Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:16 AM
Original message |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:18 AM by Xenocrates
Now that our nominee, Barack Obama, has all but secured the Democrat Ticket, it is TIME for him to move to the center. Everything he says, Everything he does, Everything he supports, Everything he disagrees with.. will be gone over and over by the press and by Grandpa's Old Party.
Obama must appear to the independents and to the disgruntled right that he is moderate or centrist.
Because Winning the Election is Everything.
Rest assured TRUE BELIEVERS, when he takes the oath of office, Obama will return to the Left.
|
GihrenZabi
(426 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:18 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If you truly believe that Obama will return to the Left, you're either delusional or don't know your history.
Obama is going to do whatever gets him elected to his second term during his first term. He's going to attempt to create a broad majority, which means Centrist, not Left.
Face it - Liberalism in America is DEAD. We lost our representation a long, long time ago.
|
cbc5g
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. We're a representative government |
|
And sadly if most of the people in America aren't liberal then you'll never get represented by pushing a really liberal person for President.
|
kid a
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
88. poor guy..i feel sorry for you. |
atreides1
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message |
|
And what was your process in this divination? A crystal ball, reading of goat entrails, a personal note from the Obama campaign?
Please enlighten those of us who have become cynical of such predictions.
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Actually I thought it was a page from Clinton's Playbook..
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I remember when the Democrats condemened other candidates for politcal |
|
expediencey and supported Obama because he was "different" and allegedly was being held to a different standard. mHow times change. "Winning is everything" was the DLC Mantra and they were considered the source of all evil.
|
goldcanyonaz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
5. You remember that too? Amazing how things have changed |
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
16. I seem to remember considerable concern during the primaries |
|
that Senator Obama would not be sufficiently cutthroat to win, and for that reason the other major candidate, whose political mettle had been tested "in the trenches" was the better choice for our nominee. Now that he has shown that he can be just as cutthroat as he needs to be, must we criticize him as too cynical?
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
48. It is a bit hypocrtical though isn't it? To sell oneseself as "change" and |
|
"above the politcal landscape" and then be supported for being exactly that one is running against?
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
56. And by "exactly what one is running against", it couldn't be more literally true |
|
This kind of stuff is why I worked so hard against Hillary Clinton. Obama was supposed to be above this sort of traingulation.
I guess that was only when he was trying to get people to vote in the primary.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #56 |
58. Flp flopping as fast as he can . Now the DC gun ban and his opposition to it was merely "inartful". |
bilgewaterbill
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #58 |
109. You noticed that, too? I understand wanting to win but.... |
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
57. Show me a politician who is not a hypocrite (St. Dennis Kucinich excepted) |
|
I am electing a President here, not a Messiah, I expect Obama to be a bit of an SOB, looking back on things, such individuals tend to get things done, even if they seem morally ambivalent in the eyes of history.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #57 |
62. But that was NOT how he sold himself. This isn't about 'change" then. |
|
The change he promoted was "new" politcs". This isn't new. It is more of the same.He isn't "staying on "message". The time to hold him accountable is NOW. Unless of course it was all "just words".
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #62 |
64. What kind of change do you want Saracat? |
|
I too would love the utopian change that Obama's ideas have been characterized by some as being. "Angelic choirs, light from heaven, etc..." (ring a bell?) Nevertheless, I am willing to settle for a change from the past 8 years. I will settle for a sane foreign policy, regulation and a return to rule of law. None of these are inconsistent with Obama's position, and none of these are likely under a McCain Administration.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #64 |
78. I would like someone who didn't support FISA and kept his word on Campaign Finance. I want a |
|
candidate who doesn't support the "death penalty". I want a candidate who supports gun control. I want a candidate who will represent ALL the people and defend the constitution. I want a candidate who will keep his word. I want a candidate who has the guts to take a less polticaly expedient course.Obama can still be held to those standards.That is the change that I want to see. If we don't get that where is the change?
