Is Barack Obama A One Trick Pony?

CNN’s daily survey today is asking a simple question:

Is Barack Obama a one-term president?

The current poll count as I start this thread is:

[li]No - 51% -104721[/li][li]Yes - 49% -100728[/li][/ul]
Total votes: 205449

Surely, the Dopers can add their own vote to a poll, but with opinions to back up the votes. What say you?

FWIW, I offer he is. My concern is, will be be defeated a la Carter or not?

That would be a no.

Regardless of whether or not I think Obama is doing a bad job (and I don’t think he is), I just don’t see any of the current crop of Republican making a solid case for themselves.

I don’t think it really matters what he does from here on out - the economy will decide his fate.

That said, though, El Kabong is not wrong about the sorry crop of republican forrunners who have stuck their heads up out of their holes so far. Yeck.

At a mere guess I think Mr. Obama will squeak through in a second ballot should he choose to run. He might decide himself against a second term mainly on the grounds of having nothing particular to offer in the way of change and since the job is incredibly wearing.
However, a general lacking of substance or specific ability should not hinder voters from electing him once more: whatever scorecard is ultimately used, ‘Barely Adequate’ is still a perfectly respectable pass and always beats ‘Raving Loon’ or ‘Klutzy Fuck-Up’.

A 51/49 chance of a second term is about where I put the odds. It’s really going to depend on who emerges as the Republican nominee.

Obama is a mediocre President in my opinion. But some of the Republican possibilities are sub-mediocre.

To be fair, it’s absolutely certain that Obama is a one-term president thus far.

Will he be re-elected? I quite confident that he will be barring some new national calamity.

Actually, a calamity might make it more likely he would be re-elected. Ask George W.

Talk about misleading thread titles.

Being a ‘one trick pony’, is hardly the same as being a one term president.

I think he may be a one term president. I think he has demonstrated he’s more interested in doing what he believes in, than insuring he’ll be re elected. Such a refreshing change from electing a guy with great ideas who then abandons them all, out of fear they will keep him from being re elected.

Also, he has a young family and I suspect they grow weary of the nature of living in the White House and being the ‘first family’, and who could blame them?

His election will be a referendum on the economy—just like most of the rest of them—unless there’s a massive ongoing foreign policy screw-up, a la the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-80. If the economy continues to be in the crapper, he’s toast. If it starts to tick up, he wins. I have no idea which outcome will happen.

As far as no Republicans to challenge him, just how household a name was Barack Obama in the beginning of March 2007? Exactly. Wait and see: I doubt the GOP nominee will be any of Huckabee, Romney, McCain, or Palin. If I have a gun to my head and must pick one, I’d go for one of the state governors, like Christie, Pawlenty, Daniels, or even Walker.

I think he’ll get a second term from the simple fact that I don’t think anything will change the way the swing voters voted last time.

Exactly what I was going to say.

I really don’t know if Obama will be a two-term president. But I do know that, as of yet, no opponent has enough support to take him. And that I had a much better idea over who was going to run this time last election cycle.

I WISH Obama were a one-term President… but the economy SEEMS to be improving at last, and NONE of the likely Republican nominees is going to excite voters.

Would even REPUBLICANS get psyched for a Romney-Jindal or Pawlenty-Daniels ticket?

So, I’m pretty confident Obama will win re-election. Oh, he’ll DEFINITELY lose many of the voters who went with him last time, but he’ll still hold on to enough sttaes to win comfortably, in my opinion.

I voted yes because last year sometime Michelle had made comments to the French first lady about how she was tired of being the first lady or didn’t like being the first lady or didn’t like the attention that came with being the first lady or something like that. So I think she might persuade Barack not to run again.

Looking up the story now everyone is denying Michelle said that but I already voted.

As noted, “One Trick Pony” does not mean what the OP apparently thinks it does.

That said, Obama will be a one term POTUS, and history will remember him mostly for being the first black POTUS. Otherwise, he ranks right up there with Carter on the list of ineffective presidents.

I expect his replacement will be either Haley Barbour (Governor of Mississippi), or Newt Gingrich.

I don’t see an republican that could beat Obama at the moment. One thing that could change that is oil. If the oil prices keep rising and Obama continues drag his heels on oil drilling permits and on opening up new areas for drilling it will give the impression he is not doing anything to help the problem. If oil remains above $4 then expect the drill here drill now crowd to make a strong come back.

Since his presidency is only barely half over, at this point there no way to reliably tell how effective or ineffective it may be. That fact alone suggests to me that your political savvy is lacking. The fact that you think Barbour or Gingrich has even the slightest chance of becoming president convinces me of it!

Actually, I say this jokingly. For all I know you are a political genius. But seriously, Barbour or Gingrich? You must be kidding!
:slight_smile: :confused:

He’s a shoo-in.

The GOP does not have anyone who can beat him. Golden opportunity; pitiful field of candidates.

Maybe not. Remember, just as it’s still early in his term for Obama (i.e., he could do something good finally), it’s still early for a real Republican to shine through. There’s only one Democrat to focus on, and everyone else is looking at his favorite Republican. So things are still fractured.

There are a couple of libertarian Republicans I have my eye on, but it’s too soon to tell if they’ll either (a) cater to the modern, stupid wing of the Republicans’ base, and/or (b) just flat out lose to the one of the many who are already part of that stupid wing.

tl;dr: It’s early.

I pretty much agree with what you wrote. Not to jinx any of them, but which libertarian Republicans do you think have a shot? Christie just got to NJ—hard to see him leaving already. Walker has even less time as a governor than Christie. My previous sleeper pick Daniels has the charisma of wallpaper, and is not showing much backbone in his attempts to lessen the influence of public sector unions. Not too late to pick up his game by the Iowa caucuses though. Pawlenty strikes me as a smart guy who will say and do absolutely anything to get elected; a bizarro Bill Clinton, minus the Rhodes scholarship.

Agree with those who cannot see Barbour (way too much of a SoCon—might as well ship the win to Obama.) or Gingrich (too old—69 in 2012, too unsavory) getting the nod.

This is absolutely not happening. If Obama were to chose not to run, he’d have said so by now. Letting the Democrats get off to a late start (somewhat mitigated by the fact that the Republicans are dragging their feet) would be absolutely horrible for their chances to hold the Presidency. And keeping a Democrat in office is essential to securing any sort of legacy for himself. Palin/Bachmann winning DC’s electoral votes is a likelier scenario.

Incidentally, for those saying that Obama came out of nowhere late in the game, by this point four years ago, he was a month into his run. And nine Democrats had declared their candidacies. Whoever the Republican nominee is, it’s going to be a name that’s getting mentioned by at least those of us who follow this stuff.