Warren pick and defense guarantee one term for Obama

[Why Syzygy]

This is my opinion after hearing Obama's defense of his decision. He said all Americans cannot agree on everything. That's it. I haven't found a link, but CNN just reported.

I believe this attitude will guarantee Obama will not be re-elected. Sadly.
He has forgotten that politicians SERVE.

You are welcome to disagree.

"It's nice to see a conservative evangelical pastor play such a prominent role in such an important event," said Tom Minnery, a senior vice president at Focus on the Family, which has fiercely criticized Obama over his support for abortion rights and other issues. "I think what it does is it underscores the importance of evangelicalism in the country."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hTbyRNWAPcFqAtQshEEA9ZT6jGDwD955G2C83

[WeDidIt]

1. I don't believe it's guaranteed.

Nothing is guaranteed.

He has started down the path to a single term, though.

[Why Syzygy]

5. Okay ..

I can concede that it is just a start down that path. It is not easy to get elected to a second term.
Unless, of course, you fix the vote.

[WeDidIt]

7. The thing that would guarantee a single term

would be for the economy to not improve greatly over the next four years.

If we're still in an economic mess in four years, Obama will be a single term president, guaranteed.

If, on the other hand, the economy is greatly improved, unemployment goes down, and the standard of living improves, he will be a two term president, guaranteed.

The economy is the only way to find guarantees with the presidency.

[No Elephants]

37. I believe that there is an a middle ground. It may be impossible to improve the economy

greatly within the next four years. We are in deep doo. I feel that, after Bush vacates, we will learn that it is even deeper than we think. And we do not have a a fillibuster proof Senate. However, skillful propaganda/pr can convince and educate people, even 4 years from now, that the economy is where it is because of Republican economic policies and no mortal could have improved it in a mere few years any more than Obama did, especcially in the face of Republican opposition. However, the one way to end the improvement trend and to set the economy right back where it was in October 2008 is to put Republicans back in power in January 2013.

I honestly think that kind of pr will work, even if Obama cannot repair the economy a lot in a few years.

[Joe the Revelator]

72. Actually, it is much easier to get elected to a second term, historically speaking

the incumbent has numerous advantages that a challenger just doesn't have.

[Uzybone]

2. flamebait

a dumb OP. How saying that Americans cannot agree on everything(which is 100% correct) means he will have only 1 term is idiotic. You might as well say he will be impeached.

[GarbagemanLB]

3. FAILURE! He hasn't even been in office a single day and I know it will be a total failure!

:rofl:

[petersjo02]

4. That's crap.

n/t

[Phx_Dem]

6. I don't think so. n/t

[NJmaverick]

8. "He has forgotten that politicians SERVE." Seems you have forgotten

that Presidents serve ALL Americans just not the ones you approve of. He is definately on course for 8 years.

[uponit7771]

9. This is an over reaction IMHO. Warren is a disappointing pic but not a game ender cause Obama can be

..."made" to give civil union rights to gays etc which he supports.

I believe the governement should stay out of defining marriage and leave it up to whom ever signs a contract

[stray cat]

10. A president is elected by a majority of Americans and must serve ALL Americans

and no one will ever say all Americans agree on any issue. To win re-election a president must be perceived to be a better choice for the majority of Americans than his or her opponent.

I suspect that even if I don't agree with everything Obama does in the next 4 years if the repubs put up Palin or someone similar - I'll vote for Obama again!

[Hanse]

11. I expect he'll pick up votes.

He'll gain evangelicals, and he won't lose anybody.

[No Elephants]

38. He will not gain Warren type evangelicals unless he ceases being pro-choice. It's that

simple. Believe it or don't.

[FrenchieCat]

48. You'd be surprised, but of those Americans know of Warren via his book

and are not the extremist fundies. It is this following that will be most interesting to watch.
Not so much Warren's "followers" who know of his specific views, but those who have bought and read his book without having a clue as to who he is or what some of his extreme views are. Those people number in the millions.

