Will Obama Fight For The Democratic Party?

[Maribelle]

Democrats will be getting a nominee who runs just as often against them as Republicans. They will be getting a nominee who shows little stomach for holding the Republican Party in general and John McCain particularly accountable for what they have done to this country.

His campaign seemingly has an easier time carving up a female Democratic opponent than they do a Republican standard-bearer who represents Bush’s third term, and who questions Obama’s fitness for office.

But what does Obama care what Dems think now?

He won without worrying about being a partisan Dem fighting for Dem issues. Now is hardly the time to expect Obama to veer towards Dems. That ship has sailed. And to be fair to Obama, he has won because of NON-Dems, having lost the Dem vote handily in this process.

Obama can argue he is representing his consituency.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/20/111659/394

[XemaSab]

1. I'd rather have a candidate who FIGHTS FOR the party

than a candidate who FIGHTS the party

[Maribelle]

15. I guess you haven't been listening to Obama ...

he siad he wants to work toward a spending agreement with the Republican Party.


But how does he even know the Republicans in Congress want to play his games? Do his supporters ever care how "he knows" all this stuff he claims to know?


Few Obama supporters can even discuss this rationally.

[XemaSab]

17. I'm sure he's on a first name basis with all the republicans in the Senate

so maybe he's spoken to them about it. :)

[blm]

60. Some of us KNOW we won't get accountable govt from the OTHER candidate YOU support.

and it is lack of accountability for GOP administrations that LED to the power of the GOP for so long.

Whatever Obama is saying now, at the very least he BELIEVES in open government, and he is surrounded by some HONEST Democrats - some of the FEW honest Democrats in DC - like the one who uncovered more government corruption than any other lawmaker in modern history, but YOU called him 'lying Kerry' the other day. Just because you side with the Bushprotectors and are mad that he sides with open government.

[Avalux]

2. One would have to assume Obama isn't a Democrat and doesn't care about Democrats.

So now we have those on the left questioning his loyalty to the party when he's the best thing to happen to it in a very long time? Nice.

[John Q. Citizen]

3. you must have missed the 1990's. The Clinton were horrible for Dems. Remember?

[Maribelle]

23. So which part of the Democratic Party Platform do you want Obama not to support?

Your vague innuendos do not seem to support the op's question.

[John Q. Citizen]

39. We don't have a platform yet. We will build it at the convention. But let me ask you, do you

remember the so called 'Republican Revolution' in 1994, when the Repos took back both houses of congress for the first time in 50 years?

The Repo turn out in 1994 (a mid term) was identical to the Repo turn out in 1990 (also a mid-term) The difference was the Dems vote was much smaller.

That was due to in large part to Bill Clinton's pushing through the Repo plan for NAFTA (which a majority of his own party voted against) and to Hill's failed passage of the insurance industries favorite 'Managed Care HMO plan.' Democrats didn't have anything to vote for, so they stayed home.

Obama, on the other hand, brings Dems out to vote as well as independents.

[Maribelle]

48. So, are you trying to tell me that Obama has established a pattern in the primary

that could possibly be carry forward to the next mid-terms where he will work to ensure the turnout of Democrats and Independents is high?

[John Q. Citizen]

57. Absolutly. I wouldn't call it a pattern as much as an awakening of interest in being

involved. He's infusing new energy into the party.

Obama is winning because he is utlizing both the grass roots as well as following the advice of the people at the Rock Ridge Institute on framing.

Having a grass roots component means that he can ask them to work for other Dems, for help in putting pressure on congress to actually pass the platform.

This is one reason why the Supre delegates are migrating toward Obama at this point. Many are looking at thier own races and want to be part of that outpouringn of energy.

[Maribelle]

61. That's an excellent response.

Thanks!

[islandmkl]

4. a little editing of gender and name...

and this 'piece' more accurately describes the status of Hillary's campaign, style and agenda

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. ORLY?

Then how come Obama's been attacking McCain, challenging him to debates, while Clinton's rhetoric sounds like she plagiarized it from McCain?

[LakeSamish706]

6. I think the ship has sailed for your candidate, so not sure what your purpose...

of this post is! At this point Hillary could be the supreme dividing force of the Democratic party, not Obama. If she drags these Primaries on beyond a certain point, instead of realizing that her chances of wining are slim to none she will be doing the Democratic far more harm than an Obama could ever do.

[Maribelle]

19. So, your answer is you don't care if Obama fights for the Democratic party?

Or is your answer that because I support Hillary I have no say in the Democratic party?


Which is it?

[buff2]

7. Same shit....different candidate

I want to hurl everytime I hear Obama talk about joining with the republicans. He is far too cozy with them and if he gets the nomination he will be a black Joe LIEberman. We are screwed.

[cali]

12. lol

YOUR dear gal's surrogate, compared her to Joementum on national TV today. And she's the one that agreed with Joea about going to war. Hilly is MUCH cozier with repukes. And she talks about reaching across the aisle more than he does. And don't forget what good friends she is with Johny McCain.

Obama is more progressive than she is, and he's got a far better chance of getting a progressive agenda passed than she is. Half this country loaths her. That's simply a fact. Anyway, she doesn't have much of a chance anymore. She's on her way down.

[buff2]

14. I have to agree

I think MOST of our dems are way too cozy with the GOPerverts. That's the reason I am so angry all the time. I'm really sick of it.

[AndyTiedye]

8. They Move to the Right in the Primaries, and Move Further to the Right in the General Election

[blm]

9. Clintons protecting BushInc the last two decades hurt our party and this nation more

than anything else.

Funny how you ignore that fact.


Bill's TIMELY defense of Bush in 2004 for THREE SOLID WEEKS.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

Carville's sabotage of Dem voters in Ohio:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward


Clinton protecting BushInc throughout the 90s led to just about everything SHITTY that's happened the last decade.
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[buff2]

11. Let's face the facts

ALL of our candidates past and present promise us a chicken in every pot and apple pie for dessert......until they win. Then they flip us the bird and do what THEY want,not the will of the people. Obama is NO DIFFERENT. Just watch and see. I hope I am wrong,but I doubt it.

[blm]

16. Obama sides with open government - and I trust Kerry when he says investigations WILL

happen and he obviously trusts Obama to cooperate as a president with access to needed papers and documents.

THAT is something Kerry and WE the people DIDN'T have with Clinton in the 90s. Clinton sided with secrecy and privilege and would do so again.

[Maribelle]

26. So, regarding supporting the Democratic Party, what do you trust Obama will do?

Is your response a YES or a NO?

[blm]

40. Get real - any investigation into BushInc IS SUPPORTING the PARTY and ALL citizens.

Your point is absolutely ABSURD coming from someone who HIGHLY APPROVED of the decades of protection Clintons gave the Bushes and their war-profiteering cronies at the EXPENSE of our party, all the HONEST Dem lawmakers who risked their careers and lives to INVESTIGATE BushInc for years, and this nation's citizenry and their right to open and accountable government.

You side with the Clintons' protection of the secrecy and privilege of the Bushes and DARE to question Obama's concern for the Dem party and this country?.

[Maribelle]

42. So, are you saying I have no right to ask any questions? Or are you ducking the answer?

Or both?

Do you even care about fighting for the Democratic Party?

[blm]

53. Obama will do what is BEST for party unlike Bill and Hillary who destroyed it for

any usefulness for any other Dem lawmaker and voter other than themselves up until 2005 when Dean took over.

Do YOU even CARE about the Democratic party OR this nation's historic record that Bill tried to keep hidden in his effort to protect the Bushes and destroy the work of HONEST Democrats while Clintons destroyed the party and its infrastructure during THEIR stewardship of the party from 1993 through 2004?

Can you REALLY not see how absurd this point of debate is coming from someone who approves of the destruction of the party and the protection of the Bushes by the Clintons for two decades now?

[Maribelle]

55. Could you be more specific regarding 'how' Obama will do what is best?

And you really haven't a clue as to what I supported last century, do you? You're the one that is being absurd.

[blm]

56. If you support Clintons then you support protecting the Bushes - whether you realize it or not.

You don't even GET the import of open government so you really have no skills that would impress me.

[Frances]

10. It's time to move on

McCain is the opponent now.

