Former WH Official Acknowledges Obama's 'Maybe' Not Good at Governing

[cpwill]

:roll: CNN discovers what has been pretty much obvious to everyone (and was predicted) for years.

CNN report Peter Hamby reports on a recent conversation he had with a former White House official:

..."I talked to a former Obama White House person, just before Christmas, when Obama was sort of adrift, figuring out what to do, his poll numbers were pretty low. And he said, 'Look, the president needs to find an issue to campaign on. This is what he's good at. He's really good at campaigning. Maybe not governing,' according to this Democrat," Hamby said this morning on CNN...

But, but, but, he had almost thirty whole seconds of experience as a national senator before he became President! Surely that is enough Executive Experience to run the government of the most powerful nation on the planet!



Worth recalling: when he was asked about this in 2008, Obama replied that running his own campaign was proof of his sufficient executive ability.

:roll:

 

[Dittohead not!]

:roll: CNN discovers what has been pretty much obvious to everyone (and was predicted) for years.



But, but, but, he had almost thirty whole seconds of experience as a national senator before he became President! Surely that is enough Executive Experience to run the government of the most powerful nation on the planet!



Worth recalling: when he was asked about this in 2008, Obama replied that running his own campaign was proof of his sufficient executive ability.

:roll:[/FONT][/COLOR]

Good point, and yet the Republicans couldn't defeat him in '08 or in '12. If the Democrats can win with an inexperienced candidate, what does that say about the opposition?

McCain/Palin helped him get elected in '08. Romney should have won in '12.

But, that is past. What are the Republicans going to do next time around? Is supporting amnesty going to get them the Latino vote? Are they going to run a Palin, a Perry, or a Bachmann? If they think that is going to win elections, they'll shoot themselves in the foot yet again.

 

[cpwill]

Good point, and yet the Republicans couldn't defeat him in '08 or in '12. If the Democrats can win with an inexperienced candidate, what does that say about the opposition?

What the guy said above. He's a good campaigner, just not good at governing.

McCain/Palin helped him get elected in '08. Romney should have won in '12.

No - the fiscal crash and weariness with the Bush Administration got him elected in '08. Republicans should indeed have won in '12; but didn't because (as stated) he managed to recreate the demographics of the '08 turnout, demonstrating an impressive (and, full disclosure, for my part unforseen) capability.

But, that is past. What are the Republicans going to do next time around? Is supporting amnesty going to get them the Latino vote?

Nope. I know some Republicans think that, but it is a delusion.

Are they going to run a Palin, a Perry, or a Bachmann?

By which you mean someone who is not erudite? Well, I don't know - George W seems to have done well enough. But I don't think so. Maybe they could run a really smooth talker instead, someone who is moderate, obviously intelligent, has a history of winning as a Republican in a blue state.... you know, like Mitt Romney.

 

[Anomalism]

The system is broken and the game is rigged; Democrat and Republican are two words that mean the same thing. Nothing will get better as long as money is allowed to control and corrupt politicians.

 

[Morton]

If he would acknowledge he's not good at governing and surround himself with people who were he wouldn't be such a failure. He thinks he's Reagan but he's worse than Carter.

:roll: CNN discovers what has been pretty much obvious to everyone (and was predicted) for years.



But, but, but, he had almost thirty whole seconds of experience as a national senator before he became President! Surely that is enough Executive Experience to run the government of the most powerful nation on the planet!



Worth recalling: when he was asked about this in 2008, Obama replied that running his own campaign was proof of his sufficient executive ability.

:roll:[/FONT][/COLOR]

 

[Middleground]

The system is broken and the game is rigged; Democrat and Republican are two words that mean the same thing. Nothing will get better as long as money is allowed to control and corrupt politicians.

Bingo we have a winner here....

 

[Middleground]

If he would acknowledge he's not good at governing and surround himself with people who were he wouldn't be such a failure. He thinks he's Reagan but he's worse than Carter.

But thankfully, not worse than Dubya.

 

[eohrnberger]

:roll: CNN discovers what has been pretty much obvious to everyone (and was predicted) for years.



But, but, but, he had almost thirty whole seconds of experience as a national senator before he became President! Surely that is enough Executive Experience to run the government of the most powerful nation on the planet!



Worth recalling: when he was asked about this in 2008, Obama replied that running his own campaign was proof of his sufficient executive ability.

:roll:[/FONT][/COLOR]

Also in the news. Water is wet.

 

[scatt]

But thankfully, not worse than Dubya.

How can a person who supports the Bush policies and expands them be worse than Bush?

 

[eohrnberger]

But thankfully, not worse than Dubya.

I think that assessment is open to be questioned. Don't think that that abortion of a web site would have been delivered with Bush in charge, for one example.

 

[MACS-24]

But thankfully, not worse than Dubya.

Originally, I didn't think anyone would be worse than Dubya, now I'm not sure. Maybe only in public speaking does Obama outdo.

