Author Topic: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread  (Read 45130 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #125 on: May 12, 2011, 11:21:20 AM »
Many of the more serious (Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, Newt Gingrich) and less serious (Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich)



________________________ __________


Don't these jerkoffs have proof-readers?   

MM2K

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1398
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #126 on: May 12, 2011, 05:31:14 PM »
Why Obama's Not a Lock
By Joe Klein Thursday, May 12, 2011

The most telling moment in Barack Obama's 60 Minutes interview came when Steve Kroft asked for his reaction after he saw the photo of Osama bin Laden, shot in the head. "It was him," the President said. And that was all he said. Now, this was a classic TV how-did-you-feel question, and Obama had a range of possible options. He could have gone all political, "I thought of the families who had lost loved ones ..." Or graphic, "Well, it was pretty ugly, but ..." Or excited, "Oh. My. God." Or religious, "Thank God." Or triumphal, "My first thought, actually, Steve, was 'Hasta la vista, baby.' " But, of course, this is Barack Obama, more Gregory Peck than John Wayne. And the same taciturn, hyperdisciplined quality that is so frustrating when he seems unable to connect with the economic anguish of the American people came across as just right, perfectly Midwestern — Kansas, not Hawaii, much less Kenya.

A few days earlier, five of the Republican candidates for President gathered in South Carolina for their first official debate. It was a weird show, newsworthy only because Congressman Ron Paul came out in favor of legalizing heroin, cocaine and prostitution. Many of the more serious (Mitt Romney, Mitch Daniels, Newt Gingrich) and less serious (Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich) Republican candidates weren't there — and so it would be unfair to compare the Republican punytude with the massive presidentiality of Obama during his strongest week. (See pictures from inside Obama's Situation Room.)

Three relevant observations can be made, however. First, Paul's willingness to go off the libertarian deep end, without a blink, says something about the ideological extremism that has overwhelmed the Republicans in recent years. Paul is certainly further out than most, but all sorts of loony notions have become accepted wisdom in the Republican Party — about taxation, about the science of climate change, about the utter perfection of markets. Which leads to the second observation: even the serious Republican candidates aren't very. Romney refuses to take credit for his greatest accomplishment as governor of Massachusetts — a universal health care plan that works. There are grounds to hope that Indiana's Governor Daniels and former Utah governor Jon Huntsman will not make fools of themselves, but it is hard to imagine either of them prospering by challenging the conventional Limbaugh wisdom of the party, and Daniels has already gotten into trouble by proposing that there should be a truce on "social issues" like abortion and homosexuality.

But my third reaction to the Republican debate cuts in the opposite direction. By depriving the Republicans of the birth-certificate and tough-on-terrorism issues in a single week, Obama may ultimately force them to spend most of their time discussing the weakest point of his presidency: the economy. My colleague Mark Halperin has observed that when Trump talks about something other than the President's birth certificate (or himself), he strikes some very resonant chords. He wants to slap tariffs on the Chinese, and he's mad as hell about gasoline prices (and wants to seize the Iraqi oil fields). This is the other side of the President's reserve: he won't demagogue those issues, or even talk about them very much. (See "The Awkward Republican Coalition.")

I came into presidential politics with Jimmy Carter, and I'll never forget his staff's derision of a certain washed-up actor-extremist from California named Ronald Reagan. Similarly, I remember the Democratic Party's despair in 1992, especially after Bill Clinton was linked, lubriciously, to a lounge singer named Gennifer Flowers. Carter had brought Israel and Egypt together. George H.W. Bush had beaten Saddam Hussein and retaken Kuwait; his popularity rating stood at 90%. But both Carter and Bush were beaten by a bum economy.

Obama could lose too, even to someone who seems silly to fusty opinionators like me. He could lose if he keeps playing on the Republican field — deficits — rather than in the arena preferred by most Americans: the sputtering economy. He needs some big, new, easy-to-understand economic initiatives. He could lose if he doesn't remind the public that he cut their taxes, as promised, and their Medicare drug bills. He also has to prove that, despite the bailouts, he's not Wall Street's sucker. (See "Bin Laden is Dead. Now It's Time to Fix the Economy.")

There is a grand history of populist loudmouths like Trump making an early impression in presidential campaigns: Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson and Howard Dean all had their moments. And so did John McCain, who lost his shot in 2008 when the financial crisis came and he didn't know how to react. Obama was calm under fire then, and ever since. It is why he's likely to be re-elected: we prefer Presidents who are adults over those who are angry. But he is certainly not a lock.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2070953,00.html?hpt=Sbin


Romney refusing to take credit for his health care plan? Did Joe Klein see Romney's speech today? He absolutely embraced it. It was a great speech too. He really blows away the myth that voting for Romney makes you a hypocrite if you hate OBamacare.
Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #127 on: May 18, 2011, 05:18:25 AM »
Obama off the deep end
By Joe Battenfeld  |   Wednesday, May 18, 2011  |  http://www.bostonherald.com  |  Columnists
Photo by Christopher Evans
What are you afraid of, Mr. President?





I know it must be tough dragging yourself to these glitzy fund-raisers and mingling with rich people who shower you with money and affection. Who needs an unfriendly reporter shouting an unscripted question at you, or checking to see whether any of the guests are getting government contracts?

We all know Obama has an aversion to tough questions. During the campaign, he would refuse to engage with most local media, and reporters who camped out at the rope line got a stern talking-to from a campaign staffer.

But using the White House press pool to possibly punish or reward media based on what the White House considers “fair” coverage? This is taking the control freak thing to new levels.

I’ve been on many press pools and can’t remember getting denied access because of which media outlet I worked for. Even when the Herald was writing critical articles about former Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988, his campaign never bumped us off the plane or kept us off the pool based on what we wrote. Same goes for President Clinton. You think Gov. Deval Patrick likes having the Herald and other media follow him around all day? No, but it’s part of his job.

But apparently this White House has a different view. It has a special place for perceived “unfair” media — at least 500 feet away. Even at White House press conferences, the president carefully chooses who gets to answer a question.

And before this Boston trip, there were other examples of questionable use of the pool. One reporter at a fund-raiser headlined by Vice President Joe Biden was held in a utility closet for more than an hour to keep him away from the donors. Even worse, he had to listen to Biden speak.

The truth is, most media dread being in the “pool” at fund-raisers. It’s tedious and exhausting and requires a lot of writing about what appetizers the president served. But the pool is important, because it gives all reporters a close-up view of what the president is doing or saying to guests paying thousands of dollars a plate.

Here’s my suggestion to President Obama: Veer off your scripted schedule and come in to Boston to say hello to ordinary voters. And don’t be afraid to let a Herald reporter tag along. We don’t bite.

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1338750

 

Related Articles:

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #128 on: May 18, 2011, 05:22:50 AM »
White House shuts out Herald scribe
By Hillary Chabot  |   Wednesday, May 18, 2011  |  http://www.bostonherald.com  |  Local Coverage
Photo by AP (file)




The White House Press Office has refused to give the Boston Herald full access to President Obama’s Boston fund-raiser today, in e-mails objecting to the newspaper’s front page placement of a Mitt Romney op-ed, saying pool reporters are chosen based on whether they cover the news “fairly.”

“I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters,” White House spokesman Matt Lehrich wrote in response to a Herald request for full access to the presidential visit.

“My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President’s visits,” Lehrich wrote.

But Lehrich said the Herald wasn’t purposefully barred from the press pool, saying local pool duty by the Boston Globe was arranged earlier with the White House Correspondents Association. And Lehrich insisted the Herald may yet be allowed into Obama events.

“As we have in the past — including the multiple occasions on which the Herald has supplied local pool reporters — we will continue to consider the Herald for local pool duty for future visits,” Lehrich wrote.

Obama is in town today to raise money for his 2012 re-election campaign. His afternoon speech in the South End’s Cyclorama is open to all media, but only a selected pool can attend other aspects of his fund-raiser. Pool reporters must share all their material with other press. The Herald has been bypassed for pool duty during Obama’s last two visits despite asking the White House to be the local pool reporter.

“Newspapers don’t have to be unbiased to get access. You can’t just let only the newspapers you want in,” said Boston University journalism professor Fred Bayles.

Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom defended Romney’s March 8 opinion piece:

“That op-ed was about jobs, which apparently is a sensitive subject for the thin-skinned people around the president. The White House may be able to manipulate pool coverage, but they can’t manipulate the fact that millions of Americans are out of work because of President Obama’s failure to create jobs and get our economy moving,” Fehrnstrom said in a statement yesterday.

The administration has a history of controversial clashes with the press.

The White House was seen to be at war with Fox News early in the administration, with its communications director calling Fox an “arm” of the Republican Party, while the president avoided Fox interviews until his health reform proposal ran into trouble. Since losing control of Congress, Obama has sat down with conservative Fox commentator Bill O’Reilly.

In April 2010, Bloomberg’s Ed Chen, president of the White House Correspondent’s Association, met with then-Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to hash out complaints about limitations on the press, saying, “In my 10-plus years at the White House, rarely have I sensed such a level of anger ... over White House practices and attitudes toward the press.”

Last month, a San Francisco Chronicle editor reported the White House threatened to bar Hearst reporters from pool duty after a Chronicle reporter shot video of protestors mocking Obama at a fund-raiser.

Glenn Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor who has followed White House-press relations at right-leaning Instapundit.com, said a pattern appears to be developing.

“It’s all about control,” Reynolds said. “At some point this will blow back on them. Most presidents behave in a more refined fashion. Experience has shown that acting presidential is good politics and to their advantage.”

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1338789

 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Boston Herald in Tiff With White House Over Months-Old Romney Op-Ed
« Reply #129 on: May 18, 2011, 11:41:50 AM »
Obama trying to censor the media again.  Hope and change.   ::)

Boston Herald in Tiff With White House Over Months-Old Romney Op-Ed
By Judson Berger
Published May 18, 2011
FoxNews.com

Shown here is an image from the front page of the Boston Herald on March 8. The article was an op-ed from former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

Shown here is an image from the front page of the Boston Herald on March 8. The article was an op-ed from former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

The Boston Herald has accused the White House of denying its reporter full access to President Obama's local fundraiser Wednesday evening, claiming the Obama administration cited concerns about an op-ed the paper ran more than two months ago by Republican Mitt Romney.

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor and possible GOP challenger in the 2012 presidential race, tore into Obama over the economy in his March 8 op-ed, which the Herald played on the front page at the time under the headline, "Why He's Failing."

The White House didn't forget.

According to emails published Wednesday in the Herald, when the newspaper tried to sign up for pool reporter duty ahead of Obama's visit to Boston, a White House spokesman questioned whether the newspaper could cover the president fairly.

"I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters," spokesman Matt Lehrich told the Herald in response to its request, according to the newspaper. "My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President's visits."

However, the White House said Wednesday that the Herald wasn't blocked from being a part of coverage, but had signed up for a travel "pool," which lets one local reporter cover the news for all local media outlets so as to limit the number of people in the room.

"In this particular instance, the Boston Globe had arranged with the White House Correspondents Association, independent of the White House press office, to be part of the traveling press pool. As such, there was no need for an additional local pooler," said White House spokesman Josh Earnest. "As we have in the past -- including the multiple occasions on which the Herald has supplied local pool reporters -- we will continue to consider the Herald for local pool duty for future visits."

A White House aide also noted that while the White House thinks staff at the Boston Herald are routinely unfair to it, the Herald has served as the travel pool for presidential visits in the past, including to Martha's Vineyard.

With the White House offering varying explanations, media analysts said they were unclear exactly why the Herald request was denied but questioned the logic in bringing up the months-old Romney column.

Dan Kennedy, a Northeastern University journalism professor and media critic, noted that the White House has the "right" to pick and choose who goes in the pool, and that the Herald is not entitled to be in the pool every time.

However, Kennedy said the Herald should get its crack at pool coverage occasionally and the White House should not factor in political considerations when making those decisions.

"You would like to think that they're going to do it in an apolitical way, without regard for who they think their friends are and who they think their enemies are," he said. "The thing that the White House did that I thought was the most stupid was to put in writing why they weren't in the pool."

Kennedy also questioned why the Herald chose to run the Romney op-ed on the front page back in March, but noted that Romney has gotten grilled on the Herald's tabloid front plenty of times.

"Everybody gets their turn ... on the front page of the Herald," Kennedy said.

Tim Graham, a media analyst with the conservative Media Research Center, also said that while the White House has the right to decide pool coverage, citing political considerations makes them look "small."

"They're looking to manage the press down to the smallest detail," Graham said. "If you're not willing to suggest that Obama is some combination of Lincoln and JFK, you're not allowed in."

In this case, the Herald was trying to assign one of its reporters to cover parts of Obama's Democratic National Committee fundraiser in Boston Wednesday evening that aren't open to the rest of the media. The Herald claimed it had been "bypassed" for pool duty the last two times Obama visited the area.

In a written statement, Herald Editor Joe Sciacca said: "We will always fight for fair access to presidential visits and other important events and we will not be intimidated by attempts to affect our news decisions."

This isn't the first time the Obama White House has had run-ins with pool reporters. The White House chided The San Francisco Chronicle last month after its reporter videotaped and posted a mini-protest at an Obama fundraiser, apparently in violation of the pool rules.

Another reporter for The Orlando Sentinel was kept in a storage closet during a Florida fundraiser attended by Vice President Biden in March. Biden's office afterward apologized, calling the decision to hold the reporter a "mistake."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/18/boston-herald-tiff-white-house-months-old-romney-op-ed/

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Boston Herald in Tiff With White House Over Months-Old Romney Op-Ed
« Reply #130 on: May 18, 2011, 11:43:07 AM »
I already posted this in another thread.   

Hope & Change bitches.   


Why should the BH laud obama for going to boston?   He was there to suck campaign cash from pathetic shills forking over 30k a plate to have bad chicken and steak with that communist puke obama. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Boston Herald in Tiff With White House Over Months-Old Romney Op-Ed
« Reply #131 on: May 18, 2011, 11:45:14 AM »
Did not see.  Which one?  I'll merge.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Boston Herald in Tiff With White House Over Months-Old Romney Op-Ed
« Reply #132 on: May 18, 2011, 11:46:40 AM »
Did not see.  Which one?  I'll merge.

i think its in obama re election thread.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #133 on: May 18, 2011, 11:50:13 AM »
bump for beach   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #134 on: May 19, 2011, 09:24:25 AM »
http://www.necn.com/05/19/11/Host-Obama-raised-22M-at-M...

BROOKLINE, Mass. (AP) — A former advertising executive who hosted a campaign fundraiser attended by President Barack Obama last night says it raised $2.2 million for Obama's re-election campaign and the Democratic Party.

Obama attended at dinner at the Brookline home of philanthropist Jack Connors.

Tickets for the dinner and an earlier fundraiser in Boston ranged from $200 to the legal maximum of $35,800.

Speaking at a reception for about 900 people at the Cyclorama at the Boston Center for the Arts, Obama mentioned Osama bin Laden, saying he will never again threaten the United States.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #135 on: May 19, 2011, 11:14:27 AM »
Poll: Romney in Dead Heat With Obama
Thursday, 19 May 2011 12:21 PM
By Henry J. Reske and Luis F. Perez

A new poll finds that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is in a dead heat with President Barack Obama in the presidential sweepstakes. The poll is the first national survey on the presidential race since former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and businessman Donald Trump announced they would not seek the GOP nomination.

The poll by Boston’s Suffolk University found Romney in a statistical tie in a head-to-head matchup with President Barack Obama among voters of all parties.

Of those surveyed, 46 percent said they back Obama; 43 percent, Romney. That falls within the polls 3 percent margin of error, meaning Romney’s support could be as high as 46 percent and Obama’s as low as 43 percent.
Romney also leads the GOP pack of presidential contenders by mostly double digits.

“With Huckabee and Trump out of the race, the whole dynamic has changed,” said David Paleologos, director of the Political Research Center at Boston’s Suffolk University. “Romney is the clear front-runner now; that’s a position he’ll have to be prepared to defend over the coming months.”

The results are good news from Romney who received largely negative reviews for his much anticipated defense of the health care plan he proposed in 2006 while governor of Massachusetts.

Romney travelled to the University of Michigan’s Cardiovascular Center last week to discuss the plan, dubbed by detractors as Romneycare, which has been widely cited as the model for Obama’s signature health care law.

Instead of walking away from the plan as many conservatives had hoped, Romney embraced it, explaining it was “right for the people of my state.”

The poll also has more good news for the GOP field. Some 48 percent said it was time to give someone else a chance when asked if Obama deserved to be reelected, while 43 percent said he deserved reelection.

However, it’s too soon to put the champagne on ice. The poll found that 46 percent of likely voters said they expect Barack Obama will be reelected in 2012 while only 37 percent said the GOP would win the White House.

Among likely GOP primary voter, the poll found that Romney garnered 20 percent of support, followed by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, with 12, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 9, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, 7 percent, and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex., 5 percent.

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., businessman Herman Cain and Mitch Daniels all garnered 4 percent of the support. That was followed by former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and former Sen. Rick Santorum with 3 percent. Of those surveyed, 20 percent said they were undecided. Three others got less than 1 percent.

It’s unclear how much of the polling was done after Gingrich’s disastrous rollout of his campaign.

Gingrich has spent much of the week apologizing for comments made Sunday on “Meet the Press” where he called House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s plan to overhaul Medicare as “right-wing social engineering.” He now says his words were “inaccurate and unfortunate.”

Nonetheless, he has been hammered by conservatives for the comments, which were closely followed by revelations in Politico that he once owed the Tiffany and Co. jewelry store between a quarter and a half million dollars.

The poll surveyed 1,070 likely voters from May 10 to 17, 2011, using live telephone interviews.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/barackobama-mittromney-suffolkpoll/2011/05/19/id/396971

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #136 on: May 19, 2011, 11:18:33 AM »
As much as I hate to say this, and it does pain me considering my i still want west, palin, bachmann, cain, et al, Romney will easily and convincingly destroy obama in a general election. 


Obama has proven himself no less than a malcontent, an enemy of the state, a terrorist in training, a economic WMD, and a disgusring communist pofs that convinced 95 ers to come outr for him.   


time to let the adults take over again.   
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #137 on: May 19, 2011, 03:22:50 PM »
President closes day with fundraisers
 By: CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/19/president-closes-day-with-fundraisers



Washington (CNN) - For the third time this week President Barack Obama ends his day by raising campaign cash.

After giving a major address on the Middle East earlier Thursday, the president is the main attraction at two evening fundraisers. Obama headlines the Women's Leadership Forum's 17th Annual National Issues Conference at the Grand Hyatt in the nation's capital, and then attends a dinner at a private residence.

A Democratic source with knowledge of the events says approximately 550 people will be at the Women's Leadership Forum, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, who is the new Democratic National Committee chair, and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. The source adds that approximately 50 people will attend the dinner.

The Women's Leadership Forum (WLF) was founded in 1993 and aims to engage female leaders and activists in the Democratic Party.

Tickets for the events range from $250 to the legal maximum limit of $35,800 that an individual can contribute for both the primary and the general election. The money brought in from both fundraisers will go to the Obama Victory Fund, with the proceeds being shared by both the president's re-election campaign and the DNC.

Wednesday night the president was the main attraction at two fundraisers in Boston. Monday night he headlined two fundraisers at hotels just a few blocks from the White House.

The president announced on April 4 that he was setting up his re-election campaign. A week later he personally kicked off his fundraising drive by headlining three events in his hometown of Chicago. He was also the main attraction at fundraisers in San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City, and last week, Austin, Texas.

Obama shattered all records by raising nearly $750 million in his bid for the White House in 2008.

Follow Paul Steinhauser on Twitter: @PsteinhauserCNN


________________________ ________________________ _________________

What a disgusting pofs.   Set the world ablaze during the day - hawk cash at night.   



Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #138 on: May 21, 2011, 09:41:18 AM »
 :-\

Zogby: Jews Will Vote for Obama Despite Israel Stance
Friday, 20 May 2011
By David A. Patten and Ashley Martella

Despite the uproar over President Barack Obama’s support for Palestinian demands that Israel return to its 1967 borders, pollster John Zogby predicts that Obama won’t suffer significant defections from Jewish voters at the polls in 2012.

In an exclusive Newsmax.TV interview, Zogby noted that Democrats traditionally enjoy a 75 percent to 25 percent advantage in the Jewish vote. The lone exception was Ronald Reagan’s re-election bid in 1984.

It will take more than a little friction with the current leadership of Israel to change that dynamic, he says. “Israel is extremely important to American Jews. But so are traditional liberal stances, particularly on social issues."

Pollster John Zogby predicts Jews will vote overwhelmingly for Barack Obama and other Democrats again despite the president's Mideast speech calling for a Palestinian state at pre-1967 borders.

Zogby predicts that the rightward shift of GOP candidates during their primary battles for the nomination will limit their appeal to Jewish Americans in the general election.

“I think [the Israel issue] will be raised by Republican candidates, but I think the lines are drawn fairly well, and I think it’s hard for it to not be a 75 to 25 split for Obama and the Democrats,” he says.

Zogby also predicts that the primary impact of Obama’s Middle East speech will be to generate “a bit more enthusiasm among liberal voters,” especially Muslim-Americans.

Zogby notes that Muslim-American sympathies shifted markedly during the presidency of George W. Bush. They broke 10-to-1 for the Democratic candidate, Sen. John Kerry. The Iraq war and the Patriot Act offended Muslim voters, according to Zogby. An estimated 2-3 million Muslims reside in the United States.

Obama enjoyed a 10-point bounce in popularity after the successful mission against Osama bin Laden, Zogby says.

The latest Zogby poll, however, shows that only 41 percent of voters believe the president deserves to be re-elected, and another 10 percent of voters say they’re not sure.

Those numbers suggest Obama still has plenty of work to do if he hopes to secure his re-election, Zogby says.

“Now what he has to do is sustain that 48 points” of approval, Zogby says. “It’s not safe, but it takes him out of the danger zone.”

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Zogby-Obama-Jews-vote/2011/05/20/id/397147

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #139 on: May 25, 2011, 03:07:22 PM »
Obama dumped by big Dem donor
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/05/obama_dumped_by_big_dem_donor.html

 ^ | 5-25-11 | Thomas Lifson





Haim Saban, a billionaire Israeli-American donor to the Democrats has announced he won't be donating to President Obama's re-election effort. Michelle Caruso-Cabrera of CNBC reports:

The most prominent Israeli-American business leader in the United States, Haim Saban, says President Obama needs to do more to show his support of Israel in light of the President's comments last week suggesting Israel needs to return to its pre-1967 borders to achieve peace with the Palestinians.

In an exclusive interview with CNBC, Saban, one of the biggest individual supporters to the Democratic Party and chairman of Saban Capital Group, said Obama needs to visit Israel as he has done with other countries in the Middle East.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #140 on: May 26, 2011, 01:54:03 PM »
Thursday, May. 26, 2011
Obamaworld 2012
By Michael Scherer





As big as a football field and nearly as empty, Barack Obama's re-election headquarters looks like a start-up gone wrong. Wires sprout like weeds from the carpeting, legions of bookshelves stand empty, and the swing-state maps hastily pinned to the wall are freebies from the AAA auto club down the street. In one room that could fit hundreds of people, just a few dozen sit at long desks. Most don't look old enough to buy a beer.


But if you want to find out why the President has set up shop in a Chicago skyscraper 18 months before Election Day, you need only peek into the office of Jeremy Bird, 32, the campaign's field director, at the far end of the room. He pulls a name from a database on his laptop, picks up his phone and dials in the hope of reminding one more person of the 2008 magic. "I just wanted to call, and first I wanted to thank you," Bird says when a volunteer from Obama's first presidential campaign answers in North Carolina. The computer screen notes that this guy hasn't done much in recent years, so Bird asks for his thoughts about 2012. "You are listed as a superstar 2008 volunteer," Bird continues. "What do we need to do to get you back involved?" (See pictures of an artist's view of the 2008 presidential campaign.)

In Obamaworld parlance, this is a "one-on-one," a cold call that aides hope will form the foundation for next year's re-election effort. This summer, the Obama campaign expects to arrange hundreds of thousands of these individual contacts, over the phone or in person, with just about everyone who gave his or her time back when Obama was an upstart outsider three years ago. To accomplish the massive task, the campaign is launching a replay of a program started in 2008 called Summer Organizers, in which more than 1,500 volunteers have committed to work 20- or 40-hour weeks through the summer. In the first week of June, the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee will hold 42 two-day training sessions in 40 states.

The goal is to reactivate old donors, door knockers and phone bankers with individual attention. "It definitely differs from past campaigns, because usually they will just call people and say, Can you come in and do phone calls?" says Bird, who, like other senior staff, has been making calls himself. "We are taking the time now so that these folks know: You are not just a cog in the wheel. You're a volunteer we respect and admire." (See the top 10 Obama backlash moments.)

The campaign's larger strategy is to capitalize on its 2011 head start. Obama is an incumbent with no primary challenger, while Republicans are still fretting about when and whether to get into the race. No one in Chicago expects a cakewalk in 2012, not after two years of political battering. But they also know an opportunity when they see one. "I can't tell you what a gift, if we use it properly, this year is," says David Plouffe, Obama's 2008 campaign manager. "If we don't, shame on us."

A New Political Landscape

From the inside, Obama 2012 looks and feels much as Obama 2008 did, with a familiar cast of characters in similar roles. In fact, all of the people who have been hired so far into the inner circle have been there before. Jim Messina, who served as the '08 campaign's chief of staff before a turn at the White House, is campaign manager. David Axelrod, the message guru, will reprise his role. After fizzled talks about a high-profile job with Facebook, senior White House aide Robert Gibbs is expected back as well. The field leadership, led by Bird and Mitch Stewart, Obama's 2008 Iowa organizer, remains unchanged. At the White House, a coterie of old campaign hands, including Plouffe, Stephanie Cutter and Dan Pfeiffer, keep in close touch with Chicago. President Obama, meanwhile, plays a chairman-of-the-board role, receiving regular progress briefings and speaking intermittently with Messina and Axelrod. (See who's who in Barack Obama's White House.)

But Obama 2012 opens its doors on a landscape that barely resembles that of the good old days. The campaign that made "Change you can believe in" a national slogan must now present a more complicated, and less emotionally stirring, case for continuity. "It was a fundamentally different position as a challenger, though the vision remains fundamentally the same," says Axelrod. "Our mission is to tell that story about where we are going and to make sure people understand that there is a consistent thread here and that they are in the center of all of this." That message, framed as "Winning the future" by the White House, will likely revisit 2008 themes about rebuilding the American Dream and restoring the American economy for the middle class.

Axelrod and company hope to recapture the energy of 2008, when Obama's organizing vision stirred the Democratic base and people who had never cared about politics found themselves inviting strangers into their homes to organize precinct walks. But it will be harder this time. There's no George W. Bush to kick around anymore. The Great Recession drove the unemployment rate above 10%, and the 2009 fight over health care swung the enthusiasm pendulum to the Republicans, making the Tea Party the nation's most talked-about people-powered movement. Many of the folks who turned the 2008 Obama dream into a reality — young voters, minorities and volunteers — haven't been heard from in recent years.

Can Obama Change the Game Again?

Some on the left have argued that the President dropped the ball by failing to keep his network of supporters engaged and by following his transformational campaign with a transactional governing style. "Fighting to make something happen is different than sitting back and trying to mediate something," says Marshall Ganz, a supporter turned critic of Obama, who teaches at Harvard. "People can't organize around that."

That critique gets a rise out of Obama's senior staff. "Those are the types of things that people with lifetime tenure like to say," remarks Axelrod. "What we have tried to do is effect change in the real world, in a difficult environment." Still, Obama's inner circle understands that the grass roots need rejuvenating. "Everything in 2008 was in service of the hand on the door knocker," says Joe Rospars, who will reprise his 2008 role as the campaign's top digital strategist. "That's the one thing that will be exactly the same." (See the 10 elections that changed America.)

Obama's senior staff has hatched a plan to start anew, urging the President's supporters to look beyond the grind of the past two years and toward the simpler choice of the next election. Obama strategists want to force the question early. When the Obama 2012 website went live on April 4, it asked a simple question: "Are you in?" The accompanying YouTube video, which was e-mailed to supporters, focused on field volunteers knocking on doors and working phones, just like in the old days. "You can't be half in," explains one Obama team member.

Playing One on One

To further engage the troops, Obama's aides came up with the one-on-one-conversation strategy, letting disillusioned or just disconnected former volunteers vent concerns and renew old passions. "We have the great luxury of spending a huge amount of time ensuring that we can have a very personal conversation with supporters in a way that alleviates any concern about enthusiasm in the long run," says Gibbs. "It's an extraordinary advantage."

The Chicago plan will play out in places like the Denver suburb of Arvada with volunteers like Suzan Rickert, a recently retired health care worker. For more than 25 years, Rickert, 60, has been active with her local Democratic Party, and she has long been accustomed to caucus meetings with just four or five people in attendance, including her husband and her. But for a fleeting time, she says, something happened when Obama burst onto the scene. "In 2008 we had 80 people," she remembers. "I want them to come back." (See pictures of Obama's 2008 victory celebration in Chicago.)

A few weeks ago, she answered an online appeal for volunteers to donate 40 hours a week all summer working the phones and pavement for the President. She decided to put off her plan of starting a small business, after being assured that she would not be the only person over the age of 25 on the job. Her training has yet to begin, but she has already started meeting with former volunteers, including a gay couple and a pastor, at the local Starbucks or Panera Bread. "Once you get people talking, they go and go," she says. Her sessions tend to last an hour, and the results of the conversation are entered into the Democratic National Committee's VoteBuilder master database.

The new volunteers will be matched up with the existing network of Organizing for America volunteers and staff that the DNC has nurtured for the past three years. "No other President going into a re-election effort has ever had a grass-roots network that we have in these states," says Stewart, 35, now battleground-states director.

The campaign, along with the DNC, has also been testing new strategies and technologies, like iPads that can play videos for voters during neighborhood canvasses or mobile applications for reporting data about voter contacts and responses. For each swing state, number crunchers have developed individually tailored recipes, with mixes of voter registration, base mobilization and persuasion, that will be required to win. And they can mine a Facebook community of nearly 21 million supporters, plus 8 million Twitter followers. "Obviously the technology is different" than it was in 2008, adds Plouffe. "The data is going to be much richer this time." (See "In a Relationship or Just Friends? Facebook Cozies Up to Obama and Congress.")

Of course, a great field organization alone is never enough to win a campaign. Obama will still need to hone a winning message and weather a recalcitrant economy. Axelrod likes to compare the field organization to the field-goal unit on a football team. "You have to get close enough to the goalpost for them to make a difference," he says. But right now, with Republicans many months from having a nominee of their own, organizing is one thing Obama's advisers can control. And if they can control it, they intend to master it. Again.

See TIME's 2008 Person of the Year: Barack Obama.

See scenes from a midterm-elections road trip.

Click to PrintFind this article at:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,2074069,00.html



________________________ ________________________ _________






Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #141 on: May 26, 2011, 02:20:29 PM »
Obama dumped by big Dem donor
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/05/obama_dumped_by_big_dem_donor.html

 ^ | 5-25-11 | Thomas Lifson





Haim Saban, a billionaire Israeli-American donor to the Democrats has announced he won't be donating to President Obama's re-election effort. Michelle Caruso-Cabrera of CNBC reports:

The most prominent Israeli-American business leader in the United States, Haim Saban, says President Obama needs to do more to show his support of Israel in light of the President's comments last week suggesting Israel needs to return to its pre-1967 borders to achieve peace with the Palestinians.

In an exclusive interview with CNBC, Saban, one of the biggest individual supporters to the Democratic Party and chairman of Saban Capital Group, said Obama needs to visit Israel as he has done with other countries in the Middle East.


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...



The MSM isn't all over this?  Shocking.   ::)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #142 on: May 31, 2011, 02:26:43 PM »
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT
Victor Davis Hanson
May 31, 2011 4:00 A.M.




Reelecting Obama

Memo to GOP: Obama will campaign against Bush (again) and play the race card. Don’t let him get away with it.


We are beginning to see the contours of the upcoming 2012 reelection campaign of Barack Obama. Whether always officially sanctioned or not, Obama’s campaign will focus on three general themes: a) the 2008 meltdown of the economy on Bush’s watch; b) conservative heartlessness in gutting cherished entitlement programs; and c) racial bias behind any criticism of Barack Obama.

By any standard, the economy has remained mostly dismal for well over two years. Deficits, joblessness, fuel prices, average GDP growth, and housing are far worse than the average during the eight years of Bush’s presidency. Unemployment during almost all of President Obama’s tenure has exceeded 9 percent, despite promises that, because of the stimulus, it would not exceed 8 percent. Gas still averages almost $4 a gallon nationwide, amid a landscape of continual administration resistance to new domestic exploration and leasing. Record numbers of Americans now draw food stamps and unemployment insurance; to suggest that these programs are plagued by abuse and fraud, or that, if they are too easily available, they can discourage initiative, is heresy. Some of the largest states — California, Illinois, New York — are nearly fiscally insolvent. We’ve borrowed $5 trillion since 2009 to “stimulate” the economy — and seen little upsurge in economic growth, but a lot of evidence of a raging inflation to come on the heels of soaring gas and food prices.

Massive debt, record new deficits, high rates of joblessness, out-of-control prices for essentials like fuel and food — a combination like that usually dooms a president’s reelection bid. Similarly weak economies in 1980 and 1992 derailed incumbents Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush.

However, Team Obama will make the argument that at least there has not been another Wall Street panic as during September 2008 under Bush, with the general uncertainty that followed. “Bush did it” is now too ironic a charge to evoke any more in matters of foreign policy, given that President Obama has now accepted all the Bush anti-terrorism protocols and wars — and gone well beyond them by joining a third conflict in Libya and quintupling the number of Predator-drone targeted assassinations.

But on the economic front, the “inherited mess” will have to do in the attempt to convince us that the present hard times are still George Bush’s while the signs of a weak recovery are all Barack Obama’s. Similarly, Herbert Hoover was still evoked for nearly a half-century any time FDR, Truman, or LBJ hit a rough patch. And if you did not know about the courageous economic decisions Barack Obama has made on our behalf on the domestic front, you will now, after the heroic killing of bin Laden. In the words of Joe Biden, it was “the boldest undertaking any president has undertaken on a single event in modern history” — an “undertaking” “undertaken” greater than the decision to drop the bomb on Hiroshima, to stop North Korea from obliterating the south, to confront the Soviet Union over its missiles in Cuba, to send troops to recover Kuwait, or to conduct the surge in Iraq?

Obama’s landmark decision, in fact, explains why we can now at last appreciate his (or Joe Biden’s) genius and courage in restoring the ruined Bush economy, or so Biden further assures us: “The American people now . . . have a crystal-clear picture of how strong and decisive this president is. And that’s the last piece of the puzzle that had to be put in place for this great man. People are now beginning to take a second look at those incredibly difficult but absolutely necessary decisions the president had to make the day we walked into the West Wing.”

Then there are those cruel congressional opponents who for some reason believe that the $5 trillion in additional borrowing since January 2009 was a bit over the top. Greed, selfishness, and a lack of compassion — not an aging population, vastly expanded benefits, and soaring health-care costs — are responsible for the difficulties facing both Social Security and Medicare. Remedies abound, but none have been adopted by Team Obama. Before 2012 do not expect that the retirement age will be hiked. Benefits will not be trimmed or some entitlements privatized to encourage competition and cost-cutting — despite the real urgency for reform, since we are already running a $1.6 trillion annual budget deficit, and millions of baby-boomers are on the verge of retirement, a generation not known for either its reticence or its willingness to do without.

If reelected, President Obama will probably be forced to do something about entitlements, but that certain something will for now remain unspoken, and he instead will attack any proposals to change Social Security with the same gusto with which he once trashed the Iraq War and Guantanamo. Already, supportive commercials are airing with a Paul Ryan look-alike shoving a grandmother out of her wheelchair over a cliff. Other hit ads portray the elderly with walkers forced to mow lawns to raise money for their benefits. Ads like that will appear soft in comparison to what’s coming in the next 18 months.

Already, almost weekly one columnist or another insists that to criticize Barack Obama is to display racial bias. A reckless Donald Trump going after Obama’s birth certificate is emblematic of endemic racism; in contrast, unhinged nuts who claimed Sarah Palin never delivered her own child are perhaps a bit too zealous in a noble cause. House Assistant Minority Leader James Clyburn (D., S.C.) summarized the racialist strategy best, when he explicitly charged that opposition to Obama’s reelection hinges on racism: “The fact of the matter is, the president’s problems are in large measure because of his skin color.”

Clyburn’s demagoguery is a sort of strategic racial preemption: Prep the campaign in such a way that no one dares to talk of the president’s shortcomings for fear of being called a bigot — just as, in 2008, legitimate questions about the racist Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his intimate connection with Barack Obama were acknowledged to be off limits by a terrified McCain campaign. Yet there is no evidence that mainstream criticism of Barack Obama is racial or has in any way exceeded that shown George W. Bush or Sarah Palin. I will concede widespread racism and irrational hatred against the president when Alfred A. Knopf publishes a sick anti-Obama screed that exceeds Nicholson Baker’s Checkpoint; or when we see something comparable to the deplorable editorial that the Guardian published by Charlie Brooker, which ended with the question, “John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. — where are you now that we need you?”; or to Jonathan Chait’s crazy “Mad about You: The Case for Bush Hatred” New Republic article.

In fact, the most racially condescending assessment of the president has come from Cornel West, professor of African-American studies at Princeton, who damned Obama as “a black mascot of Wall Street oligarchs and a black puppet of corporate plutocrats.” West went on more explicitly, couching his criticism of Obama in anti-Semitic, anti-white terms: “I think he does have a predilection much more toward upper-class white brothers and Jewish brothers and a certain distance from free black men who will tell him the truth about himself.”

The president himself — well after the beer summit, Eric Holder’s rants about “cowards” and “my people,” the racist inanities of Van Jones, the “wise Latina,” and all the rest — in ethnically divisive fashion urged Latinos to punish their conservative enemies, and joked that his opponents wanted alligators and moats to stop Mexican nationals from crossing the border.

So will this tripartite strategy work? Only if the president’s opponents allow themselves to be caricatured as greedy Wall Street profiteers who want to punish the elderly and are prejudiced against blacks. And if they can’t answer back defiantly to that nonsense, then they really do deserve to lose.

— NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, the editor of Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome, and the author of The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern.
 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #143 on: June 01, 2011, 06:44:26 PM »
Obama/DNC top fund-raisers told to collect $60 million by end of June
By Lynn Sweet on June 1, 2011 2:29 PM | No Comments

WASHINGTON--President Obama's top fund-raisers, meeting in Chicago on Wednesday were asked by Obama campaign manager Jim Messina to raise $60 million for the Obama 2012 re-elect and the Democratic Party by the end of June, I've been told.

The $60 million June 30 second quarter goal--part of a power point presentation to members of the Obama 2012/Democratic National Committee National Finance Committee--is equal to the amount raised during the comparable time by the 2004 Bush/Cheney campaign and the Republican National Committee.

Whatever the comparison, members of the NFC--Obama's major bundlers--people who use their extensive personal networks to convince others to make campaign donations--were huddling at the Hyatt Regency on Wacker Dr. to map strategy to raise what Messina has said was "north of $750 million" for the 2012 re-election campaign.

Obama and First Lady Michelle, I've learned, will hit the fund-raising trail again this month in a quest to raise big money early on for the Obama 2012 re-elect and the DNC.

Mrs. Obama headlines fundraisers in California--Pasadena and the Bay Area on June 13.

Obama has fund-raisers June 13 in Miami; June 20 in Washington aimed at Jewish donors, June 23 in New York City for gay and lesbian contributors and June 30 in Philadelphia.

Besides Messina, others briefing the NFC include Deputy Campaign Manager Julianna Smoot; Rufus Gifford, the Obama 2012 Finance Director and the NFC 2012 chair Matthew Barzun, Obama's former ambassador to Sweden.

In April Messina told me, "We'll raise enough funds to compete and win, and that will take a significant amount given the vast amounts GOP-allied groups are already raising. But this pie in the sky speculation about a billion dollars is baseless."

Mayor Emanuel--who has the golden touch when it comes to fund-raising for himself or others--met with the NFC on Tuesday.

Categories: Fund raising



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #144 on: June 02, 2011, 09:31:16 AM »

Nile Gardiner is a Washington-based foreign affairs analyst and political commentator. He appears frequently on American and British television and radio, including Fox News Channel, CNN, BBC, Sky News, and NPR. Why Barack Obama may be heading for electoral disaster in 2012

By Nile Gardiner World Last updated: June 2nd, 2011



________________________ ________________________ ____________________


Grinning on the outside only?

On a recent visit to London I was struck by how much faith many British politicians, journalists and political advisers have in Barack Obama being re-elected in 2012. In the aftermath of the hugely successful Special Forces operation that took out Osama Bin Laden and a modest spike in the polls for the president, the conventional wisdom among political elites in Britain is overwhelmingly that Obama will win another four years in the Oval Office. Add to this a widespread perception of continuing disarray in the Republican race, as well as a State Visit to London that had the chattering classes worshipping at the feet of the US president, and you can easily see why Obama’s prospects look a lot rosier from across the Atlantic.

But back in the United States, the reality looks a lot different. Many political leaders in Britain fail to understand the degree to which the American people are deeply unhappy with their president’s poor handling of the economy. Nor have they grasped the epic scale of the defeat suffered by the president in the November mid-terms, and the emphatic rejection by a clear majority of Americans of the Big Government Obama agenda.

Just seven months ago, the United States was swept by a conservative revolution that fundamentally transformed the political landscape on Capitol Hill, and gravely weakened the ability of the president to pass legislation. This revolution is not in retreat but gaining ground, led by charismatic figures such as Paul Ryan, the Reaganite chairman of the House Budget Committee, entrusted with reining in out of control government spending. And as a Gallup poll showed, America is unquestionably a conservative country ideologically, but one that is ironically led by the most left-wing president in the nation’s history.

Ultimately, the 2012 presidential election will be decided by the state of the economy, and new data released this week makes grim reading for the White House. In fact you cannot watch a US financial news network at the moment, from Bloomberg to CNBC to Fox Business, without a great deal of pessimism about the dire condition of the world’s biggest economy. 66 percent of Americans now worry the federal government will run out of money in the face of towering public debts.

To say this has been an extremely bad week for the Obama administration on the economic front would be a serious understatement. As The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday, home prices in the United States have sunk to their lowest levels since 2002, falling 4.2 percent in the first quarter of 2011. At the same time, employment growth is stalling, with only 38,000 Americans added to the workforce in May, the smallest increase since September. This compares with 179,000 jobs added in April. There has also been a steep slowdown in the manufacturing sector, and a downturn in the stock market on the back of weak economic news.

Bill Clinton’s labour secretary Robert Reich summed up the grim mood in a hard-hitting op-ed in The Financial Times, which took aim at both the administration and Congress:

The US economy was supposed to be in bloom by late spring, but it is hardly growing at all. Expectations for second-quarter growth are not much better than the measly 1.8 per cent annualised rate of the first quarter. That is not nearly fast enough to reduce America’s ferociously high level of unemployment… Meanwhile, housing prices continue to fall. They are now 33 per cent below their 2006 peak. That is a bigger drop than recorded in the Great Depression. Homes are the largest single asset of the American middle class, so as housing prices drop many Americans feel poorer. All of this is contributing to a general gloominess. Not surprisingly, consumer confidence is also down.

Unsurprisingly, the polls are again looking problematic for the president. The latest Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll shows just 25 percent of Americans strongly approving of Obama’s performance, with 36 percent strongly disapproving, for a Presidential Approval Index rating of minus 11 points. In a projected match up between Obama and a Republican opponent, the president now trails by two points according to Rasmussen – 43 to 45.  The RealClear Politics poll of polls shows just over a third of Americans (34.5 percent) agreeing that the country is heading in the right direction, with nearly three fifths (56.8 percent) believing it is heading down the wrong track. That negative figure rises to a staggering 66 percent of likely voters in a new Rasmussen survey, including 41 percent of Democrats.

There is no feel good factor in America at the moment. But there is a great deal of uncertainty, nervousness, even fear over the future of the world’s only superpower. This is hardly a solid foundation for a presidential victory for the incumbent. Even though we don’t know yet who he will be up against, Barack Obama could well go into 2012 as the underdog rather than the favourite he is frequently portrayed as. On balance we’re likely to see a very close race 17 months from now. But there is also the distinct possibility of an electoral rout of the president if the economy goes further south. “Hope and change” might have played well in 2008, but it is a message that will likely ring hollow in November 2012, with an American public that is deeply disillusioned with the direction Obama is taking the country.

Tags: 2012 election, Barack Obama, Gallup Poll, paul ryan, Rasmussen Poll, RealClearPolitics, Robert Reich, Ronald Reagan, US economy


MM2K

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1398
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #145 on: June 03, 2011, 10:48:16 AM »
Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #146 on: June 03, 2011, 11:08:00 AM »

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #147 on: June 03, 2011, 03:26:23 PM »
Dow, S&P fall for fifth-straight week
By Ken Sweet, contributing writer June 3, 2011: 4:15 PM ET
U.S. stock market

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- U.S. stocks fell sharply on Friday, with the Dow and S&P falling for the fifth-straight week, as investors digested a disappointing May jobs report.

At the preliminary close, the Dow Jones industrial average (INDU) lost 98 points, or 0.8%, to end the week at 12,151. The Dow is on its longest losing streak since July 2004.

The S&P 500 (SPX) lost 13 points, or 1%, to 1,300; and the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) shed 41 points, or 1.5%, to 2,733.

Friday's selling was broad, with 28 out of 30 Dow components ending the session lower. Economy-sensitive companies such as General Electric (GE, Fortune 500), Alcoa (AA, Fortune 500) and DuPont (DD, Fortune 500) were among the biggest drags.

Technology shares were also taking a hit in late-afternoon trading, with Research in Motion (RIMM) leading the declines on the Nasdaq along with by Nvidia (NVDA) and Amazon.com (AMZN, Fortune 500).

Investors also flocked to the safety of U.S. Treasuries, sending the yield on the 10-year note back under 3% for the third day in a row.

"I'm not giving up hope, but clearly the strength of the economic recovery is in question," said Rob Lutts, chief investment officer with Cabot Money Management.

Over the past few months, investors have been faced with increasing signs that the economic recovery is stalling. Stocks had their worst monthly performance in May since August 2010.

The government's May jobs report out on Friday only added to those worries.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/03/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63977
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #148 on: June 04, 2011, 09:34:41 PM »
Barack Obama Needs More Jobs To Keep His Job
BEN FELLER   06/ 4/11

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama cannot escape one giant vulnerability as he bids to keep his job: Millions of voters still don't have one.

Suddenly, the snapshot of the American economy is depressing again.

Job creation is down. So is consumer confidence. And homes sales, auto sales, construction spending, manufacturing expansion.

The brutal month of May was a reminder of the economy's fragility and the risks for an incumbent president.

Nothing that Obama oversees, not even a success as dramatic as finding and killing Osama bin Laden, will matter as much as his handling of the economy. It is the dominant driver of voter behavior. People hold their president accountable if they can't find work in the richest country in the world.

The weakening recovery is testing the entire foundation of Obama's optimistic economic message, that the nation is getting stronger all the time. As much as the White House says it never dwells on any single jobs report, and Obama never even mentioned the troubling one released Friday, the stakes get higher by the month.

A finally forming field of Republican presidential competitors is maneuvering into the space for the public's attention with this message: Obama has failed.

Election Day 2012 is 17 months away, and Obama's campaign knows incremental job growth won't do. The unemployment rate is 9.1 percent. If it stays anywhere near there, Obama will face re-election with a higher jobless rate than any other post-war president.

In his favor, Obama still has the loudest voice to sell his message that the longer term trends, including job growth every month, are good.

Nearly halfway through a year dominated by foreign events mostly outside his control, he plans to build his next few months around economic events.

So what comes next will be a summer when both sides select the economic facts that best suit their case. It will play against a backdrop of trying to cut a massive deficit while letting the nation borrow more so it doesn't default.

As Obama pushes his economic agenda, his re-election chances bank on more than job growth. They also depend on how well he can remind people that he inherited a recession and that compared with the early days of 2009, the country is in a better place.

"This economy took a big hit," Obama said Friday in Ohio, a pivotal 2012 state. "You know, it's just like if you had a bad illness, if you got hit by a truck, it's going to take a while for you to mend. And that's what's happened to our economy. It's taking a while to mend."

Is progress enough to convince people that he deserves a second term?

If so, he can't afford many setbacks like the new jobs report. Employers in May added just 54,000 jobs, the fewest in eight months. Almost 14 million people are jobless. Analysts suggested the economy could improve this year, but the recovery could be weak for months.

"There are always going to be bumps on the road to recovery," Obama said.

The Republicans hoping to unseat him pounced.

_Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney: "President Obama has failed to pull us out of this economic downturn.

_Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty: "Obama's failure to address the tough challenges" is clear.

_Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich: "The administration's policies are failing."

Obama's political tendency is to take the longer view. An Associated Press-GfK poll less than a month ago, for example, showed rising public optimism about the economy and his stewardship.

The election won't be just a referendum on Obama and the unemployment rate. It also will offer a choice between his economic ideas and his opponent's. Still, just as change worked for him last time, it can be used against him in 2012.

Even 8 percent unemployment, a goal once promoted by the administration, is hard to see now.

Presidents Jimmy Carter, Reagan and George H.W. Bush all faced unemployment rates higher than 7.5 percent in the final months of their re-election campaigns. Reagan won, and an important factor for him was that the jobless rate was declining at the time. Carter and Bush lost.

Obama, for now, has no reason to engage the politicians trying to win his job. He instead presents himself as the workers' champion who risked his own capital and their money in a successful bid to help Chrysler and General Motors survive and return to profitability.

"I'll tell you what. I'm going to keep betting on you," Obama told workers at a Chrysler plant in Toledo, Ohio.

And hope they'll do the same for him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/04/barack-obama-jobs_n_871375.html

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39900
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Official Barack Obama Re-Election Thread
« Reply #149 on: June 06, 2011, 11:24:59 AM »
Carville: 2012 could be ‘very rough’ for Obama, says civil unrest ‘imminently possible’
daily caller ^ | 6/6/11 | jeff poor





Who ever thought the saying, “It’s the economy stupid” from James Carville in 1992 would become a staple in presidential elections 20 years later?

That expression made its way into the campaign in 2008 and according to Carville it could be theme of the 2012 campaign as well as President Barack Obama seeks reelection. In an appearance Monday’s “Imus in the Morning” on the Fox Business Network, the former Clinton adviser said if improvements weren’t made in gains in the unemployment picture based on the May jobs number, it could be a rough road for the president.

“[L]ook, I don’t think anybody — if 54,000 new jobs is the new standard, it’s going to be a very, very rough 2012 for President Obama,” Carville said. “But three-month average was 160,000. If that is the case, then he will do OK. I can’t tell you what will happen. But yes, if this, if this last jobs number is an indication of future job numbers, it’s going to be very, very rough.”

Carville cited a 2009 book by Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff called “This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly.” According to the book, the current economic situation, as with similar crises of this magnitude, take time to work themselves out and there’s little Obama may be able to do.


(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...



________________________ ____________________