I think it's ridiculous to pressure the incumbent candidate to step down, especially to cede the floor to the person he beat to get the job in the first place. The fact is, he's President, and that has a powerful effect on our minds. We can certainly see him as President. Everyone else is a puny upstart (until they prove otherwise). Now, perhaps I'm more of a sucker for incumbents than most people. Only twice in my life — and I've voted since 1972 — have I declined to vote for the Democratic presidential candidate, and both times, it was for an incumbent Republican. I'm referring to the 1976 and the 2004 elections. In both cases, I could visualize the President as President, but not the challenger.
Now, let me be clear. I have argued that Obama shouldn't want to run for a second term. Back on April 3d of this year, I indulged in some imaginative mind-reading, but that wasn't about how the Democratic Party could increase its chances of winning in 2012. It was a flight of fancy into Obama's psyche:
If he is reelected, then that will be the end of running for President. He'll be 54 years old, and what will he do? Move to Hawaii and play golf? But he could move to Hawaii and play golf in January 2013, if that's an enticing prospect. And, if he does, he won't have maxed out his eligibility for being President. He can tantalize us, year after year, with the possibility that he would run for another term — a fascinatingly out-of-sequence term. The thing he's best at is running for President. Why let that game expire? He could toy with it in 2016, when he's 58, and in 2020, when he's a clear-visioned 62, and in 2024, when he's a well-seasoned 66, and in 2028, when he's a beneficent elder, offering his services once again, because his country longs for the golden days of 2011. It will never end, as long as the icon of hope and change — oh, my lord, I typo'd "hope and chains"! — walks the face of the earth... unless he serves that second term.So, I can see Obama choosing to withdraw, with some magnificent long-term life plan. But pressure him out? Ridiculous! Whatever his poll numbers now, whatever the pain and suffering, he's got a long campaign ahead of him. The campaigning Obama is the one we know best. Sure, he'll have a lot to answer for, but it's not a question of whether we're happy about what's been going on these last few years. It will be a choice between him and that other guy (or gal). And I'm betting he'll win.
ADDED: Here's a May 1st post talking about Mickey Kaus saying Obama shouldn't run:
I'm not saying Mickey stole my idea. In fact, our ideas are completely different (except for picturing Obama not running). Mickey portrays Obama as a big old failure who ought to get out gracefully and give another Democrat a clean shot. Meade and I were fantasizing from Obama's perspective — what his life really feels like to him and how to milk the pleasure of being Obama for all it's worth.
Posts
134 comments:
Tease.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
It’s too late for Palin, but not too late for Hillary?
Again people, details matter. Hillary or Chelsea or John Kerry or Bob Kerrey or your Uncle Bob have missed a number of filing deadlines and campaigns don’t just put themselves together. The Democrats needed to get rid of Obama in August/September, in order run someone in his place.
It’s like “pundits” can just talk out of their @rses, there is almost NO WAY any other Democrat could run, now.
The campaign season has become so extended, though, that it is ridiculous, and partly as a result, this issue won't be given adequate consideration. As a matter of perspective, it is useful to recall that Lyndon Johnson announced he wouldn't run or accept the nomination on March 31, 1968. Think about that. If that were to happen at any point in March 2012 it would be taken as almost conceding the election to the Republicans. November or December 2011 seems like a better time for seriously contemplating such questions.
"Should Obama not run for re-election in 2012?"
He's an awful President, thus he should not run.
That was easy.
The America's Politico and betting parts of me like this thread. Yes, Obama will easily win the nomination, and as an incumbent, he is likely to win re-election. Yes, Barack! Run! The future awaits!
obama needs to gather up all of the campaign cash that he can, then, 6 months before the next election, say I'm outta here. Heads will explode.
As an aside, I should add that I'm starting to hope that there is a third-party challenger from the left this year so some of Obama's disaffected leftist base can vote for that person. I'm increasingly worried that whoever emerges from the Republican primary process will be damaged goods, and I'm worried that even an unpopular Obama will have a chance of winning against such a candidate, without some sort of third-party challenge from the left.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
obama needs to gather up all of the campaign cash that he can, then, 6 months before the next election, say I'm outta here. Heads will explode
Allen my head would not explode, but I would be reduced to helpless mirth! I mean that would be such a bold, cynical master-stroke, that it would warm the cockles of my dark heart to endless laughter and tears of mirth! It would be the ONE THING that Obama could do to win my respect. But I don’t think it’s going to happen…
"We can certainly see him as President."
That's his biggest problem, though, isn't it?
We've all seen how abysmal and narcissistic he is, and those people who were dumb enough or naive enough or Bush-deranged enough to vote for him in 2008 will, I hope, be able to see through him this time.
I'm betting he'll win.
Ooo, ooo, I want that bet! What's the bet? I definitely want that bet.
If Obama loses, you have to buy upteen copies of my movie book and send it out to all your friends.
If Obama wins, I have to be unemployed for four years.
He could toy with it in 2016, when he's 58, and in 2020, when he's a clear-visioned 62, and in 2024, when he's a well-seasoned 66, and in 2028, when he's a beneficent elder, offering his services once again, because his country longs for the golden days of 2011.
You're assuming, of course, that sovereign debt doesn't crush us long before that time.
Yeah....I wanna see him humiliated.
Ann,
I'm betting he'll win.
Ah, jeez, here we go:
How much?
Please run, Obama. Please, please, please.
So, LBJ should've stood for reelection in 1968?
One problem with the Professor's analysis is that I can easily see either Hillary or Romney as President. Not happy presidents, but either could keep the place running until some more old bulls die off and the results of the new elections kick in.
Compared to Obama, any American socialist would be a great relief.
Obama has been an enemy fifth columnist destroying every thing that he can as fast as he can. That makes Obama a near genius leader because he could get away with it for so long.
That means you voted for Carter in 1980 ...
Apparently you didn't learn a thing.
In both 1952 and 1968 a Republican won the election. I don't see why these examples would encourage Democrats to nominate someone else.
This is all horseshit. He's going to run and I'll bet one large on it. Honor went out the window decades ago.
The 2012 election will be the most important in my lifetime and my first vote was for Nixon in 1960. My family were all Democrats and unhappy with me but I had taken an economics class before the Marxists took over college curriculum.
If Obama gets a second term, we are looking at another ten year Depression and no war to pull us out of it. Will no one study the effects of the Japanese Keynesian effort to pull themselves up after their real estate crash 20 years ago ?
Will no one study the effects of the Japanese Keynesian effort to pull themselves up after their real estate crash 20 years ago ?
But Lost Decades are so in vogue now!
As I've said, if the Hildabeast decides to run, the organization will be up and running by Noon CST.
We would also be reminded that she's not that much different from GodZero
It Takes A Village
HillaryCare
Miltary people were so... repulsive
etc., etc., ....
PS I've come to think Schoen and Caddell, in their 2 years or so on Fox, were less concerned with saving the country than the Democrat Party.
Looks like I was right.
Obama is a natural leader and people assume he is on our side. He is not on our side.
But the GOP will throw the 2012 election if they nominate Professor Gingrich just like the Dems threw the 1956 election by nominating Professor Adlai Stephenson.
Romney is also a non leader who only assumes victory while confidently asserting 3 versions of everything at issue. That creates confusion that demoralizes the GOP voters and attracts no independents.
The desire to see Gingrich beat Obama in a Debate is silly childishness.
A perceived leader must be nominated to beat a perceived leader. That means only Perry or Cain can win 2012.
If Obama gets a second term, we are looking at another ten year Depression and no war to pull us out of it.
The upside of this, of course, will be all of the employment those in the Southwest will get as migrant workers (documented I assured you) building Mexico's northern border wall.
ndspinelli said...
This is all horseshit. He's going to run and I'll bet one large on it. Honor went out the window decades ago.
Ditto.
The chance of Zero not running is the same as the chance of him suffering a horrible injury, illness or death, because that's the only thing that will stop him.
You could picture Dukakis as President and not John Kerry? . . .
Hillary is to Barack as God the Father is to the pastor down the street. It's the Clintons' party; Obama just slipped behind the podium with the seal on it. Without the seal, nobody knows who he is.
It's a cosmic joke. He should've stepped aside years ago, and I'm all for him stepping aside now.
"It will be a choice between him and that other guy (or gal). And I'm betting he'll win."
Perhaps.
But Romney's the least affected by the uneven playing field maintained by the MSM. If it's Romney he's up against, we at least have a shot at turning things around.
"I'm betting he'll win." Unlikely.
And, if he does, he won't have maxed out his eligibility for being President. He can tantalize us, year after year, with the possibility that he would run for another term — a fascinatingly out-of-sequence term.
The chances that Obama could get a second term without being an incumbent are less than zero.
"We can certainly see him as President."
Only the infatuated and gullible among us.
This is so racist.
A fake news question.
First of all, credit to Drudge yesterday for pointing out HOW the "Occupy Wall Street" campaign was supposed to work (against republicans). But was an epic fail.
Separate from the Toronto telecast, that at 4:00AM. With an infra-red camera. It was shown that 95% of the tents were EMPTY. No one inside them! Just a "visual."
The drum bangers were also there to create more noise than there were snoring people. Because there was no snoring to be heard.
What's this "Obama might not run" campaign? Obama is probably gonna win. But without coattails.
The congress ... which rates about 9% approval rating right now ... will probably have more seat-shifts than anything that's happened in an election cycle, before.
Obama? He stays out of the debris path. He plays golf. And, just about everything he's actually tried to do has gone the other way. It's as if the Israelis stuck the DUKU/Stuxnet virus up his ass.
Of course, the 8 contendahs for the GOP nomination ... leave nothing worth saying anyway.
So, go ahead. Dream that Obama refuses to run. So the GOP yokel can run against Hillary. Or Biden. Or John Kerry.
The GOP could also "invite back" Alan Keyes ... who was running for contention back in 1996. Just to prove to ya that a Black person is not all that unusual "campaigning."
Is it a circus? Or is it a campaign trail?
"It will be a choice between him and that other guy (or gal). And I'm betting he'll win."
Well, that's a safe bet. He has a slightly better than 50/50 chance, according to most election watchers. You're just taking the better odds.
"We can certainly see him as President."
Not very often. He dodges taking positions, he leads from behind, and he skips town whenever the heat is on. We can certainly see him as President, but a weak one, at that.
Barry's is the vainest human being on the planet. He couldn't "not run" any more than he could change his policies. It would be admitting he was wrong.
In a century, we've gone full circle back to Woody Wilson, who might not always have been right, but was never wrong.
And that sound you hear is Woody spinning.
Michael K said...
If Obama gets a second term, we are looking at another ten year Depression and no war to pull us out of it.
No, the Iranians will nuke us by then.
"Should Obama not run for re-election in 2012?"
Well, whether he should run, he obviously is running. It's really all he knows how to do, and so it's quite likely what he will continue doing it. The whole idea of his withdrawing in favor of Hill! is quite bizarre, an attempt to replay 2008 in reverse. Then the meme was -- can the country stand another episode of TV's lonigest running soap, Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton? Running Hill! as their candidate is about as attractive to the Dems as running Jeb! would be to the Reps at this stage.
And it's also helpful to remember that the realpolitik justification -- be like Truman and LBJ, and withdraw for sake of party and country -- didn't work out so well (at least as far as the Dem party was concerned) when Truman and LBJ withdrew.
Schoen and Caddell say that they write as loyal Dems and patriotic Americans. I can accept the latter, but am more dubious about the former. Perhaps the pundit prize that goes with being able to say 'I told you so' is what's really driving their train. That and a sense that the country would be much better off with a president other than the incumbent.
Voting is like herding cats - the problem is too many pussies.
In 2012, Obama will be the Democratic nominee. It must be so.
There is no way that Obama not running for a second term will go down well with the black community. If the blacks stay home, even if just 30% of those who voted in 2008 stay home, the Democrats lose. All the way down the ticket, they lose.
If progressive or urban whites try and force Obama not to run again, it'll be civil war in the Democratic Party.
Not gonna happen.
Hmmm.
McGovern, Ford, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Bush, Obama.
And you seem like such a sane person, too. And still they call you a right-winder.
ScottM: "The upside of this, of course, will be all of the employment those in the Southwest will get as migrant workers (documented I assured you) building Mexico's northern border wall."
Up-twinkles.
I thought Obummer would bow out last December for re-election. He had very little chance of winning in 2012 by December 2010. Now he has about .001% chance of winning re-election if it's a two person race.
This whole theory is moronic.
Obama will run and get the nomination. He will likely lose int the general.
But if for some reason he drops out, it will not be to run again in the future. He will have conceded that that he was a failure, and that he's not the man for the job. He's done.
Which is why he will run. Even if he loses the general, he can always pull a Carter, and work the rest of his days trying to change his legacy. And this is exactly what he will do. Blame everyone but his sorry ass self. He can do that as long as he runs...he can't do that if he loses. It's all about Barry to Barry...how can you not realize the narcissism of this guy?
And you never know, he might just win...
"Obama is a natural leader..."
Good gosh, tradguy, what are you smoking? And here I thought traditionalists like you didn't do drugs...
YoungHegelian said...
In 2012, Obama will be the Democratic nominee. It must be so.
There is no way that Obama not running for a second term will go down well with the black community. If the blacks stay home, even if just 30% of those who voted in 2008 stay home, the Democrats lose. All the way down the ticket, they lose.
With 58% approval among blacks, they may stay home anyway. That's what scares Kerosene Maxine and the rest of the Black Caucus.
And inflation will eat the poor alive in the next year.
O should dump Biden and put Hill on the ticket. Get a lot of women's votes that way.
And it would set her up to be Prez in 2016.
As for those who say O is responsible for the crummy economy, friends, that is baked in the cake for about 10 more years.
As for those who say O is responsible for the crummy economy, friends, that is baked in the cake for about 10 more years.
I suppose he gets as much credit for this economy as Clinton does for his. On the other hand, Obama is the only member of Congress since 2004 that's been elected President, with all of the blame both Congress and the Executive share since then.
Joe said...
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Again people, details matter.
No they don't. You're forgetting the Lautenberg precedent. Screw the rules, just do whatever it takes to get the result you want.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
No they don't. You're forgetting the Lautenberg precedent. Screw the rules, just do whatever it takes to get the result you want
Try to pull a “Lautenberg” in a Red or Purple State, and the court challenges will make your head spin….So no, it’s too late now, and by January it really will be too late, just from missing so many filing deadlines….
Lastly:
1) Blacks will “implode” and stay home in droves (mentioned); and
2) In 1952 and 1968 who won? (Again already mentioned)
It’s just too late to replace Obama or have Obama bow out-not that he would any way.
Curious George,
Even if he loses the general, he can always pull a Carter, and work the rest of his days trying to change his legacy. And this is exactly what he will do.
Except that the longer Carter keeps at it, the worse his "legacy" looks. He got dealt a really nasty hand, I'd say as bad at least as Obama's, between Iran and stagflation and gas rationing and every other damn thing that sucked about the late 70s. I think he did his best in a really lousy situation, and if "his best" was pathetic, at least he gave the impression of trying. Whereas since leaving office (Habitat for Humanity apart, and he does deserve mondo credit for that), he's spent most of his public time slamming Israel. At least he got his Nobel for trying to broker an actual peace agreement, with some semblance of neutrality between the parties; now there's no doubt in anyone's mind whose side he's on.
But when were the last serious primary challenges to sitting Presidents, anyway? Reagan v. Ford, right, in 1976, and then Teddy Kennedy v. Carter in 1980? For half the electorate, that's ancient history.
wv: enturig. Ought to be a German adjective by rights, but it's not.
