This election is teh proof positive why the Democrats need to attract the center.

[LoZoccolo]

Why? Because we elected a decently liberal president and haters are still whining and trying to tear him down. These people will never be satisfied and will always look for something to complain about. It is their hobby.

Meanwhile, I have three libertarian-minded friends who are thinking Barack is cool.

Score one for Obama.

Go eat some crystallized pineapple.

[Critters2]

1. I have three progressive friends who would've voted Dem in 2000

instead of Green, if we had nominated a progressive. But we needed to attract the center. That went well.

[LoZoccolo]

3. You need to stop hanging out with people like that.

One of these days they are going to do something stupid and get you killed in an accident or something. Run away!

[Occam Bandage]

10. Al Gore was one of the best candidates we've ever run.

He's been a lifelong environmental advocate and friend to science. If your friends didn't see any difference between him and George W. Bush, your friends are idiots undeserving of oxygen, to say nothing of a vote.

[Critters2]

13. He's moved to the left since then. He was a DLC'er then, who chose Lieberman,

for God's sake, as a running mate. Lieberman second in line to the White House. Yeah, THAT was a progressive idea. :eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

14. I didn't say he was a progressive.

I said he was a lifelong environment and science advocate. He is and has been. As a Senator, Republicans mocked him as the "Ozone man." He wrote Earth in the Balance, warning of the coming climate crisis, in 1992. He, as we all know, strongly backed internet funding back when nobody on the Hill understood what a computer network was.

[Critters2]

15. We weren't voting for the King of the Science Advocates.

Too bad. Maybe he would've won.

[Occam Bandage]

16. No, nor were we voting for Lord Lefty Most High. We were voting for President.

Apparently your friends did not believe that there was a significant difference in the Presidential potential of Gore and Bush. Your friends are 'tards.

[Critters2]

If the Dems had made an effort to attract my friends and others like them,

we would've won.

[Occam Bandage]

31. Or, your friends would have continued to bitch about meaningless bullshit,

just as the malcontent left is about Obama, and all that Gore would have accomplished is surrendering centrist voters to Bush.

[LoZoccolo]

34. Your friends probably live in Illinois where it doesn't matter. n/t

[Critters2]

35. They lived in Iowa. It would've mattered. nt

[BzaDem]

48. I'm sure your friends would have voted for the 2000-Gore in 2004 had he run.

Why?

Because eventually, they would realize that actions have consequences. Sometimes, when things are going well for the country, some people think that they can do something stupid like vote for a candidate who can't win. But these types of people (should they get their way, as they did in 2000) are always swiftly reminded of the consequences of their actions. After realizing that they are indirectly responsible for all the actions and destruction of the Bush administration, reality would simply force them to come to their senses and vote for a viable candidate the next time around.

Sure, maybe some time in the future, when things are going well, they can think they can try their little experiment again without worrying about the consequences. But should they succeed in electing a Republican, the consequences will once again be swift and harsh, and they will come around yet again the next time around. There really is no way to reason with people like your three friends -- only visible, real-world consequences can bring them around.

[Critters2]

53. Dems haven't realized that alienating progressives has consequences.

You'd think that would've been clear after 2000. But no.

[LoZoccolo]

54. That's because it doesn't.

The Nader vote shrank in 2004 and 2008.

[polmaven]

58. The absolute BEST way

to insure Republicans will win is to nominate candidates who are too far to the left of the vast majority of the voting public.

The largest voting bloc are registered as "uncommitted"...what used to be independent until there was party by that name.

The general public is not as tuned in as are the political bloggers.

[BzaDem]

79. That's because it DOESN'T.

After all, look at 2004. After what happened in 2000, we nominated a candidate who supported the Iraq war invasion, over Dean, who did not, and who was more liberal on many issues.

Guess what happened to Nader's share of the vote? Cut in 10.

Part of the reasons for this is that actual Green party voters (who aren't just Republicans pretending to be Green) have much more to lose by a Republican victory than their centrist counterparts. Bush won in 2000, and his views were much more divergent from these Nader voters than they were from centrists.

