Time for a Primary Challenger

[Gipper]

Should BO have a primary challenge. I think so.

Of course, no one in the left MSM is saying how the Ds are in total disarray and BO could face a challenge from the left... So...this must come as a surprise to lefties on this forum who amazingly think BO is great (proof again). I love surprises.

We know that the second worst president in recent times, Jimma Carter, ran into trouble with The Swimmer (Ted Kennedy) back in 1980. So, if the D Party is consistent, they will put up a challenger for the worst president in recent times.

Well...who should challenge BO?

How about Al Gore? Fat Al should run as a third party contender. That would split the lefty vote big time and end liberalism for a time. We can only hope.

Ralph Nader thinks there should be a primary challenge.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/04/nader-almost-100-percent-chance-of-a-democratic-primary-challenger-to-obama/

 

[Openmind]

Should BO have a primary challenge. I think so.

Of course, no one in the left MSM is saying how the Ds are in total disarray and BO could face a challenge from the left... So...this must come as a surprise to lefties on this forum who amazingly think BO is great (proof again). I love surprises.

We know that the second worst president in recent times, Jimma Carter, ran into trouble with The Swimmer (Ted Kennedy) back in 1980. So, if the D Party is consistent, they will put up a challenger for the worst president in recent times.

Well...who should challenge BO?

How about Al Gore? Fat Al should run as a third party contender. That would split the lefty vote big time and end liberalism for a time. We can only hope.

Ralph Nader thinks there should be a primary challenge.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/04/nader-almost-100-percent-chance-of-a-democratic-primary-challenger-to-obama/

Yes. . .keep on dreaming!

I don't think there is much smart in splitting a party as the Republicans are desperately finding out!

And, obviously Ralph Nader would love to see that. . .that's the only way he ever got to run, as a third party candidate who managed to split just enough votes away from the Democrats to lead us to the horrible 8 years of Bush!

 

[Pandora]

I would hate to see Algore run again but
I am in agreement there will be some challenger
From the left. Possibly two! One who thinks
He is not left enough and a
Moderate who thinks he has gone too far


The only question that matters to me is who
will be running against him on the republican
Side. I hope to God it's not another McCain type

 

[Openmind]

I would hate to see Algore run again but
I am in agreement there will be some challenger
From the left. Possibly two! One who thinks
He is not left enough and a
Moderate who thinks he has gone too far


The only question that matters to me is who
will be running against him on the republican
Side. I hope to God it's not another McCain type

See, just by that statement you are continuing the extreme partisanship that has brought us to this poing.

You are expressing that there is no way, ever, no matter who runs, that you would vote for a Democrat. So, you are not looking for the best person to run this country and take it out of the deep precipice we are in, you just want to consider the "best" of one side of the aisle, even if that "best" is second best!

I am a liberal, and proud of it. But, I am not saying that I would never vote for a Republican, maybe even an Independant. I still support Obama, but that doesn't mean I will automatically push for his re-election. It will depend on who his challenger is. . .it will depend on the strength of the presidential candidates. . .no matter what their religions (unless they are hyper religious and it interfers with their judgement), their race, their sex, even their party affiliation.

 

[Pandora]

I would never vote for a democrat?

I am a registered democrat that voted for Hillary
In the last primary. I have voted for more democrats
In my life than republican

See, just by that statement you are continuing the extreme partisanship that has brought us to this poing.

You are expressing that there is no way, ever, no matter who runs, that you would vote for a Democrat. So, you are not looking for the best person to run this country and take it out of the deep precipice we are in, you just want to consider the "best" of one side of the aisle, even if that "best" is second best!

I am a liberal, and proud of it. But, I am not saying that I would never vote for a Republican, maybe even an Independant. I still support Obama, but that doesn't mean I will automatically push for his re-election. It will depend on who his challenger is. . .it will depend on the strength of the presidential candidates. . .no matter what their religions (unless they are hyper religious and it interfers with their judgement), their race, their sex, even their party affiliation.

 

[Openmind]

I would never vote for a democrat?

I am a registered democrat that voted for Hillary
In the last primary. I have voted for more democrats
In my life than republican

Nice to know.

So, why do you, in your previous post, totally reject any idea of voting, not only for President Obama, but for any potential Democratic challenger?

I thought you were more open minded than this, based on most of your posts.

 

[Pandora]

Nice to know.

So, why do you, in your previous post, totally reject any idea of voting, not only for President Obama, but for any potential Democratic challenger?

I thought you were more open minded than this, based on most of your posts.

I would rather slit both my wrists with a dull
Razor than vote for obama and I wouldn't want
to vote for anyone left of him either. Leaving
only someone to the right of him and that person
isn't going to beat him in a primary.

