Prediction - 2011 and a More Politically Savvy Obama

2011 and a more politically savvy Obama. Yes that is what I said, “more politically savvy”! I think that the next two years should be very interesting politically. I think it took the better part of a rather inexperienced Obama almost two years to figure out just how dirty Washington politics really can be. I think it is lesson learned and watch out GOP. Not that he won’t compromise or lose a battle or two but I think he will seem even scarier to the Right than he was in his first two years. Why? Because frankly I think he has learned the game. I think Republicans actually have to produce or shut up for a change. I think Republicans have challenges in their own party to deal with. And finally, I think Republicans will throw each other under the bus to get the chance to lose to Obama in 2012.

Disagree if you must but explain your rationale if you have one.

 

Maybe. It will be interesting to see. But, looking at the tax compromise - before the Republicans even gained full power, I am not so sure he will be very popular in his own party come 2012.

 

I don't think the words "Obama" and "politically savvy" can be used in the same sentence.

 

Ah! The no real rationale approach.

 

lol

 

Well, let me dumb it down for you by using your own words:

" I think it took the better part of a rather inexperienced Obama almost two years to figure out just how dirty Washington politics really can be." - Moen1305

Not very politically savvy would you say?

 

I think that was MY point you're trying to re-make. And if you didn't even get that, the part about Obama learning from the first two years must have went right over your head. Still no rationale for your comments. That's what I meant when I said in large bolded print, "Disagree if you must but explain your rationale if you have one." You apparently don't have one.

Moving along...

 

OK, I'll explain my rationale to those who can't seem to grasp it. Obama, by evidence of his first 2 years in office, has shown little, if any political savvy. Who knows what the next 2 years will hold? We'll have to wait and see (unless you have a crystal ball). But, based upon his actions so far, "politically savvy" is not a definition I would use to describe Obama. And you, Moen, would appear to agree.

 

He isn't very popular in his own party..True, but then if the only other choice is a republican..well...

 

Any possible challenger in a primary will not be a Republican. And if he keeps giving away the farm like he did in the tax compromise, he might actually get a challenger int eh primary.

 

WOW! I guess I should have dumbed down the OP so that even the lowest common denominator might grasp my point. I appear to agree because it was my point in the first place. In other words, you appear to agree with me. Are you sure you even read the entire OP? I'm finding it hard to believe.

 

OK, please listen carefully Moen. I'm agreeing with you when you say, "I think it took the better part of a rather inexperienced Obama almost two years to figure out just how dirty Washington politics really can be." What I'm NOT agreeing with is your assertion that he will learn how to compromise, that he's "learned the game" or will become "politically savvy". Personally, I think he continues to be "rather inexperienced" and hasn't learned to become "politically savvy". The basis for your argument is that "he has learned the game". Well, I don't believe he has. Of course, no one can disagree with any of our arguments yet because the future has yet to unfold. I hope I'm proven wrong and he decides to actually work with the Republicans (or rather be FORCED to work with them). But, I'm not making any predictions because I don't have a crystal ball either so we'll just have to wait and see.

 

This article puts the question of Obama's second two years far better than I could have. But it asks many of the same questions.

Analysis: A political rebound, but can it hold? | White House News | Political News | Comcast.net

 

Maybe...but the alternative then defaults to a republican., the worst possible choice regardless. It would also be entertaining to watch (if you are correct), the right find something different to campaign on..what line of attack they'd use next. Maybe they'd attack the next democratic candidate claiming that they weren't born on earth or something. Be interesting. Anti republican regardless is the way to go so, doesn't really matter either way. I mean...who does the right have waiting in the wings...Sarah Palin or the Newt? Maybe Sean Hannity or Huckleberry as a "surprise" candidate? The pole is extremely low.

 

We would all be better served if we ignored the words " Republican" and " Democrat" and just voted on who best stood for our values ..........

 

The republican always stand against the MAJORITY's values. I only need to see that (R) next to their name to know which of the two choices (electable parties) that represents me. I'll give ya a hint. It AIN'T the one that seeks what's best for the top 2% of income "earners".

 

That's one of the wisest things I've heard on this forum.

 

I have little doubt that that's what you think.

 

Yeah, voting for the person who best represents your beliefs is outrageous!

 

I just find it hard to find any politician that has any values so where does that leave me?