Dems Look To Hillary: Bad News For Barry Hussein

Aug 2011
448
0
California
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
By PATRICK H. CADDELL
AND DOUGLAS E. SCHOEN
Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944.html?mod=ITP_opinion_0

When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality?and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor?one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president's administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern?not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He?like everyone else?knows that they are worse off. ..........<SNIP>

Rest of story: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944.html?mod=ITP_opinion_0
 
Aug 2011
448
0
California
PATRICK H. CADDELL and DOUGLAS E. SCHOEN are two influential and smart Democrats. For them to say this is just another stake in the heart of Obama's pathetic, moronic, failed presidency.
 
Mar 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
Hillary will not be running against Obama. She is fully on board with his policies. She even drags poor ol Bill in to help once in a while.
 
Aug 2011
448
0
California
Hillary will not be running against Obama. She is fully on board with his policies. She even drags poor ol Bill in to help once in a while.

Oh, I agree you are probably right: She won't do it.

But what is notable is that high profile Democrats want her to do it, and that they think Obama will lose.

(BTW: Great avatar.)
 
Aug 2011
758
0
I heard Caddell on Hannity. He's totally pissed that his party has been hijacked by the leftwing extremists, and worries that that they will lose the 2012 election, even against the generally mediocre quality of GOP candidates that have emerged.
 
Aug 2011
448
0
California
I heard Caddell on Hannity. He's totally pissed that his party has been hijacked by the leftwing extremists........
I don't blame him. Harry Truman is probably rolling over in his grave

.........He's totally pissed that his party has been hijacked by the leftwing extremists, and worries that that they will lose the 2012 election, even against the generally mediocre quality of GOP candidates that have emerged.
He is correct. Its better to have a mediocre candidate who is "normal" instead of an extremist OWS baby-killing pro-homosexual freak from your own party.
 
Nov 2011
144
0
Oh, I agree you are probably right: She won't do it.

But what is notable is that high profile Democrats want her to do it, and that they think Obama will lose.

(BTW: Great avatar.)
Wishful thinking , if he is any good why don't he switch party like many others .
 
Aug 2011
758
0
Hillary running would be the best shot for the democrats - fortunately, they are unlikely to do it, if for no other reason than that obama has bought off too many people with his "stimulus" money.
 
Oct 2011
152
0
Second Term

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
By PATRICK H. CADDELL
AND DOUGLAS E. SCHOEN
Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944.html?mod=ITP_opinion_0

When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality?and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor?one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president's administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern?not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He?like everyone else?knows that they are worse off. ..........<SNIP>

Rest of story: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944.html?mod=ITP_opinion_0

I know you are crusading for a WHITE man/woman in the WHITE house but most of the GOP contenders are incompetent when compared to Obama. No one can magically fix the economy which is driven by global forces.
We just have to learn to live in poverty to survive the global competition.
 
Aug 2011
448
0
California
Hillary running would be the best shot for the democrats - fortunately, they are unlikely to do it, if for no other reason than that obama has bought off too many people with his "stimulus" money.

As power hungry as the Clinton's are, only their own vanity & concern on how the public views them surpasses that, and their base would view her negatively if she challenged Obama so that is what keeps her from running.
 
Aug 2011
448
0
California
I know you are crusading for a WHITE man/woman in the WHITE house..............
Well, you are pretty much a ignorant racist aren't you.

Let me give you a little clue: In 1996, polls showed Colin Powell (black and Republican and war hero) beating Clinton. Many of us Republicans wanted him to run. For personal reasons he chose not to, but if he had accepted our call Clinton would have been a one term president and the first black president would have been a Republican with my vote.

And by the way, I would gladly cast my vote for Herman Cain, Allen Wwest, Condi Rice, Michael Steele, JC Watts, or many other blacks for president. And that is because its not about color but about ideas. Obama is an utter failure, and thats why we want him out.

So you can take your ignorant racist charges and shove them
 
Last edited:
Jul 2009
5,893
474
Port St. Lucie
>>>

Bottom line: Barrack Hussein will lose.

Not if the current crop run. Romney will come close but lose same as Kerry did with Bush and for the same reason. That 'other Mormon' might have a shot but he'd have to win the nomination. Everyone else has their support evaporate the moment you force them to run for votes from the whole country rather then us the Repub base.
 
Oct 2011
152
0
Colin Powell realized that he was treated as house slave and resigned from Bush ...

Well, you are pretty much a ignorant racist aren't you.

Let me give you a little clue: In 1996, polls showed Colin Powell (black and Republican and war hero) beating Clinton. Many of us Republicans wanted him to run. For personal reasons he chose not to, but if he had accepted our call Clinton would have been a one term president and the first black president would have been a Republican with my vote.

And by the way, I would gladly cast my vote for Herman Cain, Allen Wwest, Condi Rice, Michael Steele, JC Watts, or many other blacks for president. And that is because its not about color but about ideas. Obama is an utter failure, and thats why we want him out.

So you can take your ignorant racist charges and shove them
Colin Powell realized that he was treated as house slave and resigned from Bush cabinet. Black candidates from Repugs are fielded to give a delusion to black US voters that they are not racist. These candidates will never make it under GOP. The US problems are beyond Dems/Repugs grasp. We need an Independent like 'Ron Paul'. But Dems/Repugs have brainswashed US voters and will alternate power between themselves. They are a joke in the name of democracy.
 
Jul 2009
5,893
474
Port St. Lucie
Sorry but you are deluding yourself, just as the Dems deluded themselves in 2010 about the Congress.

The Dems sill have the Senate and the moderate Dems go thrown out and replaced by hardliner libs. '10 was hardly a victory. Most of the TP politicians that got elected will get run out of DC in '14.
 
Mar 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
The Dems sill have the Senate and the moderate Dems go thrown out and replaced by hardliner libs. '10 was hardly a victory. Most of the TP politicians that got elected will get run out of DC in '14.
It will not happen, but I wish all on both sides get run out of their seats. Why, neglect of duty.
 
Jul 2009
5,893
474
Port St. Lucie
It will not happen, but I wish all on both sides get run out of their seats. Why, neglect of duty.

Too little, we need a new system. Te current system is broken bond repair, we need a new constitution that allows more then 2 parties and streamlines the lawmaking process.
 
Top