[No Elephants]

59. My post specified "Warren type fundies" though, so I stand by it.

[Recursion]

87. Actually Warren is an evangelical but not a fundamentalist

I don't think he's even a dispensationalist for that matter.

But yeah, to millions of people he's just the guy who wrote that book.

[Why Syzygy]

65. I know a dozen

people who were involved in a book study with one of his books. None of them had ever voted.

[backscatter712]

12. No.

After the inauguration, Warren's words and wavings of dead chickens to the Deity will be forgotten, and we'll all move on to other things.

Like say fixing the economy, or fixing health care...

[No Elephants]

39. Warren's words will be forgotten. However, Obama's words will not. He honored Warren. He

defended that chooice dishonestly. And he has stated repeatedly that he opposes gay marriage. If none of these things change, he will lose votes from the GLBT community. NOt all of them, but a significant number of them.

[Why Syzygy]

53. There may be a viable

third party by then. I'm an "Independent", but cannot stand Republicans.

[SeattleGirl]

13. Um, no.

You are judging an entire Presidency (and before he even takes office) by one decision.

Granted, that decision was a bad one, but if you are going to judge the entire thing by that one decision, I think your reasoning skills need to be sharpened. And I think it shows that you have a very narrow focus, if you are going to condemn his entire time as President by this one decision.

[Why Syzygy]

15. Not just the selection.

His DEFENSE. Of course all Americans don't agree on everything! That misses the point here entirely, which was my point. It's a very weak response imo. If he is going to use disagreement for a reason for all his poor choices, he is a one termer. Disagreement is a given and expected to be taken into account no matter what! It does not address the concerns of his base.

[matcom]

hahahahahhahahahahahahahahha

:thumbsup:

this is why you sit behind a computer and don't have a chance to get elected to anything

its POLICY stupid

[Why Syzygy]

16. Are you sure

that I'm not an elected official? Really?

[matcom]

17. if you are

you won't be re-elected

PRICELESS.

[firedupdem]

14. yeah...okay...wow....just fucking wow....

I thought this board was supposed to be "generally supportive".....damn, he's out and he's not even in yet?

Okay...

[lamp_shade]

19. Most here (99.7%?) are still "generally supportive". I'm confident of that. n/t

[AllentownJake]

18. If the economy improves Barack is re-elected

If it gets worst in the next 4 years he loses.

Its really that simple.

This Warren anger will not last 4 weeks let alone 4 years unless it becomes a pattern of behavior and than it will be just something listed as something he's done before to whatever the recent snub to people who got him elected is.

[galaxy21]

20. If his opponenet in 2012 is a fundy, democrats will get behind him

Lesser of two evils.

Fuck, Jeb Bush could be the candidate. If that's the case no matter how deeply pissed at Barack people are, ain't no way anyone's voting republican or staying home.

[Why Syzygy]

22. Or Palin.

What a nightmare that would be.

But what about those who had given up on politics and came out in complete HOPE this time?
If they get screwed, they will not turn out again.

[No Elephants]

40. People can bote third party in greater numbers. Votes for Greens and/or Nader are what lost us

Florida in 2000 and Missouri in 2008.

[galaxy21]

43. If Jeb Bush is on the ballot, I simply can't believe anyone will do anything to help him win

which includes voting for a third party.

[Why Syzygy]

54. Exactly.

Independents out number party people. We don't like bait and switch. We were promised a CHANGE, and if there's one thing that we needed changed, it is the over identification with fanatics.

[BzaDem]

76. If they do that, they'll get back in line after realizing during the following 4 years

that actions have consequences.

[DutchLiberal]

97. No, disenfranchising black people is what lost us the elections.

And the Supreme Court. And Diebold. And Katherine Harris.

[gblady]

21. oh my.....

"He said all Americans cannot agree on everything."

sounds like a pretty accurate statement to me...

and I'm thankful for that...
and the fact that we live in a country that allows
for the open discussion of the disagreements...

I watched Dr. Zhivago again last night...
and came away feeling so humbled at the amazing
freedoms we have in our country...
we're far from perfect, but we are so much better
than lots...