The truth is, the people who vote for Nader have a very "my way or the highway" attitude that is eerily reminiscent of Bush. They know they can't get an actual majority of Americans to support their ideas (Nader got around 3% in 2000), so they try to "punish" dems for not bowing to the 3% of the country by taking advantage of the mathematics of a 2-party system.

These people cannot be negotiated with or reasoned with. The only thing that will make them see reality is having the consequences of their actions unfold right before their eyes.

[rvablue]

82. Q: Did these sycophantic friends of yours vote for Obama?

Because President Obama is not going to be that much different than a President Gore would have been.

So, if they did, have they been duped, or they just cut down on the my-way-or-the-highway approach.

Do me a favor and ask your friends for me because I can't find any evidence: name one thing that Ralph Nader has done for his country since he ran in 2000 except put down Democrats?

Wowie! Look what Gore did? Finally made everyone wake up and smell the carbon footprints, so to speak, and won a Nobel Prize doing it.... oh, and, uh, campaigned for Obama, instead of running some silly, disruptor campaign.

[polmaven]

56. Umm..

he DID win.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

60. It did go well. Al Gore won.

SCOTUS delivered the Presidency to Bush in one of the worst decisions ever handed down.

[Critters2]

65. Not by enough. If the Naderites' votes had no impact, why all the bitching

about Nader around here? The fact is that we lost in 2000 because of those who defected to the left. If they had voted Dem, we wouldn't have had GWB for 8 years. We paid a heavy price for writing off the progressive vote.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

69. As others have pointed out, courting the far left would have been a disaster.

2000 was a very different America than now. The economy was pretty good for most people and the Repukes were running on "restoring honor and integrity to the White House" and "guy you can have a beer with" faux-populist bullshit. Sure, Gore would have gotten Nader's votes if he'd run hard left but he wouldn't have gotten many more. The fact is that Gore ended up winning the popular vote after being double digits behind just a few weeks before the election.

[Hannah Bell]

72. "the far left"???? what are you smoking? First, that's Limbaugh-speak, code for

anything to the left of Ronald Reagan.

Second, there IS NO organized "far left" in the US anymore. It's been deliberately destroyed. What there is are some voters trying to keep the last tattered remnants of the new deal legacy.

Is this really "Democratic" Underground, or am i in bizarro-world?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

73. Is this Nader Voter Apologist Underground?

I didn't think so.

And by "far left", I mean public perception, which whether you like it or not, is where most people in the U.S. see us.

[Hannah Bell]

76. bull. "most people" voted for obama. who ran to the left.

& where nader comes into it, i have no idea.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

77. This is a subthread about people voting for Nader. nt

[Hannah Bell]

80. Ralph nader took .38% of the popular vote in 2004, & no electoral votes.

earth to catburglar?

in 2000, 2.7% & no electoral votes.

election is decided on electoral votes.

so where nader comes into it, i have no clue.

kerry & gore both ran center-right campaigns, & their poor showing is due primarily to that; plus gore's cowardice in conceding to bush.

if nader = "far left" to you, it's hopeless.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

83. Tell it to the person who brought up Nader upthread.

That's who I was arguing with. S/he claimed that "alienating progressives" had consequences.

[rvablue]

81. Yes, that's right, Gore is just a DINO... and to go with that myth, Nader actually cares

about his country more than he does about feeding his own self-absorbed ego.

[leftofthedial]

2. these people...

harrumph

"the center"

yeah. the center.

damn liburls.

libertarians like him?

that's NOT a good sign.

[LoZoccolo]

4. Hey, I remember you.

Weren't you saying that Republicans should be euthanized a few years ago?

[leftofthedial]

5. said that just today.

weren't you saying the earth was flat?

[LoZoccolo]

6. lol, no. n/t

[LoZoccolo]

19. Genocidal post, coming right up!

http://www.democraticunderground.org/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3181156#3181396

[leftofthedial]

50. what's so wrong about that?

