Who could challenge Obama in the Dem primaries?

[Ají de Gallina]

My better-than-passing knowledge of US politics doesn't help me with this one.

If Obama were perceived as weak for the 2012 election and his 2nd term seemed in danger, who (non-loony) would rise to the challenge? What Democrat could beat him?

This assumes that Obama hasn't raped blind, orphan puppies on national TV or called Kim Jong Il his guiding light.

[appleciders]

Well, the common wisdom was that part of the reason that Obama appointed Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State was so that she could not credibly challenge him in 2012. Beyond that, there isn't a single, strong challenger, just a raft of senior Senators and a few Governors any of whom could make a primary challenge if Obama appeared very weak, but none of whom want to risk crushing their own political careers.

[Simplicio]

There isn't really any obvious Ted Kennedy types waiting in the wings. I guess Gore could give it a whirl, but he seems pretty happy in his current incarnation as Global Warming guy. Most of his more creditable 2008 primary challengers are now in his administration (Hillary, Biden) or busy trying to stay out of prison (Edwards).

I guess Dean could try, he has a strong following amongst the Dem base, was a successful DNC chair and has been somewhat critical of the Obama administration (and was apparently miffed that they didn't offer him the Sec of HHS position).

Its pretty hard to picture anyone trying to seriously primary Obama though. If we reach a point where Obama is so unpopular he's beatable in the primary, then its hard to see the Democrats winning in anycase. And I can't really see Dean or Gore or anyone wanting to go to the trouble of running a long nasty Primary campaign just to get creamed in the General Election.

[Chronos]

It's really, really hard to primary a sitting President, and most politicians know this, and don't even make the attempt. I don't see Obama being any different in this regard.

[Chefguy]

There isn't really any obvious Ted Kennedy types waiting in the wings. I guess Gore could give it a whirl, but he seems pretty happy in his current incarnation as Global Warming guy. Most of his more creditable 2008 primary challengers are now in his administration (Hillary, Biden) or busy trying to stay out of prison (Edwards).

I guess Dean could try, he has a strong following amongst the Dem base, was a successful DNC chair and has been somewhat critical of the Obama administration (and was apparently miffed that they didn't offer him the Sec of HHS position).

Its pretty hard to picture anyone trying to seriously primary Obama though. If we reach a point where Obama is so unpopular he's beatable in the primary, then its hard to see the Democrats winning in anycase. And I can't really see Dean or Gore or anyone wanting to go to the trouble of running a long nasty Primary campaign just to get creamed in the General Election.

Dean and Gore both had their shots. Dean could possibly rehabilitate his image as a bit of a loon, but Gore has the sticky goo of "loser" all over him, and his involvement with global warming is rife with ammunition the right can use against him.

[Exapno Mapcase]

Only the most mavericky maverick would even think of this, barring a Nixon-like meltdown. Dennis Kucinich is about the only Democratic politician with a national rep who comes close to meeting this standard.

But the premise is simply absurd given our current status. Obama is way more than sufficiently popular within the party and is overwhelmingly likely to win the election. Every Democratic politician is thinking about 2016. And, really if you ask them in private, so are all the Republicans.

What you're asking is: what would be different if everything changed? I don't have an answer for that.

[ElvisL1ves]

It's really, really hard to primary a sitting President, and most politicians know this, and don't even make the attempt.Not to mention destructive, not only of their own public standing but of their party's prospects in November. The only recent times it's happened, the challenger has succeeded only in damaging the President's chances of re-election, not only by forcing him to spend resources and time in a primary but in making it appear that he doesn't even have the support of his own party.

Well, the common wisdom was that part of the reason that Obama appointed Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State was so that she could not credibly challenge him in 2012.Common among whom? :dubious: Those who indulged in caricaturing, fantasization, and personality-cultism rather than fact in the 2008 primaries? While common on this board, they were fortunately a minority in the real world.

[Little Nemo]

Obama is being challenged for the 2012 nomination. By Randall Terry, the radical pro-life activist who founded Operation Rescue.

[foolsguinea]

Randall Terry is opposed to, "Health and Human Services," or maybe to, "health and human services." His words. Seen in Tony Kaye's Lake of Fire. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0841119/)Dean and Gore both had their shots. Dean could possibly rehabilitate his image as a bit of a loon, but Gore has the sticky goo of "loser" all over him, and his involvement with global warming is rife with ammunition the right can use against him.Yeah, Al Gore has been warming the globe! Oh, wait.

[Ají de Gallina]

Only the most mavericky maverick would even think of this, barring a Nixon-like meltdown. Dennis Kucinich is about the only Democratic politician with a national rep who comes close to meeting this standard.

But the premise is simply absurd given our current status. Obama is way more than sufficiently popular within the party and is overwhelmingly likely to win the election. Every Democratic politician is thinking about 2016. And, really if you ask them in private, so are all the Republicans.

What you're asking is: what would be different if everything changed? I don't have an answer for that.

Of course, that's why there is no real answer, because the only way Obama is not the Dem candidate (to say the very least) is that he started graffitiing the Washington monument with "Allahu akbar" while wiping his ass with the US flag.

[waterj2]

Dean and Gore both had their shots. Dean could possibly rehabilitate his image as a bit of a loon, but Gore has the sticky goo of "loser" all over him, and his involvement with global warming is rife with ammunition the right can use against him.Nothing like winning the popular vote to forever tarnish someone as a loser.

[River Hippie]

Jon Stewart?

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Sitting Presidents rarely face serious primary challenges, and Obama is neither weak enough, nor any potential challenger strong enough to make this season an exception. We may see some symbolic challenges from fringe candidates, but nothing serious.

[Qin Shi Huangdi]

Randall Terry, who already plans to challenge Barack Obama.

[Ají de Gallina]

Randall Terry, who already plans to challenge Barack Obama.

I'm as pro-life as you can get, but his winning would require not only my far-fetched scenarios, but also the direct intervention of at least 5 apostles, 3 fathers of the Church, 4 churhc doctors and 34 canonised popes.
I'm thinking someone who's been at least a losing but strong gubernatorial candidate.

[Guinastasia]

Edit: never mind, someone answered my posts.

Randall Terry, good god. Fred Phelps would march in a fucking pride parade before that happened.

[Oakminster]

Of course, that's why there is no real answer, because the only way Obama is not the Dem candidate (to say the very least) is that he started graffitiing the Washington monument with "Allahu akbar" while wiping his ass with the US flag.

Bah....the classics are best. Channeling Edwin Edwards, I'd say Obama has the Dem nomination sewed up unless he's caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. If he is, and nobody can pin it on the Clinton machine, Hillary would probably step up to the plate.

[Chronos]

It depends on what you mean by "challenge". Randall Terry could challenge Obama in the same sense that Stephen Hawking could challenge Mike Tyson to a boxing match. He could issue the challenge, but it wouldn't be challenging.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Randall Terry, who already plans to challenge Barack Obama.
Like I said, no serious challenges. Randall Terry is a certified nutcase.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Randall Terry trying to get the Democratic nomination for President is like Rosie O'Donnell trying the get the nom for the GOP.

[Askance]

Andrew Cuomo is already being talked about for 2016. If he were to run in 2012 I guess you could call that a credible challenge. But he won't, of course.

[foolsguinea]

I think Dio underrates the appeal of Rosie O'Donnell in the GOP, or overrates the appeal of Randall Terry in the Democratic Party.

Seriously, once I heard Randall Terry speak about his theory of government, I realized that he's not just rabidly anti-abortion, he's also against any government department not covered in a cursory high school survey of antebellum US history.

As for the OP. I think it's just a thing in US political culture now that we let the sitting President run for a second term pretty much unchallenged in his own party. It's kind of silly.

[suranyi]

There isn't really any obvious Ted Kennedy types waiting in the wings. I guess Gore could give it a whirl, but he seems pretty happy in his current incarnation as Global Warming guy. Most of his more creditable 2008 primary challengers are now in his administration (Hillary, Biden) or busy trying to stay out of prison (Edwards).

I guess Dean could try, he has a strong following amongst the Dem base, was a successful DNC chair and has been somewhat critical of the Obama administration (and was apparently miffed that they didn't offer him the Sec of HHS position).

Its pretty hard to picture anyone trying to seriously primary Obama though. If we reach a point where Obama is so unpopular he's beatable in the primary, then its hard to see the Democrats winning in anycase. And I can't really see Dean or Gore or anyone wanting to go to the trouble of running a long nasty Primary campaign just to get creamed in the General Election.

This. If somehow a serious opponent develops in the Democratic primary, that means the Republicans will win the election.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

That's it right there. It's generally counterproductive for the party to primary a sitting POTUS absent some kind of extraordinary circumstance. The challenger (if he cares about his ideology at all) is just cutting off his nose to spite his face. There hasn't been a serious primary challenge to a sitting POTUS since 1976, when Reagan made it interesting against Ford, but that was in the wake of Watergate. Obama has had no scandals yet. I don't think he ever will, whether he serves one term or two. Whatever anyone else wants to say about the guy, I think he's a legitimate straight arrow.

[MEBuckner]

OK, but what if Randall Terry zaps President Obama by shooting bolts of lightning (http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/hatred.htm) from his fingertips (http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/8/81/BZZZZZZ.jpg)? Then could he win the Democratic primary?

[Recovering Republican]

My better-than-passing knowledge of US politics doesn't help me with this one.

If Obama were perceived as weak for the 2012 election and his 2nd term seemed in danger, who (non-loony) would rise to the challenge? What Democrat could beat him?

This assumes that Obama hasn't raped blind, orphan puppies on national TV or called Kim Jong Il his guiding light.

If the democrats have to replace Obama at this point, they might as well concede the election now.

If you have an incumbant president, you are stuck with him.

Replacing your own guy is a tacit admission that he screwed up and you don't really know how to run the country.

The ironic thing is that no president really has a fun second term. Bush had Katrina and the Great Recession and Iraq going south. Clinton had Monica. Reagan had Iran-Contra. Nixon had Watergate.

So really, they sign up for more abuse to validate the abuse they've already taken.

Maybe we should only have a single six year term.

[Recovering Republican]

That's it right there. It's generally counterproductive for the party to primary a sitting POTUS absent some kind of extraordinary circumstance. The challenger (if he cares about his ideology at all) is just cutting off his nose to spite his face. There hasn't been a serious primary challenge to a sitting POTUS since 1976, when Reagan made it interesting against Ford, but that was in the wake of Watergate. Obama has had no scandals yet. I don't think he ever will, whether he serves one term or two. Whatever anyone else wants to say about the guy, I think he's a legitimate straight arrow.

I would say that Ted Kennedy's challenge to Jimmy Carter in 1980 was a pretty serious one. Heck, if the Iranians hadn't taken hostages, Teddy probably would have unseated Carter.

The interesting thing about caring about idealogy is that the challenge was entirely about idealogy.

In 1976, Ford was a country-club moderate Republican whom the Democrats allowed under the mechanisms of the 25th Amendment. The GOP rank and file didn't care for him all that much. Reagan represented the conservative wing of the party that had been vying for control since 1964, and found themselves shunted to the back by Eisenhower-Nixon faction.

Same can be said about Ted Kennedy's challenge of Carter. Liberals in the Democratic Party didn't like Carter, felt he was too moderate.

Obama probably doesn't have much to worry about in this regard. Even if the Moonbat left are disappointed he hasn't cravenly surrendered to the Jihadis and turned us into a socialist paradise, they certainly aren't going to help the Republicans win. The best thing that Obama has going for him is the Wingnut right will probably pick the GOP nominee.

Of course, if the economy stays in the crapper, even a nutbag like Bachmann can win.

[ElvisL1ves]

There hasn't been a serious primary challenge to a sitting POTUS since 1976, when Reagan made it interesting against FordKennedy vs. Carter in 1980. Both efforts only served to damage the incumbent, as I mentioned already.

[JoelUpchurch]

Obama probably doesn't have much to worry about in this regard. Even if the Moonbat left are disappointed he hasn't cravenly surrendered to the Jihadis and turned us into a socialist paradise, they certainly aren't going to help the Republicans win.

Why do anything during the primary when they can run a third party candidate during the general election and do some real damage, like Ralph Nader did in 2000?

Heck, just a credible 3rd party candidate in Florida could swing the election. Florida picked up 2 electoral votes in the last census. We actually have more electoral votes than New York now.

[gatorslap]

Don't forget Lyndon LaRouche.

[NDP]

Like I said, no serious challenges. Randall Terry is a certified nutcase.

Randall Terry--now there's somebody I forgot was still around. You stopped hearing about him around the time he started publicly supporting the people who murdered abortion providers. After that, even the hardcore pro-life zealots didn't want to have anything to do with him.