[Why Syzygy]

23. We have a unique form of government.

That's for sure. Unfortunately, our freedoms have enemies.

[democrattotheend]

24. Whether he gets reelected will depend on the state of the economy

If the economy is in better shape in 4 years than it is now he probably gets reelected. If it's in worse shape he probably doesn't. Most people won't even remember who he picked to give a prayer at his inauguration, and anyone who bases their vote on that alone must be pretty well-off. And to the extent it affects anyone's vote it probably wins him more votes than it loses for him, sadly. But seeing as how it has absolutely no bearing on policies that affect anyone, I don't think it should be a big factor in most people's votes 4 years from now. I certainly don't think it guarantees that he will only serve 1 term. Like I said, to the extent that it affects any votes four years from now it's probably a net plus for him.

[Why Syzygy]

26. It's not the PICK, so much as his DEFENSE

that people disagree! We already know that. It still doesn't explain why he would give 'them' this.
Be sure to read the quote at the bottom. He's giving evangelicals a big fat kudo. They aren't missing the import. We should? I want to know another reason he made this decision, other than "disagreement".

[Recursion]

88. "Them"?

It still doesn't explain why he would give 'them' this.

That shows me you still don't get it.

[WeDidIt]

30. There''s a well thought out reponse

So true, too.

The economy is the best guidance for whether or not a president is re-elected. In fact, incumbents have so much going for them, about the only way they lose is for the economy to tank.

[Why Syzygy]

35. Even with the disasterous

economy we had in 1981, Carter probably would have been re-elected if not for the Iran hostages, which we know was back dealed by Bush. Carter never had the kind of opposition Obama faces.

[FrenchieCat]

25. I'm still waiting to see him raise his hand and take the oath.....

I think that stating that some are jumping the gun is an understatement.

But then, I don't do fast foods either. :shrug:

[jesus_of_suburbia]

27. NOT AT ALL! I'm furious with Warren, but I still support President Obama 100%.

This is *probably* not a huge issue in the long term.

It is only something to worry about as far as his actions in office.

If he were to nominate a SC Justice who was to the right of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, then we are in trouble. That is where my concern comes from for the most part.

[boppers]

28. One term is guaranteed already.

Whether or not there will be a SECOND term, well, that remains to be seen.

:evilgrin:

[WeDidIt]

57. All he has to do is improve the economy

Any incumbent who has a better economy when he runs for election than when he was elected is a shoe-in for a second term.

There's simply too much financial benefit to being the incumbent president and running for re-election. That John Kerry got as close to winning as he did is one helluvan indictment of Bush in 2004.

Improve the economy = guaranteed second term.

In fact, if the economy is only marginally better than now, there's no way in hell a legitimate primary campaign could be mounted against Obama.

[makinguphumans]

29. so Focus on the Family is happy with this. Of course!!

[polichick]

31. Maybe he wants to run as a Republican fundie next time - and REALLY make history!

[No Elephants]

42. Didn't TR run in two parties?

[polichick]

50. But did he run as a FUNDIE Republican?? :)

[No Elephants]

58. No clue what TR's religious views were. Since he was a conservationist, I assume he was NOT

a dominionist. But many fundies are not dominionists. A growing number are even conservationists.

[quakerboy]

32. He's not even in office yet

Yall are fuckin insane.

Plus, if there was anything going to guarentee that Obama only gets one term, its tolerating Lieberman instead of making sure the Dems told him to take a flying leap.

Ha. I condemned him to failure in a way preceding your condemnation.

[mondo joe]

33. Oh stop. Pandering to bigots rarely causes a seated president to lose re-election.

[TheWraith]

34. Well, you're wrong. nt

[nsd]

36. I'm sorry but this is ridiculous.

We're on the brink of the severest worldwide recession (depression?) in half a century, and you think people are going to judge Obama on the guy who gave the prayer at the start of the inaugural ceremony?

