Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Obama’s base is trapped

Obama’s base is trapped

Because they have no where to go, and will hold their noses, lean forward, and give the lever a pull (or more likely, push a button).

So I discount the ultimate importance of this report that Obama is losing his base:

With the 2012 presidential election just over 465 days away, President Obama appears to have lost crucial support from his core base of progressive voters, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times on Tuesday.

The Obama presidency has largely been defined by stubborn unemployment, a struggling economy, and a debt crisis that has taken the federal government to the edge of default. Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT), a lead voice on progressive matters, has openly suggested the Democratic Party should field other candidates for the 2012 presidential election to compete against President Obama in the primaries.

As I said in December 2010, when there were similar reports:

Not going to happen. 

The Democrats — particularly the left-wing “base” — never will walk out on Obama.

Like the mime in the box, deep down they believe that they have no place to go.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

TheLastBrainLeft | July 26, 2011 at 1:27 pm

A demoralized base might have no where else to turn, but parts of it might just stay home on Election Day. Every vote Obama loses benefits the GOP candidate.

Woo, wu

Rep. David Wu announces he will resign after accusations of sexual misconduct

Oregon Live

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | July 26, 2011 at 1:46 pm

Bernie Sanders is a racist.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | July 26, 2011 at 3:21 pm

    Liberals can’t be racist, regardless of any word, act, or deed. Just ask one.

      myiq2xu in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | July 26, 2011 at 4:00 pm

      You are confusing liberals with progressives.

      Liberals put principles before party.

      I am a liberal and I never supported Obama.

      BTW – Bernie Sanders is not a liberal or a progressive, he is a socialist.

        Cowboy Curtis in reply to myiq2xu. | July 26, 2011 at 4:10 pm

        I’d be interested to hear the functional difference between liberal and progressive in modern America. Who does one vote for that the other does not?

It’s not just whether they vote or not. It’s also the enthusiasm level. The only reason he won last time was because of the sense of excitement that sucked in a lot of bandwagon folks (Well that and, let’s face it, McCain’s non-campaign). Now he’s just another politician, and not a very good one at that.

LukeHandCool | July 26, 2011 at 2:05 pm

Agreed. But I also agree with @TheLastBrainLeft … a certain percentage of his base, especially the notoriously unreliable college-age crowd, won’t be nearly as fired up as last time and thus, won’t bother to vote. The only question is how large a percentage. Those younggins can be real flakes tending to flake out.

LukeHandCool (who could kick himself for having voted for Mondale over Reagan when he was still a young lefty … but who, on the day Reagan died, walked down to Wilshire Boulevard to see Reagan’s hearse drive by on its way to the funeral home Gates Kingsley Gates here in Santa Monica … and when Luke decided to walk the few extra blocks to the funeral home … he was surprised to find a large crowd of people already there, many holding and waving American flags. Luke isn’t one often given to melodrama, but a few tears welled up in his eyes as, standing next to a hispanic family with both parents and their three little girls all holding American flags … the entire crowd suddenly erupted into a loud and beautiful impromptu singing of “God Bless America.” The best and most emotional rendition he is sure he will ever sing and hear).

    RBreslin in reply to LukeHandCool. | July 26, 2011 at 5:13 pm

    I got a little teary eyed reading that. And now we need another Reagan. Palin’s the only one I can think of who’s like him. I only hope she runs.

Obama won due to the independents. Now those same indies find themselves paying more for gasoline and groceries, and even out of jobs. Without the indies, Obama can’t rely on college students who are facing not being able to get a job, or blacks who now represent only 9% of the population to pull him across the finish line.

In 2008, people could project onto Obama what they thought “hope and change” meant. Now they know that it meant nothing. It was just another campaign slogan. And according to Joe Biden, it’s all about that three letter word, jobs.

Yeah, there will be those diehards who will vote for Obama even if it means they are going to go into bankruptcy. But the Dems I am talking to are not happy with this administration and thinks they were sold a bill of goods (no one really sold it to them, they walked up and bought Obama hook, line and sinker).

    I’ve been an unaffiliated independent conservative since November 2006 when I gave up on the Bush/McCain Republicans over the two big new government entitlement build up and amnesty. Even though we told the GOP what we thought about their big government, one-world-without-borders liberalism by crushing them in 2006, they came right back and nominated the very face of what is wrong with the GOP Juan McCain in 2008. We crushed them again.

    The reason Obama is president today is because of Bush amd McCain, not because we Tea Party conservatives refused to hold our noses and vote for the dubiously named “lesser-of-two-evils”. And now we are heading into 2012 with almost nothing but Democrats running for the GOP nomination again.

    If Obama wins next year blame the Stupid Party, not conservatives like me who choose to vote for the best conservative on the ballot.

      retire05 in reply to Pasadena Phil. | July 26, 2011 at 3:35 pm

      If you pulled the lever for a Democrat in either 2006 or 2010, you are NO conservative. Unless you are painfully stupid.

      If you pulled the lever for a Democrat in either 2006 or 2010, I hope you are happy with the outcome; higher unemployment, a crashed financial system (thanks to government meddling), debt we could have never dreamed of (Obama raising the debt in 30 months more than George Bush raised it in 8 years).

        Apparently you didn’t read my comment carefully enough. I voted for the best CONSERVATIVE on the ballot. Let me introduce you to the Pasadena Phil Rule:

        “I never vote for Democrats or liberals, ESPECIALLY when they run as Republicans”.

        I’ll let you figure the rest out.

        jabrwok in reply to retire05. | July 27, 2011 at 11:33 am

        That would depend on your objectives. I have a conservative friend who voted for Obama with the explicit hope that the One would thoroughly discredit Progressivism. My friend is quite happy with the results of his vote.

The real story is that it is the one-party establishment that is losing its base, not Obama and the Democrats. This morning Rasmussen reported that only 6% of Americans believe Congress is doing a good job.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/congressional_performance

There just isn’t much to choose from if the two choices presented are any indication. Let’s try door #3 (no deal) and see what happens. I predict that we won’t default.

It’s nice to see the leadership of both parties and the entire spectrum of media calling us Tea Party conservatives as they all war on us. Sure beats “teabagger”. We must be winning or something.

A demoralized base also tends not to donate, contribute to their favorite lefty pundits, or buy bumper stickers that are featured on your website. 🙂

The first two consequences are good, but I share your concern about the third.

dorsaighost | July 26, 2011 at 4:09 pm

a demoralized based means no ground game … no ground game means leaners go to the GOP … Indies are already in the GOP camp … he may actually lose 2012 by a bigger percentage he won by in 2008 …

Who is the electable alternative. Gary Johnson?

    Generic Republican. The problem is that the GOP is determined to run another liberal Democrat again.

      Mutnodjmet in reply to Pasadena Phil. | July 26, 2011 at 7:11 pm

      I am looking forward to seeing Gen. Eric Republican sometime soon. 🙂

      janitor in reply to Pasadena Phil. | July 26, 2011 at 8:00 pm

      I’m thinking that the GOP has to run a fiscal conservative but a social libertarian like Gary Johnson, who is under the radar. Get someone who would put spending in order but won’t seem particularly threatening to liberals and independents. Everything else will fall into place after the economic issues.

        Cowboy Curtis in reply to janitor. | July 26, 2011 at 10:41 pm

        Social cons are the people who volunteer on weekends, knock on doors after work, and do all the free legwork that make modern republican campaigns work. Ask John McCain how well a campaign without them goes.

IMHO it will come down to Perry or Palin. One or the other of these two will be the next President of the US.

Anon Y. Mous | July 26, 2011 at 9:35 pm

It’s true that his base will not outright leave him. No way, no how are they going to vote for Sarah Palin or anyone else on the GOP line. Independents, sure, but not his base. But, turnout was huge for Obama in 2008. It will be less so in 2012. His base had the fire in the belly to repudiate Bush, as well as to elect the first black president. Add to that Obama’s poor performance, and some of his base will just stay home.

huskers-for-palin | July 26, 2011 at 9:50 pm

Cowboy, get ready for your nose to be rubbed in it. Open your mind and read the clues. By the end of the month, the two-year Alaskan ethics stautes runs out.

Interesting read…

http://conservatives4palin.com/2011/06/six-clues-palin-is-running-for-president.html

Romney’s ONLY hope is that Bachmann becomes the perfect stalking horse and siphons away enough votes from Palin for him to win.

    Cowboy Curtis in reply to huskers-for-palin. | July 26, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    Guys, I’m not putting her down. Hell, I like the woman. I just don’t think she has (or has recently had), any intention of running in 2012. But hey, mark it on your things-to-remember list, and if I’m proven wrong and she jumps in, feel free to roll up a section of newspaper and wave it in my direction shouting “Bad Cowboy! Bad!”

      Viator in reply to Cowboy Curtis. | July 27, 2011 at 7:23 am

      Cowboy Curtis seems to be a Perry supporter, with a handle like that it makes sense. Palin and Perry will have to fight it out. May the best man win.

      The winner will take on the lying weasel.

        Cowboy Curtis in reply to Viator. | July 27, 2011 at 5:27 pm

        I don’t know if I’m a supporter or not- there’s a lot more I’d like to know about the guy. But he gives every appearance of satisfying Cowboy Curtis’ number one rule of candidate selection: he can win.

Finally, an easy to understand 10 point rating scale for budget plans…

“It’s time to rate the Obama, Reid, and Boehner Deficit reduction plans on a credibility scale.

10-Point Credibility Scale

Golden
Rock Solid
Fudge
Jello
Marshmallow
Cream Puff
Nauseous
Gaseous
Imaginary
Delusional

Scoring the Proposals

Given a $1.4 trillion deficit, the latest plan from Boehner to cut a minuscule $85 billion a year (and back-loaded at that) is somewhere between nauseous and gaseous. It’s no wonder that various Tea-Party members will not vote for it.

Obama’s plan is imaginary or delusional depending on whether or not the President actually believes he has a plan, when he doesn’t.

Parts of Senator Reid’s plan are gaseous and the rest is clearly imaginary.

In contrast, the gang-of-six $4 trillion deficit cutting plan has something of the consistency of Jello, fudge, or marshmallow depending on details that were never disclosed.

$4 trillion sounds like a lot but it is only $400 billion a year, while the deficit is $1.4 trillion. Thus it’s tough to give that plan a rating higher than Jello, and impossible to give it a rating higher than fudge.

At this late juncture, the best one can reasonably hope for is a nauseous resolution. Unfortunately, the odds now favor something between gaseous and imaginary with delusional a distinct possibility.

The higher the score, the lower the credibility, and the better for gold.”

Mike “Mish” Shedlock, globaleconomicanalysis

The presumption of the post seems to be that his base will vote for him regardless . . . I agree with others on the thread who have opined that just because they won’t go and vote for someone else, does NOT mean they will turn out in droves for Obama, as they most certainly did in 2008.

He is most vulnerable with the independent middle, which is why he is scrambling to recast himself in that mold. He can have his base.

As it stands right now, Michael J. Mouse could beat this guy. His is a failed Presidency. In the end, that was what did in Jimmy Carter. But the mounting evidence on this guy is even more damning.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend