If Dems lose Kennedy's seat, then Hamsher, Schultz, Hartmann, Press especially,

[Windy]

as well as in some part, Olberman are to blame. They have been trashing Obama for months, claiming that we have 60 votes and that we should be able to get anything we want as progressives. Those statements have no basis in reality. The proper focus should have been the republicans and the conservative democrats. We have NEVER had a true majority. And if Brown wins tomorrow, we are further in the hole! Trashing Obama for the actions of members of the Senate, for something that is OUT OF HIS CONTROL is unconscionable. They have only succeeded in dissuading uninformed members of our party from turning out at the polls and have contributed to a disheartening of the electorate.

Flame away all you want, but we progressives have a very nasty habit of eating our own. I for one, would have given Obama at least a year to try and get a handle on the absolute cluster**** he was left with before becoming too critical. Unfortunately, the individuals listed have been critical since about 3 months in. (and many here at DU)

I am hoping for the best. I have made calls and have had a relatively positive response from those I've been able to reach, but we'll see.

If Ted Kennedy's seat goes the way of the teabaggers, our own party members must accept some of the blame!!

[Avalux]

1. I agree with you completely.

To that list - I will add that bloggers (Huff Post, etc.) and members here have been mercilessly bashing Obama and it hurts the party as a whole.

[RedCloud]

49. I Don't. Ed made the right argument today.

The American public gave Bush 8 years of patience. And now Massachusetts is ready to bail on Obama after one year?

They will be electing a Dick Cheney clone.

[cadmium]

68. I think Ed understands that he

got carried away with the carping. I give him credit that he is not just going for the facile argument that the race is close because dems arent progressive enough (note I say close - not lost - voting is tomorrow). One reason I was glad to see Ed get that MSNBC slot is that I think he understands partisanship, but he just got carried away with his own schtick. I would bet that he realizes this. The rest are probably too sanctimonious/ideological or cynical to see it.

[Vickers]

2. "we progressives have a very nasty habit of eating our own"

IRONY ALERT!!! IRONY ALERT!!!

:P

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. Why wouldn't the PEOPLE be to blame?

You know... the ones that drop the little cards in the ballot box.

[Larkspur]

4. If Dems in Mass lose the open US Senate seat, its the candidates fault

Instead of campaigning right after the primary, she disappeared and blew a 30 pt lead. This is candidate malpractice, not the fault of Schultz, Olberman, Maddow, etc., who are correctly criticizing Obama and his team for turning a deaf ear on how Americans feel about Wall Street and the Obama Admin more concerned with kissing Wall Street's a@@ instead of kicking their butts.

[Windy]

10. Hmmm...interesting way to divert blame.

And funny, didn't Bush and Paulsen craft and implement TARP? I believe the relief that Obama put into place was the bail out for the auto companies. Many here in Detroit thank him for that.

And isn't it Obama that wants a tax levied on those who took bonuses on Wall Street? Again, it will be up to the house and senate to pass a bill...good luck with that! Again, we DO NOT have a majority!!!

The critism that has been levied has been unfair and based upon histrionics as opposed to fact. Its truly a shame!!!

[demwing]

17. Then why do we even need a President?

What ever happened to the Bully Pulpit? Why can't we have a President who LEADS rather than follows? Is the Poor Potus shackled by a Congressional Majority? Is the Poor Potus too chastened by the liberal media?

Poor Potus, can't get any breaks at all.

[democracy1st]

20. how do you feel about all the wall st lobbyist in the admin,does that have anything to do with it ?

[Larkspur]

36. Obama supported TARP when he was still a senator

and his attempts at reigning in Wall Street so far have been all talk and little action.

[harkadog]

50. Wrong about TARP

As a candidate Obama demanded Congress vote for TARP. His Treasury Secretary, Geithner, helped write TARP with Paulsen.

[laughingliberal]

61. Bush and Paulsen did craft and implement TARP with no conditions whatsoever on the Wall Street thugs

Problem is our President and his economic team continued on with the same policy-give them the money with no conditions. Then they implemented a totally ineffective program designed to stop foreclosures that allowed the banks to take money for symbolically 'participating' while they foreclosed on people's home who were in 'temporary modification' programs. It's been obvious for a while it's not working but the administration has yet to decide the money needs to be diverted to the homeowners where it would, actually, stop some foreclosures.

