LBJ had years as majority leader to hone his political skills. Obama had hardly any experience leading anything.
If Obama is aloof and uninterested in the drudge work needed to push his agenda, we should all be thankful.
Look at it this way, Jimmy Carter was an awful, abysmal president. But a Democrat was going to be elected in 1976 anyway. A Southerner with a military background was probably not the worst Democrat we could have elected, even if he was more incompetent than the others.
Sooner or later, the country was going to elect a Northern Democrat again. Sooner or later we'd have an inner city Black President. And at some time or other, someone with a radical left background would make it into the White House.
Given all that, an incompetent, inexperienced Northern Democrat, an inner city African-American raised by a White mother and grandparents in Indonesia and Hawaii, and a sometime follower of radical causes who wins because of contributions from investment bankers may be a disaster, but not the worst of all possible disasters.
“(Obama).....may be a disaster, but not the worst of all possible disasters.”
Well, that is my point, thankfully, but I detect a note of inevitability in your characterization of the election of Democrats of various stripes. I would observe the opposite: Carter won because Ford, otherwise experienced and well liked, ran a nonideological campaign. Clinton beat a split ticket (he won with 43% where Dukakis had lost with 44%) and later defeated another well liked Republican who was also ideologically incompetent. And Obama defeated an anti-his-own-party maverick.
Anyway, Obama’s dictatorial megalomania is far greater than the talents needed to achieve his overarching goals. Note his visible frustration when he reminds his base that the Constitution inhibits his desire to rule by executive fiat.
Less than sixteen months remain of this appalling presidency. That’s cause enough for hope.