I wonder who will be more disappointed with an Obama victory In 2012?
Read Time:3 Minute, 14 Second
Will an Obama victory in 2012
break the hearts of the
far right or the hard left?
Since I’ve been voting, most of the time a party’s presidential nominee was fairly obvious before the Iowa Caucuses began. As hard as Bill Bradley worked against Al Gore. Or Mitt Romney worked against John McCain. In 1976 as hard as Ronald Reagan worked against Gerald Ford. The outcome was decided. (I was too young to vote for Reagan. I am using 1976 as an example).
The only primary that was a toss up until well into the season was 2008’s with Clinton and Obama. And that makes the republican primary almost unique. Despite Mitt Romney’s financial and campaign infrastructure advantages, a Romney victory in not yet a given. So far the only one that’s impressed me is Huntsman for his honesty regarding the theory of evolution. A rare and candid moment of which there are far too few in politics. Of course Huntsman has no money to run an effective campaign and the media is so adoring of Michele Bachmann and following Sarah Palin he will not get the press coverage necessary to make up for his lack of campaign cash. Plus no matter how many times he is able to get interviews with Wolf Blitzer or John King on CNN, not many republican primary voters are watching CNN.
So this leads me to believe that unless Obama does something truly insane, he will be easily re-elected in 2012. Which is fortunate for him as the fact is he has shown a total lack of the leadership when it comes to his own party. And this is where he can take a lesson from President George W. Bush. Love or hate him, the man knew how to lead. And most of all, he kept his party in lockstep with his goals. He and Karl Rove understood the power of focus, leadership and party discipline.
Another important trait Bush had was his ability to beat those who opposed his policies into a kind of political submission. Bush not only got Congress to agree to his tax cut package. He got them to pass an expensive prescription drug program with huge bipartisan support. Very few voted against either war. And if everyone remembers correctly, Bush’s opponent John Kerry was cornered by his support of Bush initiatives making his candidacy a farce as he voted with Bush on so many issues.
Obama victory or not, democrats are so much fun
I’ve been pleasantly entertained by the dissension among the left towards Obama. As the editors of MMA calls the left leaners who hate Obama, the “hard left” take every opportunity to bash Obama for what they deem his failings and the more center thinking and pragmatic left leaners defend Obama. In many cases begrudgingly admit that he is “the lesser of two evils”. In their minds even Obama is better than a republican. This makes me wonder who will be more disappointed in what I think is an almost assured Obama victory in 2012.
The right, or the hard left, who will be more disappointed? In my opinion, the hard left will be the more bitter. I can live with Obama since he has shown a willingness to listen and drop some of his more unreasonable expectations in quest of his his agenda. Compromise in an effort to get as much of what you want as possible is far better than getting nothing. And from even my conservative perspective, a democrat who is willing to see both sides and come to agreements that both sides see beneficial, is far better than a rigid ideologue like a Michele Bachmann or Dennis Kucinich raving wildly while our nation falls deeper into the abyss of financial and moral decay.
Editorial Note: An Obama victory in 2012 sounds good to me Milton.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
You’re right about one thing, Milton. The triumverat of Bush, Cheny, and Rove were an effective leader, and they were able for the most part to herd the cats of congress into line behind them. Right down every wrong road, and evetually into the ditch. If that’s what passes for leadership, you can have it. I’ll take Obama.
Right on Bradley, what do you think about that short and sweet analysis Milton?
President Obama indeed talks a good game to his supporters during stump speeches. Then moves to the center in the negotiation room. Bush would not have done that. And the democrats in Congress would not have been united in their fight against him.
He’s doing what he thinks he needs to do. And actually, if my party ends up with Rick perry or Michelle Bachman as the nominee, even this die hard republican most likely will vote for Obama. His willingness to work with us is a plus even if many on the left regard it as weakness or selling out.
I agree with you Milton. Curiously, the most sane one of the bunch, and a moderate, Jon Huntsman, is at the bottom of the pack. I guess he’s just too SANE for them.
While I am no longer as enamored of the president as I once was, I don’t consider myself Hard Left. I disagree with many of Obama’s decisions, particularly those on the environment and Afghanistan, but I generally support some of his other decisions and understand that he is often hampered by a headstrong and recalcitrant congress. As a result I will be voting for him. It is unreasonable to think that the party will put up a primary candidate. That will not happen because it could signal a clear loss for the democrats in 2012. So, Milton, I congratulate you on a well considered and well written analysis.
Gee Miltie! I find myself agreeing with almost everything you wrote. Food for thought indeed.
Sadly, I think you may be “right.” The hard left has worked just as tirelessly as those on the right to bring this president down.