This.

Anybody remember those (apocryphal?) stories about how they made sure to keep the nuclear football away from Nixon when he was drunk?

That said, Reagan was clearly losing his grip on reality in the second half of his second term...

The Mormon/Christian part of this discussion is horrible. Most Christians do not consider Mormons as being Christian, and that is the part that is relevant politically. If you want to discuss the theological differences between Mormons and Christians, I believe there is another forum on this site or elsewhere that can accommodate you.

Sure. I didn't mean to suggest that Mormons self-identifying as Christians is sufficient to make them Christian. But I think makes it much harder to make the argument that Mormons are not Christian.

Also after reading the wikipedia page on Branch Davidians, I think anyone claiming they (i.e., Branch Davidians) aren't Christian, would have a hard time supporting that claim.

Well I think the fact that Mormons consider themselves Christians is relevant insofar as Romney probably considers himself Christian, and as such is probably more able to identify with the agenda of the Christian right.

Also, if you asked Romney if he was Christian, I'm sure he'd say yes. And his being able to say that is probably important to some portion of the electorate.

However, your larger point is correct. There's a better place for this discussion. I'll stop derailing now.

Well, if the Christian Right will support a Mormon is very relevant to the discussion and that hings upon whether they think Mormons are really Christians. I think they'd have no problems supporting one against the Kenyan muslim antichrist, but would rally around a "real" Christian in the primary to prevent being faced with that choice.

How hard will Bachmann fight in the House with Cantor if the Senate debt ceiling compromise gets traction? She may benefit enough by being steamrolled and voting no.........is she dumb enough to kill it in the House and risk a default, even if it catapults her to the nomination?

Either way this seems so win-win for Obama. Tax raises bring TP primary promises into play in Congressional elections. A Bachmann led killing of a compromise...........almost as good as he can ask for.

Wow, Pawlenty dropping to utter irrelevancy faster than I imagined possible.

Pawlenty pulled from general poll after sinking too low

If Bachmann is somehow the figurehead of not raising the debt ceiling she wont be nominated. Its only slightly popular now because no one truly understands the real term ramifications of not raising it. It is also fundamentally owned by the Republicans.

The problem for them is they know they HAVE to raise it. Obama knows they know they have to raise it. They know Obama knows they know but they also know Obama has backed down a few times in the past so they will still play chicken hoping against hope he does so again despite knowing he knows they will always leap out of the way at the last moment.

Thats what the "dont call my bluff" stuff meant. Obama is basically saying "dont call me thinking im bluffing, cos we are both holding **** but my **** is better than your ****".

The big question is if Bachmann does bring about the ceiling not being raised can Romney either isolate himself from this issue or somehow leverage himself into a better position gambling as a voice of reason willing to work with the Dems to do what has to be done if he is made President to avoid such situations in the future.

time for another Bruckheimer spot.

Our founding fathers created it!

Americans embraced it!

Ronald Reagan personified it!

And Lincoln stood courageously to protect it!

And I am here to reannounce that I am reforming my exploratory committee to re explore examining the efficacy of my bid for the White House!

Being the "voice of reason" and "willing to work with the Dems" isn't going to help anyone win a Republican primary, especially not this year.

That's true of any primary in any year.

Not true in most Dem primaries:

Obama was seen as less partisan than Hillary and more willing to work with Republicans.


Kerry was the least partisan candidate other than Lieberman.

Gotta disagree with you there, Ikes.

The parties and their constituencies are different. You've surely seen the many polls showing that Democrat voters value "compromise" more than "standing up for principles," whereas it's the reverse for Republican voters.

One reason that Obama beat Clinton is that he projected a more moderate tone; and certainly, his campaign - even in the primaries - made heavy use of the idea that he could be post-partisan and work with the GOP.

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter similarly were hardly the loudest firebrands when they ran in primaries.

"Being the voice of reason" and "willing to work with the GOP" is a selling point to a notable segment of the Democratic primary-electorate.

Sad as it is i agree. I was thinking more about the election itself as hitting the ceiling and defaulting means America wont be voting for anyone whose message is they wont work with the other side and its clear Obama is willing to give ground and compromise which is what [Republican nominee] is going to have to face off against.

I think a default and everything that comes with it is going to be an absolute disaster for the Republicans and means they can lose whilst still having a completely terrible economy (way worse than now) when they stand a reasonable chance of winning today if nothing improves.