Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
I'm not sure what got into everybody's water this week, but things have taken a significant turn for the worse for Team Obama. Peter already pointed out that Maureen Dowd column with the wicked ultimate line.
Over at Salon, Matt Stoller argues that Democrats need to confront the disaster that is the Obama presidency. He's less worried about the coming election, which he thinks will go poorly, than what could happen in the long term if party faithful don't advocate for their views.
No one, not even the president's defenders, expect his coming jobs speech to mean anything. When the president spoke during a recent market swoon, the market dropped another 100 points. Democrats may soon have to confront an uncomfortable truth, and ask whether Obama is a suitable choice at the top of the ticket in 2012. They may then have to ask themselves if there's any way they can push him off the top of the ticket.
That these questions have not yet been asked in any serious way shows how weak the Democratic Party is as a political organization. Yet this political weakness is not inevitable, it can be changed through courage and collective action by a few party insiders smart and principled enough to understand the value of a public debate, and by activists who are courageous enough to face the real legacy of the Obama years.
Obama has ruined the Democratic Party.
In Stoller's world, Obama is failing because he "ignored luminaries like Paul Krugman" and "generally did whatever he could to repudiate the New Deal." Which is odd.
His plan is for legitimate primary challengers to take Obama on in various states. He's thinking of folks like Tom Harkin in Iowa. Others could emerge in other early primary states "as a way of repudiating Obama's leadership." He thinks it would change the debate if Obama had to defend his left flank. It would.
Too bad challenging Obama in any way is racist, or this would be a good plan for liberals.
- Comment (38)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Anyone else burst out laughing at the line "luminaries like Paul Krugman"?
Jun '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
This kind of thinking is just Maureen Dowd redoubled. Blame it on the man when in fact it's the ideology that's the problem. And how do you oppose a black president without alienating your most loyal constituency? Yup, the way to solve this problem is to start a civil war within the party between pro and anti-Obama factions. That'll work. I'll write the epitaph now and save you some time: He who lives by identity politics will die by it.
Jun '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
Too bad challenging Obama in any way is racist, or this would be a good plan for liberals. ·
If turnabout is fair play, then in fact:
Matt Stoller at Salon is a racist. Name another incumbent that drew a party challenger? Well besides Carter, he was terrible.
(This next part will flow effortlessly from the protectors with all the practice)
The undercurrent seeping into the forefront is that perhaps America is not mentally and emotionally ready for a black president even if he is brilliant.
Jul '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
You're right on this one. I suspect most Democrats who are in a position to mobilize against Obama (and potentially salvage next year's election) are paralyzed by fear of alienating the base and being seen as racist reactionaries trying to take out the first black president. Hillary's got to be getting antsy these days, as her long-sought prize is so very close. But she knows that she can't win if blacks sit on their hands in 2012. How does she engineer his departure without having any fingerprints on the coup? Carville's probably working overtime trying to devise a plausible scheme ... and didn't he just say how out of line the White House was in last week's speech debacle? Did anybody else notice how that undercut most of the Democratic talking point in defense of Obama? Hmmmm.
Edited on Sep 5, 2011 at 8:29amRe: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
This is what happens when a candidate poses as a Messiah. Obama led his party over a cliff in 2010. He has also caused its fiercest adherents to lose their minds. And now they are treating him as he treated Bill Clinton -- as a triangulator who has betrayed the cause. What Mark Stoller cannot get his mind around (and the same is true for Maureen Dowd) is that, in this country, we have a separation of powers and that the Democrats lost the House in the last election. Even more to the point, these folks cannot get their minds around the fact that the country in 2010 repudiated their policies in no uncertain terms. It is poetic justice that Obama now finds himself despised by the left. What goes around really does come around.
Nov '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Obama still enjoys nearly one hundred percent support among Blacks and they aren’t going to like this. It might be a good time for Republicans to explain the benefits of conservative government to Black voters. Well, that is if Republicans actually believe in conservative government.
Aug '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
It cheers me to think of Democrats and Republicans using the same campaign slogan: "Can we take four more years of Barack Obama?"