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #78 |
83. So tell me, did you support such a candidate in the Primaries, or is this a recent phenomenon? |
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #83 |
86. It is what I have always wanted and yes I did support such a candidate in the primary. |
|
In my opinion and they have spoken out on just those issues.And the primary wars ought not to be revisited. I am speaking of NOW.
|
martymar64
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #78 |
98. But if he loses, none of those questions will matter. |
|
We'll be stuck with McCain and we all know what that means, more of the SOS of the last 8 years. Also think about congress, we need his coattails to get a much more solid majority. Then we can kick Joementum to the curb. Then we can initiate real change in the economy and in the ending the war. I'm pretty left and I'll be happy to have half the issues I that value embraced by an Obama admin. But half is an improvement over none, which we are at right now with the present admin. But it becomes a moot point if he loses, so I'm devoting my energies to make sure that he wins.
|
FourPieRun
(73 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #62 |
103. exactly; all of the sudden it's okay that obama is just another fence-straddling politician. nt |
Caentor
(13 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #57 |
97. Kucinich can afford not to be a hypocrite |
|
Because he stands (stood) no chance of winning. Ditto for Sharpton, and even Ron Paul.
Reality for ACTUAL candidates (those with a chance of winning) is different.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:22 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Holding candidates to unelectable purity stances makes me say |
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
10. "purity stances"... yes, because America is so corrupt |
|
having integrity is too pure for Americans. Rove thought so too....
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyxNgnQ9m30If you want to lose, run as Ralph Nader. It's a guaranteed loser in the United States of America. If you cannot accept the reality of the American electorate, you should give up on politics.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. Yes, because craven capitulation has been SOOO successful for the Dems in the past |
|
See Kerry, John: 2004
See Gore, Albert: 2000
See Congress: 1994-2006
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
18. Holding pure liberal stances have always worked |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:33 AM by IWantAnyDem
See Kerry, John: 2004
See Gore, Albert: 2000
See Congress: 1994-2006
See Dukakis, Michael: 1988
See Mondale, Walter: 1984
See Carter, James Earl: 1980
See McGovern, George: 1972
There are three issues that are guranteed losers now. It's no longer God, Guns, and Gays. It's God, Guns, and Security. If you are on teh wrong side of any of those, you're a guaranteed loser on the national level.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
22. rrright... adobt your right wing values or else |
|
say hello to Rush Limbaugh for we Democrats.
Buh bye
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #22 |
28. No, but the last eight years excepted, |
|
The President of the United States is the servant of the entire country, not just the group that elected him. There are many people in this country who are deluded and lost, reducing every issue into a manichean us v. them struggle, only serves to alienate many people who might otherwise side with us, so long as they exposed to good governance and a savvy leader who could effectively counter the slanders of the RW hate machine.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #28 |
42. Well then.... He Loses Votes |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:45 AM by fascisthunter
while appealing to the very folks who like what's going on today. Use the base only to turn on them... Great strategy.....
The GOP is golf clapping again, and again.
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #42 |
55. We're not talking about the 29% deadenders here... |
|
We're talking about working class and middle class voters who have consistently voted against their economic self-interest, and are beginning to wake up and realize that things have gone to hell, and the dreaded "liberals" were not necessarily to blame. People are looking for someone who will fix things. Yes, he will need strong principles, and I am greatly disappointed that he has not taken a stronger stand on FISA, but if Germany in the late 1920's proves anything, when people are homeless, cold, hungry and desperate, they soon realize that civil liberties are not edible. We must take power and fix things before it gets so bad that people will embrace whatever monster promises to feed them. Otherwise, FISA will be the least of our worries.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #55 |
65. he loses votes while gaining others |
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
69. You have your agency, |
|
It's only a zero-sum game if you want it to be.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #69 |
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #72 |
74. As in freedom of choice, the freedom to decide how to define yourself and your actions. |
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #74 |
martymar64
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
99. Good Governance! You hit it on the head! |
|
Our government has devolved into a sea of incompetence over the last thirty years, starting with Reagan. It's reached it's apex with Bush Jr. People of all ideologies will respond positively to competence in governance, free of politicization in the various agencies. Party affiliation should not determine if a park ranger is qualified to work, for example. That is my key hope for an obama administration.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #22 |
33. God, Guns, and Security |
|
The three issues a presidential candidate can NEVER be on the wrong side of and still get elected.
