Barack Obama WILL NOT Have A CREDIBLE Primary Opponent in 2012

[Yavin4]

Sure, he may get a challenger who will pull in 3% of the vote, but he won't get a credible primary challenger in 2012. Just aint gonna happen. He's at 80% approve in his own party, and he's been over 80% since he took office.

For the factual based people, that means that HIS OWN PARTY highly approves of his presidency, and any challenger would need to get the entire remaining 20% and peel off 30% of his support. Again, THAT AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

So, please stop it with the fantasy posts about primary challenging Obama in 2012.

That is all.

[MadMaddie]

1. Thank you for the sanity check!

[Bluebear]

9. Because free and open elections are "insane"

[MadMaddie]

16. No one said that they weren't

This is how the Democrats ALWAYS blow it. They have a winne but that's not good enough. Then the party loses valuable voters to an unelectable candidate.

We need to get President Obama back in 2012 and this November we need to pick up Senate seats to crush the Republicans so we can get work done.

Vote for whomever you like if you are not happy no one is stopping you.

Interesting you attack me but you didn't attack the original poster who I was agreeing with....hunh...facinating.

[Bluebear]

18. FFS I didn't "attack" you, don't be so dramatic

You are satisfied with him, great, but don't say that it is against "sanity" for people to want a primary challenger.

[FiveGoodMen]

22. "pick up Senate seats to crush the Republicans"

Have you missed every single news item in the last three and a half years?

No one in the House OR the Senate is crushing anyone but the poor.

[MadMaddie]

24. So before we had Robert Byrds replacement are you telling me

that the Democratic party has been able to push everything they wanted through without capitulating to the right?

Really?

You act like the poor and the middle class just started getting crushed, it's been going on for 30 years and some think that it will be fixed in 18 months. Where have I been? Where have you been?

[FiveGoodMen]

25. Which direction are we currently moving in?

More help for the helpless ... or less?

18 months isn't the problem.

Defending Wall Street and screwing the poor as a matter of policy is the problem.

[defendandprotect]

126. And making corporations more powerful/richer with Health Care fiasco.... financial reform fiasco....

84% of TARP money goes to big banks!!

[geek tragedy]

109. Primaries are open and free. You just don't like the inevitable result. nt

[trof]

31. Isn't 'sanity check' when Sanity doesn't have exactly what you want for Christmas?

You get a Sanity check instead?
;-)

[EnlightenedOne]

2. Unless Jesus runs, he's it

and I'm happy about that. He needs 4 more years.

[gateley]

5. Jesus is a Republican -- just ask 'em. nt

[EnlightenedOne]

10. Yes, and if there was one thing Jesus was

adamant about - was that the rich strive to continue to get richer and keep theirs and the poor people should just be trampled over and forgotten. He even said 'screw the poor'. Think that is in Matthew somewhere. Jesus really had a grudge against the poor. Oh yea, and there is one whole book of the bible that he preaches against having an abortion.

[gateley]

28. Don't forget the chapter damning the Mexicans. nt

[madinmaryland]

29. Wait a second. I thought Barack Obama was the second coming of Jesus.

:wtf:

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ixion]

4. " 'cause when life looks like Easy Street, there is danger at your door"

Just sayin...

[bvar22]

54. I hear Uncle John's Band.

:toast:

[ixion]

80. Yep. Glad that someone picked up on it.

:toast:

[spoony]

6. If that's true, why all this energy on quashing the idea?

You have a hide thread option, right?

[Individualist]

149. +1

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Odd that we're getting one of these a day

In any case, given that the economy looks to be FUBAR for a few years, it'll likely be either a non-Democrat or a different Democrat in the White House come 2013. I'd prefer a Democrat, so I hope someone strong primaries Obama.

Also, once folks realize that Obama's looking to cut Social Security payments, his popularity among Democrats may drop substantially.

[Kahuna]

30. So. This is a Democratic discussion board. What would you expect?

:shrug:

[Change has come]

97. Something that looks like democracy, of course!

Or is it brand loyalty?

[Bluebear]

98. +

[Kahuna]

104. I suppose you could say SUPPORTING a Democratic administration on a

Democratic Discussion board IS brand loyalty. The admins of THIS forum have made it clear that they support brand loyalty. I don't know what you going to do when they begin to enforce the new rules.

[defendandprotect]

129. The challenger would of course be a DEMOCRAT . . . what's the problem there?

[defendandprotect]

127. Can't help noticing the difference . . . one big "D" Democracy...the other small "d" democracy . . ?

I have the same question --

brand loyalty -- or a people's government?

:)

[Fruittree]

68. Three questions as I read quite a few of your posts :

1. Who, in your opinion, who has actually been president was a good/great president?

2. How do you know for a fact that Obama wants to cut ss payments?

3. What is FUBAR?

Thank you!

[MannyGoldstein]

85. Well...

Since WWII
Great = FDR
Very good = Truman, Eisenhower, JFK
Good = Johnson, Carter
Bad = Nixon
Awful = Regan, Bush I, Clinton, Obama
Horrific = Bush II

My criteria is, fundamentally, how hard did each President work for working Americans.

[Fruittree]

101. Thank you - I disagree completely based on your stated criteria..

I think Obama is working really hard to do the best he can given the circus our politics has become but I was curious..

[defendandprotect]

128. Majority of Americans favored government run health care plan --

more than 76% of Americans by the time the thing was being voted on --

The power was there to do a single payer system - -

Unfortunately, the corporate money was there to prevent it --


We've just had something akin to that in the financial reform --

INSIDERS are saying that Dodd watered it down to secure his future in banking industry --

That's staff and aides, btw --

[scheming daemons]

71. About as many of these as there are posts about primary-ing Obama

It's a discussion board, Manny.

[MannyGoldstein]

87. "Nobody *should* primary Obama because he's great" I can see

But "Nobody *will* primary Obama, so stop dreaming" strikes me as odd. Could just be me...

[Forkboy]

8. It seems to worry people enough that they keep making posts like this.

I wish they'd make up their minds. If this is such a sure thing why do we need posts telling us?

[Bluebear]

11. Hey, 'he's at 80% approve'!!

:silly:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

45. There were tons of posts saying "Bush sucks!" for the last 9 years.

If he truly sucked, why did people have to keep saying he did? Sounds like people were trying to convince themselves of something...

Or hey, how about this?

There are tons of posts saying Obama sucks and is a corporatist. If he is a corporatist, why do they have to keep making those posts? Sounds like they are trying to convince themselves of something...


Or maybe people just like posting on message boards?

[Number23]

56. Well played, hon

There are tons of posts saying Obama sucks and is a corporatist. If he is a corporatist, why do they have to keep making those posts?

Exactly. :)

[Forkboy]

73. Well, I can't argue that.

Touche. Or should I say Trueche? :)

[girl gone mad]

79. Usually people reacting to specific events,

and complaining about specific policies.

[jaxx]

12. I doubt he gets a challenger at all.

More like they're just having fun getting by with putting down the President.

Whatever jerks their chains.

[Bluebear]

121. 'More like they're just having fun getting by with putting down the President.'

:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

130. Don't think that any of the homeless, impoverished or unemployed think it "fun" . . .!!

May be fun for corporations -- big banks, big corporations -- too big to fail!!

84% of TARP money goes to big banks!!

[LWolf]

13. Any challenger is a credible opponent if the purpose

is to send a clear message.

I've never thought there would be a primary challenger who would actually BEAT him. I just want a challenger to FUCKING CHALLENGE HIM on the issues, on his neo-liberal policies, and pull enough of the vote to send a strong, clear message.

To Obama, and to the rest of the party.

So, if there is a challenger, I will eagerly vote for him, or for her.

[EnlightenedOne]

20. Wouldn't you imagine that another

challenger, should he/she prevail - would run into the EXACT SAME problems?

The fact that this country was sold out to the rich & powerful (wall street, bankers, oil execs, ins. execs, the military industrial complex, etc.) 8 years ago? The Presidency has probably never been less powerful than it is today. I believe Obama is smart enough to give and take and play the game, with an end-game in sight. You play their game or you are eliminated. I think that has been made clear over the years.

[LWolf]

27. No, I wouldn't imagine that.

At least, not if the challenger was not a neo-liberal, and was willing to actually allow left-of-center non-neoliberal policies at the table.

