DO NOT ABANDON YOUR BASE. Obama will be a one-term president

[breadandwine]

with only screw-the-public corporate healthcare, not global warming as an achievement.

Okay, I got your attention. To be specific, I'm not sure, I hope I'm wrong. But here's the situation. Harry Truman listened to the Republicans ranting and raving against "communist" unions and he decided to distance himself from unions. Bingo. After years of Democratic rule under FDR, Truman lost the support of labor, they stayed home and with it he lost the whole Congress, Senate too. It couldn't happen. Impossible! We were riding high in the saddle! How could we lose? But we did. All because Truman alienated labor and his base and they stayed home and the GOP came roaring back.

All this futzing around with the corporate-ocracy has alienated the base. Do you have any idea what will happen to the ecosystem if the GOP takes back the government? Ecologically the whole world is a car hanging off a cliff and one more era of the GOP will push it over.

Obama has failed on global warming, net freedom, he's alienated the netroots that financed his campaign, he failed on surveillance reform, a million other reforms we were hoping for and with all his caving in to corporations and the Beltway what is he going to achieve on food safety and a million other issues we were hoping for? And remember how the servers were hacked in 2004? And statistics out of the 2008 election showed the servers were hacked in '08 too, Obama would have won by much more, but what is he doing about that? We are STILL living in the era of the stolen election and Obama has set himself up for the left to stay home in the next elections, since he has abandoned the netroots, labor and people not at the top of the totem pole.

This is a CLASSIC rerun of how Truman lost a Democratic Congress.

Offer your own warnings below or prove me wrong. Obama is totally immersed in the Beltway and has lost touch with the netroots and the new age politics. His chief of staff arrogantly says we have nowhere to go. He's right. We can stay home and many, rightly or wrongly, will. In fact, I came to believe long ago that Obama is much more old-style Chicago-ward-politics and much less internet savvy than those who supported him and he has surrounded himself with old-style Chicago politicos instead of the new politics.

Global warming is arguably an infinitely more urgent issue than healthcare. The planet is facing a metahistorical catastrophe but he's busy with insurance (companies) in a country that has lots of modern hospitals. We have a stinky insurance system but healthcare in the US as an issue is NOTHING compared to the DOOMSDAY we face because Obama politically blew his wad on healthcare instead of tackling global warming straight off. Had he done so all the money he could have spent on alternative energy and so on would have spent us out of the recession and freed us from imported oil. There would then have been more tax revenue for healthcare without even raising taxes. He put the cart before the horse and we're paying for it.

There are going to be epic Democratic losses in the House and Senate in the next couple of election cycles and Obama is looking at this like a deer caught in headlights. Obama will lose Congress and won't be able to get major legislation passed in the second half of his term, making him look like a failed president going into 2012 and then the GOP will buy, steal and bamboozle the election of 2012 while progressives and labor stay home. And in 2012 everyone will hate Obama for having done a rerun of the Clinton loss of Congress over healthcare. This whole healthcare thing has been a rerun of the NAFTA and telecommunications cave-ins that only helped corporations but which the establishment was just so sure would be an improvement. All these insiders are just so smug and sure of themselves and they don't see the handwriting on the wall.

The chaos in Copenhagen is due to Obama being preoccupied with healthcare. Corporate healthcare at that. He is an appeaser and thinks he can sweet talk without pounding the podium and without making a fight of it. So we've lost on global warming and we have healthcare in name only. And we face disaster in the upcoming election cycles because Obama refuses to listen to his base. With Obama caving to the right Ralph Nader will be back and he will make big gains in 2012, too. Remember him? With all the nuts at the townhall meetings Obama chuckled, acted like a deer caught in headlights and really didn't fight. He appeased the other side and they then walked all over him. And he was so preoccupied with that that he was essentially AWOL on global warming.

Presidents lose when they abandon their base. We saw this with Truman. We also saw this with Bush. Bush's abandonment of his Southern base by selling out the refugees in Hurricane Katrina was a key reason the GOP lost.

DO NOT ABANDON YOUR BASE.

Am I wrong?



"Forewarned, forearmed."

--- Cervantes

[pettypace]

1. No way Obama loses in 2012

The demographics all but assure it.

GOP is gonna run Sarah Palin for petesake is the other reason.

[doc03]

3. The demographics give the south 12 more seats don't they? That

can't be a plus.

[UrbScotty]

125. Obama won by way too much last time

for that to have been an influence.

365-173, in fact.

But I do believe it's waaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to say that he will or won't win.

[breadandwine]

127. I'm simply saying the exit polls and final vote tallies didn't match

by a factor way beyond chance. And down ticket there were Congressional seats lost because of this.

[doc03]

4. I think you underestimate Sarah Palin n/t

[polpilot]

102. No way Obama will expand the Afghan war OR will cave to the health insurance lobby!

Sorry...meant to post this last year.

[Arkana]

123. I don't think this is humanly possible

because every time we do someone throws her another shovel and she finds another depth to sink to.

[griffi94]

7. i'll be surprised if palin runs

i expect it to be rommney. he can at least appear moderate was governor of MA.
doesn't foam at the mouth. and could perhaps even peel off some dissatisfied indies who went for obama last time.

[MH1]

76. The paradox there is that any independent who could ideologically stomach Romney

is probably not among those really pissed at Obama. Certainly they are not part of Obama's "base".

On the other hand, it's been known to happen for so-called liberals to cut off their nose to spite their face.

Obama inherited a country that was on a trajectory to careen over a cliff very soon. He is steering a gentle turn to avoid a skid that would end up also sending us over the cliff. By 2012 he may look a lot better than he is looking now, to liberals. Or not. But there is no way Romney or Cantor or any of the other republican possibilities will look any better, to a liberal who looks at their options dispassionately.

[OHdem10]

19. Daily Kos Independent Poll sponsored by Kos

Over 80% Republicans responded that they seriously intend to vote in 2010
Just over 50% Democrats intend to vote in 2010.

