I'm convinced that some democrats want to bring down Obama. Who told Morning joe he's clueless?

[LeftyAndProud60]

Did any democrats say this about Clinton in the 90s? I really don't remember, so this is a serious question.

[dsc]

1. that and worse

After the 1994 elections Clinton was considered dead in the water politically.

[ProSense]

2. No one called Clinton clueless.

There were calls for him to step down, but there was no name calling from Democrats.

[ampad]

5. Was he told to step down

During his first term or his second term?

[ProSense]

6. Meaning

very few calls for him to be primaried, not step down. Not in his first term. In fact, the gist of the arguments were that he was damaged politically.

[ampad]

13. Thanks

I was young when Clinton was in office. I did not pay much attention as I was deployed at the time. It was not until that Monica mess that I started paying attention.

[ProSense]

3. Probably Doug Schoen. n/t

[elleng]

4. I think you're right, and some of those 'Dems' are here at DU.

Talk about clueless!

[davidinalameda]

15. so in other words

anyone who questions Obama's policies isn't a "Dem"

[elleng]

18. NEVER said or suggested that. One of our problems

occurs when people misstate, misinterpret and exagerate other's statements, intentions and actions. Repugs do it ALL the time, and some Dems and duers do the same. Serves no one's interests.

[davidinalameda]

26. so who are these "clueless" people you're talking about

these supposed "Dems"?

[elleng]

27. For examples,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x520878

[davidinalameda]

31. it talks about racists

the left

"bitter losers" who I'm guess is a reference to Hillary supporters

I doubt you have too many racists who consider themselves Democrats

[dkf]

7. I think they were pinning it on Democratic Senators who thought Obama wasn't active in getting

Senate Republican support.

[ProSense]

8. Which Democratic Senator

would tell Morning Joe anything?

[dkf]

9. Mike Barnacle said he could count 7 senators and Joe said there were quite a few but didn't drop a #

[ProSense]

12. Here's why I think this is BS

"Democratic Senators who thought Obama wasn't active in getting Senate Republican support."

That's sounds like more "Obama isn't bipartisan enough."

On that point, I'd say these "Democratic Senators" are the ones who are clueless.

It's possible that Bayh, Lincoln and a handful of other conservative Democrats could have said that, and if that's the case, the point is irrelevant.

[dkf]

14. It's all because Obama didn't invite Mitch McConnell to talk privately for 18 months.

Joe is pretty astonished at that as he is that McConnell said his main goal was in electing a Republican President.

Joe S can be pretty insightful every once in a while. I think he has a point on this.

[ProSense]

16. Why did the President owe Mitch McConnell a private talk?

Screw Mitch McConnell.

[dkf]

19. Apparently it's kind of normal Presidential behavior to meet with the opposing parties leaders

As generally there isn't enough of a majority to get it all done with one party. Maybe Obama didn't feel he needed to because he thought he had enough votes.

[ProSense]

25. Apparently people are making things up.

There is absolutely no requirement for the President to have private one-on-one meetings with McConnell.

One of the first meetings with Congressional leaders happened in January 2009, to discuss the stimulus.

[Honeycombe8]

28. Interesting that you seem to take as fact things that a Republican says on TV.

I've been alive and watching politics for many years. I have never heard that it is expected for a President to meet privately with the House and Senate leaders of the opposing party. I don't recall such meetings, either.

If it were that common a practice, I think we'd all remember these meetings taking place in the past.

Do you recall any private meetings between Bush and Reid just for the heck of it, as opposed to being for some specific bill-related purpose? I don't.

Having said that, Obama set the practice up at the beginning of 2009 to meet privately with the heads of both parties of both houses regarding specific matters, like the stimulus bill, the banking regulation bill, the healthcare bill, etc. :

1/6/09 www.usatoday.com
"He spent hours meeting with senior lawmakers, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

***
McConnell pledged to get the job done within six weeks. He praised the president-elect for listening to ideas from Republicans on the stimulus package and for making tax cuts a "significant percentage" — up to 40% — of the plan.

Obama is likely to release more details of his proposal this week. The broad outline calls for spending at least $775 billion over two years, including about $300 billion in tax cuts for individuals and small businesses.

The package will include $500 tax cuts for most workers and $1,000 for couples — elements Obama said should surprise no one.