It's that simple.
You can't do shit if you don't get elected.
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
Autumn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
84. I have to say that you were one of the |
|
most well reasoned supporters for Senator Obama during the primary's, kudos to you.:toast:
|
crankychatter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
89. You just stated that Obama, Kerry and Gore were 'CRAVEN CAPITULATORS?" |
|
Are you recruiting for the Green Party ?
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #89 |
110. Why would I recruit for the Greens? The Congressional Dems are doing just fine there. |
|
They're a walking advertisement for a third party.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
17. no but your method already has shown to not Win Much |
|
so why support such a bad strategy unless you really want to lose.
How have the last 16 years gone for ya? Not so good huh. Yet yuh think winning at all costs really is impressing voters? What percentage of the cotizens in America even vote? Wish to realize why? Because people don't believe politicians? Want to know why? Because politicians easily throw principles under the bus in order to appeal to certain voters, therein exhibiting a lack of integrity. It's no wonder why a small percentage actually votes for criminals like Bush, McCain and others who are beholden to the very powers that shirk our rights to privacy.
More of the same is not going to beat McCain... only a fool or liar would pretend as much.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
25. It puts fake Dems in power that just act like Repugs. |
|
Why shouldn't they? We've given them no reason not to.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #25 |
36. that's why I won't Compromise |
|
for politicians who exhibit a lack of integrity. No politician is perfect nor "pure" so those saying I or others want such a thing have nothing to argue with other than ad hominen and contrived rhetoric to sell a talking point.
We have seen enough of this BS in the corporate media and by Republicans and DLCers themselves.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
13. I say FUCK THAT SHIT to bullshit straw men. |
|
It's not an unelectable purity test. At the very least, it's BAD POLITICS to continue to capitulate to the most unpopular president in US history.
People HATE BUSH. People are fucking sick of the Repugs' bullshit. They WANT someone to stand up to these fearmongers, and the Democrats lose what little respect they have left every time they cave in.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. It's bullshit to hold unelectable purity standards |
|
And that's a fact.
Either you want to win or you wnat liberal purity.
You cannot have both in the United States of America.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
20. yes we heard your talking point aleardy |
|
welcome to ignore since that's what you are doing to other posters. We see your agenda....
"repeat meme... never cease... resistance is futile"
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
That said, pressure will have to be constantly placed on Obama to do the right thing, as there will be constant pressure for him to abandon progressive agendas for expedient ones. Such will always be the case, we will never get a leader that will who simply does what we want without action on our part.
There is a great danger in this campaign of becoming so reductivist as to end up characterizing this election as Satan v. Beelzebub, and a choice of lesser evils, Obama is not Kucinich certainly, but that does not make him McCain or Bush's clone either.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
30. There is a time and a place for the pressure |
|
and I certainly agree with that.
Here and now is neither the time nor the place.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #30 |
35. Yes, let's be careful what we say. It might lead to democracy. |
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #35 |
41. You ahve two choices this fall, Obama or McCain |
|
Everything that is done or said by eiother is done or said to appeal to as broad an audience as possible.
If you don't get that,. you don't understand how democracy works. Not even a little.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #41 |
50. Not really. I have many choices in how I respond to every issue. |
|
Voting is the least, most worthless part of democracy. Politicians WANT you to be that trained monkey, just waiting to pull the lever for "Any Dem".
I'll vote for Obama, but I'll damn sure let him hear me between now and the election. And afterwards.
|
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #35 |
51. imagine that? What do good, honest people know anyways |
|
huh... integrity is for losers man.
