Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
4 posters
Page 1 of 1
Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Unless their name starts with Joe or Hillary, that is. For the rest, American Prospect writer Walter Shapiro thinks potential Democratic primary insurgent candidates should start making the case against President Obama now.
He explains in an article addressed to those insurgents:
If you wait until late 2015 to criticize part of the president’s record, your dissent will come across as craven rather than courageous. Think of Hillary Clinton’s awkwardly distancing of herself from the Iraq War in 2008, even though Democratic primary voters knew that she had voted for it in the Senate. Howard Dean rose from nowhere in mid-2003 because he was the only major Democrat running who had been unalterably opposed to the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. Sometimes in presidential politics, when matters more than whether and right from the start trumps being correct right now.
That’s why 2013 is a perfect time to express skepticism about portions of the Obama record. If you say something now with the right tone, it will be perceived as a sincere expression of deep conviction. The longer you wait, the more poll-tested and political your critiques of Obama will be regarded.
This does not mean attacking Obama from the right, he cautions. Rather it is involves pointing out the chasm between the president’s liberal rhetoric and reactionary policies. Shapiro cites a long list including: National Security Agency surveillance, targeting the press, drone strikes, Guantanamo, the sequester, campaign finance reform and the economy.
“[A]ny criticisms of Obama should be delivered in a sympathetic but sorrowful tone. If possible, stress how the Republicans put Obama in a difficult position, but that, under similar circumstances, you would have made different decisions,” Shapiro writes.
He concludes: “[T]here is a void in the Democratic Party waiting to be filled by a credible figure on Obama’s left flank. And if you don’t have the courage to fill it in 2016, trust me, someone else will.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/liberal-magazine-tells-2016-white-house-hopefuls-to-distance-themselves-from-obama/article/2531964
He explains in an article addressed to those insurgents:
If you wait until late 2015 to criticize part of the president’s record, your dissent will come across as craven rather than courageous. Think of Hillary Clinton’s awkwardly distancing of herself from the Iraq War in 2008, even though Democratic primary voters knew that she had voted for it in the Senate. Howard Dean rose from nowhere in mid-2003 because he was the only major Democrat running who had been unalterably opposed to the invasion of Iraq from the beginning. Sometimes in presidential politics, when matters more than whether and right from the start trumps being correct right now.
That’s why 2013 is a perfect time to express skepticism about portions of the Obama record. If you say something now with the right tone, it will be perceived as a sincere expression of deep conviction. The longer you wait, the more poll-tested and political your critiques of Obama will be regarded.
This does not mean attacking Obama from the right, he cautions. Rather it is involves pointing out the chasm between the president’s liberal rhetoric and reactionary policies. Shapiro cites a long list including: National Security Agency surveillance, targeting the press, drone strikes, Guantanamo, the sequester, campaign finance reform and the economy.
“[A]ny criticisms of Obama should be delivered in a sympathetic but sorrowful tone. If possible, stress how the Republicans put Obama in a difficult position, but that, under similar circumstances, you would have made different decisions,” Shapiro writes.
He concludes: “[T]here is a void in the Democratic Party waiting to be filled by a credible figure on Obama’s left flank. And if you don’t have the courage to fill it in 2016, trust me, someone else will.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/liberal-magazine-tells-2016-white-house-hopefuls-to-distance-themselves-from-obama/article/2531964
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Sounds like he is writing talking points for the Dems.
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Talking points = lying to protect your cause.
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
The Dems won't need any talking points in 2016 with the economy falling squarely on their side. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts a 3.4% growth in the economy for 2014 and an average of 3.6% growth for the years 2015-2018. The CBO also estimates unemployment to drop to 5.5% by the end of 2017. The economy alone will be enough to sweep Hillary into office. All of these alleged scandals don't mean a hill of beans!
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43907
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43907
News Buzzard- Posts : 3091
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
You keep believing that.
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Maybe instead of just trying to denigrate the other side you should visit more than one news source. There is another side to this story.
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
...and what a cause it is, when 50 years ago, "The Greatest Generation" would have hanged Leftists for what they push today...
Think of Hillary Clinton’s awkwardly distancing of herself from the Iraq War in 2008, even though Democratic primary voters knew that she had voted for the Iraq War in the Senate.
Howard Dean rose from nowhere in mid-2003 because he was the only major Democrat running who had been unalterably opposed to the invasion of Iraq from the beginning.
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Yeah, dream on. It seems we were told the economy would be great before Obama's second term or he wouldn't run again. Sure. But truly, Obama or not, I wish those predictions would come true, but I don't believe they will. Unless we can get a Repub. Congress, both houses in 2014, the economy is not going to get a whole lot better. A Repub. Congress might have a chance, unless O. vetos everything.
WHL- Admin
- Posts : 6057
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-01-14
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
News BuzzardThe Dems won't need any talking points in 2016 with the economy falling squarely on their side. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts a 3.4% growth in the economy for 2014 and an average of 3.6% growth for the years 2015-2018. The CBO also estimates unemployment to drop to 5.5% by the end of 2017. The economy alone will be enough to sweep Hillary into office. All of these alleged scandals don't mean a hill of beans!
From Forbes
The pessimistic CBO estimates of growth, deficits, and unemployment for 2012 and 2013 are big news. The Democrats use them to argue for more stimulus. The Republicans cite them as a cautionary tale against government spending. Both sides express reverence for the “non-partisan” CBO, whose calculations are the “gold standard” of accuracy and integrity.
This elevated view of the CBO is wrong, not because the CBO is partisan or not immune to fudging. The CBO studies that I have examined use Keynesian models as the basis for all their calculations. If they are ordered to estimate the effect of the stimulus on GDP and jobs, they attach Keynesian multipliers to different spending categories. The model they use guarantees the finding that the stimulus saved jobs and growth.
From Forbes
The pessimistic CBO estimates of growth, deficits, and unemployment for 2012 and 2013 are big news. The Democrats use them to argue for more stimulus. The Republicans cite them as a cautionary tale against government spending. Both sides express reverence for the “non-partisan” CBO, whose calculations are the “gold standard” of accuracy and integrity.
This elevated view of the CBO is wrong, not because the CBO is partisan or not immune to fudging. The CBO studies that I have examined use Keynesian models as the basis for all their calculations. If they are ordered to estimate the effect of the stimulus on GDP and jobs, they attach Keynesian multipliers to different spending categories. The model they use guarantees the finding that the stimulus saved jobs and growth.
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
undefined wrote:
A News Crow wrote:
"The economy alone will be enough to sweep Hillary into office".
Maybe the News Crows can find something glowing for Hillary:
Re: Liberal magazine tells 2016 White House hopefuls to distance themselves from Obama
Don't blame them, they didn't do anything!
fshnski- Posts : 4223
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2013-02-04
Location : Woofbura
Similar topics
» 'Obama Is Fast Becoming the Worst National Security Press President Ever'
» White House scrubs Michelle Obama’s confrontation with LGBT protester
» Brazil snubs Obama by refusing White House state-dinner honor
» Right Wing media brain washing
» Working in the White House
» White House scrubs Michelle Obama’s confrontation with LGBT protester
» Brazil snubs Obama by refusing White House state-dinner honor
» Right Wing media brain washing
» Working in the White House
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum