Lately I've been reading that a Democrat may challenge Obama

[Ham Murabi]

The president's approval ratings aren't so hot and his policies aren't so popular.
It's entirely possible Obama will face a challenge in the primaries or, as it has been suggested, a pliant media will suddenly become interested in Tony Rezko and his close ties to the president to clear the way for another Democrat to get the nomination.
One thing is apparent: If Democrats don't like Obama, they are racists.

 

[Liar]

Did any Democrat challenge Clinton?

His approval ratings were slightly worse 2 years in.

 

[grunabona]

The president's approval ratings aren't so hot and his policies aren't so popular.
It's entirely possible Obama will face a challenge in the primaries or, as it has been suggested, a pliant media will suddenly become interested in Tony Rezko and his close ties to the president to clear the way for another Democrat to get the nomination.
One thing is apparent: If Democrats don't like Obama, they are racists.

I think it's about 50/50, at this point. Investigations in the House next year will probably determine whether a challenge will arise from within the Democratic ranks. If I had to bet on it today, at even odds, I'd bet there will be a challenge.

 

[Tetriak]

I've been reading lately that self-ordained, arm-chair pundits are never nearly as clever as the believe themselves to be. This results in real life shouting and the lazy trolling of internet discussion forums.

On my own, I realized that if they had a better understanding of their immediate surroundings, they might not feel so falsely empowered by blabbering on about things they neither control, or fully comprehend.

Next.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I've been reading lately that self-ordained, arm-chair pundits are never nearly as clever as the believe themselves to be. This results in real life shouting and the lazy trolling of internet discussion forums.

On my own, I realized that if they had a better understanding of their immediate surroundings, they might not feel so falsely empowered by blabbering on about things they neither control, or fully comprehend.

Next.

Politicians can count, and if Obama's assets dont add up, he's vulnerable. Johnson kicked Goldwater's ass in 1964 yet was spent by 1968. Hillary was 'inevitable' in 2008 and lost.

 

[Tetriak]

Politicians can count, and if Obama's assets dont add up, he's vulnerable. Johnson kicked Goldwater's ass in 1964 yet was spent by 1968. Hillary was 'inevitable' in 2008 and lost.

A) Since this is in no way a response to what I wrote, I must assume you didn't read what I wrote. Ding.

B) Linking random 'historical events' together does not a valid argument make.

 

[firespin]

Did any Democrat challenge Clinton?

His approval ratings were slightly worse 2 years in.

The Carter comparison is at least as appropriate at this point, perhaps moreso based on political acumen and governing style.

Carter faced a strong challenge from Teddy Kennedy.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

*hic*

 

[grunabona]

The Carter comparison is at least as appropriate at this point, perhaps moreso based on political acumen and governing style.

Carter faced a strong challenge from Teddy Kennedy.

The Carter comparison is apt. Unemployment is expected to remain above 9% throughout 2011, and that alone will put blood in the water. The sharks will be circling, and Obama may decide he doesn't want to take a chance on ending up fish food.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Where the Clinton comparison falls apart is Hillary.

She was the radical who refused to bathe and take his name until he got booted out of the governor's mansion. After she and her (Obama's) wing of the party lost him the Congress over Health Care, he concentrated on keeping his job and ignoring the Harvard Loon Club for Non-Growth whereas Obama, because he's an ideologue, is going to concentrate on fighting for his "failed policies of the past."
__________________
A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States...,
John P. Holdren
White House Office of Science and Technology Director

 

[off2bed]

It'll come down to who has the most personal ambition. It won't be about principles or ideas.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

It'll come down to who has the most personal ambition. It won't be about principles or ideas.

I submit that you are wrong. It will be about protecting Health Care "Reform."

They have the camel's nose under the tent, and as damaged as Obama is, he's still their best bet to win with minorities and beat whichever "Sarah Palin" the Republicans line up before the media firing squad...

They don't have to elevate him, all they have to do is destroy and they will get help from the Republican Party on that one. If you don't believe me, ask John McCain, Colin Powell, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan...,

Good lord, come February, you will be led to believe that the Mullahs and al Qaeda have seized control of the House of Representatives.

 

[firespin]

Colin Powell, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan...,

You realize that the combined influence of these folks is three votes, right?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

You realize that the combined influence of these folks is three votes, right?

What, truncating the list to try to turn it into a point?



Somewhere I hear Elmer Fudd yelling, "WAWNUT!"

 

[off2bed]

I submit that you are wrong. It will be about protecting Health Care "Reform."

They have the camel's nose under the tent, and as damaged as Obama is, he's still their best bet to win with minorities and beat whichever "Sarah Palin" the Republicans line up before the media firing squad...

They don't have to elevate him, all they have to do is destroy and they will get help from the Republican Party on that one. If you don't believe me, ask John McCain, Colin Powell, David Brooks, Peggy Noonan...,

Good lord, come February, you will be led to believe that the Mullahs and al Qaeda have seized control of the House of Representatives.

You are most likely correct about the GOP, but the Demz haven't done much different. Dukakis? Mondale? Kerry? WTF?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

You are most likely correct about the GOP, but the Demz haven't done much different. Dukakis? Mondale? Kerry? WTF?

Yeah, but they didn't crap on them.

Take Kerry for instance; his own book outed him as a liar and they circled the wagons and called him A HERO!!!

 

[firespin]

What, truncating the list to try to turn it into a point?



Somewhere I hear Elmer Fudd yelling, "WAWNUT!"

I figured you mistyped "Buckley, Jr."

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=34628526&postcount=48

 

[firespin]

Yeah, but they didn't crap on them.

Take Kerry for instance; his own book outed him as a liar and they circled the wagons and called him A HERO!!!

I don't recall Joe Lieberman feeling the love.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I don't recall Joe Lieberman feeling the love.

He shit on the consensus...





That's the ONLY crime worse than profiling.

 

[busybody..]

I don't recall Joe Lieberman feeling the love.

I wasnt around LIT during that erection

But in my OTHER LIFE

I dubbed Lieberman, who was sane and sensible BEFORE he was nominated, and became a PC PUT


LIEBERPERSON

 

[off2bed]

He shit on the consensus...





That's the ONLY crime worse than profiling.

More proof that "free thinkers" aren't.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

More proof that "free thinkers" aren't.

The free-thinking lemming usually gets trampled in the stamped...





... "rush to judgement..."

 

[busybody..]

I doubt he will have an opponent,

whoever tries will forever be branded RACIST!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

A) Since this is in no way a response to what I wrote, I must assume you didn't read what I wrote. Ding.

B) Linking random 'historical events' together does not a valid argument make.

Maybe your question includes some confounding you dont see.

Oh! You got a response to your question, but you dont care for it is the problem.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I doubt he will have an opponent,

whoever tries will forever be branded RACIST!

ESPECIALLY if it's Charlie Rangal...