[Skidmore]

13. He already has been.

His work will ensure that the party survives into another generation. The party establishment had left the people behind long ago. He's bringing in new members who will be future leaders. Evolve or become extinct.

[burythehatchet]

18. I hope not.

Party labels are what keep us at odds. I truly hope he works for the good of the country and world rather than the party.

[Maribelle]

20. So should the Democratic party care?

I would think the Democratic Party is indeed interested in their party label.

[burythehatchet]

27. Don't really have an opinion on that. I'm just into the label thing so it works for me. n/t

[RunningFromCongress]

21. I want a president to fight for ALL americans.

[Maribelle]

22. But what about the Democratic Party?

Shouldn't the democratic nominee be expected to support the party and the party's platform?

It seems too many responses on this thread that are seemingly supporting Obama on one hand, are not so hot on supporting the party on the other.

It's a tad confusing.

[blm]

25. You're confused if you think Clintons ever fought FOR the party. They DESTROYED the party

for any other purpose but to serve THEIR needs.

And funny how THEIR needs also coincided with the Bush's need for protection.

[Maribelle]

28. OK - so the Clintons destroyed the party. Will Obama fight for it?

Is it possible to discuss that page? Or do you not have a clue if Obama will or will not fight for the Democratic Party?

[blm]

36. Kerry and Kennedy support him, and Dean will soon be there, too. Obama is trusted

by them to work FOR the party.

In fact, Kerry said a few weeks ago that Senate investigations WILL happen, and Obama was standing offstage when he said it, so it's fair to assume that Obama approved of that message and pledged his cooperation as President - something Bill Clinton refused to do as he sided with protecting Poppy Bush and his cronies like Jackson Stephens.

And who did Bill Clinton screw over then? Every Democratic voter, every American citizen who deserved the truth, and every lawmaker like Kerry and Gonzalez who worked their asses off for YEARS to get BushInc cornered and at their weakest point by the Jan 1993.

How did Bill reciprocate, by the way, knowing he wouldn't have even been able to win without all those investigations and bad headlines for Poppy Bush throughout his term? What loyalty did TeamClinton show throughout the last election?

Like this:
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Like this:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

Like this:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

[Maribelle]

47. So, you simply say Obama was standing off stage then go into another diatribe about Clinton?

You use strong statements against Clinton, yet extremely weak statements supporting Obama?

What do you think Obama himself, not Kerry, not Kennedy, but what will Obama do to support the Democratic Party. Try using strong statments as you did against Clinton, and you might convince me and others.

[blm]

54. Obama is for Open Government. Open Government HELPS OUR PARTY more than any other

single matter as it is closed government that has blocked the advancement of every Democratic issue. Cooperating with Open Government will be the best way any Dem president can help our part and the country.

Personally, I think you are too narrowminded to understand that fact and why you cling to your absurd devotion to those who did the most to UNDERMINE our party as they conditioned party faithful to act in service only to the selfish needs of the Clintons.

They sold YOU out, too, when they deep-sixed all those investigations, Maribelle, along with every citizen in this country, but some are just too obtuse to recognize the gravity of those actions.


http://consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

[Maribelle]

58. I have no 'devotions' to any candidate. You're wrong.

When this primary season began, I said: for the first time in my life I love all the democratic candidates. That might seem like a life time ago now to some.

I campaigned for Kerry and Edwards in 2004, long and hard, with an extremely sick husband at home.


I started this season supporting Edwards as my number 1 choice.

The reason I started this thread is because I am genuinely concerned with what I believe to be, an unusual courting in the primary of Republicans and Independents to select the nominee of the Democratic party, and am truly concerned with how support for the Democratic Party will proceed from here.

I am, in fact, the opposite of narrow minded. I am not clinging to any devotion. I did not bring up the Clintons once, except to perhaps respond.


So, on that happy note, it seems like I have overextended my stay in trying to discuss this subject with you.

[backscatter712]

37. He fights for the party by fighting for America.

Isn't that what the Democratic Party is supposed to be doing? Fighting for America? Fighting for the people - all people.

[RunningFromCongress]

30. People > Party. Period. The nominee shapes the platform.

Pro-Choice, end war in iraq, make health care available and affordable for ALL americans, stand up for civil liberties. Actually protect the constitution. Which of these will Obama not do?

