General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs anyone fearful that Obama going left will hurt his chances for re-election?
The last couple of days have been out of character for this moderate President. His recess appointments and his announcements to cut the military have made the left very happy. They only wondered why it took so long?
But for those that argue going left hurts Democrats, how will this affect the President's chances? Will he lose a lot of votes or will he gain votes with these decisions of the last couple of days?
For sure, it will help to consolidate his base, but how much of the center will he lose?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Certainly will motivate his base
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)kentuck (1000+ posts) Tue Dec-07-10 08:59 PM
Original message
The times call for a partisan.
Especially after the last 10 years.
It is no time for bi-partisanship and compromise when the other person is trying to cut off your arms.
I do believe that Barack Obama is an honest person and doing his best to do what he thinks is best for this country. I honestly believe his heart is in the right place.
Unfortunately, the present environment makes his non-partisanship impossible. The other side will not permit it.
Bully pulpit? I know it's around here somewhere? Nope! Not under there? Nope, not over here?
There it is right in front of us!
The President has the power and the skills to talk to the American people. It is time for him to start communicating with the people. Roosevelt had his fireside chats. I think this President needs something similar. He needs to tell the people exactly what is going on. The opposition Party is doing great harm to our country.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=549847&mesg_id=549847
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
flpoljunkie
(26,184 posts)CreekDog
(46,192 posts)and who wrote the OP in this thread?
kentuck
(111,079 posts)
Do you have a problem with reading comprehension?
What do you think the post is saying??
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)and now you're concerned that he's doing just what you've been asking him to for a few years.
sounds like your convictions are fleeting.
kentuck
(111,079 posts)I am not concerned that he is doing what I've been asking??
I am only asking why some people think Democrats cannot win by being more liberal or going left? Now one might argue that appointing members to the NLRB is not left or liberal but conservatives mostly don't agree with the very existence of NLRB. So we can disagree on that but you are on a scavenger hunt looking for something that does not exist.
My point is to flush out these folks that say liberal ideas cannot win? What is your opinion on that?
on edit: Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough in the post and left it open for misinterpretation?
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)
kentuck
(111,079 posts)
pretend you don't know there's a D there and you've got a right winger with a small handful of exceptions
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)His main talent is explaining things in a way that anyone can understand. If he gets out in front of the handwringing from the right wing news, what little of the center cares about those things will probably get why it was necessary.
T S Justly
(884 posts)comipinko
(541 posts)as it has not happened.
Demit
(11,238 posts)kentuck
(111,079 posts)I see a lot of criticism of the liberal left so I guess anything to the right of that is considered the "center"??
Demit
(11,238 posts)You're obviously a thinking person. Give some thought to this 'center'. Try to find out what it stands for. People don't describe themselves this way. Identify who does and how it fits an agenda. For example, the media throws this term around but never bothers to explain it. It is an artificial construct, repeated again & again until it is accepted as a truth. Question it. Don't buy into it.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)and his various defenders and critics on this board, both about politics and policy.
Much smarter. Not, like, a little bit smarter, but much, much smarter. Kinda like, say, Albert Pujols is a much, much better baseball player than the people who have him (or not) on their fantasy team.
That's what I know.
kentuck
(111,079 posts)...since you wish to make such judgmental comments?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Your response doesn't make much sense, but I'll leave you to it.
SaintPete
(533 posts)Does that make him incapable of error? Does his intelligence separate him from his various defenders and detractors? Does no one have a valid opinion except for Obama?
What the hell is your point?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Which was, after all, the fucking question at issue.
Have a good day.
Because "going left" for him means moving to the center.
Also, it's pretty sad that doing totally reasonable, comparatively moderate things he should have been doing in the first place as a Democrat is considered "going left".
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Why would consumers vote against him for taking their problems seriously enough to appoint someone to oversee fair treatment of them?