Mar '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Question for Dr. Rahe: Is the Obama presidency not only weakening the Democrat party, but also weakening the office itself? If so, is this a good thing?
Sep '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Maureen Dowd has placed herself in Othello and taken over the lead role.
May '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Between true-believing liberals despairing as their utopian dreams dissolve and moderates pretending never to have heard of Barack Obama, 2012 promises to be a dismal year for the Democratic Party.
Am I smiling?
: )
Aug '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
If I may presume to jump in: President Obama has seemed to view himself as being somehow above and more important than both the judicial and legislative branches. So if the Obama Presidency is weakening the office, perhaps it's only weakening it back to its proper place.
Mar '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
DrewInWisconsin
If I may presume to jump in: President Obama has seemed to view himself as being somehow above and more important than both the judicial and legislative branches. So if the Obama Presidency is weakening the office, perhaps it's only weakening it back to its proper place. · Sep 5 at 8:18am
I'd submit that he actually sees himself above the Executive branch, as well. You have to separate what Obama sees as his role as President and what the office itself is about, as it's defined in Article II. In that context, what's he done to affect future Presidents and their ability to exercise that role?
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
It is certainly doing the former; it may be doing the latter. Respect for the office is not at the moment high. The man holding it does not seem to respect his own position.
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Illiniguy
DrewInWisconsin
If I may presume to jump in: President Obama has seemed to view himself as being somehow above and more important than both the judicial and legislative branches. So if the Obama Presidency is weakening the office, perhaps it's only weakening it back to its proper place. · Sep 5 at 8:18am
I'd submit that he actually sees himself above the Executive branch, as well. You have to separate what Obama sees as his role as President and what the office itself is about, as it's defined in Article II. In that context, what's he done to affect future Presidents and their ability to exercise that role? · Sep 5 at 8:27am
He has sown distrust.
Edited on Sep 5, 2011 at 8:43amAug '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
It's an easy solution.The party pushes Obama to announce his decision not to run...for the good of the country. He announces that due to Republicans and other interests (the Tea Party) cannot support any of his ideas to push success in this country and the country appears to be at the brink, his presidency is now at a point that it would be best that he not run for reelection. He will "sacrifice" himself to save the country. Once again, as always, Republicans will be painted as the bad boys. Hillary steps in, saves the party and the day. Heck, even Cheney said she would be better to work with and to the Democrats, he's the anti-Christ. So it must be done.
Jul '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Jun '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
Democratic leaders don't believe in the concept of a republic. They are oligarchs at heart. It means less than nothing to them that they were repudiated by a bunch of clodhoppers and bumpkins. The spontaneous uprising by the Tea Party should have sent a warning to elitists everywhere, but they were too smug and self-satisfied to see the significance. If they had read Hanson instead of Zinn, they would know that a republic becomes an implacable foe once aroused to action. Indeed, the wrath of the voters this way comes. And we are filled with a terrible resolve.
Feb '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
The real problem the democrats have is that their policies are stupid and unpopular.
Talking about them more won't help. Primary challenges won't help.
If Hillary had been elected president the democrats would be having roughly the same sort of trouble they have now, for roughly the same reasons. I give her credit enough to believe she'd have avoided some of Obama's more boneheaded mistakes, but she'd still have taken the country in a direction most of the country doesn't want to go.
And the democrats would have still had a bad 2010 and would still be looking at an iffy 2012. And Stoller would be arguing for the need to challenge Hillary, etc.
Some people just can't learn. The failure that Stoller has noticed isn't because Obama wasn't leftist enough. It's because the ideas of the left simply don't work.
Replacing Obama with Hillary or Tom Harkin or a player to be named later won't change that.
Jan '11
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
I just revel in the irony of the Democrat Party throwing Barack Obama ... under the bus.
Oct '10
Re: Democrat Argues That Obama Needs To Be Primaried
mesquito: Between true-believing liberals despairing as their utopian dreams dissolve and moderates pretending never to have heard of Barack Obama, 2012 promises to be a dismal year for the Democratic Party.
Am I smiling?
: ) · Sep 5 at 8:15am
Don't forget, mesquito, the Dems' opposition in 2012 is The Stupid Party...