I don't think a lifting on the cap on aid to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae on Christmas Eve to avoid having to get Congressional approval was helpful.

That whole tax he wants to levy on those who took TARP money is better than nothing but it is only a week old. Too late, probably, to swing the race in MA back again.

[NightWatcher]

5. BULLSHIT! I blame the base for not getting the job done out there

or blame the DLC policies of No Change/No Big Difference (bail out the banksters, screw the little guy) that are causing severe apathy

The Progressive Base (us wacko lefties) got Obama elected and now after feeling pissed on, we didnt show up to help out as much as back in 09. Continue to piss off the wacko lefties and see what happens later this year.

Flame me, I dont fucking care. I've been right for a while now and I fear I'll be right come November

[Windy]

12. Again, Bush and Paulsen created and institued TARP before Obama took office

Obama bailed out the auto companies....

[harkadog]

53. No way

Obama supported it and demanded Congress vote for it as a candidate.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Like it's been said, if Dems allowed the Repukes to beat them,

then Dems voters are the real wimps, and will be represented accordingly.

can't ask courage for others, if you don't practice it yourself....
and courage in this case is defeating the one we know is against not just some things,
but everything that we stand for.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[Windy]

14. What would you like him to do to Nelson, Landrieu, Lincoln, Lieberman.... put them in cement shoes?

The money that they receive from corporations guides them. The only people who can make them listen are their constituents who can VOTE THEM OUT!!!! Jesus...how ignorant of you.

[Ildem09]

16. During LBJ's days

He got funding pulled on anyone who voted against his will. you voted against LBJ and you were a democrat all federal funding would go away. Democrat would complain to him, he would say get your fucking campaign contributors to build that highway. they would fall back in line and money would be restored. Tip O'neil would call out people who voted against party on the floor. say they voted against a infrastructure bill. he would list off all the bridges that werent up to code in their district. plenty of ways to force cooperation

[Windy]

26. LBJ had a TRUE majority in the Senate and reasonable, mature republicans as opposed to rabid

frothing Neanderthals!!! Check your history! Big difference.
What do any of the conservadems need with federal money when they get MILLIONS from corporate donors? If they want to keep their job, they have to pay homage to the corporate masters. Threats like that don't do a damn bit of good anymore.

Wake up!!!

[Ildem09]

30. LbJ

had the dixiecrats. read your history.

[iceman66]

67. Reid and Pelosi should be doing that to the Republicans too,

not just recalcitrant Democrats.

Not ONE federal dollar should flow to any red state as long as the obstructionism continues!

[Mojambo]

8. You're misrepresenting what all of those people have been saying.

They certainly never said we should be getting "ANYTHING we want as progressives"

[HootieMcBoob]

94. Correct

The people who have been critical of Obama have been trying to get him to fight for something, to show some fire, to stand up for his base rather than the insurance companies and bankers. Republicans never abandon their base. That's the lesson.

[DFLforever]

9. There's a reason GOPers don't trash each other,

They know it COSTS them votes.

A GOPer writing on DKOS in 2008, said the Republicans calculate the Dems typically lose 1-2% of the vote nationwide simply because of sniping their own candidate.

[sabrina 1]

83. Wrong, the reason they march in lockstep is because they

have no principles and put winning before anything else. That is why their party has done nothing to change their views on issues the base would like to see addressed.

One more reason is the Republican Party doesn't take its base for granted. I have never seen a Republican tell their base they intend to ignore them.

It's not rocket science. I am not a Republican BECAUSE they have no principles and because they don't think or dare to criticize their leadership. Well, until now.

The blame for this goes to people like you who led this Party to believe that no matter what they did, they would still get your vote. Why on earth should they work for it when you are giving it away for free?

No more of that for me. I saw where that got us for eight years. You can keep shifting the blame, and see where that gets you, OR, you recognize the reality of the situation and then force this Party to stop catering to the right and to Wall St and ignoring the people who sent them to DC.

[demwing]

11. We also have a horrible habit of rejecting responsibility for our own

And are so in to building heroes instead of leaders, that when a candidate fails to lead, or even to act heroically, our star crossed gazes prohibit our seeing the truth.

