Sometimes the Underdog Wins

"Iran has rights too-it's just a bomb"

Come November, there will be two candidates running for president, maybe three, if you count Ron Paul as anything more than an inadvertent Obama supporter if he runs as an independent.  If Paul runs, Obama wins--unless the GOP pulls an upset.

One of those  presidential candidates is going to be an underdog. Republicans will say that Obama is the underdog because they believe he's going to lose. Democrats, of course, will say that the Republican candidate is the underdog, and both sides are going to hope you vote for the sure winner.  They will never call the opposition candidate an underdog, however, because where is it written that Americans do not like an underdog? On the contrary, we have always rooted for the underdog and will likely do the same come the election.

And I speak Manadarin

Jon Huntsman has now dropped out of the campaign, following in the footsteps of Michele Bachmann.  Herman Cain was forced out after his multiple alleged indiscretions, almost all with women having questionable circumstances, one who lived in the same building as David Axelrod, and others who definitely needed the publicity to make the money to bail them out of the aforementioned circumstances. Then we had Gary Johnson, who seems to have fallen off the face of the earth, but perhaps we'll hear from him when he decides to endorse a candidate, as Huntsman appears to have endorsed Mitt Romney.


Obama, I believe, is going to represent himself as the underdog, in spite of the liberals claiming that the election is in the bag.  When you have a billion dollars to use in smearing your opponent, that doesn't seem to make him an underdog. Yet this is how he's going to represent himself.  Poor POTUS.  It would be like the Greenbay Packers having represented themselves as underdogs in the game against the NY Giants.  It was New York who was the underdog and the underdog won.  Elections however, are not football games.

SEAL Team Leader

How will Obama be the underdog?  He will pull from his back pocket, the race card.  He might not actually be the one to mention it, but all the liberals will.  Holder already has done it, and now we need to wait for Michael-these-pants-must've-shrunk-Moore, to do the same. "If you don't vote for Obama, you're a racist."  That is such crap it's laughable, but some people will actually believe it.

If Michele Bachmann somehow got the nomination, and you voted for Obama, wouldn't that make you a sexist? If Keith Ellison ran on an opposition platform calling for Sharia to replace the Constitution, would you then be an Islamophobe if you didn't vote for him?  If Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tx) ran in opposition to Obama, would that make you a moron-hating, sexist, if you voted for Obama?  Hardly.  Not voting for someone, anyone, does not define you as the opposite of what that person represents--it merely shows that you disagree with the politics of that individual.  You may be all the things they say about you, but it isn't a default position, and they have no right to say it.

Richard M. Nixon

 

Be clear--Obama is not an underdog because he will use all of his resources to discredit the Republican candidate.  He is not an underdog if Ron Paul chooses to stroke his 80 year old ego and run independently.  He is only an underdog if the left actually considers his record and lack of leadership, and how he can only win by playing the 'blame game,' because he has nothing to go on in terms of his accomplishments.  He deserves as much credit for killing bin Laden as Nixon deserves for walking on the moon.

Click here to sample Jihad Joe, a novel

Tweet