Already some articles have cropped up here & there about whether Obama would face a primary challenge. Not surprising considering this poll.
The AP-KN poll has tracked a group of people and their views since the beginning of the 2008 presidential campaign. Among all 2008 voters, 51 percent say he deserves to be defeated in November 2012 while 47 percent support his re-election—essentially a tie.
Among Democrats, 47 percent say Obama should be challenged for the 2012 nomination and 51 percent say he should not be opposed.
Some excerpts
http://online.wsj.com/...
Key donors have told the White House that the president should decide for certain whether he's running for re-election by the end of December. Should Mr. Obama's approval ratings slip further next year, there's talk that some donors may call on him not to run, or promote an independent candidacy by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
It could go further. Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, told MSNBC in July that a primary challenge to Mr. Obama "is really possible," especially if he were to go back on his pledge to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan next year.
http://www.csmonitor.com/...
McInturff noted that in election night exit polling, people who expressed disapproval of US policy in Afghanistan "were voting overwhelmingly Democrat." That unhappiness could be coupled with a potential negative response from Democratic voters as Obama tries to find common ground with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
FWIW, I think the Pres should be primaried.
If the only reason why he shouldn't primaried is history - re-election presidents who were primaried lost - then I am not sure if that's a good reason.
Maybe all the presidents who were primaried had low approval ratings - hence they were primaried - if so, they lost the election because of their low approval, not because they were primaried.
EDIT: Removed the Front Page link coz it made one poster froth at the mouth.