What are we going to do about 2012?

Whatever you thought during the election or the primaries, what matters is what you think now. If you believe that President-Elect Obama is unwilling or unable to be anything more than an empty suit, you better start organizing around an alternative for 2012 right now. Because President-elect Obama has been organizing his run for 2012 since at least June of 2008, and probably earlier, assuming he has planned on being twice nominated by the Democratic Party.

If you have tended to prefer Democrats, you must accept the extreme unlikelihood of Senator Clinton challenging Senator Obama for the nomination. So, you need to identify somebody who would be willing and possibly able to challenge President-elect Obama for the nomination. It will be hard to find a person willing to do this. The last time a Democrat launched a serious primary run against an incumbent was when Senator Edward Kennedy unsuccessfully challenged Jimmy Carter; of course, the only opportunities since then have been to challenge President Bill Clinton who was, at the end of his first term, so successful a President that he was renominated by acclimation.

If you are looking ahead to the general election in 2012 and are an Independent, a Republican, or a Democrat willing to vote Republican, you have to accept that, as far as I know, there is no potential Republican contender with a commitment to gay rights or reproductive rights who could also garner the support of the Republican Party base.

You also need to face the fact that third party candidates do not win.

There is some possibility that Barack Obama may turn out to be this century's Martin Van Buren.  Van Buren faced an economy riddled with unsolvable problems, and that set up the Whigs for victory despite Van Buren's popularity. It is possible that President-elect Obama will face a similar problem.

Just to remind people of some basic history, with the fall of Van Buren, the country entered a period of rather underwhelming Presidencies:

• William Harrison
• John Tyler
• James Polk
• Zachary Taylor
• Millard Fillmore
• Franklin Pierce
• James Buchanan

Abraham Lincoln then came to power at a time of crisis for the Union - but not crises or problems of the sort confronting Barack Obama today.  We do not face the prospect of Civil War. Lincoln's ability to offer moral leadership in the face of that prospect in his time was well established prior to his election to the presidency, going back at least to one of his first major public speeches, The Lyceum Address, given in 1838, a speech that shows his awareness of the potential for tyranny to creep up upon a democratic republic whose citizens fail to commit themselves to the rules of law and the democratic institutions it rests upon. From that speech, entitled The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions:

It is to deny, what the history of the world tells us is true, to suppose that men of ambition and talents will not continue to spring up amongst us. And, when they do, they will as naturally seek the gratification of their ruling passion, as others have so done before them. The question then, is, can that gratification be found in supporting and maintaining an edifice that has been erected by others? Most certainly it cannot. Many great and good men sufficiently qualified for any task they should undertake, may ever be found, whose ambition would inspire to nothing beyond a seat in Congress, a gubernatorial or a presidential chair; but such belong not to the family of the lion, or the tribe of the eagle. What! think you these places would satisfy an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon? — Never! Towering genius disdains a beaten path. It seeks regions hitherto unexplored. — It sees no distinction in adding story to story, upon the monuments of fame, erected to the memory of others. It denies that it is glory enough to serve under any chief. It scorns to tread in the footsteps of any predecessor, however illustrious. It thirsts and burns for distinction; and, if possible, it will have it, whether at the expense of emancipating slaves, or enslaving freemen. Is it unreasonable then to expect, that some man possessed of the loftiest genius, coupled with ambition sufficient to push it to its utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us? And when such a one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, and generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs.

Lincoln's address invite "his audience to into a discussion of the principles, tendencies, and sustenance of self-government. He concentrates on its vulnerabilities and the burdens they place upon self-governing citizens." (source: John Channing Briggs, Lincoln's Speeches Reconsidered, p. 55).

As we have learned, much to our cost, the pace of our current electoral politics means a president who takes office - however he or she wins it (e.g. consider Bush's 2000 victory) stands a high chance of being renominated by her or his party (again, consider Bush in 2004) and retaining the presidency even after doing dreadful things (Bush). I may be wrong about President-elect Obama's chances of being a good leader or being able to resolve problems that may well be beyond his control. Perhaps, come 2012 I will feel he has earned my vote. For me, that would take a lot, because I do not believe in rewarding people who take advantage of corrupted procedures to gain office in the first place (which is what happened in Denver in 2008). But people can learn, and perhaps President-elect Obama will.

Regardless of that the nature of contemporary presevidential politics seems to demand that President-elect Obama start his current term as if he is already running for his next one. Therefore, those of us who await an election where we do not feel there is no major party candidate for whom we can vote or an election where we are not choosing the lesser of two of evils, need to begin seeking and supporting an alternative now.

Serious ideas and suggestions welcome.

Comments

[pacific]

Ah, if only it were up to us. Unfortunately, the winner in 2012, as in 2008, will be whomever the MSM decides to cram down our throats.
That said, I'm ready to work my ass off for whichever woman comes to the fore to challenge obama for the office.
Is it possibly to reassert the true electorate in this country? How do we circumvent the scumbag/corporate media who presumes to decide for us - and will sacrifice any illusion of journalistic integrity to tear down a worthy candidate (HRC)in favor of a hip candidate -no matter how corrupt, unworthy & inexperienced he might be?

[chatblu]

I have vited for very few people. I have voted against many more.

[ainnj]

Things will be getting a lot worse before they get better in this country and we might very well still be sliding downward come 11/12. I doubt that, barring any miraculous economic upturn, Obama will be very popular come the next election, and it won't be through any fault of his, that's just the way it will play. On the other hand, I am pretty sure that no matter how bad things are there will be no Democratic challengers so it will be the Republican party's election to lose next time around. There is a slight possibility that there will be enough disillusioned democrats joining the republican party to affect changes from within, but not likely.

Australia sounds nice.

[ownaa]

Heidi

Every one talks about reform but when it comes to talking about an option out side the 2-party system it's a no no. Just because it didn't work in the past that doesn't means it will not ever. what happened this year the likes of it this country never seen before. The democratic party should be exposed big time, no holding back. A new approach to the existing party system should be debated all the time so people at least develop some guts to warm up to the idea. Taking that debate out side the net also is a big plus. The big mistake in my opinion during we didn't give Hillary a place to go, that is why she caved in. I am not saying it is our fault she caved in, but the criminal activities of the MSM and the party during the primaries would have been exposed if there was a solid mass doing it.

[Nancy Armstrong]

I don't have an answer about 2012 but I am doing something here in Kansas. I am starting a grassroots movement to rid this state of the caucuses. I spoke to the new chairman of the elections committee in Topeka....got the standard we do things different in the Republican caucuses and we had a budget shortfall...I have designed a flyer I will be e-mailing to friends in Kansas and handing out with Steve Hubert's number on it asking for an end to caucuses. After that I am not certain where to go! At least I have one goal to achieve.

The Democratic Party does need more transparency but with Obama leading it can we really expose anything?

Hey wouldn't it be great if we could have something other than a 2 party system? I know it doesn't work!

[InsightAnalytical-GRL]

I have no answers about 2012. I'm wondering if it's worth voting anymore.

Or trying to "save" the Democratic Party.

Frankly, I think we should focus on women and consciousness-raising! AGAIN!!! You have to wake women up before we get any real clout...