If they frame their opposition with lies that people will believe then maybe people are just too stupid to protect.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)and for some reason you also characterize his latest moves as "left" and not "moderate".
that's three wrong answers. 
kentuck
(111,079 posts)Some people might think appointments to the NLRB are not moderate or conservative.
ejpoeta
(8,933 posts)CreekDog
(46,192 posts)
kentuck
(1000+ posts) Sun May-25-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
29. It's gotten to the point where either they go or I go?
Screw Al From, Bill Clinton, and the DLC! Yes, I can go. No big deal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6122123&mesg_id=6123240
kentuck
(111,079 posts)The purpose of the post is to point out the contradictions of those that say Democrats cannot win by going left or too liberal but Obama is going left in the last couple of days and everyone thinks it's great? I have no idea what you were looking for?? I am still not fond of the DLC. I have not changed. Sometimes we find what we are looking for, even if it is wrong. You have totally misread my post and my intent.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)will hurt his chances of being re-elected
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)of independents and moderates in 2008. Despite what we may want to believe, the far left in and of itself even with the democratic base would have a tough time securing his reelection without the soft and squishy and often affable middle.
aintitfunny
(1,421 posts)justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)and how it is going to effect your reelection chances. If you've been paying attention, it's not just the left that have been demanding we cut the military budget. It seems all Dems are in favor of this (and probably some independents too). As far as his recess appointments, I think all Dems see the necessity in that as well.
So, I think they know exactly how this was going to play for all his potential voters.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)People don't respect a wish-washy president in general. They respect strong leadership and that is what Obama has surprisingly done lately. I think the republicans have badly overplayed their hand in the recent past with their disgusting delay tactics and refusal to work with the other side to get anything done, and Obama (finally) saw the opportunity and is taking it. The American people are sick of the GOP and their unpatriotic tactics.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)He and his staff saw early on the obstruction and how it played with the American public. I think, maybe, that's why he continued to be seen as holding the olive branch to the Repubs and their continued refusal to take it. He knew he could then use that as part of his reelection campaign. Now, not only does he have a really good platform to stand on for his reelection but he also has the ability to say, "And if we balance out the house, we can get some real work done." It's a way to get Dems reelected in the house too...
ananda
(28,858 posts)This liberal leftie is NOT happy with Obama or Congress.
But I'm even more not happy with the Reeps.
I have having to vote between evil and less evil, but
there it is.
RC
(25,592 posts)The real Political Center is way over the horizon to the Left. What is considered "Center" now is way to the Right of Nixon, let alone Eisenhower.
Not only that, (D) & (R) don't really mean much anymore. Our politics are so muddled, everyone is confused as to where the goal posts are. No wonder we can't find our way out of this mess.
DCKit
(18,541 posts)A wise Man
(1,076 posts)are neither LEFT or Right....."THEY ARE THE RIGHT THINGS TO DO PERIOD !!!!!!!!!!!" Common sense will tell you this.
jody
(26,624 posts)that segment will grow, not get smaller, making a third party possible in a future elections.
Might be a good thing so my congressperson and senator pay attention to me rather than voting the party line just to get reelected and receive better committee assignments.
retread
(3,762 posts)that is turning left!!
snooper2
(30,151 posts)you have to spin the big circle thing in front of you to turn left
retread
(3,762 posts)Perfect response.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)but still came out $40 ahead
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Obama is going to the left! Thanks for the laugh, though.
The recess appointments are good.
The new military policy is merely an adjustment of the same old military policy that attempts to project dominance everywhere in the world and foresees the continuation of perpetual war. Panetta laying out in detail plans for having a land war in North Korea while simultaneously bombing Iran cannot be anyone's credible idea of "moving to the left."
In Obama's own words, which I just heard on the radio to confirm, the military budget is not being cut. It will remain higher than at the end of the Bush term.
The "cuts" are against projected increases.
They do not include the Afghanistan war.
Your "center" is a fiction. In the present economic depression, the people of this country would welcome not having their wealth wasted making more trouble and generating the next generation of wars all over the planet.
And regardless of where you think the fickle "center" may be right now, what about reality?
The end of the empire is inevitable. Will the United States effect an orderly and friendly withdrawal of its attempt to project its force everywhere? Or does it prefer the road of bankruptcy and eventual defeats?
dkf
(37,305 posts)Personally I wonder when I hear all the talk of fairness, how that translates into an economy that employs people.
The boom years of the 1950's was because government spending. The interstate highway was built, the GI Bill, VA home loan program, and other big government domestic programs. Now we talk about cutting spending so we can give Trump a tax cut or keep from raising his taxes.
The GI Bill was passed because government and corporations were afraid that if the GI's came back and were put back in soup lines, you would have big demonstrations. Remember the bonus march of the 1930's. They feared that these people saw their friend killed and they risked their lives for this country only to be rewarded by a soup line. They were military trained, able to organize, and had leadership in their ranks. A very lethal, potent, and motivated demonstrator.
dkf
(37,305 posts)It doesn't seem very efficient.
great white snark
(2,646 posts)I'm sure centrists don't mind the recent activity given he campaigned on cutting the military.
geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)Recess appointments have become SOP for US presidents. I am surprised he waited so long to make one of any significance. I think I read that he has made 28 recess appointments to date, far fewer than recent predecessors.
