Obama as a one term president?

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
By all measures Obama is pulling away with this thing.  Intrade has him at 364 electoral votes and the line is now 84%.  I know there are still 3 weeks left for him to find a way to screw this up (he is still a democrat mind you), but it seems unlikely that he will lose.  Unfortunat ly I think it is very likely that he will be a one term president...

I have said for over a year that this election is a sucker prize.  Now with the financial crisis hitting in full force that is more evident than ever.  Whoever wins this thing will be expected to...

1) fix the economy...this is of course an impossible task as no matter what we do we are on a collision course with a long overdue deep and long recession.  There is simply too much debt and too much "money" in the system and only a long painful period will work this out.  The entire current basis for our economy is no longer viable (using debt to finance the purchase of foreign made consumer goods) and it will have to be rebuilt from scratch. 

2) solve our energy problems...this also is a very difficult task.  We simply do not have the domestic resources to become "energy independent" and development and scale up of alternatives is a multi decade task.  With any luck Obama will put us on the right path, but the journey will be long and expensive. However, strong government leadership on energy may help with the economic problems by stimulating new domestic industry. 

3) devise an exit strategy for Iraq...no matter who wins they will almost certainly have to organize a majority withdrawl from Iraq.  This is a good thing by most measures, but it does introduce significant uncertainty and any negative consequences will be blamed on democrats for "cutting and running".  Any future domestic terrorists attacks will also be "the fault of the spineless democrats" for not continuing to "fight them over there".

4) deal with the baby boomers starting to retire broke and with their pension funds ravaged from the stock market collapse and social security and medicare failing due to insufficient revenues. 

These are only the most important challenges facing Obama.  He has also promised to fix healthcare as well as juggle all of these hot potatoes.  While i'm sure he will manage these issues better than McCain I'm not sure that will be enough to buy him a second term.  The odds are very much stacked against him...
< 200,000 Ohio Voters | Post your fave part from debate >
 Display:
I think Afghanistan is a way tougher job than withdrawing responsibly from Iraq.

by charlesf on 10/16/2008 06:29:36 AM EST


Democrats own all of them, and these are things with which Democrats always have done well.  They are Democratic programs and policies, and Democrats know how to do them.  Republicans don't know anything about them and don't want them anyway.

Finally, these are things that the People want.

Over the next four years we're going to learn a lot more about the damage that Republicans have done to our country.  With a united government, Democrats have a chance to get some work done, as long as they don't screw it up with a lot of incompetence and egocentric infighting they way they did during Clinton's first term.  If Reid and Pelosi decide it's worthwhile to actually be Democrats and to force Republicans to sit in their chairs (Fuck that ''bipartisan'' bullshit! ), they can be very productive.

If Democrats can do those things, I'll be surprised if the People ever vote Republican again.  The Republicans will have to completely rebuild themselves like they did after Goldwater.

Look for new, more sophisticated techniqu es in lying.

by EveningStarNM on 10/16/2008 08:13:05 AM EST


I hope he won't just be a one term President. I could definitely see him doing another term if he still has a strong support from the people and does well his first term.

by freespirit85 on 10/16/2008 08:43:56 AM EST


Very few presidents who run for a second term don't make it.

Ford, Carter, Bush (I), Hoover are the only 20th century presidents to run for and lose a reelection bid.

By contrast, Bush (II), Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, LBJ, Eisenhower, Truman, FDR (x3), Coolidge, Wilson, T. Roosevelt and McKinley have all run for reelection and won in that time.

So the overall for the last century is 14-3.

All time its 28-8.

by ProfRich on 10/16/2008 11:52:06 AM EST

[ Parent ]
First, if you count Hoover, Ford, Carter and Bush (41), then the record is 14-4, not 14-3.  I'm sure your finger slipped on the keyboard.  Second, Ford shouldn't count.  Yes, the man was President, but I don't think his stat should read as a second term loss.  Let's be honest, Ford was running for his first term.  If anything, the record should read 14-3-1 or 14-3*.  The asterix would explain away Ford's place in the recordbooks.

