General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNobody tell Brian Schweitzer that Obama's approval rating among liberal democrats is at 84%
He's convinced that running against Obama will put him in the White House.
What a fucking IDIOT!!!
I guess this is good news for Hillary and Warren should they decide to run.
Brian Schweitzer is pretty much already out of it.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It's interesting to see how liberals find compromise over some issues acceptable but others not nearly as acceptable.
But meh. Whatever. Schweitzer isn't going to win the nomination by running against Obama.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...liberals are evil and must be eliminated.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Moderates and conservatives.
Welcome to the human race!
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Well conservatives are just stupid.
But I think Obama is more liberal than Schweitzer.
polichick
(37,152 posts)LiberalEsto
(22,845 posts)but doesn't know enough about Schweitzer to form an opinion.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Not impressed with either NSA/Geithner/TPP or NRA/fracking.
polichick
(37,152 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)2014
Corporate or more corporate.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)a very small minority.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)keep looking.
polichick
(37,152 posts)indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead
Besides, those polls mean nothing - you can phrase the question to get any result.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)How did the respondents come to the conclusion that they are liberal? Did the pollster set a standard for liberal/conservative or did they just ask respondents to self-identify?
Plus that doesn't even take into account liberals who don't identify with the party for one reason or another. How much did party/personality loyalty play into the results?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I am pretty certain that it does not mean 84% of liberals approve of everything he does, it is far more likely the meaning is closer to 84% of liberals would approve of him over a Republican. This is why approval ratings in polls really don't tell you as much as people try to pretend they tell you, people have different definitions of what a liberal is, the word approval can mean anything from big time fan to someone who is not all thrilled but approves of him over the alternative, no one is answering the polls with the same criteria so it means very little.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)That's it, in a nutshell
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Presidential Kill lists or drone strikes that kill civilians.
For starters let's begin there.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)It's not specific to any ONE issue. Approval is specific to overall job performance.
I don't agree with drone strikes and I suspect most liberal dems don't, but I still approve of Obama's overall performance. There are also other issues I disagree with Obama on, but I still approve of him overall.
See how that works?
Any more questions or can I go ahead and dismiss class now?
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Let me explain how indolence works to you; seeing how your reply appears to contain a certain varietal of it.
A kill list, assasinations, murder of civilians...regardless of accident or intent, incursions into other countries under the excuse of the war on terrer are not something that I disagree with. These things are anathema to anybody that really calls themselves a "liberal democrat", and for them to be dismissed out of hand as just something that one disagrees with shows utter lack of character, callouness and no understanding of what it means to be a liberal democrat.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Would you disagree with it today if any sitting president did something similar?
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)As with all human beings, they have their good points and bad, and we must weigh one against the other in order to judge them.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Explain how kill lists are legal in this democracy! Explain how killing civilians...oops...is legal in this democracy! Explain how having covert wars going in every part of the world is legal in this democracy! Explain how shrugging it off is just for "liberal democrats?"
Explain how the indolent give a free pass to this president when they would have condemned it in the last one.
Good points and bad? God you're awful.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Show me one perfect politician in this nation that sat in the executive office, one who has not made one serious mistake, one who has not held one awful position, supported one absurd foreign policy, signed one bad law...or had no one die as a result of his presidency.
Name that person.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Kill lists are bullshit. Undeclared wars are bullshit. Killing innocent civilians is bullshit, and yes trying to sweep it under the carpet with apologies is as well.
If you think that me pointing out your lousy answer is an attack, when it really was lousy, then how would you feel if your kid was blown up by a hellfire missile from China or Great Britain?
"Oops, honey. They killed our kid. Oh, well...?"
Indolent doesn't begin to describe the flag waving going on around here.
I know one thing for certain. If the president in office was a republican there would be calls for his head...just like during Desert Storm II.
There's a difference between mistake and intentional.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Your responses have nothing at all to do with any point I made, you just want to rant.
I might be "awful", but you are not being truthful with yourself.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)It will keep the indolence company.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...from 5 days ago. Your '16%' was from the early 90s.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The Tea Party will love it. Some of DU's perpetually disgruntled will like it.
But then who?
All a primary opponent would have to do is say ... "Apparently, Brian thinks it would be ok, perhaps even necessary, to repeal and undo everything that the Obama administration has done."
