Talk Elections

Well?

Kucinich of course

The only possibility in my opinion is Kucinich, but I don't think he will.

Maybe this guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_J._Berg

Someone has got to do it.  My bet is Kucinich and maybe Feingold. 

Gravel!

Lyndon LaRouche if he's still alive.

Gravel would no chance. First of all, remember his 2008 bid when he was destroyed by media freeze. Second of all, he switched to LP. Third of all he'll be 82.

Gravel was my favorite in 2008 primaries even when he stood no chances.

And no one would primary Obama. If Kennedy couldnt' primary Carter in 1980, why do you think someone can primary incumnet at all?

Carter was a vastly superior president to Obama. If there actually were a strong candidate to challenge him, Obama would be very vulnerable as the country collapsed around him in time for 2012.

Kennedy almost certainly would have beaten Carter had Carter not been boosted at just the right time by the emergence of the hostate situation in December 1979. 

Wishful thinking strikes again!

Unless Obama has some sort of crippling incident between now and 2012 (stock collapse, terrorist attack, major scandal, etc.) there will be no serious primary challengers.  It'll all be jokes like Kucinich.

Actually maybe Carter himself should run in 2012.

Kucinch might not want to run. If he's seen as ignoring his district on some hopeless race again, he'll have his own primary to worry about again.

This. I remember reading about Kucinich barely getting 50% in his Congressional primary in 2008, and dropping below 60% in the general election. He may think again about running in 2012, especially since it is an incumbent President that he would be running against.

His main challenger got 35%.

Stiill not impreessive for veteran Congressman, SS

Anyway, with all "primary" thing... even George W. Bush with his approvals in 20s would not be primaries in GOP contests, had he be able to run for third term (I remind that McCain, in order to win a nomination, hed to became his "great buddy").

That would be a clear sign that Kucinich has completely sold out to corporate interests and the Democratic establishment.

Hopefully Dennis Kuicinich.  Obama is turning into a pro-war fascist who kills innocent muslims, just like Bush.

Another fool who has no idea what the word fascist means.

Much like you.

I use it correctly. People seriously need to drop the whole 'fascist' 'nazi' 'hitler' thing, before it loses all meaning.

You refer to Britain as a police state.

Not all police states are fascist. Try again.

It's a shame the search function is on the fritz.

So all police states ARE fascist in your rather odd version of history?

Please!  Obama inherited this war. He at least has an exit strategy.

al-Qaeda did attack America in the worst possible way, and it must be destroyed. al-Qaeda is anything but innocent. We don't have reasonable means of negotiating with them. If we were to buy them off, then we would be complicit in their next horrors, whether against us or against some country just as undeserving of a 9/11 attack as we were. 

Why are you talking like a republican now.
Under Bush you were against Afghanistan war?! WTF

Nobody is gonna primary Obama, except a totally irrelevant like Gravel or LaRouche.

I would laugh so hard if LaRouche beat Obama.

Then I would panic, seeing as he's a rabid anglophobe.

Wouldn't we all?

Maybe Elizabeth Warren.  I would hope that John Conyers or Maxine Waters runs simply so as to fracture the identity politics camp, maybe paving the way for Warren.

Nobody is going to primary Obama unless he is an utter failure.

If he is, some possibilities:

• Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH)
• Sen. Russ Feingold (WI)
• Gov. Artur Davis (AL)
• Gov. Mike Beebe (AR)
• Sen. Evan Bayh (IN)
• total irrelevant Lyndon la Rouche

Because that guy's biography doesn't scream TOTAL WACKO CRAZY!!!! even more than Kucinich.

Hillary, but only if his approval ratings are consistenly below 40%.

Howard Dean almost seems to have been positioning himself for this lately...

That's why he may run.

I don't think so.  In fact, the other day he said he'd vote for Obama (although implied that was about all he'd do for him).

Well its a bit early for a Democratic party establishment figure to be publicly announcing he's going to run against the sitting Democratic president. If Obama's approval ratings go into the toilet over the next 2-3 years, it would not surprise me if Dean decides to run, unless Rahm Emanuel threatens him with bodily harm.

"To primary someone" implies winning or at least being competitive to me, not running a counting candidacy to protest the incumbent's politics.

Thus, the answer is, quite clearly, almost certainly nobody.

Obama actually campaigned on Afghanistan being the right war.  He doesn't really have an exit strategy.  (I actually tend to support him on this.)

I'm wondering about a challenge from what's left of the Democratic right?

Answer: there will be no significant challenge to Obama.  (I do not consider Kucinich a significant challenge)

Also, why do people keep mentioning Lyndon LaRouche?  Lyndon LaRouche will be lucky to still be able to run in a physical sense by 2011, let alone run for office.  He'd be 90(!) by Election Day.

EDIT:  Russ Feingold is having too good a time in the Senate to run for President.  At least he has the good sense to be a single serial womanizer, though, so he can't really be clobbered with the family values card.

The position of Kucinich will be interesting in 2012. There will be a new map and much of his district will go to augment Fudge's black-majority district. Cuyahoga will not have enough population for two whole districts so the part left over from Fudge's district will either have to combine with Lorain or Medina to form a district.

If Kucinich wishes to remain in Congress, he may need more time to campaign in a new district, and would not be able to take the time away for a presidential run. If the district puts him in competition with another incumbent Democrat, he may just decide that a presidential run is the only way to go.

I think it would. The 10th district, which Kucinich represents, is surrounded almost entirely by the 11th and 13th districts (and it narrowly borders the 14th). I think that he will most likely gain some land from the 13th district, which is also Democratic.

Y'know, although the argument has lost a great deal of its mass appeal from the way the Bush Administration shamelessly abused and misused as a basis for invading Iraq, the Taliban and al-Queda were closely involved in killing over 3000 Americans on 9/11. There is an undeniable national interest in prosecuting the war in Afghanistan.

Comparing Obama as Bush redux because he is continuing the war in Afghanistan is just plain silly. Obama ALWAYS argued (correctly) as a candidate that the more important Afghan war was hobbled by a drain of men, material and money to an unnecessary war in Iraq, so it's not like he's changed his position since taking office. The key is whether we have a president who views American interests and the use of military power pragmatically with a strong penchant for the power of diplomacy whenever possible (as is clearly not the case with al-Queda). NOT an administration that views military intervention as a necessary crusade to expand US hegemony across the globe and diplomacy as merely a preliminary step to inevitable armed intervention.