If he can't create jobs with his policies Pres. Obama will be primaried and LOSE

First let me say I am NOT writing this to express what I hope happens.

It's just my personal analysis of how the current political situation could develop into a primary disaster for President Obama should the economy stall out.

To me it's odd how all the pundits are predicting President Obama runs a high risk of not being reelected in a general election. They talk as if Democrats are mindless robots who will support President Obama no matter what policy he pursues, and no matter who might step forward to challenge him.

It's odd to me, because the current political situation is exactly the kind that produces a viable primary challenger to a sitting president who fails to take aggressive action to fix the nation's problems (as the voters see it, not just DU'ers).

Blaming the idiot Refucklicans can only work so many times and for so long.

As of now, Democrats may overwhelmingly support the President, but much of that support is soft in part due to the White House strategy of assuming they'll get those votes, because the Republicans will nominate a loon.

However as Jimmy Carter showed, and Reagan demonstrated, even the looniest candidate can start to look "not so bad" after months of spending billions to change the mind of the USA about someone.

Unfortunately, most people do not remember how the political establishment gasped in horror when Reagan became the Rethuglican candidate for president.

He was the "impossible to believe" candidate back then, and it was a forgone conclusion President Carter was going to win reelection.

It was the disastrous failure of the Iran hostage rescue mission that handed the election to Reagan.

The vast majority do NOT even pay Attn. to the election until the month before.

In the meantime people will pay Attn. to their lives and if they are worried about their job and financial situation, their anger against those in charge will only grow.

That anger will be expressed in extreme frustration among Democrats, and it would only take a decent candidate to knock the legs out from under President Obama should he head into the election with a weak economy Etc.

Just who is viable is not clear right now, but becoming viable will also be determined by the situation at that time.

Should the economy get better, even slowly, President Obama will not have a viable challenger.

If the economists like Krugman are right, that's not a sure thing.

In that case, President Obama could find himself upset by a surprise last minute entry into the Democratic primary contest, and end up resigning because of it just like President Johnson did.

One more thing that is also parallel. President Johnson lost mostly because of the Vietnam war.

While Washington DC pretends the wars are out of sight and out of mind, the American public has not forgotten, and we can be sure as the Republicans up the volume on their claims that we are 'broke' Progressives and liberals will shout back then bring the troops home and save enough to pay for medicare Etc. This will keep the military involvements in the forefront of issues the public bases who to support when voting.

The economy and the continued involvement in a hot war in Afghanistan and a large presence in Iraq both together costing billions and billions borrowed from China + a sick economy are potentially enough to sink President Obama IN THE PRIMARY.

The chances of that happening only get worse as it becomes clear President Obama's team continues to act as if he is immune from such a thing, and only focus on winning the general - the same mistake that President Johnson's team made in 1968

Again, I'm not saying this because I think Obama has been good about the economy; I am saying this because he is a pitch perfect politician.

He may not be the best at governing, but he's certainly not the worst

But he knows how to win elections - the man out Clintoned Clinton!

Political Science Students 100 years from now will be studying the 2008 election

One point: I would contend that Congressional Democrats are not in lock step with Pres.Obama. Their choice not to defend this White House in 2011 is telling. Of course, they had a belly full when Pres. Obama caved to Rs last December.

I guess I'm old fashioned, I've always thought that the various branches of government should be checks against each other

so to speak as 2008 did, then you prove my point about people not paying Attn.

I can assume I guess safely that when it comes to the Democratic party, you do not see President Obama as sharing any of the negatives that resulted in Democrats being stomped into the ground in 2010. Do you think he would have won hypothetically speaking in 2010 if he had had to stand for reeelection?

In any case, what would cost him has LITTLE to do with President Obama, and far more to do with national group think in times of crisis.

he was an unknown commodity and a 'historic' President. He doesn't have that same advantage now. He still talks gobbledygook, but now people don't come away enthralled. And, he doesn't have that anti-war banner any more, that some people hung around him. He may be a shoo in to those who still have a good job, but not to those who are suffering. He's a failure when it comes helping the majority of people, who are still suffering, or who came crashing down since 2008.

He's the black Jimmy Carter, but Carter was much more progressive.

zalinda

He's proven beyond any reasonable doubt that he stands for the corporations and the extremely wealthy, not the people.

I'll support a Dem come election time, but I would rather support a Dem that will support Democratic values.

Obama is a pretty sure thing for the powers that be. There is no way they will let a "Man of the People" win the Presidency. Whoever may run as one, as we already know, but they will not govern as one. The Red Done button is about ready to pop out on our goose.

The 180 degree turn by Obama post inauguration fully supports everything you said and illustrates it perfectly.

Speaking of Eugene McCarthy, from Wikipedia:

As his volunteers led by youth coordinator Sam Brown went door to door in New Hampshire, and as the media began paying more serious attention to the Senator, McCarthy began to rise in the opinion polls. When McCarthy scored 42% to Johnson's 49% in the popular vote (and 20 of the 24 N.H. delegates to the Democratic national nominating convention) in New Hampshire on March 12 it was clear that deep division existed among Democrats on the war issue. By this time, Johnson had become inextricably defined by Vietnam, and this demonstration of divided support within his party meant his reelection (only four years after winning the highest percentage of the popular vote in modern history) was unlikely. On March 16 Kennedy announced that he would run, and was seen by many Democrats as a stronger candidate than McCarthy.

On March 31, in a surprise move, Johnson announced that he would not seek reelection.

he was vulnerable.

There are none that I have seen who can do any better.

And if one does, it is because Obama is such a weak candidate for re-election that a Republican win is a forgone conclusion.

I have no desire to see a Republican walk into the White House in 2013, because if one does, I think he will also take the Senate and hold the house. Having Republicans in control of all three houses again would be disastrous. They would take it to mean that Americans want them to gut Medicate, Social Security, and any other program they don't like. And since we are a government elected by a majority of those who vote, Republicans would be right.

It doesn't matter that a majority of polls say leave medicare and Social Security alone. It matters what a majority of voters say. People who do vote don't matter to the elected.

Oh let me guess, you didn't even bother to read the first line of my post, just the headline.

do you WANT preznit bachman??????

In fact if you had read the first line AFTER the headline you would have realized this.

He has disappointed, for sure.

Amazing that the successes Obama has achieved with a moderate Senate and Conservative House is still not good enough to keep some from suggesting that he has failed and should face a primary run. Unbelievable.

He hasn't proposed a government jobs bill, but rather spending CUTS which will drive us further into the economic brink.

I said I doubt that he will be primaried. I doubt if he is that he will lose.

But, I still wish that someone like Howard Dean would primary him, and win.

Do you really think he could pull off a win against a sitting president?

he probably still would win. I only said that I WISH someone like Howard Dean could primary him and beat him.

Obama has been a disappointment.

the house, nor seats in the Senate.

unemployment is too high, folks view Obama as "not fixing" the economy.

I'd be the first to argue that your problem is capitalism, not this particular guy trying to corral it, but the fact remains that until we overthrow it this is what we've got. And right now Obama is not looking like a very strong candidate for reelection.

The House was a warning - and Obama responded by ramping up the military machine. I suppose that is one way to create jobs. But it's not really the jobs people were hoping to get.

before the election... Are they waiting for all the points of view to settle?

when given the choice between a Democrat who acts like a Republican and a REAL Republican, the voter will choose the real Republican. Phonies don't fare well in a democracy.

That was back in the day when Republicans weren't batshitcrazy.