Let's stop the crazy talk: Obama is not going to lose the election

[Eliminator]

Of all the Republican candidates, only Romney has even the REMOTEST shot of coming close to almost beating him. And we don't even know if he's going to be their nominee yet. Of any of the others, Obama will wipe the floor with each and every one of them.

I don't mean to sound overconfident, and I don't mean to imply that Obama can just sit this one out and breeze his way to the finish line. He's still going to have to campaign hard and not take anything for granted. That being said, there just isn't anyone close to his caliber. I'm going to even go out on a limb and say that were the economy to take a turn for the worse (which it's NOT), Obama would STILL win.

Frankly, it's not about Obama. It never has been about Obama. He's going to be a two term president regardless. It's what he does during that second term that we need to be focused on, and that makes it about CONGRESS.

Are the Democrats going to take back the house and increase some seats in the senate? That's what needs to be focused on because THAT IS THE SYSTEM. In this regard, I'm not nearly so sure. If Democrats can't take back the house, Obama's hands are tied for another 4 years. And before anybody brings up the fact that Democrats had control for his first two years, let me just point out that they really didn't. A blue dog Democrat is almost like a Republican.

There were a bunch of times when Obama has been forced to take a right turn because he didn't have the votes in congress, despite a so called Democratic "majority" in his first two years. After the midterms, it only got worse.

This election is about getting LIBERAL DEMOCRATS elected into CONGRESS. Don't worry about Obama. He'll be fine. But until he has the support he needs to get actual progressive things done, expect more of the same. Now the good news is that polls have been showing that the people are much more fed up with the Republicans in congress than the Democrats. Will the Democrats be able to capitalize on this? I certainly hope so.

But I will say this: I'm not optimistic about that. At all.

[PeaceNikki]

1. And this is why people need to stop giving up on all Democrats because they're pissed at Obama.

Or Pelosi, or whoever. Go work for your local Democrats, your state reps, congressional reps. There are plenty of good Democrats that need our help, time, money and support. Work to get Democrats to the polls for ALL elections. As we have learned in Wisconsin... it matters.

[Hyphen]

2. The only group that won the republican debates was the Obama administration.

[Kingofalldems]

3. With this crop of repubs, I don't know how he can lose

[99th_Monkey]

21. Ah, but that is just what "they" want you to think.

can u say "that dark horse is Jeb Bush" yet?

[Kingofalldems]

28. That's what I have been saying--Jeb Bush will jump in

because they cannot win with anyone in this crowd.

[JoePhilly]

4. Correct.

I'm still waiting for Obama's most ardent critics on DU to start a "Progressive Candidates for 2016" group.

Obama will be the Dem nominee, period. And he should win in 2012.

And so, those who are most unhappy with him should be starting to think about 2016 ... about WHO they want ... who is the ubber progressive who will be their champion for Prez, and other offices.

Yet no such group exists ... and I don't see anyone trying to create one. Why not?

[Sherman A1]

5. Precisely

Romney will be the placeholder, Obama will win and the only thing that will be of particular interest is the GOP VP slot as a set up for 2016.

[greiner3]

6. I agree with the OP;

However, what will happen if say Obama really IS a Muslim, or he has an affair with Dick Cheney (actually, this might not be as bad as I think) or Obama suddenly announces that all African Americans will get $100,000 a month after he is reelected and news hits the streets a week before the election?

What crazy Republican will then become the next president?

[mazzarro]

7. About the blue dog Democrats

If the blue dog democrats inhibited Obama during the Pelosi speakership in the House, how do you think that another democratic controlled House will differ from the previous one since there are still some blue dogs democrats and probably their number will increase as well if democrats retake the House. My concern is that the democratic party leadership as well as Obama have not shown any inclination to bring the blue dog democrats under any type of control. Instead they have no problem berating the party's liberals/progressive wing including ignoring them totally. So I have doubts about getting high hopes with a democratic congress and as for rethuglican congress - that is depression, my friend!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

10. Actually, the Blue Dogs got their asses handed to them in 2010 in the House and Senate.

And with many of the Blue Dogs retiring in the Senate, it's about high time we start fighting for progressive Democrats.

Case in point: Here in Maryland, Donna Edwards is running against a DLC Corporate Democrat. That is unacceptable! So, we progressives are stepping up our game for Donna.

Rather than pointing at Obama, given him the *PROGRESSIVE* ultra-majority that he needs in order to get MORE *PROGRESSIVE* outcomes.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

11. You're right about the 2010 election. But did those in power get the message?

As long as they can say that Obama-is-not-Gingrich, Obama-is-not-Romney, etc., do they even care?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

12. Four words: United States Supreme Court! If they care about this country

and the protection of their rights, that should be motivation enough!

[killbotfactory]

31. Despite their faults, blue dogs gave us control of congress

Which means progressives in committee chairs and more progressive legislation.

For the first two years the house was passing all sorts of progressive legislation, only to watch it be blocked in the Senate by republican filibuster, which put a lot of power into the hands of conservative Democratic senators who forced a lot of things to be watered down in order to pass it. No amount of jabber-jawing from the president could change that, since they are a separate branch of government and all. As crappy and disappointing as the situation was, it is a lot better than having a republican controlled congress. Which would mean nothing of any value gets passed at all.

[Lisa D]

8. Best Post of the Day!

Let's stop arguing over Obama and start figuring out how to get liberals into congress. That's the key to moving forward in this country and implementing the progressive changes that we so desperately need.

[FarLeftFist]

9. K&R!

[bowens43]

13. romney can beat him.

Romney has a good chance of beating Obama. I don't think it will happen but it could.one bonehead move by obaba could put Romney in the oval office

[Motown_Johnny]

16. the same is true for Romney, and I could argue that he has already made that move

There are several potential candidates.

Attacking the President's end to the Iraq war. If this comes up in a debate (which it should) it will be easy to point out all the money wasted and all the lives lost and then point out that Romney wants us to still be there wasting money and losing American lives.

His hard line stance with Iran ends up in the same place.

Promising to repeal the health care reform is another potential bonehead move. Polls have approval of the bill as passed at about 50-50. Within the 50% that disapprove you get roughly 20% who think it doesn't go far enough or want single payer and about 30% who thinks it goes to far or should not have been done at all. This gives us roughly a 70-30 advantage on this issue. There are also 2 more provisions set to kick in right on October 1st of next year. The perfect time to make it part of a closing argument.


I think Obama is a better candidate than Romney and isn't going to spout off any "Corporations are people my friend" kind of gaffs while Mitt may try to bet a million dollars on something crazy he is wrong about.

Either one could snatch defeat from the jaws of victory but I think the odds are that President Obama isn't going to be the one to make a bonehead move.

[Motown_Johnny]

14. We can't take anything for granted

I will admit that I can't picture how Romney, or any of them. beat President Obama. Then again I never understood how anyone could vote for W. even once, let alone twice.



I'm thinking we can take back the House because many of the TPers that were elected in 2010 were such extremists that they should lose their seats this time around. Pres. Obama should have coattails enough to help get some closer races over the finish line.


The Senate is a much tougher nut to crack. My personal little slice of optimism + realism leads me to the conclusion that we can expect to lose 2 seats in 2012. That still gives us a 51-49 majority. I can afford to be off by 1 and still he OK because I do expect the Democrats to hold onto the White House so V.P. Biden would be casting the tie breaking votes in a 50-50 Senate.


At this point I will settle for any Democrat in office, not just liberal ones. With the splits in the Republican party between the TPers, The Libertarians, The Neocons and the few moderates that still exist I think that if we can just hold onto power for another cycle or two then they will all start blaming each other and eventually break up.

Once that happens the Democrats will also turn on each other (even more than usual) and we can then fight for the most liberal candidates possible. Pushing to hard while the (R)s are still falling in line behind their nominees is a blueprint for both short and long term loses.

[melissaf]

15. I agree

that we can't assume Obama is going to win. If the republicans get a semi-credible white male candidate (and it looks like Romney is it), Obama will have a rough time. He'll have an even rougher time if some whack job tea partier gets the VP nod. I know this is what the republicans did in 2008, but this time around Obama has his presidency, whereas last time he didn't have much of a political past to kick around.

So I can see bad things happening. And it makes me incredibly nervous.

[Motown_Johnny]

17. Historically, when the White House switches parties

it tends to be for at least 2 terms. Carter is the one exception to this rule in recent history and he had to face down a primary challenge which weakened him.

Holding the office is a plus. The guy has a great record as President. Don't let the extremists on either side convince you otherwise. His record as President is a plus.

[melissaf]

18. I really, really hope so.

I also hope that whichever awful candidate the republicans finally pick (Mitt or non-Mitt), Obama will crush him. I mean, it's not like the republicans are trying that hard this year--I'm guessing, as others have said, they don't really want to win this year, because if they did they'd have to try to fix things and they have no ideas on that score whatsoever. But, I also can't shake the suspicion that race is going to play a bigger (if unacknowledged) role this time around. Obama versus Old Man McCain was one thing, but Obama versus Healthy White Male Republican might be enough to tip the scales against him.

[Motown_Johnny]

19. I agree with your suspicion

I just hope Newt, or one of the others, attacks Romney on his religion and pushes the Evangelical voters away from him.


I kinda hate that I hope that but if they are going to live by the sword then they should expect to die by it.

[melissaf]

20. Absolutely.

There's also Mitt's being the granddaddy of Obamacare, which I'm hoping Mitt will get soundly hammered on. All the republicans, from the Evangelicals on down, have created this situation where no one candidate could possibly satisfy them, so definitely, they should suck it up and deal with the problem they created.

Then again, they're not really good at dealing with problems, either. Just screaming about them...

[Rex]

22. I don't know if it will be a landslide, but

there is NO WAY this pack of idiots has a chance against the POTUS. Mittens, maybe...probably not.

[MilesColtrane]

23. 7 points over the GOP candidate who is leading the primary polls just under a year....

out is not enough for me.

You cite the lameness of the Republican candidates as a reason that Obama will "be fine".

How lame was George W. Bush compared to Al Gore?

Reagan compared to Carter?

In an economy like this, that secure feeling you have about who will be in the oval office come 2013 is deadly complacency for those who don't want more Republican destruction.

[Prophet 451]

24. Black-box voting machines

In a fair contest, Obama would wipe the floor with any of the GOP candidates, I'm not disputing that. But remember that W got into office despite having provably lost the 2000 election (and possibly the 2004, I'm less informed on that one). Beware the dirty tricks department.

[Betty Karlson]

25. YES! YES! A thousand times yes!

Top-down never works. A party only works from the bottom up. Get the right lawmakers into congress and the president will follow them. To get the right lawmakers, get the right state congressmen and state senators first. To get those, get the right city council members. Start as high in the hierarchy of power as you can, but get the right people right there.

[warrior1]

26. I agree with you

Obama will win.

[NCTraveler]

27. I Fully Agree. n/t

[jimlup]

29. I mostly agree however...

One of my concerns is a brokered Reptilian convention in which they actually come up with a legitimate candidate like Christy or something.

[Freddie Stubbs]

30. Romney will win only if the economy doesn't improve