In 2004 Bush had to beat only with Democrats, in 2012 Obama has to deal with Democrats & Republicans

[wndycty]

There are too many folks on our side who think that its more important to beat him and risk losing in 2012 than it is to win 2012.

Whenever anyone suggests its time to rally around the President there are some who tell us they'd rather lose than re-elect Obama. I am not one of those folks.

At this point, forget Republicans, forget independents, IF DEMOCRATS BACK OBAMA HE WINS IN 2012. Folks act like there is no difference.

Tell that people who care about the Supreme Court

Tell that to the people who couldn't get insurance because of pre-existing conditions

Tell that to adult's under the age of 26 who can stay on their parents' insurance.

Tell that to the members of the military who will not be kicked out because of DADT.

Tell that to the autoworkers who now are benefiting from saving our auto industry.

There are so many "Tell that to's" I can present, and I know that for every ""Tell that to" I deliver there will be folks who will tell me that they don't matter, they could have been bigger and point what he hasn't done or what he has done but they don't like.

They might not be wrong, but I challenge them to tell me how they feel a Republican President would have given us as much as he has or done better.

[BeyondGeography]

1. You realize this is a great argument for Obama to move left

Or at least to start saying "Republican" when he's outlining what ails us.

[wndycty]

2. Or better yet its a great argument for Democrats not biting their nose off to spite their face. . .

. . .its all in the frame don't ya think? The Green folks thinking there is was no difference between Bush and Gore in 2000 fucked this country up for 8 years and its still doing damage. . .are we going to make that mistake again?

[Pholus]

4. Why isn't all that bipartisanship attracting the center?

Wasn't that why the hippies were being told they were irrelevant back during the health care debate and the extension of the tax cuts?

My opinion wasn't worth considering then, but all of a sudden I have to leap to your aid to not "spite some faces"

Seems my face already tasted some spite.

So when it comes to mistakes, perhaps being so high-handed towards the hippies in the beginning should make the list.

[wndycty]

6. The Republicans have their sites set on beating Obama, while we are debating whether or not. . .

. . .to support him and are constantly introducing arguments to undermine his support.

We need to set out sites on re-electing him, taking back the House and protecting the Senate.

[Pholus]

8. So "STFU hippie and do what you are told." Gotcha.

My concerns = undermining the president. Heard that one too.

So here is my challenge to you. Explain how MY concerns are being addressed. Bonus points if you're the only person on DU who can make a cogent argument without making your entire premise a testimony to the horrors of "President Perry" or "President Bachmann"

[Pholus]

12. I will add some context -- I will in all seriousness vote for him but my ENTHUSIASM is very low.

And this "my way or the highway" talk does nothing to change that.

[treestar]

47. YOU? Why just YOU? What about everyone else?

I did not think it was a progressive value to be all about "me" but about all of us.

[Pholus]

51. Normally it is, but I seem to remember voicing some concern and being PEELED OFF of the "in" crowd.

You remember -- "15%'er" "fringe" "professional left" -- must have felt good to whip out the rhetorical flamethrower at the time.

Yet now, seems like that's over and you're back. The center is not flocking over yet and you're getting nervous.

Face it, if the President had even a tad bit more independent support in the polls you'd still be telling me to get stuffed.

But even with that, you offer nothing (not even a flipping olive branch) but haughtily demand fealty. "NOW VOTE LIKE WE TELL YA OR IT'S YOUR FAULT."

Down below you in this thread you called the hippies egotistical -- that's funny cause it seems like a cause of projection to me.

I didn't leave you guys, you left me. And you seemed rather smug about it at the time as well.

Perhaps it is time for some self-reflection on how that worked out. You still have time.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. We are not debating whether or not we support him -

what we are debating is, is he supporting US?

[treestar]

46. Why are the hippies so egotistical?

Why should we support your way? You've nothing to offer. Where is that primary challenger? Where are those progressives running for the House to support?

Why are you waiting for us to court your vote? Why don't you have to do it?

[frylock]

56. you've nothing to offer..

then quit bullying people for their fucking vote. we have nothing to offer.

[BeyondGeography]

11. There are all sorts of mistakes waiting to be made

Not that I claim to understand all of them. But I do think Americans, especially independents, whom he will need, respond to strength. The Republicans will have a lot to work with re. the economy. And the President will have to run as a partisan, or at least more partisan than he would apparently like. I'd like to see some sharpening of the rhetoric. Don't even call them Republican; call them extremists, because that is what they are. You win by making the alternative unacceptable. I can tell that's the direction he's headed. Might as well start now before the next economic shit storm hits.