:shrug:

[LoZoccolo]

55. Make a YouTube video about how you want to kill conservatives.

Show your face!

[leftofthedial]

74. Make a youtube video?

I'm poor. I don't own a video camera.

[LoZoccolo]

91. Go straight to the New Mexico forum and ask if anyone can tape it for you.

If this is such a pressing issue that you think it's important enough to start a program of government-sanctioned genocide, you can do that.

[leftofthedial]

110. what does the NM forum have to do with anything?

You link to a four-year-old post and now it's "such a pressing issue"?

And I thought your 9-11 ghetto posts were, um, entertaining...

[mrreowwr_kittty]

78. If it's the post about the 4 types of conservatives, I liked it.

:shrug:

Humorous hyperbole.

[LoZoccolo]

90. Except he's serious. n/t

[stillcool]

7. people are 'concerned'!!

I wonder how Rezko is doing.

[LoZoccolo]

8. Bah, Rezko shmezko.

Double bezko.

[Kitty Herder]

9. Crystallized pineapple?

What am I missing here?

[LoZoccolo]

17. Yeah, buddy!

I just pulled it out of nowhere, like I remembered it from some story I read in elementary school, about how someone used it to ease a tense situation.

Sounds good though!

I'm thinking it's some kinda dehydrated sugary thing.

[Kitty Herder]

30. I remember it being used to win favor with a professor in one of the Harry Potter books.

I just wondered if it was a reference to something that I didn't understand or if you just threw it out there randomly.

[LoZoccolo]

36. Me and this dude - I forget who it was - started talking about...

..."The Biscuit Boy" on here. We wanted to make people think we were talking about something secret! lol. We did it for the lulz!

[polmaven]

59. OK...sorry, but

Grammar Police time......The "Me and" phrase just really gets under my skin for some reason.....

"This dude and I started talking about it"!

Would you say "Me started talking about it"? NO!

Again...Sorry...I do the same thing with my friends and family...It makes me REALLY POPULAR sometimes!

:hi:

[LoZoccolo]

38. Biscuit Boy, lol.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1840184
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1841818#1845958
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3822054#3822507

[Augdog20]

11. This economy is proof of the poverty of your centrism, the DLC

and the libertarian views of your DLC friends.

Go read some crystallized pol. lit.

[Occam Bandage]

20. Here I thought it was proof of the poverty of deregulation and lack of oversight.

Neither are tenets of third-way politics.

[Sebastian Doyle]

62. Then why did Bill "DLC" Clinton deregulate so goddamn much?

A lot of the financial clusterfucks of the moment would not have been possible without Bill Clinton's help in the 1990's.

[Occam Bandage]

111. He ate a lot of hamburgers, too. Are hamburgers a DLC food? nt

[nosmokes]

12. Not by any stretch is Obama a *liberal.* If hard core centrist were in the

dictionary Obama's picture would show up in the definition. Fuck appeasement,fuck any more war in asia, fuck middle of the road, fuck corporatism.

I want Gitmo closed and the war criminals and traitors that stole this country for the last eight years investigated, tried and put in prison for their fucking crimes. And all that can happen while we move forward at the same time.

[leftstreet]

18. Obama is drawing Warren fundies and Libertarians, and you call this good?

Go eat some crystallized meth.

:P

[Occam Bandage]

21. *shrug* He also has a 90%+ approval rating among Dems.

[LoZoccolo]

23. I've got to remember that these are the 10%ers. n/t

[leftstreet]

24. Who, the OP?

}(

[LoZoccolo]

28. I have a 90% disapproval rating on DU, lol. n/t

[Occam Bandage]

32. I don't think he could break a 40% approval rating among LoZoccolo. nt

[Trajan]

22. Am I the only one who is tired of 'Teh' ?

It would be nice to try and attract the center AND the left ....

The center for an electoral edge, and the left for your own reasonable soul ....

I would rather he rule as a Liberal, and toss moderates a few bones, than rule as a moderate, and toss Liberals a few bones ...

