WHY CAN'T PRESIDENT OBAMA GET ANYTHING DONE!!?1!!

[MineralMan]

Because there is a Republican majority in the House of Representatives and a stupid filibuster rule in the Senate, where Democrats have a small majority.

We can fix that. We can fix that, if we really, really want to. It's up to us. We can fix it, or we can complain about it for another three years. I vote for fixing it.

GOTV 2014!

Thanks for reading.

[MineralMan]

1. BUT...GERRYMANDERING! WE CAN'T!

But bullshit. Minnesota has two terrible Republican representatives in the House of Representatives. Both will have very strong challengers in 2014. Michelle Bachmann won only by 1% in her very conservative district in 2012. She will lose in 2014. John Kline is the other one. With the right Democratic candidate selected in our primary, he's primed to lose, as well.

Gerrymandering is a poor excuse for not trying. We must try. We must try very hard.

[kelliekat44]

61. We need to get smart and as devious as the GOP.

Primary all the bastards with fake Republicans (RINOs) who would be able to run in all the primaries and either win or knock off enough votes from the teabaggers that they will lose their primaries. The GOP did this in some rural areas and sucave tceeded in a few cases to get DINOs elected. We have to use every thing we can to defeat these heartless bastards. I agree with you that Gerrymandering is a poor excuse for not trying. We need to send some of best spokespeople to these areas to really explain to them the lies and deceit that is being pulled on them. Sure there will be some who won't want to hear the truth or deal with it even if they know it but there will be enough people who will be swayed to our side once it is explained to them what is really going on. Obama, himself, needs to hold some face to face meetings with these people or at least set up some real time conference videos with specially set up town hall meetings where the people come and ask their questions and get direct answers from the President if only through teleconferencing. This administration is just not active enough.

[calimary]

68. Yes. DEVIOUS. We have to start fighting the way THEY do.

WHY don't we have people who are willing to be more devious? Where are OUR push polls, like the one now attempting to screw Elizabeth Colbert Busch? Why can't WE fight like that???? And when (God forbid) there's a republi-CON in the White House, why do our people always cave and go along? THAT has to stop. Taste of their own medicine. See how they like it.

[MineralMan]

2. BUT BLUE DOGS! THEY'RE THE SAME AS REPUBLICANS!!!1!

No, they're not. Look at their voting records, one at a time. The Blue Dog Democrats vote with the Democratic Caucus in the House in the vast majority of issues. Republicans vote otherwise on every issue. If a Blue Dog is the only Democratic candidate who can be elected in a particular district, he or she is a better choice than any Republican. Every time.

[madokie]

3. The only true way to fix it

is through the ballot box. Nothing else works when it comes right down to it

[MineralMan]

5. +1000

[avebury]

59. In a perfect world - yes. Unfortunately, I don't even

think that the ballot box works. Just look at the gun law vote. More then half the people are in favor of reasonable gun laws and Washington ignored the wishes of the people. Marriage equality has gained a lot of traction with the people but have we seen real changes in Washington? No. If you are not wealthy, a Corporation, or the NRA, Washington really interested in listening to you.

Yes you may call be cynical.

[MineralMan]

4. BUT MY DISTRICT!!1! IT'S A LOCK FOR THE REPUBLICAN!

Are there districts near yours where that is not true? There's a good change there are, even in red states. Is there a district in a neighboring state where a strong Democratic candidate could unseat a Republican? Yes, there is.

If your district is hopeless, work to elect a Democratic candidate in another district.

[RockaFowler]

34. They said that about my district in 2012

And we elected Patrick Murphy over Crazy Allen West!!

[MineralMan]

69. +100

[kelliekat44]

62. Then run someone as a Rpublican and primary the current office holder. At least make him face a

contestant and answer some questions~!

[graham4anything]

6. 80-20. Then the 20% extremes in the nation are rendered obsolete.

[MineralMan]

10. Moving toward that is a great idea.

I don't believe we can achieve it in 2014. I do believe that we can have a Democratic Congress in 2014, though. That's the starting place.

[fredamae]

7. 98% of "Our" Problems

rest in the Senate, House-not to mention SCOTUS, Wall Street/Banking/"Budget Masters" Appointments etc...
I mean they rely on-Simpson-Bowles? Ed Rendell? Pete Peterson? Bernanke? Blankfein? Seriously?

I'm not sure I understand What PBO himself wants anymore. At this juncture, I'm not sure I ever did.
I do know I became so disgusted and repulsed by the members of my own party I have left the Dem Party after 54 years of dedication and confidence. Thats my response to what they are and are Not doing. I know I'm not alone.
What ever was intended to happen out of the administration--if nothing else nearly every "corrupted pol" is exposed and examples there are little if any differences between the willingness of either party to represent their respective constituencies. For that I am grateful-at least we now know what we are dealing with, clearly understand that which we do not want.
I know I loath most of his policies-they do not represent the Dem Wing of the party.
He either isn't the man who campaigned or he has tried Too hard to "appease" the tea party/gop/corporate dems.
I foolishly believed we had a representative for the people--a man with "True Grit" if you will.