[treestar]

48. If Americans like "strength" so much, maybe they should always make

sure Congress and the WH are in the same hands. Or maybe they should change the Constitution so that the Presidency is more like a dictator. If that's what they want, they don't understand what this country is. If they don't like how things are, THEY can get out there and start getting active. Sounds like many think they are just sitting around waiting for a strong leader from some cult of personality to take care of it all for them.

[Demit]

14. Gore won the popular vote. This is a tired argument, that the Green Party was responsible for Bush.

It came down to electoral votes, to Florida, and the Supreme Court stopping the recount there. There were shenanigans in Florida—remember the butterfly ballot? The Brooks Brothers riot? The Supreme Court installed Bush as president, and that's what was responsible for 8 years of Bush.

[muffin1]

37. SO...you don't agree that Obama should be calling out the repukes?

If he blames this shit on the "generic" Congress instead of the repukes one more time, I will throw something through my teevee.

Jesus Christ. When is he going to start fighting? Why do we have to support this bullshit caving continually? Why do you never call for him to move, if not to the left, how about the fucking CENTER?

[treestar]

49. Yeah, but it would seem we as Democrats could call them out too

(and we have more room to do it) than calling out our own Democratic President so much?

Half the time Dems are blaming Obama rather than the Republicans. That only helps Republicans.

[Davis_X_Machina]

23. In a country..

....where 21% of voters self-identify as liberal, moving left is a great idea.

For being a permanent minority.

[BeyondGeography]

26. You'd have a point if Obama was positioned as a liberal right now

He isn't.

On any number of economic issues (taxation, focusing on government investment v. deficit reduction, trade agreements, to name just a few), he has room to move to the left and in so doing appeal to the majority of Americans.

[Davis_X_Machina]

30. Not if they vote labels...

...which they do, and policies, which they don't.

[BeyondGeography]

33. OK, so maybe he could start labelling the Republicans as extremists

Seeing as their favorability ratings make him look like Santa Claus. He could even call the out by name; R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N.

[Mr Deltoid]

41. How is that moving to the right working out for ya?

The fact that threads like this one even exist tells us it is a disaster in the making. Polls consistently show 70% - 80% support for progressive economics, not neocon-omics.

Democrats do not have to flush decades of hard won ideals down the toilet because of some poll you saw.

[dsc]

3. he can't win with only Democratic votes

In point of fact his loss among Democrats is still not all that much where he has lost ground, and rather badly, is with independents.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. And, the point is, he is losing independents by not being a strong liberal.

The guy who tries to 'get along' is not the guy who will attract supporters - the guy who takes a stand, clearly articulates WHY he is taking that stand, and holds firm on that stand will draw the wishy-washy uncommitted to him.

The fact is, most people do not understand politics or economics. They trust their leaders to guide them. And the guy who sounds most confident and believable will draw the voters. It is EASY to make confident and believable arguments for progressive policies. It is HARD to make confident and believable arguments for the policies which have been failing for the past 12 (or 30, depending how you count) years - so WHY should be reach out to accommodate the failures while dissing what works?

BTW - your premise is wrong to begin with. The 'independents' were not born independents. Roughly half of them USED to be Democrats, before the Democrats went all corporate and RW. If the party started acting like the Democratic Party again, it would draw those independents back into the fold. Obama's progressive message of his 08 campaign drew exactly those independents to vote for him, and his turning his back on his own stated principles is what is pushing those independents away from him, as now they see him as just 'more of the same'.

[Inuca]

27. "he is losing independents by not being a strong liberal"?!???

Very logical, and I am sure a statement backed by solid data. Do you happen to have a link?

[RaleighNCDUer]

28. I have just as much data supporting my thesis, as explained in my post,

as do those who claim he is losing the independents by being too liberal (despite his decidedly un-liberal stances).

ON EDIT

It has been pointed out many times that it is pure myth that the 'independents' occupy a space between the republicans and the Democrats. Moving to the 'center' will only pull in a very few independents, probably not as many as the number of Democrats who will be lost.

For every independent who feels the party is not centrist enough, I can show you another who abandoned the Democrats for not being Democrat enough, and moved to the Greens, the Democratic Socialist, or the Socialists.

The 'independents' is NOT a political party, and has no ideology. There is no there, there.

[Inuca]

29. You really think that most unaffiliated voters

are such because they are to the LEFT of the average democrat? I wish you were right, but in the real workd you are not.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. Please read what I wrote before replying.

EDIT

I apologize if I was a bit short - it didn't occur to me that you may have been replying to my pre-edit post, rather than my edited one.