A challenger more concerned with reaching out and helping those who got him or her to the WH, instead of trying to reach out to those who won't ever concede anything, anyway.

A challenger who would put together a non-neoliberal, left-of-center administration.

[bvar22]

58. The most bitter broken promise of 2008:

"Everyone will have a seat at the table."---Candidate Obama

I thought this would be a huge step forward for the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party...
"Hooray! We are finally going to have a seat at the table."
.
.
.
and then THIS slap in the face:

The DLC New Team

(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

[LWolf]

67. Yep. nt

[defendandprotect]

135. "DLC" is about to be banned here . . . evidently, it's become a slur word . . . ???

Was amazed when I read that in the "New Rules" --

And would presume that the New Rules will go into effect BEFORE the "Cat Food Commission"

makes it recommendations to Obama on Social Security and Medicare?

hmmm.....

:eyes:

[bvar22]

138. If they are going to ban "DLC",

they might as well ban "FDR" and "LBJ" at the same time.

[xiamiam]

116. grayson would be the one..nt

[defendandprotect]

132. Grayson would be terrific . . . . can you imagine the debate!!

I'd also take Whitehouse -- Franken --

I'd take Maxine Waters!!!

Just would be so nice to have a real debate now and then!!

:)

[madville]

139. I doubt President Obama would debate someone from the left side

It would paint him in a bad light with the Left, a debate like that would do him more harm than good. He would debate someone like Hillary Clinton, who would hold similar positions on the issues so there wouldn't be much contrast.

[LWolf]

147. He'd be great. nt

[defendandprotect]

131. Yeah -- would be nice to hear someone on the left challenging Obama . . .

:)

[Subdivisions]

14. Who are you calling out? n/t

[Yavin4]

46. The Truth

I'm calling out fact based truth.

[FBaggins]

15. Of course he could draw a challenge.

I expect the economy to improve markedly before it becomes an issue, but if things DON'T improve, of course he could draw a challenger.

Just because a majority of Democrats approves (it isn't 80% and it isn't CLOSE to "highly approves"), doesn't mean that they wouldn't prefer another alternative if given the choice.

Also - Quite a few self-identified "independents" vote in Democratic primaries (among whom his support is far lower).

I wouldn't put it past Hillary (whose approval among Democrats is higher).

If we lose the House and/or Senate... the intra-party warfare only heats up.

[Tesha]

44. Here in NH, we have an essentially "open" primary.

Democrats and "undeclareds" can vote in the Democratic Primary.
And most of the "undeclareds" are really Republicans at heart.
In round numbers, our electorate is one third Republican, one
third undeclared, and one third Democrat.

Wanna bet on Obama winning the 2012 NH Democratic primary?
i'd say the outcome depends on how hot a race the Republicans
are running.

Another fact folks might want to consider is that many of us are
loyal-enough Democrats that we'll still tell pollsters that Obama
is the best thing since sliced bread, no matter how we're actually
feeling. That might explain some of this "4 out of 5 Democrats
recommend Barrack" stuff.

Tesha

[defendandprotect]

133. Question: Will NH being voting FOR Obama or AGAINST GOP . . . ???

[Tesha]

141. They'll be voting FOR the GOP and AGAINST OBAMA.

I thought I made that clear.

Tesha

[defendandprotect]

143. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with NH's voting history . . . did they vote for McCain in '08?

And, specifically re your last paragraph ...

Another fact folks might want to consider is that many of us are
loyal-enough Democrats that we'll still tell pollsters that Obama
is the best thing since sliced bread, no matter how we're actually
feeling. That might explain some of this "4 out of 5 Democrats
recommend Barrack" stuff.

I'll ask it this way . . . will Democrats be voting FOR Obama or AGAINST GOP?

How strong are the anti-Obama feelings-- ?




----------------

Here in NH, we have an essentially "open" primary.
Edited on Tue Jul-20-10 07:44 PM by Tesha
Democrats and "undeclareds" can vote in the Democratic Primary.
And most of the "undeclareds" are really Republicans at heart.
In round numbers, our electorate is one third Republican, one
third undeclared, and one third Democrat.

Wanna bet on Obama winning the 2012 NH Democratic primary?
i'd say the outcome depends on how hot a race the Republicans
are running.

Another fact folks might want to consider is that many of us are
loyal-enough Democrats that we'll still tell pollsters that Obama
is the best thing since sliced bread, no matter how we're actually
feeling. That might explain some of this "4 out of 5 Democrats
recommend Barrack" stuff.

[Tesha]

148. Here are the 2008 results

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/individual/#NHP00
 
Obama: 384,826 54%
McCain: 316,534 45%

Obama won, but it wasn't exactly a run-away victory.
 
Now as to "how are the feelings?", that's tougher to call.
A lot of NH really, really hates Obama. Meanwhile, the
Democratic Party machine still loves him. The rank-and-
file Democrats? Who knows! As I said earlier, many of
us are simply lying to the pollsters in support of our
party and our President. But personally, I think you'll
see all three of NH's Federal Elections go red in 2010 and
I think you'll see us vote for the Republican Presidential
candidate in 2012.

(John Lynch, our "Democratic" Governor may keep
getting re-elected, but he's not a real Democrat.)

Tesha


Tesha

[xchrom]

17. You're probably right. I'm not one who puts

A lot of faith in the mob though.

That's rarely worked out for my peeps.

[msongs]

19. looks like the anti-democracy believers have all gotten together to squash dissent today lol nt

[Bluebear]

21. "It seem to me you love making anti-Obama post"!

:cry:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8781351&mesg_id=8781860

[Ignis]

36. Who is this Anti-Obama, and why are people making him post?

"Put the dog down, Damien!"

[Bluebear]

86. -----

:rofl:

[Bluebear]

122. .

[DCBob]

23. Any Prez with 80% approval is not going to get primaried..

Those who disagree are simply clueless.

[FBaggins]

33. He doesn't HAVE 80% approval.

So anyone who thinks that's relevant may simply be clueless.

[DCBob]

34. Yes he does.. we are talking about about a Democratic primary and Democratic approval..

who's clueless?

[FBaggins]

39. Nope.

He doesn't even really have it among Democrats (several polls have shown it lower in recent weeks) - but that's beside the point. Approval among self-identified "Democrats" and Democratic primary voters is not the same thing. Not even close.

All you have to do is spend ten minutes on DU to tell that the base isn't anywhere close to 80% approval. Not even in the same zip code. And the base is who votes in primary election.

Moreover... even moderately high approval among party members doesn't help you if the person running against you has even higher approval numbers with those same voters and they perceive a weakness for one candidate in the general.

So the answer to your question would appear to be "you"

[DCBob]

40. Guess you dont keep up with Gallup much..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/141131/obama-job-approval-rating-down-among-independents.aspx

[FBaggins]

42. Guess you thought they were the only polling firm in the country.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-content/misc/usapolls/US100617/Obama_Oil_Spill/Complete%20June%2030,%202010%20USA%20Poll%20Release%20and%20Tables.pdf
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_oil_spill_062110.pdf?tag=contentMain;contentBody


Or that others would miss that you can't respond to the parts that aren't "beside the point".

You really think that Democrats are stupid? If the President has 35% approval nationally a year from now and polls show him trailing any republican with a pulse by double digits... do you really think that they'll say "well... we like him... so I'll vote for him anyway" ???

This isn't complicated. If a year from now it looks like he'll lose (taking another half-dozen senate seats with him) - he will draw a challenger... regardless of how democrats in general feel about the job he has done.

[DCBob]

43. Are you dense or just pretending?.. I repeat, I am talking about Democratic approval ratings..

His approvals among Democrats are very high in every poll I have seen. 70-80%.

[Yavin4]

47. Gallup Has Tracked Him Since He Took Office

And he's never even been below 75%, and some people here keep fanning the flames that he will get a credible primary challenger.

It's unreal. Obama has near unanimous support in his own party, and folks on DU keep posting that he's losing his base. Ha!

80%+?!?! and he's going to get primaried?

[DCBob]

50. They are clueless...

I dont know why I even waste my time. :)

[Number23]

59. "Obama has near unanimous support in his own party, and folks on DU keep posting that he's losing

his base. Ha!"

