+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Washington Post: To be a great president, Obama should not seek reelection in 2012

  1. #1
    asshat cowhorns00 demands perfection! cowhorns00 demands perfection! cowhorns00 demands perfection! cowhorns00's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    under some clouds
    Posts
    6,089

    Washington Post: To be a great president, Obama should not seek reelection in 2012

    Interesting article, but there's no way Obama would do this...

    Opinion | One and done: To be a great president, Obama should not seek reelection in 2012
    By Douglas E. Schoen and Patrick H. Caddell
    Sunday, November 14, 2010;


    President Obama must decide now how he wants to govern in the two years leading up to the 2012 presidential election.
    In recent days, he has offered differing visions of how he might approach the country's problems. At one point, he spoke of the need for "mid-course corrections." At another, he expressed a desire to take ideas from both sides of the aisle. And before this month's midterm elections, he said he believed that the next two years would involve "hand-to-hand combat" with Republicans, whom he also referred to as "enemies."
    It is clear that the president is still trying to reach a resolution in his own mind as to what he should do and how he should do it.
    This is a critical moment for the country. From the faltering economy to the burdensome deficit to our foreign policy struggles, America is suffering a widespread sense of crisis and anxiety about the future. Under these circumstances, Obama has the opportunity to seize the high ground and the imagination of the nation once again, and to galvanize the public for the hard decisions that must be made. The only way he can do so, though, is by putting national interests ahead of personal or political ones.
    To that end, we believe Obama should announce immediately that he will not be a candidate for reelection in 2012.
    If the president goes down the reelection road, we are guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it. But by explicitly saying he will be a one-term president, Obama can deliver on his central campaign promise of 2008, draining the poison from our culture of polarization and ending the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity and common purpose.
    We do not come to this conclusion lightly. But it is clear, we believe, that the president has largely lost the consent of the governed. The midterm elections were effectively a referendum on the Obama presidency. And even if it was not an endorsement of a Republican vision for America, the drubbing the Democrats took was certainly a vote of no confidence in Obama and his party. The president has almost no credibility left with Republicans and little with independents.
    The best way for him to address both our national challenges and the serious threats to his credibility and stature is to make clear that, for the next two years, he will focus exclusively on the problems we face as Americans, rather than the politics of the moment - or of the 2012 campaign.
    Quite simply, given our political divisions and economic problems, governing and campaigning have become incompatible. Obama can and should dispense with the pollsters, the advisers, the consultants and the strategists who dissect all decisions and judgments in terms of their impact on the president's political prospects.
    Obama himself once said to Diane Sawyer: "I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president." He now has the chance to deliver on that idea.
    In the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama spoke repeatedly of his desire to end the red-state-blue-state divisions in America and to change the way Washington works. This was a central reason he was elected; such aspirations struck a deep chord with the polarized electorate.
    Obama can restore the promise of the election by forging a government of national unity, welcoming business leaders, Republicans and independents into the fold. But if he is to bring Democrats and Republicans together, the president cannot be seen as an advocate of a particular party, but as somebody who stands above politics, seeking to forge consensus. And yes, the United States will need nothing short of consensus if we are to reduce the deficit and get spending under control, to name but one issue.
    Forgoing another term would not render Obama a lame duck. Paradoxically, it would grant him much greater leverage with Republicans and would make it harder for opponents such as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) - who has flatly asserted that his highest priority is to make Obama a one-term president - to be uncooperative.
    And for Democrats such as current Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) - who has said that entitlement reform is dead on arrival - the president's new posture would make it much harder to be inflexible. Given the influence of special interests on the Democratic Party, Obama would be much more effective as a figure who could remain above the political fray. Challenges such as boosting economic growth and reducing the deficit are easier to tackle if you're not constantly worrying about the reactions of senior citizens, lobbyists and unions.
    Moreover, if the president were to demonstrate a clear degree of bipartisanship, it would force the Republicans to meet him halfway. If they didn't, they would look intransigent, as the GOP did in 1995 and 1996, when Bill Clinton first advocated a balanced budget. Obama could then go to the Democrats for tough cuts to entitlements and look to the Republicans for difficult cuts on defense.
    On foreign policy, Obama could better make hard decisions about Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan based on what is reasonable and responsible for the United States, without the political constraints of a looming election. He would be able to deal with a Democratic constituency that wants to get out of Afghanistan immediately and a Republican constituency that is committed to the war, forging a course that responds not to the electoral calendar but to the facts on the ground.
    If the president adopts our suggestion, both sides will be forced to compromise. The alternative, we fear, will put the nation at greater risk. While we believe that Obama can be reelected, to do so he will have to embark on a scorched-earth campaign of the type that President George W. Bush ran in the 2002 midterms and the 2004 presidential election, which divided Americans in ways that still plague us.
    Obama owes his election in large measure to the fact that he rejected this approach during his historic campaign. Indeed, we were among those millions of Democrats, Republicans and independents who were genuinely moved by his rhetoric and purpose. Now, the only way he can make real progress is to return to those values and to say that for the good of the country, he will not be a candidate in 2012.
    Should the president do that, he - and the country - would face virtually no bad outcomes. The worst-case scenario for Obama? In January 2013, he walks away from the White House having been transformative in two ways: as the first black president, yes, but also as a man who governed in a manner unmatched by any modern leader. He will have reconciled the nation, continued the economic recovery, gained a measure of control over the fiscal problems that threaten our future, and forged critical solutions to our international challenges. He will, at last, be the figure globally he has sought to be, and will almost certainly leave a better regarded president than he is today. History will look upon him kindly - and so will the public.
    It is no secret that we have been openly critical of the president in recent days, but we make this proposal with the deepest sincerity and hope for him and for the country.
    We have both advised presidents facing great national crises and have seen challenges from inside the Oval Office. We are convinced that if Obama immediately declares his intention not to run for reelection, he will be able to unite the country, provide national and international leadership, escape the hold of the left, isolate the right and achieve results that would be otherwise unachievable.
    Patrick H. Caddell, who was a pollster and senior adviser to President Jimmy Carter, is a political commentator. Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster who worked for President Bill Clinton, is the author of "Mad as Hell: How the Tea Party Movement Is Fundamentally Remaking Our Two-Party System." They will be online Monday, Nov. 15, at 11 a.m. ET to chat. Submit your questions before or during the discussion.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111202846.html
    Last edited by cowhorns00; 11-14-2010 at 11:44 PM.