[Inuca]

45. Yes, I did reply before you edited, and

I very much appreciate your considerate comment, there is too little of this kind of attitude around here nowadays, unfortunately (and I am not without blame myself :blush:)

[frylock]

38. i personally know several people in that category..

myself included.

[louslobbs]

55. I know several myself frylock.......

myself included as well. We are a larger percentage than most are willing to recognize I'm afraid.
Lou

[Mr Deltoid]

42. Obama's poll numbers among independents are plunging worse than among Dems

http://people-press.org/2011/08/25/section-1-views-of-obama-5/



Obama is committing political suicide by shunning strong Democratic support, in favor of indiependents, whose support of him is plunging.

[liberal N proud]

5. K&R

[axollot]

7. There is much at stake in 2012 and I tell folks at least vote

because all politics is local.

What the Pres didn't do and what the RW does well is pander to the base. Now as his base I didnt need much pandering. I know he has kept 142 campaign promises v. 40 in compromises. Maybe it's the nature of the compromises that hurts. Maybe it's the people he surrounded himself with going into the WH (like Rahmn "fuck the left" Emmanuel. Maybe it was "look forward not backwards" and pressuring Spain/Europe to not proceed with War Criminal charges against the Bush/Cheney Cabal (who still has many cronies in office) or maybe it's a little bit of all of it. :shrug:

What I can say is, obviously he'll get my vote and the vote of many others like me. But there has never been a better time than now (80% of the people agree on the major issues) for the President to move to the left. Just a few steps. The center is so far to the right it's a joke to keep playing to it.

He would get many to rally to his side if he took a few steps to the left. Stood strong on keeping with SS/Medicare and not allowing anyone to put it on the table.

The pres is leagues better than a TP President - as someone who lives in FL knows how fast and furious they start acting like they are not governor, but CEO and that their time in office is to make as much money as possible. I do not wish to see that on a Federal scale and know we are THISCLOSE to having some semblance of balance on the SCOTUS with 5-4 now.

Just so sick of the corpoRAT-crap.

Cheers
Sandy

[elocs]

9. Instead of demanding that Dems support Obama how if he backs his base?

This is a 2 way street. Obama can easily gain the support of all Democrats by ending the kowtowing to the Republicans--the seemingly endless compromise and bipartisanship, and having his actions and decisions match his rhetoric and words, especially the rhetoric and words of the 2008 campaign.

So don't put this all on the backs of Democrats because none of this happened in a vacuum. Obama could have done much to prevent the disenchantment and unhappiness with him by a good segment of his base. These are people who would love to enthusiastically get behind Obama if they truly believed that he strongly supported, and demonstrated that support, of cherished Democratic Party values and beliefs.

[Pholus]

10. +1!!!!!

That is pretty much the core of the issue.

[Pholus]

13. Nice re-edit. Much better than your original. nt

[wndycty]

16. I did edit, but tell me what you think I edited. . .

. . .what was the original and what was the edit?

This should be interesting. I believe the admins can tell us what the original version and the change was. Should we contact them?

[Pholus]

53. You're right, I was wrong. I confused two different threads. PLEASE DON'T TELL MOM AND DAD!!!!!

I beg you, please please please please.

[Bluenorthwest]

15. Why is it that his 'bipartisanship' has not delivered the massive

results and support he expected? Where are his 'independents' and 'centrists'? When does he apologize for all the anti-gay energy in the last campaign, come out for equal Civil rights for all, investigate Cheney, and do somethings about the economy other than send envelopes of cash to Wall St?
Where are the results? Where is his 'middle'? Those famous 'moderates' where are they? The 'centrists' are where? When do they arrive to canvass for you? Late Oct '12?

[vaberella]

18. Because unfortunately the American people gave votes to Republicans and Teapartiers.

If you're speaking before that---I don't see Blue Dogs or Conservadems that much different from Republicans. They look blue but bleed red.

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. There are two applicable Truman quotes here:

"Whenever somebody tells me he is 'bipartisan', I know he is going to vote against me."

"Given a choice between a Republican and a Democrat who acts like a Republican, people will pick the Republican every time."

[n2doc]

17. I guess that proves Democrats aren't lemmings

But Republicans are.

If you want to blindly follow your leader and have all your fellow believers do the same, become a Republican.

[Fearless]

19. And if he is just another of the Republicons... what good does that do?

The lesser of two evils? So he gets blamed for the economy and a Republican is elected in 2016. Then we're right back here again. We'll have to wait til when 2020? 2024? to elect a real Democrat?