Good luck with that as a summary of your political platform.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...til they looked at what he actually wants, which is pure socialism. They already believe that Obamacare is socialism, and it is corporate and market based which is what they claim to be for.
Come to think of it, who cares what they think!
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Still would like to see him in the primaries. Always good to hear all sorts of voices instead of The One Voice that Rules Them All.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)how positing polls which show Obama having a high approval rating among liberal dems can cause so much anger.
You mad?
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Lozo did it better.
You mad?
ecstatic
(32,566 posts)isn't it? I could be wrong.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)that the same posters who chide liberal dems for attacking dems are starting all these threads....attacking a dem.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)at the first sign of anything other than unadulterated adoration.
Cha
(295,907 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)is a shit statement
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)he certainly made an impression on you in those 7 days, to remember him so well almost 2 years later.
Lemme guess. Long-time lurker?
Sid
JI7
(89,174 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)zappaman
(20,605 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...you can cut it with a knife!
pampango
(24,692 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...it is the politicians fault.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)It will be because there was a failure to "get his/her back."
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)support of marriage and equal rights for LGBT, I will be campaigning for him 24/7, barefoot over fields of broken glass if necessary, unless someone even more democratic-progressive, like Elizabeth Warren, runs.
polichick
(37,152 posts)That's what he - or someone - should do. Leave names out of it.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)84% is complete nonsense. NO way liberals are that supporting of Obama -- UNLESS you frame the question in a way to get that answer, which all polls do. Every single poll has a framing bias of some sort. Some are a lot more obvious about it than others.
Do I support Obama as opposed to the idea of President Romney? Yes, of course.
DO I think Obama is better that Ryan, Palin, or McCain? I'd have to say yes to that one also.
DO I support what he has done with health care, the environment, and the banking industry? No, not so much.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)so this "running against Obama" is just stupid...
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)precisely BECAUSE he had the balls to stand us and say the average person is getting screwed here. Schweitzer doesn't have good odds to start with. Taking a strong populist position probably IMPROVES his chances considerably, especially considering that Hillary will have all the "New Democrat/DLC" space covered.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that's just lame....and shows what "Democratic" Underground has fallen to.....
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)get away with that kind of sloppy argument here.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)second line of the OP reads
"He's convinced that running against Obama will put him in the White House."
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)If nothing else, it's at least funny.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I lurked for years....
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I think that's known as an unintended consequence.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)me pray tell?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but if you would like to accuse me of something....spit it out man ....what you holding back for?
Or should I say...."please proceed Mr. Romney"?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)That was the beginning and the end of it.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Tapping Out are we?
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I told you what I intended to tell you--are you not able to understand that? Is there something further you'd like to know from me? I've left you babbling on more occasions than I can count, and I have no trepidation about engaging with someone of your abilities, but it so happens I don't have much more to say to you at this moment. If you have questions for me, it would be appropriate for you to ask them. If you don't, it would be appropriate for you to do some remediation on how conversations are conducted.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I have no idea what you intended...other than to smart off to me! Don't start nothing...there won't be nothing I always say!
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)what did you expect...that you could just do a drive by shot at me and walk away?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)BWHAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!
It is to laugh!
MADem
(135,425 posts)He used to work for Bill, and ran HRC's NY campaign office. He agrees with them on many issues--people seem to forget that Bill ran on hard truths and new expectations.
Bill swore him in, in one of his "people's" ceremonies.
This former governor of Montana doesn't seem to understand that the party leadership right now sits in the White House. That's where all the money is, where the connections are, and dissing the POTUS and suggesting all he did was "be black" is just not cutting it. My R-adar is going off, frankly. The NRA sucking up, the unfettered access to guns with no restrictions, the SYG bullshit, and the virulent opposition to drug legalization (beyond a grudging accession to medical MJ because the voters of MT demanded it), coupled with his enthusiasm for the death penalty and his advocacy of harsh sentences for drug users/dealers, well, that's kinda prison-y and it's not too progressive. Then there's his support for Keystone and clean coal, which kinda conflicts with the happy windmill stuff.
I think he's the flavor of the month, but it's one of those flavors that gets cloying in large doses.
