BHO is certainly no Edwards or Kucinich but he's definitely to the left of the Clintons

[ddeclue]

and all of the above are miles to the left of John McCain and the Republican choices and most of these were at least somewhat to the left of Georgie Jr. who blessedly thanks to the 22nd Amendment no longer rules and NEVER rocked...

:patriot:

This is my opinion in response to those who are deciding that Obama is now officially "DLC".. I don't really think so - The Clinton's were (Hillary more than Bill) but I think he's (Obama is) between DLC and true progressive but that in and of itself is just SO much better than where we were a few months ago that I'm willing to let it slide for the time being and see how it works out...

:)

[FrenchieCat]

1. Wasn't Edwards DLC?

And Obama didn't say he was DLC. He said he's a new Democrat......DLC does not own the word "new" last I checked!

[ddeclue]

3. Edwards was very much populist left in 2008 and had more in common with Kucinich than

any other candidate.

And I do NOT agree that Obama is DLC hence my OP here - I think "new" does not equal DLC but some amongst us do.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Edwards talked like populist after his 2004 defeat......

but that hedgefund thingie that he was involved in thru 2008 wasn't exactly a populists dream.

For me, whatever political adjustments he made after his 2004 defeat, there was no proof of those principles as far as time and consistency.

I also remember him saying that those who were accusing him of having had an affair were lying. Obviously he was lying about that. That now makes it even more difficult to have believed him and to disregard his standing record.

[ddeclue]

7. Believe what you want to believe... I was involved in his campaign

saw firsthand that the man was very sincere and passionate about what he believed in. He could have very easily staked out much more neutral ground and said very little but chose to take a very deliberately populist stance, an RFK-esque stance in his campaign when it would have been much safer to play it like Hillary or Obama did. Kucinich was the only candidate who was more progressive but I didn't see him as having any chance to win so I picked Edwards as my early horse and switched to Obama when Edwards dropped out.

Edwards zipper problem is another story and yes I'm disappointed but plenty of politicians have had problems keeping their zipper zipped over the years...

[FrenchieCat]

9. Well, I have a different view of John Edwards and his sincerity.

But the primaries are over, so I won't got into all of that at this time. We will just have to agree to disagree.

[geek tragedy]

14. He's certainly a man driven by passions.

Sincerity, notsomuch. Ask his baby mama.

[cali]

27. yeah, that was the phony 2008 version

the other version, the one that spent 6 years in the Senate was closer to Joe Lieberman.

[Radical Activist]

18. Edwards was the DLC leader in the Senate. Obama is to the left of Edwards.

Some of us look at records and aren't so easily impressed when someone suddenly moves left to pander during the primary.

[ddeclue]

19. Well whatever.. I think people have a right to grow, learn, and change their minds

and holding them accountable for something that was 5 years old is not reasonable - it shows that you are being brittle, unforgiving and unreasonable in your approach to other people - hardly what I would call "progressive" thinking on your part.

Doug D.

[Radical Activist]

21. Even during the campaign Obama was to the left of Edwards.

Yeah, Edwards jumped up and down about how liberal he became. But if you looked at the policies and records in detail, Obama was to the left of Edwards. You have to do more than listen to a few speeches. For example, everyone was harping about Obama and "clean coal" for a while but hardly anyone took time to notice that Edwards was proposing billions more in subsidies to the coal industry than Obama did.

Edwards wasn't a college student forming his views in the Senate. He was an adult and it says something about his values. It isn't being brittle. People can say anything during the campaign and smart progressives will look at what someone actually does in office. The only primary candidate with a more liberal record and platform than Obama was Kucinich.

[ddeclue]

22. No Obama wasn't - Obama's big problem in the campaign is that he refused to take a clear stand on

anything so he couldn't get pinned down on it.

Hillary's approach was to be un-apologetic for her past mistakes or even admit that she was wrong about anything.

Doug D.

[Radical Activist]

25. Again, that's the kind of take

I'd expect from someone who only listened to speeches instead of doing more research. Obama was the only candidate with a book outlining his political views and his published policy proposals were as detailed as anyone's. Sure, he focused on big themes and principles in his speeches but the details were available for those who bothered to look. For example, he was the first candidate to come out with a detailed transportation/alternative fuels plan. No matter how many blogs accused Obama of not getting specific on issues, it just wasn't true.

[XemaSab]

28. It's not "progressive" to be played for a sucker

It's like Sarah Palin. Yeah, she believes in abstinence and family values and Jesus and marriage and all that crap, but her daughter? A single teen mom.

At the end of the day, you've got to see some sort of voting record. Obama's earmarks alone showed me that he was the guy I wanted in office.

[Sebass1271]

2. agree with you 100%!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jennicut]

4. I have been saying forever here that Obama is to the left of Clinton

He is in no way a full centrist.

[readmoreoften]

5. I see no evidence of this. I think he's absolutely on par with them.

Summers, Geithner, Kissinger, the creation of a faith-based funding department (even Bush didn't do that), this merit-pay bullshit, expanding war into Pakistan and Afghanistan, CIA black sites still up and running despite rhetoric...

Really, I could've stopped at Kissinger and his bank friendly appointments. There's not much difference in my opinion.

[sense]

10. He'll surprise you

I think many people are looking at what he's done or is doing in a very shallow way. The man is a thinker. There are all sorts of things going on that will only become evident later. There is a method to how he's doing everything and we're not privy to that.

[readmoreoften]

13. Hero worship.

He's using war criminals to do his business and has appointed champions of bank deregulation. There's nothing to overthink. Bombs are falling in Pakistan--possibly as we debate.

[MadBadger]

15. Nice inflammatory dropping of "hero Worship"

What horseshit.

[sense]

16. Over think?

Clearly you're not over-thinking..... everything is not always as it appears on the surface. That is what I said. Try thinking more about why he might be doing the things he's doing.... I have no intention of worshipping him. Intelligence and compassion are two qualities long missing from government. Not meant to apply to all in gov., just most!

[depakid]

11. I'd say they're pretty even on

His adminstration basically IS Clinton without the Republican deregulatory focus.

[ContinentalOp]

12. LOL, how is that even?

To my ears you just said "He basically IS Clinton without all of Clinton's right wing, free market tendencies."

[depakid]

17. No, just not the deregulatory fetishes

Other center right economic tendencies seem firmly in place.

[tritsofme]

8. Sounds like a compliment to me.

BHO is certainly no Edwards or Kucinich

[G_j]

20. he's already done more good, than Bush did in eight years

& I'm a stiff critic.

[960]

23. Edwards was to the right of Obama and Hillary.

Don't delude yourself. His rhetoric was just that. His senate voting record speaks for itself.

[Raine]

24. Obama is the most leftist President

in my lifetime. :-) :thumbsup:

[Radical Activist]

26. mine too.

You'd have to go back at least to LBJ for any competition.