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. In 2004, Democrats had to beat only Republicans; in 2012 Democrats will have to deal with

Republicans and Obama.

I guess it depends on which brand of Republicanism you prefer.

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. There are -- more accurately were -- four parties....

...sharing two labels. There are Democratic Democrats, Republican Democrats, and Republican Republicans.

There used to be Democratic Republicans -- Ed Brooke, Chuck Percy, Jim Jeffords, Jacob Javits, etc, etc --but they're extinct.

Moving left doesn't get you any votes. Not with 21% of the population identifying as liberal. Not with no liberal Republicans left out there. Not in Congress, either.

Welcome to the joys of coalition government.

You have two choices -- coalition, or permanent minority.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. Wrong. It is about properly framing, not labeling.

21% identify as liberal. 70% support liberal positions.

Fuck the labels - campaign on the policies. Stand by the policies. THAT is how we move left.

[blm]

25. In 2004 Bush had Bill Clinton on TV, vigorously SUPPORTING Bush's military leadership

and decisions on Iraq, all throughout his high profile summer book tour. Bush also had many other wellknown Democrats supporting his military leadership on TV, including Biden. They would not publicly support Kerry's position of stabilizing Iraq and turning mission over to UN with no permanent US bases.

[jzodda]

31. Tell Obama to stop giving in to Tea baggers

and then we will have his back in 2012.

Many of us will vote for him anyway BUT its important to energize the base so we man the phones, open up our wallets and knock on doors. We are the people he needs to win, and not to just go and pull a lever.

I want to see Obama in attack mode from now till the election. No more deals with the devil to appease the wacko right.

[dennis4868]

32. many irrational Obama haters here...

will not understand your very important posts...they will not get it...they hate Obama more than they care about the issues.

[frylock]

39. please cite examples of the obama hatred in this thread

[RaleighNCDUer]

40. No, they care more about the issues than they care about Obama.

The ISSUE is the thing - and if Obama is on the wrong side of the issue, that doesn't change our attitudes on the issue.

SS is no longer the 'third rail' BECAUSE OF OBAMA. Once upon a time only a few radical republicans even suggested ending it - Eisenhower said to never touch it. Now, since the radicals have taken over the republican party, when they talk about killing SS, Obama says "OK, lets talk about that."

That's YOUR SS and your CHILDREN'S SS that is under discussion - and before Obama it was NEVER put 'on the table' by a Democrat.

Not only has he offered it up for sacrifice, he is already de-funding it with his so-called 'FICA tax holiday' (sounds like a real fun time!!!).

I don't hate Obama - I hate the Republican policies he advocates.

I am a Democrat for a reason, and it is not because I was born into it or it was politically advantageous to pick D over R.

[Pholus]

52. I think the President is cool, but some of his most fervent supporters give me the creeps.

Any dissent on any issue is treason to them. Want to know EXACTLY where it started with me? It was with the TSA.

Not ONE DAMNED POST appeared on DU during Bush's eight years of hell in support of any personally invasive things TSA did to us.

That only happened after the change of administrations -- then I was a Republican plant (or a tool) for staying consistent with my distaste for invasions of my personal privacy. I saw lots of people PRAISING BUSH CREATED PROGRAMS FOR NO OTHER REASON than President Obama continued them.

"Don't criticize, it will make the President look bad."

That was rich because honestly I thought it made him look bad to not fix something that was wrong. So in other words I should apologize to you. It goes like this:

Sorry, I was NAIVE enough to care about the issues and not "THE MAN, THE MYTH, THE LEGEND." I see a fairly successful politician who has done a decent job with some glaring holes and a penchant for giving up way to much in negotiations before it would even be necessary.

But oh, yes, I obviously only do this because I "hate Obama."

:eyes:

[frylock]

57. you on a lunch break?

still waiting for you to drop a dime on the "many irrational Obama haters here." i'll check back later.

[boxman15]

43. They will come November 2012.

If for no other reason than the GOP has gone completely insane. Not the best reason, for sure, but he'll get liberal and Democratic support, no doubt.

[Mr Deltoid]

44. All Obama has to do is step back into the light

His little foray into the dark side is having predictable results.

[Pholus]

54. You Obama hater you! :)

[wndycty]

50. Wednesday afternoon kick

:kick:

[Magister Ludi]

58. Repukes know how to deal with Benedict Arnolds within their ranks.

[totodeinhere]

59. You are wrong about one thing.

forget independents, IF DEMOCRATS BACK OBAMA HE WINS IN 2012

He cannot win without the votes of independents.