Despite the president delivering a well-received (even by conservatives) speech in Tucson last week and once again demonstrating that he can deliver a unifying address, he still has a problem with his agenda. People may like him as a person, but they don’t like the big-government, policies he is pushing, er, has pushed.
That’s why former vice president Cheney thinks the Democrat will be a one-termer:
Former vice president Dick Cheney, back in the public eye after a major heart operation, predicts that President Obama will be a one-term president because of health care and other big government programs.
In an interview to air Tuesday on NBC’s Today show, Cheney cited Obama’s “overall approach to expanding the size of government, expanding the deficit, and giving more and more authority and power to the government over the private sector.”
As for health care, Cheney said Obama has “enacted a program that a great many people are very worried about. And that there’s a lot of support out there for the effort to repeal that health care package.”
The Wyoming Republican also lauded the Illinois Democrat for taking a page from former president Bush and adopting many of his counter-terrorism policies (policies he once criticized).
I’m not yet as sanguine as Cheney about Obama’s 2012 prospects, but do think this sterling public servant has a point. Unlike 2012, Obama can’t run on the amorphous slogan of “change” and rope in, as he did in 2008, conservatives and libertarians disgruntled with the incumbent Republican president and more ready to take him at his word when he paid lip service to their concerns.
Now, we see that lip service for what it is.
The Democrat can’t ride on people’s hopes that he’ll be a new kind of politician.
We also see that the economy hasn’t rebounded as the president promised us it would (when Congress passed his “stimulus”). Obama may still win, but he can’t count on the media to conceal his record as they did now nearly three years ago. A president can’t hide in the same way a candidate can.
The eyes of the world are upon President Obama and his accomplishments. But, all that said, if the economy rebounds vigorously, we’ll have a whole new ball game.
Obama will probably win a second term. The mutual contempt of the establishment GOP and the Tea Party wing for each other, coupled with the sucktacular Republican bench, assures it.
You doubt me, but you also doubted me when I said Ma’am Boxer would be re-elected.
Meanwhile, Axelrod talked about an Obama $1 BILLION campaign in 2012 and they have mega BILLIONS of stimulus cash stored away.
Take a lesson from Baby Doc Duvalier. Ghetto rats do not starve. They thrive in chaos and misery.
Axelrod and Rahm have headed back to Chicago to plan and scheme where there is no official record. No visitor’s log, no archive of e-mails, phone logs, official notes of discussions, etc. And the Daley brother has taken charge of Obama in the White House.
There may be enough natural chaos in 2012 to make it easy to hire on a huge number of Obama voters. Obama can throw off the wraps and lead the ultimate “them against us” campaign. All he can do is lose, which is nothing different from not taking the gamble. He sure as heck can not become a moderate. That would be a tacit admission that he fundamentally transformed America too much and that he has to walk it back. His leftists to his left would go ballistic.
The Obama bean counters are calculating the vote precinct by precinct across the nation. They know where to cheat and how. They are buying up their precinct captains right now.
ObamaCare, the deficit, inflation, & high unemployment will haunt Obama; therefore, I beleive these factors will make him a one term POTUS. The rift between the establishment GOP is not wide enough from the Tea Party Republicans to have any detrimental effects.
The point is that draconian cuts must be made at the national level and in numerous state houses. Democrats are the party of pandering and they can not change their tune without losing their grip on the amalgamation of piglets at the teats of the government sow.
Republicans have to take the bull by the tail and face the source of the problem. We have to take an axe to the unfunded entitlements in order to stem the hemorrhaging. That clearly means that the Republicans have to start kicking piglets off the teats of the government sow.
Just yesterday, I heard Harry Reid proclaim that there is no Social Security problem. It was an all inclusive statement of finality. No problem.
The Democrats promise: Elect us and the problems will go away.
The Republicans promise: Elect us and we will slash entitlements and guide you through rough times until we return to stability.
The Demagogues talk up the impossible and smear those who talk amputation. Then they round up people and pay them to vote and return the Demagogues to power.
I think Obama won because he was thought to be special. A different kind of pol. Plus I think about 10-20% of the electorate thought they could wash away some guilt about race relations by electing a Kenyaian.
All that specialness is gone. I think a lot of the white vote Obama got, those folks now know Obama and his team are just incompetent. In other words he blew his chance.
I also don’t expect the Republicans to nominate a Bob Dole or John McCain again.
The GOP has a prime opportunity to pick off the North Dakota senate seat, though.
Gene, Obama ran as a cipher or a ghost since his track record was near invisible; therefore, Obama exploited this fact as people projected their own definition of “Hope & Change.” Now that Obama has ObamaCare & Porkulus as albatroses on top of high unemployment, the coming inflation, & high gas prices in part due to Obama’s Gulf oil moratorium all will be large factors in his downfall. Obama’s fall will be due to self-inflicted Marxist ideology wounds. He has already made “Democrat” & “progressive” dirty words.