[Zen Democrat]

13. I totally agree. Frank Schaeffer told Rachel Maddow that the fight against Obama is huge.

He stressed that the right-wing fundamentalists, of whom he once was one, have been fighting a war against Obama since the day he was elected. Democrats fall right into the right-wing trap to whine about Obama and spread a dampening of enthusiasm, rather than a fiery spirit to support our President who has the hardest job of any president in my memory and before. I love President Obama, not because I agree with everything out of the White House, but because he has the weight of the world and I'm satisfied that he's the smartest guy in the room. I'm going to have his back.

[Windy]

15. +20 for critical thinking and maturity!!! nt

[FrenchieCat]

Aye......

We can take steps forward, even if they aren't giant leaps,
or we can start walking backwards;
its our call!

[michreject]

18. Matthews wasn't very flattering tonight

Fienman was trying not to sound like a defeatist. His voice didn't match what he was saying though.

[Tom Rinaldo]

19. False premise

Democrats never expected to win 60 Senate seats when Obama made all those campaign promises about health care. Democrats would have been ecstatic winning 57 or 58 seats. If they lose the Coakely seat, and I hope they don't, watch them learn how to legislate with less than 60 seats. They might even start with health care, and they might suddenly decide it is time to dust off reconciliation and actually start using it. I wrote a piece that's in my journal called "Nine ways Obama didn't fight for the HCR he promised. There were a series of tactical decisions made that did not have to be made the way that they were made.

[fascisthunter]

21. No. The Party Itself(being steered by corporatist ideology) is to blame

the people are upset, because the dems have been exposed for screwing the middle class while bailing out the wealthy. All the happy talk means shit to them, not because of the media, but because people are informing each other through the internet.

We know the media is biased, but truth is truth. The democratic Party is TO FUCKIN BLAME. It's their responsibility, not the media's. The reason Mass locals are disinterested has been stated, but some don't want to listen. Politicians can lie and spin all they want, but eventually all the bullshit catches up with them. If the politicians don't get it by now, I doubt they will ever have the capacity to.

[anonymous171]

22. So progressives are important after all?

Someone better tell Obama and Rahm.

[Ildem09]

23. +1000.... Gee do we matter or are we irrelevant? get us the memo! we're confused

[FrenchieCat]

24. It's call paying the big tent price.....

either it is paid,
or nothing gets done.

Until we agree to that as a party,
we just have to be wimps who gets our ass kicked by the other side.

Put anykind of dressing on it that you want,
but losing doesn't make us winners, ever.....
in any game, period.

[depakid]

32. And that price is minority status- a prescription for major losses in 2010 and beyond.

[FrenchieCat]

43. Whatever.

I'm not the one that is supposed to be sooooo passionate....
cause remember, I'm just an Obama cheerleader!

I say, like you do....Let the country get torn to hell.
like it was for so long.

See, I was raised Black....
I'm fucking used to the spoiled asses "ruling" classes,
trying to have their way or no way all the while calling names.

It the kind of thinking that you promote that has put us exactly where we are,
and again, your passion don't mean jack shit, if you never get anywhere,
and you about to take some giant leap back.

The GOP laughs at you.
You are their tool.

[Ildem09]

51. sometimes things have to get bad

before the get good. FDR wouldn't have been so amazing if not for Huey Long threatening a run against his left flank in 36. LBJ wouldn't have been so liberal had Bobby scared the living bejeebus out of him. The Democrats it seems need someone on the left flank making noise its the only way things get done. if you don't push them, then nothing happens

*Edit: what does being black have to do with anything? I mean if we all take that attitude it will exacerbate already tenuous relationships in the party. between the gay community and the black or latino communty. between labor and the globalist etc. etc we are liberals/progressives first.

[FrenchieCat]

66. Being Black means that we are used to the ones who think they know everything,

screaming all or nothing, holding hostage and all of the dumbshit.

Black folks are used to going without....
and so, we will continue. No health care subsidies for us.
we can just keep on dying of preventable deseases and shit,
as long the "intellectuals" have their way or no way.

As long as you're happy and can say "told you so"....
good for you. Personally, I'm glad you'll feel better now.
Like I said, Black folks and the poor will just have to make do;
we're fucking used to it.

[Ildem09]

73. Being Gay means a lot of the same

the whole equality can wait meme really upsets me. i dunno i might wanna propose to my boyfriend. or not have the fuckwads who beat me get off for anything less than hate crimes. etc etc. again it's the divide in the progressive community in the way we view this issue. I can assure you we want the same thing. we just go about it in different ways

[depakid]

72. Actually, Republican strategists are laughing at the administration

and congress- as well as their partisan supporters for playing right into their hands.

To squander such unprecedented political capital, to fail to harness the populist anger and resentment- in create the perception that they're unwilling (or incapable) of fighting the good fight for ordinary Americans against the most unpopular and abusive groups on the national stage really is impressive. Even the most cynical sorts couldn't have guessed the extent of it.

I'm quite certain that Republicans are thanking their lucky stars that a conciliator and consensus builder is in the Whitehouse, taking advice from the one of architects of the 1994 disaster.

I surely would be if I were in their shoes.

[Ildem09]

33. we are always going to be less cohesive than GOP

we have far to many special interest groups vieing for control. Labor V Globalist African Americans, Latinos, Gays, Women, Environmentalist, peacnicks, Interventionists etc.

[Dr.Phool]

46. After a while, you get tired of being stuck with the bill,

And not even getting any scraps.

[FrenchieCat]

57. Well, one day, you'll get tire of not getting jack shit.

When that day comes, you, as well as others, will be willing to become pragmatic.....
otherwise, well, what may happen (if you wish it hard enough) in MA
will repeat itself everywhere,
and then the "Oh soooo passionate" will be left with what they started with; jack shit.

[Ildem09]

62. damn if you were alive in the 1950's

I wonder what kind of watered down civil rights bill you would have been championing.

[FrenchieCat]

69. That's exactly what we got till 1964......

remember the poll tax and shit.

and even after that, we couldn't just live anywhere,
or get hired or a whole bunch of shit.

1964 wasn't even a magic year,
cause a lot of it kept right on going.....

But what we didn't ever do is try to defeat those who could help us the most,
in order to teach them a lesson.

This reminds me of 1968 Democratic Convention.
How'd that work out?
Who was in office when that war finally ended,
after even more folks were killed?

[Ildem09]

its complex

equality takes time i realize that. but what i'm saying is if there werent progressives pressing for everything balls out so to speak back then then nothing else would have happened. if i'm not here now pushing for single payer or at least a strong PO and threatening the dems of electoral ruin then they will have no incentive to make even slight concessions to the left

Edit: also without those 'intellectuals' in the civil rights groups things wouldn't have happened. the civil rights movement needed northern intellectuals

[FrenchieCat]

80. A whole lot of things are "complex" including our current position......

Northern Intellectual back in those days were also pragmatists,
possibly even more so then Blacks were.

Today, the "Intellectuals" (and I doubt that they really are)
I am speaking of,
believed erroneously that they had somehow elected a tall tan Kucinich,
when Kucinich couldn't garnet enough votes to win anything anywhere.

So now these same "intellectuals" have held Obama's feet to the fire,
till he can only walk with a limp...

in the meantime those "intellectuals" (who are not really that thoughtful),
ain't gonna get jack shit for their troubles.

In the end, it is the pragmatists that have the least to lose....
because they didn't ever fool themselves thinking that it was all gonna be easy.

[Ildem09]

82. hmm

we can afford to be more ideologically pure. considering A) we have a better plan and B) Pass or Fail it doesn't affect us that much

[JVS]

74. It would probably involve black people making mandatory payments to municipalities to make...

the separate but equal schools less glaringly unequal.

[FrenchieCat]

81. That's so funny......

and yet, you still end up with jack shit.

[Ildem09]

84. sorry

but in matters of equality. there is no excuse for compromise or waiting our turn. Just because blacks had to wait 240+ years dosn't mean that it was right or that Gays, should have to wait either. full bore on equality regardless

[Zen Democrat]

93. I'm old enough to remember the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 -- and it was considered weak at the time.

Yes, it was weak. But I was PASSED and IMPROVED in later years. That's the way it works. If you try to get the whole apple at once, you'll go hungry.

[jgraz]

85. Yes, but we can only LOSE elections. When Democrats win, we don't count.

:eyes:

[Stinky The Clown]

25. It is about what has become crystal clear is the bent and direction of the party right now.

[notesdev]

27. Is this "blame the victim" time?

Howabout blaming the people who have been given actual power and haven't done the right thing with it? Blaming unelected pundits is pissing in the wind.

