OFFLINE

Democrats wonder aloud if 'weak' Obama can win again



President Barack Obama is facing mounting doubts within his own party about his re-election prospects, with fellow Democrats beginning to ask if Hillary Clinton would have made a better president.

Mr Obama's capitulation to Republicans in the recent tussle over deficit reduction is being seen as the lowest point of his presidency and the latest in a series of blows to the liberal agenda.

Faced with the staunch opposition of the Tea Party contingent of the Republican Party, he agreed to widespread cuts in government spending without winning any revenue increases in exchange.

Finding it hard to defend his often listless and repetitive performances, Democratic strategists and commentators are privately agreeing with Republicans and comparing Mr Obama to Jimmy Carter, another Democrat who remains the post-war benchmark for a failed president.

'Do-gooder'

"He is a do-gooder at heart," said Morris Reid, a Washington consultant and former Clinton official. "He thinks everyone has the same agenda to do the right thing, but other people don't have the same agenda. Their agenda is to score points and get their party re-elected.

"This is the downside of him not being terribly political like Bill Clinton was. Bill Clinton woke up every day relishing this kind of fight, and Hillary is just a tougher person. The Clintons are much more combative, they are always ready to go to Defcon 1 ('war is imminent' state)."

Mr Reid added that the president remained a formidable campaigner and fundraiser and should not be ruled out of the fight in 2012. But he said some Democrats were feeling "buyer's remorse" for selecting the president in his epic battle with Mrs Clinton for the 2008 Democratic nomination."The notion everyone is talking about is 'is he Jimmy Carter, will he be a one-term president'," he said.

Gary Pearce, a Democratic strategist in North Carolina, a swing state Mr Obama is likely to struggle to retain in 2012, said: "Democrats are worried. He looks weak, he doesn't say anything that grabs you, and people are looking for some kind of magic."

He said some activists were asking "do we need someone tougher to fight the Tea Party? You see a yearning for a Bill Clinton-type approach and Hillary would reflect that. Obama is just a different political animal," he added.

Mr Obama's approval rating has fallen dramatically since the killing of Osama bin Laden in early May, and he has failed to outline a vision for how he will improve chronic unemployment and a housing market in which one if five mortgage holders are in negative equity.

A 2012 primary challenge by Mrs Clinton is regarded as unlikely, but a growing number of party activists and old hands are hoping that she changes her mind. On his nightly television show, liberal host Bill Maher dismissed Mr Obama as a Republican, and asked his panel if Mrs Clinton would have made a better president.

An article in 'The New York Times' by Drew Westen, a professor of psychology at Emory University and a specialist in political messaging, summarised the dismay at Mr Obama's performance. "Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president," he wrote. (© Daily Telegraph, London)

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/democrats-wonder-aloud-if-weak-obama-can-win-again-2844154.html

OFFLINE

aww, poor obama and poor democraps. things don't always go your way when you don't have a supermajority do they? he's absolutely in over his head, and never should have been elected. and the fact that even democrats are starting to figure this out, gives me a small measure of joy. the bottom line is, obama is a one trick pony. he's far too ideological and inexperienced to change his tune. he keeps making all these prime time speeches and national addresses, and everytime, people still hold their breath as if he's going to unveil some new tack or new strategy that will actually help us, and then he just comes out and repeats the same old talking points we've heard from him for years.

OFFLINE

I don't think its possible for anyone to be considered a competent president with a divided government these days.  A large part of this problem is that too many idiots in our country were apparently spending more time chasing skirts than paying attention during their 6th and 12th grade government classes.  They seem to forget that the president can not make laws, nor is it his responsibility to force congress to do their jobs.  The only official influence the president has over legislation it to veto it, however the Republicans have taken away this power by mixing crap legislation with provisions that are needed to keep the government working and giving them to him at the 11th hour, so that if he vetos it there is no time to pass another law.  What choice does he have, sacrifice the country for ideology or sign something unsavory?  Also, compromise is not a bad thing.  Those on both sides that hold to the mantra 'my way or the highway' need a good smack upside their overly thick craniums.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:
the president can not make laws, nor is it his responsibility to force congress to do their jobs.

that defense only works for democrats. if it's a republican president in office, then he is the owner of all the problems.

OFFLINE

Obama's done.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Obama's done.

Well, given the republican hopefuls debate last night, who is going to "do" him so?

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Obama's done.

I doubt it.  From watching the debates last night I think you guys better be praying Rick Perry can turn things around, because the contestants sucked.  Pawlenty and Bachmann came off looking like childish idiots.  Newt looked like overly smug and acted like an utter ass (at one point laying into Chris Wallace for asking a 'gotcha' question about his record).  The health care law and most everything else Romney did as governor is going to keep biting him in the ass (and proving him to be a complete hypocrite).  Santorum didn't come off very well, but I don't know how seriously anyone has ever taken him.  I like how Herman Cain tends to break down complex problems into smaller, simpler components (it sounds like a really good method of making a huge problem solvable), but thats the only positive thing I can say about someone who's primary method is to stoke fear of a minority and use it to garner support (kinda ironic considering who he is).  From what I've hear out of the final two, I actually harbor some amount of respect for them (although I deeply disagree with many of their views).  One of them should never be allowed a spot at 1600 Pennsylvania (although it would be damn interesting), and the other is too reasonable to ever be elected.

OFFLINE

Rick Perry could destroy him.
Bachman could beat him.
Romney could beat him.

Actually I could live with any of the GOP hopefuls except Ron Paul.  (That guy's a nut).

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Rick Perry could destroy him.

I don't know about that, Texas hasn't exactly flourished under his leadership.  For example:

*32% of Texans failed to graduate from high school
*Texas students SAT scores rank 49th in the nation for verbal and 46th in math, making Texas's school system one of the worst in the nation.  Perry turned down federal money for schools.
*Only a quarter of Texans hold BA/BS or higher degrees
*Texas has the fifth highest poverty rate in the US (16.2% of population below poverty line, compared with national 12.6% below poverty.  Texas only beats Mississippi, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Alabama).
*Texas has one of the highest incarceration rates in the nation and ranks 15th in the nation for violent crime
*Texas has 5th highest teen pregnancy rate in nation, and 2nd highest teen live birth rate
*Texas has the highest percent of individuals lacking health insurance in the United States

As bad as things have gotten in the US, a little more Texas style leadership in the White House will likely only make things worse.  More over, you can bet Bachmann, Romney, and Obama are going to use these stats to destroy him.  I doubt Ron Paul will.

Bachman could beat him.

I really doubt that, she's a religious fanatic.  She couldn't even hold a job on a school board without getting fired for trying to insert Christianity into the public school's curriculum.  She's a sham candidate, and Romney and Perry will destroy her for it.

Romney could beat him.

I doubt it, the main grievance the GOP/Tea folks keep raising against Obama and the Democrats is "Obamacare," which as you know was partially modeled after the health care act Romney endorsed as governor.  Bachmann, Paul, and Perry will be sure to use this to drag him through the mud in primaries.

Actually I could live with any of the GOP hopefuls except Ron Paul.  (That guy's a nut).

I respect him more than any of his rivals.  At least his ideology is consistent.  So far as I can tell all individuals that harbor socially and politically conservative views (ie most Tea Party and GOP types) are hypocrites.  How can you in one breath say you want the government out of your bank account and in the next you want it in your neighbors bedroom?

If the GOP actually wanted a chance at winning the White House they'd throw their weight behind Huntsman.  He's conservative enough to represent most conservatives (perhaps not Tea folk, but they're the outspoken fringe), yet moderate enough to threaten Obama over moderate democrats.  With Perry, Romney, or Bachmann I'd expect moderates to either vote blue or stay home.  Further, Huntsman has enough honor to try to run a clean, civil campaign (probably why he's doing so poorly in the poles, unfortunately people keep rewarding irresponsible campaign tactics while punishing the honest).

OFFLINE

i just wonder how long it is before the left brands perry with "bush's third term" because he's from texas and shares a similar accent. as for obama, i mean, if he isn't done for, he'll have to buy his way back into office, and i just don't know if the coffers or the excitement is there this time. this country has really suffered under his leadership (or lack there of) in so many ways, and the latest gallop poll reflects this, with just a 39% approval rating.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:

Actually I could live with any of the GOP hopefuls except Ron Paul.  (That guy's a nut).

I respect him more than any of his rivals.  

That really doesnt surprise me.

OFFLINE

i actually don't think ron paul is quite as mad as i once did, but is still a bit of a loon.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:


Bachman could beat him.

I really doubt that, she's a religious fanatic.  She couldn't even hold a job on a school board without getting fired for trying to insert Christianity into the public school's curriculum.  She's a sham candidate, and Romney and Perry will destroy her for it.

Why?  Because she spoke her views on 'submitting to her husband' when asked?  Gotta tellya that there are a whole LOT of Christians out there who, even if they arent in agreement with that bit, will vote for her simply because she's a Christian and not afraid to say so.  And truth is, you athiests / agnostics are outnumbered.

As for her being a sham candidate...I dunno about her job on the school board, but she has done well in Congress and been re-elected as well.

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

I doubt it, the main grievance the GOP/Tea folks keep raising against Obama and the Democrats is "Obamacare," which as you know was partially modeled after the health care act Romney endorsed as governor.  Bachmann, Paul, and Perry will be sure to use this to drag him through the mud in primaries.

They will.  But you liberals go ahead and keep thinking that Obama's record doesnt really matter. Lol!  Bachman and Perry may continue to make an issue of it, but the people in this country are so sick of Obama and his abysmal record...and this economy, that they are willing to vote in practically anyone other than Obama.  Other than the bin Laden killing where Obama simply gave the go-ahead to get him, the President has absolutely no record whatsoever he can run on.  The ONLY thing he can possibly do is attempt to demonize the opposition.  Even the dumbest conservative or independent doesnt believe that raising taxes will help create jobs and improve our economy.  And thats what Obama has been telling us for years.

The only way Obama wins imo, is if Ron Paul somehow miraculously wins the nomination for GOP.  And that just wont happen.

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:
If the GOP actually wanted a chance at winning the White House they'd throw their weight behind Huntsman.  He's conservative enough to represent most conservatives (perhaps not Tea folk, but they're the outspoken fringe), yet moderate enough to threaten Obama over moderate democrats.  With Perry, Romney, or Bachmann I'd expect moderates to either vote blue or stay home.  Further, Huntsman has enough honor to try to run a clean, civil campaign (probably why he's doing so poorly in the poles, unfortunately people keep rewarding irresponsible campaign tactics while punishing the honest).

Moderates are the ones who got us into trouble.  Moderate GOPs (Rinos) are the ones who spent all that money in the Bush era.  Conservatives are sick of Rinos.  They are exactly why the Tea Party emerged.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
i actually don't think ron paul is quite as mad as i once did, but is still a bit of a loon.

Allow Iran to get the nuclear bomb after all the threats they have made?  Plus legalize ALL drugs, pot, ****, heroin, etc?  A bit of a loon?  The man is insane.

OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Rick Perry could destroy him.
Bachman could beat him.
Romney could beat him.

Actually I could live with any of the GOP hopefuls except Ron Paul.  (That guy's a nut).

Irony:

A conservative who labels the only true conservative candidate "a nut".