Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The right says Obama is too radical, and the left says not radical enough

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:36 PM
Original message
The right says Obama is too radical, and the left says not radical enough
Edited on Wed Jan-20-10 06:44 PM by whosinpower
And both sides are using the Mass. Election result to prove their point.

Wow.

The Teabaggers are crowing that Obama is way too radical, people are angry is why they have mobilized in true tea party tradition.

Progressives are bemoaning that Obama kowtowed far too much to the republicans and big business and this is makes the progressive people angry.

I think that Ted Kennedy was a remarkable man and a valued and cherished senator. People voted for him and supported him - not just because he was a democrat, but because he stood for something.

I miss him. And the funny thing is - I am not even American.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yeah, my head's spinning over that one, and I'm trained to create spin!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. The right says anyone without R behind their name is "too radical"
So why should we give a big fat rats butt what they are going to say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
19. Hell, some of them say certain Rs are too radical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Not just repubs, some dems also say he is too far left
The two narratives you describe are also fighting it out within the Democratic Party, and here on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
4. When one looks at a standard politcal compass though the reality of the situation dawns.
That American politics are horribly skewed to the right and that our right wing would be called "far right" everywhere else in the world...well maybe not Columbia or Saudi Arabia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. It's to the point that even much of our left wing
is skewed to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Don't like to quote Chomsky verbatum...but he was right on this one.
Sad really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. The left and the right can
spin their heads off but it's not going to change reality.

LESSONS LEARNED.... Given that the results in Massachusetts were not quite what the political world was expecting as of, say, two weeks ago, there will be plenty of "what just happened?" questions over the next several days. We're already hearing ample talk about what lessons Democrats should have learned from this painful defeat.

I think it's probably a mistake to overstate the larger significance of a special election 10 months before the midterms, but it'd be foolish to pretend Scott Brown's victory was some random fluke, never to be repeated again.

With that in mind, here are my Top 5 lessons to be learned from the Mess in Massachusetts.

1. Successful candidates hit the campaign trail. Candidates seeking office should probably campaign while voters are making up their minds. It's old-fashioned thinking, I know, but winning a primary and then dropping out of sight -- while your opponent is working hard to reach out to voters -- tends to be a bad idea.

For much of the post-primary period, the campaign calendar on the Coakley website was blank. Dave Weigel noted yesterday, "From the primary through last Sunday, Scott Brown held 66 events of varying size. Coakley held 19." Part of this is because Brown had to introduce himself to voters who had no idea who he was, while Coakley was already well known. But 19 events in 40 days is evidence of a Senate candidate who was taking victory for granted -- and in the process, throwing victory away.

2. Voters like likeable candidates. Some voters care more about policy and substance than which candidate they most want to have a beer with, but these voters tend to be outnumbered. We've all seen races in which the thoughtful, hard-working, experienced candidate who emphasizes substantive issues loses out to the fun, likable opponent (see 2000, presidential election of).

The Massachusetts race fits this model nicely. Chris Good noted this week, "hile Coakley focused on the issues in this race, Brown can credit his lead in multiple polls to his own personality and personal image, which he crafted with a series of successful ads portraying him as an average, likable guy." It's tempting to think voters in a mature democracy, especially in a state like Massachusetts, would prioritize policy over personality, and appreciate the candidate who "focused on the issues." But yesterday was the latest in a series of reminders that personal qualities often trump everything else.

3. Saying dumb things will undermine public support. When the pressure was on, Coakley insulted Red Sox fans -- twice. She kinda sorta said there are "no terrorists in Afghanistan," and that "devout Catholics" may not want to work in emergency rooms. When the Democratic campaign realized it was in deep trouble, and readied an effort to turn things around, it had trouble overcoming the distractions caused by the candidate's public remarks.

Maybe, if the campaign had been in gear throughout the post-primary process, Coakley would have been sharper on the stump, had more message discipline, and been less likely to make these costly, distracting errors.

4. Learn something about your opponent. Because the Democratic campaign assumed it would win, it didn't invest much energy in understanding its opponent (who, incidentally, won). They didn't identify Brown's weak points, and seemed to know practically nothing about his background. When the race grew competitive, nearly all of the damaging stories about the Republican candidate came from well-researched blog posts, not the campaign's opposition research team. "Get to know your opponent" is one of those lessons taught on the first day of Campaign 101, and campaigns that forget it are going to struggle.

5. Enthusiasm matters. No matter how confused and uninformed Brown's supporters seemed, they were also motivated. Dems liked Coakley, but they weren't, to borrow a phrase, fired up and ready to go.

Looking ahead, chances are pretty good that organized right-wing voters will be mobilized and itching to vote in November. They certainly were yesterday. Democrats can't expect to do well with an unmotivated, listless party base.

—Steve Benen 6:30 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (51)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. So, what you are saying, in a nutshell
Is that Coakley lost because she simply did not work hard and smart enough. Fair enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. It had been pointed
out before and now reading Steve Benen's summary I can see why the Perfect Storm had a lot to do with Martha losing a sure thing.

And, look who they ended up with.. someone spouting lots of teabag points..

brown "worked hard to get it" but will he work hard as for the People of Mass?..or the teabag party of NO? The saga continues..

"A NOTICEABLE DROP-OFF IN QUALITY"

Sen.-elect Scott Brown (R-Mass.) offered an interesting peek into his worldview last night during his victory speech.

" In dealing with terrorists, our tax dollars should pay for weapons to stop them, not lawyers to defend them.

"Raising taxes, taking over our health care, and giving new rights to terrorists is the wrong agenda for our country."

Perhaps now would be a good time to note that this is a Senate seat once held by John F. Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Henry Cabot Lodge, and John Quincy Adams, among others.

It now belongs to Scott Brown -- a conservative who supports torture, opposes Wall Street accountability, supports more tax cuts for the wealthy, opposes economic recovery efforts, opposes Ted Kennedy's life's work on health care reform, and doubts that global climate change is the result of human activity.

<more>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x13933

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frazzled Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Good points, but also ...
We have to remember that this race took place over a mere 6-week period from primary to election day. For a big seat like the Senate, that was an incredibly short span of time, and a good deal of it came over the Christmas and New Year holiday (and it didn't help that Coakley went on vacation).

So the time between when she was ahead and when she started to tank was very brief. Candidates (with the help of the big boys in Washington) can come back from these kinds of gaffes over time (witness Obama and his "guns and religion" gaffe) ... but you can't turn around the thing in a week. I think the DSCC, the DNC, and the WH were caught off guard. She didn't look like she needed any help coming out of the primaries, and then when it did start to look dire, there wasn't enough time to fix it.

I guess the real lesson is: never ever ever take even a single vote for granted, work hard even if you are 20 points up ... and, um, don't dis the Red Sox.

I'm pretty worried about our upcoming primaries here in Illinois for the Senate seat--Feb. 2. I fear we may have a repeat. There's barely been any campaigning or discussion: it's just assumed Gianoulis will take the Dem. nomination. And I'm frankly not sure he can win against the Republican Kirk. But at least we have all the way to November to buttress him up and put him through the paces.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Your's is another
important fact to this race.

Good Luck to you in Illinois and please read post # 11 for Benen's report on who Mass got as a Senator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenArrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
6. His Republican detractors have been crying "socialism"
at even his most tepid, centrist policies, and the average slob has no clue about Socialism, other than they've been told that's it's evil, while those on the left, having at least a basic understanding of socialist principles, can see pretty clearly just how far Obama is from aproximating them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. The only solution is if Obama/Dems gave the public what they wanted originally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. Except that does not jive
With what the corporate masters want. It seems to me that Obama tries to find the middle ground from which both sides can function. However, the way the nation is right now, I am not sure that is tenable. And that is why both sides, and I say sides deliberately, both sides are using this election as a bellweather event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
14. No, no, NO! It's not about radicalness. It's about forcefulness
It's not that Democrats are "too conservative". It's that Democrats are willing to compromise everything.

We don't need a more liberal agenda. We need a Democratic party and Democratic leadership that unapologetically defends and promotes the agenda we have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
15. Not exactly what "the left" is saying.
"The left" (i.e. the majority of the country) is saying that Obama is not showing enough leadership. The PCCC poll demonstrates this quite aptly:

http://act.boldprogressives.org/cms/sign/mapollresults


HEALTH CARE BILL OPPONENTS THINK IT "DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH"

by 3 to 2 among Obama voters who voted for Brown
by 6 to 1 among Obama voters who stayed home
(18% of Obama supporters who voted supported Brown.)


VOTERS OVERWHELMINGLY SUPPORT THE PUBLIC OPTION

82% of Obama voters who voted for Brown
86% of Obama voters who stayed home


OBAMA VOTERS WANT DEMOCRATS TO BE BOLDER

57% of Brown voters say Obama "not delivering enough" on change he promised
49% to 37% among voters who stayed home


PLUS: Obama voters overwhelming want bold economic populism from Democrats in 2010.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Smashcut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
16. And what he stood for was LIBERAL VALUES.
Let's not forget that.

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
17. In your post do you mean "radical" = "liberal"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whosinpower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. No offense meant, or implied
I was listening to theradio, and they had on the fellow who founded the tea party movement. It was his word - radical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
18. It has been, and continues to be, The Perfect Storm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
20. +1 "because he stood for something. "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Obama stands for something also...
Change.

It's a slow process, but we'll get there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. We shall see
Edited on Wed Jan-20-10 08:24 PM by depakid
His college and professional endeavors- and surely his US Senate and presidential record suggest a person who goes along to get along. Someone far more comfortable and versed in the role of conciliator and mediator than advocate.

Seems to me Republicans read that right- and exploited those tendencies to the hilt.

Brilliant strategy- and quite foreseeable, given the history behind their strategy: attack the opponent's strength.

Many men (and their counselors) have throughout history met such challenges (might also call it feedback) -and responded to it successfully. Many more have failed.

It'll be interesting to see whether this one plays out as an epic- or a tragedy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
23. I've already heard right wingers saying they are taking the country back
They never seem to get discouraged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
25. And, the right is wrong. The left is right. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
27. The right says that Bush wasn't even a conservative.
You believe their bullshit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-21-10 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
28. The right is the enemy, though Obama hasn't discovered that yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC