Many on the Left believe Obama has let them down, that he’s just too much of a centrist for them. One of these is Sen. Bernie Sanders (Independent.-Vt.) who recently appeared on a talk show and said this about deciding to challenge the party leader, according to The Daily Caller‘s Jeff Poor:
“Well, at this point I have not,” Sanders said. “But I am now giving thought to doing it. You know, I think you know the names out there as well as I do. And I think the American people have got to be engaged. It’s not just me or anybody else here in Washington. There are a lot of smart honest progressive people who I think can be good presidents.”Sanders said such a challenge was necessary since in his estimation, the president had begun to take his position as the party leader for granted. And I think one of the reasons President Obama has moved as far to the right as he has is he thinks he can go all the way and no one will stand up to him,” Sanders continued. “So, Tim I don’t want to tell you more than that but this is an issue I am – we are beginning to talk about a little bit.”
This may appear at first blush to be a distraction and a minor issue. But it isn’t. Here’s why: in the past six decades there have been five primary challenges to the incumbent president, and every time it occurred, the incumbent and his party lost the Presidency. In 1952, Truman was challenged by Kefauver who beat the President in New Hampshire. Truman withdrew and Stevenson ran and lost to Ike. In ’68, Eugene McCarthy challenged LBJ, and his surrogate and veep Humphrey lost to Nixon. In ’76. Reagan challenged Ford, who succeeded in becoming the nominee but still lost to Carter. Ted Kennedy challenged Carter in ’80, when Carter held him off but lost to Reagan. Finally, Pat Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush in ’92, and while Bush won the nomination, he lost to Clinton.
Bottom line: a challenge from Sanders or from anyone else could, if history is an accurate predictor, spell the end of the Obama years, all four of them.
The idea that Obama has moved even one centimeter to the right is so delusional that I think someone advancing the notion should seek professional help.
Mr. Felix, it’s all a matter of perspective. To many on PJM, Obama is a far leftist, if not a Socialist. But there are significant numbers of leftist liberals who are deeply disappointed with him for not going further than he did on the public option on ObamaCare and now, on the debt deal with no new taxes on the arch-enemies, the rich and the big corporations (who tend to employ a majority of those still employed in the private sector, but that means little to Obama and his types.)
I love how arguments are framed in this country. It is truly wacky.
One example:
Every single industrialized county in the world offers it citizens health care and also makes for profit insurance against the law. Here in the Unites States Obama makes a law that gives the for profit insurance companies huge numbers of new customers. So follow along…… compared to the rest of the world this is a very right wing plan. Only here is the land of wacky is it called far left and socialism.
A far left medical program would include maybe plastic surgery, mandatory paid time off for stress and things like that. But to have a basic program that again EVERY industrialized county offers is CENTRAL, RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE.
Any ideas as to why things are like this here? USA USA were are the best is not the answer I am looking for.
Belladonna Rogers: From your pen to God’s eyes.
Great! This is all we need! Bernie Sanders is about as relevant to the realities of today’s politics as a Stutz Bearcat. His antique socialism is straight out of a “Debs for President” campaign brochure. I’m pretty sure that Bernie believes that the “workingman” is some guy out of a 1930′s Jack Levine propaganda painting wearing bib overalls and sporting a neck wider than his head. (Tip of the hat to Tom Wolfe for that image.) If Sanders runs for President then I am sure that his first campaign pledge will be to go to the aid of the Loyalist government in the Spanish Civil War. If Sanders thinks that Mr. Obama has moved “far to the right” then he is even dimmer and more irrelevant than he generally appears to be.
It sounds like you believe that for ordinary Americans to want a quality life is anachronism. Lets hear from conservatives why they gave up on trying to make America the land of opportunity. Why are conservatives so willing to let the rest of the world out pace us in every sector that defines quality of life for the average person and increasing profits and power for the wealthy and corporations by decreasing income and power of the average American.
Also, how are we going to downsize government without firing the hundreds of thousands of working people employed by the government, thereby increasing unemployment.
Conservatives also tend to overlook the fact that we used to have a healthy economy at the SAME TIME that we had higher taxes. What BENEFIT did we gain by tax cuts for the wealthy? When are these tax cuts going to produce the jobs they were supposed to? When is trickle down going to start tricking? Deregulation brought down the housing market and the stock market, do we need MORE deregulation?
Conservatives, you are being bamboozled. FOLLOW THE MONEY! If you want to know who is bamboozling you–just look at the stock market to see who has the money–who is making more money while average Americans are making less? Who is backing the politicians and who is running the media.
If you believe in lowering the quality of life for the average American you are a conservative and a member of the appropriate party.
They get primary challenges, because they are weak candidates. They lose because they are weak candidates. The primary challenges do not cause them to lose. They lose because they suck.