It seems the One group he has yet to listen to is "us".
Given the force we have been against those who voted against UBC's? You'd think a few of "them" would wake the hell up. imo.

[Super Iridium]

14. Problem -- Harry Reid and Senate

Obama's second term was over before it started -- when Harry Reid and fellow Democratic Senators didn't have the stones to push through real procedural reform in the Senate. Republicans will keep their feet on the brakes for the next four years thanks to our Senate.

[Sheepshank]

17. I don't agree with pressing blame in this case....it achieves nothing. What's done is done.

IMHO giving up and dropping out is the bigger, more long term, cumulative problem.

We have no idea what happened behind the scenes. I am disappointed though in the final result of filibuster reform. But I gotta tell ya, the poster you were responding to....that type of reaction is the bigger problem. And rather than working for change, giving up achieves nothing. It's counter productive and that type of helplessness is being promoted quite avidly at DU lately. I find it disgusting actually.

[fredamae]

21. I'm sorry you feel that way

I never stated I stopped supporting progressive dems. I never stated I am "giving up"---I am not.

I plan to vote for the candidate(s) most representative of my, my family's and friends pov.

I no longer support, across the board, "Democrats"-for me, staying with a group that has so severely failed "we, the people"--is not possible for then, it appears I also support their politics. That is what I have quit.

[Sheepshank]

24. Certainly sounded that way Fredmae

..re-read your own post.

Your walk-back is interesting.

[fredamae]

30. There is no "walk-back"

You are "reading" something that was not "there".

Flat-screenitis doesn't allow for much communication beyond the written "flat" word.
I meant what I said. No more-no less.

[Sheepshank]

31. oh alrighty then

you didn't give up, and you didn't say that.

[fredamae]

32. At the very least

I can thank you for your interest in my political affiliations

[billh58]

44. It is interesting that you

presume to speak for an unidentified bloc of " disenchanted Democrats." Your statement above that "It seems the One group he has yet to listen to is "us" seems to be at odds with recent polls which show that 80% of registered Democrats support President Obama.

So please forgive me if your theatrical bashing of President Obama has the familiar ring of PUMA about it, and leaves me wondering about your true motives for posting here.

[fredamae]

47. How did I "bash" PBO?

If I have mis stated anything that I perceive as being true--please point it out. I don't know how to respond, nor do I care to respond to your speculation of my intent. I don't believe "my intent" is the point here.
If I have stated anything about the dem party and POTUS that is not "real"--educate me. Explain why and where I am wrong. It would literally be a relief to me to discover I'm not correct in my observations and experience. I speak for those I know, Me and my family and friends---if others agree? Thats their own choice...But please stop speculating---Speculation is part of what went wrong on wall street-

[billh58]

66. When you presume

to speak for other Democrats, isn't that "speculation" on your part?

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts. You actually speak for a very small minority of Democrats when you say that you have left the Democratic Party because President Obama has not lived up to your expectations.

Unless, or course, you are using the royal "we," in which case 80% of we Democrats are not amused.

[fredamae]

72. I await your response

to my request for additional information re: how I bashed PBO?

It's certainly not just this administration I disagree with on many issues, I disagree with the Leaders of the dem party-
As I stated earlier, I will continue to support progressive dems-I simply refuse to "settle" and vote for candidates who call themselves dems and then vote in support of the gop agendas.
Voting records actually reveal a lot. I base my frustration accordingly.
And if you are indeed correct about the majority of dems being happy with what the leadership is doing? Thats ok too. It is their decision and as I made clear earlier--I express my own observations and feedback I'm getting from and with-in my own community.
It is possible we are the only "small pocket" in the country that shares my/our views.
I accept "we" may be the minority--but change always starts small. Not everyone speaks up.
Hopefully, dems don't get so frustrated they Will turn out and not stay home in the upcoming elections--but I do believe you underestimate the growing angst within the dem party.....I hope I'm wrong.

[cheyanne]

8. You can't make deals with someone in an alternate universe.

None of the usual parameters for deal making are available to Obama. The Republicans are:

a. fighting nonexistent battles, e.g. debt ceiling crisis

b. labeling opposing opinions as sins making it impossible to compromise

c. straddling the conservation divide in the party

[MineralMan]

9. Public approval ratings for those who voted against

the expanded background checks are dropping fast. We have many opportunities in 2014 to change representation, but we will have to work for that change. We cannot just complain. We have to make Congressional change happen. It's up to each and every one of us who cares to do that work.

GOTV 2014!

[MineralMan]

11. Each of the People below can be defeated the next

time they run. We must do that.

