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

Bookmark and Share    Last week White House 2012 asked readers if they believed  that there was a Democrat who could challenge President Obama and snatch the his party’s nomination away from him. In that poll, 49.15% of respondents indicated that they believed Hillary Clinton could do that while 25.42% feel that no one can take the nomination away from him at this point. That was followed by other names that readers felt could beat the President which included 8.47% for New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, 5.08% for former Indiana Senator Evan Bayh, 1.69% for Howard Dean, and 10.17% who believe that other Democrats could take the Democratic nomination away from President Obama.

At the moment, the President is so vulnerable that even the most optimistic of liberals must be having doubts about President Obama’s reelection chances. In many ways it does seem that his prospects for reelection are dimming each day. With increasing bad economic indicators, high unemployment numbers, low consumer confidence, and nothing to show for his effort except for a national debt that he brought up to crisis levels, no one is willing to suggest that Barack Obama is the person best suited to lead America in the right direction for the next four years. This is reflected by numerous national polls which demonstrate that President Obama is now at the lowest approval ratings that he has ever seen. On Monday Rasmussen reported that the President is approved by only 22% of those voters who are currently not yet committed to him or any particular Republican candidate who is running for President.

With the writing on the wall, President Obama has even realized that he must really work some magic to turn both the economy and his approval around. Yet his latest attempt failed to pull any rabbits out of the hat and was nothing more than a regurgitated version of his previous stimulus packages which only achieved the first ever downgrading of our national credit rating. After his big roll out of this plan before a special, nationally televised, speech to a joint session of Congress, most people simply yawned and asked themselves……. “didn’t we hear him say this before?” And now that President Obama has fired his big guns with his new jobs bill, it would seem that he has nothing left in his arsenal.

Oh sure the President can continue to position himself through an attempt to wage class warfare. And he can try to position himself in a way that will allow Republicans can be blamed for the economy because of their lack of support for his jobs plan. But such maneuvering still won’t help him. At some point people see through the posturing and at some point they will not deny where the buck stops and why it is not making its way in to their pockets.

That is why there are some who are beginning to wish that President Obama would decline the nomination to a second term.

This suggestion recently appeared in of all of places, The Chicago Tribune, one of President Obama’s hometown newspapers. In 2008, Barack Obama was the first Democrat that the paper endorsed in its 161-year history. Yet in the particular article, columnist Steve Chapman wrote;

“Obama might do his party a big favor. In hard times, voters have a powerful urge to punish incumbents. He could slake this thirst by stepping aside and taking the blame. Then someone less reviled could replace him at the top of the ticket.”

Chapman who supported Obama also noted the following;

“Former White House spokesman Bill Burton said that unless Obama can rally the Democratic base, which is disillusioned with him, “it’s going to be impossible for the president to win.” Democratic consultant James Carville had one word of advice for Obama: “Panic.”

Then there was a Monday morning article that appeared in the Washington Times which had the headline Liberals Vow to Challenge Obama in Democratic Primaries. According to that piece, so-called progressive leaders and more than 45 liberal leaders (both terms mean Democrats) want to recruit six candidates to challenge President Obama for the nomination in order to give a greater voice to liberal positions on everything from the military to poverty.

So it would seem that no one is really pleased with Barack Obama. His base feels he has not gone far enough, his opponents believe he has gone to far and those who are in the middle just don’t approve him of anything that he’s done. Such a situation does make it look as if Democrats would be better off running someone other Barack Obama in 2012. With him at the top of the ticket, not only do Democrats improve their chances of losing the White House, they will find themselves likely to lose control of the Senate and unlikely to gain any ground towards retaking control of the House. This would be a trifecta for Republicans that would set liberals back for a decade or more and spark the type of talk about the Democrat Party that Democrats themselves brought up regarding Republicans in 2008. After taking control of all three federal legislative branches, many on the left claimed that the G.O.P. was going the way of the Whigs.

Such setbacks could leave an incredibly negative legacy that will truly damage the  progressive, liberal Democrat agenda.  For that reason, the question of stepping down has to be at least considered. When President Lyndon B. Johnson saw his base divided and his popularity pummetting, not only considered not seeking reelection in 1968, he took advantage of not running.

