reelected. Congress will get nothing done either because most of our politicians care more about themselves, their party, and getting reelected than running this country. Most of them don't know what it's like to be a working class American. What we need is a good, strong bipartisan candidate willing to do what's necessary to fix this country and put it back on track in the right direction. But of course with our stupid polititions and parties, and pOlitacly gridlocked Washington, this will never happen and we will have another year of decline, until finally someone in charge might reilize on the course of decline we're headed... I hope by then it's not to late to fix our declining ecomomy and our 14 trillion dollar debt among other problems like health care and social security...

Sorry for the grammar/spelling errors, I wrote that ion my iPod...

Oh and I agree with whoever said people won't take time to actually look at the candidates, they'll just vote for Their party and what the news said, rather then the actual best candidate most of the time..

It's very odd that you would say that, seeing as based on what you've just written, I would bet my house on the fact that you are one of those people who votes for his/her party regardless of the nominee.

Wow I just said we need a bipartisan canadate and said what I thought was the whole truth... I will vote for who I think will run this country the best ( none stand out atm) how could you think that?!

There won't be a bipartisan candidate because America is very partisan itself.
Unless America is so screwed up that there is no-one else credible to lead the country, sorry, no independent President.

Well from someone from the UK, I hope Obama wins again. He seems to have sensible policies. Bush was a disaster - what was Iraq all about. What a waste of lives and resources. Afghanistan was necessary, but Iraq - what a shocking decision.

Also, I think Obama will win if the US economy keeps improving. If the Euro crisis drags it down again he could be in trouble.

Historically, the Democrats treat their centrists a lot nicer than the Republicans do. And I think that if there's going to be a serious third-party challenger, it'll be a Perot, not a Nader.

Ah yes I saw a stat that said it is jobless trend, not rate, which determines elections. That means Obama will win if things stay on course.