I predict that gas will be below $3.00 a gallon by November.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

We have had this discussion before. We are being Enroned. We have two, completly sociopathic oil men in the White House, whose energy policy is a secret. Suddenly, in the year of the election, Oil goes through the roof. This week oil starts to drop a little and I am watching C-spin and there are all these Republics trying to blame the whole mess on the Democrats and sell us on the bullshit idea that, if the Democrats would just let the poor, abused, oil company's drill everywhere and fuck up our beaches and what remains of our wilderness, everything will get back to normal, whatever that means.

Now, I know that the Republics would not use public policy to influence voters but I am willing to bet that gas prices will go down dramatically by election day and the "Tools" will credit Bush policy's for the drop. The BFEE will win again but all of this has Rove written all over it.

I also predict that Obama will serve only one term. Bush has fucked us up so badly that, no matter who is the next President, things will be so bad that the next President does not stand a chance . It can't be fixed in four years and Barak will be blamed. We have a short memory. After all, isn't it all Clintons fault?

[Captain Angry]

1. Wow. You should change your login name to "sunshine and ponies"

:-)

Anyway, gas prices probably will fall to that level due to the money leaving the speculative commodity markets and going back into equity at the low prices that are available.

If interest rates start to rise here in the states, it becomes more expensive to borrow, so companies will pull back on their expansion. This will reduce demand.

But yes, the next president has a lot of crap to fix. If we are lucky and Obama is elected, we can only hope that he puts people in that want to get things done rather than do all of the stuff the Republicans did just to spite them.

[Kolesar]

10. Governor Strickland inherited a mess, but Ohioans still give him the benefit of the doubt

...with respect to economic issues. They know that he has not had time in 1.5 years to turn "anything" around.

There was a poll on this.

I expect that the media is going to try to ruin President Obama starting on Day One, though.

edit:typo

[Captain Angry]

13. Oh absolutely.

President Obama, you've been in office for 6 hours, and there have already been lower earnings announcements on Wall Street.

Which one of your failed policies can you attribute this to?

[cliffordu]

28. LOL Very nice!!!

:rofl:

[gateley]

2. I disagree, but really hope you're right and I'm wrong.

Nixon didn't "end the war" during his first term -- even though he said "anybody who can't end a war in 4 years shouldn't be president."

I hope Obama comes to the American people and SHOWS us what he has been left with, explains the ramifications, levels with us and offers his plan to BEGIN rebuilding.

[Maggie_May]

3. We need to win big!

We need to pick up seats in both houses and things will be a whole hell better. We can turn things around but we need to win big and if so Obama will have a chance of being a two term President.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

7. really? With Dems like Lieberman, Pelosi and Fienstien?

I doubt it.

[Truth4Justice]

22. LIEberman is no Dem.

[AlCzervik]

4. good thing my car runs on anger then, running it has cost me no money.

but in terms of years off my life, too many to count.

[DailyGrind51]

5. Unfortunately, if Obama tries to do what needs to be done,

he will piss off a lot of people and never get re-elected.

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Never again below 3.00. n/t

[Truth4Justice]

26. I'll second that. Peak oil is real, but lots of people remember 1973/75 and think it's a lie again.

We were all told that oil is running dry (which it was and is but not then) back in the Nixon/Ford era, and now its like "crying wolf".

[scheming daemons]

8. When Reagan won in 1980, lots of people thought he was a sure one-termer

Because of all the problems in the world.

In 4 years, everyone was able to answer the "are you better off now than 4 years ago?" question in the affirmative...


...and the largest blowout in Presidential election history occurred.



Don't assume that Obama will be a one-termer because of the problems we have now. The best time to become President is when the country has nowhere to go but up.


Ask FDR.

[Art_from_Ark]

17. Are you sure that

(in 1984) everyone was able to answer the "are you better off now than 4 years ago?" question in the affirmative?

Having survived the Reagan years, I can assure you that this was not the case with "everyone"

[scheming daemons]

19. 60%.... which is LANDSLIDE proportions in a Presidential race... 500+ electoral votes too

It was the biggest blowout since the invention of the radio.

[Leopolds Ghost]

20. Similar portions of the American populace support FISA, disbelieve in Peak Oil and other science.

Just look at DU for confirmation of that fact.

[scheming daemons]

23. The bottom line is that no presidential race in history has been more lopsided than 1984

So the theory that "becoming President during bad times leads to a one-term Presidency" is bogus.


In 1980, this country was fucked up economically (stagflation, 19% home mortgage rates, 10% unemployment) and in foreign policy (Iran hostage situation... Russians were defying the world in Afghanistan) and in general (Boycotted the olympics...disco was king (blech)...Rock and Roll was at a low point).

In short... this country was in the crapper in 1980.

Kind of like now.


There is nowhere to go but up.


The next President will get enormous credit for SMALL gains in the economy or on the world stage.


The winner this year is a two-termer.


Like I said... ask FDR. It is ALWAYS better to be named the head coach of a team that came in last place the year before rather than one that won the title.


Think.

[Art_from_Ark]

33. Maybe you should check out the election of 1932

Herbert Hoover got a smaller proportion of the vote than Walter Mondale did.
As as far as major party candidates go, George bu$h Sr. and William Howard Taft got far less than Mondale's 40%, although admittedly there were 3rd-party candidates in each election that siphoned off a significant proportion of Republican votes.

[Art_from_Ark]

21. 60% bought into the Reagan myth

Whether they, themselves, were actually better off, or merely shared Reagan's disdain for non-mainstream types, is another matter.

I can tell you that in my home town, there were a lot of people who were in the latter category.

[scheming daemons]

25. You missed the point entirely....

The OP said that Obama would be a one-termer because of the problems he would be facing.


Historically, this is ass-backwards. Presidents that take over during difficult times in this country almost ALWAYS get a second term.... because there was nowhere to go but up, and the modest good news that happened was on their watch.

Abe Lincoln
Franklin Roosevelt
Ronald Reagan


A head coach that takes over a last place team gets ENORMOUS credit if he has a marginally winning season.

The same coach gets fires if he takes a championship team and only has a marginally winning season.



Obama, if he wins, will be a two-termer.

[Art_from_Ark]

30. Jimmy Carter took over during difficult times

Gerald Ford took over during difficult times.
James Buchanan took over during difficult times.
Andrew Johnson took over during difficult times.

[scheming daemons]

31. Point conceded..... on Carter and Andrew Johnson.....

Ford doesn't count... that's just continuing Nixon's second term. He wasn't elected.


...and Buchanan CREATED the bad times as much as he inherited them.

He took a bad situation and made it worse.

The exception that proves the rule.

[Art_from_Ark]

32. Buchanan did not create the bad times

The Taney decision was the Supreme Court's, not his. Moreover, the friction between slavery promoters and abolitionists had been building up long before he took over, including the 1808 prohibition on the importation of slaves. The North-South union had been a fragile one, one that every President before him had tried to deal with through compromise. He did what he could to preserve the Union without bloodshed. If his Vice President had been elected in 1860, chances are that the Civil War would not have been fought, at least not when it was.

[scheming daemons]

36. The civil war was inevitable....

[depakid]

29. Reagan won because the Dems nominated a sure loser

who had every weakness they could dream of to exploit- and none of the strengths (regionally, rationally and telegenically and enthusiastically) of his primary opponent, Gary Hart.

You probably weren't alive then, but others who were recall that the economy and the sentiment was none too good. "Morning in America" only worked because it was set against a reprise of late 70's Carter malaise.

Had the election narrative been a reframed as set of new progressive ideas v. old Republican ideas- and focused on al the failures= the outcome may well have been VERY different.

[Art_from_Ark]

34. Mondale didn't help his cause by saying he was going to raise taxes

The Number 1 no-no for presidential candidates is to say they're going to raise taxes

[Joanne98]

9. I second that!

[Speck Tater]

11. I think gas will be over $5.00 by then, BUT...

what we REALLY need is a web site called "I Told You So dot com" where people can post their predictions, and then come back later to gloat when they come true.

Otherwise, who's going to even remember these predictions?

[1]

15. "and then come back later to gloat..."

i would hope we would only "gloat" if our predictions about the price of gasoline going down come true.

if not, then that website should called "screw the poor and those just barely getting by now dot com."

because gloating about a price rise would just be wrong...

[Mind_your_head]

12. I sincerely hope that you are correct in your prediction!!!!!

I won't put any of my good money on it, though.

But here's to your 'good thoughts/wishes' :toast:

[Truth4Justice]

24. I hope we dont have a repeat of the 1980's when people went back to gas hogs due to low priced fuel.

[Terry in Austin]

14. Care to back that up?

This is SO not about the evildoers and bad actors. Plenty of 'em doing what they do, don't get me wrong. But markets are stupid animals that don't care what they are wrecking, just as long as supply and demand keep finding their price-point.

I say gas will be staying above $3.00 a gallon, and Mr. Franklin here is backing me up: for December 1, 2008, US national average for regular grade will be $3.00 per gallon or higher (going by EIA weekly US retail stats). What do you say? Loser donates $100 to DU.

[On the Road]

16. That's Entirely Possible --

Computed as a straight average, a decline from $4 to $3 at the pump would equate to a drop in oil from near $150 to about $110-5 a barrel. Personally, I think it will drop below $100, but that may not happen by election day.

[Tutonic]

18. I hope its below $3.00 but I wonder if the growth in China and India

will keep it above $4.00? Not sure all of the increase is due ot speculation.

[cherokeeprogressive]

27. Bingo. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

35. india is 3.3% of world demand. even if they grow 10%, that adds .33%

to world demand. & they won't be growing 10% in a world recession.

which leaves china, they're about 9% of world demand, but they produce 1/2 their own oil.

increase in 2007 world demand was 990,000 bpd. us demand this year is down about 800,000 bpd, which nearly wipes out last year's world demand growth.
europe down too. together they use nearly 1/2 the world's oil.