This is so dumb, it's hard to know where to start. But one thing I might point out is that if you asked the general public what they thought of the Warren pick, the most frequent answer would be "What Warren pick? What are you talking about?" And most of those who have heard of this controversy probably give Obama props for reaching out to this opponents. It's only on places like DU and DailyKos that people are going crazy.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

41. Yup

+1

[Occam Bandage]

44. You're hilarious.

Obama will lose because everyone will be horrendously upset over some douchebag speaking for two minutes four years ago? Dream on, chump.

[Zynx]

45. I am willing to bet significant money the Warren affair has no impact beyond 0.1% on the 2012 race.

I am willing to be $1,000 on that.

[Fearless]

46. GUARANTEED? BEFORE THE INAUGURATION?

Wow, that must be a record.


Actually that sounds a little melodramatic.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

47. What is Ironic

Is that I was watching the conservatives on CNN talk about Mr. Warren today and they were flabbergasted on the "outrage". They pretty much said that Warren is not even part of the hard corps Fundie preachers. Warren's image is made for the mass market.

It is like the people on this site do not live in the real world, know real people and have real world problems. Obama picked a very solid and experienced foreign policy team because he wants to focus solely on the economy.

I will even say this, if in 4 years, the only thing that Obama does is revive the economy, then he will be reelected. We can still have 100k troops in Iraq at the time. If formerly unemployed or underemployed Joe and Jane Doe are doing well in the next election cycle, then O's reelection is guaranteed.

[NutmegYankee]

49. FAIL!

[xchrom]

51. it seems to me that kicking lgbtiq folk is how you guarantee election. or re-election.

and that's the prism through which i see barack.

[dbackjon]

52. Obama has a lot of work to do to make it up to me

If things go as they are proceeding, I will NOT vote for him in 2012. I hope he gets his shit together and becomes a real progressive.

[Why Syzygy]

56. That's what I'm talking about. nt

[Zynx]

61. Other than this symbolic nothing, what else has he done that you are pissed about?

[dbackjon]

69. Symbolic nothing to you, HUGE deal to anyone that gives a crap about equality

Anyone that can't see that is either homophobic, or in denial about being homophobic. Really that simple.


His cabinet picks have been mediocre as well.

[GOPisEvil]

55. Poppy Bush's approvals were over 90% in 1991.

How'd his re-election work out?

[Hippo_Tron]

60. ROFL you really think his actions before even being inaugurated will make him a one term president?

Are you sure you're not just kidding?

[Why Syzygy]

66. Again.

It is his blatant disregard for his electorate (HIS) that will do him in. Not a bigot's prayer.

[Thrill]

71. You don't speak for his electorate. And I've seen the exit polls. He has a very big tent

[Mz Pip]

62. I doubt it.

If Obama does a good job as President, he'll be re-elected. It's hard for me to imagine that Warren will become the single issue in the 2012 election.

[Odin2005]

63. Oh BS.

You rabid Naderites need to quit confusing your delusions with reality.

[zulchzulu]

64. You are a political novice, it appears

You actually think an inaugural invocation by some two-bit charlatan, which will last for a minute or two and be bookended with a benediction by a preacher (Lowery) who is for gay rights/marriage and equal civil rights for all and who himself will give a historic speech before record crowds is somehow going to make it an issue almost four years later?

Who's going to run against Obama in 2012 and use the Warren "issue" to bring him down? Give me a list.

[Why Syzygy]

67. If you read the thread

you will have a greater understanding of the POINT. Hint: It isn't the prayer.

[anonymous171]

81. Ralph Nader will make it the centerpiece of his campaign.

:rofl:

[Danger Mouse]

68. Wow.

Just when you thought people couldn't reach any harder...

[Thrill]

70. Yeah Governing the Country has nothing to do with it. HYPERBOLE

[leftofthedial]

73. Unless he pulls some serious economic/health care magic out of his ass

he will never again build a coalition like he had in 2008. He's already run off at least 33% of his supporters.

[Why Syzygy]

74. Yes.

That's it. He DID NOT become the first black American president by alienating people.

[BzaDem]

77. Are you in the 33%?

If he loses in 2012, would you vote for him in 2016 after you see the republican in 2012 appointing supreme court justices that continue to roll back everyone's civil rights?