"See son, compromise your principles, you too can become a politician or even a President. Win at all costs son, and never buy into integrity, honesty or those so called principles. No one ever gets to the top that way..."
Meanwhile, back to reality, we have a criminal administration not held accountable and we still are losing our rights. Great....
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
32. Win by losing... is that it? |
|
Such crap. Why didn't you vote for Clinton if you wanted that kind of craven politics? She's the best at it.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #32 |
39. If you want purity, you lose |
|
it's that simple.
If you hold standards of purity sacred, accept loising.
It's that simple.
You cannot win on a naitonal level and hold pure liberal stances. Not in this country.
The time to hold a Democrat's feet to teh fire is DURINNG THE PRIMARY and AFTER the General Election.
The time in between is the WRONG TIME to be holding purity standards.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #39 |
46. Wait, you *lose* if you want purity? Cuz I didn't hear it the first 8000 times you said it. |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:46 AM by jgraz
:eyes:
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #46 |
|
because you obviously want McCain for president if you cannot back the Dem nominee.
Don't like his stance on FISA? Bring it up on Novemeber 5 and push it home every day after that.
Don't like the fact that people can buy guns? Psuh the issue starting on Novemeber 5.
Whatever problem you ahve with Obama, bite your lip and accept it or accept a third Bush term.
Those are your only choices.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #54 |
60. Are you capable of any nuance? Or does your brain only have an on/off setting. |
|
Obama will do NOTHING on FISA in his first term. He'll be too worried about a second term. And by the second term, people will have given up and let the Repugs back in, so he'll be stuck.
Should he now cave on the gas tax? What about torture? Maybe he should vote to bomb Iran. After all, it's all about following the polls now.
Forgetting, of course, that this is the guy who's entire candidacy was based on doing the right thing when it wasn't popular.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #60 |
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #46 |
91. Obviously, you didn't |
|
so it needs to keep being said.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #91 |
95. So tell us: why are you a Democrat? |
|
If they can do anything and you'll still support them and attack anyone who complains, what are your core principles, if any?
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #95 |
106. I'll be right there complaining and holding their feet to the fire beside tyou |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 08:22 PM by IWantAnyDem
on November 5, 2008.
IF you don't win, all the principles in the world plus 2 bucks just might get you a cup of coffee.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #106 |
107. Here's the deal: if you win by faking your core beliefs, you've lost. |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 10:46 PM by jgraz
How do you think this is going to work? That Obama's going to somehow bullshit his way into office as a center-right candidate and then go hard left? It doesn't work that way.
If he runs as center-right, he's going to get votes as a center-right candidate. The more votes he gets, the more his faux center-right rhetoric will be reinforced.
He'll also turn out voters who buy into that spiel (i.e. the dumber, more gullilble voters) and that will lead to a more right-leaning, lower quality batch of Representatives and Senators.
The goal of having such a brilliant persuasive candidate as Obama is the win the fucking debate. If he doesn't even show up for it during the election, he has no chance of changing course once he's in office.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #107 |
112. HEre's the deal, if you don't appeal to the most people, you've lost |
|
That's the reality.
Sorry if you don't understand how politics works, but it's a popularity contest, not a principles contest.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #112 |
113. So your premise is we appeal by lying and pretending that Obama is something he isn't? |
|
No thanks.
Part of our job as citizens is to criticize our politicians. If they can't stand up to it and still get elected, then we made the wrong choice in our nomination process.
As I said before: we've got a brilliant, charismatic candidate who already has a 15-point lead on a creepy, bumbling nutbag from a dying party with his nose 12 inches up the ass of a retarded president with a 19% approval rating. And still think we need to lie about his shortcomings?
