He always sucked


Column: The Sloppy Incumbent
The once-invincible Obama campaign team has become mistake-prone

The sound and fury of the Republican primary has distracted political observers from one of the most interesting political developments of the cycle thus far: President Obama’s reelection campaign is a pallid imitation of his 2008 juggernaut.

The merits and importance of that campaign have been exaggerated, of course. Show me a candidate from the out-party running in an environment in which the incumbent averages 29 percent approval in the run-up to the election, in which the economy is in a recession and credit crisis, in which U.S. troops are deployed overseas in two unpopular wars, and I’ll show you a winner. The fact that Obama’s general election opponent chose to ignore his greatest vulnerability only eased his passage to the White House. The favorable political landscape and the media’s hosannas obscured weaknesses—Obama’s remoteness, his dependence on scripts, his partisanship, and his inflated sense of his powers of persuasion—that would harm him after the Inauguration.

Obama for America 2008 may not have been, as the president put it on Election Night, the “best political campaign, I think, in the history of America.” Nor was it, as a former editor of the New Republic once wrote, “the political equivalent of crossing a Lamborghini with a Hummer.” But Obama’s first presidential run was formidable in at least this aspect: The then-senator and his top lieutenants were careful in projecting a “good-government,” squeaky-clean halo over his candidacy. Obama pledged to operate within the system of public financing. No lobbyists were allowed to donate to the campaign. No lobbyist, it was said, would be allowed to serve in an Obama administration. Such an administration, moreover, would be committed to “creating an unprecedented level of openness in government.”

Such promises, more than any specific policies, were crucial to the burgeoning conceit that Obama’s candidacy was “potentially transformational.” That Obama held to a supposedly higher standard than Hillary Clinton or John McCain added to his “cool” factor and helped him excite young voters. But the pledges lasted only as long as they were politically useful. As soon as the Obama campaign realized that it could raise more money outside than inside the public system, it revealed how empty its rhetoric had been. Obama, an outspoken supporter of campaign finance reform, became the first candidate in the post-Watergate era to reject the public financing system.

The Republicans working against Obama’s candidacy in 2008 were both frustrated and impressed by his campaign’s thoroughness in quashing potential scandals. Try as they might, Republican researchers four years ago could not uncover any major lapses in the Obama campaign’s vetting procedures for donors and bundlers. Sure, the Republicans uncovered minor mistakes here and there, but the material was small fry. Chicago was fastidious. And the money came flowing in: $750 million, the most money raised by any candidate for office in American history.

The turnabout on public financing, meanwhile, set the pattern for future reversals. First comes the flowery profession of left-wing ideals. Then the grubby realities set in and Obama and his team backtrack on earlier pledges. The switch causes a brief news sensation in which partisan Democrats declare that Obama was forced into abandoning his position because of Republican perfidy. The media herd nods its collective head and the breach is quickly forgotten.


One of the Common Obama Myths is the “He Ran a Great Campaign” meme. The truth is he always sucked.

How is this possible? He won, didn’t he? He must of done something right.

Obama had a huge money advantage with millions of dollars in donations coming from Wall Street and other 1%ers. He was the media darling. He had the secret support of the Democrat establishment. Despite all of that he nearly lost in both the primary and the general elections.

Obama raked in $99 million during 2007. That is more than all the other Democratic candidates except Hillary were able to raise combined. In 2008 he raised (and spent) $650 million. With that kind of money you can hire people who can sell ice to Eskimos.

The media refused to investigate Obama’s background. When negative information came out anyway the media tried to ignore it. Meanwhile they kept insisting that Obama was the inevitable nominee and that Hillary had no chance of winning.

Despite the advantages of money and media support, Obama failed to beat Hillary. When the primaries were over she had a slight lead in votes and they were in a virtual tie for pledged delegates. So the Democratic establishment declared him the winner anyway.

Obama was and is a crappy candidate. He is pissy, rude and fails to connect to ordinary people. He is a lousy debater and commits numerous gaffes, especially when he speaks without a teleprompter. He has no core beliefs except himself.

