One Term President or Not?

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

Read your history. Who really passed the Civil rights amendment? Was it the Dems in the 60s or the Repubs? Whose side was Johnson really voting against? I think you will find it was the Dems in the south that favored segregation and that was their Waterloo. What are now considered Republican and Democrat core issues have switched remarkably since then.

In vast swaths of America not called NYC or LA, Liberal is still a dirty word. Especially in the south. Texas and Florida are just as big as NY and CA voting wise and the demographics favor the Sun belt. Not to mention the giant swing in local elections that will decide the borders of congressional districts. There is trend here that looks a lot like 1994, but it seems the Repubs have learned and are specifically targeting Obama unlike Clinton.

You're confusing liberal and Democratic. Johnson was more liberal than Obama. Obviously things were a little different then and Johnson lost huge support from the South for that. That's strength. Obama has tried to please everyone, and pleased no one. That's weakness.

The trend is not like 1994. The Democrats have lost the popular vote for Presidency once in the past 5 elections. Not only that but the Republicans have no platform and the United States is actually in huge trouble this time. The Republicans have no idea what they are doing when it comes to actually governing. They haven't presented a good piece of legislation in years. How will they handle the economy, healthcare, unemployment insurance and sell out to the corporations? People will not take doing nothing for an answer. People will not accept losing their Medicare and social security while the banking industry makes record profits. They will not accept not having a job.

The last time they were in charge they wrecked everything. If I had to guess, this is a blip in future Democratic dominance. That's what everyone should hope anyway, otherwise the collapse of the US is pending. I'm totally serious. The Republican Party is entirely corrupt and will ruin the country if allowed to govern.

[tjinaz]

The last time they were in charge they wrecked everything. If I had to guess, this is a blip in future Democratic dominance. That's what everyone should hope anyway, otherwise the collapse of the US is pending. I'm totally serious. The Republican Party is entirely corrupt and will ruin the country if allowed to govern.

Technically the Dems have been in power since they took over Congress in 2006. What has happened since then that has been good?

[mikey_the_redneck]

Obama should be a one term president, but I could see Americans rallying around him if another "terrorist attack" should happen.....

[Weiser Wonder]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

Technically the Dems have been in power since they took over Congress in 2006. What has happened since then that has been good?

Off the top of my head: Stimulus, healthcare bill, increasing minimum wage, student loan legislation, financial reform.

But, of course, the best part of having the Democrats in control is that none of the crazy, right wing agenda of the Republican Party gets passed.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by HOZ

An interesting take because the last election was the rejection of His and the Democratic Party's Liberal agenda.

He is facing Bill Clinton's dilemma. Can he pull off what Clinton did? Or is he about to be railroaded by Clinton?

Look at the races where the Democrat held onto his/her seat. Their platforms were boldly liberal, not pandering to wary moderates.

The electorate rejected Obama's lack of courage to get things done, not his principles.

As much as some might like to think the future of America is the tea party, it's simply not the case. The midterm elections aren't 'cool'. Young people will bring out the vote in 2012 and Obama will get his second term.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

There is trend here that looks a lot like 1994, but it seems the Repubs have learned and are specifically targeting Obama unlike Clinton.

Yes and no. My cartoon at the top of this thread I think truly shows the public's' attitude. GOP was the default setting. The Democrats were called on their BS. They were part of problem and so were the GOP. This election was on reduction of government, spending and taxes. GOP has been given the keys for now.

By 2012 we will know if Obama is Carter-plus or Clinton-lite. Will he be the Narcissist in Office or the Leader in Office?

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Look at the races where the Democrat held onto his/her seat. Their platforms were boldly liberal, not pandering to wary moderates.

The electorate rejected Obama's lack of courage to get things done, not his principles.

As much as some might like to think the future of America is the tea party, it's simply not the case. The midterm elections aren't 'cool'. Young people will bring out the vote in 2012 and Obama will get his second term.

True enough...about the most liberal Democrats holding on to their seats.

But that doesn't explain the move to the GOP and Tea Party Candidates. Could it be that the most liberal areas held true to their convictions and the rest of the country didn't like what they saw? Honestly, the GOP (see my cartoon) has a short leash.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by HOZ

True enough...about the most liberal Democrats holding on to their seats.

But that doesn't explain the move to the GOP and Tea Party Candidates. Could it be that the most liberal areas held true to their convictions and the rest of the country didn't like what they saw? Honestly, the GOP (see my cartoon) has a short leash.

i think the American public just wants a leader that will get things done, whether they agree with their policies or not. Obama trying to pander to the right and achieve a mythical middle ground is the cause of his negative views IMO, the public sees him as weak because he didn't stand up to the republicans. they're not mad at him because of health care, that's what he campaigned on and that's what people voted for. they're mad because of all his promises in the election (gays in the military, shutting down Guantanamo, economic reforms, etc) have meant nothing since he's spent the majority of the last 2 years wasting time trying to convince a segment of the population that will never see eye to eye with him

if he had taken a page out of Bush's playbook and gone into the White House on a full charge, pushed through his major campaign agendas (despite any hateful rhetoric from the right), he would be in a much stronger position right now. he could have then campaigned on the offensive for the mid-terms, outlining new agendas and policies, instead of being on the defensive the entire time

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

i think the American public just wants a leader that will get things done, whether they agree with their policies or not. Obama trying to pander to the right and achieve a mythical middle ground is the cause of his negative views IMO, the public sees him as weak because he didn't stand up to the republicans. they're not mad at him because of health care, that's what he campaigned on and that's what people voted for. they're mad because of all his promises in the election (gays in the military, shutting down Guantanamo, economic reforms, etc) have meant nothing since he's spent the majority of the last 2 years wasting time trying to convince a segment of the population that will never see eye to eye with him

if he had taken a page out of Bush's playbook and gone into the White House on a full charge, pushed through his major campaign agendas (despite any hateful rhetoric from the right), he would be in a much stronger position right now. he could have then campaigned on the offensive for the mid-terms, outlining new agendas and policies, instead of being on the defensive the entire time

Honestly,

He DID came with the Bush play book! When he came to power he had a majority in both houses to push through his and the democratic party's agenda. When he met with the GOP heads he told them, "I won."

