Obama: If Stimulus fails "then you'll have a new president."

[Ganhyun]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/16/zelizer.stakes/index.html

I know everyone has different thoughts on the Stimulus, some for, some against. I thought this was an interesting read. interesting how both sides try to prove that their views are right.

From the article.

Last week, Obama told an audience in Florida that if his economic recovery plan does not work, "then you'll have a new president."

Hmm... I guess you Democrats better pray the Stimulus fixes everything.   Otherwise the Man of Change won't be back. At least thats what he seems to think.

[Human Snorenado]

Yeah right.  One thing both polling and history has shown us is that if the people think you're working for them, then they've got your back.  Ask Republicans who were so sure that FDR was going to give them back Congress just because of the New Deal how that turned out.  Republicans need new ideas and are fucked until they get them.

[Ganhyun]

Yeah right.  One thing both polling and history has shown us is that if the people think you're working for them, then they've got your back.  Ask Republicans who were so sure that FDR was going to give them back Congress just because of the New Deal how that turned out.  Republicans need new ideas and are fucked until they get them.

Well, both sides can claim that their ideas worked at one point in history. Republicans during Reagan's time, and Democrats with the New Deal.  The commentator seems to think that if things keep getting worse, the American public will turn their backs on Obama/Democrats views, in which case, both sides' views will have failed.
so the question is, where would we go from there? Would that cause the rise of the third party?

He means in 7 years.

7 years?

Then why this line:

Regardless of whether Obama meant that he would not run again or that he would be defeated, he referred to how much is at stake with the federal programs that were debated over the past two weeks.

Seems alot sooner than 7 years.

[Fragamemnon]

He's arguably right-if we're stuck in 8-9% unemployment shitsville three years from now, he may be too unpopular to realistically run again.

Note that doesn't mean a Republican will run and win, just means that we might wind up with a different Democrat.

[Cheebs]

Well good thing his policies will work out and we'll be seeing improvement within 4 years.


govt. spending on liberal domestic policies

[Ganhyun]

He's arguably right-if we're stuck in 8-9% unemployment shitsville three years from now, he may be too unpopular to realistically run again.

Note that doesn't mean a Republican will run and win, just means that we might wind up with a different Democrat.

This is true.

[Phoenix Dark]

He's arguably right-if we're stuck in 8-9% unemployment shitsville three years from now, he may be too unpopular to realistically run again.

Note that doesn't mean a Republican will run and win, just means that we might wind up with a different Democrat.

You think that's a real possibility?

[Cheebs]

If there is ANY improvement at all by 2012 he can easily argue that the GOP's miserable economic policy left him with the worst economic state since the Depression and his policies are starting to show improvement and Candidate ______ will just take us back the failed policies that got us into the mess.

All he needs is just a slight improvement by 2012, which is going to happen anyway. American economies don't go downhill for 5 years straight.




and HA! at a different dem nominee in 2012. Even if the country is imploding Obama will still be the nominee. Look at Carter, he was able to still be re-nominated in 1980.

[ToxicAdam]

As long as he keeps his pulse on the opinion polls, he will be okay. Obama is coming off of one of the least popular Presidencies in history, a 2006 that some saw as anti-incumbent and an economy that should be rebounding by 2011.

The only thing that could hurt him is if a true outsider challenges him and successfully paints him as "part of the establishment". That could be political poison for him if things remain bad.

[Fragamemnon]

He's arguably right-if we're stuck in 8-9% unemployment shitsville three years from now, he may be too unpopular to realistically run again.

Note that doesn't mean a Republican will run and win, just means that we might wind up with a different Democrat.

You think that's a real possibility?

It would take some extreme economic circumstances to put Obama in such a situation where he would have little hope of winning against the current crop of GOP shiteaters. It's only a possibility, realistically, if we wind up with an extended bout of 8-9+% unemployment lasting for over a year and a half with no sign of relief. At that point the combo of cash-raped states and municipalities raising taxes and an ineffective federal response would essentially disqualify Obama for re-election.

[Cheebs]

The only thing that could hurt him is if a true outsider challenges him and successfully paints him as "part of the establishment". That could be political poison for him if things remain bad.

The only person who could pull that off is Jindal. Palin, Romney...etc have been in the national scene too long. And I get the feeling (partially due to the fact he has to run for re-election in a off year, 2011 just about a month or two before Iowa) Jindal will decide to wait till 2016.

[ToxicAdam]

I wouldn't count Romney out as someone who could do it (assuming the economy remains this bad until 2011). Just because he is a national name, doesn't disqualify him as being a Washington outsider.

Jindal will never make it out of the primaries.

[Phoenix Dark]

Oh boy, can you imagine how far Palin would go to tear down Jindal? That South Carolina primary is gonna be fun to watch.

I'm not qualified to predict the economy will be much better by 2012 but I think people will be able to see the benefits of the stimulus for instance, on local levels. If Obama can manage to stay out of scandal and keep the people's trust he should be ok. He gets fucked the minute he's seen as more of the same, so honesty is gonna be important. It's not like his coalition of going to disappear over night

[Cheebs]

The whole election of 2012 discussion is pretty much useless if the GOP base continues their love affair with Palin. You don't get two first impressions in politics, especially with one as culturally wide was Palin's was in 2008. Regardless of the economy the moderate middle wouldn't trust her. Which is why I am curious to watch. Will the GOP go with their heart and go for Palin or  ignore their gut and actually try to find someone they think is electable? I am honestly clueless. Republicans hate nominating new faces unlike the Democrats....

[recursivelyenumerable]

he said as much in an interview a couple weeks back.

something with those assets,

MATT LAUER: At some point will you say, "Wait a minute, we've spent this amount of money. We're not seeing the results. We've got to change course dramatically?"

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Look, I'm at the start of my administration. One nice thing about — the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I've got four years. And —

MATT LAUER: You're gonna know quickly how people feel —

PRESIDENT OBAMA: — and — and —

MATT LAUER: — about what —

PRESIDENT OBAMA: that's exactly right. And — and, you know, a year from now I think people — are gonna see that — we're starting to make some progress. But there's still gonna be some pain out there. If I don't have this done in three years, then there's gonna be a one-term proposition.

[Joe Molotov]

Impeach Obama

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Impeach Obama

Actually, I would like to see this happen on the charge of "being a communist" or something like that.

Obviously he won't be removed from office, but it would be a good way to out the true fucktards in the Senate.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Democrats would win in 2012, even if Obama were to step down.  GOP has no chance because they will be at each other's throats between the religious fundies and the economic conservatives.  There was already a sign of that in 2008 where it took Republicans a long time (arguably up until Palin) to unite behind McCain...and even then, a lot of dissent did happen.  It will be worse in 2012.

[Cheebs]

Democrats would win in 2012, even if Obama were to step down.  GOP has no chance because they will be at each other's throats between the religious fundies and the economic conservatives.  There was already a sign of that in 2008 where it took Republicans a long time (arguably up until Palin) to unite behind McCain...and even then, a lot of dissent did happen.  It will be worse in 2012.

As long as the GOP is stupid enough to nominate Palin then it honestly doesn't matter what the dems or obama do, they win by default. Nominating Palin would be as suicidal in an election as Bush on the ballot.

[y2kev]

He's arguably right-if we're stuck in 8-9% unemployment shitsville three years from now, he may be too unpopular to realistically run again.

Note that doesn't mean a Republican will run and win, just means that we might wind up with a different Democrat.

I don't believe this. The program could realistically out and out fail and Obama could sell people on it.

It'd be like No Child Left Behind if Bush hadn't pissed everyone off six times over.

[Phoenix Dark]

I'd bet Obama wouldn't need to step down, unless it's some huge scandal. Dude could sell water to a well

spoiler (click to show/hide)

then sell soap in jail
/fiddy

[close]

[AdmiralViscen]

Uh this is news? I saw this live because I'm, you know, actually paying attention to what is going on in this country

[Ganhyun]

Uh this is news? I saw this live because I'm, you know, actually paying attention to what is going on in this country

Uhh some of us can't actually sit around all day and watch the news? Some of us actually have jobs with work to do?
 

[AdmiralViscen]

Who said I watched it on a TV at home? There are transcripts posted in the evenings as well 

[Ganhyun]

Who said I watched it on a TV at home? There are transcripts posted in the evenings as well 

Are you just here to troll friend? 

[AdmiralViscen]

Who said I watched it on a TV at home? There are transcripts posted in the evenings as well 

Are you just here to troll friend? 

Are you?

I'm sick of the Beardo/FoC/SD hit squad bursting onto the scene with BREAKING news about some minuscule Obama comment while ignoring everything of substance

[Ganhyun]

Who said I watched it on a TV at home? There are transcripts posted in the evenings as well 

Are you just here to troll friend? 

Are you?

I'm sick of the Beardo/FoC/SD hit squad bursting onto the scene with BREAKING news about some minuscule Obama comment while ignoring everything of substance

Who says I ignore everything of substance? I just posted a opinion story on it. Others thought it was discussion worthy as they discussed it If you are so sick of this, then why come into the thread at all?

Also.

Who said I watched it on a TV at home? There are transcripts posted in the evenings as well 

I never said you were at home watching tv. But I do see how it could be implied that way. You could easily have been watching it on the Internet at work or in a college lobby or something.  Also, a transcript != Live. Transcript=copy posted later.


Your own earlier post:

Uh this is news? I saw this live because I'm, you know, actually paying attention to what is going on in this country

Or did you mis-post and meant you had read this before? 

[ShogunOfFear]

Who says I ignore everything of substance? I just posted a opinion story on it. Others thought it was discussion worthy as they discussed it If you are so sick of this, then why come into the thread at all?

That would have made too much sense.

[AdmiralViscen]

no, I watched it on stream. The hot transcript tip was for your benefit, hence "as well." Just showing you the numerous ways you could have picked up on this in the last week, without waiting for some CNN loser to post a couple of excerpts for you to digest. As for ignoring substance, Obama said was talking for a good hour before he made that comment

btw:

Hmm... I guess you Democrats better pray the Stimulus fixes everything.  Otherwise the Man of Change won't be back. At least thats what he seems to think.

Actually, people who aren't partisan lunatics hope this fixes things so that America can thrive again, not so our boy can stay elected.

[Ganhyun]

no, I watched it on stream. The hot transcript tip was for your benefit, hence "as well." Just showing you the numerous ways you could have picked up on this in the last week, without waiting for some CNN loser to post a couple of excerpts for you to digest. As for ignoring substance, Obama said was talking for a good hour before he made that comment

Well kudos to you for watching everything Obama does on Stream or Live Television, or however you do it. I myself don't have alot of free time to watch every little thing Obama says or does, so I use major news outlets to check news when I can. But I guess, if we go by your words, CNN is no longer an acceptable news site?

Ok, but I guess i'll have to go take one of these...



and only read the Huffington Post from now on. After all, CNN is too conservative. 

Actually, people who aren't partisan lunatics hope this fixes things so that America can thrive again, not so our boy can stay elected.

So now anyone who disagrees with the Bailout is a partisan lunatic who wants America to fail. Ok. Nice to know the logic you are using.

In the end, my point still stands. If you are sick of these threads that go against Obama, why come in and post at all? Others posted their opinions on why it would or would not happen and other things related to it.  You just came in and trolled because you don't like the news story.

[Cheebs]

Actually, people who aren't partisan lunatics hope this fixes things so that America can thrive again, not so our boy can stay elected.

So now anyone who disagrees with the Bailout is a partisan lunatic who wants America to fail. Ok. Nice to know the logic you are using.

No that is not what he is saying at all it's not about disagreeing with the idea of it but that anyone who hopes it doesn't WORK is a partisan lunatic who doesn't have the countries best interests in mind.

[AdmiralViscen]

I don't read the huffington post at all lol, wtf are you talking about. I said nothing about the political orientation of CNN. Also maybe you should read my post about what I'm actually sick of. I gave my response to this news "story" when it was posted the first time in the big political thread.

Here's a clue: I'm sick of people who need someone else to watch the words of our President for them, and then cherry pick what he thinks will get him a lot of hits on his blog. If you're interested in the process then WATCH THE ORIGINAL SOURCE and then you can respond to a whole range of things that Obama said instead of a repeat of something he's said before.


edit: and a direct reading of that remark would indicate that the 'partisan lunatics' are those Democrats who want the stimulus to succeed simply because of Obamamania. If those people exist

[Cheebs]

If you are sick of these threads that go against Obama, why come in and post at all? Others posted their opinions on why it would or would not happen and other things related to it.  You just came in and trolled because you don't like the news story.

Uh... for every 1 person at EB who doesn't support Obama is doing there is 100 EB'ers who do, this isn't freerepublic. If you make a anti-Obama thread expect 90% of the replies be from people who won't be very happy with your remarks. If you don't want them to post then you kind of picked the wrong message board.

[Ganhyun]

I don't read the huffington post at all lol, wtf are you talking about.

Also maybe you should read my post about what I'm actually sick of. I gave my response to this news "story" when it was posted the first time in the big political thread.

(I did not see this in the Poli-thread.)

I'm sick of the Beardo/FoC/SD hit squad bursting onto the scene with BREAKING news about some minuscule Obama comment while ignoring everything of substance

Ok, reading this, you are tired of people posting a story such as the one I posted. That right? So once again, why come in and post an obvious troll post? Especially if you had already made your feelings on this known?

The Huffington post quip is because during the election, almost all news not from the Huffington Post was looked down on by alot of Liberals.  

[AdmiralViscen]

I'm not a liberal. I just want people who criticize someone to actually bother listening to that someone. Or people who feel the need to chime in on politics to.... follow politics

[Cheebs]

The Huffington post quip is because during the election, almost all news not from the Huffington Post was looked down on by alot of Liberals. 

HuffPost was the news source who broke and recorded the infamous "bitter" comments of Obama you know.

[Ganhyun]

If you are sick of these threads that go against Obama, why come in and post at all? Others posted their opinions on why it would or would not happen and other things related to it.  You just came in and trolled because you don't like the news story.

Uh... for every 1 person at EB who doesn't support Obama is doing there is 100 EB'ers who do, this isn't freerepublic. If you make a anti-Obama thread expect 90% of the replies be from people who won't be very happy with your remarks. If you don't want them to post then you kind of picked the wrong message board.

Yes I know this board is decidedly Liberal. My point is look at the rest of the replies. Discussing their views on if it would happen or not. Then we have Viscen's post. Which is obvious troll. Big difference. So my whole point to him is, if you are sick of a certain type of thread, don't go in it. You don't see me shitting up the Obama is President thread or other threads where the Liberals made to go off on Conservatives. At least not in the last few months.

[Ganhyun]

anyway, this thread is no longer even about what it is supposed to be about. Derailed Total.