Would you support a Democratic challenger in the 2012 presidential primaries?

[garybeck]

Poll question: Would you support a Democratic challenger in the 2012 presidential primaries?

If you vote for choice 1, please reply with suggestions.

[Tom Rinaldo]

1. Unlikely but increasingly becoming less unlikely. n/t

[garybeck]

3. If the war goes bad, all bets are off. Look at what happened to LBJ.

[garybeck]

2. Howard Dean.

[calico1]

4. Not gonna happen. n/t

[suzie]

36. Because the regular base of the Democratic Party that doesn't spend their time

on DU being shrill doesn't want to see 30 years of the same kind of administration we had under Bush? Or worse, the kind we might get under Palin?

Why are there so many here who want to turn everything over to Republicans permanently?

[Garam_Masala]

42. You are pivoting

No one wants to turn it over to republicans, Palin especially.

But watching the performance of the president so far, I am willing
to keep an open mind. Open mind simply means I have NOT decided,
one way or the other. May be some other candidate will appeal to
us more and push strongly single payer.

[calico1]

58. No......what I mean is nobody is going to challenge Obama

for the Democratic nomination. It just isn't realistic to think that can happen.

So all this speculation about who should challenge Obama in 2012 is just wishful thinking. Barring Obama doing something truly unspeakable, resigning or God forbid dying in office he will run again in 2012 and no one will challenge him for the nomination.

[suzie]

61. I wasn't disagreeing with you, just should have used a sarcasm icon.

[closeupready]

5. Dean, Kucinich, Feingold.

Those are my top three.

[harun]

30. Yah, you can trust those three, not many others.

[Renew Deal]

6. I would support banning people that start these polls

[garybeck]

7. geesh, I thought there was free speech. It's not like I'm telling people to leave the party....

[opihimoimoi]

8. Its a tad Divisive....free speech vs substance

[Papagoose]

14. Well that's mighty Democratic of you.

n/t

[Sebastian Doyle]

20. On what grounds?

Because they would vote for a DEMOCRAT?

I'm sure we have some people here who voted for Ted Kennedy in the 1980 primary. You want to ban them too?

[WheelWalker]

9. That's yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater!

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

10. Only if he/she could win the nomination. A symbolic challenge would weaken the party to no purpose.

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. I think any primary challange to Obama would face odds far worse...

than Ted Kennedy's challange to Carter did. And that led to Reagan's election. McCarthy couldn't defeat LBJ, if LBJ didn't decide to step aside he would have been renominated. Nixon won the following election.

[salguine]

12. Jesus Christ, yes. The way things are going now, by next year we'll be

levying fines against homeless people for not buying houses.

[ima_sinnic]

41. lol! and for not upgrading to the latest model car & going w/out life insurance

yes, I will be first in line to vote for someone against the one-party system of corporate bloodsuckers and vampires.

[Garam_Masala]

43. I just fell of the chair laughing n/t

[impik]

66. Obama would win 2012 in a landslide, and you all

just stay as bitter as you always been.

[BlueIdaho]

13. I say Obama won't run for a second term.

[Papagoose]

15. I agree

I can't really even explain why, but I get that feeling.

[BlueIdaho]

22. Let me try...

He is the dog that caught the car - now he just doesn't know what to do with it. But its not his fault - exactly. The party seeing a real opportunity to land someone in the WH took the pulse of the country and realized it was time to try the "fresh face" strategy again. So they found a handsome young man with a telegenic family. Much to their surprise, it turned out he could make a pretty good speech too. Just like boxing promoters, they needed him ready for a big payday fight so they put him up against some real canvas backs so they could build up a terrific record fast. They got him to the senate without much fuss where they showcased him in some very public committee hearings followed by TV testimonials from virtually every democratic senator with some name recognition - "He's Amazing..." "Wise Beyond his years..." "A three dimensional chess master" they all said - and the legend was born.

Just one problem. The President waltzed into the WH without ever facing a fierce opponent. Much to his surprise, the republican party knows how to fight close and fight dirty. Its early rounds yet but he's been knocked on his ass at least three times and now he's cut over his right eye. I think he suddenly realizes just how long four years can be and just how unequipped he is for the fight of his life. The problem, you see, is that unlike the last WH occupant, this one has a sense of self and a curious mind. He knows he needs a knock-out to win and he just isn't a big puncher.

He'll announce he's not running after we lose seats in 2010.

[garybeck]

25. Look at history. LBJ. If the war goes bad, and Dems are protesting, he's toast.

[closeupready]

31. Nobody elected to the most powerful office in the world gives it up.

He will run for a second term.

[brentspeak]

49. LBJ did n/t

[quantass]

32. Obama will become MORE progressive nearing Primaries ONLY to re-establish Liberal "Hope" n/t

[ima_sinnic]

46. sorry, once burned, twice shy--ain't buying the next time around

I've learned it's all fluff without any substance and just a way to get into my wallet.

[bigwillq]

16. Open to the idea.

Depending on who the challengers are. Dean, Kucinich I would vote for again. I did in 2004 and 2008.

[David Zephyr]

17. I support democracy. I support the primary process.

I support democracy.

[slackmaster]

18. One man comes to mind...

[Writer]

19. I can't believe that it hasn't even been a year, and some people are actually considering this! n/t

[Arkana]

21. Unless Obama's caught in some sort of dead girl/live boy scenario, no.

[tranche]

23. You're an idiot.

If you think it's Obama and not the need of the party to secure campaign financing by showering favors on corporate interests, then you're more a part of the problem then you believe Obama may be. What Kuch (or any other liberal fantasm) would need to do to win the nomination (of 1 of 2 major US parties mind you) would be to morph into the type of deal maker you'd end up hating as well. Work on campaign finance reform instead of rearranging deck chairs. Pathetic.

[TexasProgresive]

24. Oh! and when did that ever work?

I was trying to think of a time when running against a sitting president for the nomination ever resulted in a White House win for the contender. Maybe it's happened but I don't think this would do anything but guarantee another puke in the White House. Stupid is as stupid does.

[uponit7771]

26. You're fuckin kiddin right?!

[CBR]

27. if you stuck by Clinton in 1996 and don't stick by Obama in 2012...

then, wow!

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[ima_sinnic]

45. please expand on this

I'm curious what relevance that has to ANY of this and how you can explain it without being simply a racist.

[ima_sinnic]

44. what the hell does that mean? everything's exactly the same as in 96?

funny, I forgot that Bill Clinton was at the head of an effort to force me to buy worthless, overpriced health insurance. He also forced me to hand over money to banks and wall st. fatcats to prop up a corrupt, unregulated system--silly me!

sorry, Obama lost me back when he gave Baucus the task of "shaping" health care "reform" without giving him any basic conditions or features that the reform should have, and without ensuring that everybody would "have a seat at the table" as he LIED they would. He treated the idea of single-payer like a joke, the same way he treats legalization of marijuana.

Obama treats progressives like scum, something that might get his hands dirty. Not again for that one from me, I'm finished being his unwitting tool to my own demise.

[CBR]

55. It means what you assume it means nt

[LooseWilly]

65. I voted for Cthulu in '96...

[Jennicut]

28. Nah, not into giving the Rethugs a win for the WH.

It always happens that way. No matter what, a Rethug is always worse. Please remember 2000. It was a third party but same concept.

[Blue_In_AK]

29. President Obama was not one of my top choices in 2008

so, yes, I would be interested in a primary challenger, depending on who it is.

[phleshdef]

33. Yea, lets have Carter/Reagan all over again. Fucking foolishness.

[Arkana]

35. But...but it strengthened the party for 1980! Look at the landslide election Carter won!

Oh, wait....

[Vidar]

34. Dean, Kucinich or Feingold.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. I won't support a challenger in the primary or the general

:-)

[Odin2005]

39. DRAFT DEAN!!!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

40. no because whether or not I consider obama a sell out, i am confident

that america will only vote for a republican or a sell out dem

[Divine Discontent]

47. 100% likely if the opportunity arises, since I'm a Dem, but if no challenger, I will either vote 3rd

or not at all, or as my friend said, "well if there's really no one else with a chance, and it's Mittens vs Obama, I'll probably vote Obama - just depends on how bad the weather is that day..."


says it all.

[Metric System]

48. Ugh, some of you are determined to have a Rethug President in 2012.

[brentspeak]

50. It appears Obama is the one who's determined to see the White House go back to the GOP

[ima_sinnic]

54. well, others are determined to have a repthuglican democrat--what's the diff?

you haven't noticed we're in a one-party system now?

[Phx_Dem]

51. Progressive = Republican President

[IndianaGreen]

52. If the captain of the ship doesn't change course, he will have a mutiny on his hands.

Too early to tell, but at this rate we are going to have our hands full saving those worthy of reelection in 2010.

[depakid]

53. Democracy like nature abhors a vacuum

Attempt to create (or create the perception of) a center right coalition- and progressive elements of the former base will seek another candidate (or party) that they believe more accurately reflects and earnestly responds to their attitudes, beliefs and values.

[Avalux]

56. HOLY SHIT. A year into his term, and a majority have thrown Obama under the bus.

I'm completely disgusted. What the hell has happened to DU?

[IndianaGreen]

59. How could we have thrown Obama under the bus when he is the one that threw us there?

The Lieberman/Obama Health Racketeering bill was the last straw for many people still hoping for Obama to do good.

[jefferson_dem]

69. Trolls, cynics, and haters aplenty.

n/t

[Blasphemer]

57. Possibly.. depending on what the person's platform was.

However, I would hold no illusions about their chances of winning. They would not. Still, I think primary challenges and additional national parties are key to reclaiming true democracy regardless of the initial outcomes.

[old mark]

60. A viable LEFT Democrat...what I thought I was getting this time...

Yes, I certainly look forward to it.

mark

[winyanstaz]

62. Kucinich, Dean.....

are my favorites.
We did not leave Obama, he deserted us.

[saltpoint]

63. We'll see who steps into the fray. Were a challenger to emerge she or he

would have to have a pile of cash and a rationale of candidacy plus critical mass and momentum, plus significant electoral appeal in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Not least, she or he would have to be instantly acceptable to county chairfolk coast to coast who are promoting Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. Said chairfolk are most certainly not going to get behind a Kucinich or a Dean candidacy.

[vaberella]

64. The man has barely completed 11 months and yet....people want him out.

I mean for us to have this discussion when there are so many other things going on politically says to me that people just want President Obama out of office, now and would give a rats ass about 2012.

[argonaut]

67. A majority are 'open to the idea'?

Well, that's it. We're doomed in 2012.

[goldcanyonaz]

68. Nope.