Update on this post: Clinton trounces Obama by 20 points in head to head poll
It’s time to think about 2012. Yes, it’s true. As we know, the world doesn’t end until 12/21/12 so we will have one more presidential election…presumably….
It’s way to early to make valid predictions. So I will satisfy my need for predictions by attempting some that may be inoperable in short order. But first I will reach back to one of my previous crystal ball moments about THE ONE. (Forgive me regulars, you’ve heard it all before.)
Obama is toxic for Democrats (made in Feb 2008). He would upend the Democrats, obliterate the Left, and accomplish next to nothing that the Democrats presumably stood for…and he said he did too. The returns are in on this point. You can google it. The Left will recover a bit now that the midterm is over, but it’s essentially neutered for a generation.
Further it was evident from early on that Obama’s real agenda dovetailed nicely with W’s, if one cared to look. Clinton and McCain both stood for departures from W’s agenda in one way or another. Clinton in particular could not be relied on to do as told. They had to be stopped, so they were. In broad strokes that meant Obama actually stood for this:
The expansion of centralized, corporate control. The HC law is not an intrusion of the government into the private sector so much as it is an admission that the Federal government and corporations are one and the same. Ditto for the bank and auto bailouts. I expect the talk of repeal will fade after a show vote or two. The law will be tweaked to adjust the most obnoxious elements. Nothing that damages centralized control in any real sense will occur.
War. Toning down the Iraq theater, while expanding of the wars elsewhere. Obama followed through on W’s Iraq agenda. He has expanded the Afghan war into Pakistan dramatically. Hell, Obama may even believe he’s set a deadline for an Afghan pull out. If he’s that naive, he’s in for a surprise. Ain’t gonna happen.
Social Security ‘reform’. Bush overplayed here in 2005. Too much, too soon, the economy was too good. Now Obama is in position to finish W’s job with a big hand up from the newly minted Congress.
These were always Obama’s big 3 agenda items. Everything else was for show or ignored.
Our candidates are selected for us. I am convinced of this. When predicting Presidential elections one has to A. Survey the landscape for those who are viable. Then B. Assess if these people are acceptable to the ‘powers that be’.
A number of Republicans hit both marks. Thune, Daniels ( it seems), Huckabee, possibly Romney. Marco Rubio is an even bet to be on any GOP ticket as the VEEP. Palin and Gingrich both fail on A. or B. or both. They will not be nominated no matter how many votes they get in primaries. (See 2008 Democratic primary campaign for a primer on how this might work.)
The Democrats are stuck. Firstly, the ‘powers that be’ have turned on the presumptive 2012 Dem nominee. Secondly, it’s unclear if he will be viable in 2012. Probably to a degree, but his brand is damaged badly. We are then left with Biden, who is a nonstarter, and Hillary Clinton, who has become acceptable to some of the Powers That Be if only because the mistake they made in 2008 is so overwhelmingly in evidence. But she’s stated repeatedly that she won’t be running and I believe her.
Whether or not there is a viable Dem nominee in 2012 may be beside the point. I suspect GOP voters will nominate as they are told to (both overtly and covertly), and then their guy will win the election. Please note this, as no one else seems to think it, I feel it needs to be repeated: The Tea Party PEAKED on Tuesday. The midterm was the beginning of the end of the tea party as a movement. They are now mainline Republicans circa 1984. Subsumed. Nothing they want diverges dramatically from what the Post GW Bush-Pre GHW Bush GOP establishment wants. They are in the tent. Rand Paul will act as a Bernie Sanders for the other team, interesting on occasion, mostly powerless, and always pointless.
As far as a second term for BHO goes it matters less if he improves in the country’s eyes, what matters is if he improves in the eyes of those who selected him in the first place. In terms of policy he’s done alright by them. The Fed’s happy. Wall Street got away with it. No public option. No prescription drug reimportation. The war(s) have expanded. The shucking and jiving about DADT lasted long enough to kill its repeal. Where Obama has failed astoundingly is in communication (He’s actually right here, but is referring to the wrong audience.). The promise of another great communicator in the White House to bamboozle most of us, most of the time has been brutally dashed. He’s just not that good at it. The same cabal that backed Obama in 2008 won’t be coming around again in 2012. He’s annoyingly disappointing. His character flaws seem to negate any possibility for a recovery. They fly in the face of his prime function as the Chosen One: to convince us that he’s one of us. Fail on this count and you’re out.
2012 will be interesting for 2 reasons. 1. To see who the GOP lands on to beat Obama (Who is most acceptable to the ‘selectors’?) and 2. To see if Obama decides to put himself through a losing campaign.
Ah, it is early. But this is may take from 11/8/10.
Please, please, please, anyone but Romney. Anyone but Romney.
Oh God, amen. I’d take Perez Hilton over his ass.
I’d take perez hilton’s ass over obama.
Oh PLEASE NOT him.
I have a nightmare that my choice in 2012 will be the fraud and some R nightmare like Romney. What I ask is the difference? Romneycare was the (failed) prototype for Obamacare.
ACK!
I would take Bristol Palin over Obama at this point.
I would takes Bristol’s bristols.
Be careful what you wish for…President Petraeus anyone?
Blech! They’re all equally horrible. :-p
I have said since day one that I’d never vote for Obama, but I’m more worried about President Rubio than Barack. Rubio is walking on holy water while wearing his religious right messaging on his wristband.
I’ve been reading that some folks believe the TP is a new and viable 3rd way, I disagree, (as noted by Pat Johnson) it is nothing but a reincarnation of the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition. The cloaking approach in calling it the TeaParty and attempting to portray it to the masses as an unaffiliated populist movement belonging to neither party was a new approach, but it didn’t take long for the facade to crumble and it’s candidates revealed as anti-choice, anti-gay political activists. I thought the effort by the Teaparty to relegate it’s anti-gay, anti-choice messaging to second tier status was clever and worked for awhile, but in time the driving forces behind the movement, which in essence is religious fanaticism run amok, became visible to all who CARED TO NOTICE.
This movement has tried to take this country before, it failed then, it will fail again because in time people see through the facade and come to understand that it’s real purpose is legislating religious right dogma into law, which in time steps on all toes. I predict the TP, which in fact is the extreme right of the GOP, will return to the mothership, from which the vast majority of it’s Congressional campaign funds came.
Now, back to Rubio. An Evangelist speaks about Rubio. Try not to throw up while watching this video:
Did God, like, say all that on His Twitter?
No Tamer, god’s not twittering, he’s speaking directly into her ear. Don’t you know how the god-to-human-prophet communication works? Wonder why god didn’t tell her to get rid of that hideous dress?
Seriously, Rubio is the cultural hero of the TP and that should make people stop and ask themselves, “WTF is the TP REALLY about?” Like I said, they can’t hold-up the populist facade for too long because eventually the reality that it’s held together by religious-right extremism surfaces, if only in the form of a red anti-choice wristband held up to the cameras in a pumped fist pose.
I did throw up. I think it was the dress. Lord have mercy. I am still shrieking in terror.
Did you notice the blank look, the mindless imitation of speech. Scary shit. Somebody needs to call an exorcist.
She needs to do a better job of coordinating her nonverbals with her verbals. As she was saying, “God will do this, God will do that” she was shaking her head no no no.
So Rubio is another Chosen One. How many Ones can there be?
sheesh, Anon, that video brought back my nightmarish upbringing. The Moral Majority was marching on and proselytizing every Sunday, all day long: Christian warriors were to take over government.
No matter it didn’t make sense. There are some strong proclamations in the Bible that thwart this idea.
PJ, “She needs to do a better job of coordinating her nonverbals with her verbals. As she was saying, “God will do this, God will do that” she was shaking her head no no no.”
And yet people still will follow what she says (blah, blah, blah) and not what she does (shaking head no). Who else does that? [hint: He's got a teleprompter.]
She said she wasn’t going to run in 2008 either, her exact words being “not in this lifetime” and it’s illegal for her to say she wants to run even if she does. Sorry, but it’s my duty as an American to hold out hope, for the reasons mentioned above.
I’m a young American, my entire future is invested in this country and I’m not going down without a fight god dammit.
L.I., I hope you are correct.
Amen LittleIsis
how are you doing? i agree Hillary will play her cards close to her chest and Bill collected alotof IOU’s this last midterm…Also the Sheeple may be waking up!
Hey Fuzzy! I too hope LI is correct. But will the PTB eat crow and admit they blew it?
Amen, L.I. That’s exactly what I thought.
I think she can be persuaded, and in fact, is contemplating her options even as we speak. After all, she is looking at the same dreadful Repub Presidential possibilities as all of us are. Does she really want to let the next President be Mitt (the Glove) Romney?! Come on!
If I understand her personality correctly (I do) and she is being honest when she says she will always be on the front lines for Americans until everyone has had the opportunities she had growing up, she would at the very least consider it.
In total agreement. Anyway, maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but when a politician categorically denies anything, all bets are off!
John….
While right when discussing Obama….
the normal laws of physics and Politics never apply where the Clintons are concerned. 2 years ago the Republicans were declared out in the weeds for the next 40 years and they resurged….
It is the lefts turn now and a viable left is necessary to the “powers that be” or the rethuglicans become Don Quioxte Josusting with straw horses and windmills!
I miss the Clintons and my “Third Way.” <3 <3 <3
“…the normal laws of physics and Politics never apply where the Clintons are concerned…” Amen.
check out the update i just posted at the top of this post.
The link mentioned Evan Bayh collecting a war chest for a possible ’12 run. Now, Bayh is a Clintonite, and he might be the icebreaker, declaring his candidacy, then Hillary can run and Bayh gets VP.
great news TL! many moons ago…as soon as bayh quit, actually, I thought a clinton/bayh ticket was a great bet for 2012. very middle of the road but it would go miles toward repairing the democratic party and making it viable again. The people brazile said they did not need, they really need. who’d a thunk?
Plus your thesis is very ‘clintonian’ – they are always playing 12 steps ahead. Bayh found obama unbearable so i can see this playing out. plus clinton/bayh can defeat Thune/Rubio or Huckabee/Rubio or cardboard cutout of Reagan/Rubio where as Obama/Biden would lose to all three.
Plus…again counter intuitive..but i think true: a legit Dem challenge to Obama in 2012 has to come from the middle not the left. A challenge from the Dem left in 2012 means obama cruises to renomination. and looks like better in the general.
I agree, and in my opinion it would be a good thing because a challenge from the center to Obama would be a challenge from the left, technically speaking. ;p
Nitpicking, but I would prefer that she run with a woman who is more of a lefty. We have to think of what happens after Hillary stops being President in 2020 (wink wink) and we want things to keep moving in a leftward direction. Bayh gives me an Obama vibe – sorry!
But I do agree that a centrist (aka Hillary) is our best bet in 2012.
That would be ideal, but I doubt our sexist nation could handle that much ova. Maybe Feingold or Franken?
“: a legit Dem challenge to Obama in 2012 has to come from the middle not the left”
More than that: the winner of the ’12 prez election will be someone who runs AGAINST obama’s record (as BO ran against Shrub’s.) The only dem who can do that is HRC, who already ran against him.
Love the idea but hate the pollster…Tea Party Puma ??? Newsmax??? Ewwww!!! Bleh! Would love to see it from a more reliable source.
“The Tea Party PEAKED on Tuesday. The midterm was the beginning of the end of the tea party as a movement.”
LOL! I’m laughing because I think you’ve miscalculated this so dramatically it’s kind of funny. People still just don’t get it and I apologize for not being better at explaining it. The Tea Party is not an oddball bunch of extremists, they aren’t an anomaly. They’ve been a part of this country forever. They are the moral majority, the Reagan democrats, the Clintonians. America’s base. They stayed home in 2008. They didn’t stay home in 2010. They won’t be staying home in 2012.
Palin presents the Republicans with a paradox. It’s going to be fascinating to watch. My money is on Palin. Anybody who can look Karl Rove in the eye and tell him to “buck up or stay in the truck,” is already leading the Republican party. But I’ll skip that for now and point out what the Dems will do. They will not primary Obama. That’s political suicide. Hillary will not be running in 2012. In 2012 it will be Obama. Narcissists don’t resign.
Yttk, I have been first and foremost in making the same points about the tea party since at least march of 2009. I insisted that they WERE NOT crazies, but as American as apple pie. I refused outright on many occasions here to succumb to the astro turf lies. I even corrected an NPR lib at lunch today – telling him that the Tea party peeps represented a far greater part of the U.S. than libs on the coasts. And they were by and large good, sane people. And the Dems were fools to debase them.
What I am saying is that they made a deal with the GOP. They got what they wanted in the midterm for the most part. Unless the GOP is stupid enough to ignore them (they won’t be ) they are now THE ESTABLISHMENT. With Obama as the perfect antagonist. This narrative is set. They won. On policy, they will be led from here on out by more conventional figures in the GOP. and those figures will be farther Right than they have been for 10 years. The marriage of the GOP and the TP is new but it is done. They expunged W. Reaganism is back. The GOP will control the house for a good long while.
I’ve also defended Palin often on this site. and my last ones. But she will not be President unless circumstances change so rapidly we hardly recognize our country. It is just not gonna happen. She leads a very vocal minority. She cannot win enough votes in the electoral college and the GOP players know this. She was the point guard for the TP all year. She did a fine job. The moves to bury her will begin in ernest soon enough. She may have told Rove to shove off, but Rove has a far more solid track record in elections. He, too, represents a minority but it is a much more powerful one than what Palin represents. The GOP wants to TP involved, they need them, they do not want Palin in power. They’ll finesse this so she is not nominated if she runs. Her power peaked on Tuesday night. It will be everybit as ugly as 2008. More so, the GOP is better at it.
The next GOP star is Marco Rubio, unless he’s got some skeletons.
And if Palin runs and gets the GOP nod, it means the PTB have decided on a second term for BHO, or Hillary is the opponent.
I’ve come to view Palin as pushy rather than smart.
The TP shifted the power center of the Republicans to DeMint. I had never seen DeMint interviewed and I think he is the clone of Jerry Lee Lewis and just as crazy.
Yup. The base of the Party stood up to the leadership, and they won. They are in charge now. The GOP will have to deal with it somehow – my money is on them putting a TP “star” (like Rubio or Rand Paul) as VP in 2012.
Keep your eye on Paul. I disagree that he is going to be powerless. He has the same type of dangerous charisma that Obama does. I know nothing about Rubio because I don’t care, but I’ve heard far too many times about GOP “rising stars” who turn out to be complete nothings. Look at NJ Governor Chris Christie, who is already being asked about 2012. LOL! Forget his positions, with which I obviously disagree: The man is extremely overweight. When was the last time we had a fat President? Yes, Americans are that shallow. Nagahapin (unless he loses about 100 pounds). Look at Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Bobby Jindal, Rick Santorum, etc. etc. etc. etc. Bottom line is, I’ll believe it when I see it, and I see it in Rand Paul.
An X factor in all of this is if the GOP leadership pisses off the TP Congresscritters too much, and they decide to run Palin as a Tea Party candidate for President. I haven’t seen this possibility talked about much, but I can’t imagine that La Sarah hasn’t thought of it.
“She leads a very vocal minority.”
According to recent polls, 54% of voters now identify as conservatives, only 18% as liberals, only 27% as moderate. If Palin is a conservative than she is not leading a minority.
“She cannot win enough votes in the electoral college”
The midterms just handed Republicans 680 state legislature seats and several governorships. That is still the untold story of the midterms. R’s now have a trifecta of control in 23 states and partial control over many others. That is who choses our president.
madamab:
I used to think Chris Christie’s weight would be a problem for him as a presidential candidate but I no longer think so.
Let me explain.
At least half the population of voters is also overweight and might relate well to another overweight person. Plus Christie could say it is a form of prejudice to speak derogatorily about someone’s weight problem (just as Obama used his blackness to shut off all criticism of him by labeling it racism).