+100 There are few so blind as those who REFUSE to see.

[FBaggins]

64. You can seriously post that on DU?

You can't even lurk here without seeing that he is in no way garnering "near unanimous support in his own party" - not even close.


Once again - there's a BIG difference between "democrats" and democrats who vote in a primary... AND there's a big difference between people who generally "aprove" and those who are willing to go vote (see "adults" vs "likely voters") AND there's a REALLY big difference between luke warm support for the leader of the party in general, and saying that there isn't someone ELSE in the party that you would prefer.

[Number23]

69. lol I don't consider DU to be anywhere near representative of the Dem Party

And I don't think that anyone else does either.

[FBaggins]

70. They are more representative of the primary electorate

than a random sampling of adults who self-identify as democrats.

[JI7]

100. no they aren't , Obama is more popular among Dems overall

than just on DU .

[FBaggins]

102. Wouldn't it be better to read the post before replying?

No doubt he's more popular among "dems overall"... but we're talking about how popular his is among the people who will vote in the next presidential primary. That's a very different group (and much closer to the mix here on DU than to "dems overall"

[JI7]

142. yes, he is more popular among those who will vote in the primary

far more than he ison DU.

the people who vote in primary don't reflect much of DU either. as Obama was more popular in the actual primary voting than he was on DU during the primary.

and Edwards was one of the more popular ones during the primary. and look at how he did. and this was before the scandal.

[defendandprotect]

134. "Folks on DU" . . . ?? How much of the world are you ignoring?

And I agree on the polls -- he was down to something in the 50's last week or so --

[FBaggins]

48. You refuse to read what you reply to yet call others "dense" ???

We're both talking about democratic approval ratings (nice to see you shift from "80%" to the more accurate "70-80%" (you think they go up if we lose the House and/or Senate?)

His approval is NOT that high among the Democratic base... and THAT is what matters in a primary. It's also incredibly naive to think that overall approval numbers don't matter to primary voters.

You obviously haven't seen many elections if you haven't seen Democrats vote for their 2nd/3rd favorite candidate because he was the one that polled best in the general election. Or vote for their favorite against an incumbent when that incumbent polls poorly against a general opponent and their favorite doesn't.

BTW... 70-80% isn't "very high" when you're talking about your own party... and it gets worse when you break the approval down.

[DCBob]

51. It's high enough.. He will NOT be primaried.. its absurd.

Feel free to keep living in lala land if that gives you some pleasure.

[FBaggins]

53. What do you think Carter's job approval numbers were in 1978?

His overall approval numbers were quite close to Obama's. On what basis do you think that his Democratic internals were any different?

He drew a very credible primary challenger.

IOW... you haven't a clue what you're talking about. You're just performing an exercise in wishful thinking.

[DCBob]

60. OMG!.. Obama is not Carter...

Please keep it real.

[FBaggins]

62. That's your argument?

He isn't Carter?

What happened to just being able to it just isn't possible to draw a primary opponent if you're reasonably popular among Democrats two years out?

If his performance doesn't improve, especially if we lose the house/senate, his approval numbers among democrats will continue to decline. A credible opponent hinting that she might get in the race followed by a poll showing her as competitive - changes everything.

[DCBob]

63. Yes.

[FBaggins]

66. Then you are left where you started.

Without a valid argument.

Have a nice evening. :)

[G_j]

78. I wish he was nt

[FBaggins]

106. Lol... good point. n/t

[JVS]

26. So is "No you can't" the new slogan for 2012?

[Oregone]

32. In a primary, the people--not you--get to decide that

Hey....you convinced yourself yet? You getting worried or something?

:rofl:

[Ignis]

35. This needed a new OP? There weren't enough threads on the topic?

:shrug:

[QC]

57. We get two or three of these every day ately.

It's almost like some sort of message discipline operation has sent out talking points or something.

[Bluebear]

96. And all the same verbiage.

Hot off the fax machine!

[QC]

105. Surely it must be the purest coincidence. n/t

[Bluebear]

145. !

[K8-EEE]

37. I TOTALLY AGREE! THEY GOT NOBODY!!! NT

[Hydra]

38. Heh

:popcorn:

Is that fear I smell?

Wasn't Secretary Clinton "The inevitable candidate" at one point?

Tell me, if the numbers are that great, why did you even post this?

[Yavin4]

49. You Smell Truth Based on Facts

Not fear. The truth based on evidence that he's polling 80%+ in his own party means no primary challenger, who would have to start campaigning in earnest by this coming January.

Aint Gonna Happen.

[Hydra]

52. Uh-huh

Truth is self-evident.

But that's ok- you can talk tough and either be proven right, or like so many others, you'll disappear and we'll never hear another word on the subject.

BTW, I don't think there will be a primary challenger either, unless the President opts not to run for re-election. After all, they're all getting what they want, and that's what matters...amirite?

[rpannier]

41. Bush Sr was at about 90% with the public at large and he didn't get re-elected

Politics is extremely fluid and 6 months is an eternity
Just ask Harry Reid and the Nevada Republican Party about that
In January he was toast, now he's 7 points ahead

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

55. I've already promised him that I won't run.

And I'm a man of my word.

[sendero]

61. I agree...

... and that just makes it more likely that we'll have a Republican president in 2013.

[depakid]

65. Barak Obama himself may not be credible in 2012!

and his support may well whittle down to those who think he can do no wrong.

[scheming daemons]

72. Keep wishing... the OP was about reality, not your deepest desires...

...

[depakid]

76. Not sure what your definition of credible is- but here's mine

if his poll numbers are mired in the low 40's or 30's- that's not credible.

If he gives a speech and no one cares- or believes what he's saying that's not credible.

If no one knows what (if anything) he believes in or is willing to stand up and fight for, that's not credible.

And the fact of the matter is that it happened to his political soul mate, Kevin Rudd- who was a far more successful and popular leader than Obama a mere 7-8 months ago.

[Yavin4]

82. Again, No Facts. No Numbers. No Truth.

Just fantastical thinking. Just like Bush, and we all use to make fun of him.

80%+ approval rating from his own party, and never lower than 79% after 18 months.

A series of major legislative accomplishments which have put us back on the rigtheous road, and yet, there are folks here that have some sort of weird fantasy that someone will challenge Obama for the nomination.

Unbelievable.

[depakid]

84. Spare us the regurgitations

You're living in a fantasy world if you don't think it can and does happen to much more effective leaders and presidents than your hero.

I'm not sure how many more constituencies this guy can alienate with his incessant pandering to the right and pathological conflict aversion- but I'm quite sure they'll find some more in the coming months.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Yavin4]

91. Name Calling

That's against DU rules. Thanks for playing.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Yavin4]

94. More Name Calling

Keep going. Keep it up. You're doing great. Almost there.

[Bluebear]

95. Look we can sense you are frustrated, maybe you should take a break.

:cry:

[Yavin4]

111. I'm Fine.

You're the one resorting to calling people names.

[geek tragedy]

110. Somebody missed their nap time. nt

[NJmaverick]

108. Based on what you have been posting, it's you that refuses to face the real world

when challenged to actually provide a REAL WORLD name that meets your ideological purity test and can actually get elected you come up with NOTHING.

[Yavin4]

75. You Are Good for a Laugh

I guess 80% approval is really whittling it down. Huh?

[depakid]

77. What's always good for a laugh is people citing bogus numbers (which they don't understand)

and then drafting a foot stomping post with them- thinking "that'll show 'em"

;-)

[Yavin4]

81. Really? Really?

From the poster that uses polling data to tell everyone that America is a Progressive nation, but then shuns that same data when it opposes their argument.

Nice.

[depakid]

89. I look at what's behind the dozens of metrics and what flows from trends

You look at one number (that's not very telling- and isn't what you claim it is) and make broad and sweeping pronouncements about the future!

Something tells me you've never taken a stats class or had to use quantitative or qualitative analysis.

[Yavin4]

93. Oh Wow, You Know Qualitative Analysis

I'm impressed. Tell me what does average mean?

Oh, brother.

[Radical Activist]

118. bogus numers

Like claiming Obama's #'s are in the 30's and low 40's? You're making shit up again.