[Maribelle]

52. So if he wins the nomination his health care package is the party's, his revisionist mentality of ..

NCLB is the party's, and so on? Is that how it goes?

[RunningFromCongress]

65. I'm not sure what it is your asking. The nominee has a good amount of control over the actual

party platform that is distributed. So yes, his health care plan would become part of the party platform.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

24. No, he's just running for shits and giggles.

:eyes:

[Maribelle]

29. It seems not even one Obama supporter here wants to discuss this issue.

Not surprised, however. Issues and Obama supporters seem to be opposing poles.

[RunningFromCongress]

33. What party issues does he not represent?

[NJSecularist]

35. Of course Obama will fight for the Democratic party.

Why would you think otherwise? What has he done to ever throw the Democratic party as a whole under the bus?

He's attacked Hillary, but Hillary has attacked Obama. That is the nature of primaries.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

41. When the issues aren't pointless flamebait, they will.

The article complains Obama is attacking Hillary more than McCain.

Could it possibly be because Hillary is still in the race? And that the sooner she drops out, the sooner Obama can focus on McCain?

[Iceburg]

31. Parties are passe -- we want American Idols! [/sarcasm]

[rodeodance]

73. not far from the truth.

[BuyingThyme]

32. Fuck the Party. If he's president, he gets to make it his own.

Oh, and fuck Pelosi to high hell.

[backscatter712]

34. He'll do one better - he'll fight for America.

He'll fight for the people. All of them.

Isn't that what the Democratic Party is supposed to be doing?

[redqueen]

46. Well put.

:thumbsup:

[Armstead]

38. Of course he will -- There's a bigger question about BOTH candidates

Will eitehr really stand up and say I'M A LIBERAL AND I'M PROUD OF IT!

And then actually put on the armor and fight for basic liberal values again?

THAT'S what the Democratic Party ought to be doing is realigning itself as the majority party that truly does represent liberal/progressive values.

While I wish Obama would do that, and I'm disappointed he doesn't, his message is not to make the Democratic Party more Republican. It is more trying to attract people who have become Republicans but may respond to liberal principles and policies.

Hillary, IMO, has come to represent empty partisanship, in which two "teams" battle it out while not truly diverging on the substance of ideology.

[ProSense]

43. Wait, aren't Hillary surrogates spinning his support of Dems for reelection as paying off delegates?

His support is three times as much as Hillary's.

Talk about wanting it both ways!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

44. seems to me he hardly ever even mentions the Democratic Party....it's all about "the Movement"

[Cha]

45. Oh, another disingenous

bullshit question from a hilary..quell surprise!

hilary is like lieberman..haven't you heard?

[Maribelle]

50. You cannot discuss this issue I see.

You can ignore all my posts to help your ailment - - I would not mind in the least.

[Renew Deal]

49. Hillary is attacking a probable Democratic standard bearer.

So maybe I'm missing the irony.

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

51. please watch one of the 971 debates. next one's tomorrow night.

[miceelf]

59. Oh Please

The CLinton campaign has been far more negative about Obama than the reverse.

[Arkana]

62. What the hell does that even mean?

Obama has barely bothered with McCain because he's too busy fighting off the shit being flung at him from Hillary's campaign.

Effectively, he's being ganged up on--Hillary from his own party, and McCain because he perceives Obama as a severe threat.

[smalll]

63. This is the KEY question. Take a rec as well.

Sure the Clintons have often practiced triangulation -- during Bill's term, often to get good moderate Dem things done, when more leftward Dem things were politically impossible. But Obama practices triangulation with a vengence -- standing as high as only a "god" can stand, and condemning his own party along with the Republicans.

Sure Bill Clinton got some benefits (and some heat) for his Sister Souljah moment back in 1992. Remember that? When he attacked a rapper (and Jesse Jackson ally) for incendiary remarks she had made about the LA riots? I understand why people had issues with that move by Bill. But my God, Obama's whole campaign is one big Sister Souljah movement!
The "tired" "old" fights of the 60s and 70s -- thwap!
The very idea of Democratic partisanship itself -- splat!
Boomers, gay people, old people -- ka pow!

