Feb 11 2010

Obama On Path To Be Worse Than Carter & Clinton Combined

Published by at 9:57 am under 2010 Elections,All General Discussions

It really is amazing how the far-left never accepts America’s repeated rejection of their government-centric, socialistic policies. Each time they trot them out the American people hammer them at the voting booth, put in small-government conservatives and the country enjoys decades of mostly positive economic health and wonderful lives.

Carter tried his command-control economic policies, which led to gas rationing and mind boggling inflation rates and recession. Carter got the boot in one term even though his administration came in the shadow of Tricky Dick Nixon. He was going to be the salve to an ugly moment in time and ended up making Nixon look good in comparison (better to have missing tapes than long gas lines).

Bill and Hillary went for the mythical holy grail of government run health care, which led to the first time in decades the GOP had control of Congress for a reasonable period. Clinton survived by moving to the center, and pushing small government policies. His socialistic plan for school uniforms was rightly dismissed, but everyone applauds his work with the GOP congress on eliminating the annual deficits.

Yes, there are times when the electorate has nailed the GOP as well – usually for not being a small government party as we saw with ‘Read My Lips’ Bush and the debacles in 2006/2008. Recall, George W Bush as actually a very successful president taking on two wars, 9-11, rebuilding the economy, etc. The 2006/2008 elections nailed do nothing GOP congresses who failed to control spending.

I could never understand why the left cherished Carter & Clinton considering how much damage they did to the Democrats’ reputation. But I guess that means President Obama will be a hero when he not only loses huge majorities in Congress this fall to the GOP (the House will fall, the Senate is on the brink), but also fails to win a second term. A possibility that is rapidly becoming a reality.

Earlier this week I noted a strange poll question by Marist regarding a 2012 matchup between Obama, Palin and NY’s Bloomberg. Initially I thought it was a bizarre matchup, until I realized Obama was in deep trouble because 44% would support him and 44% would vote against him. In the world of political incumbents these mid 40% poll numbers are just above DOA at the next round of polls. Under 50 is bad, approach 40 and it is over (which is why so many Dem Senate seats are now turning to lean GOP because incumbents like Reid and Lincoln are stuck at 40 or less).

It seems I was dead on in my assessment of the Marist poll being a cover for really bad head-to-head numbers, as Gallup has just come out and proven:

Same results statistically 44-42. RCP notes this key factor in the underlying numbers:

Independents are leaning toward the unnamed Republican by a double-digit margin — 45 percent vs. 31 percent for Obama.

Apparently there are a lot of independents sitting on the fence right now. But in VA, NJ and MA independents were the key to those election blow outs. They ran 60-40 against the Democrat candidate, a range not too far off from Gallup’s current numbers.

This pattern is becoming a national trend this year. It is the reason the Dems will lose the House and could lose the Senate. If centrists maintain this current posture the Democrats will see historic losses that will make 1994 look like a cake walk. It is too far off to rate Obama’s future for certain, but right now he is on the edge of political oblivion.

President Obama needs to listen to Virginia’s and America’s first elected black governor, who unlike President Obama was a huge success here in the Old Dominion:

During the 2008 campaign, I strongly endorsed Barack Obama for president. I did so early, when many Democratic leaders — including many prominent African-American politicians — believed the safe bet was to back then-front-runner Hillary Clinton.

I still believe Obama can stand for positive change. But first he must make some hard changes of his own.

The need is becoming more obvious by the day: He must overhaul his own team, replacing the admittedly brilliant advisers who helped elect him with others more capable of helping him govern. Getting elected and getting things done for the people are two different jobs.

One problem is that they do not have sufficient experience at governing at the executive branch level. The deeper problem is that they are not listening to the people.

Hearing is one thing; listening is another.

Governor Wilder had to face a lot of challenges in Virginia, since we are a center-right purple state. Wilder never let the uniqueness of his historic election distract him from being one of the people working for the people. He was not an elitist, he was the classic left of center VA democrat who win elections and respect in this state all the time.

President Obama is young and idealistic – which helped him win the presidency. He is also naive and inexperienced in managing in an executive role. Wilder is correct, Obama has very little time to change his trajectory – which right now is aimed at a spectacular impact into the dirt of history.

Obama has the childish view of the presidency as a place where you can dictate your grand vision and the robots will follow. He never understood that the details of heading down the president’s stated path have to be resolved and worked by  lots and lots of people in Congress, and in the end must have the support of the electorate. Obama thinks all he has to do is recast his rejected priorities and people will fall in line.

Not now, not after this much failure. Right now the American people want to see the Democrats fall in line and start giving up things. They want to see the Dems reach out by giving up on a massive health care overhaul and giving up on bureaucracy driven stimulus programs. To be blunt, they want to see some crow eating.

But mostly they want smaller government so government screw ups don’t have such huge implications for them. This is where the American people have been for centuries. It is now time to prune the federal beast way back, across the board in many areas. Ironically, the more the liberals fight the current trend the more pruning the electorate will allow when the power shifts back towards the GOP.

My feeling is the liberal egos now running the DC Democrat machine are incapable of the humility being demanded of The People. Their response has been insults and stage crafted stubbornness, not respectful acknowledgement. The Democrats in Congress and across this nation are going to pay a dear price for their misjudgment – as all failed political leaders deserve.

Is our young President capable of learning from his mistakes? Only time will tell, but right now it doesn’t look too good for him either.

16 responses so far

16 Responses to “Obama On Path To Be Worse Than Carter & Clinton Combined”

  1. WWS says:

    Amazing that the Dems apparently still think they can push Health Care through by using reconciliation. First, I don’t think it will work; Second, even if the tactic does work it will lead to so much ill will in the country that a landslide election could turn unbelievable, and whatever was passed would be overturned shortly, and third, win or lose this ongoing fight is burning up time they should be using on other things in a critical election year.

    Since we’ve just finished the football season, it’s the last 2 minutes of the Superbowl, down by 14, Obama is the quarterback, and he’s not even throwing the ball – he’s just fooling around and letting the clock burn.

    In the other big story today, The EU, and most notably Germany, has agreed to bail out Greece. (as I and others had predicted) I believe the easiest way to explain why this was inevitable is to note that the short term cost of bailing Greece out was actually less than the short term cost of doing nothing. (collapse of the Euro, etc) Long term, who knows? I believe there’s a collective acceptance of the idea that the future has become so unpredictable, so unknowable, that there is no pressure for any government to consider the effects of their policies past about a 3 month window. After that, the outcome depends on too many other unknowables, and so assumptions can be made which justify any possible course of action.

    Hence the pseudo-intellectual justification for always following the path of least resistance.

    Of course this is now the achilles heel of not just the US, but of western civilisation in general. This is the fault line which will give birth to systemic failure. But what form will the final failure take? Perhaps we do indeed face the same challenge that Gozer gave to Venkman, Spengler, and Stantz – Choose the form of the Destructor. Many are possible, but one must be chosen.

    And we’re not innocent enough to choose a Stay-Puft Marshmellow Man.

    “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.” – “Freewill”, Rush.

  2. BarbaraS says:

    AJ, didn’t Reagan kill some of the unnecessary and/or obsolete government agencies? I seem to remember that he did but not Nancy’s pet project of the rights of grandparents. She got a lot of flak from the media about that. I ask because posters are saying once an agency is in place it it there for good and either cannot or will not be done away with.

  3. AJ,

    The problem is that the Democratic Party Lefties will be even more Leftie after the election defeats they have coming in 2010 thru 2014.

    That is what happened to the Democrtic Party in 1994-2006.

    And it is set to happen again.

    None of the Leftie politicians from the surviving Democratic urban majority-minority, or Majority government employee congressional districts that take over the Democratic Party Congressional leadership — due to issues of seniority and survival — will remember the 2010-2014 election defeats come the 2026-28 election cycles, any more than Pelosi and Reid remembered 1994 in 2006-08.

  4. Redteam says:

    He is also naive and inexperienced in managing in an executive role.

    Strange how long it took so many people to recognize this. I knew it after watching him when he first decided to run.

  5. >It is too far off to rate Obama’s future for certain, but right
    >now he is on the edge of political oblivion.


    Obama’s future was written in economic stone when his economic team released this future economic prediction, per Jim Geraghity:


    The Economy Is So Bad, Even ‘Rosy Scenario’ Lost Her Job

    I mentioned this yesterday, but it’s worth repeating as an illustration of just how miserable the jobs situation looks. As Calculated Risk lays out, “As part of the annual budget, the Obama Administration released the underlying economic assumptions too (see Page 13 of PDF). For GDP, they are forecasting real GDP growth of 2.7 percent in 2010, followed by 3.8 percent, 4.3 percent and 4.2 percent in 2013. For unemployment, the forecast is for an average of 10 percent in 2010, with a decline to 9.2 percent in 2011, 8.2 percent in 2012 and 7.3 percent in 2013.”

    If unemployment is still around 8 percent in 2012, Obama’s a one-termer, presuming the Republicans don’t nominate a Dede Scozzafava/Lady Gaga ticket, right? Give them credit for avoiding a rosy scenario in at least one aspect; their assumption right now is that the economy’s performance in the coming three years will probably lead to additional job losses, centered on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    02/02 07:45 AM Share

    Note that this unemployment prediction by the Obama administration does not include the effects of the major tax increases following expiration of the Bush administration tax cuts in 2011.

    Major tax increases during a recession make things much worse.

    This Sept 2009 Michael Barone column makes the following point about unemployment during the 2010 election cycle:


    The Office of Management and Budget now projects unemployment at 9.7 percent, the same as last month, in the fourth quarter of 2010, when the off-year elections take place. Maybe the administration and congressional Democrats should consider job-creating rather than job-destroying policies right now

    Given how bad this recession is, we can expect the programed in 2011 tax increases to turn it into a depression.

    I.e., look for unemployment to stay over 10% until after Obama leaves office, and it might rise to 12-13% next year and stay there through 2012.

    That’s official unemployment.

    The real figure is about half again as much.

    The real problem with Obama is the Democratic Party and media did not perform their normal duty of weeding out extremists.

    Because they agreed with the leftists, and still do.

    Eventually the public will figure this out, after they are hurt enough economically.

    BTW, consider the definition of economic depression, particularly in terms of the country going off a cliff next spring after the Bush administration tax cuts expire.



    There is no widely agreed definition for a depression, though some have been proposed. In the United States the National Bureau of Economic Research determines contractions and expansions in the business cycle, but does not declare depressions.[1] Generally, periods labeled depressions are marked by a substantial and sustained shortfall of the ability to purchase goods relative to the amount that could be produced using current resources and technology (potential output).[2] Another proposed definition of depression includes two general rules: 1) a decline in real GDP exceeding 10%, or 2) a recession lasting 2 or more years.[3][4]

    The Democrats are busy turning a recession into a depression.

  6. AJ,

    The latest from the Calculated Risk blog:


    >Obama Forecast: 95,000 Jobs per Month in 2010, >Unemployment rate at 10%
    >by CalculatedRisk on 2/11/2010 11:03:00 AM
    >Based on my estimates, it would seem that 3.0% real GDP
    >growth in 2010 would lead to about 160,000 payroll jobs per
    >month and a slight decline in the unemployment rate.
    >Conversely, 95,000 jobs per month is probably consistent with
    >real GDP growth at just over 2%, and an increase in the
    >unemployment rate to over 10%. Based on their forecast for
    >real GDP growth of 3%, it appears they are being conservative
    >on their jobs forecast.

    Now the political point of all this is that American voters count jobs on their own. Which is based more on family than friends, and on friends over acquaintances, and vote accordingly.

    These “personal statistics” are far more important to them than abstract ones.

    Unemployment statistics per se are more a means used by the political classes to keep score…or hide it.

  7. crosspatch says:

    What I find absolutely astounding is the rhetoric coming out of the administration today that higher taxes cause economic growth.

    The depth of the stupidity of this administration is just beyond belief. They seem to be able to rationalize anything as long as it fits their world view.

    And the extent to which the press enables these nincompoops is also surprising. You have a President who babbles like an infant when his teleprompter goes on the blink yet the press concentrates on a woman who wrote a few key words on her hand so as to make sure she covered each topic in a speech she gave without the need of a teleprompter?

    This is just simply unbelievable.

    Folks, please vote in these off-year elections. We have simply got to get these morons out of their seats of power.

  8. Terrye says:


    My thoughts exactly. Just as I think it can not get worse, it does.

  9. Paul from Boston says:

    I’m waiting for the corruption scandals to start, which will only happen if the press finally turns on him. This is a politician who was schooled in the one of the nastiest and most corrupt political machines in the country where something like 25 alderman are in prison, a lot of them from the South Side. We already saw his attitude towards lawlessness with the appointment of Geithner. He cheated on this taxes? What’s the problem?

  10. crosspatch says:

    Paul, I don’t understand why Michelle Obama isn’t already before a grand jury.


    And it has been reported in some news media but it gets pooh-poohed. This is out and out political corruption. Wife gets a 200% raise, her employer gets money earmarked by hubby. Absolute “pay for play” mutual back-scratching political corruption. Basically, it is a kickback. He earmarks money for the hospital, the hospital kicks back a portion by raising Michelle’s salary from $100K to $300K.


  11. crosspatch says:

    Oh, and you know who is filling that position now that Michelle is digging in the White House lawn? Nobody. The position seems to have become unimportant when Michelle left and has been eliminated.

  12. crosspatch says:

    It looks to me like George Soros has robbed the US Treasury and used Obama to do it.

  13. momdear1 says:

    Obama is confirmaton of all the old racial stereotypes portraying all blacks as incompetent. I predict he will set the civil rights movement back at least 50 years since his governing abilities seem to be on a par with Idi Amim, Robert Mgabwe, and other African despots who rule by oppressing their people, while looting the treasuries , and reducing their countries to total third world poverty and destitution. Obama is just another cunning, slick talking, affirmative action promoted incompetent who has surrounded himself with self serving carpetbaggers who aren’t happy with just confiscating what we now have but are selling our children and grandchildren into servitute to pay off the debts they are incurring to slake their uncontrolable appetite for more and more riches for themselves and their favored supporters. This is the culmination of the Second Reconstruction which began in the 1960’s when industry began abandoning the Rust Belt and moving South. Just as they did in the First Reconstructon after the Civil War, white men have been disenfranchised (since at least the 1970’s) and incompetent “anybody but white men” have been put in charge. Look at college enrollment. over 60% of students are now women. When you add in the favored affirmative action minoriites and all those Wahabbi financed foreign students, that doesn’t leave much space for white males, who, by the way, have always been the backbone of our innovative industrial interprises. Tell me just one great invention a woman or affirmative action college grad has come up with. Oh yes…Didn’t one of them invent peanut butter. But that’s a recipe, not and invention. Our country is in the pits because we have promoted the less than most qualified to positions of leadership in business and government. The government has shackled our industries with so many crippling regs and taxes that it is no longer possible to compete with foreign products. What was it the were saying in the 1970’s, “We’re neck deep in the big muddy and the big fools says, push on.” That us, all right.

  14. Quite Rightly says:

    “But mostly they want smaller government so government screw ups don’t have such huge implications for them.”

    I think that’s right and well said.

    It is maddening to watch a collection of fools, incompetents, and crooks in some legislature or gov’t agency make decision after decision that wipe out years of work and planning.

    And, of course, they do so in full, self-congratulatory confidence that they know better than those of us who have to suffer from those decisions.

  15. Neo says:

    Apparently, the Democrats have convinced Boehner that it is “reconciliation” …

    A productive bipartisan discussion should begin with a clean sheet of paper. We now know that instead of starting the ‘bipartisan’ health care ’summit’ on Feb. 25 with a clean sheet of paper, the president and his party intend to arrive with a new bill written behind closed doors exclusively by Democrats — a backroom deal that will transform one-sixth of our nation’s economy and affect every family and small business in America. They will then engage a largely handpicked audience in a televised ‘dialogue’ according to a script they have largely pre-determined. They will do this as a precursor to embarking on a legislative course that Democratic congressional aides acknowledge has also been pre-determined — a partisan course that relies on parliamentary tricks to circumvent the will of the American people and engineer a pre-determined outcome. It doesn’t sound much like bipartisanship to me.

    For the weak minded, that’s a NO to the health care summit.