*
Yes, for sure! Progressive Democrats are certain to resonate to this kind of twaddle while the Obama White House is simultaneously busy with futile but chilling expressions of authority that will seem inexplicable and evil to any person who has grown up with open access to the internet. You know what kind of people those are: Obama's base.I believe it's inevitable that President Obama will have a stiff primary challenge in 2012 from the progressive wing of his party, and that it will be strongly supported by the progressive wing of society at large.
good stuff here. first 2/3 of the first one (Why) should be sent to Michelle Obama, assuming she's the one of that pair with real common sense.
ReplyDeleteBut you got a couple things wrong. Pelosi will not ever be a candidate for Pres. First, she's no progressive. Second, she's got no charisma (she's Steny Hoyer in a dress). Third, her secretive, multimillionaire husband has to remain secretive.
A primary challenge from the left? Possible. But I like your detection of Obama's regret at becoming Pres and think his abdication is much more likely. Thing is, why, if he knew he'd not be running again, doesn't he let the assholes have it right between the eyes now?
Only thing I can come up with is that he literally feels threatened-- not just for his Presidency, but for his safety and that of his daughters. You know, the old "we know where you live" threat. So he'll cave in and dance off the stage at the same time.
When he does abdicate, Hillary will definitely be the one (and the winner). At least her running would make Palin disappear forever. The question then is would Hillary operate like her peckerwood husband did or, once in power, use that power like a Banshee from hell (which at this point, I'd welcome).
One other thing-- don't discount a third party of the Perot type. This time the Dems and Reps are so weakened that it might actually work, if done right (and Perot did it close to right until he picked a cadaver for VP). I see all kinds of possible leaders of such a thing-- disgusted Reagan people (Jim Webb for one), Feingold, Bloomberg, Petraeus, and frankly, even some brainy, charismatic celebrities.
But maybe the whole "sucker" has to go down first. That's probably the ticket. Dead host = dead parasite. Start over.
BO: will talk about a third party later. But don't forget that we already have one new one, plus two old ones. A real "third party" will have to offer more, and will not nucleate around the cult of Ross Perot or Sarah Palin.
ReplyDeleteDon't misunderstand: I'm not cheering for Pelosi, just taking a guess (not even making a prediction). But I missed much more obvious vector out of the White House for the other BHO. Will post it at top level.
By the way, a modern presidential candidate needs neither charisma or a squeaky-clean family. The Bushes and McCain confirm that. I know Pelosi is Establishment, but she has spent the past several years fighting harder for progressive legislation than most other prominent Democrats. I'm pretty sure that no progressive "insurgent" will ascend to the White House in the next few election cycles.
gotta point this out-- You're right; morality, criminality, ethics-- none of that matters any longer for public office. For a Republican. For Democrats there is a much tougher standard and Pelosi can't and never will meet it.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what the third party is you're saying we already have. Not tea baggers-- they're just a Republican insurgency. I say, take the intelligent players out of both parties, put them into a new 3rd one, tie up the Democrat and Republican gunny sacks with the remains and toss them into the river.
...and said sacks are filled with cats. The Turkish penalty for adultery (women only.....of course).
ReplyDeleteEartha Kitt
P.S. Call it a Fourth Party to at least improve the chances.