Obama Needs Luck To Win In 2012

nytimes.com:

Barack Obama probably will have to pull out a familiar card next year: the luck of the draw.

In winning the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, the president defeated political heavyweights, starting with Hillary Rodham Clinton. His other triumphs were facilitated by lots of luck.

Also on HuffPost:

Read the whole story: nytimes.com

 

 

Comments

[Fremon]

08:19 PM on 12/27/2011

All candidates need luck to win. Obama needed it to win over Hillary and the same over McCain. He inherited a very bad situation for which many in the US hold him now responsible and are willing to forget the bad situation that the previous party put us and him in. Voters are fickle as to who they blame for less than an ideal situation. Should Obama have cured the nation's ill in four years despite that it took 8 years of Bush 2 to put us in? Many, some, and all of the Republican's will say "yes" whether it is rationale or not. Obama was vilified from day one with an opposing party that said openly that the number 1 priority was to get him out of office. Their priority was not to better the nation or provide a realistic jobs plan (their's again was more tax cuts and deregulation). Many will continue to vote against Obama because they are Republican's/evangelicals/or racist. It will be turnout by the Democratic base to overcome the rabid GOP voter. The problem with independents will be those that have religious or racist bigotry against peoples of color. Often independents pride themselves as looking as they will cast "intellectual" votes based on observations of both parties. It is easy for people not wanting to be pigeonholed by saying that they sift through the information yet harbor values and positions, such as bigotry or racism, that may favor one party or another.

[Gingermann]

10:28 PM on 12/27/2011

Excellent opinion piece Mr Fremon. I agree wholeheartedly.

[thehardertheycome]

06:46 PM on 12/27/2011

The pundits agree, It will be Willard Romney against incumbant Barack Obama.

In this race you have a man who has worked towards fulfilling a large percentage of the campaign promises he made. Many he achived some he compromised and some he realized would not be attainable because he needed the support of Congress not get it ; (GITMO). The incumbant was handed a shrinking economy with job losses in the millions his first day on the job. A middle east that was churning and largely mistrustfull of the West. Two wars and a terrorist who managed to out manuever all of the sophisticated surveillance of the West.

The middle east rose and grabbed for its freedom confident that if they did the right thing, the most powerful nation in the world would support them.

People are working and shopping again. Those that lacked health insurance either have it or will have it once the legislation goes in to full effect in 2014. Our schools are getting better funding. We have placed the spirit of competition back in to the learning system. We have adapted and expanded the "Yes we can" mantra.

Then there is the challenger, a one term governor that has been running for president for the last 8 years but has yet to provide workable solutions for anything on national scale. Instead he claims that most of the nation's problems should be returned to the states.

My money is on the incumbant.

[uncle george]

09:15 PM on 12/27/2011

People forget that OBamacare came about because the healthcare program was on life support and headed for bankruptcy if something wasn't done .Insurance Companies had to be brought under control and look what happened and is happenging..The cry went up ,"OBama will be a one term President" became the conservative cry.This was the answer to the problem.It's hard to believe that all this is going on.especially at this time.The country is in their hands and they sit on them.Unbelievable!!!!!!

[UKLLee]

03:48 PM on 12/27/2011

In his 2004 race for a U.S. Senate seat in Illinois, the candidacie­s of both his chief primary opponent and his initial Republican rival collapsed when divorce papers were disclosed during the campaign; one was accused of violent behavior and the other of kinky sex."

Gee, didn't obama i.llegally leak those closed divorce records to the press?”

[Raiderthree]

03:46 PM on 12/27/2011

"Barack Obama probably will have to pull out a familiar card next year: the luck of the draw."

I'm sure he will just stick with the race card.

[Littlewords]

02:58 PM on 12/27/2011

Given the retreads, tro11s, and loose tea cannons filling out the GOP field and the continued loss of momentum with the GOP party as it becomes even more extreme, Obama would have to implode to lose this election, which is his to win or lose more of his own doing than anything mounted from the errant Right.

[rioderek]

02:51 PM on 12/27/2011

Obama needs luck to win in 2012 ? Are you serious. If Americans are dumb enough to elect any of the clowns running for the GOP nomination, they'll get what they deserve (a depression and misery).

The GOP offers nothing bull lies, failed economic policies, war mongering, racism and general stupidity. This country does have many people compatible with the above noted GOP nonsense, however I do not believe there are enough to actually help elect a GOP clown.

No luck is required this go round, just voter common sense. Conversely the GOP needs the sky to fall in-order for one of their misfit candidates to win.

[MotivatedMarine0311]

05:28 PM on 12/27/2011

Curious. Would you rather be operated on by a doctor with little or no experience, or a doctor that just happened to show up once in a while?

[thehardertheycome]

05:52 PM on 12/27/2011

Curious. Does your comment have any valid basis in the context of this conversation?

A doctor could have tons of experience and still be a terrible doctor. Usually in any situation the professional that shows up once in awhile has proven that he can do that job when he is there and is in demand when he is not there or esle he wouldn't be allowed to "just show up."

However in the context of this conversation, the GOP has not presented a single candidate that has a single answer or new idea on how to fix anything that is currently broken. As a whole the GOP has wasted so much capital being anti-Obama that they now sound like the school teacher in the Charley Brown cartoons.....wah wah wah.

[LINY01]

01:47 PM on 12/27/2011

Something is seriously wrong and flawed about an election process that continues to give voters more of the same (more economic hardship; more wars, and more poverty), no matter which candidate we pick.