[Sheepshank]

12. Handing anything to the GOP, anything at any time by flaking out...is so not a viable option.

that ANYONE would try and promote giving up voting or political involvment "because it's hopeless", is disingenious at the least. In fact and IMHO, feeling helpless should be a motivational factor for getting involved and trying to get something done would seem to be the thing to do. There is ONLY one reason I can think of for pursuing and actively promoting that fatalistic, helpless thinking here in DU.

GTVO 2014 ...for sure.

[MineralMan]

13. Thanks! You're right.

[Plucketeer]

15. I'm finding solace in a "handshake" between "friends"

Just IMAGINE the gridlock in the Senate if Harry hadn't taken Mitch's grip to heart!

[on point]

16. Because he caves at every turn or proposes bad positions

Case in point he should have just let the bush tax cuts expire. We would be so much better off

Or, instead is social security cuts, how about raising tax rates back to Eisenhower levels until debt is paid off?

So tired of corrupt, craven complicit dems

[MineralMan]

18. I'm tired of many things. One of those is being silent.

I'm tired of that, especially. Look at what has been accomplished, not what has not.

[JDPriestly]

56. But the list of things that could have been accomplished within the administration without

Congress is long and quite troubling.

Banking could have been set straight had the Obama administration been willing to replace the top bankers the way he did those who were corrupting and destroying our auto industry. Banking could also have been set straight if Obama had taken a few of the worst in the banking and mortgage industry to court rather than just making money deals with them. Bankers pay their debts with other people's money. Making them pay fines does not cause them to think about what they have done right and wrong. What if we made drug dealers pay fines rather than send them to jail? What do you think the drug dealers would do? Why, sell more drugs of course. Bankers are not going to react any differently. Faced with huge fines, bankers will just try to think of even more risky schemes to make the money to pay the fines. The Obama administration is dealing with banks so as to perpetuate the fraud, not to end it.

I am hearing more and more often that the regulations needed to enforce Dodd/Frank and reform the financial industry at least to the extent that bill requires have not been agreed upon or set in place, much less implemented. That is really bad news.

We are still in Afghanistan. And we have paid Karzai all kinds of money. How is that supposed to help us end that war and handle the Taliban? Again, we are encouraging Karzai and Afghanistan to do more of whatever they were rewarded for with the money we have already given them. And that whatever they were rewarded for does not seem to have improved the situation in Afghanistan. That is a failed policy of rewarding conduct that harms us not conduct that helps us.

Now that we are officially out of Iraq, whatever happened to the Green Zone? Did we just abandon our huge investment there? Or are we really still there? I would like to know whether we dismantled the Green Zone? Is there a report on this out there? Did I just miss it?

And why has it taken so long to implement the ACA?

I'm sorry, but Obama has been too ready to just move slowly on things that should have gone very quickly.

Obama's relationship with Congress is bad because he wasn't in Congress very long and doesn't really understand how it works. Also, Obama has surrounded himself at the White House with a lot of smart guys who are mostly interested in themselves. He has only a very small number of long-term friends who will support him through thick or thin.

What is more, it appears from the press that Obama is closer to the foes of Democrats like Boehner and Pete Peterson, the head of GE, etc. than with those who support Democratic values like Elizabeth Warren, Grayson, Sherrod Brown, Sanders, Marcy Kaptur, Maxine Waters, Xavier Becerra, etc. Why don't we see Obama working with these truly liberal members of Congress? Why does he spend so much of his time working with conservatives? It's like he punishes his friends and those on the left by spending less time with them than with the Boehner/McConnell bunch.

Obama seems to think that to get along with people you have to avoid offending them. That is sometimes true, but often not. Also, even if, from the point of view of tastes and similar personalities, you don't get along with the people who are on your side, in Obama's case, with those in Congress who are going to vote for his bills for sure or at the outer reach of your side (like very progressive politicians are for Obama), you need to be really good to them and to show your good relationship with them for all the world to see. You want to reward loyalty with attention and the opportunity to get good press. Obama seems to reward his foes with time especially press time more than his real friends.

It isn't enough to get close to your enemies, to be buddy-buddy with them, if you don't scare them just a bit. Obama is very good at flattering his political enemies, being nice to them, but he doesn't appear to be willing to really get in their faces and encourage his allies, those who oppose his enemies to really get out on the limb to support Obama's policies.

Obama is too low-key to deal with a lot of the people in Congress who are ambitious and looking for opportunities to grandstand. Obama, himself, grandstands the Republican fools. Obama should, instead, be giving people to the left of him more opportunities to make news and shine. He opens himself up to attack and makes sure that the attacks against him get as much press as possible by constantly trying to compromise with Republicans.

He should get as close to Democrats as possible, make sure everyone knows he is close to Democrats, the more to the left the better, and then invite the Republicans to enjoy some of his attention and bask in his (Obama's) popularity. Only when the press and public are reminded of how much clout, how much backing from progressive Democrats, from all Democrats, Obama really has, how popular he is with Democrats, will he be able to negotiate from a position of strength with the Republicans.

Obama is a great campaigner, but he doesn't know how to negotiate or how to use his friends and those to the left of him as support.

The Republicans are in the news all the time because Obama puts them there. That is a huge mistake.

[Sheepshank]

20. BULL!!!

Extending the tax cuts provided many many more weeks of unemployment for millions that were unemployed during the financial crisis. You would have let those poeple starve in order to get back at the wealthy? wow.

Please provide links for the cuts in social security.

And if Obama were a dictator and actually able to unilaterally pass tax law, you may have had a decent point on raising tax brackets to Eisenhower levels....duh!

[flamingdem]

19. Yep we need to start thinking 2014

It's the only answer

[MineralMan]

23. Not just thinking. The process of selecting candidates

has already begun in most places. It's time to get involved with local Democratic organizations so we can influence those choices. Thinking isn't going to get it done. Political activism within local party organizations will.

[flamingdem]

28. True, and the organizing seems better now

Lots of meetings and chances to engage

[L0oniX]

22. He's not working for us poor elderly people?

[MineralMan]

25. As one of those, I don't think he is not working for us.

I'm working for him, though, and will be trying to get him a Congress he can work with.

But thanks for your reply.

[L0oniX]

27. I thought he had a majority in the house a while back. So what would be the dif now?

[Sheepshank]

33. So...just how long did Obama have that majority?

lets be honest here and don't say 2 years, ok?

[fredamae]

55. 13 Weeks. And a Lot got done n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

26. ...and because not enough Democrats showed up in 2010, the result thus being the GOP takeover.

[riqster]

76. ^^^This^^^

GOTFV!!

[Bluenorthwest]

80. No such thing happened on the West Coast. Oregon set midterm turnout records in 2010

This low turnout seems to have struck the districts and States of the 'moderate centrists' and Blue Doggy Dogs who were apparently not motivated in large groups.
Why do you think some States did so well while others failed so miserably? I think the candidates are the key.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

81. Then explain to me why Russ Feingold lost? Your theory doesn't hold up in all instances.

Verg Bernaro ran an exceptional campaign. There was no reason why he should've lost to an asshole like Rick Snyder, especially when Jennifer Granholm left that state in good fiscal shape, as Bernano had with Lansing.

The bottom line: not enough Democrats showed up. Even if a Blue Dog was on the ballot, we need to shop up. Liberals will not be elected in conservative states like Arkansas or Louisiana. Much to my dismay, there aren't enough liberals to carry a liberal through. We have to show up or this is the result we'll get. This is happening precisely because Democrats allowed the Teabagger Bastards to overtake state legislatures and governorships. And 2010 was the worst possible year for that because they gerrymandered all those GOP district.

I'm not buying all the excuses. Obama can't get ANYTHING done because he has no **working** majority in BOTH the House and the Senate (and he never did in the Senate; this is a lie that must be put to rest once and for all).

[Jamaal510]

114. I thought it was strange how close

Meg Whitman was to winning the 2010 CA gubernatorial election. If I recall correctly, she only lost to Jerry Brown by a percentage point or two. In a state as blue as this, there's no reason why she should've been that competitive. Looks like not too many people really voted in that election, either.

[zipplewrath]

29. I fully expect to have to fight OFA in primaries

If history is any guide, I fully have to expect to fight OFA and Obama in selecting candidates for 2014. His preference tends to be for the Spector and other DINO types. DCCC and DSCC tend to fall into the same category as well. It's why OFA won't be getting my time or money, as well as the congressional committees. I'll stick to individuals or potentially Dean's.

[MineralMan]

38. I see. Well, OK.

[MadHound]

35. Two things,

First of all, Harry Reid is directly responsible for the problems in the Senate. He could have changed the filibuster rule back to that good old standard of requiring a talk-all-day-and-all-night filibuster, but he instead opted for more of the same old faux filibuster that basically brings the Senate to a standstill.

Second of all, Obama has the power of the Executive Branch and can accomplish quite a bit of good with it if he would choose to use it. Instead, he wants to compromise, play by Marquess of Queensbury rules. Hell, he had two years of a majority in both Houses of Congress, and look how he screwed that up, no public option,a faux stimulus, etc. etc.

But damn, he sure can act as the judge, jury and executioner when it comes to drone strikes, Congressional oversight be damned.

Poor, poor President Obama, so helpless, except when he decides he doesn't want to be.

[MineralMan]

37. Then I guess I shouldn't count on you for the GOTV effort?

I'm not surprised, somehow.

[MadHound]

42. Oh, I will vote, I will donate money, I will probably even work for a campaign or two.

The question is which one, Democratic or other. At this point the Democrats have to earn my support, and for the past few years they simply haven't been doing a terribly good job of that. They can still turn things around, but I seriously doubt they will. Go into Syria, or cut SS benefits, that's it, they lose.

[Skidmore]

49. I would guess you would pick "other."

[MadHound]

50. Well, that is really up to the Democratic party and its candidate now, isn't it?

No party should automatically get anybody's vote, they should earn each and every one.