Marcus Moulitas reported this himself on MTP Sunday before last.

His comment: These numbers mean We Democrats are in trouble.

We know the Independents have left the Democratic column.
It seems Obama depends on Beltwya analysis as to the reason why.
I believe they voted for change and we are getting GOP Policies
tied with a beautiful ribbon. Typical DLC. Kinder anf Gentler
but Republican Policy all the same.

Just above 50%, I seem to remember 51% of Democrats plan to turn
out. The Jobs situation runs into 2010.

[breadandwine]

26. Important info, OHdem10. As I said elsewhere, "If you run a Republican against a Republican

the Republican will win every time." --- Harry Truman.

Trouble is, Truman should have listened to himself more. But Obama is trying to be more and more of a Republican, and it won't make him beat a real Republican.

[Mojorabbit]

57. I got an email today for something called

independent voting.org
here is a snip

I want to thank each and every one of you who has given between $5 and $1,000 towards this effort. It's an important fight and our legal team needs our help.
2009 has been a year of great strides for the independent movement. We put Obama in the White House, elected the first independent Mayor of NYC, and have established "on-the-ground" organizing efforts from coast to coast. Jackie Salit's leadership conference call now includes hundreds of activists from 45 states. We've positioned our political reform agenda in the mainstream and inserted ourselves firmly in the national dialogue.

And this growth has everything to do with why The Idaho GOP is attempting to exclude us from primaries.

If our movement was not growing, the political parties would not give us a second thought. But we are, and we're establishing ourselves at a time when the dissatisfaction with the Democratic and Republican Parties is in the stratosphere.

The Idaho fight is an important one for our movement - and of course it is funded by independents like you who will not leave the future of our democracy to the partisans. Please take 60 second and make an on-line donation of $50, $100, $250, $1,000 or more.

Thank you and Happy Holidays!

John Opdycke
*************************************
I know nothing about this group but it looks like independents are starting to organize. I have no idea what kind of platform they have....I had not heard anything about this before today. I wonder how this will play out if at all in the next election. I also wonder why they address me as an independent when I have been a reg. Dem since I was old enough to vote in the early 70s and also am curious how they got my email address.
mojorabbit

[Confusious]

63. Waste of time

Independent parties in our system are doomed to failure because of the way things are set up.

We need a different system for more parties, which I would welcome with open arms.

[AuntPatsy]

98. Nominating for best reply to this particular op...and the only right one..

[crazyjoe]

64. How the F** does Marcus get on MTP ??

[MH1]

78. If you think Obama's admin is delivering "republican policy"

I can't wait to see the next actual republican administration and see what you have to say about it then.

[jimlup]

24. I hope you are right but I'm worried

that Obama's base will be disillusioned enough to stay home.

[Blue_In_AK]

28. They won't run Sarah...

She's going to continue to self-destruct.

[breadandwine]

30. That's what I'm thinking, Blue_In_AK. Palin is politically incompetent.

She can do the right wing talk show circuit. But she will likely be French fried beyond that.

[ThomThom]

110. she can make more money not running

she is just noise

[Toasterlad]

47. No Way Obama Wins in 2012 Unless the Republicans Run Palin

And they're not that stupid.

The demographics assure it. Obama only won last time with the support of the gays, which he will not have next time. Nor will those independents who voted for change swallow his shit a second time.

Obama is a Jimmy Carter, but on a much more failriffic scale.

[pettypace]

92. Demographics are hard to beat

Obama is gonna pass a comprehensive immigration bill in the next couple of years, so with that he'll have the following votes in 2012:

95% blacks
80% hispanics
70% asians
35-45% whites


Keep in mind the white population is decreasing annually as well, replaced by a larger asian and hispanic group.

Don't worry folks, we've got Obama for 8 years. Hopefully we'll get another good minority candidate in 2016 to keep our guys in power.

[lunamagica]

99. I know TONS of people who can't wait for that immigration bill

and have a big desire to vote for Obama, and the Democratic Party in general. People who have grown to hate the GOP, and their racist, anti-latino, anti-immigrant slant.

But unfortunately, there's no way that the people who will benefit from the immigration bill will be able to vote in 2012. The process for citizenship will take much, much longer.

But once it passes, I don't see how the Republicans can get any kind of power again. The Reform will bring millions of new Democrats. The GOP knows that, and that's the main reason -not cheap labor- that they will do anything to defeat the comprehensive immigration bill

[Tesha]

105. Yeah, but this time when he promises "Change!", he'll really, really mean it! (NT)

[man4allcats]

50. The way Obama is going, for his sake the GOP better run Palin.

At this point, it would seem a Palin/Glenn Beck ticket or some equally demented Palin/Rightwing_lunatic GOP choice is perhaps the only way Obama even might win in 2012.

[frazzled]

2. Only if the Republican has a brother who is governor of, say, Ohio

Get real. This is how the Nader crowd tried to bring down that big centrist wimp and general evildoer Al Gore. It wouldn't have worked, except for the fact that Jeb Bush and Katharine Harris managed to bump half the people off the voter rolls in Florida and proclaim Governor Bumblebrains winner by 500 votes.

The so-called "base" is probably no more than 2% of the non-Republican voting public. If they run a third-party candidate, it will be a repeat of 2000: less than 2% of the vote.
But keep it up: you're doing a fine job of confusing the hell out of independents. You'll probably drive them straight into the arms of the Republican ... and you know that would be an outcome we'd all be grateful for.

Jeebus. Is it vanity or myopia or what that makes you think you are the "base"?

[breadandwine]

9. Frazzled, have you thought of working for Rahm Emanuel?

If you admit that "Bumblebrains" can win, how can you be so sure the Republicans will lose in 2012? We had a little frat boy in the White House for 8 years despite people like you being so sure of yourself.