Moderation is too lukewarm an approach when disaster looms ominously ... He needs BONE FIDE Rooseveltean policies, with strong regulation in the marketplace, and decent low end stimulus ....

We don't need a pusillanimous, weak-kneed approach to government ... We need a bold visionary: One does not find bold visionaries in the center ...

[LoZoccolo]

26. My point is that the center seems to be more loyal than the left.

Given that, why would our candidates toss DUers a bone? What do they get out of it?

[Trajan]

37. I think you are just tossing out numbers ...

Implying ratio and proportions that most likely do not exist ...

Perhaps Moderates are just quieter, and are just as frustrated by some of the moves made so far, and perhaps the Liberals YOU hear are vocal, while a greater number of them are quietly awaiting the governmental policies to come before they judge ....

I think it foolhardy to throw away what is by most accounts a lopsided victory by a man who ran as an inclusive LIBERAL, based on the ignorant musings, however enlightened, of someone prancing about an internet forum with questionable assertions about popularity and political philosophy ...

I would prefer Obama rule as he ran: THAT is who we voted for ... That is the persona he should assume ...

NOTE: Ignorant = lacking knowledge of specific facts ... NOT Ignorant = stupid ...

[LoZoccolo]

40. I didn't toss out any numbers, lol.

This is just my anecdotal evidence.

[Trajan]

43. 'Numbers' = implied ...

I am guessing you intended to imply that gaining a GREATER number of Moderate voters was worth giving up a LESSER number of Liberal voters ...

THEY are the 'numbers' I question .... They are without empirical foundation ...

We all know the limited value of anecdotal evidence ....

Hence: I do not believe it to be true ....

[Fumesucker]

45. The center more loyal? Surely you jest...

I guess you've never heard of Reagan Democrats?

[G_j]

51. & who did the tireless heavy lifting on the ground

that won the election?


...not the center
it was a lot work coaxing them off their asses to vote

It's always been a joke to me, to see Reagan and Democrats in the same sentence,

[ulysses]

85. loyal to what?

[Occam Bandage]

33. Reminds me of:

http://www.chainsawsuit.com/20081210.shtml

[Trajan]

39. I am a nominal Pacifist

But I feel some sympathy there ...

[Bake]

52. Sometimes "teh" is just a typo ...

:hi:

Bake

[LoZoccolo]

61. Actually here it wasn't though.

lol

[specimenfred1984]

25. The U.S. is a progressive majority, not a centrist one

Go suck your own banana and revise history with Chimpleton and his crime machine-o-lies.

[LoZoccolo]

27. I want to start out by saying I hear ya', man.

I remember when Kucinich won the primary and they said "oops, we're going to nominate Obama anyways."

lol

[ima_sinnic]

75. there's no way to know who really would've won the primary if the media hadn't

molded and influenced reality instead of simply reflecting the voters' will.

You do remember that Edwards came in 2nd in Iowa, yet he wasn't even mentioned on CNN (for one--I assume all the "news" stations were the same)--it was Hillary Hillary Hillary Hillary Obama Hillary Hillary Hillary 24/7

That is just one example of the way the election went the way it was "supposed" to go, not the way the voters might have wanted.

[SammyWinstonJack]

88. We got the candidate CorpoRATe America wanted the repubs to run against.

Ignore the progressive candidates and shove the corpoRATe candidates in our faces 24/7. x(

[Kitty Herder]

44. You're absolutely right about the U.S. having a progressive majority.

When it comes to actual issues. But when do real issues ever make it into campaigns? They don't, so we're left with the illusion of a centrist majority.

edited to add: The majority don't even vote. Perhaps if issues that mattered were discussed they would and we would have progressive candidates elected to office?

[BzaDem]

49. Apparently the exit polls are lying then.

Only 22% of voters claim to be liberal. 34% conservative, and 44% moderate. Sounds like a progressive majority to me. :crazy:

[Skittles]

29. "decently liberal" - and libertarians like that?