[leftofthedial]

94. I'm no longer willing to be complicit in my own political marginalization.

I will never again vote for a "slightly less evil" enemy.

The DLC's triangulation of the left-most half of the country must end, whatever the cost.

[Drunken Irishman]

84. 33%? I love when people pull numbers out of their asses.

For losing 33%, he's still a pretty popular fellow.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/112006/Gallup-Daily-Confidence-Obama.aspx

[leftofthedial]

95. apples and oranges.

Clinton had 70%+ "confidence" ratings for much of his second term. He never received anywhere near 70% of the popular vote anywhere.

King george had 90% approval after 9-11, but never received even 50% in any vote.

[Drunken Irishman]

101. No, but he easily won re-election.

If you're at 70% confidence ratings, you're going to walk to re-election.

Right now, there is no evidence to suggest Obama is a one-termer or a two-termer. Anyone who tries to state that doesn't know shit from chocolate.

[stevietheman]

75. The overreaction continues. n/t

n/t

[MrSlayer]

78. Well that is ridiculous.

The man hasn't even been in office for one day and you already have him as a one and done? Without even seeing how he governs? You're saying if even if Obama is a President worthy of Mount Rushmore, he's done because of this Warren thing. That is just plain dumb.

[last_texas_dem]

79. I doubt anything happening right now will have any substantial impact on

Obama's chances of being reelected. Certainly his cabinet choices are very important because they will impact how what he tries to do in office is carried out for the next several years. But Warren speaking at the inaugural, as foolish a choice as I believe him to be, is unlikely to even be remembered by most Americans in a few weeks, not to mention four years from now. Americans have notoriously short attention spans when it comes to politics, and that is true of even American political junkies. So much will happen over the course of four years that I doubt Warren's inaugural prayer will be even a blip on the radar.

[anonymous171]

80. Fuck He's not even in office yet. Come back in a year.

[grantcart]

82. You need to get out more

While I am proud of DU's response on the Warren issue I have found only 2 out of 30 of my liberal friends outside of DU who knows who Rick Warren is what the upset on the issue was. None of them thought it was a major issue given the context of the current economic collapse.

[Drunken Irishman]

83. You really think, four years from now, Americans will be talking about this?

C'mon, are you serious?

haha

Obama very well might be a one-termer, but it won't be because of this. If the economy rebounds at any point over the next four years, he'll be swept back into office. I mean, even Bill Clinton, who didn't even crack 50% nationally and had approval ratings in the 30s by 1994, won a decisive re-election.

[Why Syzygy]

89. Bob Dole. come on.

[Drunken Irishman]

90. Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin. Come on!

[SuperTrouper]

93. Nobody will be talking about Warren by January 21st.

[Democat]

85. Prop 8 won, even in California

Think about what that means as far as the mainstream view of gay marriage.

Right or wrong, most Americans do not seem to support gay marriage. Why do you think that the Warren thing will hurt Obama at all?

[Splinter Cell]

86. Bullshit

[Horselover Fat]

91. you drastically overestimate your opinion

Actually, Obama remembers that he serves...all of America.

He has said for months that he will not beholden to special interests.

[snooper2]

92. I am bookmarking this...

And as the first ( He's a One Termer ) thread on DU...


I will repost the link in exactly 4 years...even just put a reminder in my calendar :rofl:



:rofl:

:rofl:

:rofl:


YOU GET THE HONOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rofl:

[slackmaster]

96. The OP has a first name, it's NOM NOM NOM NOM NOM

[alwysdrunk]

98. Aaaaaaand the hits just keep on comin'

To stupid to reply to. I'm going to to stop talking about this post or that post being the worst of the day\week\year. You just can't underestimate people like that.

[Renew Deal]

99. If you make the argument that politicians "serve", then Obama is on the popular side.

So that's not a very good argument.

[lumberjack_jeff]

100. Don't you think it's prudent to await ordering his headstone until he's inaugurated?

If he's the nominee in 2012, DU'ers will support him.