[Sheepshank]

67. So who or which party has worked hard to earn your vote?

and FWIW, I am really interested in know what another party can do to earn your vote. Like does the GOP earn your vote by fighting hard to close Planned Parenthood? Do the Libertarians earn you vote for their disingenious stand on "Less Government". Or did you have something more personal in mind? I'm just really curious what you mean by fighting hard for your vote and who has done that for you so far?

Thanks.

[MadHound]

70. LOL!

It is more about what the Democratic party will do. Like I mentioned upthread, if we go into Syria, or cut SS, that's pretty much a deal killer with me.

But I just love how you are trying to imply that somehow I'm a conservative troll, with your sly comments about the GOP and Libertarian party. That is just so cute of you.

For your information, I seriously doubt that I would vote for members of either of those two parties, so you can put your mind at ease on that one.

Anything else you want to insinuate?

[Sheepshank]

73. Nope...you are barking up the wrong tree...my insinations are in your own mind

I was merely givong some real examples of stands political parties have been known to employ to earn votes of their constituency. Clearly you understood these were examples, because your changed your tune. So now you are saying the Dems don't actually have to earn your vote, they just have to ensure they don't lose your vote by certain actions. Two very very different concepts.

Thanks for the clarification.

[MineralMan]

71. I doubt we'll ever get an answer to that question.

It, and similar ones have been asked before.

[SidDithers]

116. I know we won't get the answer to that question now...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=112094&sub=trans

Sid

[MineralMan]

117. Uff da! That's shocking. nt

[Hissyspit]

100. The counter-argument to legitimately argued concerns is not "GOTV."

[ananda]

36. GOTV 2014!

Yeah buddy!

[Rex]

39. He is starring in a movie as Daniel Day Lewis?

nt.

[hue]

40. Thanks for this MM!! Wisconsin is a prime example of why we have to fix this!!!

[MineralMan]

41. And that's duplicated in many places.

We can win this!

[chknltl]

43. WHY IS EVERYONE SHOUTING??! IS THE SKY FALLING?

(Ever vigilant, chknltl keeps an eye out for the day the DUZY returns.) KnR

[kjackson227]

45. I AGREE 200%

... GOTV, 2014!!!

[MineralMan]

46. Thanks!

[judesedit]

48. That's right If the 2nd Amendment stands then so should the simple majority to pass a bill No 2/3 bs

Vote 2014! Get the bums outta there asap. Greedy you know whats

[hedgehog]

51. Thank you!

[MineralMan]

52. You're very welcome!

[Javaman]

53. I LIKE TYPING IN ALL CAPS!!!

Well said MineralMan.

[Dustlawyer]

54. You cannot fix shit! This will continue until we take campaign money out of the picture and fund

elections with only government money. Why do we still have the filibuster rule unchanged? Corporate Democrats, most of them, answer to the same Facists rulers. Obama is not the leader of the free world, a cabal of corporate titans run this country and all 3 branches of government. We can complain of each new insult, each new issue and some not so new, but the root cause is that we allow for legalized bribery and extortion of our politicians. Cry all you want about how much better Democrats are than Republicans, but to a large extent it is not true. I am a Progressive in my views, but I refuse to go about with Rosé colored glasses on! I get tired of the new insults being dealt like Obama and the chained CPI, or Harry Reed saying he will fix the filibuster rule and then does not. They are not "spineless", just corrupt! I think people just do not want to face the fact that our country has been taken over by corporate power. I for one refuse to stick my head in the sand and pretend that we still have Representative government. Call me a conspiracy nut, whatever, just know this, until we have Complete Campaign Finance Reform we will keep scratching our heads at some of what they do, especially b/c they will be doing it to us, not for us!

[whatchamacallit]

82. GOTV =

Get Out The Vaseline (and grab your ankles).

[sorefeet]

96. It went right over their heads Dustlawyer

That is the bottom line. The money has to be taken out of the politics. Our politicians are OWNED by the corporations. Our politicians have no SHAME. The corruption is well known, it's common knowledge that ALL of the politicians participate. Look how they just voted on insider trading again. Restored it right back to the same fucking thing that got Martha Stewart in prison. Corruption is SOP in politics and we are getting immune to it. It doesn't matter how unethical or immoral it is, they will just make a law so that it isn't illegal, for them at least.

VOTE fuck a vote. Is my entire life span fucking nothing. 60 fucking years, where's the land of opportunity. Where is the "land of the free". My fucking vote means nothing because some rich mother fucker can BUY my spineless greedy candidate AFTER he is in office. How much fucking longer do I have to live to see this so called DEMOCRACY correct itself. Or would it be long enough if I lived another 100 years.

The fucking Republicans exploit the children every day by saying we just can't put our financial burden on them. But in the next breath they want to start another war and cut taxes. I am sick of the fucking lies from everyone.

Prison Industrial Complex anyone. We are warehousing human beings for profit.

[Dustlawyer]

109. Finally, someone who gets it! They cannot see the forest through the trees!

They get all wrapped up in the various fights over specific issues. They should take a step back and see the big picture. The game is rigged and they laugh at our ignorant asses as we think our side is actually fighting the good fight. The shock on everyone when Harry agreed walked back on his filibuster reform and did another handshake deal with the turtle.

[DallasNE]

57. Not Mentioned Nearly Enough

Is the role of Citizens United in our broken government. And not directly at the federal level. Money has purchased most seats in State legislatures and that is where much of the damage has happened with Gerrymandering, voter suppression efforts and draconian anti-abortion laws. Efforts really need to focus first at the local level and that will be tough because Citizens United money scares off a lot of good candidates but the effort needs to be made nonetheless.

[MineralMan]

63. Then, explain how Minnesota regained control of

both houses of its state legislature in 2012, after losing them both in 2010. I think you're incorrect, and that we can win on our own, if we're willing to work for it.

[DallasNE]

74. That's Not What I Said

I said its really tough because of Citizens United but we need to put in the effort even with money and Gerrymandering obstacles. Minnesota should be pretty easy pickings. Some other States look ripe for 2014 -- like Michigan, Pennsylvania and perhaps Ohio and Florida. Virginia should give us a clue this November.

[MineralMan]

75. Money is one thing. I don't have money.

Boots on the ground is another thing. I can offer mine.

I'll explain what happened in Minnesota. We got the boots on the ground. We got out the vote in 2012. We learned the lesson of 2010, two years too late, unfortunately, after the new congressional districts were already set. However, Minnesota has a very good system for redistricting, and little damage was done.

In 2012, we turned out the vote. That is what we must do in 2014, as well. That takes human power, not money. It takes dedicated people walking precincts. It takes phone banks. It takes a personal effort by people who want to make something happen.

That is what I'm talking about. If we put out the effort, we will get the vote out, and we will succeed. If we do not, that will not happen. It is that simple. That is the case throughout the country. We can win, if we have the will to make it happen.

[grahamhgreen]

58. Because he did not pressure Harry Reid to kill the fillibuster. Or, bring it as an issue to

the American people, indeed to Reid's state.

Stop pretending that O is powerless to force people's hands - if he's asshole enough to cut SS, he can be asshole enough to put massive pressure on Reid. Asshole enough to get the public option, end the Bush tax cuts, etc....

[JoePhilly]

77. Which superpower does Obama use on Reid?

... please be specific.

And because I think its fun ... please tell me how Obama gets Lieberman to vote YES for a public option. I'll spot you all of the other blue dog votes.

You are the President. You only need Lieberman. How do you get him to vote yes?

When you respond, please be aware that

1) Lieberman campaigned against Obama and for McCain in 2008.
2) Lieberman was not going to run again.
3) Lieberman's nickname was "Senator from Aetna".

So please, please explain how Obama forces Reid to change the filabuster rules, and how he gets Lieberman to vote yes for a PO.

Good luck with describing the specifics on these things.

[grahamhgreen]

98. 1) Offer Lieberman a cabinet post (or, use your intel to figure out what he wants and then get it)

2) Same with Harry Reid.

Plus, use the bully pulpit to bring the issues to the American people.

It's not superpowers, it's politics 101.

[JoePhilly]

103. 1) Which cabinet post do you as President offer Lieberman?

Are you suggesting, Obama should have offered Lieberman SECDEF ... maybe SOS?

I can see it. Unless you think Lieberman wanted to be SEC of Agriculture. And of course, given when the ACA was being passed, Obama had people in these positions. So surely Obama just asks one of those currently in one of those top two positions to step down to make room for Lieberman. Obama puts one of the top three Iraq war cheerleaders in as SECDEF. Good plan. Other than the fact that this path doesn't work, it would have been fun to watch the freak out on DU when Obama announced SECDEF Lieberman.

The reality on Lieberman is that he was never voting for a PO (Paul Krugman just said the same thing about a week ago) and there is nothing you could offer him, or anything you could use to force him to vote yes. Did you know he recently took what will be a lifetime position at a conservative think thank? That's what he wanted. And in part, by voting no on this, he got it.

2) And as for Reid, you assume he'd want one of those positions ... and all indications are that he does not. You also ignore the fact that to take any such position, Reid would have to GIVE UP being the majority leader of the Senate. Which he seems to like.

Neither of those paths works. And screaming "Bully pulpit" isn't a plan.

Oh, and neither of the approaches you suggested applies any political force. Both are OFFERS of something. Offers that are easily rejected.

Where is the FORCEFUL option?

You'll have to try again.

[grahamhgreen]

115. Not buying it. Obama is a skilled political operative who can figure out how to manipulate one

Senator.

[jeff47]

94. Because killing the filibuster would get bills through the House?

Remember, there are two houses of Congress.