If a Conservative made moderate deals and failed to get through truly Conservative legislation with a huge majority, many Conservatives, ignoring political realities, would be calling such a Conservative President a RINO. Obama had it all handed to him on a silver platter, and the Repubs handed him his head. If you are on the Left, you think he moved to the Right, or you say that he was just too weak or sold out.
Of course, the truth is, America is not a far-Left country. There was no way for Obama to produce the Leftist revolution. Although, Obama should have been able to get far more than he did. ObamaCare should have been universal healthcare. They had the power to do it. They could have sold that, if they had gone about it correctly. In this, the Left is correct to feel aggrieved. Sucks to be them. They should have elected someone with some actual executive skills, not Obama, the Hope-and-Change, Unicorn President.
I voted for Obama . He has dissappointed me in almost every way. Where is the change? Is he a closet Republican? The only thing he got passsionate about was healthcare , which was about a tribute to Ted Kennedy, which Jimmy Carter rightly stated could have beeen acccomplished in the 1970′s had Kennedy supresssed his EGO.Why are we involved in Libya? I’m an Independent, but always looked at the democrats as the lesser of two evils these days. I know we’ll never see another FDR, but a legimate primary challenger must emerge!
Why settle for the lesser evil? Chthulu for President!
I’m sorry but given the current configuration of the Democrat Party, there is no way that an old white guy from Vermont who’s not even a de jure Democrat himself is going to challenge the first African-American President seeking re-election. I don’t care how good his Socialist-Progressivist bona fides may be. The same’s true for just about any other potential challenger. They’d be absolutely savaged by the media-Democrat complex as a spoiler and a racist; they’d leave with their reputations in tatters.
Chipper: You write, “The same’s true for just about any other potential challenger. They’d be absolutely savaged by the media-Democrat complex as a spoiler and a racist; they’d leave with their reputations in tatters.”
BUT what if the Democratic challenger is an African-American member of the Congressional Black Caucus? Or an African-American mayor with real executive experience?
Stranger things have happened.
It is important for liberals to show Obama that if he can’t tow the line he cannot count on their support. Bruce Bartlett, a former Reagan financial adviser, recently called Obama a moderate conservative in practical terms. Is there any wonder why liberals are upset? Obama had control of both houses yet failed to achieve or even show a spine on the following liberal expectations:
1. He provided a medical care option conservative enough for a republican – Mitt Romney. He gave away single payer before it was even voted on.
2. He escalated the war in Afghanistan and continued the Bush policy on the war on terror. He retained a republican secretary of defense.
3. He never prosecuted anyone for torture or extraordinary renditions.
4. He has not yet criminally prosecuted any major bank or financial institution for the 2008 collapse, nor has he even tried to break the banks up under anti-trust laws.
5. He capitulated on extending the Bush tax cuts and only got a one year extension of unemployment benefits for a two year tax cut extension. Not a quid pro quo response.
6. He now proposed a cuts only budget without even a token “throw ‘em a bone” tax increase even for such ridiculously unnecessary deductions as for corporate jets
7. His advisors have openly stated his base has nowhere to go so he can ignore them.
I think a primary challenge is a strong possibility. As a liberal I know many who will support anyone but Obama. Even if it means Obama loses, it will chasten the democratic party not to ignore its base just as the tea party did with the republicans. The tea party did a great job advocating their position. Liberals will now do the same.
’1. He provided a medical care option conservative enough for a republican – Mitt Romney.’
Mitt is a RINO. And the similar medical care in his state runs a deficit and has to get money from the Fed. If we get that nationally, where are we going to get the money?
’6. He now proposed a cuts only budget without even a token “throw ‘em a bone” tax increase even for such ridiculously unnecessary deductions as for corporate jets.’
The corporate jet deduction that he keeps on pounding was enacted in 2009. That’s right, under YOUR Democrat-controlled Congress. And Obama didn’t veto it then. Funny how nobody mentions that.
Obama may be disappointing, but only the relatively few ideologue Democrats won’t vote for him.
The independents are the ones in play here.
‘The tea party did a great job advocating their position. Liberals will now do the same.’
The Tea Party’s success was due to their position, which is a good one. It advocates itself. Liberals only have fiscally irresponsible positions, and no presentation technique or narrative can hide that. People are not as stupid as Obama and a lot of other Democrats seem to think.
republicans and democrats are the same party
The nominating process and electoral system are the only recourse the people have to remove incompetent or feckless leaders short of impeachment. The dead hand of history should not constrain us from using our only tool. Obama himself would never have been nominated if historic precedents marked an uncrossable line. Most importantly, however, the examples cited fall short because they ignore all of the other factors in those races (Truman would have won were it not for Kefauver? Would Reagan have lost were it not for Kennedy?). They turn historical causality on its head.