  2. #2
    asshat Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hyde Park
    Posts
    5,026
    There is no way in hell that Obama not seeking reelection will bring Democrats and. Republicans together, forge consensus, stand above politics, accomplish anything, and create national unity. What the authors of that article suggest will produce the exact opposite of their conclusions.

  3. #3
    Bill probably put them up to writing that screed on Hillary's behalf.

  4. #4
    asshat Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel should starts Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hyde Park
    Posts
    5,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Armybrat View Post
    Bill probably put them up to writing that screed on Hillary's behalf.
    That would be funny. That article is about as dumb as the one I read recently that said that Hillary should be secretary of defense. If Obama doesn't run for reelection, it won't be for any of the reasons mentioned in that article.

  5. #5
    The Commit-able Offer TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    End Of The Trail
    Posts
    9,491
    With America's sons in the fields far away, with America's future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world's hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties other than the awesome duties of this office--the Presidency of your country.

    Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President.

    But let men everywhere know, however, that a strong, a confident, and a vigilant America stands ready tonight to seek an honorable peace--and stands ready tonight to defend an honored cause--whatever the price, whatever the burden, whatever the sacrifice that duty may require

    Go out like a Viking.

    Finally do something impressive.
    Last edited by TTomTerrific; 11-15-2010 at 07:45 AM.

  6. #6
    asshat TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty TahoeHorn aka Old Freak Nasty
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Hazel Green, AL
    Posts
    8,379
    The less governing Obama does the better. I prefer he engage in a failed attempt at a second term, and that his efforts at "governing" are failed, transparent attempts to reestablish his popularity.

