WSJ: Why Obama Is Likely to Lose in 2012 (Consider the source it's written by Karl Rove.)

[Crazy Guggenheim]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]




President Barack Obama is likely to be defeated in 2012. The reason is that he faces four serious threats. The economy is very weak and unlikely to experience a robust recovery by Election Day. Key voter groups have soured on him. He's defending unpopular policies. And he's made bad strategic decisions.

Let's start with the economy. Unemployment is at 9.1%, with almost 14 million Americans out of work. Nearly half the jobless have been without work for more than six months. Mr. Obama promised much better, declaring that his February 2009 stimulus would cause unemployment to peak at 8% by the end of summer 2009 and drop to roughly 6.8% today.




Mr. Obama also has problems with his base. For example, Jewish voters are upset with his policy toward Israel, and left-wing bloggers at last week's NetRoots conference were angry over Mr. Obama's failure to deliver a leftist utopia. Weak Jewish support could significantly narrow Mr. Obama's margin in states like Florida, while a disappointed left could deprive him of the volunteers so critical to his success in 2008.


What he is missing - besides a conscience - is not that we wanted a leftist utopia but a follow through on what he promised; public option, etc. If he did that he would wouldn't take the time to spit someone like you.

BTW Karl, why didn't you ever serve in the military? Selfish fruitcake.

[Christine]

Bullshit!

[SubstituteTeacher]

I won't be voting for Obama again because he didn't follow through on the public option.

[Kbob]

I won't be voting for Obama again because he didn't follow through on the public option.
1) I don't think that the combined power of Jesus Christ, Gandalf and the Powerpuff Girls could have brought us the public option.

2) I don't believe that Obama ever promised us the public option as is implied by "follow through."

3) Who do you plan on voting for? Romney?

[webhead]

The next President may be in a position to nominate 2 or 3 people for the Supreme Court. This means the potential to add 2 or 3 CONSERVATIVES to the Court to side with Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts, and Alito. I am horrified by the possibility of 7 or 8 Conservative Justices for the next 15 to 30 years. This cannot be allowed to happen!

This is the reason why I will be voting for Obama in spite of my great disappointment of Obama's failures to robustly support progressive positions.

Should Obama lose and a Republican President take office in 2013, I will give up my political interests. I will leave DW, I will not watch Rachel, Keith, Ed, and other liberal TV hosts, I will tune out Tom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes. I will never vote in an election again.

And what do I expect will happen under a Republican President? I believe SCOTUS will overturn Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood will be defunded, Social Security will be privatized, Medicare and Medicaid will end, unions will lose the right to collective bargain, the middle class will disappear, and America will go to war over and over again. Moreover, the wealthy will become more entrenched as America becomes an oligarchy.

I am very pessimistic should there be a Republican President in 2013. I will just drop out and find other things to do that are more healthy than following politics.

And I will blame liberals for failing to vote for Obama. Sitting at home on election day will be much, much worse for liberals than voting for Obama with nose pinched.

[N.U.]

Every instance through history where the middle class has disappeared has resulted in violent, bloody revolution, as the Middle class serves, at it's most basic level, only one purpose: to shield the rich from the vitriol of the poor.

[SubstituteTeacher]

I hope Dean runs.

[big sky brad]

Howard Dean was on Lawrence O"Donnell's program last night and he said that Obama would get reelected.
He said it was because of all of the crap that the rightwing Governors are doing in several states now.
States like Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Indiana, and Wisconsin where they are passing ridiculous laws against the average Joe, who is a union member.
He said that the backlash will be felt at next year's elections and that the Democrats will take back the House, hopefully.
And we can back to solving the nation's problems instead of the Republicans holding everything from getting done.

[webhead]

Howard Dean was on Lawrence O"Donnell's program last night and he said that Obama would get reelected.
He said it was because of all of the crap that the rightwing Governors are doing in several states now.
States like Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Indiana, and Wisconsin where they are passing ridiculous laws against the average Joe, who is a union member.
He said that the backlash will be felt at next year's elections and that the Democrats will take back the House, hopefully.
And we can back to solving the nation's problems instead of the Republicans holding everything from getting done.
I sure do hope Dean is right!

Obama did a decent job today in framing the debate as a choice between the Republican aim to allow corporate jet owners to continue to receive tax benefits at the expense of people on Medicare. This is going to be hard for Republicans to defend. Moreover, the Republican plan to throw Grandma, Grandpa and their posterity under the bus in order to prevent the wealthy from a tax increase, not to mention the aim of Republicans to even CUT the taxes of the wealthy. Add Grandma, Grandpa and the kids are going to remember how the Republicans want to increase their costs of living when they vote in November 2012.