That leaves me with voting 3d party or republican

 

[Openmind]

I would rather slit both my wrists with a dull
Razor than vote for obama and I wouldn't want
to vote for anyone left of him either. Leaving
only someone to the right of him and that person
isn't going to beat him in a primary.

That leaves me with voting 3d party or republican

Anyone right of Obama would be a strong Republican, as Obama is already to the center, rather than the left!

But. . .don't slit your wrists yet! It's really not worth it!

 

[Openmind]

I would rather slit both my wrists with a dull
Razor than vote for obama and I wouldn't want
to vote for anyone left of him either. Leaving
only someone to the right of him and that person
isn't going to beat him in a primary.

That leaves me with voting 3d party or republican

Anyone right of Obama would be a strong Republican, as Obama is already to the center, rather than the left!

But. . .don't slit your wrists yet! It's really not worth it, and we would miss you here!

 

[Pandora]

Anyone right of Obama would be a strong Republican, as Obama is already to the center, rather than the left!

But. . .don't slit your wrists yet! It's really not worth it, and we would miss you here!

obama "might" be right of Bernie Sanders but I wouldn't vote for home either




Question ? Did you wait to see who challenged President Bush before you were sure you would vote against him? Or did you just know you would vote for what ever democrat got the nomination?

 

[Openmind]

obama "might" be right of Bernie Sanders but I wouldn't vote for home either




Question ? Did you wait to see who challenged President Bush before you were sure you would vote against him? Or did you just know you would vote for what ever democrat got the nomination?

If you mean in 2004, yes, actually, I did. But really, the bar wasn't too high to meet my own criteria of "who was better" than Bush. Actually, I never thought Bush was elected in a very "clear and unshakable" way!

But, there is no doubt that I am looking at who will put their hat in the ring. . .on either side.

Now, unfortunately, it looks like the one Republican candidate that I have the most respect for is not going to get the GOP nomination. . .Romney.

And, the second one that I might consider, because at least he is a straight talker (even if I don't agree with all his opinions) and he doesn't wiggle around or catter to extremists and religious zombies just to get their vote, is Ron Paul. . . but unfortunately. . .he won't get the nomination either, because precisely. . .he is a straight talker and doesn't catter to the religious right!

So. . . I'm a "lady in waiting!" And right know, Obama is still head and shoulders above any other candidate. But I do realize that it is not your opinion.

 

[Gipper]

Anyone right of Obama would be a strong Republican, as Obama is already to the center, rather than the left!

But. . .don't slit your wrists yet! It's really not worth it!

Hahahaha.....BO is in the center....hahahahaha......

If BO is center, than the center has moved far to the left.

Liberal media basis has distorted many minds.

 

[Openmind]

Hahahaha.....BO is in the center....hahahahaha......

If BO is center, than the center has moved far to the left.

Liberal media basis has distorted many minds.

Fox News distorted your mind to the point of no return.

Too bad! "A mind is a terrible thing to lose!"

 

[Gipper]

The lesson of the debt-ceiling deal, Mr. Weisberg sobbed, is that "there is no point trying to explain complex matters to the American people. The president has tried reasonableness and he has failed." A pithier expression of this lament was the headline of an online column by liberal Republican Charles Fried: "Obama Is Too Good for Us."

It takes an authoritarian mindset to look at a failing leader and fault the people for failing to follow him. But Mr. Weisberg has long harbored suspicions about his countrymen's fitness to be led by the man he described, in an August 2008 column, as "handsome, brilliant and cool." At the time, Mr. Obama was not doing as well in the polls as Mr. Weisberg thought he should have been, given the all-around awesomeness of the junior senator from Illinois. If Mr. Obama lost to John McCain, Mr. Weisberg concluded, it could mean only one thing: America was irredeemably racist.

Actually, Mr. Obama botched the budget negotiation not because he wouldn't fight but because he didn't know when to give in to minimize his losses. He stubbornly clung to his demand for a tax increase long after it was clear that was a deal breaker, yielding only when the alternative was to risk imminent catastrophe.

By contrast, Bill Clinton never even made such a demand in the budget battles of 1995-96, from which he emerged victorious. Later he worked with the Republican Congress to enact conservative policies, including welfare reform in 1996 and a cut in the capital gains tax in 1997.

Mr. Clinton was ideologically flexible, whereas Mr. Obama is rigid. Yet the left stuck with Mr. Clinton even through his impeachment. Everyone loves a winner, and progressives are angry and disconsolate with Mr. Obama because they increasingly see him as a loser. But if the president is a loser, it is precisely because he is one of them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904140604576499003691054810.html?KEYWORDS=james+taranto

That is another great column by James Taranto.

Some on the Left think BO is a moderate (meaning not commie enough). Some also believe he is a loser....but, as Mr. Taranto stated, BO IS a loser because he IS one of them...no truer words have ever been spoken.