Obama’s policies will also not allow the slide to reverse in time for the 2012 elections.
Back in 1980, it was by no means clear that the People would be able to overthrow Jimmuh Carter. It took an exceptional candidate – Reagan – and even then, he only won with 51% of the vote, and that only developed in the final days (with a third party candidate who siphoned off more from Carter).
My point is that it wasn’t pre-ordained and could easily have gone the other way. Likewise with 2012. Nothing is pre-ordained, neither Obama’s victory nor His defeat.
I see five key factors: the economy, what the GOP is able to do with the budget this year, whether the GOP can find a really good candidate who ‘connects’ with Americans in 2012, what Obama does, and whether we have a foreign crisis (which could cut either way for Obama, depending on what it is).
Here is what should happen, in justice: Foreigners stop lending to the U.S. That causes a dollar collapse, causing the inflation/debt roof to crash on Obama’s head. The American people make the connection and get rid of him.
But here is what might happen: GOP pressure to reverse Obama policies is enough to improve the economy… meanwhile, Obama ‘triangulates’ the media pushes its false narratives, resulting in Obama’s re-election. And the GOP chooses another Bush or McCain, i.e. someone who (on the economy) offers an echo, not a choice.
I agree with V the K. I don’t see anyone out there as of right now that can realistically beat Obama in 2012. Perhaps the dynamics will change between now and then, but I doubt it. If he does win it may not be all bad because it would give us divided government for a few more years, restraining the ability of both sides to run amuck.
I think V the K has it right as well as John. There are no Republicans who can run against Obama. I wouldn’t even vote for Sarah Palin at this point even though I was a huge supporter of hers before she became the Lady Gaga of politics. Romney only differs from Obama in being from a long line of political scions, hardly something that will help the GOP against Obama. I would vote for Romney, but how many others would? I would vote for Mike Huckabee but I’m sure in the primary struggle his rivals would smear him and make him look bad over his compromises, etc. And Pawlenty and Barbour et al are just so boring, I need to drink lots of coffee just to stay awake when they talk. Maybe Michele Bachmann?
For Obama to lose, he would have to be running against someone who can win. There’s no 3rd party likely at this point, unless some Naderite incantation runs as a Green or Workers Party and miraculously siphons 16% of Obama’s vote, allowing for a Palin or Gingrich to win the election with 40% of the popular vote or something. I just don’t see it happening.
It might be a good thing if the Repubs take the Senate and we have a split government until 2017. I think I’d like that. I don’t want the GOP to control the whole government. Any party gets corrupt under such conditions.
remember, back in 1991, they said there were no Democrats who could run against George H.W. Bush — and that was after he broke his campaign pledge not to raise taxes.
we can only hope it’s one term. But,,,,and it’s a big BUT – who will the Republicans put forth for 2012? I certainly hope it is not Romney (I am a MA resident and still dealing with his flippin healthcare “reform”) or Palin (personally I like certain things about her, but certainly she’s not presidential material) Who’s the Reagan out there waiting in the wings???
No one has mentioned Indiana’s governor Daniels.
Oh, yes, please! And get the commemorative T-Shirts, Bumper stickers and buttons for that right here. 🙂
Vice President Cheney, by the way, has also announced that he might need a heart transplant. Scary, scary stuff. (Dont even want to see how liberals are treating that revelation) God Bless Dick Cheney and his ticker.
#15
He can have my ex-wife’s. Gods know she’s not using it.
All the sh-t being thrown at Sarah Palin by the left is just practice for whoever gets the Republican nomination.
I can understand the desire for commentators on this site to see Obama as a one term President. But his actions so far clearly see him appearing to move towards the middle (tax cuts, deregulation, etc). So, if he is cagey, I am sure he will have some success painting Republicans as obstructionist (if there is a showdown over government funding). So, it reminds me of Clinton’s strategy after 1994. If you don’t succeed in kicking him out, health care is a done deal… On the economic front, I think it highly unlikely that folks will stop lending to the US (the largest economy in the world). Short of a fundamental realignment of currency, so that the Yuan becomes the international currency of choice, the US will always be able to print dollars that foreigners will accept. Where else are they going to park money? I think a 10-15% devaluation of the US dollar would be advantageous–cutting standards of living (wages in real terms fall), increasing competitiveness in exports, decreasing imports, increasing aggregate demand. China doesn’t want that (it needs the US market), so it will work through its central bank to prop up the US dollar, for its own domestic needs. Hyperinflation is unlikely–excess currency can be sterilized. The one thing that you could get is some slow steady increases in interest rates, as the economy drags itself at the recession (job recession); that might have an impact on aggregate demand through falls in investment (and maybe, consumption). There aren’t a lot of signals yet for inflation, and not likely to be until the housing market and jobs market picks up. Maybe after he is re-elected? Could Republicans make something about jobs issue? Who knows.