[PFunk]

Dean is probably right. And the supreme court is the ONLY reason why I probally will vote for Obama (who I now think is a DINO). Still there is a sizable (and growing) part of the democratic base that believes the party should begin to fear it's base instead of dissing them. This to emphasize this they are willing to give the repugs the presidently and both houses in 2012. And start working on putting real dems in 2016.

While I agree in principle I just don't think this country could survive until then. So my thought is why not start to do this now in 2012 to both push Obama back into the democratic fold and give the dems rank and file something to think about.

[webhead]

The next President may be in a position to nominate 2 or 3 people for the Supreme Court. This means the potential to add 2 or 3 CONSERVATIVES to the Court to side with Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts, and Alito. I am horrified by the possibility of 7 or 8 Conservative Justices for the next 15 to 30 years. This cannot be allowed to happen!

This is the reason why I will be voting for Obama in spite of my great disappointment of Obama's failures to robustly support progressive positions.

Should Obama lose and a Republican President take office in 2013, I will give up my political interests. I will leave DW, I will not watch Rachel, Keith, Ed, and other liberal TV hosts, I will tune out Tom Hartmann and Randi Rhodes. I will never vote in an election again.

And what do I expect will happen under a Republican President? I believe SCOTUS will overturn Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood will be defunded, Social Security will be privatized, Medicare and Medicaid will end, unions will lose the right to collective bargain, the middle class will disappear, and America will go to war over and over again. Moreover, the wealthy will become more entrenched as America becomes an oligarchy.

I am very pessimistic should there be a Republican President in 2013. I will just drop out and find other things to do that are more healthy than following politics.

And I will blame liberals for failing to vote for Obama. Sitting at home on election day will be much, much worse for liberals than voting for Obama with nose pinched.

Ginsburg says she has NO plans to retire before 2015. But this article corroborates my concern of a Republican President nominating a conservative Justice if OBama loses the 2012 election.

Excerpts:


Ruth Bader Ginsburg Talks Supreme Court Retirement Plans

By MARK SHERMAN 07/ 2/11 12:06 PM ET

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

WASHINGTON -- Democrats and liberals have a nightmare vision of the Supreme Court's future: President Barack Obama is defeated for re-election next year and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, at 78 the oldest justice, soon finds her health will not allow her to continue on the bench.

The new Republican president appoints Ginsburg's successor, cementing conservative domination of the court, and soon the justices roll back decisions in favor of abortion rights and affirmative action.

But Ginsburg could retire now and allow Obama to name a like-minded successor whose confirmation would be in the hands of a Democratic-controlled Senate. "She has in her power the ability to prevent a real shift in the balance of power on the court," said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California at Irvine law school. "On the other hand, there's the personal. How do you decide to leave the United States Supreme Court?"

For now, Ginsburg's answer is, you don't.

There are few more indelicate questions to put to a Supreme Court justice, but Ginsburg has said gracefully, and with apparent good humor, that the president should not expect a retirement letter before 2015.

[Xena]

Personally. the way things have gone so far, I don't think Ginsburg retiring now would guarantee a liberal justice. Obama probably wouldn't nominate a true liberal, and the Senate GOP would block the nomination of anyone he nominated anyway.

[webhead]

Personally. the way things have gone so far, I don't think Ginsburg retiring now would guarantee a liberal justice. Obama probably wouldn't nominate a true liberal, and the Senate GOP would block the nomination of anyone he nominated anyway.
He nominated Sotomayer and Kagan! They seem to be very liberal.

[Xena]

I'm not sure about "very."

[webhead]

I'm not sure about "very."

Compared to Scalia, Roberts, Alito, and Thomas - yeah - they are very liberal! :¬) Yet they are not enough to prevent the conservative rulings.

[big sky brad]

This is shaping up to the be most boring re-election cycle for a President in 40 years.
The funny ones like Trump and Huckabee already dropped out.
Pawlenty and Bachmann put me to sleep listening to them.
And when Romney starts talking, I start laughing.

I think Obama will be re-elected by the widest margin a Democrat President has been re-elected with in the last oh, say, 70 years.

Every time Obama tries to talk to the Republicans about doing ANYTHING, they walk away from him.
So, Obama takes a step towards Boehner, and Boehner takes 2 steps away from Obama, inching closer to the right all the time.
The more Obama keeps stepping towards Boehner, Boehner gets closer to the edge of the cliff.
Boehnor is now standing at the cliff's edge, and Obama is taking baby steps towards him, trying to talk him back from the edge.
Now Boehnor has to decide whether he will jump off of the edge of the cliff to avoid letting the black President from touching him, or just try to live with it later.

Frankly, I hope Boehnor decides to jump off of the edge.
He has gone so far to the right by now that he has passed Reagan's previous positions, and is approaching Nixon's old position of just firing everyone on the same Saturday night and hoping like hell no one will notice.