And as for Palin, I have mixed feelings about her candidacy (politically speaking). On the one hand she only looks good until she opens her mouth and has to prove she knows something, which she doesn't. She might therefore get stabbed in the back by other Republicans and not get nominated. Lots of people at the top of the GOP hate her. If she does get nominated the real issue will be whether she has good handlers who help her polish her rough edges. Don't be so smug about Democratic victory if you want to win. It's the first warning sign of failure.

[frazzled]

96. Have you ever thought of taking a reading comprehension course?

I didn't say Bumblebrains could win. The whole point of my post is that disaffection on the left with Al Gore allowed Jebbie and Katharine to complete their theft of the election.

[suzie]

129. No, we had a frat boy in the White House because people like many here who were too pure

to vote for Al Gore.

But those of you who did so made up for it by complaining louder than anyone else during the Bush years.

[ima_sinnic]

35. the base is the people who went door-to-door for Obama, the ones who

made phone call after phone call, set up fund-raising websites and hosted fundraising parties. The ones who would have hung around and brought in even more votes the next time if Obama had really been who he said he was. But the stink got too big to ignore. They're fleeing the exits.

Good luck in 2010, "democrats," and in 2012. Personally, I couldn't care less which "party" "wins"--they're opposite sides of the same coin.

[NanceGreggs]

55. Ah, yes ...

... the "base" is the people who went door-to-door for Obama.

And, of course, that "base" was only comprised of people who now couldn't care less which party wins, and believes that Democrats and Repubs are part of the same coin.

Might want to check your numbers on that "base", and who's still standing behind the Party and the President - and who's "fleeing the exits".

Hint: The "base" is still in the fight; the rest are standing on the sidelines, whining - as per usual.

I guess we know which category you fall into.

[breadandwine]

58. Ah yes, NanceGreggs, all those who raised 100s of millions on the net,

went door to door, organized like nothing we ever saw before...

They're just whiners I guess.

The useless, irrelevant base.

[NanceGreggs]

122. You might not have noticed, but ...

... millions of people who went door-to-door, contributed, and organized are still supportive of this President.

It is just the whiners who are, of their own volition, being rendered useless and irrelevant.

[breadandwine]

128. NanceGreggs, have you read a paper lately?

As mentioned by others elsewhere on this thread, Obama's poll numbers have suffered very serious decline. If you're going to MAKE people buy something they can't afford you're going to piss off a lot of people. And there is nothing national and everything corporate about the bill. It's basically welfare for the insurance companies. This is going to hurt Obama. It already has. Meanwhile, the planet is going off a cliff. But the insurance companies can count their money on the way down.

[NanceGreggs]

130. ...

Is this the "serious decline" you're talking about?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x99935

[voc]

59. +1

[ima_sinnic]

60. I said "base," not unquestioning sheep who accept any old thing

appears to be a semantics problem. You can call the people who defend renewed use of torture with even more power to the president to decide who will be tortured and why, who see nothing wrong with promising "fierce advocacy" of LGBT rights and then fiercely advocating for quite the opposite--among a lot of other lies and unacceptable things--whatever you like. If that is the "base," you're right, I'm too principled and "idealistic" to associate with ... that.

[NanceGreggs]

121. Well, I know exactly what you mean ...

... when it comes to "unquestioning sheep who accept any old thing".

Seems to be a lot of that going around lately.

BTW, don't forget to check whether Hamsher/Norquist/Krugman/Dean/Kucinich etc. are "in" or "out" today as people whose positions are acceptable to the sheep. Seems to be a moving target - you'll want to stay on top of that.

[treestar]

87. right, Nance, they think their door-knocking means they can

threaten the rest of the party - as if there were no Republicans who got 48% of the vote.

[treestar]

89. If you are so powerful becaues of this, why did you not do it for

someone else then? Why didn't Kucinich win the primary? Or whoever it was that you wanted? Why didn't the green party gain the Presidency and the Congress?

And is whoever you will be supporting going to win?

And if your answer is that it's not about winning, how do you ever expect people you want to be in a position to get anything done? It shows a propensity to enjoy being on the outside and sniping.

The far left will get no more of what it wants than the far right. If you don't canvas, someone else will.

LOL, if it is really the "corporatists" getting everything then they are the ones doing the knocking. they could even pay people to do it.

You are insulting the voters as so mindless that they can't vote without your assistance.

[bfarq]

5. He figures he doesn't need us in 2012

By that time, he'll have all the money he could possibly need from AIPAC, the bankers, the insurance companies and anybody else who is looking to suckle at the government teat. He figures he won't face a serious primary challenge and he won't need our help getting out the vote for him because the corporations will finance the biggest political ad spend in history.

And he's probably right about that. But that doesn't do any good for the mid-terms and for the down-ticket candidates in 2012. Your comparison with Truman is a cautionary tale that should be heeded.

[FrenchieCat]

8. You certainly don't speak for me!

[bfarq]

72. Then how would you explain ...

Obama's transformation into a President who can't give Wall Street executives enough money, blocks efforts to repeal the antitrust exemption for health insurance companies, supports EXPANDING the Fed's powers, and EXPANDS Bush's wars, hasn't done anything about Gitmo, still permits renditions, and still supports don't-ask-don't-tell.

Either he's doing it for the money or else he has had one hell of a philosophical transformation in the past 14 months.

[bfarq]

90. I notice nobody has tried to explain those things

Wise move. The facts speak for themselves.

We expect every successful politician to adjust a little once in office. But on issue after issue, this guy has flipped all the way to the Cheney end of the spectrum.

I'm not yet to the point of saying that these guys are as bad as Bush/Cheney. There have certainly been some important differences, but so far those differences are mostly at the margins. On the big issues, these guys are continuing the Cheney playbook and in some cases doing Cheney one better (e.g. tripling troops in Afghanistan, giving big new powers to the Fed, outdoing Bush in bailouts to the richest corporate executives)

This is heading for disaster electorally. Anybody can type snarky comments on a keyboard. We won the Presidency and solid majorities in both houses PRIMARILY from the work of activists, progressives, young voters, those new to the scene. If you lose the enthusiastic support of that group what you are left with is the DLC that brought you 6 losing elections in a row.

[liberal_at_heart]

11. The democrats will definitely lose some seats in the midterm election

As far as the next presidential election, the first go around Obama needed every dollar he could get from grass roots organizations. Trouble with Obama is, he doesn't need the grass roots organizations anymore. He won't need the little people putting boots on the ground next time. He will have all the money he needs to get re-elected from corporations next time.

[breadandwine]

16. Thanks, bfarq. Some comments ---

2008 proved that DEMOCRATIC corporate money wasn't enough against the superior GOP corporate money machine. As Harry Truman himself said, "If you run a Republican against a Republican, the Republican will win every time." (Reagan said that too, but he got it from Truman.) It seems to me that Truman should have listened to himself more. At any rate, Obama is trying to out-Republican the Republicans on love of the corporations. It won't work. Why vote for a fake Republican when you can have the real thing will be the sentiment of many. Obama would have gone nowhere without the money from the netroots, gobs and gobs of cash off the internet but those people are very disappointed now.

The comments about Palin elsewhere on this thread partly prove my point. If people are relying on the GOP nominating a devil we can run easy against, then they are deer in headlights. Don't depend on the GOP helping us win. That's stupid and very risky. At any rate, I don't think Palin is going to get nominated unless she polishes herself and gets rid of her cucarachas enough to be an effective campaigner. In any case, strategically she's an idiot. Don't be so sure she will be the nominee. She campaigns impulsively and her opponents in the GOP are already quietly plotting how to screw her strategically. The front runner this early in an open primary often fails to make it to the nomination.

Again: Those who "need" to run against Palin to win in 2012 have less confidence in Democratic victory than they claim.

[jaxx]

6. I am the base.

I am not feeling abandoned. If you choose to stay home in the next election cycle, that's going to be your problem. This thing of constantly looking backwards for a reason to bale isn't doing one thing to address today. Instead it's scare tactics and poor ones at that. In 2012 not everyone will hate Obama.....just the ones who hate him now.

[breadandwine]

25. Jaxx, some comments ---

You say, "If you choose to stay home in the next election cycle, that's going to be your problem." Perhaps you don't understand the positive value of constructive warnings. I do not choose to stay home and I was obsessed with Democratic victory and victory for Obama long before some other people. I am saying that THE BASE will in many cases stay home. And if you care about the world the base staying home is YOUR problem too. You've heard of labor unions, yes? What do you suppose they are? Can you SPELL labor union? Labor is threatening to stay home, not me. Think about it.

You decry "This thing of constantly looking backwards." Perhaps you never heard the statement, "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it."

Perhaps the past doesn't matter? Perhaps in your eyes the future doesn't either..... Perhaps you would make a good Prozac salesman.

This is not about "scare tactics" as you call it. You remind me of the joke about the guy who walked into a movie theater and screamed at the topic of his lungs, "Do not PANIC!" And then he added, "The landing craft will be explained shortly..." Your comment about "scare tactics" sounds itself like a very panicky comment. If you decry what you call "scare tactics" I decry what I call "Prozac peddlers." This has been only one year into the Obama presidency. There is still time for a course correction IF we recognize that this past year has been a huge wasted opportunity and that we NEED a course correction. If you don't get that, YOU'RE part of the past. NOW is the time to issue the warnings --- when there's still time to make that course correction.

[jaxx]

31. I didn't say those things because I thought you'd like it.

Yeah I can spell labor unions, I belonged to one. And they're not about to vote repug. Like it or not they're made up of people who do what they want, not what they're told in the voting booth. For damned sure nobody is going to tell them to stay home and give that vote away.

"Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it".........and those who live in the past will never get out of it.

Your prozac comments sound panicky to me. You went right on me with those. Why?

I don't call this last year wasted opportunity. I see there was a lot of opportunity taken advantage of, and good outcomes to many legislative bills. I also see there is more to do that will take time.
I also see your warnings, they're hard to miss in CAPS. I don't panic. And I don't spend my life second guessing the President of our party or selling him out because he didn't do it all my way.

[breadandwine]

34. I appreciate some of your comments, Jaxx, but selling out Obama? The base is not doing that.

He's selling us out. Almost everyone seems to be aware of this except a few. It is astonishing how LITTLE Obama did for the environment and to fight global warming and many other issues this past year. He definitely did NOT hit the ground running.

I have seen campaigns that were turning into disasters and the most panicky people of all were the Prozac peddlers screaming "Do not panic!" Wearing a smile button will not fix the rot taking hold in Washington and a fish rots at the head first. The planet is already going off a cliff and Copenhagen was a disaster. Obama went to Copenhagen and essentially said, "Eh." This is not a fight. THE PLANET IS THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE. And as for use of capital letters and PASSION, there is something wrong with people who can't exercise passion when times are tough. Are you saying you are AGAINST passion during the greatest crisis in all of history? It ain't healthcare, pal, it's global warming. If you are emotionally comatose at a time like this, that's a problem. There is a reason for passion. It's a conduit between thought and action. A person can know intellectually what the right thing to do is but if they are calm, calm, calm, and can't get exercised about it, moved, passionate, what are they going to DO about it?

[jaxx]

41. I am the base. I will say that again because it's been ignored.

Global warming is a big issue, I don't see where we've been sold out. I see where a bunch of other countries are dragging their feet and it's expected that Obama should demand they stop. You think health care is a killer, wait till they start on cap and trade in the congress. There is a brick wall because people don't understand it.

I think the president did hit the ground running and he ran right into leftovers like the economy tanking and two wars to start with. Those two things would be enough for the next 4 years, but then there is health care reform needed, and global warming to look at, and a myriad of other issues to be taken on. Don't sell him short for not walking on water.

