The Real Clear Politics headline to Mark Mellman’s column reads, “It’s Too Soon to Write Off Obama.”
True enough. Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan both and god-awful first two years, and worse poll numbers to boot. Of course, Presidents 40 and 41 also didn’t start from such amazing heights. No one has fallen farther, faster, than Obama. But, yes, it is still far too soon to write him off.
What’s interesting is, glancing around the blogosphere and even the MSM, that almost nobody thinks it’s too soon to start wondering out loud about it.
Wasn’t Clinton 42 and GHWB 41?
Yes, but what about Generalisimo Francisco Franco?
Oops…wrong dictator. Sorry, Steve. Won’t happen again.
Technically, yes, it’s too early to write him off. There are plenty of examples of politicians who were unpopular early but came back to win (in fact, NYC’s Mike Bloomberg made it a strategy–get the unpopular stuff done early so it’s ancient history come campaign time).
I think what makes people want to write Obama off at this early hour is the (totally reasonable) view that he does not have a plan like Bloomberg or good plain sense like Clinton. He won’t be able to turn this around. He’s far too arrogant to admit he’s been wrong (see, for example, his insistence that the unpopularity of his programs is the result of his failure to explain it properly).
“But, yes, it is still far too soon to write him off.”
It is not at all too soon to write off Barack Obama. There are two things that change everything.
1.)Purple and red state voters no longer rely on the MSM. They get their news and opinions from the alternative media.
2.)These same voters now realize that the Democrats are out to enslave them. Do you earn your living almost entirely in the private sector? If so, you are a complete fool if you cast your ballot for the typical Democratic Party candidate. Ann Coulter said it best: there are a number of bad Republicans—but there are also no good Democrats. She is only slightly exaggerating. Democrats inherently wish to expand the size of government. This is the core existential doctrine underpinning their political beliefs.
A very good argument can be made that the Democrats are no longer a national party. They now can only win elections in the bluest areas in the country. Furthermore, there is next to no hope for so-called moderate Democrats to recapture their party. The leftists are firmly in control. “Blue Dog” Texan Democrats joined the GOP some fifteen to twenty years ago. That is currently the situation confronting all “moderate” Democrats throughout the United States.
Reagan wasn’t throwing gasoline on the economic fire/meltdown like Imeme is doing.
The first step in turning things around is admitting that you have a problem. Obama is convinced the only problem he has is not having someone to run against. That’s why a turnover in the house and senate doesn’t bother him much.
If and when Obamacare is in its grave (for the second time), then and only then will Obama be irrelevant.
Reagan and Clinton were both skilled politicians. Obama only thinks he’s smart because he’s been told so. He is not flexible, and he won’t know how to recover.
David, my point was there is plenty of time to correct all that (which there is). Obama won’t correct it, but that’s a result of who he is, not where he is.
Reagan had a genuine love of America. Clinton was a charming enough rouge, such that America was content to let him be president, as long as there was an opposition Congress.
Dear Liar’s distaste of America is clear, and he’s not a charmer. He can give a good speech, but he doesn’t have the natural charm of Clinton.
The problem for the GOP is to come up with a good, solid candidate. B+ doesn’t make it. They need an A candidate. Who is . . . ?
After actually reading the article, it seems the author is trying to dismiss the present by recalling the past. The author conveniently forgets that Reagan had a very hostile press corp to contend with as well as Democratic control in the House and Senate. He was fighting a headwind with good policy and his obvious love of country as his only weapons.
Obama has the exact opposite problem. It’s the press and his party in power that are keeping him going. Only his arrogance and policy are getting in his way.
Not only that, rbj, but Clinton was a capable politician (as opposed to campaigner) who learned about keeping the Chamber of Commerce happy in Arkansas. He knew how to trim his sails.
“Yes, but what about Generalisimo Francisco Franco?”
Still dead.