We need some real change in 2012

[jcolvin325]

04:48 PM on 12/27/2011

You are so correct...both parties have been purchased and compromised. This country is starving for a true leader and statesman....but we must very careful...because Germany was starving for the same thing in 1933

[mcgeenate]

01:30 PM on 12/27/2011

Whoever called themselves a writer for this story should reconsider their abilities. It is writing like this that is mostly responsible for the fear and mis-information that seem to dominate a media today. Fortunately, more and more people have finally figured out the fact that reading stuff like this and watching fox news leaves less informed than not reading or listening to any news!

[UKLLee]

01:17 PM on 12/27/2011

"In his 2004 race for a U.S. Senate seat in Illinois, the candidacies of both his chief primary opponent and his initial Republican rival collapsed when divorce papers were disclosed during the campaign; one was accused of violent behavior and the other of kinky sex."

Gee, didn't obama i.llegally leak those closed divorce records to the press?

[Pijiu]

01:35 PM on 12/27/2011

Axelrod did.

[Berlet98]

11:54 AM on 12/27/2011

2011 Hopes, 2012 Realities

I began writing an article entitled “A Christmas Retrospective” with, “The eventful year 2011 now drawing to a close may have been one filled with natural, political, and sociological disasters yet it produced unmistakable signs that all is not lost for America and the rest of humanity.”

I recounted the earthquakes, tsunamis, and tornados, the Arab Spring which portended an Arab Winter and worsening national and international tensions, the Occupy upheavals suggestive of revolution supported by Barack Hussein Obama 201 and yet I decided 2011 wasn’t as much a debacle as it was a year of hope springing eternal for our beknighted planet and nation.

Scratch any suggestions of 2012 being an improvement on 2011. On re-consideration of my Chistmas-inspired attack of optimism, 2012 promises to suck big time.

In part, events occurring over the past few days forced the revisionism.

The mayhem resulting from the sale of Air Jordans, a Santa in Grapevine Texas murdering 6 relatives, riots over rappers at the Mall of America, and Tim Tebow’s Denver Broncos losing all contributed to a change of perspective.

Iran taunting the U.S. Navy in the Strait of Hormuz and Obama’s public approval rating rising to 47.1 didn’t help, either.

Still, it was an article by Professor James Petras on GlobalResearch.ca that convinced me my rose-colored glasses had been clouded by my cataracts . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=11820.)

[k6007]

11:43 AM on 12/27/2011

The president doesn't need luck, we do.
And, if the largest section of voters in this country, the working class, chooses to vote for another silver spooned trust fund baby over Mr. Obama, they deserve what the repubs will do to them.

[pookie01nj]

11:16 AM on 12/27/2011

No need for luck. The American people need to ask themselves in 2012, is the United States better off now, than it was 4 years ago? Vote accordingly.

[k6007]

11:43 AM on 12/27/2011

Hear, hear.

Obama '12!

[jsgaetano]

12:46 PM on 12/27/2011

Yep. If we had used that rule, Reagan and George Dubai Bush would have never had second terms.

[LafnBacstage]

10:58 AM on 12/27/2011

Oy!

I used to blindly support Obama, I have issues with the way he has fallen short on health care, jobs and not recalling the Bush Tax cuts. My newest concern is the why he appears to be dismantling citizen rights. I think many Americans feel similar. However, I am confident that he will be re-elected because what choice is there? Really! As bad as Obama is, the Republican alternatives are far, far worse for Americans outside the 1% and who are not social conservatives. You think its bad now, just watch what happens if one of the ill-prepared conservatives are elected. It will be "Pander-monium."

[jsgaetano]

12:48 PM on 12/27/2011

I agree. I'm not much of an Obama supporter (I didn't even vote for him in 2008... didn't vote against him either, just left that blank), but the reality is, as always, that even the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican.

[biabouman41]

09:21 AM on 12/27/2011

Luck has been with Obama many times and I feel that it will be again.

The Rpublicans are destroying themselves. Their excessive lying in 2010 gave rise to the Tea Party which has now returned to haunt them. (Oh, what a tangled web we weave when others we try to deceive)

The only candidate who I feel has a chance to beat Obama is Huntsman. He has a very good record, has quality accomplishments, is straight forward, does not play the usual games. But Obama, knowing the lunatics on the other side will castrate Huntsman for accepting to be Ambassador to China. For the ignorant of the TeaParty Republicans, that seals his fate.

Altogether, Obama has done a good job domestically and in foreign policy. In respect to foreign policy for his success in getting rid of Bin Laden he will be compensated by the public. That is why his campaign has been relatively quiet about it. They are leaving it up to the public.

[CONSERVATIVEONLY]

09:37 AM on 12/27/2011

LOL - giving credit to Bo when it was Bush's enhanced interrogation that set it up? I guess that's all he's got, though!

[k6007]

11:45 AM on 12/27/2011

bush shut down the op on OBL in 2006. If it took another 5 years to finally catch him enhanced interro was as useless as the bush adm. fauxnewsmakesonestupid.

[biabouman41]

03:23 PM on 12/27/2011

YOU FAR RIGHT PEOPLE HAVE SUCH DIFFICULTY WITH THE IDEA THAT YOU DO NOT NEED TO TORTURE PEOPLE TO GET THEIR HELP.
How many times and in how may ways do we have to prove it to you that you do not have to invade countries, kill their people, kill our soldiers destroy out treasury to get them to get rid of their dictators: Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and so on.

[Cratewasher]

09:00 AM on 12/27/2011

Will there be a debate if they agree on most things?