The problem for the Dems is that those most unhappy with Obama don't believe he has been liberal or ideological enough. Bernie Sanders', the most liberal member of congress, call for a primary challenger is a good example of this dilemma. Hillary, if anything, would be more moderate and pragmatic than Obama. So, I don't see how a return of the Clinton brand to the Democratic party would sit well with those liberals most dissatisfied with Obama. I don't see any signs of insurrection against Obama among the mainstream elements of the party...at least not yet.
He will likely lose int the general.
Against whom is he running?
I'm not sure I see any current viable candidate likely beating him.
"It will be a choice between him and that other guy (or gal). And I'm betting he'll win."
Yes, this is exactly right, of course.
Voters too dumb, too gullible and too ignorant to have voted for him in the first place will prove, once more, too dumb, too gullible and too ignorant to learn from experience.
My own bet is that 95% of those who voted for him the first time around will slavishly do so again.
November '12 isn't just an election, it's an intelligence test. And too many will fail, once more. We are so totally f^cked. Cannibalizing the future is NOT a winning strategy.
"...fantasizing from Obama's perspective — what his life really feels like to him and how to milk the pleasure of being Obama for all it's worth."
Wow, the mind races. I imagine a sort of dark place (when contrasted with my worldview) filled with magic words, teleprompters, sacred cows and memos...there are no suggestion boxes.
There is the working class, and then there is me. And my words are not free.
Because I think, it must be so. It's what I've been told all my life.
But the milk part, well, isn't that fattening and completely polluted with antibiotics? And wouldn't I necessarily have someone else do the milking for me??? Does milk go with arugula?
wv - tolost
Many commenters are just tolost to make sense.
With Newt Gingrich able to mount the GOP stage, to run for the presidency ... is not politics just a lark?
By the way. I have a question. Let's say the half million signatures are "raised" ... which hasn't been proven, yet. And, there is a recall election. And, Walker wins it.
Do the democraps then turn around and say that he's only won a "TWO SEATER" term? Not a 4 year term?
In a recall ... should the incumbent win it, does it EXTEND his "new" term for a whole for years?
Or is Russ Feingold "running" for a TWO SEATER term?
Would there be a different answer if Feingold wins, or Walker wins?
Here's my bet: The half million signatures aren't that easy to produce.
Even at the "OUST" coffee shop ... they had up a "poem" ... not a petition signature sheet? How come?
All petitions have to be signed "outdoors?"
What if people sign petitions with their neighbor's name and address? How could you challenge this in a court of law?
Is part of this "recall ploy" ... a way to take Wisconsin out of being one of the 12 toss up states?
If this were a school test, we wouldn't get our answers back till election day, 2012. While the media, so far, is having wet dreams.
were less concerned with saving the country than the Democrat Party
They're terrified of losing the Senate and more governors and state legislators on top of 2010. That's their bench.
Psychedelic George said...
As for those who say O is responsible for the crummy economy, friends, that is baked in the cake for about 10 more years
Nothing like "accountability" for the left.
Nope. Not too late for Palin!
I couldn't understand why she went on Fox to defend Romney's nomination ... but then I thought Romney hasn't been chosen yet. (People are lining up to collect "points." Every one of the 8 contendah's is collecting points.)
I can't imagine a worse ticket than Romney/Gingrich. But the GOP is in the habit of trying to run into 3rd place. With the most amount of money spent.
I still think Palin/Trump will run as independents. And, they'll try not to have litmus paper stuck on their asses. (Which is why Palin is making such a grab for the GOP center ... with Romney.)
What's the GOP doing right now? Burning through money.
When can an Independent race get going? Ross Perot picked up steam in June of 1992. Maybe, it was July? But the engine that revved him up came from "grass root" types in every state ... who collected the signatures to get him on the ballot in all the 50.
For the money he spent, if Ross Perot wasn't a lunatic, Bill Clinton might not have had the "plurailty" he got for the "win."
Pluralities aren't majorities.
Sarah Palin is far more politically wise than she looks. She's got a very loyal core group. As I'm sure Donald Trump could also build. Money wouldn't be an object.
And, ALL the money an Independent spends comes right after Labor Day 2012. When Americans not only begin paying attention ... It's the September where a majority of voters makes up their minds.
"The Hillary Moment: President Obama can't win by running a constructive campaign, and he won't be able to govern if he does win a second term."
Obama govern? hahahahahaha...
When has he ever governed? He will talk his talk and say 'to forth and legislate... right now!"
Nah, Obama will cling to power. Where else can he get so much vacation time free.
Too bad old campaigns go down the memory hole.
But it would be fun ... to "celebrate" the 12th debate ... coming to some free hour ... soon. To run, instead, an old Bob Dole crawler. Where nobody who was voting particularly like him.
And, you had Steve Forbes running FLATTER THAN A FLAT TAX. And, whatever happened to Morry Taylor?
There was some real thumb wrestling back in 1996. And, there was Alan Keyes. The first black guy in either major party ... to make a stab at winning the GOP nomination.
I say that the democraps focused on getting a "black guy" running ... because of Alan Keyes. In 1996.
Herman Cain? Seems overly fond of white women. And, nobody's gonna touch the ramifications of that with a ten foot poll. But you could dip litmus paper into it, just to watch the colors turn.