While history still questions exactly al the reasons why Johnson decided not to run for reelection, it is clear that he was not entering the ‘68 campaign in a position that would have allowed him to win any popularity contests. He was even receiving a significant challenge from liberal Eugene McCarthy. Although Johnson did not actively campaign against McCarthy in the New Hampshire Democratic presidential primary, McCarthy still embarrassed Johnson by coming within 7 percentage points of defeating the incumbent President. But by that point in 1968, it was too late for Democrats to turn their electoral fate around, regardless of who they ran at the top of their ticket.  By November, not only did Democrats lose the White House, they lost seats in the Senate and the House. From the look of things now, President Obama will be costing Democrats far more seats  in 2012 than they lost in ‘68. And to make matters worse, the losses will be so severe that the G.O.P. will be able to repeal the President’s single self described, greatest accomplishment….. socialized healthcare.

No matter how you look at it, President Obama is doing no one any good. He is not helping his own Party and more importantly, he is not helping America. Which is why WorldNetDaily columnist Joseph Farah offered his own unique strategy. Farah suggests that Sarah Palin challenge Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination. He writes that “the idea would be for Palin to win the Democratic nomination with mostly Republican and independent votes.”

By getting Republicans and Independents to change their Party affiliations so that they can vote in Democratic primaries and caucuses, Farah believes Palin could beat Obama or at the very least, cause him to spend some of his ample war chest before the general election. According to Farah,

“Personally, I believe most Americans would lose interest in the Republican contest and focus their political money, time and energy on the Palin-Obama race.” He adds, “I think it’s a sure-fire recipe for saving America by making sure Obama is not even a viable option in the general election. He might be forced to run as a third-party candidate, a write-in or not at all! “

While Joseph Farah’s Rush Limbaugh-like 2008 launch of Operation Chaos which compelled Republicans to vote for Clinton over Obama in the Democratic primaries, such a scheme for Palin is unlikely to work. But Democrats should be able to turn to someone other than Sarah Palin to save them. Right now President Obama is a rudderless ship steering the United States into the thick ice. Republicans are more than willing to change the course before the hull of our ship of state is pierced and the water starts filling in. And right now most voters agree with the need to change course. The only people who do not believe so are the diehard Democrats. Unless one of them is willing to admit that the ice is straight ahead and the wayward Captain must be removed from the helm, the American voter will be forced to do so in an electoral mutiny that will throw many Democrats overboard come Election Day 2012.

Of course there is always the chance that Republicans can simply blow their chance to prove themselves. They could get off topic and begin to make Barack Obama look like the rational candidate running. But the G.O.P. will have to really screw things up to do that. Still I do not past it past the ability of the Republican political establishment to shoot it self in the foot, However; is hoping that the other guy screws up more than you really a good strategy? It’s time for us to stop the hoping that President Obama wants us to keep doing and it’s time that someone start the doing that we need. Since 2008, Americans have moved far beyond hoping for change and are now demanding big changes. Whoever can prove that they will provide real change in 2012, will win. For Democrats, the best way to show that they are the the agents of change is to change the top of their ticket.  But we all know that  four more years of the same we’ve seen is not the kind of change that anyone is hoping for.

Until and unless a Democrat is willing to come forward and say “I must save the Party and the nation from Barack Obama”, only President Obama can spare us from any more of his failures. And while many may view the chances of President Obama declining a run for a second term as thin to none, they should remember that few anticipated Lyndon Johnson’s announcement that he would refuse the Party’s nomination for President in 1968.

Back then President Johnson, was delivering a speech regarding the war that was raging on in Vietnam. But at the very end, he shocked the nation with the following words;

“Believing this as I do, I have concluded that I should not permit the Presidency to become involved in the partisan divisions that are developing in this political year.

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.”

Given the seriousness of our national debt and budget problems, problems which our own Secretary of Defense defined as a national security issue, is it that hard to see President Obama do the same as Johnson? Can any one not see President Obama say the following after delivering another speech about the economy?;

“I have concluded that I should not permit the Presidency to become involved in the partisan divisions that preventing us from making the hard decisions that are required to reduce our debt and get our economy back on track.

With America’s working force sidelined, with America’s future being challenged right here at home and abroad, with our hopes and the children’s hopes for propsperity 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.”