Maybe the planet is your number one issue, but it isn't everyone else's. Do you understand you put down others issues when you demand yours are fixed first?

Was that passion or persuasion? I can't tell the difference here. What I see is a bully pulpit and if I don't agree I need prozac according to you. No sale.

[Toasterlad]

48. If you choose to stay home in the next election cycle, that's going to be your problem.

Um...no. That's going to be AMERICA'S problem. And Obama will only have his own incompetence and dishonest to bloawm.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

56. really, obama is to blame if you decide to sit at home and twiddle your thumbs rather then vote? nt

[ima_sinnic]

61. well, then, whose fault IS it if people are not moved to vote again for Obama?

duh--people DO know when they've been let down and lied to. We'll see if they vote for more of the same in 2012.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

83. Its the fault of whoever not voting if they decide to sit and twiddle their thumbs

Nobody is forcing them to sit at home and do nothing.

And in all honesty, even if you dislike somebody; the choice would atleast for those who dislike Obama be between the lesser evil(him) and the greater evil(any republican).

if people want more liberal legislation, well then vote for more liberals and progressives in congress; its the only way that will happen. And saying that because the dems have a majority is no excuse to be lazy, especially not when about half in the senate are conservative democrats which means currently everything is a tight balancing act(my suggestion is getting 2 or 3 more liberals at minimum into the senate since that would help tug legislation toward more liberal bills and would weaken the power of Liberman, Nelson and that crew)

[ima_sinnic]

85. it's the fault of the candidate for not making them want to vote for him--DUH

nobody's "making" them sit home? that is the freaking point! nobody's making them sit home, they are doing it of their own free will--because, guess what? they don't give a shit anymore.

[mitchtv]

94. I am the base

Union /senior/contributor/long time Dem/Gay/ and I am not happy with progress. I will never vote GOP, but I will be selective about Dems I support ;this GayTM is closed

[quiller4]

101. I'm not feeling abandoned either.

[Thickasabrick]

10. I enjoyed your post except the biggest issue in every poll over the

last quarter has been the economy with healthcare coming in number two. I've seen two polls that say the independents are very angry and if the economy does not come back the pukes will gain more than the 3 Senate seats they are projected to pick up now.

Now, if you can tie in jobs with climate change - fine but that is the issue he has to focus on.

I agree that he has alienated his base and if he doesn't do something relatively dramatic to fire up labor and the progressives, they will likely stay home in huge numbers. The most alarming thing about one of the Kos polls was that only 36% of blacks plan on voting in 2010. Things needs to change really quickly to fire people up to get out to vote and I don't think telling us that if we don't the republicans will repeal health care is going to do it.

Everyone think Palin is going to be the candidate in 2012 which is total bullshit. It will be either Mittens or Jeb Bush.

[griffi94]

14. i'd be surprised if it's bush

it's too soon since the last bush fiasco.

[Thickasabrick]

18. Unfortunately, the sheep in this country have very short attention

spans. Jeb Bush is prime and he's married to a Latino which will help him with the hispanic vote.

He was tremendously popular across party lines when he was the Gov of Florida. He's moderate enough to appeal to the Independents and the RW Teabaggers will begrudgingly vote for him even if he's not Sarah.

Also keep in mind that Georgia, Texas and SC will be adding delegates if the current census holds in 2010 and we can pretty much count on all the new additions being in the puke column.

[breadandwine]

29. Thickasabrick, maybe healthcare is a big issue because Obama chose to make it so.

Global warming could be too if Obama had made THAT the big issue. At any rate there are a million ways fixing global warming can benefit people economically, like by making it easier and cheaper to hang solar panels out your window and save money on electricity or even pipe that electricity into the local electric grid and make a profit for individual Americans (called "cogeneration.")

I didn't know the statistic about only 36% of Blacks planning to vote. If that's true that is truly frightening, almost epically frightening. This partly proves my point. Obama, with his corporate cave-ins, is not even inspiring people who might be expected to be especially loyal to him.

[Double T]

12. BO is in over his head. One term for sure.

Leaves plenty of time to select an experienced, brilliant presidential candidate like HRC and the like.

[TicketyBoo]

23. Hillary says she will not run again.

I tend to believe her.

[juajen]

49. She would have to say that now because she is in his cabinet.

I hope she is feeling fit and able to run, for I believe Obama will not want to run. IMHO, he's had his moment in the sun and will not need or want any more.

[TicketyBoo]

88. No way Obama is just going to up and quit.

He's got too many things he wants to do. Considering how the Republicans are fighting him at every turn, it's unlikely he'll manage to accomplish what he wants to do in just three more years.

In the interview I saw with Hillary, she did not hem and haw one little bit about it. She could have said, "Well, I never say never," or some sort of soft "No," but that's not the way it was. It was a fast and firm "No," and she even talked about retiring from public office. With Chelsea getting married and the possibility of grandchildren in the future, I can see that happening. Maybe she wants to take some time to bake those cookies she didn't have time to bake in her earlier life.

[TheKentuckian]

116. What in God's name is hillary going to do to tackle issues differently?

She's as corporate as anyone.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

13. Bush's base didn't give a shit about the

Katrina refugees. If anything they took great pleasure in watching them suffer while scattered all over the country.

Most people don't live and breath politics. If Obama manages to create jobs, he's in for another four years. Jobs
are what it's all about.

[breadandwine]

32. EmeraldCityGrl, that's not true. The GOP TANKED right after Katrina.

People said, dang, there's a hurricane down South and you don't kick down Bubba. Southerners were VERY mad at Bush for ignoring the plight of the South in Hurricane Katrina and GOP poll numbers among their base COLLAPSED after that. It's a fact.

The lesson, again:

DO NOT ABANDON YOUR BASE.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

40. Frank Newport, director of the Gallup Poll organizations

doesn't agree with you either.

"He cites recent articles in The New York Times and Reuters linking Katrina to Bush's approval ratings slide, but then points out, "Bush's job approval ratings throughout September 2005 were identical to his ratings in August, and although the president's ratings fell in October and November, they had recovered by December of last year and January of this year. Bush's major slide in the ratings occurred in late February through May of this year, and there is little evidence to suggest that this was a result of his handling of Katrina."

http://www.allbusiness.com/services/business-services-miscellaneous-business/4701290-1.html

I'll never forget some of the ugly comments made by the right during that period. Do Not abandon your base, but be sure to identify and read them accurately, Surely that applies to
Obama now.

[breadandwine]

54. EmeraldCityGrl, the Gallup Poll is headed by a Republican fundamentalist hack

and has lost credibility. Moveon.org took out ads attacking their faulted methods. Gallup was always Republican and only got worse. They're bullsh*t. They play with their numbers up, down and sideways to suit the occasion. Total apparatutchiks. They would tell you your mother is a giraffe if it suited the GOP master plan.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

103. Breadandwine, with your argument it would be in the right's best

interest to claim Katrina was Bush's downfall, they being the "compassionate conservatives" and all. Katrina was blamed by those in Bush's inner circle because the blame
could be pawned off on "Good Job Brownie." Bush's base abandoned him when the economy started to tumble. They are all about the money and to suggest for one instant
that those bastards abandoned Bush because of the "poor black folk" in New Orleans is ludicrous. Anyone that would make that analogy is incapable of reading the current
political climate.

[live love laugh]

66. It IS true: Bush's base delighted in blaming Katrina victims for their plight. nt

[Kaleva]

15. Very few liberals in Congress are worried about losing their seats

It's the blue dogs in battleground states and districts who will suffer the most loses.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

17. Only if the Democrats are stupid enough to listen to Nader, Hamsher, and others

on the GOP payroll.

If the Democrats wise up and realize they don't need the garbage, they will not only win the second term, but they will do what needs to be done, which is keep the Repukes out of office.

However, if the Democrats are stupid enough to give the Naderites, the Hamsherites and the saboteur greenies a voice AGAIN, there will be another few decades of Repuke presidents.

And as a European woman, I will tell you this. No Naderite, No Hamsherite, no Kucinich, no Greenie, none of the saboteurs will ever be elected in the U.S., because they are mostly cowards, and they side with the Republicans. They cannot be trusted, and people know this. No Republican will ever, ever vote for any of those, and the Democrats will have been burned by their sabotage, and will not come near them. They are the untouchables. Those that nobody wants around.

But the Democrats must wise up and shut the door on them permanently. If not, they'll be like an albatross around their necks, and that's a problem.

[breadandwine]

37. Okay, Sarah Ibarruri, so how DO you shut the door on the Naderites?

Not by giving them an opening. If you abandon the base you split the party and Nader comes waltzing right in to steal Democratic votes again.

Again:

DO NOT ABANDON THE BASE.

[LostInAnomie]

20. Obama will win 2012 in a walk.

A lot of DUers overestimate their representation in the base.

[laughingliberal]

46. It's not those on DU I'm worried about. It's the real base out there

I'm worried about. It has always been crucial for turnout to be large for Democrats to win. And Democrats are notorious for not voting when they don't see good reasons to. I believe most on DU, disappointed as they may be, will vote for the nominee of their party. But we're not the issue.

[quiller4]

100. You are right. I'm one of the more conservative posters here yet I am

probably the furthest left in my district Democratic club. I support the emerging health care bill with reservations but most other club members are enthusiastic supporters.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

21. If you are going to use Harry Truman as an example, than at least tell the whole story

Truman lost control of Congress in the 1946 midterm elections. He then went on to win a full four-year term at the 1948 presidential election and Democrats. He subsequently won the 1948 presidential election and Democrats regained control of the House and Senate in 1948 and held it for the rest of his presidency.

Using Truman as an example of why Obama will be a one-term President doesn't actually boost your argument

Clinton also lost Congress mid-term in 1994 and won a second term in office so that example doesn't work either

[breadandwine]

38. RFKHumphreyObama, yours isn't the whole story either. I guess we could compare notes.

Fact: Truman sold out the unions.
Fact: They stayed home.
Fact: Democrats suffered huge losses as a result.

FACT: OBAMA IS SELLING OUT UNIONS AND THE BASE.

[ShortnFiery]

22. Yes, I wish he could be Primaried next year. I'm burned out from "corporate pragmatism"

:puke:

[AVID]

27. haha

OMG

are you really 14?
or just acting like a teen girl princess.

[ima_sinnic]

36. +++1000

[breadandwine]

43. ShortnFiery, my hope is that it won't have to come to Obama being primaried.

There's plenty of time. If we oppose the shift to the right, the cave in to the corporations NOW, maybe Obama will back off and respect the base. Resistance to Obama's sellout NOW is what matters, not in 2012. This is why I think the Prozac peddlers are so misguided. By defending Obama's indefensible cave in to the corporations now, they only exacerbate the situation later on. The right wing has pushed Obama and we need to push back and push back NOW or the sellout will continue, millions will be disillusioned and then Democrats will lose, maybe even Obama. Opposing the sellout NOW causes the least damage. Waiting till the disease is incurable is the worst thing we could do.

That said, if some Democrat started making noises as a potential Democratic primary opponent of Obama NOW, watch how fast Obama would move to the left and the whole sellout would end quickly and he'd be reelected. So I'm not afraid of some opposition to Obama now within the party and I think those who are are making a great mistake.

[Dinger]

74. Good Post, Especially This Part:

"That said, if some Democrat started making noises as a potential Democratic primary opponent of Obama NOW, watch how fast Obama would move to the left and the whole sellout would end quickly and he'd be reelected. "

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marr]

39. The people who are currently saying, "no way, he'll win again, we don't need you"...

will the *first* assholes whining about how the "far left" made Obama lose the election.

It will almost be funny.