Just Dem minions lining out excuses for Obama to run negative campaign. Obama has never been able to govern anyway.
MDT,
"and if 'his best' was pathetic,"
Why, yes--yes, it was.
>>We can certainly see him as President.<<
Not compelling. Didn't "we" see George H.W. Bush as president? Didn't "we" see Jimmy Carter as president?
However, when I see the idiocy of the electore on display in Wisconsin and Ohio, together with the Pew results last month that fully 50% of the respondents could not name a single Republican candidate running for president, I'd say the odds are cloes to even money that the low information, uninformed electorate will send him back for a second term.
Mickey Kaus fancies himself a big thinker.
Obama wins by staying out of the debris path. While the germans, through Angela Merkel, know the Euro is going down. But it's not a "crisis" when you're negotiating a "rich exit."
Obama learned his lessons in the first two years. He let Pelosi drive Obamacare through. And, inside the White House, that's their nightmare! (You think Obama wants this to be his legacy?)
I think Chris Matthews told the truth! (As it appears in Drudge's headline.) Obama has topped calling everyone on the Hill! Faxing emails? Most people just remove the paper from their copying machines. So the faxes can "go into the wind."
Obama has no coattails. When he wins his re-electon ... OR IF Donald Trump/Sarah Palin produce the winning numbers ... congress critters are gonna be having burial ceremonies for all their fallen "incumbents."
The numbers you need to know? How big are the pensions when they get booted?
Morry Taylor once said "in the $4-to-$5-million dollar range.
SOFT LANDINGS FOR PRO POLITICIANS. But not for their staffs. Unless their staffs were making money on Wall Street. And, they socked it all away. (Hardly likely. Given how people don't learn about money until they lose it.)
But that's just me. I won't know the answers until we get to election day, 2012.
Did you just see Spain's?
Will anyone discuss the "soft cushions" the "socialist democraps" took with them ... out the door?
COUNT THE SILVER! (That's why I'm sure hostesses in DC use plastic silverware. But the booze is real fancy.)
Like all addicts, Obama won't quit until he (and the country) are at rock bottom.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Except that the longer Carter keeps at it, the worse his "legacy" looks. He got dealt a really nasty hand, I'd say as bad at least as Obama's, between Iran and stagflation and gas rationing and every other damn thing that sucked about the late 70s. I think he did his best in a really lousy situation, and if "his best" was pathetic, at least he gave the impression of trying
You couldn’t be much more wrong….he dealt this hand to us and himself. Iran, he forced the Shah out…he allowed Khomeini in, and expected him to be “moderate” and then Carter OK’d the Shah’s entry into the US. Stagflation was a result of his decision to “reflate” the economy, in a Keynesian sense….gas rationing was his fault, he passed windfall profits taxes and made petrol MORE SCARCE, rather than easing the acquisition costs. Carter was a fairly miserable failure, with very few bright spots…as Obama has NO bright spots, Obama surpasses Carter. But please don’t “feel sorry” for Carter, he didn’t have bad luck, he had BAD POLICIES.
Hmmm.
This is just not an issue for me. I haven't "seen" anyone in my conscious lifetime as "Presidential" - the magic of authority doesn't seem to work on me in that particular way. Carter is the first Pres I have a memory of really - he was a dork who blew nearly everything he touched; Reagan was way too old for me to consider; Bush 1 seemed vaguely executive compared to the lumpy dems during his first run and that did affect me, I suppose, but after the wall and USSR fell it was clear his time had passed; Clinton I saw as a chatty, fat band geek who could think; Bush 2 was indeed a little squinty and chimpy and did seem to get any "authority" from family ties; Obama is about 8 or 9 years older than I am and getting close enough to my age that I feel fairly confident in my call that he's a complete poseur and I feel sorry for any of you who bought into it.
I would be interesting to go back to the pre show-biz days of boring, ugly presidents with the gravitas to warn against that military-industrial complex being a threat to democracy while still in office...
(thinking of flickering newsreels of Ike.)
Perhaps this is why I don't have a problem with this or that female candidate having gravitas or not - I don't see the guys in my lifetime as having it either.
Our beloved President has to run for re-election as the First vacationer has four more years of tax payed funded vacations all lined up.
Is there any way he can un-run in 2008? He could just tell the country that he now knows that it is not worthy of him.
cede the floor to the person he beat to get the job in the first place
"the person he beat to get the job" -- LOL!! that is a myth that you got suckered into, sucker!
He can tantalize us, year after year, with the possibility that he would run for another term — a fascinatingly out-of-sequence term.
Just like that peanut feller...
Obama's excuse for the dreadful state of the economy is "I inherited such a huge mess that all my efforts haven't turned it around." Even if you're Althouse and the mere fact that Obama's the president makes him presidential, even if you're of that mindset why would you vote to re-elect a president who admits to his own impotence?
it's not a question of whether we're happy about what's been going on these last few years.
I think this is spectacularly wrong. Of course it's a question of whether we're happy about what's been going on these last few years. That's always the issue in a re-election campaign. Do we want to fire this guy, or four more years of this crap?
Obama can't run on hope and change this time around. What's he going to change, himself? No, he's going to have to run on "fear and no change."
He is going to try to scare the American people that a change would actually make our economy worse. Good luck with that!
