The Conservative Cave

Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2012 => Topic started by: BlueStateSaint on November 13, 2010, 09:07:26 AM

Title: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: BlueStateSaint on November 13, 2010, 09:07:26 AM
Could the Obamessiah be challenged from the Left?  Commentary magazine looks at it.

Quote
The Liberal Crisis

John Podhoretz
December 2010

The defeat of Russ Feingold in the November 2 election has unexpectedly provided the most uncompromisingly left-wing Democrat in the U.S. Senate with a new job opportunity—that of candidate for the presidency of the United States. Feingold hinted in his concession speech on election night that he might challenge Barack Obama in the Democratic primaries. “It’s on to 2012,” Feingold said, “and it is on to our next adventure.”

The next day, a spokesman said that Feingold had “no interest” in running for the presidency, but such a denial is meaningless. The scale of the Democratic Party’s defeat and the parlous condition of the country’s finances inevitably raise the specter of a challenge to a first-term president from within his own party. Such challenges have been part of the political landscape for the past half-century. Eight presidents since 1960 have run for re-election. Four of them have had to fight off a significant primary opponent whose key message was that the president had betrayed his party’s core principles. In each case, the challenge preceded the president’s eventual ouster in the general election.

In 1968, Eugene McCarthy came at Lyndon Johnson from the anti-war left and, in losing in the New Hampshire primary by a mere seven points, convinced the man who had won the biggest landslide in American history three years earlier that he could not secure a second full term. Ronald Reagan went at Gerald Ford in 1976 in part on the grounds that Ford was capitulating to the Soviet Union; Reagan went on to win several major states, galvanized the Republican Convention far more than its actual nominee, and left Ford to close a 30-point gap in the polls with Jimmy Carter (which Ford almost did).

With stagflation at home and chaos abroad, Edward Kennedy confronted Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election. Kennedy went on to win 10 primaries, upstage Carter at the Democratic Convention just as Reagan had upstaged Ford, and in general, presage Carter’s doom. Twelve years later, George H. W. Bush began his re-election campaign in the economic doldrums and came under unexpected pressure in New Hampshire from the paleoconservative Pat Buchanan, who got a stunning 38 percent. Ross Perot saw this and designed an independent bid against Bush on the single issue of the budget deficit, which Bush had actually taken aggressive measures to confront; Perot’s bid got Bill Clinton elected.1

There is great ideological irony here. McCarthy and Kennedy ran to their presidents’ left at the beginning of an election cycle that concluded with the victory of a hated conservative—Nixon in 1968, Reagan in 1980. Reagan ran to Ford’s right in an election that went to Carter. And by running to Bush’s right, Buchanan helped establish the conditions under which Clinton would achieve victory in 1992. Both Carter and Clinton ran as Southern moderates but began governing as aggressive liberals. Feingold, or any other Democrat who considers a challenge to Barack Obama, will have to contend with the knowledge that the better he does, the more likely it will be that a conservative Republican will occupy the White House come 2013.

I can think of about three conservative Republicans I'd like to see in the White House in 2013 . . .

Anyway, here's the link:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/the-liberal-crisis-15577
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: seabelle on November 13, 2010, 08:22:10 PM
An Opinion piece in the Washington Post doesn't want him to run in 2012 ... oh my  :-)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/12/AR2010111202846.html?sub=AR
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: NHSparky on November 13, 2010, 10:13:58 PM
Problem is, it would be pretty damned hard to find someone credible who would run to the left of Obama, considering he's about as far left as it gets.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: Chris_ on November 13, 2010, 10:14:46 PM
It would give Hillary another chance. 

Can't believe I just typed that.  Don't need to be giving them any ideas.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: TheSarge on November 14, 2010, 01:12:19 AM
Problem is, it would be pretty damned hard to find someone credible who would run to the left of Obama, considering he's about as far left as it gets.

Berine Sanders is the first one that comes to mind.  You know the DUmmies would push for Alan Grayson.  Deval Patrick is another.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: NHSparky on November 14, 2010, 01:35:23 AM
Berine Sanders is the first one that comes to mind.  You know the DUmmies would push for Alan Grayson.  Deval Patrick is another.

Notice the word I included?  CREDIBLE...none of which meet that criteria.  Not that it's ever stopped a liberal.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: TheSarge on November 14, 2010, 01:43:45 AM
Notice the word I included?  CREDIBLE...none of which meet that criteria.  Not that it's ever stopped a liberal.

True....look at who is in office now.  No real world experience.  No credible legislation or bills topoint to as a politician at State or Federal level.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: JohnnyReb on November 14, 2010, 05:35:33 AM
True....look at who is in office now.  No real world experience.  No credible legislation or bills topoint to as a politician at State or Federal level.

Hey, that's how he got in the Whitehouse. No birth cert., no grades, no experience, no legislation, no nothing to judge him by. It was all planned to be that way from the beginning. Only the worst of the democrats would have voted for him if there had been any firm information to judge him by.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: seabelle on November 14, 2010, 10:31:52 AM
Hey, that's how he got in the Whitehouse. No birth cert., no grades, no experience, no legislation, no nothing to judge him by. It was all planned to be that way from the beginning. Only the worst of the democrats would have voted for him if there had been any firm information to judge him by.

He had pretty shaky credit too.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/05/04/2009-05-04_president_obamas_mantra_in_debt_we_trust.html

I was more heavily scrutinized to become a Gov't GS-3 clerk-typist with a TS clearance back in the 70's.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: BlueStateSaint on November 15, 2010, 08:46:09 AM
Dupe . . .

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,51231.0.html

And a BS for being the last member to post in that thread!
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: Chris on November 15, 2010, 08:51:58 AM
Dupe . . .

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,51231.0.html

And a BS for being the last member to post in that thread!
Un-BS'ed.  Sorry, that was my fault.  My browser locked up on me.
Title: Re: The Liberal Crisis
Post by: BlueStateSaint on November 15, 2010, 12:58:39 PM
Un-BS'ed.  Sorry, that was my fault.  My browser locked up on me.

Should I BS you, then? :tongue: