Would a primary challenge from the left serve any purpose for Democrats?

Nov 29, 2010
223
26
16
Would a primary challenge from the left serve any purpose for Democrats?

I believe that no matter how far left on the political spectrum you are or how frustrated you might be with progress toward your ideals or what's perceived as campaign promises unkept, that challenging Obama from the left would be futile and risk doing a lot more harm than good.

It's possible that a challenge forces Obama slightly further to the left, so when and if he were reelected, he would have campaigned on a platform further to the left, but it almost certainly wouldn't effect how he'd govern anyway.

He won't be able to get as far to the left as he wants anyway, as the next Congress and subsequent ones will be further right than he is.

So basically I'm saying regardless of how frustrated anyone on the left is, a primary challenge is a silly option.

In a 2nd term he would move the agenda as far left as a center-right Congress would allow anyway. A primary challenge could only cause divisiveness among ranks, push Independents away, and possibly prevent Obama from beating the Republican challenger. It might be the only way the GOP could win.

There's certainly a miniscule chance that a Dem challenger would beat Obama in a primary, substantially less than 1%. If they were able to beat him (say 1 in 1000), it would only be because the Dems were weak at that point, and that challenger would have no chance of beating the Republican.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if a challenge would succeed either ED.

I almost wonder if the left might not give it a try though. They sure aren't pleased with their boy right now.

I also wonder if the rest of the Dem party would side with the left or not??

Good question though.
 
It doesn't matter. Obama is a one term President and the next President will be a Republican. America is sick and tired of all the Democrat bullshit.
 
Other than some candidates running just to get their names in the paper, it isn't going to happen
 
A challenge because he's not left enough would be messy. The voters just rejected Barry's lefty agenda a month ago and his party got its ass kicked as a result. The whole world knows that, but someone's gonna challenge him to go more left? That's nuts.

The Dims best bet to keep the White House is to hope this clown can somehow appear at least center enough to get back the independents who've abandoned him in droves as well as others who voted for him in '08 but think they made a big mistake. But of course doing that would further piss off the far left of the party. Having fun yet, Barack?

A successful challenge would be tantamount to anarchy within the Dim party. How many blacks would support a Dim presidential candidate after the Dim party fired their guy? An election recipe for disaster.
 
I'm a stats guy, that wishes I had a website as popular as Nate Silver's.

My best guess is the economy improves marginally going into the 2012 elections (unemployment lower than today, but not low enough, GDP growth, but not enough, steady markets, etc.). For the first time in a while, it's not so much a change election as the next 2 years will be a little better than the last 2 and there's not one party to blame for problems.

Obama wins (the margin will depend on the GOP candidate, but the election will probably be pretty close), and the Republicans hold the House and take the Senate, but with small margins.
 
If Shrillary takes her testicles back from President Obama (they were loaned out evidently), she might reconsider her claim that her last public job is serving as Secretary of State and possibly, then, she could run against him.

She and Bubba know (as do we all) that he's a one-termer. He's ripe for the picking. Shrillary and Billary have enough political savvy to realize that the Republican nominee will win the White House if the Dems re-nominate President Obama. That leaves only the final calculation which is the key, naturally:

If Shrillary runs and knocks off the incumbent, can she follow it up with an Electoral win in November 2012? If team Clinton considers that prospect sufficiently "do-able," she would run. IF she suspects that she can't seize the Dim nomination OR that she would not be likely to win the General Dejection, then she will not run in 2012 and her political career will probably draw to a close.
 
If Shrillary takes her testicles back from President Obama (they were loaned out evidently), she might reconsider her claim that her last public job is serving as Secretary of State and possibly, then, she could run against him.

She and Bubba know (as do we all) that he's a one-termer. He's ripe for the picking. Shrillary and Billary have enough political savvy to realize that the Republican nominee will win the White House if the Dems re-nominate President Obama. That leaves only the final calculation which is the key, naturally:

If Shrillary runs and knocks off the incumbent, can she follow it up with an Electoral win in November 2012? If team Clinton considers that prospect sufficiently "do-able," she would run. IF she suspects that she can't seize the Dim nomination OR that she would not be likely to win the General Dejection, then she will not run in 2012 and her political career will probably draw to a close.


Not only do we not all think he's a one-timer, but I'd like for someone that voted for him last time, to make a post stating that you think he is definitely a one-timer that will lose the next election.

All of the posts I read from people stating that, didn't vote for him last time and don't give any reason to back-up their claim.

He'll beat the GOP candidate in 2012 and I've explained why I believe so in multiple posts.

Hillary won't run in 2012 against Obama. That's absurd. If she ever runs for President again, it would be in 2016.

The only option I know of that could do him real harm within party is Russ Feingold. Dean won't run against Obama. Kucinich is too weak. And, if Bloomberg ran, it would be as an Independent. There might be someone else I haven't named, but it would not be Hillary.
 
Last edited:
Sitting back and looking at this, I'm starting to think the dems need thier own 3rd party.

Libs and progs are not the same. Ones left, the other far far left.

I doubt big 0 will get a serious challange, there's always someone, but right now, who would do it? Clinton and whoelse? Grayson got dumped by his own people, so he's out.

For big 0 to stay he has to pull a clinton, and move to the center, NOW, but the dems in congress are not going to let him. Right now they are looking to block the tax/UI compramise.
 
If Shrillary takes her testicles back from President Obama (they were loaned out evidently), she might reconsider her claim that her last public job is serving as Secretary of State and possibly, then, she could run against him.

