To say that liberals, and more specifically democrats, are in a state of disorder over the upcoming Presidential election would be a major understatement. Liberal pundits and politicians are throwing every possible excuse up against the proverbial wall hoping that something will stick; hoping that something, anything, will turn the tide for their guy, who by all previous estimations, should be running away with this election without the slightest worry that he’ll not gain the trust of the American people for a second term. That’s not happening. That’s not going to happen.
That’s not to say that he won’t win a squeaker in November. There’s still enough intellectually dishonest, stupid people out there who may vote. But every day, the likelihood diminishes drastically. The Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker is right in this respect, “Nobody likes a loser“, and that includes the brain dead. Parker lays out in no uncertain terms that the pack smells blood and they’re beginning to turn.
But the fact that Obama’s surrogates can’t stick to the script may be the best barometer of his perilous incumbency. In the political jungle, where people tend to be more Darwinian than divine, he is wounded and the pack is beginning to turn. Former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell, who could be a hockey mom if he wore lipstick, recently told CBS’s Charlie Rose that Hillary Clinton would have been a better president.
Yes, that is blood you smell.
If the next five months are anything like the last two, Barack Obama is toast. That’s what many Democrats are saying privately, and it’s not about Wisconsin.
The effort to recall Scott Walker failed, but exit polls show the president holding an edge in the state, which hasn’t voted Republican since 1984. It’s the weak job numbers from last week that has Democrats panicking. There’s a sense that the economy has stalled, and that the Obama campaign is stuck in a time warp with a message that assumes steady if slow progress, when the jobs picture may not get better.
“Our real concern is that they’re just sleepwalking,” says a Democratic strategist, who did not want to be quoted by name criticizing the Obama campaign. His fear, echoed by many, is that Obama’s responses to the dire economic conditions fall far short of the bold leadership needed.
Then of course there’s the old fallback position of lazy liberals, the race card. Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News played the race card once again, saying that in 2008, Americans who are inherently racist anyway, somehow voted for the black guy despite their racism because they didn’t have a good excuse not to. This time around, however, they don’t have any other excuses not to let their true, racist nature show, so they won’t vote for him. Did you follow that logic? No? Me either.
I wonder if liberals will ever wake up to the fact that they simply have a flawed candidate who has a lot of baggage from his past, was unable to keep his promises from 2008, never really grasped the enormity of being President of the United States, was in over his head from the start, and whose main objective, that most voters want no part of, was to transform the country, not help facilitate a true recovery?
Yeah me neither, I’m thinking they’ll just keep trying to find something that sticks to the proverbial wall of blame to explain away his resounding defeat come November.
UPDATE: Just in case you needed more evidence.