Republicans are absolutely united that Obama needs to be out of office. Democrats are demoralized, despondent, and depressed. Nobody wants to campaign with this guy. That tells you everything you need to know.
Look for a lot of Democrats to stay home, and the entire frickin' Republican party to vote this asshole out of office. The only question in regard to our nominee is whether this is going to be a landslide of Reaganite proportions, or whether it's just an ordinary defeat for the blue team.
Who the hell wants four more years of this guy?
Seriously, Ann, are you thinking of voting for him again? I say no way you vote for him again. You are too smart, and another vote for Obama is too damn embarrassing.
Kirk Parker,
[me:] "and if 'his best' was pathetic,"
[you:] Why, yes--yes, it was.
Hey, I know. I was there, though I wasn't actually old enough to vote til the '88 election. In '80 I was a John Anderson fan. In '84 I was (retrospective shudder) a Gary Hart fan. (No, seriously, "neoliberal" was my niche, at 16, and I suppose it'd be "neoconservative" now, only Sarah Palin isn't the only one who doesn't know what the word means.)
In '88, I think I dithered for ages, and I still don't remember what I did ultimately, but as I was a registered Dem then, I probably voted Dukakis.
But as by then I'd been at UC/Berkeley for four years, I'd kind of soured on "progressive" politics.
wv: tudicial. Adj: said of a judge or justice with 'tude; most often used in regard to Justice Scalia.
[Enh, my bad. It's only "tudical." I did a great deal of tudical when I was a TA -- extended office hours and so on.]
Nobody wants to campaign with this guy. That tells you everything you need to know.
This. A thousand times this. More than anything else, this is why I'm confident he's toast.
In '80 I was a John Anderson fan.
How can you not still be?
In 2008 Obama was a blank slate. In 2012 he will be the graffiti on the wall.
He will run, what else does he have to do and what else can he do?
Hillary as the replacement is fantasy 'moderate' democrats have in which they believe they can save the party.She has no chance either with her baggage.
Hopefully the far left will bolt and go 3rd party and the republicans will stay on time and on target. A year is a very long time in politics but the only thing that is certain that this Will be the most expensive and dirtiest campaign in our lifetimes.
FYI Ann - you got all of those ages wrong in your April 3 post. I know this because I was born in 1960 (thus it's very easy to calculate the I-will-be-XX-years-old-in -2XXX question). And I am older (by almost a year) than Obama.
Joe,
I still think you're too harsh on Carter. He inherited a government larded with Nixon's environmental regulations, wage & price controls, &c.; gas rationing was a response to the OPEC-imposed price increase in 1979, which wasn't his fault; and I don't see how we in decency could've shut the Shah out, given the decades of propping-up we'd done. We did the same for Ferdinand & Imelda Marcos later.
It was all a damned mess, and
Who the hell wants four more years of this guy?
Garage, Allie, Ritmo, shiloh/J, purple penguin
And absurdly there are millions more like them.
In both cases, I could visualize the President as President, but not the challenger.
In 2008 you also visualized Bambi as president. So much for your vision.
The campaigning Obama is the one we know best.
Yeah, that is right. But now you have a failed governing Obama. What do you do with HIM?
By your own account you've selected for the Republican candidate only twice in your career as a voter. That would be Gerald R. Ford in 1976 and George W. Bush in 2004.
By my "back of the envelope" calculations your ability to predict a winner is about 40% accurate, i.e. considerably below chance. You might been better off tossing a coin than using whatever instinct to "visualize" a given candidate as President but not his challenger that you have relied on heretofore.
Pollsters and political operatives like Caddell and Schoen live and die by the predictive power of their methods, not this visualization crap.
"I'm betting he'll win."
MikeR said...
Unlikely.
Only Romney is competitive with Obama in recent polls. And consistently competitive with Obama since he announced.
Cain popped up to be competitive alternative for a couple of weeks, then scandal and the obvious ignorance the Pizzaman has on a range of vital matters became obvious, and he again trails Obama by double digits. As do Perry, Paul, Gingrich.
The dumbest mistake conservatives and the most hardcore of the Tea Party Norquistians can make is that since they hate Obama, the rest of the country thinks the same way. So "any hearthrob true believer Religious Right conservative is acceptable to America, over Obama"
Not so.
Is Obama still President? I barely hear him mentioned anymore. It's almost like the country is on auto-pilot.
BTW, the people that are saying "it is now impossible" for anyone other than Obama to head the Dem banner - are dead wrong. It hasn't happened yet in Presidential politics, a nominee or incumbent dropping dead or dropping out at the close of the election cycle - but has happened with other races.
Toricelli of NJ most recently, on drpping out over scandal. With Lautenberg inheriting his money and organization. Other times a Congressman or Senator has died while in the ending stages of an election campaign. NO matter, their Party ran someone else and often won on a sympathy vote.
Obama could say the hell with it and go on to golf, the continued lifetime adulation and money making fandom of his rabid followers in Palinesque fashion (albeit on a vastly larger money making scale).
And no doubt, wait for the SCOTUS seat Hillary promised him.
At least since Nixon second terms have not gone well for presidents. Maybe since LBJ, if you consider 1964-68 as his 2nd term. By that measure, we've already seen the best of Obama, and it all goes downhill from here
By that measure, we've already seen the best of Obama, and it all goes downhill from here
I'm sure Obama hopes to change that.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait a minute here. Stop everything.
You're telling us that you voted AGAINST Jimmuh Carter in 1976, and then found some reason in his first term to vote FOR him in 1980?
Seriously?
I thought the crack epidemic started in 1984. Were you an early adopter?
ScottM at 2:06pm: That's O's problem right there. Change begets hope, not the other way around.
Yikes! My deleted comment crossed the line I guess. I was hoping for the story of how Althouse voted against Carter in 1976, the found reasons to vote for him in 1980.
I repeat the question without my earlier unseemly insult.
How?
Wait... I don't remember Obama running a constructive campaign last time.
If he runs and loses, he has a lucrative lifetime of lectures, books, and talk show appearances based on the premise that we weren't really ready for a black President. As well as the fawning adulation of the people who voted for him and aren't willing to admit that it was a mistake.
As well as the fawning adulation of the people who voted for him and aren't willing to admit that it was a mistake.
Plus, Louis Farrakhan as assured him VIP accommodations on the space wheel.
Let's take the Zappos approach to politicians. Of course, you'd have to put a lot more on the table than three grand to convince any of them not to run for reelection.
Obama has been using the Bush playbook, and the opposition party seems intent on playing along, right down to nominating a mot-too-likable Massachusetts flip-flopper.
"I think it's ridiculous to pressure the incumbent candidate to step down, especially to cede the floor to the person he beat to get the job in the first place."
Except Obama didn't really beat her. He was given the nomination when the DNC split up Florida's and Michigan's ballots. Without that intervention, Obama v Hillary would have gone to a floor vote at the DNC Convention.
Obama was given the nomination by a committee of insiders
Scott M,
How can you not still be [a John Anderson fan]?
OK, OK, there's more than one. Actually there's probably many thousand. I meant the third-party Pres. candidate.
If you mention John Adams in the SF Bay Area, no one's going to know whether you mean the composer or the Second President (or the other composer, who goes by John Luther Adams for precisely this reason). And UC/Berkeley's music librarian was (and maybe still is -- the Cal Web site is balking at the music faculty list for some reason) a noted Handel scholar named John Roberts, who is not Chief Justice of SCOTUS.
wv: nouts. "nuts" with an "o" in the middle?
Obama WILL be the nominee. If he steps down, or if he loses in a primary, the Dem's lose their hold on the black vote.
We've been told that opposition to Obama is racism, and there will be enough blacks who would view Obama's removal as racism.
@Blagoh: What part of this do you think is racist? I didn't see it at all on a quick look-through.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
@Blagoh: What part of this do you think is racist? I didn't see it at all on a quick look-through
Sarcasm/Irony alert…please have your sarcasm detector adjusted…ANY criticism of Obama, that is not based on his FAILURE to be MORE LEFTIST, is, INHERENTLY RACIST!
Grand Moff Obama: "Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances."
Grand Moff Obama: "Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances."
Erudite, but what constitutes his 2 meter opening...and you can't say Joe Biden.
I wrote this a few months back:
"Think for a minute how massively stupid the Dems really are. They were going to take the White House in 2008. They already had both houses of Congress with a veto proof majority in the Senate. They had Hillary Clinton ready to be the first woman President. Their media cheerleaders had destroyed Bush and they were ready to take control for at least 16 years. The Repubs had (and continue to have) a lackluster field of re-treads and marginal potential candidates. Just say President Michelle Bachmann or President Ron Paul without snickering. And the Dems blew all that to elect an arrogant, smooth talking snake oil salesman. Just because of the color of his skin. Megadumb."
Still think I'm right.
Scott M wrote:
[W]hat constitutes his 2 meter opening...
How about this? Wamp rat size at least.
Glenn wrote: And the Dems blew all that to elect an arrogant, smooth talking snake oil salesman. Just because of the color of his skin. Megadumb.
Well, I hope you're right that they blew it completely, but it remains to be seen what happens in 2012. If Obama holds on and wins, it will teach the Democrats another lesson, that no matter how incompetent and corrupt their party's candidates may be, they can still hold on and win through a combination of: their cheerleaders in the press, divisive, class-warfare rhetoric, union thuggery, and massive electoral fraud.
A. Should he not run because to do so would be bad for how he is regarded in history?
B. Should he not run because to do so would be bad for his party?
C. Should he not run because to do so would be bad for the country?
D. Should he not run because I dislike him as president?
********
A. My guess is that his image in history is more or less locked in. I doubt a second term would make much difference, unless he really blows. Then he would be well advised not to run.
All this must be taken with the caveat that, for the foreseeable future, history will be written by the Left, so Obama will come off as exceeding George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
B. The potential effect on the Democratic Party is hard to predict. I would like to think he would do sour people on liberalism that he would end up hastening a realignment in favor of limited government and fiscal responsibility. And I would like to think that's already happened, but I'm not sure sure it has.
C. Hell, yeah. Step down!
D. Hell, yeah. Step down!
This falls under the category of "The Insane Shrill of Hillary supporters."
They are worse than the Palin supporters - but apparently just as blind in their allegiance.
Hilarious and maddening at the same time. What's particulary absurd is to think Hillary would be conservative enough to break the partisan gridlock. Are they kidding?
Kurt:
They already lost the Senate supermajority and control of the House and much more important over 600 Dems at state, county, and city level. The few remaining Dems in competitive districts are running scared. And the ones who lost are PO'ed. Soooo ... I'm guessing there are a lot of Dems who are saying to themselves "What were we thinking?" Or they could be thinking "We can't possibly lose to any of the mooks the R's are gonna put up so what the hell? We can always use executive orders for the next 4 years, the press is with us so go for it." I dunno.
Erudite, but what constitutes his 2 meter opening...and you can't say Joe Biden.
Unemployment. The Republicans don't have to say anything else - they can just keep hammering him on UE and they win.
increase it's [sic] chances
Oh no - you too, Althouse?
Well, I could pick certain aspects of Althouse's post apart-
But, I won't.
It's good to see her write again-
And, I encourage it. It's why I stayed here in the first place.
Just say President Michele Bachmann or President Ron Paul without snickering.
Why? Because the MSM has taught you to snicker at them? If, by some miracle, either Bachmann or Paul should be the Republican candidate then it will be Bachmann or Paul against Obama. Bachmann's words against Obama's words...unfiltered. Yes, the MSM will do its damndest to mock her but millions will get to hear her words direct and I guarantee she'll wipe the floor with Obama. Same for Paul. And at the end of the process we'll have a SERIOUS president, ready willing and able to grapple with our dead serious problems.
Unemployment. The Republicans don't have to say anything else - they can just keep hammering him on UE and they win.
The trouble is the Republican's can't help themselves, and will soon be talking about how we need the right to torture Iranians and Arabs, put Christianity first in the hearts of all the world's people where it belongs, and some new incarnation of the birther issue.
How the hell can you take Ron Paul seriously as a President??
Monetary policy--HELL YA--all day-
But, the dude is totally out there on domestic and foreign policy-
Paultards are just as nuts as libtards....in my book
I still think that the end game will be that Obama will have to announce his ill health. Some sort of degenerative disease that would make it impossible to continue four more years as President. Something that would be made worse by the terrible stress of the Presidency. Maybe something like Parkinson's.
Sooooo....for the good of the American People (for whom he really doesn't give a shit) and the Democrat Party (for which he probably cares for slightly more than the bitter clingers he is forced to pander to), he will fall on his sword.
Or more accurately be pushed onto the sword.
BTW, the people that are saying "it is now impossible" for anyone other than Obama to head the Dem banner - are dead wrong. It hasn't happened yet in Presidential politics, a nominee or incumbent dropping dead or dropping out at the close of the election cycle - but has happened with other races.
A friend who dabbles in conspiracy theories (hi J.R.!) claims that Obama has already outlived his usefulness, and if he seems destined to lose in 2012, someone like George Soros -- someone very much like George Soros, in fact -- will arrange for one of those Tragic Events that seem to periodically befall American presidents. That way the Democratic successor candidate (not Biden) can run on a platform of "I'll fulfill our martyred hero's dreams, but if you elect those murderous RethugliKKKan scum they'll bring back slavery, legalize rape, and make sure that the Evil One Percent steal all your money." It'll be the Paul Wellstone funeral writ large.
I don't think that'll happen. But it's an interesting scenario, isn't it?
Only Romney is competitive with Obama in recent polls.
oh, snort, C4. I know you're stupid, but come on.
Everybody is paying attention to the Republican primary, because there is a very high probability we will be selecting our next President.
People who respond to these polls are hoping to influence this process. I imagine liberals want the most liberal Republican they can find. Independents want the most moderate Republican they can find.
But Republicans will pick our strongest candidate. And, newsflash to C4, he will be pro-Israel. So go back to your tent, Mr. 99%.
Paultards are just as nuts as libtards....in my book
LOL. The nightmare scenario for the Republican party.
Obama: "I killed Osama bin Laden."
Paul: "I think we're to blame for 9/11."
I would just cry.
Contempt for everyone else is a bad default position.
Da-reaming! yeah-Obama is just gonna bow out.
I can see that you all are solidly behind-who again?
Yall never let me down.
A couple of things.
First, I think that a couple of the posters are correct - that dumping Obama will cause his Black supporters to revolt. Big Time.
Secondly, also as pointed out, unless Obama bails by the end of the year, the Dems won't be able to get Hillary! on the ballot. A majority of states are run by Republicans now, and they aren't about to let that happen.
Which leaves Joe Biden. If Obama quits, and Hillary! is not on the ballot in enough states (as would be likely), then the Dems have Joe Biden as their nominee, since he will be, in fact, on those ballots, where Hillary! isn't.
So, if the Dems don't replace Obama pronto, but do it later, they most likely will have Joe Biden as their nominee, and that should scare the bejezess out of any thinking Democrat.
But, the timing doesn't look at all good. Congess is going to be out for a good chunk of the rest of the year, and I don't think that the Dems are going to be able to ease him out until spring or summer - which would likely be much to late.
That said, the one thing that might save the Dems if they push Obama out before the convention are all the super delegates. They typically don't come into the convention pledged, and, thus, could throw their votes, maybe, to Hillary!
Should be interesting.
Not only will he not run in the General election, he will be prevented from running by legal challlenges, with standing, to his eligibility.
Althouse should read Betsy's Page today. Betsy and a lot of us aren't as sanguine about our country's future if Obama is reelected.
A really interesting blog.
Post a Comment