She and Bubba know (as do we all) that he's a one-termer. He's ripe for the picking. Shrillary and Billary have enough political savvy to realize that the Republican nominee will win the White House if the Dems re-nominate President Obama. That leaves only the final calculation which is the key, naturally:

If Shrillary runs and knocks off the incumbent, can she follow it up with an Electoral win in November 2012? If team Clinton considers that prospect sufficiently "do-able," she would run. IF she suspects that she can't seize the Dim nomination OR that she would not be likely to win the General Dejection, then she will not run in 2012 and her political career will probably draw to a close.


Not only do we not all think he's a one-timer, but I'd like for someone that voted for him last time, to make a post stating that you think he is definitely a one-timer that will lose the next election.

All of the posts I read from people stating that, didn't vote for him last time and don't give any reason to back-up their claim.

He'll beat the GOP candidate in 2012 and I've explained why I believe so in multiple posts.

Hillary won't run in 2012 against Obama. That's absurd. If she ever runs for President again, it would be in 2016.

The only option I know of that could do him real harm within party is Russ Feingold. Dean won't run against Obama. Kucinich is too weak. And, if Bloomberg ran, it would be as an Independent. There might be someone else I haven't named, but it would not be Hillary.


LOL!

Yeah. President Obama will win re-election.

Right.

:rofl:
 
If Shrillary takes her testicles back from President Obama (they were loaned out evidently), she might reconsider her claim that her last public job is serving as Secretary of State and possibly, then, she could run against him.

She and Bubba know (as do we all) that he's a one-termer. He's ripe for the picking. Shrillary and Billary have enough political savvy to realize that the Republican nominee will win the White House if the Dems re-nominate President Obama. That leaves only the final calculation which is the key, naturally:

If Shrillary runs and knocks off the incumbent, can she follow it up with an Electoral win in November 2012? If team Clinton considers that prospect sufficiently "do-able," she would run. IF she suspects that she can't seize the Dim nomination OR that she would not be likely to win the General Dejection, then she will not run in 2012 and her political career will probably draw to a close.


Not only do we not all think he's a one-timer, but I'd like for someone that voted for him last time, to make a post stating that you think he is definitely a one-timer that will lose the next election.

All of the posts I read from people stating that, didn't vote for him last time and don't give any reason to back-up their claim.

He'll beat the GOP candidate in 2012 and I've explained why I believe so in multiple posts.

Hillary won't run in 2012 against Obama. That's absurd. If she ever runs for President again, it would be in 2016.

The only option I know of that could do him real harm within party is Russ Feingold. Dean won't run against Obama. Kucinich is too weak. And, if Bloomberg ran, it would be as an Independent. There might be someone else I haven't named, but it would not be Hillary.


LOL!

Yeah. President Obama will win re-election.

Right.

:rofl:

Do me a favor. When the Super Bowl comes around, let me know who you're betting on so I can make money betting on the other team.

Or you can just let me know right now who's going to win the BCS, Auburn or Oregon? I'll take the other.
 
Not only do we not all think he's a one-timer, but I'd like for someone that voted for him last time, to make a post stating that you think he is definitely a one-timer that will lose the next election.

All of the posts I read from people stating that, didn't vote for him last time and don't give any reason to back-up their claim.

He'll beat the GOP candidate in 2012 and I've explained why I believe so in multiple posts.

Hillary won't run in 2012 against Obama. That's absurd. If she ever runs for President again, it would be in 2016.

The only option I know of that could do him real harm within party is Russ Feingold. Dean won't run against Obama. Kucinich is too weak. And, if Bloomberg ran, it would be as an Independent. There might be someone else I haven't named, but it would not be Hillary.


LOL!

Yeah. President Obama will win re-election.

Right.

:rofl:

Do me a favor. When the Super Bowl comes around, let me know who you're betting on so I can make money betting on the other team.

Or you can just let me know right now who's going to win the BCS, Auburn or Oregon? I'll take the other.


You so Clev-ah!

Listen, McDork, YOU are the one who just guaranteed that this idiot President, this failure who is already coming apart at the seams, is "going" to win re-election. :lol::lol::lol:

:rofl:
 
I don't think it is necessarily a left/right thing. It would be about political principles. There ought to be a challenger who:

A) Voted against the unpatriotic act

B) Generally supports civil liberties

C) Generally doesn't support corporate cronyism


This is why I would like to see Russ Feingold run
 
I don't think it is necessarily a left/right thing. It would be about political principles. There ought to be a challenger who:

A) Voted against the unpatriotic act

B) Generally supports civil liberties

C) Generally doesn't support corporate cronyism


This is why I would like to see Russ Feingold run


LOL.

Didn't Russ Foolsgold just fail to win reelection to the freaking Senate? :lol:
 
I don't think it is necessarily a left/right thing. It would be about political principles. There ought to be a challenger who:

A) Voted against the unpatriotic act

B) Generally supports civil liberties

C) Generally doesn't support corporate cronyism


This is why I would like to see Russ Feingold run


LOL.

Didn't Russ Foolsgold just fail to win reelection to the freaking Senate? :lol:

That is merely a measurement of Wisconsin thinking, not the country in general. It is wishful thinking though, because the corporate media would crucify him :p
 
I don't think it is necessarily a left/right thing. It would be about political principles. There ought to be a challenger who:

A) Voted against the unpatriotic act

B) Generally supports civil liberties

C) Generally doesn't support corporate cronyism


This is why I would like to see Russ Feingold run


LOL.

Didn't Russ Foolsgold just fail to win reelection to the freaking Senate? :lol:

That is merely a measurement of Wisconsin thinking, not the country in general. It is wishful thinking though, because the corporate media would crucify him :p

If the guy could not win re-election in Wisconsin, you think he has any shot at the Oval Office?
 
Re: Liability

"She and Bubba know (as do we all) that he's a one-termer."


I was responding to your foolish post. I've read posts from a couple 100 posters on this site. You win the top spot as most delusional.
 

Forum List

Back
Top