The Left's Dubya
Whatever you think about George W. Bush, one thing is certain. His administration discredited the Republican Party and rung an albatross around the neck of conservatives. Instead of strengthening the right and buying it time to work out its many kinks, W's reelection weakened it, leaving a badly flawed McCain/Palin ticket to pick up (or not) the pieces. Three years into his first term, the die was cast for Bush's impact on his party -- and, in a different way, his country.
Take that problem and multiply it by a thousand. That's Barack Obama. Even if he wins -- which he will only be able to do by a narrow, unconvincing margin -- his effect on the Democrats will be negative. It's impossible for Obama to do anything game-changing in the fourteen months between now and Election Day. Small ball won't cut it. America can't stomach another big round of going for broke (ahem) to implement Obama's vision of justice. And so:
There is still time for Democrats to fix this — but only if they force their leader not to seek a second term.
Hillary or bust.
- Comment (8)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Aug '11
Re: The Left's Dubya
All great correlations. I would add what many never seemed to notice: Obama couldn't win the Democratic nomination out right. They had to take Hillary's Michigan votes and give them to Obama to declare him the winner. She was by far and unquestionably the superior candidate, but she had the media and the party heads against her. If he was so great, why couldn't he defeat her in actual votes? Pelosi, Reid and Kerry wanted the most liberal candidate who would not triangulate like they knew a Clinton would. They could only fool people once.
Apr '11
Re: The Left's Dubya
Wouldn't it be racist of them to dump Obama for Hillary? ;)
Jun '10
Re: The Left's Dubya
Remind me, Crystal. I don't remember the details. Didn't Obama have more votes than Hilary? But, you are saying that he didn't have a majority? Interesting. Did Hilary give the votes or did the state's party managers give them to him.
Good question about him being unable to marshall a real majority. I also don't know the history here. Does this happen a lot?
Jun '10
Re: The Left's Dubya
James, it's interesting that Bush 43 had a double effect: the Left hated him for all the things about Iraq and the security interests of this country and the Right were angry at him for running up more spending. He could have given us a balanced budget or at least used the bully pulpit to ask for it. Instead he was absent. Then, also the Right were angry at him for not defending himself against all the lies that the Left were spewing. Unforgivable! And then when you combine the W residue with the worst Republican and the worst Republican candidate in history, the 2008 election didn't have a chance.
I think Obama will get reelected because of two things: 1) the media has gone mental since 2008 and 2) he will use the race card against the GOP candidate in a way that no one can possibly imagine yet. It is going to get ugly -- with riots and street theater.
But, you might be right that it will really damage the Dems. That's the best we can hope for.
If Hilary gets the nomination (however it comes about) then I think she can be beat.
Edited on Sep 2, 2011 at 11:08pmApr '11
Re: The Left's Dubya
I'm not sure party affiliation is the driving force. That strikes me as anachronistic in this day of segments and niches. The battle in its broadest terms is a philosophical one, the taxpayers versus the tax spenders. This is the crux of all elections, but never before has it been so clear. Call my view simplistic, but so is a vote. One or the other. Yes or no.
Re: The Left's Dubya
Larry Koler: [...]
I think Obama will get reelected because of two things: 1) the media has gone mental since 2008 and 2) he will use the race card against the GOP candidate in a way that no one can possibly imagine yet. It is going to get ugly -- with riots and street theater.
But, you might be right that it will really damage the Dems. That's the best we can hope for.
One comment I heard today was that the specter of Rick Perry, for instance, will cause the Dems to go to the mat for Obama despite their disillusionment and exhaustion. This sounds plausible, and yet...we know from experience the limits of this forced kind of negative electoral will, don't we?
Jun '10
Re: The Left's Dubya
James Poulos
Larry Koler: [...]
I think Obama will get reelected because of two things: 1) the media has gone mental since 2008 and 2) he will use the race card against the GOP candidate in a way that no one can possibly imagine yet. It is going to get ugly -- with riots and street theater.
But, you might be right that it will really damage the Dems. That's the best we can hope for.
One comment I heard today was that the specter of Rick Perry, for instance, will cause the Dems to go to the mat for Obama despite their disillusionment and exhaustion. This sounds plausible, and yet...we know from experience the limits of this forced kind of negative electoral will, don't we? · Sep 2 at 9:50pm
Well, their position will be that they just need to get him over the finish line -- at any cost. How far will they go, I wonder?
Jan '11
Re: The Left's Dubya
What is hard to figure out is that the left got so much of what they wanted - I think they're angry and frustrated because it hasn't worked & they are projecting this onto Obama.
I think he's done in four. Would Romney make it easier for the "mushy middle" to vote for a GOP candidate? Yes & too bad. I want the decision between 4 more years of this empty suit and Perry to be excrutiating for them (I realize I'm using feelings more than thinking on this). But aside from winning in 2012, a major course correction must take place - I don't think Romney will change course to the same extent as Perry. The GOP Senate & House seem scared enough not to waste the majority again. If they do, the Tea Party will go 3rd party - and I'll go with them. Rollback of the leviathon is the only acceptable course.