:rofl:

[eridani]

41. Because the Iraq war was a good idea. So was the bankruptcy bill

So was repeal of Glass-Steagall. So was Medicare Part Disaster. Torture is good. Spying on Americans is good. We need a less unionized workforce and more outsourcing. We can build a great sustainable economy by putting each other in jail and selling wach other cheap poison imported crap. The loony lefties are all wrong about that stuff.

[Number23]

42. This independent thinks he's pretty damn cool too

And the frothing feverishness around DU for the last two months has proven to me that becoming an independent was one of the smartest moves I've made in a while.

Ideology is for suckas...

[Fumesucker]

46. Everyone has an ideology..

Including those who don't think they do.

[Number23]

64. Some people's ideology is to be decidedly unideological

Which imo, is unquestionably the only one worth having...

[mmonk]

47. The election proved people didn't like the way bush ruled or the policies

as well. Democrats were given a mandate. I don't think the mandate was any continuance of any Republican ways, "bi-partisanship" or policies. They liked the message of "change" so it better be real.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

57. The election "proved" that the electorate saw Bush and the Repugs as a disaster.

The "center" didn't vote for "liberal" policies, or "centrist" policies. They voted against a disastrous 8 years of incompetence, arrogance, and failure.

Hell, even Hillary could have beaten McScrewy.

[yurbud]

63. which center? Do you think FDR was an extremist?

[blindpig]

66. That libertarians think Obama is 'cool' speaks volumes.

Libertarianism is an excuse for injustice and exploitation.

You probably shouldn't go around telling people dumb shit like that.

[Stevenmarc]

67. Centrist.... it's the cult of the mediocre

God I am so tired of the Centrist concept, I want legislation that corrects an issue not legislation designed to make everyone do a happy dance, hold hands and sing Kumbaya but doesn't get to the core issues.

[PVnRT]

68. Blah blah haters blah blah whining blah blah

Same shit, different day.

[ulysses]

87. what you have to admire

is the ability to turn people who are taking Obama at his word and turn them into "haters". The moldy ghost of Lee Atwater is applauding.

[Mari333]

70. not everyone wants to be a dittohead

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else." Teddy Roosevelt

[SammyWinstonJack]

89. !

:thumbsup:

[Hannah Bell]

71. if he runs on populism, but acts on neo-liberalism, damn right i'll bitch.

some people's hobby is excusing lies & liars

[L0oniX]

84. The "Check Spelling" tab is your friend. n/t

[ulysses]

86. just admit it.

Your libertarian friends (talk about people you should hang out with!) would bolt in a second if Obama went hard left. You've just bought the idea that there are more of them than there are on the left.

[LoZoccolo]

92. Define "hard left". n/t

[ulysses]

93. by way of example,

"attempted to address poverty through a $700 billion bailout".

[LoZoccolo]

94. Probably not. n/t

[ulysses]

95. probably not what?

Bolt? Libertarians who like anti-poverty programs? Perhaps your friends don't understand the label.

[LoZoccolo]

96. They probably wouldn't. n/t

[ulysses]

97. then it what sense are they libertarian?

And if they wouldn't bolt, why the need to attract them by *not* doing things more progressively?

[LoZoccolo]

98. They like their civil liberties. n/t

[ulysses]

99. as do I.

Being a libertarian also implies the minimization of the state and state action.

[LoZoccolo]

100. Sure.

I said "minded". There would be things they would abandon over, but it's not nearly as sensitive as what I've seen here.

"Labradoodle."

[ulysses]

101. so it's a matter of sensitivity?

What *would* they abandon over? I'm trying to get a handle on these paragons of loyalty.

[LoZoccolo]

102. Probably some kind of Chavez shit. n/t

[ulysses]

103. define "Chavez shit".

[LoZoccolo]

104. Caring for the poor.

They hate that.

[ulysses]

105. my point.

:thumbsup:

[LoZoccolo]

106. I was kidding.

Like demagoguery.

[ulysses]

107. so define "Chavez shit".

[LoZoccolo]

108. Like using phrases such as "up the spout" during dignified interviews. n/t

[ulysses]

109. that would make your friends bolt?

Glad they're not overly sensitive. :D