Since “Democratic” President Hopey-Changey Obama’s latest sellout — giving the plutocratic and pro-plutocratic traitors of the Repugnican Tea Party their tax breaks for the rich and the super-rich while slashing the federal budget (except for the war profiteers, of course) — chatter about a Democratic presidential primary challenge to Obama has increased.
There is this food-for-thought piece on Salon.com about Secretary of State Billary Clinton challenging Obama, but the piece is written by someone who says that he doesn’t consider himself to be a Democrat, so I’m not certain of his intent.
While it’s true that Billary’s balls are bigger than Obama’s (but so are a mouse’s balls…) — and, admittedly, knowing what I know about Obama now, if I could do it all over again I would have supported Billary over Obama in the 2008 Democratic primary race — because Obama’s “governing” style is fairly Clintonesque, I can’t see that a President Billary would be a huge improvement over the status quo. (Admittedly, U.S. poverty did decrease dramatically under Bill Clinton, however.)
Still, if it came down to Billary or Obama for 2012, I’d take Billary. I’d switch my voter registration from the Green Party to the Democratic Party in order to vote for Billary over Obama in a 2012 Democratic presidential primary. Yes, Obama is that bad.
But hopefully it won’t come down to a choice between Billary or Obama.
Hopefully an actual progressive will challenge the worthless Obama.
Reports The Daily Caller* within the past 24 hours:
Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate and perennial third-party presidential candidate, announced last month that he would work to find a Democrat to challenge President Barack Obama in 2012.
Nader now says that a primary challenge is a near certainty.
“What [Obama] did this week is just going to energize that effort,” Nader promised in an interview with The Daily Caller. “I would guess that the chances of there being a challenge to Obama in the primary are almost 100 percent.”
The only question, he said, is the stature of that opponent and whether it will be either “an ex-senator or an ex-governor” or “an intellectual leader or an environmental leader.”
In approximately a week and a half there will be “another chapter of this effort,” Nader predicted.
The Public Citizen founder said he disapproved of how Obama handled recent debt ceiling negotiations, and claimed the deal’s failings prompted this week’s dramatic stock market drop.
“He made a deal that did not provide for a public works project to create jobs all over the country. All he did was he agreed to cut spending,” Nader said. “And that’s what the market is reacting to.”
President Obama “shouldn’t have even had that problem,” Nader said. “When he surrendered the continuation of tax cuts for the rich last December, the least he could have gotten was the debt ceiling increased. He didn’t even do that. So he set himself up for this hostage situation by the Republicans and it’s his own fault. And the country and the workers are paying the price.”
Asked whether the Tea Party movement was responsible for an unsavory resolution to debt ceiling negotiations, Nader responded: “It’s not really a movement. It’s the conservative non-libertarian wing of the Republican Party.”
Nader continued: “Ron Paul is a conservative libertarian. These are the conservative corporatists that have decided they like the brand name ‘Tea Party’ because the press reports on every movement of the Tea Party. So they’ve jumped on the bandwagon and hijacked it.
“There are a lot of Tea Party people, for example, who wanted more revenues. I think the polls showed that half of them wanted more revenues. And a lot of the Tea Party people want to get out of the wars. But its been hijacked by the corporatists.”
Nader said he doesn’t plan to launch another campaign for president, either as an independent candidate or as a primary challenger to President Obama.
In 2000, Nader received nearly three million votes as the Green Party’s presidential candidate. Some disillusioned Democrats blamed him for handing Florida, and with it the election, to George W. Bush.
Nader ran for president in 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008 as a left-wing alternative to the Democratic nominee, but has decided another campaign is “very unlikely.”
“I’ve done my rounds,” he said.
Part of me is disappointed that Nader doesn’t plan to run in 2012 — because I’d vote for him, very most likely — but another part of me, a larger part of me, is glad that Nader doesn’t plan to run again, since because the 2000 presidential election debacle, he has been a waaay-too-convenient scapegoat for the establishmentarian (that is, utterly spineless) Democrats.
I mean, fuck, Al Gore didn’t even win his own home state of Tennessee in 2000, yet the Dems don’t blame Gore for having been too weak a presidential candidate — nooo, they blame Nader for having exercised his right to run for president, as though he didn’t have that right.
If I could pick Obama’s 2012 challenger, it would be Howard Dean.
He has balls, like Billary does, but I think that he’s much more likely to stand up for the middle class, the working class and the poor than is Billary.
Also, of course, it was the progressive wave that Dean started in 2002 or 2003 that the lazy hack Obama just co-opted as his own and rode on into the White House.
Dean still was not, in my estimation, the right candidate in 2004. But he’s the one for the job now. And he deserves the job. He probably would be the president that Barack Obama only promised us that he would be.
P.S. Don’t miss this column by Ted Rall. He nails it, as usual. My only addendum is that you shouldn’t vote only if there is no true progressive to vote for. Should a true progressive presidential candidate emerge, or should a stronger Democratic candidate (like Howard Dean) emerge, then you should vote for him or her.
P.P.S. Because California is the most populous blue state in the nation, I think that it’s pretty significant that the California Democratic Party’s Progressive Caucus has called for a primary challenger to Obama. They want to see an actual progressive run on the Democratic ticket in 2012. I’m wholly on board with their effort.
*The Daily Caller is an outfit by the loathesome wingnut Tucker Carlson, so I don’t necessarily take this piece for gospel, but my guess is that it’s accurate. It sure sounds like the Ralph Nader that I know and love.