Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Democrats dream of an election without Obama

By CALLIE MORAN
White House Correspondent
October 19, 2011

Hillary ClintonFrustrated and anxious Democrats grumble privately that their party’s prospects for 2012 would be “much improved” without President Barack Obama on the ticket and some are saying they won’t be contributing to his re-election campaign or campaigning for him next year.

“I’ve had it. Obama is a failure to America and to the principles of the Democratic party,” says longtime activist Betty Ackerman of Chicago — Obama’s home town. “I wish he would pull a Lyndon and step down,” she added, referring to President Lyndon Johnson‘s decision not to seek re-election in the 1968 campaign.

In private meetings at the Democratic National Committee on Capitol Hill, nervous political strategists look at dismal fundraising numbers for the party’s candidates and polls that show declining public confidence in both the President and his party.

“We’re in trouble, there is no doubt about that,” says one DNC staffer, who asked not to be identified. “We face serious problems going into 2012.”

Some political pros flash back to the 2008 political primary and say the party’s fortunes would be “much improved” if Hillary Clinton had captured the nomination.

“Hillary would have made a much better President,” says Ackerman.  “She wouldn’t be lost like Obama.”

At the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, strategists say more and more candidates say they don’t want the President campaigning in their districts and don’t want any ads paid for by the committee to link them with Obama.

“Obama has become the George W. Bush of the Democratic party,” says one field operative. “Nobody wants anything to do with him.”

Democratic operative Jonathan Brinkley says he advises his clients to “stay the hell away from Obama” is they want to win in 2012.

“It’s every donkey for his or her self next year,” he says.

Enhanced by Zemanta

14 Responses to Democrats dream of an election without Obama

  1. Carl Nemo **==

    October 19, 2011 at 10:07 am

    “Obama has become the George W. Bush of the Democratic party,” says one field operative. “Nobody wants anything to do with him.” …extract from article

    How interesting in that Obama has become such a pariah to his party. What if…just what if Obama is a ‘republican plant’, their “Manchurian Candidate” and his last act is to take a dive to the mat in order to facilitate the rethugs taking office again? Regardless of this high theater, the Republicans are the “flagship party” of the wealthy class in this country. Obama has surely performed as if he were ‘Bush Lite’ during his term to date.

    Since Americans are seemingly trapped in an endless faux exchange of ‘power’ between entrenched, now single party duopolists, the only winners 24/7/365 are the shadowy corporate entities that operate the puppet paddles controlling these plug-in module presidents we must now suffer in these times via their army of palm-greasing lobbyists.

    They’ve engineered this political “Matrix” . The question is: Do our citizens have the courage to take the “red pill” in order to break out of this engineered hell on earth or continue to live the illusion they are free and things are just great politically speaking while slapping back another “blue” upper…? / : |

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_pill_and_blue_pill

    Carl Nemo **==

  2. Davld Clark

    October 19, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    They are all the puppets of Wall Street. Money makes them dance. What is the point in voting for people that are already bought and paid for?

    • KishinD

      October 20, 2011 at 6:43 pm

      Couldn’t have said it better myself.

      The financial institutions pay their campaign bills. Campaign money historically is what gets people elected. If a politician threatens the corruption of the banksters, they threaten their own chances at re-election, and we all know politicians will do ANYTHING to get re-elected.

      Most of them, anyways. Here’s hoping that Ron Paul secures the nomination. He’s the only candidate not in the pocket of big money. Otherwise, we’ll be faced with yet another election of Bank-bankrolled candidate A or Bank-bankrolled candidate B. If things keep going that way, we’re totally F’ed.

  3. Davld Clark

    October 19, 2011 at 12:07 pm

    This isn’t anything new. Thomas Jefferson had the same problem. I’m going to vote for Thomas Jefferson.

  4. griff

    October 19, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    Sorry folks, but if you have a “D” next to your name, you’re linked to Obama. Thats the way it is, just the same as you linked every one with an “R” to Bush in 2008 in order to win.

    What a truly pathetic state our politics – and hence our country – is in.

  5. Fivebyfives

    October 19, 2011 at 8:56 pm

    Obama has come to remind me of Alf Landon, who ran against FDR in 1936. As the modern Republican Party morphs into whatever it is, Obama, like Landon, is becoming more and more the “me too candidate.”

    The national narrative is vacuous, mainly because of the inept, inert, or narcissistic approach of the White House. This has been a terrible disservice to the Democratic Party as well as to the nation.

    I don’t quite agree with Carl about the “Manchurian” aspect of Obama, but I don’t strongly dispute it, either. Since January 2009 I believe the president has sustained a lot of muscle damage to his neck by repeatedly kissing his biceps in front of the mirror.

    In a nutshell, Mr. Obama’s estimation of himself far exceeds that of the voters. But hey, raise a billion dollars and you’ve reached Mt. Olympus.

    • Carl Nemo **==

      October 19, 2011 at 10:19 pm

      Hi Fivebyfives…

      The reason I made the comment about Obama acting as a Republican friendly “Manchurian Candidate” is the fact that he’s done little to nothing to turn back Constitution destroying policies and laws set in place by the Republicans during their eight year reign of error/terrors under G.W. Bush/Dick Cheney. He’s rolled over on every serious attempt to mitigate the damage wrought under the Bushistas and in fact his administration has enhanced many of the laws and methods set in place by eight years of Republican rule making them even moreso draconian.

