Sunday, August 22, 2010
Here's a Question for You, Folks
Will President Obama face a primary challenge in 2012? And, if in fact this does happen, will that challenge emerge from the left (a Howard Dean, say), or will it come from the right (an Evan Bayh, perhaps)? As a centrist, my preference would obviously be for the latter to happen.................................................................................................But, folks, you also have to consider this little fact. The last two occasions that a President faced a primary challenge, he ended up losing the general election; Ford in '76 (challenged by Reagan) and Carter in '80 (challenged by Kennedy). So, unless you're secretly (or perhaps not so secretly) wishing for President Obama to lose next time, you're probably not going to be interested in seeing him being challenged. This, though, clearly, it WOULD indeed be interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
Will,
I'd expect the DLC and all Dems to work together to prevent any challenge other than maybe a token, just cause Obama's support is shaky among what should be his base.
Anything more than a token attempt IMO would weaken him.
Voter dissatisfaction will hurt them but IMO not as badly as some think, most of the anger is directed at the incumbent rather than Dems in particular. Even with low Dem turnout I don't see a sea change, maybe the loss of several seats but Obama really chose to do nothing with his lead anyway so this actually strengthens his pro-business policy. He can continue to cater to business interests and blame Republicans, partisan Dems will continue to give the POTUS a pass.
A primary challenger? I'd say one could come from the left, which even with my dissatisfaction with Obama is too close to suicide in this climate.
Gentlemen, this would seem to be a very bad year for the Democrats. They do, however, have one very important thing going for them. They're not the Republicans. Yes, the independents are seemingly running away from Obama. But I just don't see them running in the direction of Angle and that bunch, either. My suspicion is that Oso probably has it about right; the Dems will definitely lose some seats, but probably not enough to lose either house......Wow, Will tnp as a prognosticator. Now THAT is scary.
I think you guys are dead wrong....this year the dems will lose control of the house but maintain the senate and Pelosi will be gone,although I'm not that keen on the Orange Man being speaker.
You guys always focus on the republican kooks like Angel,Rand and Bachman but never mention Ryan,Cantor,Christie,Jeb Bush and their like.It must be the talking points of the left to point at the wing nuts.
Yea, I think Obie is in for a rough ride the next two years and if unemployment remains close to 10% he's a one term president no matter what his base does.People vote with their wallets.
That's a fair point, Russ. Too bad that it wasn't Jeb who got elected in 2000......And Ryan HAS put forth a credible budget proposal. Unfortunately, he has only 13 co-sponsors for it in the House. Not a lot of courage these days, my friend - on either side of the aisle.
Oh, Ryan's proposal is a solution?
Basically, it cuts all social programs but continues to fund the military industrial complex and drops all corporate income taxes along with lowering the taxes on the wealthiest but increasing them on the middle class..
Not realistic at all....
At least he's put forth something (I'll admit that I haven't examined it closely). Most of the Republicans haven't been specific at all (as to where they'd cut spending, etc.).
And Ryan HAS put forth a credible budget proposal.
Then;
(I'll admit that I haven't examined it closely).
But you claim it is credible, with out actually reading it?
Interesting one will.
I took Chris Matthews' word for it; the fact that there are supposedly tangible budget cuts in it (as opposed to the smoke and screen stuff of guys like Pete Sessions, etc.)......What are you trying to make trouble for? Or are you just angry in general?
Neither just pointing out a glaring contradiction, you stated something is reasonable but you then admit you haven't even read it.
Chris Matthews hasn't either or you both would know Ryan's proposal is nothing more then the continuation of the rolling back of the Insurance net FDR created (unemployment, SS, and the medicare/medicaid programs LBJ added FDR wanted)which has backstopped the middle class. The republicans go after it because they want a return to the Gilded Age where they was a very small upper class of extremely wealthy, a small middle class, and 90% of the population was poor and readily able to be exploited like happened before reform and regulations outlawed that. PS one of the real reasons the economy crashed back then, too much wealth in the hands of too few people to support a booming economy. Sort of where 30 years of republican ideals have gotten us back to.
That is why the republicans refuse to openly advertised their real plans.
Sort of the way Bush claimed he was not going to nation build even though the invade Iraq and colonize it for big oil plan PNAC had were being finalized by Cheney Rumsfeld ET AL.
Republicans want lazzie-faire for the masses but government handouts and give aways for the rich and corporations, which is why every budget item they scream for being paid for except tax cuts.
And they lie about the FACT that tax cuts CUT revenue,
Reagan's did which started ballooning the debt, even though he raised total federal taxes on the middle class and poor, he just took the higher taxes the middle class and poor were paying and used the money to cover up how much money he was giving from the middle class and poor to the rich.
Bill Clinton got it under control for a short while till Bush Jr exploded the deficit and debt with his give $300 to every one so the rich could reap millions tax cuts.
Anonymouse say.....all conservative bad kemosabe....all liberal good.
All the libs that bash conservative economic policy always point to Clinton as a guiding light but they never mention the high tech bubble that fueled the economy most of the 90's.They also never mention what happend when that bubble burst.Pretty damn similar to the housing bubble.