[breadandwine]

45. Marr, that's a hilarious comment.

I agree. You're absolutely right. Exactly. Those saying "We don't need you" are full of crap.

[Forkboy]

53. That's exactly what happened in the 90's.

I watched as Dem after Dem shit on the leftwing Dems, then when some of them went Green they blamed everything on them for not sticking around and being beat up anymore. :crazy:

[Tesha]

111. It's becoming a "Standard Operating Procedure", isn't it?

"We don't need you."

"If you don't like what we're doing, then piss off!"

"Who cares what you think? WE DON'T NEED YOU!"

"Why can't you get it through your stupid lefty heads --
We don't need you!"

(Party loses election)

"Waahhh -- we lost because those damned lefties abandoned
us and didn't do their part!"

Lather, rinse, repeat...

Tesha

[Political Heretic]

42. WE ARE NOT OBAMA'S BASE. I wish we were as powerful as you think we are

but we're not.

Obama's base are beltway insiders with ties to wall street. That's Obama's base.

[breadandwine]

44. Political Heretic, I disagree. We ARE the base.

The net raised millions and millions and millions and TENS OF MILLIONS of dollars for Obama, it was an absolute TSUNAMI of cash like nothing anyone had ever seen before. We put Obama over the top and don't you forget it. The net raised way, way, way OVER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for Obama. Perhaps someone can provide the exact figure, I recall it being nearly TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS. It was UNHEARD of. We ARE the base. We made him president.

[Adelante]

62. Do you really think all of the Netroots is abandoning Obama?

The people who raised a "TSUNAMI of cash" and went door to door were not comprised of "the base" strictly as you seem to define it. You can't just axe millions of people out of the base or the Netroots and make such grandiose claims for one dissident faction. Plenty of the Netroots and the left in general are sticking with Obama. You seem to want to believe "the base" and the Netroots are made up of people who think like you do and will do what you believe they should do. "The base" -- which only includes the Netroots, and is in no way defined by it -- is made up of a broad spectrum of Democrats. But I'll tell you what the base does, the base goes out and votes Democratic. That's why they call it the base.

[breadandwine]

73. Adelante, why are so many progressive commentators blowing their stack over being "sold out"?

This is all a figment of our imagination?

[Political Heretic]

95. "The net" and all those gave $ were not all progressives or leftists.

And despite the small money given, the majority of Obamas money still came from large donors with ties to special interests, just like any other politician trying to make a serious run for president.

Just so no one is confused, because there was a lot of hooplah about this during the campaign - the literal number of contributions from the 100$ and under category may have been larger. But it terms of dollars raised, the majority of campaign money didn't come from the street or the "net."

And to return to my original reminder - people donating to Obama were most certainly not all progressives and they sure as hell were not all leftists (there's a difference between the two in modern vernacular.)

[Tesha]

112. "Some folks call you the elite -- I call you 'my base'!"

I've heard that somewhere before...

Tesha

[Johnny Harpo]

51. Providing 'Obama' Really Knows Who His Base Is

Obama was elected by a whole bunch of folks who were fed up with lies, lies, and more lies.

Obama was elected by a whole bunch of folks (Youth-Gays-Seniors-Women)who THOUGHT he understood their problems, and HE probably did.

I don't know if we can say the same for his 'staff'.

The trouble is Barak still sounds like a the CANDIDATE not the PRESIDENT.

He has surrounded himself with many of the same crowd that caused this mess in the first place.

And I fear he lost the only truly Big Gun he had when Teddy died, so he can't dig in his heels and tell the Congress 'This is what I want and if I don't get it I won't sign anything' because he dosen't have the clout to get it done his way.

So we wind up with him taking anything in the name of progress except progress itself.

I'll give him the first year, but if things look the same come June of 2010, then I'm afraid 2012 won't be the 'lock' we would all like it to be.

[Historic NY]

52. Just think then Palin can roll back the HCB,

[live love laugh]

65. One thing's fer shurr: Boosh didnt abandon his base--and look how well he did

:sarcasm:

[Kltpzyxm]

67. But you just want

Obama to be a left-wing Bush!!

Obama can prove to be much better than Bush by doing exactly the opposite of what his base wants and abandoning Democratic principles.

Let's kowtow to Republicans. That'll show 'em.

:crazy:

[Le Taz Hot]

68. I'll say it one more time,

I didn't abandon Obama or the Democrats, Obama and the Democrats abandoned me. I have but one vote and I'll be damned if I'll waste it on ANY political party or politician that does not work for my best interest.

[Kltpzyxm]

69. I'm not quite there yet.

But I understand the sentiment.

A party cannot expect us to fight for them, if they don't fight for us.

What kills me is America loves fighters, and Democratic principles CONSISTENTLY poll with overwhelming support.

If Obama were to show some backbone, he'd have a huge reelection margin.

It's like the people advising him on his political strategy are the same ones who advised Tiger on how to conduct his personal life.

[dysfunctional press]

70. "Global warming is arguably an infinitely more urgent issue than healthcare. "

not in the minds of most voters it isn't.

[breadandwine]

77. So, Dysfunctional Press, you're saying Obama should be a follower and not a leader?

Pretty soon there won't be a planet to vote on if global warming continues.

But at any rate, the president has influence over the nation and he can choose to move the country on whatever issue moves HIM. He blew his wad on an issue that in real terms was less important. If he had focussed on global warming this past year he could have accomplished at least something. Instead he gave huge profits in forced buying to the insurance industry.

Suppose he had made a stink about global warming. No matter how much the oil companies tried to shout him down at least some good would have come of it, more good than came in the phony healthcare bill.

For instance, all he had to do was push for better gas mileage and that OF ITSELF would have cut oil imports, which would have meant that people spent less at the pump which would have made a lot of ordinary Americans happy. Real savings, real money in Joe Sixpack's pockets. This healthcare bill has been viewed by a lot of voters as some sort of voodoo. There is no way on earth that mandating better gas mileage would have been viewed that way.

[dysfunctional press]

84. that would depend on whether he wants to be re-elected in 2012.

"There is no way on earth that mandating better gas mileage would have been viewed that way."

i'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you don't have a whole lot of life experience, do you...? or is it just that you haven't been paying attention?

you could probably save yourself a LOT of frustration and gnashing of teeth if you allowed yourself to come to terms with the simple fact that until the truly catastrophic shit that affects them directly and measurably starts happening, the vast majority of human beings simply aren't going to be too motivated about doing anything about it that involves any kind of personal sacrifice on their part. it's human nature- get used to it. :shrug:

"Pretty soon there won't be a planet to vote on if global warming continues."
:eyes:
over-wrought melodrama doesn't help, either. no matter what kind of abuses human beings are able to inflict upon it- the planet itself will persevere.

[Tim01]

71. I think he's in real trouble. Or maybe before it is time for his re-election

the republicans will have regained control of the house and senate and Americans will be gun-shy of putting republicans in the white house, too. I think that everybody knows now that the republicans ability to influence is out of proportion to their actual numbers in D.C., the republicans seem to fight like Spartans. And the democrats fight like democrats.
So maybe splitting the power is the only solution.

[breadandwine]

82. Right, Tim01, Republicans fight like Spartans. Is there some reason why we can't?

They scream and holler. It works. Is there some reason why we always think that shouting is shrill and uncouth and some sort of sin? Because shouting WORKS.

And no, splitting the power is a LOUSY idea.

The point is that Obama should fight instead of being a pussy cat and let the GOP have what it wants. He spent a year trying to be a conciliator and it doesn't work.

[Tim01]

91. I don't know why.

I suspect it is because democrats are so very arrogant about how much smarter and more sophisticated they are than republicans.They seem to think everybody should just "know" their ideas are better better they are so superior.
Obama demonstrated this so very well with his elitist "bitterly clinging" comment that pissed off so many people.
It doesn't work that way.
It is totally possible to be a serious fighter who fights hard with dignity and courage, and wins. Somebody to be respected and admired. Someone to follow. A leader. I think John F Kennedy show us this.
But nobody recently.

[Odin2005]

75. K&R

[Vidar]

79. K&R.

[defendandprotect]

80. Certainly Democratic voters feel betrayed .. .

I think we need to put in a lot of time discussing what we have been doing --

why it doesn't work -- the very nature of corporatism/fascism and how to beat it --

how to get liberals/progressives and others to come together as a voting bloc --

and what we've gotten for voting for "the lesser of evils" time after time --


Should we vote for any politician with his pockets full of corporate money?

How much does delay on reacting to all of this help corporations who want 1000% control

of our government and its agencies?


And what the hell is Plan B, folks????

[WeDidIt]

97. The polls say your assertion is a crock of shit. n/t

[Tesha]

114. Well then you'll have nothing to worry about in 2010 or '12, ehh? (NT)

[defendandprotect]

118. So nicely put . . . meanwhile only 20% of voters are identifying as Repug . . .

[TwilightGardener]

81. Ralph Nader. LOL. Isn't he eleventy hundred years old?

[treestar]

86. The base would not be making this statement

No member of the base would make that statement.

Is this fictional third party's presidential candidate going to win? If the voters were that liberal, Obama would have won by much more than 52%.

[defendandprotect]

120. How quickly we forget stolen elections, for just one thing . . .

This is an overwhelmingly liberal nation -- not that our corporate press is ever

going to tell you that --

And you could question our elections all the way back to Nixon-Humphrey because the

individual voting computers and the LARGE computers used by MSM began to come in during

the mid-and-late-1960's.

Previously MSM could only report actual vote results --

The LARGE computers gave them the ability to PREDICT elections and wins for candidates --

and to CALL elections and wins for candidates.

Voters having gotten used to that -- they simply reversed their new powers in 2000 in

RECALLING Florida from Gore -- and later RECALLING it for Bush!

Coincidentally, the computers began to come in just about the time America was passing

The Voting Rights Act!

And, of course, primaries are also where we are GIVEN the candidates the power elite want

us to have.

[defendandprotect]

124. PS: ---

It was too late to edit my post -- however, re this ...

If the voters were that liberal, Obama would have won by much more than 52%.

There are some that say that Obama won by a landslide -- a much larger figure than reported.

And that 24 seats in the House were stolen --

[L0oniX]

93. Well at least he will have all the health insurance and big pharma CEO's votes.

[HuckleB]

104. The members of the base that I know personally don't think they've been abandoned.

Hmmmmmm.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

106. It's all a vast left wing conspiracy.

People need to get a grip.:eyes:

[HuckleB]

107. I'm not sure of your point?

:shrug:

[EmeraldCityGrl]

108. I'm agreeing with you.

I should have used the little sarcasm thingy.

[HuckleB]

109. I figured as much, but wasn't quite sure.

I think I'll take a nap.

Cheers!

[EmeraldCityGrl]

113. Sweet dreams.

:)

[Shagbark Hickory]

115. I wouldn't exactly say he's a failure just yet but look at what it took to get him elected

It took the destruction of GW Bush and every African american in the country to turn out at the polls. A near depression and housing market crash. Two freaken wars!

I mean... he was up against John McCain who could only utter the same three words.. "The surge worked" and sarah palin who is best not allowed to speak.

I'm not impressed enough with his performance thus far to bother going to the polls. That's why Mitt Romney or other repuke is going to win in 2012. But what difference does it really make anyway. The president can only do what congress will let them do.

[TheKentuckian]

117. The base has to be reenergized for the midterms

Obama will probably be okay but if he's going to accomplish anything worthwhile we'll need crazy majorities.

[walldude]

119. Ya get a MAgic 8 Ball for Christmas?

3 years. He has time to fix all this.

[BbeltAtheist]

126. I think you are on to something

But you will probably have to join forces with Grover Norquist for it to go anywhere