[grahamhgreen]

99. OK, true that.

[tridim]

106. So our President is an "asshole" because he has "cut SS"?

That's fucking genius!!!111

[titanicdave]

60. Count Me

in, where can I sign..........this do nothing bunch of right wing hacks is an atrocity to our form of government

[calimary]

64. I think Job ONE is to get more Democrats elected. ESPECIALLY at the state level.

That seems to be where all Hell is breaking loose and the bad guys have control. And look what they're doing!!!!!!!!!! 152 different kinds of Voter suppression, 3459 different approaches to curtailing or doing away with a woman's right to choose, umpteen hundred ways to screw the worker and further pad the fat cats. It's just astonishing! And HORRIFYING!!!!

Priority ONE, I think, is to remove as many republi-CONS from office, and prevent them from gaining ground. Yeah, we have those supposedly in our camp who are unruly, but the BIG problem is the bad guys on the other side. Too many of 'em. WAY too many of 'em.

It's a nationwide, culture-wide reeducation we have to work on - changing people's minds on things they've been taught to cling to through propaganda and media and relentless repetition of talking points, whether it's the hatred of paying taxes or denying legitimate science and just thumping the Bible all the time.

And as usual, our Dems were snoozing while all these little worker bees were busy three decades ago, building an infrastructure. They built it alright. And it's bringing us all down.

[MineralMan]

65. Minnesota did that in 2012. Democrats regained control

of both houses of the legislature, after losing both houses in 2010. We just took them back. Now, we have a Democratic legislature and a Democratic Governor. It's much better, although things are still difficult to pass here. My fingers are crossed on the marriage equality question. This could be the year.

[Ikonoklast]

78. Because he's a closet moose scratcher.

More villainous scum the likes of which you'll never see.

[libodem]

79. Frustrating

Nothing embarrasses them either. They are shameless because they have no conscience. They are the people the corporations are modeled after. Evil incarnate.

[rhett o rick]

83. I am with you about fighting tooth and nail in 2014 and I will once again be manning the phones

for GOTV. But.........

Lucy has pulled the ball out too many times for me to trust that we can fix things.

First of all and most importantly, the election system is broken in many ways in addition to gerrymandering. And I think the conservatives are perfecting their electronic vote stealing. I dont see us doing much to fix that. Without free and fair elections, we are toast.

Secondly, just getting more DEmocrats elected isnt the answer. In 2008 we had lots of Democrats elected. We need progressive Democrats that wont support the Republicans.

GOTV and support progressive candidates. And work to fix our broken election system.

[MineralMan]

85. Thanks for continuing your efforts!

[raouldukelives]

84. Who says he isn't? Jamie Dimon seems happy enough.

Yes! GOTV for canidates that will put people first, not corporations. That is the only answer.

[pa28]

87. Now you've done it. You just went right ahead and cut through the bullshit. n/t

[Coyotl]

86. Because of attitudes like this. Your loaded question is very anti-Obama.

Maybe because of the way questions like this are framed.

FACT: Obama gets a lot done all the time. Ask why Congress is a failure instead!

[randome]

88. Maybe you should read past the subject line. I don't think the OP is 'anti Obama'.

[MineralMan]

89. Read the post.

[Skittles]

91. LOLOL

do you understand ANYTHING?

[Coyotl]

97. I understand what the implied rhetorical assumption is.

That Obama can't get anything done. That's a complete crock! It is Congress that's not getting shit done. So why hang it on Obama?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

90. He's going to get the Social Security cuts done. As soon as the Repubs stop blocking him.

[Indyfan53]

92. I'm onboard

With the fascist sweep-in of 2010, I was afraid I would lose my healthcare. I currently rely on the ACA. If it's repealed, I'm fucked.

I always press my friends who refuse to vote or vote third way to vote for progressive dems in primaries and the elections. I'm like a broken record, constantly having to explain how the repukes used the filibuster to halt Obama's agenda.

My home state of Illinois is trying to pass gay marriage and medicinal marijuana. If we don't act now, these things will never happen

I plan to donate, attend call centers, and press the apathetic youth now and in in 2014. Don't sit out, research the candidates and vote in every election!

[woo me with science]

93. The vast majority of betrayals on this list

had nothing to do with Republican obstructionism:

Corporate and bank-cozy appointments, over and over again, including major appointments like:

A serial defender of corrupt bankers for the SEC; the architect of "Kill Lists" and supporter of torture, drone wars, and telecom immunity for the CIA; and a Monsanto VP who has lied and been involved in extremely disturbing claims regarding food safety for the FDA. An Attorney General who has not prosecuted a single large bank but wages war against medical marijuana users and *for* strip searches and warrantless surveillance of Americans. And let's not forget Tim Geithner.

Bailouts and settlements for corrupt banks (with personal pressure from Obama to attorneys general to approve them),
Refusal by Obama's DOJ to prosecute even huge, egregious examples of bank fraud (i.e, HSBC)
signing NDAA to allow indefinite detention,
"Kill lists" and claiming of the right to assassinate even American citizens without trial
Expansion of wars into several new countries
A renewed public advocacy for the concept of preemptive war
Drone campaigns in multiple countries with whom we are not at war
Proliferation of military drones in our skies
Federal targeting of Occupy for surveillance and militarized response to peaceful protesters
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for warrantless surveillance
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for strip searches for any arrestee
Supporting and signing Internet-censoring and privacy-violating measures like ACTA
Support for corporate groping and naked scanning of Americans seeking to travel
A new, massive spy center for warrantless access to Americans' phone calls, emails, and internet use
Support of legislation to legalize massive surveillance of Americans
Militarized police departments, through federal grants
Marijuana users and medical marijuana clinics under assault,
Skyrocketing of the budget for prisons.
Failing to veto a bipartisan vote in Congress to gut more financial regulations.
Passionate speeches and press conferences promoting austerity for Americans
Bush tax cuts extended for billionaires, them much of it made permanent
Support for the payroll tax holiday, tying SS to the general fund
Support for the vicious chained CPI cut in Social Security and benefits for the disabled
Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid offered up as bargaining chips in budget negotiations, with No mention of cutting corporate welfare or the military budget
Advocacy of multiple new free trade agreements, including The Trans-Pacific, otherwise known as "NAFTA on steroids."
Support of drilling, pipelines, and selling off portions of the Gulf of Mexico
Corporate education policy including high stakes corporate testing and closures of public schools
Entrenchment of exorbitant for-profit health insurance companies into healthcare, through mandate
Legal assault on union rights of hundreds of thousands of federal workers
New policies of targeting children and first responders in drone campaigns,
New policies of awarding medals for remote drone attacks,
Appointment of private prison executives to head the US Marshal's office
Massive escalation of federal contracts for private prisons under US Marshall's office

[Doctor_J]

95. He had 60 senators and a large House majority in 2009-2010

nothing got done. And no amount of GOTV is going to top those numbers this time around if you say that he has to have 68 Senators to get anything done, then you've given up.

He was put in office in 2009 to undo the damage the Republicans did for 8 years. Instead he decided to meet them half way, and they of course ran him over. If the president wants the next 3.5 years to be different, he needs to behave differently (like serving his voters instead of those who are trying to destroy him).

Thanks for reading

[Indyfan53]

107. We had 59 democrats, not 60.

When Ted Kennedy died, we lost the filibuster-proof majority. The republicans pounced at the opportunity to obstruct us once scott brown filled Ted's seat.

[Doctor_J]

112. yeah, yeah

and if we had 61 we'd be told that 3 of them aren't really Dems. My point is still valid. If you claim that he is completely paralyzed without 64 "real Dems", then you're admitting defeat, and saying that electing him was a waste of time.

it is time for Obama to start leading the fight against the Republicans, instead of bashing his own party. If he can somehow muster up the nerve to actually fight them (pretty far-fetched after 4.5 years), he might get something done.

[Indyfan53]

113. Then, what do we do when the republicans filibuster?

[Sheepshank]

110. oh fuck it

I can't believe people are still trying to use this big fat whopping lie.

[spicegal]

101. The only real way to move forward and address our challenges is to remove the

biggest obstacles in our path, which is the GOP. There's no question about it. Unfortunately, even when they're not in power, the GOP is good at either finding loopholes or moving the goal posts. Perhaps Americans are waking up more, especially in the wake of the recent gun legislation, the sequestration, Gitmo, etc. (to name a few).

[Laelth]

102. Obama has accomplished a great deal.

But the truth is that what he has accomplished is not particularly liberal. He's no liberal pragmatist. Giving him a more Democratic Congress will make it easier for him, and I applaud that goal, but that will not change what Obama truly is.

He wants to be loved by TPTB. He's afraid of even "appearing" to be a lefty. That won't change if he has a more Democratic Congress.

More here: http://laelth.blogspot.com/2010/12/kissing-butt-and-taking-names-obamas.html

-Laelth

[tridim]

108. Attention gays, women & the poor... Everything the Pres has done for you was really done for TPTB!

Thanks Laelth!!!!!!1111

Another genius post on the glorious new DU!

[treestar]

104. K&R

It's called the separation of powers, too many DUers seem to not know of it or not like it.

[LWolf]

105. Why doesn't he want to get the right things done? nt

[hughee99]

111. Yes, that MUST be what it is.

If you want to find a period of time where the Dems controlled the house AND the Senate AND a 60 member majority (including the 2 Dems), you have to go all the way back to 2010.

September 25, 2009 - February 4, 2010: Democrats held 60 seats following the appointment of Paul Kirk (D-MA) and prior to the seating of Scott Brown (R-MA).

Of course, during that period of time, President Obama was able to get almost everything done since he didn't have to worry about the filibuster in the Senate OR the House republicans.