Should Obama Face a Challenge in the Democratic Primary?

[xchrom]

http://www.thenation.com/article/163802/should-obama-face-challenge-democratic-primary

The Illinois 10th Congressional District Democrats work in Barack Obama’s political heartland, the northern suburbs of Chicago, which so warmly embraced a young state senator’s bid for the US Senate in 2004 and the presidency in 2008. Long before Obama became a national phenomenon, he had liberals swooning in Glenview, Deerfield and Northbrook. But early last month, after President Obama overruled his own Environmental Protection Agency and scuttled anti-smog regulations, the blog of 10th District Dems featured a plaintive post: “Do I still believe his promises? I want to… I really want to.” Even as the grassroots group was spreading the word that “volunteers are needed for Avon, Antioch, Grant, and Lake Villa for President Obama’s campaign,” sincere activists were speculating on its website about whether President Obama is a “monumental fraud.” The frustration with Obama is real and widespread, extending from environmental issues to economics to foreign policy. “I’ve been going door-to-door a lot in the past few weeks” for Democratic candidates, says Sharon Sanders, a member of the group. “We’re only hitting Democrats, and they are so discouraged about everything—as I am.”

So what about a challenge to Obama? Should a progressive take on the president in the rapidly approaching Democratic caucuses and primaries?

“Boy, have I given this some thought,” says Sanders. “I’m fifty-fifty on it. On the one hand, it would wake up Obama and the Democratic voters and perhaps get them out to vote.” On the other hand, she worries about taking steps that could strengthen the hand of conservative forces she fears are hellbent on “destroying any fragment of what’s left of our democracy and taking away all essential government programs.”

In labor temples, lecture halls and library meeting rooms across the country in recent months, I have had hundreds of discussions with folks like Sanders: hard-working, deeply committed grassroots party activists who line up well to the left of a president they see as too quick to compromise on economics, civil liberties and wars. Some prominent progressives have stepped up, endorsing a letter in mid-September arguing that without a primary challenge, “progressive principles past and present be betrayed.” The signers include Ralph Nader, Cornel West, Gore Vidal, Jonathan Kozol, Rabbi Michael Lerner, former South Dakota Senator James Abourezk and Friends of the Earth president Erich Pica. It is not just unmet expectations that lead roughly a third of Democratic voters to tell pollsters Obama should face a primary challenge; it is also a sense that the president cannot energize the Democratic base and win in 2012 unless he is forced to define himself as a dramatically more progressive candidate.

[Windy]

1. Do you want a republican president?????? nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

2. Absolutely, positively no, IMHO nt

[RC]

3. To answer the OP, 'Yes'.

And a primary challenger does not equate to a split ticket in the elections. Obama needs to understand he is governing too far from the Right for the country to recover to any measurable degree.
The measures that got this country into this economic mess are not the measures that will get us out. He needs to start listening to the "We the people..." and not his Right leaning advisers. Hopefully he is reading the signs of the protesters on Wall Street and asking why they are at odds with what his advisers are telling him.

[jaxx]

4. Hell no!

Do the disenchanted want to win, or are they just wanting to make another meaningless statement?

[RC]

6. The disenchanted want to win, that is why we need a primary Challenger.

Either wake Obama up, or replace him.

[jaxx]

7. That won't do a thing but make the pubs happy.

He is awake, always has been. Get real in your expectations.

[dotymed]

40. No ponies allowed? B.S. Of course he should be primaried.

I am a Democrat. I am a proud Progressive. I manned phones, knocked on doors, etc in '08. Just like the majority (that is what we are about, isn't it?) of citizens who did the same and more, I no longer accept the premise that President Obama is Progressive. Forget about Wisconsin (for a moment), look at wall street. Better yet, how about the protest in D.C.? He wouldn't even have to go far.., where are the "walking shoes" that he promised to wear while standing WITH US?
We hear pretty (teleprompter even in elementary school presentations) speeches about his understanding OWS and other Progressive ACTIONS, yet our (I thought) saviour is in the background, closing MMJ stores that he promised not to interfere with and still refusing to look back, yet pressing war at every opportunity. He is generally disappointing Progressives, going along with the monied elite in action and forcing us to defend his lack of leftward movement.

Hell NO, I do not want another RW GOP'er in the White-house, that is why I am begging a known and respected Progressive (like Bernie Sanders) to primary President Obama and show Americans how a real peoples President behaves. I am not ready for another 4 years of apologies which will ultimately end in being unable to get a real Democrat in the White-house for decades.

IMO, we have a Repub. currently in the white-house. I hate to admit it. I want my damned pony. I do not want the wall street options that come as extra's (Geithner, Summers, et.al.)

Give us another RWer and we'll give you a revolution.

That is how I feel.

[11 Bravo]

70. Yeah, because the list of successful incumbent Democratic Presidents who were primaried is ...

so very fucking long.

[jefferson_dem]

8. They do not want to win.

They want to prove a point ... at the nation's expense.

[jaxx]

11. Yep, and then say they didn't do it.

We've heard this story before.

[11 Bravo]

71. Exactly, and the wind whispers (Nader).

[jefferson_dem]

Those who say "yes" might as well wear a placard saying "GO GOP in 2012!"

[alc]

5. a Dem primary would help to beat the republican

It will give Obama a chance to work on and give his message to the left. Otherwise he will spend all of the next year going toward the middle and will leave a lot of the left unexcited about the general.

It will let many on the left express their displeasure with Obama BEFORE the general election. They can get that out of their system in the primary and vote Obama in the general.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

43. Nice theory but history tends to show that those who back a primary challenge

go on to continue to express their displeasure at the ballot box. A key reason for Reagan's landslide victory in 1980 was because disgruntled Kennedy supporters voted for Anderson to slight President Carter, costing him victory in several states including traditionally solid Democratic strongholds in the Northeast

[treestar]

9. Thread #567,897,321 asking this pointless question

Not going to happen.

[JNinWB]

28. This must be Friday's "Let's primary Obama thread"

[Oldenuff]

46. I agree..

it's the same old "lesser of 2 evils" ploy.Gets tiring doesn't it?It's either Republican or Republican Lite.

We will never get a decent candidate..

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

49. I know! Un-fucking-recommended! Tired of this shit!!! n/t

[Bryan Buchan]

12. Are you fuggin serious?

Running a primary candidate against Obama would be disastrous to a Democratic win. And, not to mention just plain STUPID! Those who even entertain this idea should either question if they are truly a democrat, or they should focus on winning back some fuggin house seats for the dems with some liberal/progressive backbone. Any effort or energy put towards running a candidate against Obama is FRUITLESS!!!!! Get a life, seriously...or go join PDA and have fun getting angry and getting nothing done.

[frazzled]

13. Move on

I thought I'd resurrect the original meaning of that organization's motto. Just move on. Obama is our candidate, there is not going to be a challenger within the party. There are no "white knights." ( And I mean that in both senses of the term.)

[Number23]

37. God yes. Would the people pushing this insantly idiotic meme PLEASE **MOVE ON**

A challenger ain't happening. The Dem base supports this president by large margins.

The fringe that keeps pushing this idiotic "we need a challenger" point have had months if not years to come up with somebody. They didn't. MOVE ON.

[MrTriumph]

14. He must be replaced at the top of the Dem ticket. Not only is he an "underdog", he's a Republican.

x

[jaxx]

15. Oh jeez, go back to bed.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jaxx]

19. #1, I'm not your pal.

#2 you're not a good one to be throwing rocks.

[jefferson_dem]

16. Why stop there?

He's a Kenyan, Muslim, Black Nationalist, Communist, Fascist, Puppy Killer too!1!!!!!1!

[SwampG8r]

36. first i heard about the puppy killing

[dotymed]

47. And Nader killed -----------------(fill in the blank).

In a political environment completely owned by wealth, the majority of Americans KNOW that both parties are "on the take." If a "we shall know him/her by their actions" candidate is offered as a possibility, He/She will win (if voting does work). The Democratic party must again (and always) be the "party of the people." A party willing to stick up for the average American, against the elite. A politician like FDR is our only hope. We are in worse condition now than we were during "the great depression." That is why we have OWS, October 6, etc. The people (worldwide) realize that the history of this world has been controlled by and for the elite.

We must demand a candidate (even after elected) that admits this fundamental truth and will stop at nothing to change it.

There is going to be a revolution. It can happen at the ballot box (if still possible) or it can happen in the streets.

Capitalism has displaced Democracy, that must be fixed.

[YellowCosmicSun]

25. Are you a Democrat?

[Jakes Progress]

42. Are you?

Do you know what a Democrat is?

[YellowCosmicSun]

56. I support Barack Obama and all the other elected Democrats. Who do you support?

[Jakes Progress]

62. You did not answer my questions?

I support Democrats. (FYI: Putting a D beside your name doesn't make you a Democrat)

[YellowCosmicSun]

65. Do you support the Democratic Party and its elected officials or some figment of your imagination?

If you don't support the Democrats who've been elected, you're little more than an opportunist using this Party as a means to an end.

[Jakes Progress]

69. You didn't answer my questions.

I support Democrats. I have been doing so for over forty years. I know who Democrats are. I sort of get the feeling that you think that you are the opportunist looking for some party to make help you decide what to think. I know what I believe and I support the public officials who do that. For me that has always been Democrats.

Calling me an opportunist is a sloppy insult. Now. Try to answer my questions if you can.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

50. I just turned 40 years old and I'm fucking drunk!! Go Obama/Biden 2012!!! n/t

[WI_DEM]

17. Jeez Louise why do people keep this up around here? It's October and the first votes

will be in early January. To effectively run for president you need a strong organization in most states, a strong fund-raising apparatus, and, especially at this late time, a name that people will gravitate towards. No leading democrat (not Howard Dean, not Russ Feingold, etc) are going to challenge President Obama. So who will Nader and his group come up with? perhaps somebody like Ex-Senator Gravel of Alaska--or somebody like him--either a has-been on the political field or a never was. And that is who the 2-3 percent who will vote against Obama in the primary will support.

p.s.
not to mention getting your name on the ballot. Many states that requirement is fast approaching.

[RC]

20. To answer your question, Obama is not Democrat enough.

He caves to the Right-wing loons time after time. He put Social Security and Medicare on the table up front. He bails out the big money on wall Street and the big financial institutions, while he simply bails on us common folks.

[WI_DEM]

21. Then who is going to run against him? and if he's so bad why hasn't a 'real' democrat

stepped up to challenge him?

[MrTriumph]

23. There are many Democrats who could replace Obama, win & be a far better president.

x

[BklnDem75]

26. That 'x' must be the entire list

[Hutzpa]

27. You guys stop it, it's too early for this sh*t

:rofl:

[RFKHumphreyObama]

44. And who will undoubtedly be stabbed in the back by the professional left

at the earliest possible opportunity just like they did to President Obama, the most progressive Democratic President since Lyndon Johnson. And so the cycle will continue

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

51. Fuck that!! Obama/Biden 2012!! Here in New York and joined the protests

These people are clearly Obama enthusiasts!!!! Stop with the bullshit!! Obama/Biden 2012

[RC]

29. For starts, who controls the media?

Then continue on to how honest, truthful and trustworthy the Republicans are.
There are a whole lot of clues here to answer your question, if you'd take the blinders off.

[YellowCosmicSun]

58. Let us know when SS or Medicare has actually been cut.

Until then, you're just blowing smoke.

[elocs]

22. Wow! I've never heard this proposed before. Is this a new idea?

:sarcasm:

[YellowCosmicSun]

24. No. That's why no intelligent Democrat is challenging him.

[CakeGrrl]

30. Yawn. Unrec.

[DevonRex]

31. Wow. I had no idea that you don't like Obama. Really.

Now I must reconsider my position. Because surely if some woman I've never heard of and you don't like him then I must have been wrong all this time.

The very fact that there are so many liberal Democrats who have jumped into the race should have made me see the light, right? But no. I stuck with Obama, even in the face of JFK rising from the dead. Will I ever learn?

[Zorra]

32. It would be a great way the President to specifically define his beliefs and intentions.

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. its just not going to happen - besides the Occupy Wall Street movement has created an opportunity

for progressives to change the course of the administrations and the Democratic Party much as conditions in the 30's gave the left and the unions the opportunity to really influence and to a significant degree define the New Deal and the Roosevelt Administration. Right now with the economy as it is - the Obama Administrations knows perfectly well that they will likely lose reelection because that is what almost always happens when an economy is down and the country feels itself in a state of economic frustrations and malaise.

However this incredible phenomena which is happening now on the streets of New York and across the country offers a lifeline to the Obama Administration and a very plausible path to an otherwise implausible reelection.

The historic precedent I see in this is similar in many ways to how FDR's administration recognized at some point that they needed the unions, the progressive organizations and the left in order to sustain a working majority. It appears that the Obama Administration is finally contoning on to the idea that they need the progressives. That unless they can strengthen their street cred they will almost certainly lose reelection.

Rather than embarking on some improbable primary campaign - this is the time for the left and the Obama Administration to bury the hatchet and start working together just as in the 30's the left and the Roosevelt Administrations recognized their mutual need for each other.

Some skeptics of the left might wonder what on earth would make one think that the Obama Administration would even be willing to change directions and embrace the progressive cause. Well there certainly has been a sea change in the tone of public statements coming out of the White House along with open expressions of empathy with the Occupy Wall Street movement. Something is under foot. Perhaps they have gotten the message - albeit a little bit late - but not too late. It perhaps would be a mistake of catastrophic proportions for progressives not to explore this new tone with an open mind.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JoePhilly]

34. This fantasy again.

[tallahasseedem]

35. Not this shit again.

:eyes:

[NorthCarolina]

38. Not just "yes", but "HELL YES"....np

[KoKo]

39. Sigh....I just don't know.. I'm hoping the OWS will wake him up...but

given the Presser yesterday where he absolved Wall Street of all Crimes while folks are camped out there and all over the country new protests are beginning...makes me wonder if Obama will ever get "what's wrong." He seems to only listen to those who tell him what he wants to hear and those who will never ask him to take a strong stand. Decisions don't come from him but from "experts or panels of independent economists, etc." that he can refer to while he stands back and says the "experts" told him their opinion and that's what he goes on.

I don't think he has any real "core beliefs." There's nothing he feels strongly enough to go after and take the head if his efforts fail.

It's a hard one. I really wish he wouldn't run again. But, then the Dem Candidate stream is weak and the Repugs are crazy. So.....it's hard to say.

I think something has to be done...but, I don't see anyone on either side who would step up to the plate and really talk about the TRUTH and carry through with an agenda that would be good for the country but bad for the PTB, Military Industrial, Media Complex and the Rest who are bleeding our country dry.

[NorthCarolina]

45. Make no mistake,

Obama knows full well what is going on with OWS, including the "what's wrong". Lets put it this way...IMO, if he DOESN'T know what the OWS protests are about, then he is certainly not qualified to be President of the United States. From my perspective, a primary challenge by a true peoples advocate that is not afraid to publicly discuss the issues raised by OWS, and can offer legitimate solutions to the issues, would strike a chord within the OWS crowd that would spread like wildfire through much of the country. Nothing going on with the GOP candidates, certainly no wildfires for sure. On the Dem side, an incumbent struggling HARD to stay in the 40% approval range, and that, among independents, polls neck-and-neck, or even behind, with the GOP gaggle of fools running. Not a pretty prospect. It's funny that a primary challenge is SO FEARED by Democrats when, from a practical point of view, it is tantamount to a necessity. Give Dems something like a Grayson candidacy (and I'm not advocating him but rather using him as an example), basically someone who not only talks the talk, but also walks the walk, and does it forcefully and BELIEVABLY, and you got a winner right there. At the VERY least, Obama should dump Biden and snag Grayson in his stead.

[Douglas Carpenter]

54. I don't know that FDR had a whole lot of "core beliefs" either. but he had the sense to

harness the spontaneous political energy at loose in the streets and form it into an essential part of the New Deal coalition that did affect long term change. Whether it's Obama or anyone else even remotely capable of mounting a credible campaign in this day and age - we are faced with the same professional political operative class that dominates the Democratic Party. That group of disgusting amoral sociopaths certainly have no "core beliefs" beyond winning elections without the faintest regard for what they have won and for whom. If the future of humanity depends on the "core beliefs" of professional politicians and their operatives - we are all truly doomed.

But right now there is a ray hope that is appearing on the streets of New York and across the country. Both Obama and the professional operatives know full well that they have minimal chance of winning reelection given the state of the economy and the complete lack of enthusiasm among the Democratic Party faithful - This amazing and largely unpredicted new development allows an opening. It might be a mistake of catastrophic proportions if progressive did not seize this opportunity as progressive forces did in the 1930's when the Roosevelt administration recognized that they needed to harness the energy of mass dissatisfaction in order to create and sustain the New Deal coalition. Perhaps it's not much. But it's all we've got. That is the sad reality.

[Skidmore]

48. No, but we do need to give him a Congress to work with.

[Dr Fate]

52. Just like bf the midterms. Nt

Nt

[Skip Intro]

53. I would welcome a challenger. This whole things is supposed to be about what's best for the nation

not what's best for any one politician. I'd give anyone an opportunity to put forth a real agenda for this nation, propose real solutions, and convince me he/she would be committed to getting the job done.

[woo me with science]

60. Thank you.

I'm not sure the country can afford four more years of this, but there doesn't seem to be anyone on the horizon...

except maybe on Wall Street.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skip Intro]

74. I think more of democracy than I do those who seem to fear it. nt

[woo me with science]

55. Of course he should. nt

[YellowCosmicSun]

57. He shouldn't and he won't. And he'll be reelected, too.

[woo me with science]

59. Four more years of Bush/Obama policy. Woo fucking hoo.

But who else ya gonna vote for, chump?

:eyes:

[YellowCosmicSun]

66. Obama's imminent reelection really sticks in your craw, don't it?

[woo me with science]

72. Republican policies stick in my craw. nt

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[YellowCosmicSun]

67. I'm the one attending Obama's second inaugural...

[woo me with science]

73. Great cartoon. nt

[Exilednight]

76. That about sums up the leadership of the executive branch. n/t

[mopinko]

63. the 10th dems have a lot of reasons to be frustrated.

obama is the least of them. they can't get their own shit together and nominate someone who can win what should have been a take-able district.

[Enthusiast]

64. One thing for certain,

the American voters DID NOT vote for Obama in 2008 imagining him to be a middle of the road centrist.

Make no mistake about it, The American electorate, rightly or wrongly, thought they were electing a fire breathing liberal in Obama. And we needed one desperately, if we were to climb out of the Bush morass.

[BlueIris]

75. He should face reality, accept that he cannot win, and step aside for someone who can.

To me, the issue is not the failed policies, betrayal of his party and lack of credibility, it is that the numbers for victory do not check out. He's renominated, he loses. Huge.