[noiretextatique]

74. um. that's a message of "unity"

i talked with a long-time friend today, and it seems she's caught the "bam," including mouthing rw talking point about "cynical liberals." :puke: so much for "hope and change."

[krabigirl]

64. No. He'll fight for himself.

[Bake]

66. Like his buddy John Kerry fought for us in 2004?

Oh wait. No he didn't.

Bake

[ProSense]

67. This is one of the reasons Hillary is losing!

Kerry endorsed Obama!

[Ivote]

68. Obama Voting Record 110 Congress

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/

[Bake]

69. Let's "hope" B.H.O. is more of a fighter than Kerry, then.

Mr. Go-ahead-and-swiftboat-me Kerry.

Kerry is dead to me. And not because of his endorsement of B.H.O. But because he rolled over and played dead in '04. So much for "fighting for us."

Bake

[ProSense]

77. "Mr. Go-ahead-and-swiftboat-me Kerry." Pretty sure you don't give a damn about "his buddy," but how

do you feel about Bill congratulating Rove on stealing the election:

The Clintons recognize the skill Rove has brought to politics and admire his craft, if not his ideology. Just days after the November 2004 election, Bill Clinton pulled Rove aside at the dedication of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas. "Hey, you did a marvelous job, it was just marvelous what you did," Clinton told Rove, according to the book "The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008," by John F. Harris and Mark Halperin. "I want to get you down to the library. I want to talk politics with you. You just did an incredible job, and I'd like to really get together with you and I think we could have a great conversation."

more

[blm]

80. he SIDES with Clintons' protection of BushInc and probably hates Kerry for targeting Bush

corruption. Yep - Clinton was a hero for deep-sixing all those investigations for Poppy Bush throughout the 90s. He's a hero for getting paid MILLIONS of dollars now by the very same people he protected when he deep-sixed BCCI's matters.

Yep - this poster loves Clinton for his decades of deceit against the party and those FEW HONEST lawmakers like Kerry who risked their xareers and their lives to uncover the corruption of BushInc and their cronies.

It's so easy to side with the bad guys if they can make honest lawmakers look like losers to the gullible wing of the party.

[blm]

79. Kerry fought and DNC ROLLED OVER while RNC stole that election. Did DNC fight a fight for you?

Did the left media fight the fight for you?

The ONLY one who WON his matchups was Kerry.

Kerry won - it was the DNC who let that election get sabotaged by Bush and by TeamClinton who was helping Bush. THOSE people you love while the finest lawmaker and BRAVEST lawmaker this country has produced in the last 35 years gets your misdirected hatred.

Backstabbing:
http://www.depauw.edu/news/index.asp?id=13354

Undermining by defending Bush:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/

And outright SABOTAGE of Ohio Dem voters:
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

[Neshanic]

70. No. Because he will not be elected. Reasons? Too many to list.

[crispini]

71. Obama appears to be trying to run in every state, at least in the primary.

Hillary stuck to the tied-and-UNtrue strategy of only putting resources into states you think you can win. Obama has had people on the ground everywhere. To me, this is the logical extension of Dean's 50-state strategy and will be nothing but good for our county party and state party organizations.

If you want to take care of the party, you have to GROW the party.

[rodeodance]

72. " His campaign seemingly has an easier time carving up a female Democratic opponent" I think

many on DU belong to this camp---Hard to know if Pro-Obama or just Anti-Hillary in their hate-filled comments/smears.

[miceelf]

75. did it occur to you

that some of us didn't have any animosity whatsoever toward the Clinton campaign until they started their sleaze? Up until north carolina I expected (and would have been reasonably happy with) a Clinton nomination.

I don't think she's a bad person and I'd vote for her in the general. but the race-baiting and the dishonesty and Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson have just really turned me off.

If some of you all have the right to hate Obama because of his obnoxious supporters on DU, surely we have a right to dislike her because of her hired campaign staff and their dishonest tactics.

[Major Hogwash]

78. Gimme a break! Why don't you just start throwing grenades at everybody!

That simply is not true.

[Occam Bandage]

76. He's bashed Mac hardcore in a few of his speeches. He can take it to the mat.

[Horse with no Name]

81. Nope. n/t