 

[Middleground]

I think that assessment is open to be questioned. Don't think that that abortion of a web site would have been delivered with Bush in charge, for one example.

Dontcha think the website is a drop in the bucket compared to the disaster that was Iraq??? Good freakin gawd.

 

[Middleground]

Originally, I didn't think anyone would be worse than Dubya, now I'm not sure. Maybe only in public speaking does Obama outdo.

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on 2 wars that have gotten pretty much nothing in return aside from more hatred? I agree that Obama has sucked, but dang, at least his disasters were minimal compared to Bush. Jeepers it does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

 

[MACS-24]

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on 2 wars that have gotten pretty much nothing in return aside from more hatred? I agree that Obama has sucked, but dang, at least his disasters were minimal compared to Bush. Jeepers it does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

Sorry, just making a humorous (to me) comment because all the bashing of W in the past by me. But now thinking more: which one has done more damage to the Constitution? That's more damaging than money.

 

[washunut]

Dontcha think the website is a drop in the bucket compared to the disaster that was Iraq??? Good freakin gawd.

How many Americans will die because of Obamacare. Something like 6 million people now have no coverage who used to buy it. Who knows how many more will lose it next year (after the midterm elections) when the corporate mandate is imposed.

 

[Anomalism]

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on 2 wars that have gotten pretty much nothing in return aside from more hatred? I agree that Obama has sucked, but dang, at least his disasters were minimal compared to Bush. Jeepers it does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

Those wars would have happened if Obama was in office at the time. The system is corrupt, and I think you're overestimating the influence the president actually has.

 

[Morton]

Before Obama "Trillions of dollars" was alot of money.

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on 2 wars that have gotten pretty much nothing in return aside from more hatred? I agree that Obama has sucked, but dang, at least his disasters were minimal compared to Bush. Jeepers it does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

 

[eohrnberger]

Dontcha think the website is a drop in the bucket compared to the disaster that was Iraq??? Good freakin gawd.

From a management perspective, and invasion is a lot harder to manage, lead and organize than a simple web site, yet that simple web site defeated Obama, and made him look the incompetent leader that he is.

 

[Anomalism]

From a management perspective, and invasion is a lot harder to manage, lead and organize than a simple web site, yet that simple web site defeated Obama, and made him look the incompetent leader that he is.

Bush didn't manage the invasion and Obama didn't manage the website.

 

[eohrnberger]

Bush didn't manage the invasion and Obama didn't manage the website.

Obama not managing, or effectively leading, the web site effort is clean and plain as day.

Bush did lead the effort for the invasion, not the military logistics stuff, but the leader stuff that made it happen. Doubtful Obama could do the same if called on.

 

[Anomalism]

but the leader stuff that made it happen.

What leader stuff? The part where he declared war?

 

[eohrnberger]

What leader stuff? The part where he declared war?

How about the leadership to assemble the international coalition? Granted, that was for Afghanistan.
By now, the international leaders have identified Obama as such a weak and untrustworthy leader, they'd laugh him out of their office.

 

[Velvet Elvis]

How many trillions of dollars have been spent on 2 wars that have gotten pretty much nothing in return aside from more hatred?

Why don't you ask the members of congress that voted to go ahead and go to war? Why are you insulating them from blame?

0bama said he was going to end BOTH wars in his first year. Five years later, and we're still involved in one of them, and he's still using drones in the other one. I guess killing people with drones isn't considered a "war" action, huh?

I agree that Obama has sucked, but dang, at least his disasters were minimal compared to Bush.

Are you really sure about that? A lot of 0bama's "disasters" have been kicked down the road. He "pays" for stuff by pushing the "bill" off on future administrations. The things he DOES do are nothing more than power grabs. Ways to take freedoms away from people. How is he paying for 0bamacare? By putting a forbearance on payment. Where did he get the money for all those drone strikes in Syria and Egypt?

Jeepers it does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

Good thing you're not Einstein.


0bama is the worst president of all time. Unfortunately, he's brilliantly charismatic so he even looks good fiddling while Rome bur....err....plays golf while the nation falls apart.

 

[Anomalism]

How about the leadership to assemble the international coalition? Granted, that was for Afghanistan.

Any president would have done that.

By now, the international leaders have identified Obama as such a weak and untrustworthy leader, they'd laugh him out of their office.

I'm not going to defend Obama, but I don't agree with this.

 

[bubbabgone]

Good point, and yet the Republicans couldn't defeat him in '08 or in '12.

If the Democrats can win with an inexperienced candidate, what does that say about the opposition?

McCain/Palin helped him get elected in '08. Romney should have won in '12.

But, that is past. What are the Republicans going to do next time around? Is supporting amnesty going to get them the Latino vote? Are they going to run a Palin, a Perry, or a Bachmann? If they think that is going to win elections, they'll shoot themselves in the foot yet again.

Because he's really good at lying ... and don't forget that dreamy smile and that lump in his back pocket called The Media.