[Windy]

37. Absolutely not...its called FACE REALITY!! We need more progressives in the Senate and the House

if we want to get things done.

Some of you are beyond all reason and react strictly from emotion. I hope you're all happy if Ted Kennedy's seat goes the way of the teabaggers tomorrow.

Kennedy knew that compromise had to happen and change was incremental. Its so sad that his seat may now be lost because many on the progressive side of the aisle suffer from ADD and are impatient and demanding with unrealistic goals for someone who is trying to fix a mess and make change with a broken senate and a polarized government and populous. YOu are like petulant children. I am frankly disgusted by it.

Am I happy that the health care bill in its current form does not have a public option? Hell no... but the blame belongs with the Senate!!

[notesdev]

40. Impatient?

It has nothing to do with patience. It has to do with having NO enthusiasm for a process in which all participants are openly bribed, and the in-your-face middle finger that they give to us... except during the brief moments when they are begging for our votes.

[depakid]

28. Behavior not unlike a battered spouse

Blame everyone else- and especially anyone who's called attention to the abuse.

Couple of memos you may have missed:

From Bernie Sanders:

Progressive activists are angry that a Medicare-for-all single-payer approach was totally ignored during the healthcare debate. They also cannot understand how, despite overwhelming support for a strong public option in healthcare reform, there will not be one in the final bill. Trade unionists, many of whom voted for Obama and against McCain because of the latter's position on taxing workers' healthcare benefits, are apoplectic that Obama and Senate Democrats now support the McCain position. Women are outraged that the Democratic House was put in the position of having to support major restrictions with regard to abortion rights. And seniors, who for the first time in forty-five years will not be receiving a Social Security cost of living adjustment, are responding to the hypocritical Republican attacks about "cuts" in Medicare.

Now, I may not be the greatest political strategist in the world, but I don't know how you win elections by ignoring the ideas of the progressives who have worked hardest at the grassroots level for your victories, or the trade unions that have provided significant financial support and door-to-door volunteers for Democratic campaigns. I don't know how you succeed politically when you insult women, who far more than men consistently provide you with great margins of support. How do you preserve a big majority in Congress when you fail to be aggressive in protecting the interests of seniors, a huge voting bloc in off-presidential-year elections? In other words, it should not surprise anyone that the Democrats are in serious trouble.

More: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100201/sanders

and Robert Kuttner:

How could the health care issue have turned from a reform that was going to make Barack Obama ten feet tall into a poison pill for Democratic senators? Whether or not Martha Coakley squeaks through in Massachusetts on Tuesday, the health bill has already done incalculable political damage and will likely do more. Polls show that the public now opposes it by margins averaging ten to fifteen points, and widening. It is hard to know which will be the worse political defeat -- losing the bill and looking weak, or passing it and leaving it as a piñata for Republicans to attack between now and November.

The measure is so unpopular that Republican State Senator Scott Brown has built his entire surge against Coakley around his promise to be the 41st senator to block the bill -- this in Ted Kennedy's Massachusetts. He must be pretty confident that the bill has become politically radioactive, and he's right.

It has already brought down Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, a fighter for health care and other reforms far more progressive than President Obama's. Dorgan championed Americans' right to re-import cheaper prescription drugs from Canada, a popular provision that the White House blocked. Dorgan, who is one of the Senate's great populists, began the year more than twenty points ahead in the polls of his most likely challenger, North Dakota Governor John Hoeven. By the time he decided to call it a day, Dorgan was running more than twenty points behind. The difference was the health bill, which North Dakotans oppose by nearly two to one. The fact that Dorgan's own views were much better than the Administration's cut little ice. He was fatally associated with an unpopular bill.

More: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/18-8

[bridgit]

29. You're not going to get any of them nor anyone here to admit they've done a damn thing wrong...

Ain't gonna happen :rofl:

[Windy]

47. Yeah, I know.. Just thought I'd give it a shot.... nt

[rwheeler31]

31. I blame the entire corporate media the will never let up

on this President even though they gave Bush a pass.

[aquart]

34. Better to be loyal Bushies, I mean Obamies, right?

The idea that we are NOT ALLOWED TO QUESTION OUR PARTY OR ELECTED OFFICIALS is anti-democratic.