But yes, I get what you're saying....  First term Presidents need to be REALLY bad or REALLY disconnected to not get re-elected.

14-2, coincidentally, was my pick for the Cowboys record this season...  *sigh*  Well, if the Horns can keep up their winning momentum we might be just exhausted enough to barely lose at Baylor.  If not, there's always Kansas!  I have faith.  I have faith.  And if we win, then NO ONE can bring up the "weak schedule" arguement this year.

by Kang the Conqueror on 10/16/2008 01:03:09 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Yes the record is good for winning a second term, and if these were normal times then I would surely assume that he would win one.  The problem is these are not normal times.  Look at what the country looked like when carter and hoover lost re-election and extrapolate what the country is likely to look like when Obama seeks re-election in 2012...see any parallels?  I know you all have faith that the democrats are going to sweep in and save everything, but the fact is for the last 2 years controlling congress they havn't gotten jack shit done...also, none of the problems i've adressed are solved over night and many of the solutions will have to be painful.  His choices seem to be to make the hard decisions and loose re-election or do nothing and loose re-election...his best political option is to probably apply half measures and things that appear to attempt to solve the problems and have a chance.  Not a good set of options if you ask me. 

by alphasigmookie on 10/16/2008 01:27:30 PM EST

[ Parent ]

All the Dems need to do is win the PR war on who to blame this on.

So we need to convince people Bush fucked everything up.

Think we can do it?

And we all know the primary reason the Dem Congress couldn't do more is the need for 60 Senate votes and the presidential veto.  Neither should be a serious impediment going forward.

by ProfRich on 10/16/2008 02:48:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The advantage FDR had was 4 years of the economy bottoming out before he took over.  Obama will be taking over at the beginning of the slide in the actual economy.  We are not even technically in a recession yet, we're just in 1929...things got a lot worse over the following few years and it is likely that they will in 2009-2012 as well.  We've got a long way to go before we hit rock bottom and Obama will be president durring a significant portion of the slide.  That in itself will be hard to overcome. 

by alphasigmookie on 10/16/2008 07:59:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The Congress that was elected in 1930, a year after the collapse, went on to great electoral success for decades.  People aren't idiots (no matter how much conservatives wish they were), they all know who to blame.

by ProfRich on 10/16/2008 11:27:17 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm just not sure patience is a common quality these days.  People want instant results and I think that is unlikely in this situation. 

by alphasigmookie on 10/16/2008 11:39:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]

To a large extent, success is a subject of contrasts.  The worse of a job that Bush did, the easier it will be to look better next term.

You can bet that Obama will start his 2012 campaign team and effort before he is ever sworn in on January 20.  I don't think this will affect Obama's policy, but it will affect public relations.

by rbruck on 10/16/2008 10:25:46 AM EST


It was a real break for Obama and a huge blow to the Republican party that the financial collapse didn't wait till after the election.  The Republicans will still try to blame him for it, as they are pathetically trying to blame the Democratic house majority in 2007-2008, but this is going to ring hollow now no matter what they do.  Some of the rabid base will buy it but no one else will.  You can see it in the polling numbers.  I think as things get tougher the anger toward the Republicans will become set in stone.  It's not like they're believing this is all going to end in a few months.

Still, I agree Obama will have little room for mistakes.  Mistakes in this economic climate will snowball out of control and if they are really ham-fisted he will suffer for it, as he should.  If he moves deliberately and calmly to address problems people will develop a trust for him that will carry him through a second term.  I've read enough of his writing to believe that he is unlikely to be rash and that he weighs things carefully before he acts.  Time will tell I suppose. 

by bfaul on 10/16/2008 10:41:33 AM EST


...he'll still be the first black president and be immortalized. Eventually his face will be on money and he'll have a statue. I hope he does a great job and carries a legacy that is independent of his race but he'll be an American icon forever more either way.  That is if he wins.

by s10129107 on 10/16/2008 04:34:19 PM EST


McCain is a one term president. If he makes it out of the 1st term alive, no sane person will elect him for a 2nd term ending atan age of 80 years OLD.

by noitsngo on 10/17/2008 12:43:29 AM EST


 Display: