The Case for Obama Stepping Down

[Owlet]

Hold the pepperspray! I'm not advocating this: just reporting it.

"When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor—one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president's administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy."

full story here

[Fumesucker]

1. Clinton?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[dipsydoodle]

8. OWS is one thing

WOS is another.

[Danse]

2. Obama has been a miserable failure

...Obviously. Unless you're a banker or a warlord. Obama is essentially Dubya with competent speaking skills. But advocating Clinton as a replacement is the height of idiocy.

[Itchinjim]

9. 19....

[polmaven]

12. huh??

[polmaven]

11. There is something really weird happening

with these internets tubes!! I came to Democratic Underground, and somehow, apparently ended up in Freeperville!!!

"a miserable failure"??????? In your world, maybe....Not in the real world, however.

[Owlet]

17. Did you read the disclaimer?

Hold the pepperspray! I'm not advocating this: just reporting it.

Not my viewpoint - that of a couple of Wall Street hacks. Sheesh.

[polmaven]

20. Well, sheesh!

I was not responding to your OP! I was responding to post #2, declaring President Obama to be a "miserable failure".

[stillrockin]

3. The problem is that both parties have been co-opted.

Changing pawns won't do anything but perhaps provide an illusion of change--kinda like when Obama ran in 2008. They've all got the same masters.

[markpkessinger]

4. Did anyone bother to ask her if she was interested?

She has been pretty emphatic about not seeking higher office again.

[izquierdista]

5. Obvious?

More like oblivious. Talk about someone who has stomped and trampled over the 99% on her climb to join the 1%......

[Scuba]

6. LBJ didn't run because he was dying of cancer. It is a sad state....

....however, when citizens don't think one can run for office and govern effectively at the same time. And indeed, those two things are becoming mutually exclusive.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. I'd like to see an FDR Democrat rather than Clinton

Her track record on the 99% is awful, ranging from absurd wars to the banker-written bankruptcy bill.

[Ineeda]

10. Secretary Clinton is #2 on the hate list,

after President Obama and before Speaker Pelosi. Actually, ALL Democrats are hated by the rethugs, so it wouldn't really matter (to them) who would be the Dem candidate.

[MarianJack]

13. Given his record of positions and statements for the last 20 years,...

...Democrats really need to listen to a fox news dem like pat caddell. He certainly has our best interests in mind. :sarcasm:

PEACE!

[greenman3610]

14. of course. His skin color makes him unacceptable to racists, so he should step down

what a great idea.

[frazzled]

15. Patrick Caddell... really??!! The Fox News (faux) Democrat?

The one who thinks environmentalism is "a conspiracy to basically deconstruct capitalism?" Who denounced Democrats for voting against reinstating Terri Schiavo's feeding tube? Who basically hates everything the Democratic party stands for (everything good they stand for, that is).

You've got to be kidding posting this crap. And no, you're not just "reporting" it. Because this is an op-ed piece, not reporting facts. By posting it you are clearly supporting its premise. Pfeh.

[Owlet]

18. Oh, Bullshit

He was being sarcastic s a r c a s t i c - look it up - about Pat Cadell. You evidently don't read very well, as you missed that and my disclaimer:
Hold the pepperspray! I'm not advocating this: just reporting it. in the OP. Or has DU become so closed-minded that the purveyor of any information that doesn't jibe with the party line is automatically labeled a troll, a RWer, or worse. Pfeh yerself.

[frazzled]

19. I commented on the "reporting" it aspect

And I found it lacking in depth of commentary.

Note that another poster who started a thread on this same op-ed prefaced it with "How these two bottom-feeding hacks can show their face in public is beyond me... Seriously, just try to read this tripe and keep from either (puke) ing or (barf) ing." Not, "just reporting."

And by the way, I read just fine. It's my job.

[MineralMan]

16. Oh, bother!

Poor try.