How about Michelle Obama in 2016?
Commenter “Mrs Whatsit” asks:
Is anyone besides me wondering whether the reason that the Obama administration has been so quick to throw Hillary under the bus might be to make room for a new candidate who’d offer the trifecta of being black and female and having great name recognition and besides that, would circumvent the 22nd Amendment ”” that is, Michelle Obama?
I’ve been hearing people predict for years that Michelle would run in 2016. I have never thought so, and I still don’t think so.
It’s not that I don’t think Obama would want it. I just don’t think people would buy it, due to Michelle’s complete and total lack of political experience—and by “people” I mean also Democrats. Hillary Clinton has been a senator for years and then a Secretary of State, and no matter what you think of her performance in each job you can’t deny it’s relevant experience for a run for the presidency. Michelle only has the First Lady experience behind her, which I don’t think would be enough for her to win, even with the Obama name.
People have also long suggested that Obama is going to force some sort of crisis before the 2016 election, declare a state of emergency a la Reichstag fire, and run for a third term. Again, I am fairly certain that he would run again if he could, but I don’t think he can or will. That’s not because I think there won’t be a crisis (manufactured or natural, there are plenty of potential possibilities). Nor is it because the US is so filled with people who are wedded to and protective of the Constitution; I think fewer and fewer people care about the importance of following a constitutional process that protects us against a tyrant. The reason I think Michelle won’t run is that many Democrats and even some on the left are sick of Obama, and they want new blood. For the left, that new blood would be someone like Elizabeth Warren, not Michelle. And since Warren would also be a first woman president, it’s not necessary to the left that she also be black; first black president has been done.
I recall that right before the 2008 election quite a few people thought the economic crisis had been engineered by shadowy behind-the-scenes operators such as Soros, in order to facilitate Obama’s victory. I never bought that conspiracy theory, but it is the case that the economic crisis certainly acted to do just that. And by the way, this seems as good a place as any to point out to those who are angry that McCain ran against Obama, because McCain was such a poor and RINO-esque candidate, that I think you should refresh your memory as to the entire list of Republican candidates that year. Besides McCain, there was Thompson, Huckabee, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Duncan Hunter, Rudy Giuliani, and Mitt Romney. Who of those do you think would have been able to beat Obama?
My favored candidate at the beginning of the season was Giuliani, but he ran a poor campaign and dropped out. I seem to recall he was rejected as being a RINO by the right of the party. And I don’t see how any of the others would have had a chance against Obama—except perhaps for Romney, but only after the economic downturn. But by then the primaries had ended and the candidate, McCain, had been chosen. McCain was, unfortunately, probably the weakest of all of them on economic affairs (which had become particularly important) and Romney the strongest, which might have meant that by November of 2008 Romney would have been a far better candidate than he seemed to be back when the Republican field was being winnowed down.
That’s one of the problems with the nomination process; it’s not nimble enough to react to changing circumstances—although I think it was highly probable that Obama would have won against any of those 2008 GOP candidates, because Americans were determined to repudiate Bush and the Republicans and go with hope and change.
So here we are.
By the time of the 2008 election — meaning, after the primaries — only someone who was absolutely, utterly serious about unmasking and defeating Candidate Hopenchange might have stood a chance.
And that was a necessary, not a sufficient, condition. Someone like Gingrich in 2012 was fully capable of taking the fight to Sir Hopenchange, but someone like Gingrich had other very serious baggage issues, justified or not.
No, the country had had it with the Republican administration, and the economic calamity, whatever the actual cause of it, clinched the deal. Hillary! would have won at that point; even pretty boy John Edwards would have won at that point. Hell, even John F. Kerry might have won in 2008 at that point.
We still need a candidate who is absolutely, utterly serious about defeating so-called progressivism. And it’s still a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for winning. Even then, I fear the war’s already over anyway.
I agree with everything you have said. I also don’t think Michelle Obama is viable, yet. And I don’t see what she has done as first lady that will lead to being a senator and try that path. According to reports, she hates the White House and hates Washington, so why would she want to come back when they can become billionaires by just being them? However, I do buy the theory that the Obama’s and VJ want to wrest control of the Dem party from the Clinton’s. I do not think they want Hillary to win the next election. Why do the Obama’s want to move to NY? This is very interesting.
Michelle has complained about life in the White House several times, even likening it to a prison. She gets out as much as possible, both in her capacity as FLOTUS (all of her “Let’s Move” events) as well as for me-time (and a lot of her time away never makes it into the news, such as the regular trips to Vail).
I think it’s more likely Michelle will seek some type of media opportunity given her propensity to show up on various television shows. But I think she will take the Hillary route and no longer live with Barack following his presidency.
2008 would have been a better year for Romney than 2012. Might have still lost, but probably had a better shot then.
I’ll go out on a limb (ha), there is not ‘a snowball’s chance in hell’ that Michelle Obama will be the 2016 democrat nominee.
“People have also long suggested that Obama is going to force some sort of crisis before the 2016 election, declare a state of emergency a la Reichstag fire, and run for a third term.”
People who readily advocate that scenario are not thinking critically. Obama would certainly welcome such an opportunity and Obama and the Left are certainly working toward facilitating the emergence of crises both foreign and domestic. Any one of which would credibly allow them to subvert the electoral process. But neither Obama nor the Left can, at will, force such a crisis to emerge. It will arrive when reality wills it for the dynamics involved are far too broad and deep to be engineered upon a timetable.
“There is a great deal of ruin in a nation.” ― Adam Smith
Then there is the purpose and necessary conditions to such a crisis. The purpose of course would be to secure a leftist coup. To succeed, it must have the support of the US Military and to gain the military’s support, it must be a ‘bi-partisan’ crisis, so severe and ‘natural’ in nature that support for any extraordinary means is widespread on both the Left and Right.
Among that 2008 list of Republican candidates, I liked Thompson, Keyes and Guiliani. Not because I agreed with them on every issue but because my perception is that they are all of good character. Guiliani’s personal character may be flawed but of his love for this country, I have no doubt and, 9/11 proved that under pressure, his ‘instincts’ are good.
Romney would have been better than McCain in 2008, but I don’t think he would have won then, either. In fact, I think it’s very hard to imagine a pair of candidates in which the Republican won. Voters were somewhat soured on Republicans at the time (as partly shown in the 2006 mid-terms). And the media was able to effectively link the crash with the Republican party – despite the fact that all of the congresscritters who were actually identified as having some responsibility were Democrats.
In short, any conceivable Republican candidate would have gone into the race with too big of a millstone around his or her neck.
In the event it came to pass, we would, after eight years of gender role-playing, have a FLOTUS and POTUS more in keeping with historically and stereotypically representative roles. FLOTUS would have a woman’s desires and POTUS, having the ‘guns’ of an NFL Safety, would suggest they came with a ‘big stick’.
http://nypost.com/2015/03/28/google-controls-what-we-buy-the-news-we-read-and-obamas-policies/
THIS ^^^ is the tale of the corrupted 2012 election.
Winston Smith — take notes.
Obama mucked it up so badly that there will never be another black president for many decades. Sorry, Dr. Carson…
I’d like to do Michelle’s campaign ads: Eat your vegetables. No sweet drinks. Forget the mashed potaoes. I have such a tough life here with all those servants and florists to manage.
I can’t imagine any man voting for her.
Thompson could have been a great candidate, but he didn’t really want it.
Whew. I feel better. Well, a little better. Thanks, all!
expat made me laugh out loud.
I agree that mo does not want to return to dc when she and bho exit the White House. This despicable pair wants to make the really big bucks offered by book deals and enormous speaking fees. They want a penthouse in nyc, vacation homes in Hawaii and Aspen, and a large private jet to fly them in luxury on their globe trotting journeys.
They might run someone on an Occupy Wall Street platform. Banksters, corporatists, blah blah blah. Likely it will be someone well-versed in using all the buzz words associated with the Marxian hatred of finance. Might even split off some of the right who’ve drunk that Kool-aid. I’m sure Michelle can mouth the proper platitudes. Wonder if she wants it? Wonder if they got anybody who can equal Ted Cruz in a debate?
They really do mean to destroy capitalism and finance is its heart. Never mind that it’s finance that has reduced poverty dramatically ever since the industrial revolution.
The heroic 99% will love it. Matter of fact, probably 99% really do hate those who have more than they.
Probably the candidate is already selected. What follows will be just theater. The Hillary chronicles have been pretty entertaining to many so far. Do you really think it’s anything but a show? The party exists only for the sake of the party. Individuals mean nothing. Their views are subjugated to the will of the party. Hillary will happily go along with anything.
No thanks.
Besides are her cheekbones high enough to meet Democrat standards?
They might run someone on an Occupy Wall Street platform.
————————-
If Warren runs, this will be what she runs on.
Eh … I could see it, if she wasn’t such a dislikeable and impolitic person. It’s happened before, mostly in South America, where the Grande Queso can’t bear to let go the reins of power and authority, and so puts in his wife as a willing puppet. I’d almost be willing to say that it would be impossible – but then I saw the national media try and paint her as beautiful, accomplished, with world-class taste in couture, interior decoration and policy matters. If the compliant national media really put their back into it, she might yet have a shot…
Thinking on these lines, I did a post this last weekend about the early 20th century Texas governor who had a go at getting his wife elected, in spite of her having very few political skilz … http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/47993.html
Neo
I’ve been hearing people predict for years that Michelle would run in 2016. I have never thought so, and I still don’t think so.
May be this a PR for black and female candidate
If Michelle Obama were to run, that would cement our descent into a banana Republic. Can you say: Marcos?
RickC…
You’re thinking Argentina…
I don’t think she’d want the job, and I don’t think he’d want to stick around either. He’s always been half-hearted about it. He probably saw as a young adult that he could achieve anything he wanted to, so he charted a course for the highest office in the country, and he attained it. But he never really had an agenda or anything that made him stand out. Not really. Now, he’s a celebrity, and he gets to keep the jet-setting part of his life without bothering with meetings or anything. That’s fine by him, I’d guess.