      I think Woody188’s superb indictment list against this President concerning things that should have been addressed to date can be found seven comments down on this supplied recent link on CHB concerning “Doom and gloom dominate Obama White House”.

      http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/42228

      Carl Nemo **==

      • Fivebyfives

        October 19, 2011 at 10:30 pm

        Hey Carl…well, like I said, a “me too” candidate. Pres. Obama has continued so many policies that he condemned in 2008 that I don’t believe he believes anything any more except re-election for re-election’s sake….country be damned.

        Friendly waves and small swells to you, amigo.

        • Carl Nemo **==

          October 19, 2011 at 10:47 pm

          Thanks for the good cheer Fivebyfives and back at you. I always enjoy your thoughtful comments to this site. : )

          Nemo **==

  6. DaveM

    October 19, 2011 at 9:28 pm

    The next election is still a year away and look what we have to choose from. It most likely will be Obama and one of the Republican bozos. If the American public thinks they are screwed now, just wait and see what the next election will bring. The fall of the American Empire is in full swing. Enjoy it while you can folks.

  7. woody188

    October 20, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    Have to laugh at people wishing they had Hillary instead of Obama. Things wouldn’t be any different with Hillary at the helm. She is very much for war, torture, spying on our own, and shipping jobs overseas.

    Of course things wouldn’t be any different had McCain won either.

    What you are witnessing isn’t a Manchurian Candidate, but a re-defining of what it means to be a mainstream conservative or liberal. Both parties are now, essentially, social conservatives, foreign policy hawks, and fiscal liberals based on the older meanings of the terms. They feel they have to be this way to win the money from supporters required for election.

    This situation won’t change until graft and influence peddling are once again prosecuted. I don’t expect those recipients of the graft and influence peddling to grow a conscience and outlaw or stop their gravy train. So this situation will not change without upheaval, violent or otherwise.

  8. Carl Nemo **==

    October 20, 2011 at 9:34 pm

    Thanks Woody for your sentiments concerning the election of Hillary Clinton in lieu of Barack Obama. You are correct in your analysis that nothing would be different, in fact possibly even worse so.

    Since Hillary Clinton is the featured photo with this article; I thought I’d supply a recent photo collection of ‘Madame Secretary’ on a mission to suck up to to Pakistan, a nation that basically gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden for a number of years while this nation spent trillions in these regions to interdict him and other terrorists and we’re still there with no seeming end in site until our nation is destroyed financially.

    Reagan/H.W. Bush (Mr. CIA) allowed Pakistan to obtain nukes in the 80’s against arms proliferation constraints and now in the early 21st century we are handing these military provocateurs 5 billion in ‘military aid’ as a bribe while they continue to allow destablizing Taliban strongholds to hideout within their lands.

    These photo’s are highly irritating because you get to gaze upon the collective faces of our government elitists who are having a great time gadding about while frittering away evermore tax debt dollars for the purposes of bribing rogue nations such as Pakistan to do their globalist schemed bidding. You’ve got our SOS, General Petraeus (retired) now head of the CIA et al. all lined up to shake hands with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, another Paki interloper; I.E., here today gone tomorrow depending on whether he can stay in the favor of Pakistan’s vicious ISI (Interservices Intelligence) generals, that rivals the former Soviet KGB in its heyday over the Russian people, now titled the FSB (Federal Security Service), same evil organization, just a different name.

    http://news.yahoo.com/photos/secretary-of-state-hillary-clinton-visits-pakistan-1319156282-slideshow/pakistans-prime-minister-yousuf-raza-gilani-r-shakes-photo-234453713.html

    Tragically America is in harms way with this gaggle of corrupt characters that have managed to worm their way to the highest levels of our government. The best, brightest and most honorable do not represent our nation’s interests.

    During the era of Imperial Japan it was known as the “Empire of the Rising Sun”, seemingly our now broke and broken nation would be best titled ‘The Empire of the Rising Scum’ predicated on the quality of our leadership along with their “We the People” unfriendly motives. : |

    Carl Nemo **==

    • Carl Nemo **==

      October 22, 2011 at 11:04 pm

      “You’ve got our SOS, General Petraeus (retired) now head of the CIA et al. all lined up to shake hands with Pakistan’s Prime Minister…” extract from post

      I’ve just noticed awkard sentence construction on this stale post.

      should read:

      You’ve got our SOS, Hillary Clinton along with General Petraeus (retired) now head of the CIA et al. all lined up to shake hands with Pakistan’s Prime Minister…

      My apologies.

      Carl Nemo **==

  9. sherry morrison

    October 29, 2011 at 10:52 pm

    Obama will be re elected. Who do the republicans have? Rick Perry? Herman Cain? Mitt Romney? Obama will win by default as he did last time. Sad, but true.
    I was a Hillary supporter, and was not a happy women when the DNC snatched the nomination for Obama. Would she have been better? I believe she would have been. Would I have voted to re elect her? Probably not. Now that she has gone to work for that administration, I wouldn’t vote for her to police stray dogs.