The Obama we see today in the Oval Office is the same Obama we saw on the campaign trail four years ago. Those of us that were not wearing Koolaid goggles could see back then he is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.



This entry was posted in Barack Obama and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to He always sucked

  1. DeniseVB says:

    I have a gut feeling he’s still going to win re-election. So much worse was written about GWB + starting two wars, I thought for sure it was an easy win in 2004.

    Then we ran John Kerry against him…….

    • myiq2xu says:

      The next four years are gonna suck no matter who wins.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Here’s why he’ll win: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/200-oil-coming-central-banks-go-ctrlp-happy

      Having drained Wall Street of the money and will to fund him again, and with the electorate cluing into the fact that this is what happened in 2008, they’ve turned to foreign markets to work their econ magic on, thus giving the appearance of a recovery.

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        Not the oil part, ftr, the QE money-printing monster part.

        • Three Wickets says:

          Sounds right. QE3 is already underway, around $500 billion in easing from the European Central Bank which the US Federal Reserve is supporting with dollar swaps. The new liquidity is pumping up commodity prices again. It’s the same thing the Fed did in 2009-2010 in the US, now extending to Europe. Central bank repos are making up for severe contractions in shadow banking money markets. Whether this is pure dollar debasement is still an open question. Printing and releveraging is not necessarily the same thing when it comes to money aggregates.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Maybe not, but the result is the same. An unrecovery that just looks like a recovery. Kick that can, Obama!

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Huh. I just realized your username can be roughly translated to: For the win! Certainly it implies excellence and success. Totally enjoy your comments, btw. Do you have a blog?

  2. driguana says:

    This is an awesome piece and absolutely right on….how so many people did not see through him is astounding to me…it’s like we passed through a momentary “twilight zone”. No matter, once his 2012 campaign of “viral lying” and mega media contributions come in (the ultimate douche bag Bill Maher already ponied up $1M), no one will defeat him in the up-coming election…unless they go toe-to-toe with him……Who can do that? Certainly none of the current candidates. Maybe Newt in debates but none of them are real leaders. The saddest aspect of all of this is that we need “leadership” in this country and around the world…..Obama is no leader….he himself said that he leads from behind….Do we even have one leader out there!!!!! We’re in a sad state in this country and I fear that the closer we get to the election, the closer we get to the real nefarious doings of Obama’s campaign….isn’t that really the hallmark of the 2008 run????

  3. Glenn McGahee says:

    As bad as Obama is, I’m thoroughly convinced the Republicans want no part of whats to come the next 4 years and definitely want to hang it around a Democrat’s neck. They’re not even trying.
    I agree that a Republican in office would open up great possibilities for a new and wonderful Democrat to win in 2016 but doubt that can happen if Obama governs through the next term. We’re screwed.

  4. DandyTiger says:

    Honk, honk! Nailed it.

    What really gets my goat is that we have a power mad republican in the white house destroying FDR programs faster than his ears can flap, and we have supposed progressives praising him while he does it merely because he uses a D label. I’m still stunned that so many people are so stupid.

    And the one thing that we desperately need, health care reform, is the only big thing he’s done, and he did it exactly the wrong way — it was written by and written for the health insurance companies.

    And here’s the real kicker. The one and only person in the universe that the republican party could pick that couldn’t possibly win, the one who is the foundation of obamacare, is the one the republican party is going to pick. Or I should say instead of “couldn’t possibly win”, who is so much exactly like Obama that it wouldn’t matter if he did win.

    Crony capitalism laid bare and corrupt party machines laid bare.

    • DandyTiger says:

      I think it’s safe to assume everything Obama is doing is in some way a payout to his backers. It’s the Chicago way.

    • Lulu says:

      It is all a scam. The contributors, bundlers and venture capitalists who contributed were all in on it. It is in my opinion it started as a green tech boondoggle that Obama preached to the creative class and similarly affected Democrats because it is cool and was to be his payback to get them to cough up big bucks. When the economy tanked they blew it up to include job stimulus to sound good to the unemployed yokels and to pressure the Republicans into going along with it. If timelines are made showing when these “bundlers” got invested in the companies it shows mostly during and right after the campaign and election. None of the companies were viable either because of bad technology, heavy debt, or ridiculous business plans. Most were meant to fail so the investors could pocket the loans or try a “pump” up of stock or an IPO and then the investor bundler walk away after the “dump”. And of course the SEC, DOE, and the DOJ would look the other way. Solyndra and Lightsquared are perfect examples only both were incompetent.

  5. HELENK says:

    it is not going to be easy for the down ticket democrats this election. If the town hall meetings are like this one from now until election.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/25/video-dem-rep-booed-by-constituents-over-hhs-mandate/

  6. foxyladi14 says:

    BO has no coat tails.none!!!! 😆

  7. HELENK says:

    during the last election, I just like most of you, read about Wright, and Ayers and saw how little backtrack knew about America. When I tried to discuss these things I was called racist and a few other choice names.
    i remember asking my boss can an new conductor do your job a general manager? His answer was no. I then asked why he thought that backtrack could do the job as president? No answer.
    color counted more than country during that election. If that makes me sound racist so be it. I think it is more racist to vote color over country.
    We read about how he stabbed people in the back Reszko’s apartment dwellers, the maytag workers, Alice Palmer.
    We read how many times he voted present, how other people’s bills were presented with his name on them. We read about his idea of redistributing the wealth of the country.

    WE KNEW WHAT HE WAS.
    people would not listen. I do not know if enough people have awakened this time around, but for the sake of the country I hope so.

    • leslie says:

      So, even if they wake up and listen, WHO are they (we) supposed to vote for? I didn’t vote for TehOne and I won’t this time. I can vote Green and most likely will (though here in IL that will be as meaningful as a vote for the GOP).
      But given the (presumptive) GOP choice, who does the average (former) koolaid drinker choose?
      I agree with some of the comments that the GOP doesn’t actually want to win this time. If they did, Jeb would be running – or Christie – or someone else who comes across as a conservative with cajones. But these guys????

    • leslie says:

      I’m sorry for the consecutive comments ……but my experience was similar t yours r/t the 2008 elections – name calling, marginalizing, ignoring logic, etc.
      And many of those voters remain loyal to the D after the name and others remain loyal to the color of TehOne’s skin. Some even think of Obamacare as improvement. Just wait until 2013 when the costs are dumped on us all.

  8. DeniseVB says:

    On the fundraising trail, the Obamas keep telling rich people to feel guilty about their good fortune and share their wealth. I’m so confused, is that before or after we buy our vacation homes ?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/realestate/some-tips-before-you-spring-for-that-vacation-rental-home/2012/02/20/gIQAfDBnTR_story.html?hpid=z5%3Futm_campaign%3Dwpapp&socialreader_check=0&denied=1

  9. myiq2xu says:

    I love this song:

  10. myiq2xu says:

    Rio Bravo is on AMC!

    The Duke, Dean, Ricky and Walter with a smokin’ hot Angie too.

  11. mothy67 says:

    Earlier today I was talking with a 20 year old man who is an adamant supporter of Occupy. We are related so I am denied the luxury of despising him. He is going to a state school and his parents are paying 100%. He was decrying that it is unfair that his parents have to work so hard to send him to school. I was not prepared for that in any way. Talked to lots of the punks and he was the first and only one to address the parents sacrifice. He did tell me he wants to commute as the environment is really negative. He says everyday he is bombarded with what is wrong.
    Christ he is 20. I realize its a time to be socially conscious but lighten up.
    So I thought of this

  12. myiq2xu says:

    Can you believe they wanted George C. Scott to play this role?

  13. HELENK says:

    backtrack did his damnest to get the muslim brotherhood to be in charge in Eqypt. Now what is his plan to stop this

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/world/middleeast/us-seeks-deal-for-americans-facing-charges-in-egypt.html?_r=1

    American hostages in Egypt, trial starts Sunday

  14. HELENK says:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/24/the-mystery-of-the-missing-igs/

    vacancies in the inspector general office. look at where they are

  15. myiq2xu says:

    This doofus never heard of internal hemorrhage:

  16. Almighty ABG says:

Comments are closed.