I think in this chronically overweight America, Christie’s fatness could be an asset.
This is for ducksoup:
I suppose you could be right, but all of our recent presidents have been on the thin side. Teevee, you know. I just don’t see it.
On a more substantive level, he has not had a promising start in New Jersey. Everyone I know in NJ (and most are more conservative than I am) hates his guts. He is an unqualified disaster.
madamab,
I hope you’re right, as I despise the man.
We are a very impatient public. We want things to happen immediately or our attention drifts off and we begin searching for the “next best thing” to get our juices flowing. The hoopla that surrounded Obama a mere two years ago has all but been extinguished and it seems that we are already looking elsewhere for the “quick fix”.
This is what happens when an untried candidate is foisted upon the nation. A man whose image was burnished largely by a cheerleading MSM and the party leadership who felt the time was ripe to introduce an “exotic” into the mix to demonstrate our new found ” racial tolerance”.
The disaster that followed has many “signatories” to this debacle. But the issue remains that it could happen again. When you have an electorate who is rather ignorant of the topic and the issues involved, but have been raised in a culture that elevates “celebrity”, the chances are the narrative can once again be reworked that holds just enough appeal to allow them to make decisions based on nothing more than cult personality.
This merely leaves the door open to even the most undistinguished, unaccomplished, inexperienced candidate to walk through if the “powers that be” decide that this is their choice. If Obama, and the last handful of Tea Party candidates emerging from this election cycle have taught us anything, it is that it can be done.
” The Tea Party is not an oddball bunch of extremists,”
Their slate of candidates surely were.
“According to recent polls, 54% of voters now identify as conservatives, only 18% as liberals, only 27% as moderate. If Palin is a conservative than she is not leading a minority.”
Citation, please, kitty!
In contrast to TP hubris, two polls from Pew:
1. Exit poll showing –
Conservative 41%
Moderate 39%
Liberal 20%
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1789/2010-midterm-elections-exit-poll-analysis
2. Sept 2010 poll shows conservative : liberal identification to be nearly static over the past 20 years:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1743/static-america-no-shift-political-values-elections
“Is the electorate moving in any meaningful political direction, other than toward pique and annoyance?” Answer is no.
“A plot of more than 20 years of data … produces a graph that is ‘mind-numbing in its consistency and the small variations that do occur seem to have no consistent relationship to larger happenings on the political scene.’ In other words, an ideological flatline.”
From your own link:
“The proportion of self-described conservative voters increased by nearly a third from 2006 — from 32% to 41% — and is the highest percentage of conservative voters in the past two decades.”
Regardless of which polls you use, the vast majority of people in this country are conservative, followed by moderates, leaving a small but vocal number of liberals hovering at or below 20%. Therefore, if Palin is a conservative, she is not representing a small minority.
” vast majority of people in this country are conservative, ”
That would be a “plurality”, a term and concept you are obviously unfamiliar with.
In any case, Consv/Mod/Lib is but one way to slice the demographic. Some polls do a 4-way, very consv/mod consv/mod lib/very lib, or even 5 divisions. They are just convenient labels, not set ideologies.
The TP shifted the GOP leadership to the right. The MAJORITY of Americans still do not embrace TP ideology or Palin’s positions.
yttik, Also keep in mind it depends upon whether you are talking social or fiscal policy as to how one self identifies. These distinctions make a huge difference.
Just an example, I come from a family of Reagan fiscal supply-side pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps conservatives, but some are socially moderate. The socially moderate ones describe themselves as “moderate.” They are in mixed racial, ethnic marriages with biracial kids and are prolife. Some are fiscally conservative but strongly pro-choice. None of them like Obamacare and contributed to the total republican sweep in WI.
The key wording there (besides the majority vs. plurality mistake, which TL has already pointed out), is “if Palin is a conservative…”
Sarah Palin holds religious views that are not held by the majority of Americans. Americans as a whole are far more socially liberal than she is. Since those views are part and parcel of her conservatism, she does, as John said, represent a small minority of the population.