They also conviently never seem to want to talk about how the dems screwed the pooch with Fanny and Freddy,the prime driver of the mortgage meltdown.
Yes,Obie did indeed walk into a recession,but what has he and his economic wizards done to improve the situation? You cannot spend your way out of this.Remember when they siad the stimulus was necessary to keep unemployment under 8%...that was pure bullshit.How many "gifts" have they doled out to the SEIU,UAW and the AFL-CIO? Over 50% of americans now want Obamcare done away with.
When Obie was running for president all the libs were wetting their pants over his speeches...."OMG...he's the second coming,he's a Harvard grad,he's so smart,he speaks so well,if he's president the world will love us again." Well kids,hows it going?
More good news for Obie today...existing homes sales dropped to a 15 year low and this happened when mortgage rates are low and housing prices are also low.Bad news for "the one."
Upon hearing this Barry was quoted as say.."whens our tee time?"
Anonymouse say.....all conservative bad kemosabe....all liberal good.
As usual ignore the facts and attack the messenger eh rusty?
Attack the messenger? Facts...existing home sales the lowest in 15 years.with low mortgage rates and low prices!
Fact...unemployment continues at almost 10% while Obie said the stimulus would keep it under 8%!
Fact...when the housing news came out today Barry said..."whats our tee time?"
They also conviently never seem to want to talk about how the dems screwed the pooch with Fanny and Freddy,the prime driver of the mortgage meltdown.
Over 66% of the sub prime loans were sold by NON regulated mortgage brokers who went to Wall Street to unload them, NOT Fannie or Freddie.
Those loans were requested by Wall Street bankers to re-bundle as CDO's which were then sold as triple a investments which were made up of slices of loans of lower quality.
Former Enron Senator Phil Gramm actually slipped in the Securities Deregulation & Credit Default Swaps in 2000 and the ENRON LOOPHOLE that was the beginning of the end of our economy, because the Wall Street ideal was keep borrowing money on higher limits based on an inflated net worth (mostly inflated home prices) and nothing bad will ever happen, which is why the CDO equations the "quants" used had no provision for catastrophic losses.
Perhaps if it (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act) had not been slipped into an omnibus spending bill at the
last minutes an had actually been read and fully understood then we wouldn't have many of the current problems sub-prime mortgages, jobs the economy.
Countrywide was at the center and he couldn't sell loans to Freddie or Fannie just wall street.
Any regulations brought to the floor of the House & Senate from 2002 to 2006 were blocked by the GObpers who were in control of the House and Senate during that time.
Sorry but the right wing spin it is all fannie or freddie's fault is simply another big lie you and other right wing propagandists keep repeating.
Hmmmm....no mention of Barney Franks involvment with F&F.Maybe you just forgot about him.Or perhaps you fail to lay blame on his doorstep because he's a lib.
Hmmm....and no mention of Chris Dodds involvement with Countrywide.Maybe you just forgot about that also.
Fact....Obie's stimulus will cost more then the entire Iraq war.
Damnmit.....It's all Bush's fault...no wait...it's Reagan's fault...yea,thats it....it's Reagan's fault...wait a minute....that friggin Ike was the cause...yea that right it's because of Ike,Reagan and Bush...no wait...that prick Nixon was there...yea thats it...Nixon's fault....O.K.,it was Ike,Nixon,Reagan and Bush's fault...come to think of it that S.O.B. Lincoln started all this shit......yea thats the ticket.
When informed that the Dow dropped 130 points today Obie said..."damn...I should have birdied 15 today but I three putted and ended up with bogey."
1) I said that it was "credible" (this, in that it actually does have tangible cuts and has been looked at by the CBO), not that I would necessarily agree with it all. 2) I said that I hadn't "examined it closely", not that I was totally unaware of what it contained. 3) I think it's fair to say that we ALL comment on things that we aren't experts on (aren't you the same guy who said that Transjordan and Palestine were synonymous?). 4) And, plus, like Rusty said, it's very difficult to have a discussion with people whose mind tends to looks at everything with such a dichotomous thinking. VERY DIFFICULT.
Fact.....In 7th grade little Barry Obama got a D in math.....he blamed the low grade on George Bush.
And, plus, like Rusty said, it's very difficult to have a discussion with people whose mind tends to looks at everything with such a dichotomous thinking.
Ummm, will;
Rusty is the epitome of dichotomous thinking,
But for some reason Voltron and Rusty always get a free pass on that one, here.
It's a bit quizical that anonymouse never has a retort when negative facts pertaining to "the one" are presented.
Mouse has noting to say about the housing market news.
He cannot squeek about the near 10% unemployment rate.
All he can do when he finds his way out of the maze is to blame Obie's complete lack of leadership and failures on Reagan and Bush.
I wonder how many dems will want Obie campaigning for them the next 70 days?
Anonymous, I disagreed with Voltron on the Muslim/Mosque controversy. And Rusty knows how I feel about Fox. I'm civil with these guys because they're civil with me......And to be fair to Rusty, he's admitted on many occasions that Beck and Hannity are lunatics who he doesn't like to watch. So, yes, he is consistent in certain regards.
Post a Comment