« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Could Obama actually lose?

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)  |  December 6th, 2010 at 10:45 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The more I think about it, the more I really wonder if Obama could lose in 2012. Consider what was supposed to be making people support him and his party in 2008:

[ ] Lower the seas
[ ] Stop the "bailouts"
[ ] Free the GTMO prisoners
[ ] End the fighting in Iraq
[ ] End the fighting Afghanistan
[ ] Don't fly regular Predator missions in Pakistan
[ ] End the "Bush Tax Cuts"
[ ] Free people from the "tyranny" of having to buy medical insurance
[ ] Allow openly gay people to serve in the military
[ ] Replace a Supreme Court justice opposed to Casey
[ ] Cap and Trade
[ ] End the secret ballot for union certification
[ ] World respect at venues like Copenhagen, Olympics, World Cup
[ ] Lower unemployment
[ ] Reduce dependence on foreign oil

But then what have they achieved?

[X] Freebies for wealthy fatcats at Planned Parenthood
[X] Freebies for wealthy fatcats at UAW
[X] Sweetheart deal for medical insurance companies
[X] Defeat of DeMint earmark ban
[X] Put America's first open race bigoted woman on the Supreme Court
[X] Put the King of Queens on the Supreme Court
[X] Minimum wage increase
[X] Minimum wage increase waiver for places where the Pelosi family has business interests

What am I missing?

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • thurman

    n/t

  • belcatar

    He was going to provide child care to every working mother and round up loose nuclear material.

    Well, as far as working mothers, a lot less of them are actually working, so they can do their own child care now. I don’t know how things are going with that loose nuclear material. The Iranians seem to have theirs closely guarded, as do the North Koreans.

  • d_lamar

    Increase our dependence on middle east oil through total ban on domestic drilling

    Cap and trade to be achieved through epa regulation of co2

    Nationalized health care

    Perpetual unemployment benefits

    Probably at least one more marxist on the Supreme Court

  • SoFiMil

    .

  • Tbone

    the oceans really haven’t risen noticiably and Gitmo will close just as soon as the lease in perpetuity runs out.

  • powertothepeople

    if we are prepared to beat him. And that is what worries me.

  • speciallist

    let the left do the worrying…if double Zero doesn’t run, they have Nobody…

    and I mean Nobody to run in 2012 and if he does run he’s toast…even against Sarah

  • spainishirish

    It won’t be easy, though. If we are smart and focus on who can win rather than who we like and nominate that person, we likely win, It also will be important to avoid the Demolition Derby primary we had in 2008 because he will have tons of money, Obama is gone unless things turns around for him in the next few months or we do something stupid. The former doesn’t appear to be in the cards and I hope the latter can be avoided.

    As far as sea levels, this is a guy who couldn’t get oil cleaned up on beaches, for God’s sake. Governing is hard.

  • Menlo
  • acat

    I’m expecting him to finish his term, because nobody wants to say President Biden… but I’m not expecting him to win the Dem nomination in 2012.

    It would take challenges on the left and center to do him in, but it is possible … and given the Dem predilection for smoke-filled rooms, it may not even be put to a primary.

    Mew

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    Both sides have a history of putting “bad” candidates forward.

    Yeah, McCain was not the best Republican Candidate, but was Obama actually the “best” Democrat? Hillary was. Bush won re-election because Kerry was a horrible candidate. Neither Bush nor Gore were great candidates. Clinton won re-election because Dole was a McCain precursor. Clinton won against Bush Sr. because Sr. was a horrible candidate. I don’t recall if there actually was a better Democrat candidate in that 92 primary field. Sr. was horrible from the get-go, but Dukakis was worse. Reagan was the great candidate twice, which is why he beat two horrible Democrat candidates, Carter and Mondale. Carter was horrible from the get-go, but he won under slightly similar circumstances to Obama; not a Republican.

    Focusing on who can win though instead of who we like could give the Republican party its own “Obama”, and if the Republican party is trying to reform, stay solvent and in power, the upper eschelons on down to the voters better not be so pragmatic. Going with pragmatism first may win the you the game but you could lose the pot in the process.