That's not the democracy I signed up for. That's some sick Lee Atwater/Karl Rove dystopia that Democrats are supposed to be working against.
|
Growler
(896 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #39 |
68. It's the Politics of Failure |
|
Dems are addicted to it. Never understood why, exactly.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #68 |
79. My theory: the ones in power are the ones who haven't been hurt by it |
|
Survival of the Shittiest.
|
Runcible Spoon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
52. doesn't anyone have any synonyms for "purity"? |
|
all I ask is a bit of variety with your shitting on of the progressive base of the party. Too much?
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #52 |
61. How about: "taking it up the ass from the Repugs"? |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:56 AM by jgraz
Works for me.
|
Zodiak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 12:55 PM by Zodiak Ironfist
Not a very effective rhetorical device.
Many of us want to win, but not compromise our souls and the very compact that makes us a nation. That falls firmly between your two false choices.
For example, I'm willing to allow nuclear power and corn-based ethanol subsidies if I can have my Constitution intact. It is not a purely liberal position, is it?
Failing to understand that the right to privacy is a deal-breaker for other DUers is precisely why you fail to convince anyone.
|
Lorien
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
Very true. Let's hope that Obama's team and the DNC figure this out in time.
|
Growler
(896 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:23 AM
Response to Original message |
8. Rrrright..... We Must Continue to BELIEVE |
|
like stupid sheep. In the mean time, he screws himself by ditching principles and looking weak on integrity.
We already see the right wing using this as a way to call him compromised and less than strong. Great tactic..... it worked wonders for Hillary.
|
Demit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:24 AM
Response to Original message |
9. So we shouldn't take him at his word now, because he doesn't really mean what he's saying? |
cbc5g
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:27 AM
Response to Original message |
12. Ummm looking at his website I don't see him changing his issues to the RW |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:32 AM by cbc5g
Maybe you're looking at a different website? Looks the same as it did in the primaries which he won.
Compromise isn't a bad thing people. Does Obama really want to side with, what is it, 8 (D) Senators, over 92 others? That's got Dukakis written all over it. He said he would work to get telcom immunity removed.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
82. Actions speak louder than HTML |
|
And it's 25 Senators who voted for the filibuster that Obama promised.
It's really sad to see people learn the opposite lesson from all these defeats. Dukakis lost because he was weak. Gore lost because he was weak. Kerry lost because he was weak. We lost the Congress for 12 years because the Democrats and Bill Clinton were weak.
And what's your solution? We just aren't being weak enough?? Fuck. That. Noise.
|
bowens43
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:32 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If Obama has to move to the right to win or pretend to move to the center then it's the same old crap and he's just another politician.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:35 AM
Response to Original message |
23. And when Bush bombs Iran before the election? Should Obama kiss his ass on that, too? |
|
Or should he wait for a poll?
Shit, if I wanted this kind of bullshit politics, I would have voted for Clinton.
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
26. If Bush Bombs Iran... |
|
Then it doesn't matter what Obama does, he'll have the election secured.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
29. Oh goody! Let's all hope Chimpy starts WWIII then. |
|
Charlie Black, is that you?
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message |
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #24 |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:41 AM by jgraz
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
31. Sticks and Stones, pal (nt) |
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #31 |
37. Removed, with apologies. |
|
I'll try to keep my blood set to just below simmer.
|
malik flavors
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message |
38. I think he'll move back to the left somewhat, but I think he really wants to be post-partisan, |
|
I think he'll hold onto his core principles, but will shape legislation in a way where both parties can be pleased. he said a big thing he wants to accomplish is making government work again, and government doesn't work when both sides aren't in agreement.
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
|
Politics, as I must have stated a hundred times in the past few days, is the art of the possible. If enough of the people in this country can be convinced that government works, then the whole Reagan meme of being terrified of the Government, would die away. But we have to prove to the people not only that we are principled, but that we get things done. Ideals and principles are necessary, but alone they do not fill bellies or provide roofs, only money and the power to use it can do that.
|
WeDidIt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
47. There are two time periods to hold a Democratic Candidate's feet to the fire |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 11:47 AM by IWantAnyDem
The entire time BEFORE THE PRIMARIES END and the entire time AFTER THE GENERAL ELECTION HAS BEEN WON!
