Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Is it too late for Democrats to replace Obama?

Written By: Bob - Aug• 27•12

Hit the road, Barack, and don’t cha come back no more…

Is it too late for Democrats to dump Barack Obama from the top of the ticket, and come back with a winning option?

Leading indicators, history, and reputable polls suggest that Barack Obama is an electoral dead man walking, with very little to no chance of defeating Republican challenger Mitt Romney on November 6. In fact, one model that has correctly picked every winner since 1980 predicts Romney will blow-out Obama, with 52.9% of the popular vote.

Meanwhile, other economic indicators suggest that Obama’s “recovery summer” was all bark and no bite, and that we’re actually in an Obama Depression.

In a world with competent media, pundits would be asking an obvious question: if he puts his party first, why is Barack Obama still running for President? Independents and moderates that voted for Obama in 2008 based upon “hope and change” are disillusioned with Obama’s pathetic economic record, his obvious penchant for crony capitalism, and his inability to offer any new solutions. The only economic proposal to come out of the White House is “son of stimulus,” which voters increasingly view as throwing good money after bad.

His economic ineffectiveness has been “complemented” by a feckless foreign policy, which has seen the United States shift from being a leader on the world stage, to being a reactionary, delayed, and weak actor.

Compounding his domestic and foreign policy failures are the criminal scandals brewing within his Administration at the cabinet Level. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has been accused of running a crony-filled “female frat house” that sexually harasses male employees almost as badly as her TSA molests airline passengers. Attorney General Eric Holder faces perjury charges for his deceptions about Operation Fast and Furious, the deadliest Executive Branch scandal in U.S. history, where the Department of Justice ran thousands of guns to the Sinaloa drug cartel and caused more than 302 documented deaths, including two federal agents.

At this point, a rational political party would realize that their current candidate cannot be elected, and that promoting a failed candidate and failed policies will only ensure the decline of their party.

We’ve already heard claims that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton passed on an offer to replace “Slow Joe” Biden on the bottom half of the Democratic ticket, but the more rational solution for Democrats would be to replace Obama with Clinton as their Presidential¬† nominee.

Unlike the irreparably damaged Obama brand, the Clinton brand is a strong or stronger than ever. Many Americans over the age of 40 remember Hillary’s “co-presidency” with Bill Clinton and the far more rosy economics of that era, and could be persuaded to revisit those days with Hillary are the shot-caller and Bill being her charismatic “First Husband.” The two are still a formidable power within the Democratic establishment, and Hillary is already all but assured of amassing a significant war chest from disheartened and deep-pocketed Democratic donors if she stepped in to save the Party’s 2012 chances from a nearly inevitable Obama Defeat.

The Democratic Party desperately needs a coup in Charlotte, and conveniently for Democrats, North Carolina already has a history of successful Democratic insurrections.

A ticket with a seasoned political hand like Hillary Clinton at the top, featuring a charismatic Democratic “young gun” like New Jersey Mayor Corey Booker would not just be a much stronger Democratic ticket for 2012, but if the Clinton camp was successful in correcting the listing ship of state, the ticket would have good hopes of repeating in 2016. It would also potentially place a very likable Booker as the frontrunner in 2020, and if he succeeds 2024.

This, of course, is all mere speculation, if not fantasy.

Barack Obama would never consider conceding that his Presidency is a failure, even when it is obvious to everyone else. His desire to satisfy his own immense ego could never be brought under control to do what was right for the Democratic Party’s future.

As a conservative, I’m actually relieved that Obama’s self-focused world view won’t allow him to bow out the the 2012 race. He sets up Republicans for an excellent 2012 campaign that not even the most sycophantic and sympathetic of media denizens¬† can save.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

6 Comments

  1. Mockingbird says:

    I can’t believe there are no comments.
    I hope they ditch Obama and run Joe Biden. Why don’t they run James Carville, he’s got all the answers! What about Medea Benjamin with George Soros as VP? I think they would get more votes with Cindy, Cindy, um…Sheehan, than with Barack Man bites Dog Obama.

  2. Steven says:

    Not to give Dems any ideas …. but:

    Hilary, IMO and as much as I dislike her both politically and as a person, would win.

