Yeah I think holding Obama's feet to the fire is important- after he's elected.

[cali]

But now? In the middle of a general election campaign? Nope. My goal is to see Obama beat McCain and to elect as many dems as possible to Congress. However disappointing Obama and the dem Congress may be, they're legions better than the alternative. So yeah, I'll wait on slamming Obama until after the election.

[Owl]

1. K&R

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

2. EXACTLY!!!!! Get him elected first and foremost, then take his ass to the shed

when he fucks up!

K&R!!!

[SwampG8r]

3. those who are kicking up the fuss now are

not interested in seeing him win
they want to be the i told you so crowd

[JVS]

7. They're tricking a few people into joining them with their act, but mostly you're right.

[JVS]

4. But what about your deep seated need to have him pick unwinnable fights and lose the election?

;-)

[Labors of Hercules]

5. I haven't been disappointed in Obama AT ALL...

Because I know he is doing what needs to be done to build a solid mandate in January, so of course he will make some concessions to appeal to "other voters" and not to me. That's the ONLY way he can build a CONCENSUS SUPER-MAJORITY.

If Democrats can't see that, and instead call it "selling out", they are just not thinking rationally about it.

[ginnyinWI]

9. That's the way I'm seeing it, too.

We on the left should just take everything with a grain of salt from now until the election. He's got to run to the middle, even if he's leading in the polls. He's got to solidify the Independent vote--while still remaining honest and not throwing principles overboard. I don't think he will.

Particularly on the FISA bill, we really need to give him some space. I figured out six months ago that this man is far more intelligent than I am. And far more informed about the details of this bill. So I've got to continue to trust that he knows what he's doing. Simple as that.

He's got enough mud flying toward him from the right and also from "concerned" supposedly neutral media persons. I even had to turn off a Wisconsin Public Radio talk show this morning because two knuckleheads were criticizing him on stuff that has obviously gone zooming way over their heads. Self-proclaimed "pundits" are a dime a dozen, and their comments are worth even less.

I stand by the statement in my sig line!

[atreides1]

6. Winning is Everything

That strategy has been working great for the current occupant of the White House!

Why is it that so many people are willing to fore go their principles during the GE campaign, but will all of a sudden get them back once we "win"?

If we're willing to let Senator Obama slide now, what makes anyone think that we won't let him slide after he's won the White House?

An if Democrats are willing to look the other way to win, what exactly makes us any better then the Republicans that we are constantly smacking down?

Just wondering out loud again.

[HereSince1628]

8. How does that work? Politicians only NEED us when they are running

How would WE hold them accountable after they are elected? They won't even pay attention at that point (Pelosi and Impeachment being a case in point).

It seems to me that in our system accountability time = election time. Accountability at the ballot box is why the NeoCons and Antisocial Capitalists are gonna get to lose big this November.

BTW, I've got nothing to hold against Obama.

[ginnyinWI]

10. Well there's re-election, for one thing.

But I think Obama would do a good job just because it was the right thing to do. In other words, for love of country.

That said, I think even Dubya loves his country and believes he's helping it. So you have to pick the person you think is best able to fix things--who is the most capable. Is there anyone here questioning which of the two remaining candidates is best qualified?

[HereSince1628]

12. I think that's my point. election time is accountability time.

[populistdriven]

17. what you fear runs counter to everything obama has ever worked for in organizing people

if true then we are fucked either way and it makes little difference

[DinahMoeHum]

11. Agreed, first get Obama in the WH and more Dems in the House and Senate

This way, we AND the Congress will have Obama's back when he endeavors to do the right thing - and his ass if he tries to push something not to our liking.

:kick::kick:

[goclark]

13. Thank you cali

[butterfly77]

14. And that doesn't mean the day after the inaguration...

people give him some time...

[Forkboy]

15. That's basically my feeling.

But I still feel some issues can be, and should be, discussed that may not be totally favorable. To me, it's not discussing the issues, it's how it's being discussed that leads to trouble.

[Raine]

16. Agree TOTALLY. We have got to get him ELECTED

we can work on him for our issues AFTER he gets into the Whitehouse. UNTIL then let him be, let him get the job!

[Eric J in MN]

18. Won't you be concerned about hurting his re-election chances?

Why hold Obama accountable when there is a 2012 election ahead but not when there is a 2008 election ahead?

[MGKrebs]

19. It's all about motivation.

I am definitely interested in talking about issues or positions that I don't understand... as a means of developing the rhetoric so that I am able to talk about these things with others. I mean, I will probably end up making some calls or doing some canvassing or even just talking to people, and if certain questions come up, I don't want to have to say "go to the website" too many times.

I think some people here are feeling a little "buyers remorse" because apparently he isn't necessarily the candidate that they had created in their minds. We'll need to help them get over that, but the answer isn't to not talk about anything critical. We have to avoid this "all or nothing" point of view that conservatives have pushed us into. THEY are the ones who want to make every issue either the Word of God or the End of Civilization. We're better than that.

But I genuinely need help on the PAC/lobbyist/527 thing. Right now, all I can say is "we've got to get the money out of politics", but if it goes any deeper than that, I ain't got nothin'. I'll bet somebody here has the right frame of reference on that, and if not, we should create it.

Obama said running against HRC made him a better candidate, and I believe him. I think we can challenge him, but we have to keep our eyes on the prize.

[Evergreen Emerald]

20. We can only go by what he says

he said he would fillibuster the FISA bill. Now he says (just like GW says) "I will monitor it so there will be no abuses."

If we cannot trust his words, do we just "trust" him because he is a democrat despite what he says?

[MGKrebs]

21. What's the alternative?

If you were really expecting a revolution to occur with one man in one election, then I suspect you may have had unrealistic expectations. I'll bet the revolution you want is going to start at your next school board or state rep election, and a thousand other like it all across the nation. When those seats are mostly progressive, the President will HAVE to be progressive.