Article

2010-11-13 Home Front: Politix

Washington Post op-ed: Obama Should Not Run Again In 2012

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2010-11-13 10:21|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 And so it begins.
drip...drip...drip...drip...drip...

Posted by tu3031 2010-11-13 12:04|| 2010-11-13 12:04|| Front Page Top

#2 Friends of Bill and Hillary, no doubt. They are behind a LOT of the Obama erosion. Several major newspapers, the tabloids, a lot of the broadcast media and others would be more than happy to undermine and sabotage Obama if it would give Hillary another crack at it.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-11-13 13:14|| 2010-11-13 13:14|| Front Page Top

#3 Not run again? He should resign now.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-11-13 13:32|| 2010-11-13 13:32|| Front Page Top

#4 Friends of Bill and Hillary, no doubt.

Yep. There's a lot of fear that whatever gains made on the progressive front are, or will be in, jeopardy. Meaning that the chances of a "reasonable liberal" getting into the White House will be much diminished.

Posted by Pappy 2010-11-13 13:56|| 2010-11-13 13:56|| Front Page Top

#5 Just because it's being done by the FOB/H doesn't mean it isn't correct ...

Posted by Steve White 2010-11-13 14:50|| 2010-11-13 14:50|| Front Page Top

#6 The key move will be when Shrillary resigns to "spend more time with the family".

That will be the signal for open season on the Obamanation.

Any bets on who else will take a shot at this loser?

Posted by Alan Cramer 2010-11-13 15:14|| 2010-11-13 15:14|| Front Page Top

#7 For starters, Howard Dean, and Hillary. Probables include John Kerry, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi if she loses Minority Leader. Several others have been too compromised by their close working relationship with Zero, like Janet Napolitano. Maybe one of the retiring Dem Senators as well.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2010-11-13 15:27|| 2010-11-13 15:27|| Front Page Top

#8 Note that the authors were pollsters for James Earl Carter and BJ Clinton.

Note that the most recent one term Presidents have faced primary challenges, Johnson/McCarthy, Ford/Reagan, Carter/Kennedy and Bush/Buchannan.

This article is an implicit threat; withdraw or we run a primary opponent. Once again, the Black has to go under the bus for the good of the Democrat party.

What will it take for them to get a clue? Only the Jews vote as consistently against their group interest. And if those two groups did not vote so consistently monolithicly, we'd have a much healthier two party system.

Howard Dean is the easy pick, but he's a re-tread and we're all tired of the yarrgh video. Note that the two Democrat challenges were mounted by safely ensconsed senators. Candidates? Tom Harkin, Michael Bennett, one of the Udalls.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-11-13 16:03|| 2010-11-13 16:03|| Front Page Top

#9 Nimble -

This article is an implicit threat; withdraw or we run a primary opponent.

I had not considered that possibility at all...this takes on a whole new angle, then - the possbility of a flat-out civil war within the Democratic Party would destroy its chances for the next decade or so, just the way it did when Carter had to fight off Kennedy in '80. Not of course, that Reagan wasn't the better candidate, but it went a long way towards leaving the Donks disorganized and demoralized. Which leads to the thought that a Republican victory in 2012 could offer the possbility of a Reagan-like opportunity to rebuild things here.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2010-11-13 16:33|| 2010-11-13 16:33|| Front Page Top

#10 Most all of those mentioned are retreads or thoroughly LObamatized. That's one of the problems with the Dem party. They don't have a good farm system. On the 'pub side you get Palins and Jindals and Christies, a new look with a new vibe.

Maybe Chuckles Shumer?

Posted by Alan Cramer 2010-11-13 16:53|| 2010-11-13 16:53|| Front Page Top

#11 There is a civil war going on in the donkateria.

Look at the San Fran Nan succession plan (the black has to go under the bus).

And this transition is a major generational shift. All the donk leaders are over 70. The New Left-Far Left pre-boomers (Silent Generation - the only generation that did not produce a President of the US) will not give up the controls of donkdom.

The GenX clean-up crew took over trunkdom after the McCain debacle. This is a more difficult transition for the in-power donks that will put the ass behind the 8-ball for a generation. Popcorn, please.

In politics, victory sows the seeds of defeat.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-11-13 16:56|| 2010-11-13 16:56|| Front Page Top

#12 they could pull somebody in who's wayyyy over their head with no business experience, a narcissistic vanity, lefty socialist academia social ring...

oh.....wait.

Posted by Frank G 2010-11-13 17:01|| 2010-11-13 17:01|| Front Page Top

#13 Chuckles is a possibility, but it's hard to take him seriously as a challenger. Neither the self-righteousness of Clean Gene nor the lese-majeste of Teddy the submarine driver. He seems like one of the old bulls more interested in getting Harry's job than trying to actually do something. But then, of the challengers, only Reagan ever did anything.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-11-13 17:03|| 2010-11-13 17:03|| Front Page Top

#14 Nimble says: but it's hard to take him seriously as a challenger

Given my proclivities it is impossible for me to take any of them seriously. Can anyone name a Donkrat under 60 that would be a realistic candidate?

Posted by Alan Cramer 2010-11-13 20:33|| 2010-11-13 20:33|| Front Page Top

#15 Chuckles was positioning hisself for Harry Reid's spot. SonovabitchReid won.

Dilemmas. Schumer is not attractive on a national stage. He knows that

Posted by Frank G 2010-11-13 20:43|| 2010-11-13 20:43|| Front Page Top

#16 A lot will depend on the candidate the Republicans will be running.

At this point a credible Republican candidate will destroy Obama's hopes, but also Hillary's to run in 2016.

The Clintons may be despicable but they are smart. Hillary has been "loyal". Next year she'll just need a good reason to fall out with Obama, better a reason that moderate Democrats and some Republicans find acceptable.

Given the stellar competence of Obama's foreign policy, that reason shouldn't be hard to find.

Then we talk.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-11-13 21:05|| 2010-11-13 21:05|| Front Page Top

00:05 Steven
23:50 Steven
23:34 abu do you love
23:30 JosephMendiola
23:21 Grunter
23:06 Black Charlie Chinemble5313
23:00 Rambler in Virginia
22:58 Dinah Kanser
22:55 Black Charlie Chinemble5313
22:22 Pappy
21:51 gorb
21:48 gorb
21:27 mojo
21:12 Glenmore
21:10 Glenmore
21:05 European Conservative
20:51 Procopius2k
20:48 Procopius2k
20:43 Frank G
20:33 Alan Cramer
19:51 chris
19:22 remoteman
19:17 Frank G
19:14 tu3031