The time in between those two events must never be questioned if you want as liberal a candidate as possible to enter the white house.
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
49. His voting record in the Senate speaks for himself |
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #49 |
53. You mean the one where he stood up to Bush all those times? |
City Lights
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message |
40. The "Democrat" ticket? |
|
Surely you meant "Democratic" ticket, right?
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #40 |
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #40 |
44. You know what I meant |
|
Apparantly, my fingers didn't. :)
|
City Lights
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #44 |
fascisthunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #40 |
truthisfreedom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message |
71. We're all voting for Obama. It's ridiculous for us to fight about this. Obama is the best choice. |
|
Let's just sit back, relax, and enjoy him destroying the last vestiges of hope for the rethug party.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #71 |
81. If it's inevitable, just sit back and enjoy it? |
|
Now where have I heard that before? :shrug:
|
Autumn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #81 |
85. Lie on your back and think of England |
Catherina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message |
73. What about all the Independents on the left that he's losing? |
|
What about all the citizens from all spectrums who care about laws and truth?
"REST ASSURED" isn't a very convincing argument. Unless we want to look like we're peddling hope and kool-aide, we need something must stronger than "rest assured" especially after 16 years of "rest assured" under Clinton and Bush.
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #73 |
77. Consider the alternative... |
|
Your own sigline notes the continuing fear of a preemptive strike against Iran. Which candidate is more likely to fulfill that fear? If independents on the left would like a McCain Administration, with its attendant evils, they need do little more than not vote, or vote third party this fall.
Call it a scare tactic if you will, but in the end its Obama or McCain, I'm for the one who won't ram the ship of state into an iceberg at full speed.
|
Catherina
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #77 |
87. Why does your dictum apply to Independents on the Left and not Centrists or Conservative Democrats? |
|
If Conservatives and Centrists had put Obama where he is, you'd have a point with that suck-it-up/consider the alternatives line but they didn't. It's not the Independents on the Left who are upset, it's all across. It's suicidal to ask your base to suck it up on an issue that upsets across the spectrum.
|
SidneyCarton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #87 |
93. I was attempting to answer in consideration to the groups you mentioned in your post |
|
In actuality, the dictum holds true for us all, regardless of ideology, democrats, republicans, etc. In the end it boils down to Obama or McCain, there are third party candidates sure, but the current crop (Barr, Nader, McKinney) are unlikely to mount a real challenge. Hence voting for one of them essentially opts the voter out of the system, and allows others to choose their President for them. You are free to say our choice sucks, indeed it may, but the alternative sucks worse.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 01:11 PM
Response to Original message |
80. Xeno: why are you a Democrat? |
|
If you really like winning, I'd think you'd be much more attracted to the Repugs.
Tell me: what would the Democrats have to do in order for you to fight back? Authorize and fund an illegal war of aggression? Oh wait.. . Cave in on the 4th amendment? Oops... Hand the Supreme Court to a coalition of troglodytes? Nope... Stand by while the Justice Department becomes the enforcement wing of the Republican Party? Um... Approve the torture or prisoners and immunize a criminal regime against war crimes prosecution? Damn...
Seriously -- what would it take for you to stand up to the Democrats? Is there anything they could possibly do that would make you protest? Or is anything OK as long as the traitors in power have (D) after their names?
|
Xenocrates
(183 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #80 |
|
Seriously, call off the attack dog. I'm trying to boost the morale of the troglodytes around here, and you go batshit crazy.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #92 |
94. It's a serious question. If winning is EVERYTHING, what happens to our core principles? |
lumberjack_jeff
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #80 |
115. Does the fact that he is a democrat pose a problem for you? n/t |
crankychatter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 02:34 PM
Response to Original message |
90. These folks spent 14 months foulmouthing Obama... they can't stop |
|
They started out calling him unelectable for being too far left
the fact is they'll say and do any fucking thing to assure a Democratic Defeat
they're fucking operatives
fuck them... I usually mean that in a kind way... the BEST possible way
not now though.... fuckem
gawud... how many times did I just say "fuck?"
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #90 |
96. Nope, I spent the past 4 months supporting him, donating to him and busting my ass for him. |
|
I think I've earned the right to complain when he disappoints me.
No wait ... I've always HAD the right to complain about a politician. Even St. Obama.
|
Blue_In_AK
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 05:55 PM
Response to Original message |
100. I hope you're right. |
depakid
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message |
101. Yet failing to learn from past mistake is for LOSERS |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-26-08 06:01 PM by depakid
and embracing the shallow Washington mythology and going Republican lite (yet again despite REPEATED INSTANCES THAT NEVER WORKED) is a prescription for disaster on EVERY LEVEL.
Not only for the prospects of winning on the executive- but down ticket as well.
Quite frankly, if Obama listens to the same consultants who've caused this mess, then unfortunately, he'll deserve to lose just as Kerry and Gore did.
ps: Gore technically didn't lose- but that one shouldn't have even been close enough to steal- and wouldn't have been without the Republican lite.
|
FourPieRun
(73 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 06:32 PM
Response to Original message |
102. if he gets elected, isn't he going to have to run for *re-election?* yeah. nt |
osperto
(20 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 07:04 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Look, Obama is "to the left" (he hasn't left), but he is not Kucinich, or Sharpton. People who are propping him up as some sort of "progressive" are going to be dissapointed.
Look at his positions, and he is clearly distinguishable from the right. That's good. He's clearly in line with the majority (to put it mildly) of positions that are associated with the Democratic party. That's also good.
Is he triangulating a bit? Yes. But, these are not wholly unusual positions. Consider that in the audacity of hope, he supported (basically) the DP. It's nothing new.
|
styersc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 07:07 PM
Response to Original message |
105. I would prefer a man of principle to stand tall and bravely speak |
|
his beliefs. I would prefer a candidate who can lead those to follow what is right rather then say what others want to hear.
Paul Wellstone is crying today.
|
jgraz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-26-08 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #105 |
108. And we KNOW that Obama can do that better than anyone. Remember the "race" speech? |
|
People were calling him the second coming of MLK Jr. Why the HELL could he do that on race -- one of the most divisive subjects in this country -- yet when it comes to the fucking 4TH AMENDMENT, he goes and hides under his desk.
Is all the brilliant oratory just for when his own campaign is on the line? Does it somehow mean less to him if it's just the personal civil rights of all of his supporters?
|
BooScout
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 05:01 AM
Response to Original message |
|
This whole thread is funny as shit.
|
lumberjack_jeff
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jun-27-08 10:56 AM
Response to Original message |
114. Winning IS everthing, but centrism is no panacea. n/t |
crankychatter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jun-28-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #114 |
117. centrism as a function of corruption (lobby influence) is not the same as pragmatism |
|
in fact, they are mutually exclusive
|
azmouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jun-28-08 06:16 PM
Response to Original message |
blues90
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jun-28-08 06:36 PM
Response to Original message |
118. I'm past this winning is everything crap |
|
This is the mindset that brought us right to where we are now.
This is what got us bush because winning was everything.
This is what got us in Iraq. winning the war on terror and freeing the people from our own plant.
I am sick of the games. This is what many here stoned Hillary for was it not?
Sorry , I want the fucking truth this time , if Obama needs to play top the center and toss aside standing up for what he claims to believe in then he is as fake and as bad as anyone else.
If it's all for the vote and lies for the win then it's a game without borders.
If Obama, as he claims, believes in the people and needs to lie and play the center for votes then he does not believe in the people at all , it is as simple as that.
What people will tolerate to attempt to redeem themselves.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 08th 2024, 02:12 PM
Response to Original message |