    Yes, she’s a polarizing figure, but all her baggage is known and she’s a popular figure in our revisionist PC history.

    It wasn’t until I got on to the internet in 2000 that I found out “what the deal” was with Whitewater and how vile and cruel that land deal was. It chewed people and their savings up and spit them out.

    And it’s widely known, but apparently of little to no consequence that Hilary openly committed Domestic Violence against Bill during the Lewinsky scandal. I mean the guy showed up at a presser with a claw like scratch mark on the side of his face. He blamed the cat.

    And about 50 other serious problems with her ideology – but, being an honest man and giving credit where it’s due : she’s a FAR more adept policy maker (versus academic theorist-in-chief), far more pragmatic in her approach (versus arrogant dogmatism), and is (I can’t believe I’m saying this) far more moderate than the ideologue-in-chief we currently have.

    I truly believe she’d energize their base, gain a ton of women votes and ultimately win. And were she to follow her husband’s economic course she’d be a success.

    Anyone else want to chime in?

    • Joel C says:

      Sure. I’m old enough to remember. I remember she tried to give us some kinda Obamacare before we had Obama, and she not even an elected official. I remember the Clinton assault on the 2nd amendment. And though Hilary doesn’t call the shots or set the policy, I reckon she’s been part and parcel of our “feckless foreign policy.”

      Nah, the Clintons may well be, almost certainly are, more moderate than the ideologue in chief we’ve got now, but if she became president I suspect it’d be hard to see that once she got rolling.

      I could be wrong about this, but for now it’s my opinion.

      • Steven says:

        Joel,

        Oh, please do not misunderstand – Hilary is a true believer hard core leftist IMO.

        However – Here is the key difference, and this is purely IMO.

        Barrack Obama has RELIED on his skin color and his “I’m an Indonesian foreign student” when he needed it, to his “I’m an American community organizer” personas.

        BHO and his wife both have ridden the race train at every turn. I could write a long and detailed account of both of them and how they’ve played it out, and I will if you request – but suffice to say if they were white they wouldn’t have made it out of Illinois.

        Hillary I think was shell shocked when, for the first time in her leftist life, Affirmative Action was a plague to her instead of a boon.

        All that said – she’s a PRAGMATIC leftist, whereas BHO is a true believer ideologue academic who has no real world experience.

        He voted present when he would not commit, and every job he had he simply set his sights on his NEXT job, and not DOING his job.

        Hillary is a lying scheming weasel like her husband, but she’s good at hiding it.

        Look at Chelsea, a product of their home: she’s Hillary without the veneer: she’s arrogant, entitled, connected, petty, and has no desire to live amongst “the little people”. Hillary groomed her well, but she’s rough on the edges at pretending to care about common folk.

        Hillary committed domestic violence with impunity (and propabaly to this day, good little feminist that she is, does not believe she is a DV’er), she sold land to people with an evil option if they missed more than **1** payment they lost the land (and got no equity back), got the travel office folks FIRED, covered for her husband’s sexual harrasment / assault, lied about her beginnings (her name, who she associated with etc), and is KNOWN to destroy people’s lives for the “crime” of opposing her.

        Yes – she’s not a great leader – this I know. But could she get elected?

        Yep.

        BHO’s arrogance and his ease of use of the race card to shut people up cannot be hidden on a stage as big as POTUS – he’s a mean racist opportunist hustler who’s risen far far above his ability – and he’s picked appointees, cabinet members, and czars who are not just leftists, but often, IMO, whack job theorists with little to no grounding in reality.

        Sorry if I sounded like I was endorsing Hillary, I certainly was not.

        Steven

      • Joel C says:

        Oh shucks no Steve, I didn’t think you were endorsing her! Not at all. I more or less agree with everything you got here, though Chelsea’s been way off my radar for about a decade now- so I’ll just take you on your word ’bout her.

        That was just my visceral quick reaction to the notion of Commander in Chief Hillary. Didn’t mean to psyche you there, bud!

        Good points you made there. Enjoyed reading them.

  3. Grady Strickland says:

    You are the man BOBO! Keep up the great writing bro! Come on down to the coast and lets drink some beers and you can paddle out with me for old times sake!

    G2