  7. #7
    asshat BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    watching 'Tobacco Road Con Man' starring Mack Brown
    Posts
    12,507
    You have to have a big ego to run for POTUS and that ego gets bigger after you win. No way in hell that ego, would let you not run for a second term.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by BrothaHorn View Post
    You have to have a big ego to run for POTUS and that ego gets bigger after you win. No way in hell that ego, would let you not run for a second term.
    Not always (see LBJ)

  9. #9
    asshat BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn aka Old Freak Nasty BrothaHorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    watching 'Tobacco Road Con Man' starring Mack Brown
    Posts
    12,507
    Quote Originally Posted by Armybrat View Post
    Not always (see LBJ)
    Any dude, who can openly talk about his bunghole, has no shame

  10. #10
    asshat TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Reno, Chicago, Fargo, Minnesota, Buffalo, Toronto, Winslow, Sarasota, Wichita, Tulsa, Ottowa........
    Posts
    8,920
    LBJ was talking to his tailor not in the open. And a man can't have his pants coming up into his bunghole now, can he?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexasHammer View Post
    LBJ was talking to his tailor not in the open. And a man can't have his pants coming up into his bunghole now, can he?
    Yeah, that would make it tougher for some of us to talk.

  12. #12
    asshat naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo should starts naked_bongo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    1 mile east of the Disch
    Posts
    7,222
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeHorn View Post
    The less governing Obama does the better. I prefer he engage in a failed attempt at a second term, and that his efforts at "governing" are failed, transparent attempts to reestablish his popularity.
    I'll never understand this mentality, Rush Limbaugh. Why would anyone hope that our President fails? Guess you're the ultimate party team player.

  13. #13
    Do you guys know the difference between a newspaper "article" and an editorial?

    Bernard

  14. #14
    asshat TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Reno, Chicago, Fargo, Minnesota, Buffalo, Toronto, Winslow, Sarasota, Wichita, Tulsa, Ottowa........
    Posts
    8,920
    Quote Originally Posted by naked_bongo View Post
    I'll never understand this mentality, Rush Limbaugh. Why would anyone hope that our President fails? Guess you're the ultimate party team player.
    Since you can't figure it out, let me help you.

    1. Rush wants to make a stir, so he says what he said. It makes headlines. That's why he said it.

    2. He did, in fact, mean it. It wasn't just ratings. His prediction was that despite the hagiographic imagery, Obama was actually a hard, hard leftie. Most people at the time thought he was a moderate. It didn't take a genius to see why he wasn't. This was a guy who sat in the pews listening to Rev Wright teaching he flock to GD America for 20 years. This was a guy who voted to deny medical care to dying babies. A guy who was to the left of Bernie Sanders, an out and out socialist. A guy who talked about "bitter clingers" and "you can't just keep driving your SUV's and flushing your toilets and setting your thermostat at 72" and who looked down on the American flag and patriotism generally. For anyone with a brain, this guy was scary as $#@!.

    3. It is clear that failure would have been good for the country. Passing Cap and Trade, immediate withdrawal from Iraw and closure of Gitmo, HCR, Card Check, the Fairness Doctrine, nationalizing the car companies student loans and god knows what else, that $#@! is bad, bad for the country, for freedom, and for prosperity.

    But in summary, it was mostly about the money and elevating himself by the comparison. You ought to respect Rush for the fact that he has a powerful intellect, the size of which is only rivaled by his egomania. But then it's lonely at the top, so what can you do.
    Last edited by TheTexasHammer; 11-15-2010 at 09:23 PM.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by naked_bongo View Post
    I'll never understand this mentality, Rush Limbaugh. Why would anyone hope that our President fails? Guess you're the ultimate party team player.
    I believe, that most of Obama's critics, wish failure on him more than they do success for the country. Mitch McConnell has already declared as much when he said his #1 goal for the next two years is to defeat Obama. Is that what the people of his state elected him to do? There really is little evidence of patriotism in our country. The Party comes first. Winning is more important than succeeding. Its been that way for a while now and both parties are guilty of it. We have 2 wars going and are experiencing the worst economic times in 70 years, but that is all secondary to politics. A true patriot sacrifices for his country when it is needed.

  16. #16
    The Commit-able Offer TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    End Of The Trail
    Posts
    9,491
    I'll never understand this mentality, Rush Limbaugh. Why would anyone hope that our President fails? Guess you're the ultimate party team player.
    You clearly didn't watch the television from 2002-2008

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexasHammer View Post
    2. He did, in fact, mean it. It wasn't just ratings. His prediction was that despite the hagiographic imagery, Obama was actually a hard, hard leftie. Most people at the time thought he was a moderate. It didn't take a genius to see why he wasn't. This was a guy who sat in the pews listening to Rev Wright teaching he flock to GD America for 20 years. This was a guy who voted to deny medical care to dying babies. A guy who was to the left of Bernie Sanders, an out and out socialist. A guy who talked about "bitter clingers" and "you can't just keep driving your SUV's and flushing your toilets and setting your thermostat at 72" and who looked down on the American flag and patriotism generally. For anyone with a brain, this guy was scary as $#@!.
    This is just comical. Left of Bernie Sanders? Give me a break. Obama's major failings have been because he hasn't been nearly as progressive as he campaigned. For the most part, he has been a corporate shill and enabler.

    This may come as a surprise to you, but unlike our president, Bernie Sanders actually IS a socialist.

  18. #18
    asshat TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer aka Old Freak Nasty TheTexasHammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Reno, Chicago, Fargo, Minnesota, Buffalo, Toronto, Winslow, Sarasota, Wichita, Tulsa, Ottowa........
    Posts
    8,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank Justice, Sr. View Post
    This is just comical. Left of Bernie Sanders? Give me a break. Obama's major failings have been because he hasn't been nearly as progressive as he campaigned. For the most part, he has been a corporate shill and enabler.

    This may come as a surprise to you, but unlike our president, Bernie Sanders actually IS a socialist.
    Do you really think that I just make stuff up? Really? http://nj.nationaljournal.com/votera...2=desc#results

    Yes, left of Bernie Sanders. More left than a Socialist, which makes him what exactly?

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexasHammer View Post
    Do you really think that I just make stuff up? Really? http://nj.nationaljournal.com/votera...2=desc#results

    Yes, left of Bernie Sanders. More left than a Socialist, which makes him what exactly?
    Wait Hammer, I thought this $#@! wasn't about left vs right and how that was all just a facade to hide the truth?

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexasHammer View Post
    Do you really think that I just make stuff up? Really? http://nj.nationaljournal.com/votera...2=desc#results

    Yes, left of Bernie Sanders. More left than a Socialist, which makes him what exactly?
    Do I think you make things up? I don't know, you tell me. Because, yes, in a small sample size of one year, a year when he was campaigning as much as he was working, his votes were the most liberal in the senate. Let's go back to those other years he was in the Senate that you are ignoring. He was ranked 16th in 2005 and tied for 10th in 2006. So the implication that you and Rush make that he is the most liberal person in the Senate is a little misleading. Was he very liberal and to the left? Yes. Does that mean he is a socialist? No. It means he believes in social policy for some things like 99% of other Americans do, and he believes in a little more of it than your side does. If you really think his presidential accomplishments make him a socialist, I'm going to assume you're using the term "socialist" broadly and incorrectly as a blanket term for "big central government."

    You claim that most people mistakenly thought he was a moderate. Actually, a lot of us thought he would be much more liberal. Because if his presidency was as liberal as you think it is, the more progressive part of his base, people like me, would not have abandoned our faith in him long ago.
    Last edited by Frank Justice, Sr.; 11-16-2010 at 12:40 PM.

  21. #21
    The Commit-able Offer TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific should starts TTomTerrific's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    End Of The Trail
    Posts
    9,491
    He is "much more liberal", he is just now realizing that the country isn't, and in order to stay employed or to have any of his policies enacted, he has to move to the middle......or things like the "tea party" or town hall meetings will put his ass back in check.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Home .. Advertise .. ShaggyShop .. PanchoChat
Football .. Basketball .. Baseball .. Other Sports .. RC Didn't Offer .. Gamboool
Varsity .. Hole in the Wall .. PCL .. Einstein's .. Nasty's .. GM Steakhouse .. NSAA
Bada Bing .. Can you help me with this? .. Shagslist .. Cloak Room .. Classics .. Bellmont