President Obama does not need to actually mean those words. He does not need to believe those words, but by saying them, he will give his Party a fighting chance in 2012 and as a lame duck President, he will create the opportunity for liberal leadership to come out of Congress,fill the void that he has created, and allow for a new voice to offer a viable liberal vision for his Party.

Bookmark and Share

Prosser Win Confirms Conservative Sentiments

Democrats in Wisconsin may want to think twice about continuing to pursue recall votes against Republican Senators who just saved their state by making some tough choices. In fact, Wisconsin is showing that despite major blowback, the country is ready for a party to step to the plate and make those tough choices.

Justice David Prosser

It seemed like Prosser would have an easy election after taking more than 50% of the vote in a non-partisan primary against pro-union, liberal Kloppenburg. But after unions within and outside of the state poured millions of dollars into Kloppenburg’s campaign, it seemed like the state-wide election for Wisconsin Supreme Court would be closer. In fact, union cabbies offered free rides for union voters to the polls. Wisconsin liberals were organized for America and the Prosser/Kloppenburg election became a referendum on Scott Walker.

In fact, a Kloppenburg victory would have swayed the state Supreme Court to a 4-3 Liberal court. Walker’s union busting, budget saving legislation would be a footnote in Wisconsin history.

Walker had made the tough conservative choices. The city was nearly shut down as union members were bused in from other states to crowd and trash the capitol. Democrat Senators fled the state to shut down the legislative process and kindergarten teachers were sending death threats to Republican Senators while staying home with fraudulent sick notes from liberal doctors. On the blogs and comment sections across the web, Democrats were thanking Scott Walker for 2012 on a silver platter, and I even saw one comment talking about how they would get their revenge on the “scabbers”. It felt like a choreographed fight scene from Newsies.

The lead in the Prosser/Kloppenburg election kept changing and kept everyone on the edge of their seats throughout the night, and with a lead of about 200 votes Democrats claimed victory the next day. A recount was possible, but it seemed as though the left was right. Going after public unions to cut a $3 billion state deficit would be the end of the Conservative tidal wave that swept the country in 2010. It was a dark night.

But the next day, we discovered that the AP vote total did not include all the votes. Prosser had actually won by a very comfortable 7,500 votes. If you want to know how significant the Prosser win is, just Google his name. You will find as many stories as you did about Iraq a couple months after the surge strategy started. When stories about successful Republican politicians or policies disappear from the mainstream media, you know they are significant.

This was a statewide election where the same Wisconsin voters who elected Scott Walker came out again and elected Justice David Prosser. Anyone who thinks 2010 was a fluke and that an Obama re-election is a forgone conclusion should look at the national union mob that was re-defeated in Wisconsin.

Americans are ready to cut spending and deal with the deficit.

Surprising Results in Evangelical Poll

The Barna Group is perhaps the most respected Christian Evangelical research group. That makes their recent poll findings particularly startling when it comes to who Christians might support in 2012.

Perhaps not the results you expected

In a poll of Catholic and Protestant Christians, the candidates with the highest negatives were Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich. This is especially surprising considering the incredible support these two have put behind traditional family values.

Newt’s unfavorable ratings in the mid 40’s very likely relate to his nagging marital infidelity issues from 16 years ago. While most political bases find such things to be easily forgivable, the Christian base is not so forgiving nor will they defend Newt’s actions. This could make a Christian grass roots support base difficult to build.

Palin’s highest negatives are even more surprising. When it comes to Evangelical Christians, most pundits would consider Palin to have that category wrapped up going into this race. However, this poll is reminiscient of the Family Research Counsel’s straw poll that put Palin behind Romney, Huckabee and Newt Gingrich in a straw poll won by non-contender Mike Pence.

This is not a mainstream media poll and it was not reported by mainstream media. Perhaps the message to Sarah Palin coming from Christians is that whether they agree with her or not, they don’t want her to run. At any rate, without the Christian vote, she does not have a prayer.

Perhaps what I found most surprising was the favorable rating for Mitt Romney. I don’t think anyone was shocked to see Huckabee do well in a poll of Christians. Romney on the other hand struggled to get Evangelicals to vote for him in 2008 due to his liberal history and Mormonism.

My suspicion is that many Christians have resigned themselves to the possibility that they will not be voting for their favorite candidate in 2012, but instead will be voting for the best candidate who can defeat Barack Obama. When this poll is viewed in that light, it makes sense that front runner Mitt Romney would get high ratings; as would Huckabee who Christians love but acknowledge will likely not even run.

George Barna suggests that no matter who the Republican candidate in 2012 might be, they will be “bloody and half-poor” coming out of the primary.

 

 

What do you think? Are you a Christian or values voter? Leave a comment and tell us if you are planning on voting for the candidate who most represents your values, or a candidate who is not Barack Obama but can beat him.

Hung Out to Dry

If ever there was a time for conservatives to stand up for Sarah Palin, now would be it. Palin is certainly a front runner for the Presidency, even as a TEA Party outsider in the Republican Party. This makes her an easy target.

Oops, did I say target? The absolute ridiculousness with which the left has attempted to tie Jared Loughner to Sarah Palin should have every Republican up in arms. The ease with which Loughner’s actual political leanings and mental stability can be documented should add fuel to a conservative fire that overturns years of a subtle left-wing bias in the media. It should be pretty obvious right now which way the mainstream leans.

So why aren’t conservatives standing up for Palin? When given the chance to stand up for Palin and shred the media’s unjust attacks, Newt Gingrich stated that Palin is the one who needs to be more careful about what she says. Immediately left-wing bloggers seized on Gingrich’s words and reposted them with glee.

Shortly after the Tuscon shooting, left-wing loudmouth Keith Olbermann associated Loughner with Palin. Though he obviously put his foot in his mouth, speaking out of ignorance, mainstream Republicans did not respond. Finally Palin did.

The result? Palin was attacked by the left for responding. But she was also attacked by the right. Ross Douthat, supposedly a conservative New York Times columnist (yeah, I hear they found bigfoot and UFOs too), echoed the establishment complaint that Palin’s response was unpresidential. I wonder if anyone ever confronted Andrew Jackson, blood flowing from an open wound, gun still smoking, fresh from winning a duel (or losing as he did on one occasion) that he was acting unpresidential.

This one was a slam dunk. Loughner was a druggie, fed on 9/11 conspiracy theories and hatred of women in power. He didn’t listen to talk radio and certainly wouldn’t have followed the details of Palin’s TEA Party successes this past fall. Republicans had a chance to take on the the lies that were coming out and show the country exactly how the left had chosen to politicize the shooting. But they didn’t.

I have tried to reconcile the lack of conservative response. The person who came closest to defending Palin and the TEA Party movement was the President himself when he called on Americans not to blame each other or point fingers.

Most likely, mainstream potential candidates are trying to avoid putting themselves in a situation where they face the same grueling attacks that Palin has. Possibly, some establishment candidates may be secretly satisfied to see their stiffest competition for the 2012 primaries knocked out as a result of the media’s unnecessary roughness.

Dark Horse Potential?

From George Washington to Teddy Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhower, the US has a long tradition of the “war hero” President.  In most cases, this has been beneficial for the US.

So why not have a candidate who has stayed out of the political rancor of the last three elections, has a blank political slate, has served both President Bush and Obama, and has succeeded once already in a war that was pronounced unwinnable?  It should also help that he has a Masters of Public Administration and Ph.D. in International Relations from Princeton.

I am speaking about the highly decorated four star general, Gen. David Petraeus.  Even the Moveon.org attack ad in the New York Times from a few years ago has done nothing but bolster Gen. Petraeus’ popularity among most in America.  After the last few White House occupants, Petraeus seems to carry an air of honor and earned respect that seems almost unworthy of this highest post.

General David Petraeus

Gen. Petraeus is certainly qualified.  So why isn’t he showing up in any media chatter or straw polls?  Probably because among all the candidates who have claimed they have no interest in running, his claim sounds the most sincere.  When asked about it in a 2007 Foxnews interview, Petraeus offered what he called a “Shermanesque” response.  Sherman was the popular Civil War general, who when asked if he would run for office responded by saying “I will not accept if nominated, and I will not serve if elected”.

Was Petraeus simply participating in the time honored tradition of denying Presidential ambitions until the time is right?  I tend to feel that was sincere, but only time will tell.

%d bloggers like this: