Page 1 of 10

Dear President Obama, DON'T RUN AGAIN.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:32 am
by The Republic of Lanos
So the Chicago Tribune's Steve Chapman writes this piece about Obama's reelection campaign:

When Ronald Reagan ran for re-election in 1984, his slogan was "Morning in America." For Barack Obama, it's more like midnight in a coal mine.

The sputtering economy is about to stall out, unemployment is high, his jobs program may not pass, foreclosures are rampant and the poor guy can't even sneak a cigarette.

His approval rating is at its lowest level ever. His party just lost two House elections — one in a district it had held for 88 consecutive years. He's staked his future on the jobs bill, which most Americans don't think would work.

The vultures are starting to circle. Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, "it's going to be impossible for the president to win." Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: "Panic."

But there is good news for the president. I checked the Constitution, and he is under no compulsion to run for re-election. He can scrap the campaign, bag the fundraising calls and never watch another Republican debate as long as he's willing to vacate the premises by Jan. 20, 2013.

That might be the sensible thing to do. It's hard for a president to win a second term when unemployment is painfully high. If the economy were in full rebound mode, Obama might win anyway. But it isn't, and it may fall into a second recession — in which case voters will decide his middle name is Hoover, not Hussein. Why not leave of his own volition instead of waiting to get the ax?

It's not as though there is much enticement to stick around. Presidents who win re-election have generally found, wrote John Fortier and Norman Ornstein in their 2007 book, "Second-Term Blues," that "their second terms did not measure up to their first."

Presidential encores are generally a bog of frustration, exhaustion and embarrassment. They are famous for lowest moments rather than finest hours. Richard Nixon was forced to resign in disgrace, Reagan had the Iran-Contra scandal, and Bill Clinton made the unfortunate acquaintance of Monica Lewinsky.

Administration officials get weary after four years and leave in droves. The junior varsity has to be put into service. New ideas are hard to come by.

Someone said that when a man is smitten with a beautiful woman, he should remember that somebody somewhere is tired of her. Likewise, the most inspiring presidents get stale after years of constant overexposure.

In the event he wins, Obama could find himself with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. Then he will long for the good old days of 2011. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner will bound out of bed each day eager to make his life miserable.

Besides avoiding this indignity, Obama might do his party a big favor. In hard times, voters have a powerful urge to punish incumbents. He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.

The ideal candidate would be a figure of stature and ability who can't be blamed for the economy. That person should not be a member of Congress, since it has an even lower approval rating than the president's.

It would also help to be conspicuously associated with prosperity. Given Obama's reputation for being too quick to compromise, a reputation for toughness would be an asset.

As it happens, there is someone at hand who fits this description: Hillary Clinton. Her husband presided over a boom, she's been busy deposing dictators instead of destroying jobs, and she's never been accused of being a pushover.

Not only that, Clinton is a savvy political veteran who already knows how to run for president. Oh, and a new Bloomberg poll finds her to be merely "the most popular national political figure in America today."

If he runs for re-election, Obama may find that the only fate worse than losing is winning. But he might arrange things so it will be Clinton who has the unenviable job of reviving the economy, balancing the budget, getting out of Afghanistan and grappling with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. Obama, meanwhile, will be on a Hawaiian beach, wrestling the cap off a Corona.


Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/colu ... 512.column

It seems that now his own hometown paper is saying DON'T RUN. Now I beg the question to NSG.
Opinion (to come in compliance): I don't care. He's not in my party. Let them fight it over.

Should the President keep running or should he RAGEQUIT?

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:38 am
by Coffee Cakes
Typically the OP gives an opinion for the sharks people here to chew the fat on. What's your opinion of this?

And to answer the OP, I want Obama out of office, I don't care whether it's from him losing, or not running for re-election.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:38 am
by Dread Lady Nathicana
Gee, I dunno. What do you think first, after the copypasta. ;) It's only fair you offer your own opinion before asking everyone else theirs.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:39 am
by New Manvir
There's still more than a year until the next election, plenty can happen in that time. Also, the Republicans are a joke.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:39 am
by Coffee Cakes
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Gee, I dunno. What do you think first, after the copypasta. ;) It's only fair you offer your own opinion before asking everyone else theirs.


I ninja'd you with the same point. :p

And I'm hoping Obama quits, actually.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:40 am
by The Republic of Lanos
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Gee, I dunno. What do you think first, after the copypasta. ;) It's only fair you offer your own opinion before asking everyone else theirs.


Fixed, my lady.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:41 am
by Farnhamia
No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:41 am
by Keronians
Yes. Republicans are batshit insane.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:42 am
by Keronians
Farnhamia wrote:No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.


If I were an American, the only GOP candidate I'd be willing to vote for would be Huntsman.

I may consider Romney, but you just can't hold that guy to his word.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:43 am
by Dread Lady Nathicana
I keep hoping a knight in shining untarnished armor will ride out of nowhere, rally the nation, put us back on track, and cut through all this two-party bullshit.

And then I remember I shouldn't be thinking politics late at night whilst on hydrocodone cough syrup. It makes one think all manner of silly things.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:43 am
by The Republic of Lanos
Farnhamia wrote:No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.


Source?

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:44 am
by Keronians
The Republic of Lanos wrote:
Farnhamia wrote:No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.


Source?


The debt ceiling deal.

The fact that there had to even be a deal is source enough.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:45 am
by Herskerstad
Judging from the contenders, the only one among the Dems that would have a ghost of a chance to replace Obama would be Hillary Clinton. Obama, as much as I hate to say it, might actually have a decent shot. There is no 'Reagan' amongst the republicans. While both Romney and Perry would be hard to beat no doubt, they are fairly uncharismatic and unlikeable in their own distinct ways.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:46 am
by The Rich Port
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:I keep hoping a knight in shining untarnished armor will ride out of nowhere, rally the nation, put us back on track, and cut through all this two-party bullshit.

And then I remember I shouldn't be thinking politics late at night whilst on hydrocodone cough syrup. It makes one think all manner of silly things.


I'm still working on reviving Teddy Roosevelt.

Voodoo is more complicated than just waving a chicken around.

Farnhamia wrote:No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.


I keep wondering which of these nobodies people think can replace the first black president ever.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:46 am
by Sanguinthium
LOL @ poss options.

anyway, i want ron paul to win, and i view Obama as the Ideal Candidate to oppose him, since many of Pauls ideas can be either liberal or conservative, and will thus attract bipartisan support.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:46 am
by Dread Lady Nathicana
Herskerstad wrote:Judging from the contenders, the only one among the Dems that would have a ghost of a chance to replace Obama would be Hillary Clinton. Obama, as much as I hate to say it, might actually have a decent shot. There is no 'Reagan' amongst the republicans. While both Romney and Perry would be hard to beat no doubt, they are fairly uncharismatic and unlikeable in their own distinct ways.

Speak not the name of the unclean ... *shudders at the mention of HC running the nation* She had her shot. Ugh. >_>

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:48 am
by Sibirsky
Keronians wrote:Yes. Republicans are batshit insane.

Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are not batshit insane.

Obama on the other hand, is economically illiterate.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:48 am
by Farnhamia
Keronians wrote:
Farnhamia wrote:No Republican candidate is acceptable. A Republican win next year will vindicate the strategy of doing actual harm to the economy (or threatening to) in order to win political points. And a primary fight within the Democratic Party would be absurd. No, President Obama must stay and fight to win.


If I were an American, the only GOP candidate I'd be willing to vote for would be Huntsman.

I may consider Romney, but you just can't hold that guy to his word.

Just to toss in the fun-fact ... uhm ... factor, do you know where Huntsman's money came from? His father, Jon Huntsman, Sr., founded the company that gave is the styrofoam clam-shell container that MacDonald's burgers used to come in. Not to mention plastic egg containers, plates, knives, forks, spoons, etc.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:50 am
by Dread Lady Nathicana
Farnhamia wrote:
Keronians wrote:
If I were an American, the only GOP candidate I'd be willing to vote for would be Huntsman.

I may consider Romney, but you just can't hold that guy to his word.

Just to toss in the fun-fact ... uhm ... factor, do you know where Huntsman's money came from? His father, Jon Huntsman, Sr., founded the company that gave is the styrofoam clam-shell container that MacDonald's burgers used to come in. Not to mention plastic egg containers, plates, knives, forks, spoons, etc.

Huntsman is a fraud. Having had a husband work for one of his companies before, and watching how he took a successful, profitable business and chopped it up, and moved it out of country for cheap labor? Hell with that, folks. Seriously. Huntsman can sod the hell off.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:50 am
by The Floridian Coast
It would be good for Obama to walk away, rather than risk a loss, but I don't think it'd be good for the people, or even for the Democratic Party.

Americans have a delusion that most two term presidents must have been good and most one term presidents must have been bad because Americans have a delusion that the majority of voters are even remotely insightful and can think past emotions, fearmongering, and buzzwords.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:50 am
by Coffee Cakes
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:I keep hoping a knight in shining untarnished armor will ride out of nowhere, rally the nation, put us back on track, and cut through all this two-party bullshit.

And then I remember I shouldn't be thinking politics late at night whilst on hydrocodone cough syrup. It makes one think all manner of silly things.


:rofl:

This is so Sigged.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:52 am
by Cannot think of a name
What did they call that back in 2008? "Concern trolling?" Thinking that Clinton would have magiced away the problems is as stupid as thinking that Obama was going to be able to magic away our problems.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:52 am
by Herskerstad
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:
Herskerstad wrote:Judging from the contenders, the only one among the Dems that would have a ghost of a chance to replace Obama would be Hillary Clinton. Obama, as much as I hate to say it, might actually have a decent shot. There is no 'Reagan' amongst the republicans. While both Romney and Perry would be hard to beat no doubt, they are fairly uncharismatic and unlikeable in their own distinct ways.

Speak not the name of the unclean ... *shudders at the mention of HC running the nation* She had her shot. Ugh. >_>


Well, to put it like this. Neither side fields any strong candidates. There is no JFK on the left, and no Reagan on the right. Most likely, this political hay will continue quite a few more years. Some kind of mutual unification is bound to occur sooner or later, but I suspect things will not look up for quite some time.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:55 am
by Trotskylvania
Sibirsky wrote:
Keronians wrote:Yes. Republicans are batshit insane.

Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are not batshit insane.

Obama on the other hand, is economically illiterate.

:roll:

Just because someone doesn't believe in you fundamentalist, absolutist conception of economics doesn't mean they are illiterate.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:55 am
by Katganistan
The Republic of Lanos wrote:Should the President keep running or should he RAGEQUIT?

Run. He may not be the best president, but we can't let the lunatics run the asylum. They ran the economy into the ground and have been stonewalling to destroy the country rather than compromise on anything -- or have we forgotten why our credit rating was downgraded, young Republicans?