2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumPolitico is popping the bubbly tonight: "DC Turns On Obama"
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/dc-turns-on-obama-91386.html?hp=t1_3It mentions that Democrats are turning on President Obama too. Democrats like............Maureen Dowd! Well, I guess that it's all over then for President Obama. Methinks that the folks over at Politico are popping the bubble a teensy bit early.........I mean, I know that they want to see President Obama crushed and destroyed and see Republicans get back to running the show in Washington but them saying that President Obama is finished in DC doesn't make it so..................
jenmito
(37,326 posts)and then it spreads from there...
Cracklin Charlie
(12,904 posts)They're so predictable.
He's still President of the United States. Yawn.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)full of hot bad air
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)I think he was right to hammer the IRS if what happened is true. I think people need to keep their cool. Give it a week or 2 and we will see it change.
Cha
(297,220 posts)Their big fat fake scandals will die and who will be left standing?
hint.. not these guys. I'd post a pic but they're too damn ugly.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)then I doubt that there is really anything to worry about. Anyway, a few days of this and the media will probably move on to the next big shiny object(s). The more information that comes out the more it looks like there is nothing really to any of these "scandals" let alone anything that anybody can nail President Obama to the wall to. Stuff happens in any large organization, of course, but as long as it's not being promoted, covered up, and/or tolerated by its leader, then I'm not going to get too worked up over it personally. I just want to see the bad things investigated and fixed so that they don't keep happening.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)And how can she turn on the President when she has always hated him.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)She's antagonistic and topical to every powerful figure in this town...she was brutal on Bush, mocked Cheney, accused Al Gore of lactating, calls Obama "Spock"...and through it all she shows no comprehension of political-nuance.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Maureen is vicious, but she cheered Obama on in 2007 & 2008. At that time he was running against Hillary and she positively hates her with a passion.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)I never called people I cheered by silly, inmature names.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)She's a scorpion, even when she likes you. It's in her nature.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)I'm not even sure that she IS a Democrat nor am I sure she ever really liked him, so Politico trumpeting her *current* disapproval of President Obama as a sign of his "downfall" doesn't mean all that much to me, as I was trying to convey in my OP. Notice that the article didn't name any Reps or Senators whom are "turning on him". The Politico story that was in my OP was dumb and premature IMHO.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)Last time I checked, his approval rating was still in the high 80s to lower 90s among both Democrats and liberals. Who knows where they got this idea from that the base is turning on him. People on the fringe probably aren't too happy with him, but they're a small minority and clearly don't speak for the entire Left.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Well, who could have known considering the way she pilloried Gore and the Clintons.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Dowd is someone who knows she will never have to run for office, or even do anything other than get paid to type. Whenever people talk about the "death of print journalism", I point to her as an example of the lazy, silly nonsense that really stopped the presses.
WeekendWarrior
(1,437 posts)Two months before the first inauguration?
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)brooklynite
(94,561 posts)"Popping the Bubbly"?
Point to an example in the article where the author is gleeful about this development. And "we all know" isn't an answer.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)No, I guess that there isn't a *specific* example in the article but, based on what "we all know" about Politico, it is (or should be) fairly obvious that Politico is trying to demoralize President Obama's supporters and declaring (VERY prematurely) that Obama's Presidency is essentially over and that he's worn out his welcome in DC. I don't really know how else to take this ridiculous article, do you? How did you interpret it?
brooklynite
(94,561 posts)As a piece of political analysis, which Politico publishes in myriad forms. Is it "pro-Obama"? Of course not, but neither is it "anti-Obama". It is perhaps "pro-Beltway", and fixates on a pundits view of politics, but it includes liberals, moderates and conservatives among its stable of writers.
Proud Liberal Dem
(24,412 posts)More like wishful (delusional) thinking to me on the part of the writers IMHO
mgcgulfcoast
(1,127 posts)octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei :
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/20/hack_list_no_1_politico/
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)babylonsister
(171,065 posts)davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Then I am Fozzie Bear.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)if they don't have a story they just make one up.