If you have "no place to go," come here!

The unity pony being dead, Obama's gonna need a war or a second 9/11 to win in 2012

And so, doubtless that will magically happen, as Broder suggested long ago.

* * *

Anyhow, shocker, I know, sit down for this one, but the people Obama threw under the bus are dubious about voting for him again. AP-GfK polling:

—White independent voters, who divided their support evenly between Obama and McCain in 2008, may be the president's biggest challenge now. Just 3 in 10 white independents say Obama deserves to be re-elected and only 41 percent say he understands the problems of people like them.

Fifty-six percent of all whites approved of how he was doing his job in the first three months of his presidency. But that support has fallen, with only 36 percent now liking how he's doing his job, while 59 say Obama deserves to be voted out of office.

The outlook is negative for Obama among white voters in the Midwest and West, regions where so many electoral votes are at stake.

More than 6 in 10 white voters who did not graduate say the president deserves to be voted from office, while 53 percent of white college graduates say as much. ...

Shills like Amanda will yammer about racism, and no doubt that's a [n unquantifiable factor, such claims being based mostly on the self-regard of the "creative class"] factor, but I'd suggest "white independents" is a proxy for the working class "bitter"/"cling to"s that Obama threw under the bus and out of the party in 2008.

—Women no longer are a bright spot for Obama.

At the 100-day mark of his presidency, they gave him significantly higher approval ratings than did men, 68 percent to 60 percent. That's since fallen dramatically.

Stupak Amendment. Favreau eruptions. And the grotesque and vile misogyny of Obama's 2008 campaign is a cancer.

—Younger voters and liberals are showing doubts about him, too.

For the younger voters, jobs and debt. For both younger voters and liberals, the dawning and/or denied realization that hopey change was a con.

The poll interpretation in the post is heavily skewed toward the "strong leader" -- ie, "man on the white horse" (Bloomberg, Petraeus) -- perspective, which of course is what Versailles wants, but it's interesting nonetheless.

For Obama in 2012, lots and lots of lovely billions in bribes campaign contributions will be necessary. But not sufficient. Already in 2011, his campaign is running on Kool-Aid fumes. Kinetic events won't be sufficient; he'll need a real war. Would the Army comply? Doubtful. That leaves an attack...

NOTE I've got to stop writing about the horse race and start wriing about non-violence again. This stuff isn't good for my heart, in both senses, and the elites are going to do what they do anyhow.

No votes yet


CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

File this one under "what they're thinking." From back in September of 2010, Kos says:

...Believe it or not, Idaho has a rapidly growing Latino community, and Democratic chances in the state depend on nurturing that community and bringing it into the progressive fold.

• Although only about 10 percent of the state’s residents are Hispanic, growth in that population represented about 25 percent of the state’s population growth between 2000 and 2009. Idaho’s Hispanic population grew at an annual rate of 7 percent, compared to 2 percent for non-Hispanics. The nationwide Hispanic population grew by 4 percent during the same period

...With the Latino demographic growing at over three times that of Anglos, its clear that Idaho's days as a lily white enclave are finished.

CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

Over at DailyKos, Armando has a post up. Just to be clear, I've not made any mistake here. The date on this post to which I've linked is Sun Aug 28, 2011 at 07:00 PM PDT.

...The excerpt above is from my favorite speech by President Obama, his 2008 Democratic Convention speech. I like the speech so much that I have embedded the video and ask that you all watch it again. It is also an important document for understanding what we Democrats need as a party and what the nation needs from its leaders—a clear-eyed, full-throated explication and exhortation for Democratic values.

...The time has come for the president and Democrats to present what they think should be done to face our problems. And if the Republicans block the Democrats and the president from doing what they believe the country needs, then the president must go to the country and present the choice. He must say THIS is what we need to do. The other party disagrees. You, the American people, must make the choice.

...No, I do not expect much good to be done in terms of policy with this Congress. I think the moment is best described as a holding action in terms of policy.

But it cannot and should not be a holding moment for describing what needs to be done in the second term of the Obama administration. The Fierce Urgency of Now applies to commencing the political and policy debate about what the country needs, even if that decision is not made by the voters until November 2012.

For the good of the nation, we need a return of Barack Obama, the partisan—the one who ran the brilliant general election campaign of 2008. We need that Barack Obama, not just to win the election, but to save the country.

The guy's as looney as Hindrocket and Glenn Reynolds ever were.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Seriously. The idea that Obama somehow isn't putting forth what he believes in is, at this point, delusional. Stoller, who saw the Admin close up while working for Grayson, is quite right about that - Obama is doing what he's doing because it's what he wants to do.

Here, courtesy of Susie, is a nice counterpoint.