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)We can talk pointless history all you'd like. Don't know why you'd want to go down that road, except to divert and distract from the issues at hand.
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)paying for it. My long term memory is a curse sometimes, but I'll move on eventually
MADem
(135,425 posts)They endorsed the primary winner, Lamont.
Unfortunately, that guy started out strong, and ran out of gas. He stumbled towards the finish line.
In the end, the voters in CT went with what they knew. It was close, though.
Who knows what kind of a VP Lieberman would have been? Sometimes, all it takes is a rising tide; when dashed against the rocks, he went with his oppressor--but who knows what direction he would have taken had the election not been stolen? People are influenced by their experiences. He's certainly no profile in courage, but he may have been acceptable. We will never know. He was rejected by his former party, not permitted to serve as a delegate (and rightly so), and he went with the nut-jobs.
An ignominious end to his career, certainly.
ProfessorGAC
(64,421 posts)Unless you actually have the questions from the poll in question, you can't actually say that as fact. You have no idea whether this was a poll design to push to a pre-ordained conclusion.
It it possible? Yes. But without actually knowing, that's a pretty tenuous statement.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)The ones that have a bias that matches our values, we call those "fair and professional" polls. The ones that have a bias against our values, we call those rigged.
It is not just the wording of the questions. It is the sequence of questions. It is the tone used when asking them. It is WHEN they are asked. Polls are fraught with bias. It is inherent.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 15, 2014, 08:02 PM - Edit history (1)
approve of kill lists or drone strikes that kill innocent civilians?
It boggels the mind when these rah-rah numbers are flogged on DU as fact.
Rex
(65,616 posts)He doesn't pay attention to demographics and he just thinks being opposite will work, because he drank some of the kool aid. Alas, being the opposite of a very popular POTUS is what the TEABAGGERS do!
Oh well, maybe he will grow out of his current confusion.
R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Gallup hates Obama.
I bet his approval rating with liberal dems is actually around 90%
polichick
(37,152 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)Gallup slated (R)money to win.
Don't believe polls...or the hucksters trying to sell them to you.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)Beacool
(30,244 posts)He's more of a Left leaning Libertarian. Rand Paul's black sheep cousin, so to speak. Hes' more of a mix bag.
Regardless, to propose to run in 2016 as the anti-Obama is a stupid strategy for any Democrat.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)Among his stances (according to the article) are supporting extension of gun rights, the XL Pipeline, and opposition to the NSA.
Beacool
(30,244 posts)He doesn't seem to have much respect for the president.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)in President Obama's 2nd term.
The economy will continue to improve.
Good luck running against that.
Beacool
(30,244 posts)A Democrat cannot be seen as completely dissociating himself from a president of his own party. He risks ticking off fellow Democrats (both other politicians and voters). Even in 2008 Republicans were careful not to bash Bush more than necessary.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)They want corporations to run everything, even the government. He is very anti-corporate. He want's single payer.
He doesn't fit any one mold as a Democrat. He can be best described as a Montana Democrat. Fickle folks up there in Montana.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)A thread praising him has nearly 150 recs --->>>http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024333473
Why is this interesting? Because of his policy positions:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024336990
But he's bashing Obama so he gets the thumbs up anyway from so-called liberals right here.
Fucking pathetic.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts). Schweitzer signed an array of NRA-backed bills into law, including a 2009 stand your ground bill that the NRA called a victory.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)You can run against the NSA without doing that.
You can run supporting single payer while still acknowledging the good that the ACA is doing.
Although neither are running, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren would do that just fine if they were. We don't want to support people who are unnecessarily dickish because they THINK it helps their cause.
But aside from that, he is a right wing prick on guns and environmental issues and he can't hold a candle to the President when it comes to achievements in the fight for LGBT rights.
I like Schweitzer ok until he started this tact, now he just spells light weight.
treestar
(82,383 posts)already. Hilarious. Mere ODS, they didn't even realize Brian's environmental stances.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)nilesobek
(1,423 posts)when I voted for President Obama. Or Democrat in the last 3 elections. I voted for the best man for the job and the President has exceeded expectations despite being up against overwhelming resistance. Kerry being in there is the cherry on top.
Its insane for this guy to think overturning the best thing to happen to the Democratic Party ever is wise he is crazy.