His approval rating has "dipped" to about 50% and stayed there.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

[SteveG]

74. But according to the teabaggers, Hillary is going to challenge him

in a primary run. They are pinning all of their hopes on this. How many think Hillary will give up her job as SoS to run against Obama in 2012? I don't, I think she is enjoying herself too much, she is really good at the job, has a lot of influence and just don't see her resigning and opposing Obama in 2012, unless he decides he want's out.

[Radical Activist]

119. She would get a lot of support.

But I don't believe she'll run and she would do even worse than she did last time. She had every advantage on her side last time and still blew it.

If there's a serious challenger it will be a corporate-backed person with little or no public record. Someone who can attract liberals without getting pinned down on the issues.

[kgnu_fan]

83. We really need to free our election from money so that credibility is not bought and sold

[unkachuck]

90. I'm supporting Sean Penn in 2012....

....I saw him on charlie 'two-lip' rose; he's magnificent!....he's ten times raygun with a heart and brain....

....our next president, Mr. Sean Penn!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

99. Gene McCarthy wasn't considered "credible" in '68. Ask LBJ.

[sufrommich]

103. A rather odd confluence of leftist and Hillary supporters

in this thread. Politics makes strange bedfellows.

[Orsino]

107. We have decided, two years ahead of time, that we will be unable to do better?

That saddens me.

Even if it's true, leaping to that conclusion saddens me.

[Yavin4]

112. You need two Years To Put Together A Campaign

You don't just create a presidential campaign out of thin air. You need two years to put the apparatus together.

[FBaggins]

117. Not if they already exist you don't.

n/t

[defendandprotect]

125. And especially if you are well known . . . don't think Jack Kennedy announced . . .

until just months before the election --

We're been so inurred now to the idea of 4 year campaigns -- minimum two years --

that we don't understand any longer how that works against our interests and in the

interests of MSM which gets 80% of the campaign money -- and other interests.

Mainly it gives the right wing time to run swiftboatings --

Right now you can hear people saying re November . . . wow, 5 months to go!!

Who fears that most -- left or right?

[derby378]

113. Sounds like someone's afraid there WILL be a primary challenge

...and is resorting to a little armchair PsyOps. But maybe I'm wrong.

[sufrommich]

114. You know those people who claim we must be "afraid" of

Sarah Palin because we ridicule her fantasies? Yeah, that.

[Yavin4]

120. I'm Afraid of a Primary Challenger

Like the Yankees are afraid of the Orioles.

[defendandprotect]

124. I don't think they'll be a vote FOR Obama . .. I think we'll continue to vote AGAINST right wing --

but I'd like to see challenger --

Whitehouse, Grayson -- Franken -- whatever!

Actually, I'd prefer someone like Maxine Waters!! --

and wouldn't it be ironic if we were finally "saved" by someone like Al Franken???

Does have its humorous side!!



:)

[xiamiam]

115. i'm in northern california..very little support for obama here now

I keep reading about the polls and how high his approval rating still is but i can tell you that i dont run into anyone who is not disgusted...we are admittedly a liberal area..but we are worker bees and he doesn't have us in his corner anymore..if someone like grayson stepped up, the majority here would get behind him..

i KNOW that is not going to happen...but I can hope..miracles sometimes happen when people are deserving

however it plays out, Obama is not going to have the broad swell of support from the masses..just is not gonna happen..too many disappointments and in this area, we are deeply opposed to these wars

[defendandprotect]

123. Interesting . . . .

How much is left of liberal California -- you know the California which used to be

so feared by the GOP -- and why has it allegedly dwindled?


I wouldn't say that anyone will be voting FOR Obama --

it will be a vote AGAINST the right wing --

but I'd much prefer another candidate --

[jah the baptist]

136. i have never met a single democrat who thought he would or would want him to

not in real life

are people who suggest such things really democrats?

[bigwillq]

137. Hello

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[jah the baptist]

140. ciao

grazie

[JJ]

144. Big hole in your logic

I approve of the job the President is doing, but that doesn't mean I would vote for him if I saw a primary challenger who would kick the Republicans in the ass rather than kiss their asses for co-operation they will never give.

[Scurrilous]

146. Indeed. n/t