Nick:
I strongly disagree. I’ve written about this a lot so I won’t go into it again right now, but I think Obama has a strong agenda, one he’s held for a long time, and he is fulfilling it.
Stan…
Thompson was McCain’s CAMPAIGN MANAGER in 2000.
He was only a stalking horse to thwart McCain’s competition.
The fellow that could’ve derailed ayatollah Soetoro was CAIN.
He was rolled by Axel…
blert:
Wasn’t the Cain thing in 2012?
The Clintons realized she would have to get some title before running for president. Hillary over Manbearpig Hugecarbonfootprint was not plausible. That was another time.
Michelle is no more plausible than un-senator Hillary, although (impotent) Daft Uncle Joe is no more plausible than Michelle. Michelle would be fine if she could manage the implausibility. No Democrat (or anyone else) slightly suspects that she can, not even BO.
What they might very well believe is that the implausibility is irrelevant.
The actual electoral machinery in the cities and the relentless soviet sodden newspaper asphyxiation propaganda so effective on the masses, plus the highly successful discouragement of folks who realize what is going on (discouragement caused in part, I think, by blackmail of the Boehners, McCains, Grahams etc) make Michelle’s success possible regardless of plausibility to Democrats or anyone else. The government even local police are effectively in the hands of the Left, meaning Barrack Obama, Soros, Ayers and who knows who else. They spent decades achieving this result. They succeeded.
BO’s presidency, despite conforming precisely to the expectations of those who knew what he was about (red diaper and pro-Islam), remains a mystery to most folks. Even many so-called conservatives still are ambivalent about something which was readily apparent before BO was elected.
Evil people and Leftists are not dumb. They will do what they can get away with. It does take some advanced degree of intellect and creativity to get something you do not deserve morally.
If evil people and Leftists cannot get away with it, they will try to achieve the thing that will work.
I don’t think it has gotten to the point that Michelle can be gotten away with. But it is pretty close to that, and we will find out. BO staying in power, however, does not seem close at hand to me, although we are getting there, and he has consciously been preparing the way.
And to all the immoral non-Leftists who consider their non-vote a badge of honor, please, please reconsider.
BTW neo, I do not think folks expect BO to create a crisis in order to maintain power.
I think what people expect is that he will CONNIVE in a crisis which will significantly create chaos.
Whatever BO will do, will be an unmistakable finger to America, perhaps historic.
I am with Lizzy. I just don’t see it happening. Michelle doesn’t like the White House or campaigning and her general attitude has been that her family has been doing the country a huge favor for the past six years. She loves the perks of course (especially the travel) but she’ll be able to maintain that as an ex-First Lady without the hassles and obligations of public service. Not to mention the fact that she has no track record with elective office (and wasn’t there some question about the status of her law license?).
I am not a fan of conspiracy theories but I always considered it highly plausible that Soros had something to do with the very convenient timing of the economic crisis that coincided with the 2008 election. It sounds far-fetched, but doesn’t he have a history of tinkering with world currencies and markets?
CV there is no question: she surrendered it. PERIOD.
As did Bill Clinton and ayatollah Soetoro.
IIRC they were, de facto, kicked out of the bar.
Hillary, too, IIRC.
It’s not as if any of these four was ever going to practice law….
Breaking it is much more their style.
Val Jarrett!
She has served as President for 6 years.
She’s black.
She’s a woman.
She lived in Iran.
And she can continue the failed policies of Barack.
Cornhead for the score!
No Jarrett, she was born in Iran, too late to seal records
Molly NH:
Born in Iran to American citizen parents. Therefore completely eligible to become president.
CV, 9:07 pm — “I always considered it highly plausible that Soros had something to do with the very convenient timing of the economic crisis that coincided with the 2008 election.”
I agree. If not Soros, then someone or someones, but the timing was so-o-o-o conveeeenient. I offer no hypothesis and no evidence, but the idea that something was engineered in the Fall of 2008 is certainly “highly plausible” — in my rarely humble opinion, of course.
I’ve been saying this for a while. It is based on the premise that if Hillary stumbles there is no one obvious to fill the vacuum and the door is then wide open for anything. Of the arguments against it here the best one is that she just doesn’t want to do it. Assuming it’s her choice.
If the British royal family can do their darnedest to see that Queen Elizabeth stays on the throne for as long as possible so to ensure that William and not his father is crowned the next king, I don’t see why Democrats in the US can’t just jettison fraught-as-she-is-with-baggage Hillary and go with Chelsea.
I mean, what difference does it make?
Really.
When Kerry comes back waving “peace in our time”, they will run him. With Faux as his pit bull veep.
And we’re done for 16 years, until Chelsea.
You know if the right of the party says a candidate is a RINO and all the other candidates put up by the establishment wing are RINOs, maybe the problem is not with the right wing but with the establishment not listening to its base.
Obama would have beat anyone, except maybe Paul with his anti-war stance (And that’s not terribly likely).
The nomination process isn’t supposed to be nimble. It’s supposed to be a vetting filter. If a candidate can’t adapt to the nomination process, then they can’t adapt to a four-year presidency.