In 2010 Douglas E. Schoen, a Bill Clinton pollster and Patrick H. Caddell, a pollster for Jimmy Carter, published a piece in the Wall street Journal which expressed disappointment in Barack Obama's deliberately divisive and cynical approach to governance.WSJ July 2010:
Rather than being a unifier, Mr. Obama has divided America on the basis of race, class and partisanship. Moreover, his cynical approach to governance has encouraged his allies to pursue a similar strategy of racially divisive politics on his behalf.
We have been watching the division of class Obama created, stoked, encouraged, and embraced, play itself out in the headlines over the last two months with the Occupy Wall Street antics.
In November of 2010 in the Washington Post op-ed pages, Caddell and Schoen begin making the argument that Obama should not run for reelection in 2012 saying they did not come to that conclusion lightly but that it was clear to them that Obama had "largely lost the consent of the governed," going on to state that the 2010 midterm elections was a "referendum on the Obama presidency," a vote of "no confidence in Obama and his party," and that Obama "has almost no credibility left with Republicans and little with independents."
Today, the same two men write that Obama should abandon his candidacy for re-election, citing examples of Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson who, according to Caddell and Schoen, "accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House," further stating that Truman and Johnson took the "moral high ground" in their decision against running for a new term as President.
Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.
Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.
President Obama is now neck and neck with a generic Republican challenger in the latest Real Clear Politics 2012 General Election Average (43.8%-43.%). Meanwhile, voters disapprove of the president's performance 49%-41% in the most recent Gallup survey, and 63% of voters disapprove of his handling of the economy, according to the most recent CNN/ORC poll.
They also believe that Hillary Clinton would be the natural choice to play savior to the Democratic party.
I have my doubts as to why Clinton would want to save a party with leaders that turned against her in 2008 when they stripped Michigan of their delegate's votes which favored Clinton.
We have seen multiple examples of buyer's remorse from individuals and groups that voted for Barack Obama in 2008, and the feel of the Caddell/Schoen pieces encouraging Obama to abandon his 2012 candidacy for reelection, seems to have that same type of regret attached to it.
It is doubtful if Obama's ego would allow him to withdraw and more doubtful still that Hillary Clinton would want the presidency at this time, but to see what Andrew Malcolm at Investors Business Daily describes as "friendly fire" continuing to come from Caddell and Schoen is indicative of party supporters who are desperate for "anyone but Obama."
.