    People make candidates winnable who under normal circumstances should not be. You can stick to principles over pragmatism and still win. Reagan proved it. Marco Rubio with Erick Erickson proved it.

  • jomo2009

    trying to make the country safe for smokers again.

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    I’ve read quite a lot of articles from even before Obama won the presidency that said he’d be a one termer. The articles continue to be written saying the same thing, only with more consistency and stronger circumstantial evidences.

    The man was pegged as a neo-Carter before he even got into office and he seems to be doing a bang-up job of fulfilling those prophecies so far.

    The real question is whether or not he’ll even run for re-election. His resume’ is a track record of rarely completing any job, of rarely staying long at any job/position. His wife has already noted how she does not like being at the White House.

    He’s a patsy. He’s doing his level best to cark things up and doing a pretty good job of it. Before he even became president he was becoming and feeding an international following. I suspect that the general populace of the world still finds him more favorable to George W. Bush. Obama can retire after one term and go global, either to make more money or to climb politically higher (UN) following in the coattails (however feebly) of Bill Clinton.

    I believe a serious argument can be made that Obama will probably not run in 2012, and many have already made such sound arguments. I believe that even if Obama does run again, he stands to be soundly defeated. Sound arguments have been made and the midterm election only adds weight to them.

  • http://wadingacross.wordpress.com logus

    is yet another ruse.

    She’s said she’s done after the SoS position.

    It’s rare that such high level WH staffers last thru a whole administration. Under normal circumstances, whether or not Hillary was the SoS, I could see the individual stepping down come January or February.

    That Hillary has mud on her face after what has come out due to Wikileaks in my mind more easily opens the door for her to resign. Whether she really should resign due to Wikileaks or not, and whether she is now a liability to the WH abroad or not, the situation gives her the perfect excuse to retire. If she waits until after the Wikileaks media circus wanes, she can shrug off most of the mud and resign with some dignity. She can then come back in a year as a presidential contender. There are many Democrats who would most certainly see her as a “savior” to the party, and she still has many supporters and fans.

  • thurman

    Also you read the articles about him being sooo smart that he gets “bored” with the mundaneness of actually governing– presumably compared to the narcissistic adrenaline high of the campaign trail where he was a de facto rock star with swooning crowds

    I could see him becoming petulant and increasingly frustrated for the next 2 years now not getting what he wants and having to compromise his lofty ideals and walking away

    Remember, he and his wife and just gotten a taste of affluence the last few years with his book money and they do seem to like it– he could fancy himself walking away from the sleaziness of politics and becoming the next Al Gore or Bono type global liberal celebrity advocate…

  • acat

    an entirely viable one… although I’m not sure Bill has enough cred with unions to pull them away… and Hillary would need a pretty big chunk of the Dem coalition to win the primary…

    Of course, there’s also the possibility that Bill gets to be the one to sit Obama down and say something like “Look, you can’t win the election against any of these Republican candidates. You’re done. Now go get me some coffee.”

    Mew

  • SoulEspresso

    Ross Perot.

    Not saying either was a great candidate, but any Republican would have been swimming upstream those years.

  • SoulEspresso

    … for the GOP?

  • jakota

    Zero won’t run because too many states will have passed “Proof of Eligibility” laws for him to qualify!

  • spainishirish

    I’m not talking about some poll-driven squish–Dole and McCain were the two worst Republican candidates in my lifetime. But we don’t want some Bladerunner when the stakes are this high, either. I don’t see principle and pragmatism as always an either/or proposition. The American people as a whole are much closer to the positions people here embrace. It is who offers those principles, and how, that will determine if we win. What I meant by “like” is personality more than principle, particularly in 2012.

  • throwback59

    make us a post-racial nation.
    We all know how well that worked out.

  • powertothepeople

    if you want to keep Neil, Moe, Bill or the other mods from kicking you out, I would suggest you follow house rules and never again bring up the ignorant Birther talk.