[div class="excerpt" style="width:65%;"]http://yesbuthowever.com/facts-behind-the-5001248-cordray-appointment/
FACT: The President broke over 100 years of precedent in naming Cordray to CFPB while the Senate was technically still in session. The Senate was in pro-forma session during this year’s holiday break specifically to prevent the President from making any recess appointments. Harry Reid did the same thing when the Democrats seized the House and Senate in the 2006 elections. George W. Bush did not take the extraordinary step that Barack Obama took yesterday. Not once. Yes, it is true Bush made many more recess appointments than Obama has made to date, but he honored Senate rules when his party lost the House and Senate in 2006.
Many on the left make the argument that Mr. Obama is only making recess appointments because Republicans refuse to approve his various nominees. Fair enough, but the same case could be made for each of the recess appointments that George W. Bush and any other president made in the past.
It should be noted that traditionally Congress had to be out of session for ten days before a President made recess appointments. The Clinton administration argued, and won, that Congress should be out of session for just three days before the President could exercise his recess powers. That is the model that both the Bush and Obama administrations followed until yesterday.
dkf
(37,305 posts)geckosfeet
(9,644 posts)of his first term than his predecessors?
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)You ask the question as if it is established fact that Obama is moving left....which is total BS. IF it were true, he would simply be joining the 70 to 80% of voting Americans who are already there...but lets be honest, he's not moving left, and this is just a simpleton post that will sway only a few of the more gullible.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)If there were 70-80% of voting Americans out there...they have just been proven to be far from the Left if Congress means anything. Congress is unreasonably right wing with crazy nutters making BS laws. These are not LEFT people and if you claim Americans from the LEFT voted for them...then I'm glad Obama is not siding with this 70-80%.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)the OP is a little push-pollish.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)And frankly, I do not see that he's 'gone left'. At all. He has dropped some of the stupid bipartisan ideology he pushed tirelessly for years in spite the the entire world recognizing GOP would not work with him. At least he is not praising our opponents and calling them 'my good friends'. At least when a crowd of Democrats boos the mention of the GOP, he no longer stops them to tell them we are friends with the GOP, as he did for years.
He's a tad less ideological, not pushing his 'post partisan partners' routine in the face of reason.
I think he is finally simply doing his duty, and the people will support him for finally doing so, late and slow, yet if he does it, he will stroll to a second term.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)... instead of weighing every decision on how it will effect their re-election campaigns.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)Thank you.
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)what he is doing is standing up to the GOP much better than he did before and that will win him votes, yes.
WingDinger
(3,690 posts)Therefore, it will not cost him. Sure glad Huntsman and Paul are diluting the rethug agenda.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)capturing a lot of the center now by making all the (R)s look bad as the primary heats up and those candidates are still moving right.
The guy is a brilliant politician. I think he has got this.
JustAnotherGen
(31,815 posts)Nope - I don't think it will.
Is he really going left? Or is he just trying to get his job done? I think we will see quick results in terms of our economy. If unemployment drops, people can pay their bills, and their long term savings go up - they are going to look at the Num Nuts Candidate versus the President and vote their best interests.
BTW- Buddy Roemer may end up being President Obama's greatest ally. Yep - he lit into him today calling him a hypocrite . . . but he was far faaaaaaar nastier on morning Joe to the leading Republican Candidates.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Republican or Democrat, they all do them.
As for cutting the military, that is a wait and see, but I know of no one, conservative or liberal, that don't think it is not only necessary but long overdue.
President Obama going left? I would be happy if he went as far left as moderate.
He loses nothing with these moves, maybe gains a little. He went up a notch in my opinion, not for what he did, but because he finally did it.
kemah
(276 posts)Rove did the same thing in 2004 a close election. It is easier to get a supporter to the polls then to convince someone to vote for your candidate who leans towards your opponent.
The same thing in marketing, it is easier to get a loyal customer to spend more money on you then to get new customers. That's why cashiers are trained to say, "Would you like fries with that?" or "Do you want cheese on that burger?"
The ground game is how Rove won that election and Obama is working on the best ground game. But you have to have a message that resonates with your supporters to motivate the base.
Remember the GOP mantra why vote for a RINO, when you can get the real GOP. It works. That's why Romney can not close the deal, he is considered and is a RINO. Which means a moderate.
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Iggo
(47,550 posts)Nope. Ain't worried.
getdown
(525 posts)same thought 
DeathToTheOil
(1,124 posts)He needs his base reenergized.
deacon
(5,967 posts)put him in the position to take action.
getdown
(525 posts)
Eliminator
(190 posts)He needs to go left in order to win the election. It's when he's forced to govern to the right that has people angry at him. But that's only because people don't seem to understand that it's congress that's the problem.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)... and those that are worried about him being a "soshlust commie" were never going to vote for him in the first place.
mimitabby
(1,832 posts)that all he has to do is keep doing what he's doing and he will be elected.
barbtries
(28,787 posts)he's been leaning right throughout his first term and it's hurt him.
Charlemagne
(576 posts)This will force the Republican candidate to the crazy fringe (has to counter the POTUS somehow)
Thus the moderates and independents will again choose obama.
Maybe, anyway.
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)...drag them to the polls like we did in 2008.
Here's something for you to read (written in 2007, incidentally):
"Centrism" is the creation of an inaccurate self-serving metaphor, and it is time to bury it.
There is no left to right linear spectrum in the American political life. There are two systems of values and modes of thought -- call them progressive and conservative (or nurturant and strict, as I have). There are total progressives, who use a progressive mode of thought on all issues. And total conservatives. And there are lots of folks who are what I've called "biconceptuals": progressive on certain issue areas and conservative on others. But they don't form a linear scale. They are all over the place: progressive on domestic policy, conservative on foreign policy; conservative on economic policy, progressive on foreign policy and social issues; conservative on religion, but progressive on social issues and foreign policy; and on and on. No linear scale. No single set of values defining a "center." Indeed many of such folks are not moderate in their views; they can be quite passionate about both their progressive and conservative views.
Barack Obama has it right: Get rid of the very idea of the right and the left and the center. American ideas are fundamentally progressive ideas -- the ideas this country was founded on and that carry forth that spirit. Progressives care about people and the earth, and act with responsibility and strength on that care...
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/no-center-no-centrists_b_60419.html
NGU.
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)While more Americans claim the label "conservative" than "liberal", when they are surveyed on the actual issues, Americans are significantly further to the left than Washington usually is.
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)NGU.
MH1
(17,600 posts)It happens that the appointments were 'left'-ish, but the general idea of making appointments to agencies that are already voted into law, shouldn't be controversial. The Senate had months to act on the nominations and chose not to. At least in the case of Cordray, we know that the nomination would have passed by a simple majority, if the republicans had allowed it to come to a vote. I don't know about the NLRB posts, but assume it would have been the same.
Therefore, Obama can't be painted as using recess appointments to appoint 'extremist libruls' (although the republicans might try). If his picks were so extremist, they would have been voted on and nixed.
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)NGU.
MH1
(17,600 posts)Which makes this a good thing.
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)NGU.
MH1
(17,600 posts)is what the op is about - the effect of these actions on Obama's appeal to moderates.
I honestly think that
a) most people will actually see this as "getting the job done" instead of taking a partisan action;
and
b) it can certainly be defended as "getting the job done" instead of taking a partisan action.
Therefore, in response to the op, it should help Obama with moderates, not hurt.
Also, since the actual effect in this case is actions that liberals like, it should help Obama on the left as well.
But there is also a substantive difference. In this case Obama only forced the appointment AFTER he had expended reasonable courses of action. There's no way a reasonable person can see this as a partisan act.
If, on the other hand ... for example ... he had appointed Elizabeth Warren by recess appointment, very soon after he nominated her and before the republicans had announced that they would block her appointment, THAT could only have been seen as a partisan action. Then it couldn't be claimed to be "getting the job done" against obstructionism.
Is that more clear?
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)But in terms of substance, I think there's little difference. The only way to get things done today is to take the left fork in the road.
NGU.
underpants
(182,778 posts)he has it in the bag to start with AND he is just doing common sense (left) things that should have been done all along.
99Forever
(14,524 posts).. he can do. EVERY poll taken shows HUGE majorities toward the Progressive position on virtually every policy question of importance to the American People.
However!!!!!!
Lip service to these VITAL issues will NOT cut it.
Are you listening?
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)it's always been this way. Every election, the Dem president will espouse left wing politics, and guess what, it works in drawing in independents too. This country is much more left wing when it comes to domestic issues, than the media lets people know. Going to what "center"....? There is no such thing.
ClassWarrior
(26,316 posts)NGU.