AND HOW DARE YOU BLAME ANYONE FOR USING THE OPTIONS AND TOOLS OF DEMOCRACY?

Or are you just so tired of being an apologist that you relish the heaping of blame?

[DailyGrind51]

35. Remember when we mocked Republicans for the same thing?

Did we develop "Stockholm Syndrome" during the previous administration?

[O is 44]

38. +1....

I could not agree more, I thought the same thing listening to Ed a little while ago. He has bashed Obama for months, now he is asking for Dems to vote to give Obama more than just a year with the majority. Ok, Ed where was that train of thought months ago? The critics should have focused more on bashing the messed up senate instead they focused their loudest and shrillest attacks on Obama. And no I am not saying Obama should not have been criticized.

[Blasphemer]

39. That is an oversimplification of reality

That is like saying that Bush's low approval ratings were merely the result of negative press and criticism of his policies and not the policies themselves. Critiques didn't prevent him from winning in 2004 but two years later, he and the GOP were in the toilet. There are a lot of forces at play. The media does have a lot of power but we've also seen that the public is quite capable of ignoring a media meme. When the GOP was blathering on about Obama's failure relative to the terror attack attempt, the public wasn't buying what they were selling. As far as this Senate race goes, I'll wait until the votes are cast and we, hopefully, hear from the voters of MA to find out what impacted their decisions.

[Atticus]

41. "If Ted Kennedy's seat goes the way of the teabaggers, our own party members must accept some of

the blame!!"

We agree on that, but we definitely disagree about WHICH of "our own party members" should be blamed.

As a regular viewer of both Schultz and Olberman, I haven't seen or heard any "trashing" of Obama. If you define "trashing" as comparing what he said and what he's done so far, as daring to criticize outright reversals of position, then fine, they have trashed him.

It used to be said that "Democrats want to fall in love; Republicans want to fall in line."

I'm a lover.

[Ildem09]

44. Right on [phone]

[HughMoran]

55. Can lovers also be winners?

:think:

[Atticus]

71. They're the ONLY ones who can! nt

[laughingliberal]

42. In order to believe this is the group to blame I would 1st have to accept that the HCR

debate in the Senate was OUT OF HIS CONTROL. I do not, personally, believe it. I am backed up in that belief by Russ Feingold who said it does no good to trash Lieberman, that this is the bill the President wanted to begin with. Now, that may or may not be true. I would be more inclined to think the President was really in favor of a better bill and the Senate was the sum total of the problem if I had seen a little more encouragement on his part while the House and the Senate HELP committees were getting their much better bills passed out of committee. But, no. No 'attaboys' for any of those committees, just praise for Baucus and Grassley and the gang of six thugs who were busily destroying the positive aspects of HCR. It would have been one thing to see him fight for a PO or some of the progressive items in the House's bills and then have to compromise with the Blue Dogs in the Senate. I would have, then, believed the Senate was solely to blame. But I did not see that. I didn't see it at all. I watched, dumbfounded, while the conservatives and lunatics took over the debate while the President remained silent and the CofS called groups who ran ads for the public option, "fucking stupid." It was not helpful.

[G_j]

45. just make it easy, blame Nader nt

[Faryn Balyncd]

48. Progressives generally have NOT been saying that we have 60 votes, but that we should pass with 51..

....by either using reconciliation, or by forcing the obstructionists to actually stand up with their urine bags and actually filibuster, exposing them for the obstructionist fools that they are.

.....that we should STOP using the "60 votes" malarkey as an excuse to pass corporatist legislation worse than anything the GOP could have gotten through.

[JVS]

52. I blame Obama, Rahm, Baucus and Reid. Pelosi has done ok in my book and is off the hook here.

They've allowed the HCR debate to take up too much time and be too unnerving to the public. And by the public, I don't mean just the conservatives who are against anything proposed by the democrats, this process has also been unnerving to many democrats and watching Holy Joe and Ben Nelson (who even himself wants to give back the concessions he demanded because they were so crass and politically tone-deaf) pull a stickup on the Senate floor was not confidence inspiring at all. If Obama wanted to bet the farm on this he really should have done a vote count before the summer in order to know what was going on, rather than have the Senate spend most of a year making really grotty sausage in front of the public.

[coti]

79. I even think Reid has given it his best shot.

He tried to put the public option in the Senate bill. He just couldn't pull it off without Obama's support.

[JVS]

87. I'm less inclined to cut him slack. As Sen majority leader one of his duties is to maintain the...

Democratic caucus in the Senate, and engaging in a publicly aired protracted compromise dialogue within the caucus was an extremely bad move. This debate has made our caucus look bad. Bear in mind that because the republicans are completely obstructing, they don't have to take any blame for any piece of legislation leaving the senate. Any warts this bill has are considered our fault. Reid should have told Obama that in order to get the HCR in a reasonable form, the party would need to gain however many seats necessary. Then Obama could have used his popularity (which has diminished since the HCR process began) to help get good democrats in those seats in 2010.

[coti]

91. That definitely would have been a better plan.

If they couldn't get it done right, the solution wasn't to get it done but make things worse while doing so. They should have kept working for what they needed and waited until they got it.

I tend to place the blame on Obama for not doing it that way, though, rather than Reid. It sounds like Rahm had a plan and Reid wasn't going to be able to argue with him about it.

[HughMoran]

54. Remember how we were flattered that they seemed to be reading DU?

:think:

[madrchsod]

56. that`s right ----blame the progressives in the party.....

we`ll all go away now....

[ShortnFiery]

58. Bunk. It's the Corporate side of our Party's fault = GREED that's to blame. eom

[madrchsod]

59. boy, oh, boy... wait till obama`s old senate seat goes to a republican.

[O is 44]

65. and that will be his fault too....

according to many people's logic here.

[demmiblue]

60. Blame game, blame game, blame game

Why does this OP so remind me of:

[Sebastian Doyle]

76. Quack quack!

Whatever happened to Scottie the Duck? :rofl:

[cadmium]

63. I agree. It is an umpopular position but I think it is

very true. I am disappointed in Ed because for some reason I thought he understood the importance of partisanship. Of course most of them will blame the moderates for not being progressive enough. It is an easy argument --- much easier than admitting any responsibility

[Sebastian Doyle]

64. Blame the DLC for a weak candidate, and Diebold for the fraud that is all but certain

and the whore media who called this race for the naked teabagger last week.

[Adelante]

70. Absolutely right

:thumbsup:

For a year, while the left wing was bitching and moaning, the right wing was organizing.

[Raineyb]

75. Without reading the entire POS OP I can say without doubt that this is bullshit. n/t

[sabrina 1]

77. What utter nonsense. Those very same people you mentioned

along with a whole lot more, if only they had the power you are ascribing to them. I remember them trashing George W. Bush for years before the 2004 election. Did Bush lose because of them?

If she loses it will be the fault of a party who took that seat for granted, as well as their base.

Stop trying to shift the blame. Voters don't owe any party their votes. Politicians earn them.

This notion that has arisen on democratic boards, this attempt to emotionally manipulate people by shifting the blame from where it belongs, is EXACTLY why Democrats have lost support.

The operatives they've been sending out with these messages have turned many people off.

I certainly hope this is not the message of the Democratic Party because if it is, it is a sure loser.

[burning rain]

78. If lefty media pundits were a serious problem....

then getting them off the air in favor of nice uncritical anodyne voices like Tim Kaine would be the solution. Hint: lefty media pundits aren't a serious problem.

[jgraz]

86. AND, it was that snotty kid's fault that the Emperor was naked.

It can't POSSIBLY be the fault of the people actually fucking up the politics. It's the fault of the people who NOTICE they're fucking up the politics.

Cuz if nobody had said anything, Coakley would suddenly be a much more attractive candidate. :eyes:

[JVS]

89. You're just posting that because Jane Hamsher and Olberman told you not to be content!

;-)

[Gman2]

88. Nope, lighting a fire under him, is proper. And there are no rethug positions to analyze.

[xultar]

90. Unrec with pleasure. This post makes no sense. NONE.

[H2O Man]

92. You forgot Poland.

[TankLV]

95. Bullshit - the spineless dems only have THEMSELVES to blame. PERIOD!

And THANKS TO OLBERMAN, he is one of the TOO FEW fighting for US!!!

Obama has ONLY HIMSELF to blame when HE put SINGLE PAYER and tried to keep the PUBLIC OPTION off the table AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS WHOLE MESS!!!