G4Gold,

I agree with your caution, and I take nothing for granted. I spoke only out of a historical context as someone who has followed politics closely for a long, long time.

Point #1: Only once in modern history has the party in power won a 3rd term to the Presidency, and that was Pres. Bush 41 (Sr.). It can be strongly argued that this was the result of very high opinions of Pres. Reagan. It was noteworthy at the time that he accomplished this. Even then, he wasn't able to win a 2nd term. Obama is nowhere near as popular as Reagan was, and the most likely candidates to get the Dem. nomination have serious issues as well.

Point #2: The economy is not doing nearly as well as what the numbers reported would indicate. The growth rate is anemic, small businesses are dying at a faster rate than they are being started, and the unemployment rate is much higher than the rate suggests due to so many people having gone on welfare permanently (or in many cases disability), so they are no longer reporting to the unemployment system so don't count as looking for work. This has caused, for good reason, a sense of economic negativity to set in. When this happens, people most often vote for the party not in power.

Point #3: I believe that people are growing increasingly alarmed at the way this admin. handles foreign policy. Our enemies no longer fear us and our allies no longer trust us. Sadly, people have historically not paid attention to foreign policy, but I sense that this is changing quickly.

Given these points and others, history is strongly on the side of the Republicans winning the Presidency next year. Of course, something could happen a month from now that changes the dynamic in a way that is impossible to predict, and it is also possible that the Republican who wins the nomination won't be a reform-minded conservative. If a moderate gets the nomination, he will likely lose to the Democrat nominee. Forget what the media says...when moderates get the Repub. nomination, they usually lose. If a moderate would somehow win, I doubt he would do much to undo what Obama has done because moderates are all about not making waves and are afraid of being criticized by the media.

So, to your point, the money is not in the bank, for sure, but there is reason to have some optimism, and my basic point was sound in that rules and executive orders can be undone. Also, VP was correct that Congress can limit or eliminate executive branch rule-making authority as long as there is a sufficient majority to overcome a filibuster and a veto if applicable.

Wesley