The PUBLIC not the GOP shot him down. Clinton once faced the same thing during his terms in office.

[SebC]

Two objections:

1 - If voters were believed that losing seats would be interpreted as a signal to Obama that he shoudln't seek re-election, the election may have had different results. It's raising the stakes (based on historical precedent) after the game has been played.

2 - If the Republicans are more concerned with making Obama look bad than contributing solutions to America's problems, doesn't it fall on the Republicans to correct that?

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by SebC

Two objections:

1 - If voters were believed that losing seats would be interpreted as a signal to Obama that he shoudln't seek re-election, the election may have had different results. It's raising the stakes (based on historical precedent) after the game has been played.

2 - If the Republicans are more concerned with making Obama look bad than contributing solutions to America's problems, doesn't it fall on the Republicans to correct that?

1. I think the election shows that his policies to date are not popular and if he is to win a second term (which was stated int he article) he should focus on the great divide in politics rather than pander to them.

2. The GOP is on a short leash. The public wants fiscal responsibility, less government and JOBS! Abortion, gays, and such are an after thought..... Get down to business....play politics at your own peril!!!!!

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

Read your history. Who really passed the Civil rights amendment? Was it the Dems in the 60s or the Repubs? Whose side was Johnson really voting against?

Johnson is who passed the CRA. Everyone was scared poopless of the guy. No one would stand up to him Democrat or Republican.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

That's not true. The polls indicate a lack of enthusiasm of liberal voters, not a huge swing of independents. The United States is far more left than conventional wisdom believes it to be.

So Obama can't even inspire his base two years in? That's worse news than what you were refuting frankly.

Despite what Hot Hot Heat said, Obama's best chance is to bury the rhetoric, stop ignoring his successes because they aren't in the area he wants (Iraq) and work with the divided Congress to move forward on issues that they can get something done on. I don't mean capitulate to the GOP either.

If he decides to push an ultra-liberal agenda (ie bang his head against a wall for the next 2 years) he's doomed IF the GOP can come up with a legitimate candidate...which as of this moment they do not have.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by tjinaz

Bobby Jindal

He could easily beat Obama on the republican ticket. He has better credentials and cannot be seen as the "typical" republican candidate. Obama ran as a moderate but his policy since getting into office can be accurately classified as "Liberal". Democratic candidates are running from him now. All the repubs have to do is learn from the 1994 election and attack on a narrow front. They lost to Clinton as he was a true moderate. Jindal coming from the South and as a minority is their worst nightmare.

lol, it would be fitting if a guy who forcibly held down a woman to perform an exorcism on her would become the next president.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

i
if he had taken a page out of Bush's playbook and gone into the White House on a full charge, pushed through his major campaign agendas (despite any hateful rhetoric from the right), he would be in a much stronger position right now. he could have then campaigned on the offensive for the mid-terms, outlining new agendas and policies, instead of being on the defensive the entire time

That's EXACTLY what he did! LMAO.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

If he decides to push an ultra-liberal agenda (ie bang his head against a wall for the next 2 years) he's doomed IF the GOP can come up with a legitimate candidate...which as of this moment they do not have.

Or Clinton challenges him.

[Calgaryborn]

The only thing that hindered Obama's agenda in the last 2 years were the American people. Their dislike of Obama's big spending and power grabs scared Democrats who resided in anything but ultra liberal States. Their fears were realized in this last election. They lost the House and only kept the Senate because less Democrat seats were up for grab.

I'm guessing that any reasonable legislation coming out of the House that curbs spending and/or rolls back big government will pass the Senate easily. Obama will be left to sign it or play obstructionist. Obama won't be able to say the Republicans are the party of no anymore or claim they lack ideas. He will have to pit his ideas against theirs.

A big wild card is what the results of the health care bill will be. If its benefits don't start out weighing the burden it imposes Obama doesn't have a hope. Another thing Obama will have to do is rein in his party and his media. If every time someone opposes Obama they continue to be labeled a racist he will lose a ton of swing votes. People don't like being called a racist for having an opinion.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

Off the top of my head: Stimulus, healthcare bill, increasing minimum wage, student loan legislation, financial reform.

But, of course, the best part of having the Democrats in control is that none of the crazy, right wing agenda of the Republican Party gets passed.

What is crazy about the Republican agenda?

What could be more crazy than being required by the federal government to purchase a product from the federal government?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Or Clinton challenges him.

She won't.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Weiser Wonder

The last time they were in charge they wrecked everything. If I had to guess, this is a blip in future Democratic dominance. That's what everyone should hope anyway, otherwise the collapse of the US is pending. I'm totally serious. The Republican Party is entirely corrupt and will ruin the country if allowed to govern.

The GOP is corrupt and the Democrats are clean, wholesome and only have our best interests at heart?

I can't believe you're the one who typed this. I really can't.