The plan would also extend unemployment benefits and provide tax credits for businesses creating new jobs.

***
Lawmakers from both sides vowed to act fast and put aside the divisive politics that has stalled much work in Congress for years. "The atmosphere of bipartisan cooperation was sincere on all sides," McConnell said.

Some members say the plan can't be rushed through Congress. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, who also met with Obama, said he is concerned about the size of the relief bill and wants to make sure no wasteful spending is included because the costs ultimately will "be paid for by our kids and grandkids."

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he agrees with some Republicans that Congress should hold bipartisan hearings on the measure before holding a vote."

LESSON: Just because you hear it on TV, and no one disputes it, doesn't mean it's true, ESPECIALLY is the person saying it has an agenda.

[dkf]

32. Apparently those were not one on one meetings.

news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20101030/pl_yblog_exclusive/a-new-angle-does-mitch-mcconnell-really-want-harry-reid-to-lose

"But when it comes to potentially difficult one on one interactions the President isn't always eager to engage"

[Honeycombe8]

22. Barnacle can't be trusted about ANYTHING he says. He has an agenda,,,,

and he's not too subtle about it.

He should be on Fox, that's how obvious he is. He frequently spouts "truisms" which are almost always anti-Obama, and almost NEVER supported by facts. He just "knows."

[JamesA1102]

30. Scarborough and Barnacle are BS artists

driven more by their hatred for the President than anything else. Don't beleive a word either says.

[impik]

11. All those who hates Obama. They're all over.

[BlueCaliDem]

10. Wasn't one of them Pat Caddell, the cross-eyed "Democratic Strategist" who said

President Obama should just tell the American people he won't run for President in 2012?

Pat Caddell was once Tweety's favorite go-to-Democrat who doesn't sound the least bit like a Democrat. Not ONE BIT. The only reason he's still considered one, is because that's how he's billed at Fixed News Channel. He was, consequently, a ONE-TIME pollster for Jimmy Carter - and look what happened there!

I think when he calls himself "Democratic Strategist", he means, "I know the Democrats and how to strategize against them".

The MoFo is worthless as a Democrat, but invaluable to the Republicons, so that makes him a Repub in my book.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. Morning Joe is clueless? Or Obama?

[OHdem10]

20. This is serious. We do need to know. It is one thing for Republicans

in opposition. If Democratic office holder said this,
we need to know who.

A certain Mayor has walked close to the line. He helps
no one.

[Honeycombe8]

21. I agree. I've never seen anything like this. I am wondering if there are plants...

everywhere on the internet.

I'm seeing him being called names by Democrats, saying he shouldn't run in 2012, etc.....the same things Republicans are saying. I'm suspicious.

They'll hook on any one thing, large or small, and use that as an excuse to trash him. Full out trash him. I've never seen anything like this during my lifetime.

Then when you consider all the good things he's done for the country in the short time span of two years...it doesn't add up. He's not perfect, but trashing him because he hasn't gone far enough on stopping oil drilling, or not getting Congress to repeal DADT yet, or supporting Congress's cap and trade bill, or not totally doing away with the current healthcare system in one bill? No, it doesn't make sense.

[pnwmom]

24. Everywhere on the internet, including

right here.

I've seen plenty of posts here calling for someone else in 2012.

[ampad]

29. The last poll I saw

In regards to the presidents approval rating had him at 45%. So that leaves me with one question: Why all the opposition on the internet? I say it is because certain blogs and websites have become virtual echo chambers. I was reading the people's view blog last night and the author explained that he will probably leave the DailyKos. Reason being is that he is jumped on anytime he expresses support for the president. He has now branched out and started his own blog, which is a great read btw. He also stated that many others have left DailyKos because of their support and the negativity. So when people on DU claim that more liberals are disappointed in Obama than not I have to wonder about that. I have to wonder if they are basing that perception on the blogs and websites they frequent. Blogs and websites that have turned many people off based on the level of negativity. I predict that the blogs that are running people off will eventually lose credibility. I am not saying that is the case because of their disapproval of the president. I am saying that based on the level of negativity which in some cases have reached the level of hate. Eventually they will start looking like the tea party left. No reasonable person wants to be a part of that. Disclaimer I am not talking about DU.

[Steely_Dan]

23. Rightly or Wrongly...

President Obama is perceived as weak.