Skip to content

Barack Obama on the difference between the 1994 mid-term and the 2010 mid-term: “Me”

January 25, 2010

  Scott Brown’s election has had a profound effect on worried Democrats in congress. Worried Democrats are starting to back away from the president’s agenda as the similarities between the 1994 mid-term elections– when the Democrats lost 50+ house seats– are now being brought to light in the media.

  Barack Obama has a message for those who worry that the upcoming mid-term elections will have the same type of result as the mid-term elections of 1994: Don’t worry about a thing, I have your back.

  Barack Obama claims that there is a major difference between the 1994 mid-term election and the impending mid-term election, and the difference is him. This revelation comes courtesy of the latest Democrat to declare that he is not going to run for re-election– Marion Berry.

They just kept telling us how good it was going to be. The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.

  Apparently, Barack Obama is counting on his personal likeability rating to encourage Democrats that this upcoming election won’t be the same bloodbath that befell President Clinton. While it is true that the president’s personal likeability is still  high, more people are opposing the president’s agenda on a daily basis.

  We need to look no further than the recent election of Scott Brown to the senate for an example of how the president’s personal rating compared to his policy rating effected the special election. Barack Obama still held a personal favorability rating of 60% in Massachusetts before the election and it still wasn’t enough to carry Martha Coakley to victory. Voters went to the polls and voted against Barack Obama’s policies even though they still claim to like him personally by a large margin. Why should the upcoming mid-term election be any different?

  Yet the president appears blind to this fact as he tries to encourage Democrats that the public still likes him enough to send incumbant Democrats back to congress in November. How can he still feel this way? Is it arrogance? Is it denial? Or his he merely trying to “rally the troops?”

  Most likely, it is all of the above. The Massachusetts election should be a warning to all of those politicians who still support the president’s agenda; the people do not support it. It doesn’t matter how much somebody may or may not like you, in the end it is the results that people are interested in. Right now the people do not like the results– or lack thereof– and they are voting against this president. He can claim that the Massachusetts election “is not about me,” but in fact it was about him. It was about him and his policies.

  The fact that Barack Obama is unwilling to acknowledge this, coupled with the fact that he is still asking Democrats in congress to put their careers on the line in order to pass his agenda is certainly good news for those of us who oppose the president’s policies. If he keeps his head in the sand, and he continues to deny that his policies are being rejected by the American people, there will be a bloodbath at the mid-term elections. And, unless Barack Obama is just putting on a brave face, the only one that will be surprised by the outcome will be Barack Obama himself. Then, and only then, will Barack Obama realize that, yes, it is about him.

  Barack Obama’s arrogance could be his downfall. Instead of learning the lesson of the Massachusetts election, Barack Obama is denying that this election had anything to do with him. He will carry on as if nothing unusual happened in Massachusetts. But the question is, have the other Democrats learned the lesson that Massachusetts is trying to teach them, or will they trust Obama when he claims that his popularity will carry them through the mid-terms?

  Democrats will have an interesting choice to make over the next 10 months, surely they all can’t be in denial the way Barack Obama is, can they? If they are, Republicans and conservatives can expect to make gains in congress that seemed unthinkable just a few short months ago.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

16 Comments leave one →
  1. January 25, 2010 9:53 pm

    I’ve said it before; just let him keep talking. In fact, I hope he makes some campaign stops later this year. We see how well that has worked out so far.


    • January 26, 2010 5:58 am

      He is going to make a stop for Harry Reid. Good, that will seal Harry’s fate.


      • LD Jackson permalink
        January 26, 2010 8:34 pm

        Reckon we could take up donations to send him to Nevada? That is one donation I would gladly make.


      • January 26, 2010 9:20 pm

        After he visits Nevada a trip to San Fransisco might be in order.


  2. LD Jackson permalink
    January 25, 2010 10:43 pm

    I can’t figure our President out. Is he really so naive that he is the one who will make the difference in the mid-term elections.


    • Sam Price permalink
      January 25, 2010 11:06 pm

      Liberalism is mental disorder, so yes, he is that naive.


      • January 26, 2010 6:01 am

        You could have a point there.


    • January 26, 2010 12:31 am

      Actually, naive isn’t the word I would use. Delusional would be my choice. Or even egotistical…narcissistic…


      • January 26, 2010 6:00 am

        Delusional and narcissistic, now those are two words that seem to sum him up very well indeed!


    • January 26, 2010 5:59 am

      I think that it is arrogance, he really thinks that he can make a difference. His appearance didn’t help Martha Coakley, but he has already forgotten about that.


  3. January 26, 2010 12:30 am

    “The president himself, when that was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.”

    Actually, I think he is right. The difference IS him and he will see first hand the consequence of his arrogance and disrespect of the ‘we the people.’


    • January 26, 2010 6:01 am

      True, but the difference that he makes is reverse of what he thinks he makes! 🙂


  4. Mike permalink
    January 26, 2010 10:07 am

    I agree with the basic premise but I’m not sure I agree on the target. I think the Mass election was a blistering rebuke of Pelosi and Reid and, to a much lesser extent, Obama. The President made an enormous mistake in handing health reform over to those two congressional clowns and they screwed it up. Obama indicated on many occasions that he was more flexible in his approach to a compromise but they wanted to push thru a much more liberal package…and it came back to bite them in the butt.

    As for Brown, I said in an earlier comment and stick by it — his only redeeming quality to conservatives was his vote against health care reform BUT he is actually a health care reform supporter. He is also pro choice. And he posed nude for Cosmo. Hardly a conservative poster boy. A year from now I will like him more than any of you because he is essentially a fiscal conservative and a social moderate.


  5. prrof permalink
    January 26, 2010 1:42 pm

    i agree with the president because compared to anything bush did is a plus


    • January 26, 2010 3:43 pm

      Not sure what Bush has to do with this post but, whatever.



  1. Scott Brown and conservatives | Political Realities

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: