Can you hear us now?

[MadHound]

By all measures the Coakley campaign should be coasting to an easy victory in tomorrow's election. After all, this is an election to fill Teddy's old seat, in a state that is one of most Democratic in the country. But a funny thing has happened, the left has gotten pissed, and it shows.

Never mind that Coakley is, to put it delicately, something of an inept campaigner, that's not what's killing her chances at this point. What is killing her chances actually has very little to do with her and a lot to do with what is going on nationally.

The left is in full out open revolt against the Democratic party. After giving Obama and the Democrats everything that they wanted the left suddenly found themselves an unwanted guest at the table. Suddenly, despite their hard work the left found that not only were their issues not being addressed, but worse Obama and the Democratic Congress were following a much more conservative path, ranging from snubbing the LGBT community to expanding the war to caving in to corporate interests over the HCR bill.

The anger over these outrages against the left is now culminating in the Massachusetts senatorial election. The left is either looking to stay home, or worse yet, voting for the RW yahoo out of sheer spite. In other words, the left is sending a message, "Pay attention to us, start moving the party back to the left or suffer the consequences."

So the question now is whether or not Obama and the Democratic party are getting the message. Will the party start tacking back to the left, or will they continue to pursue their corporate friendly rightward course? If the party starts tacking back to the left, then they stand a good chance of winning big again in the fall. If not, the left is going to do what they're doing in the Massachusetts election, staying home or voting 'Pug out of sheer spite.

So win or lose tomorrow, the ball is in the court of the Obama and the Democrats. Stop ignoring and spitting on your base or suffer the consequences. It's up to you.

[jezebel]

1. Bullshit. And boring bullshit at that. nt

[MadHound]

8. Now that's an erudite response

You can't deny that MA is heavily blue state. You can't deny that under normal times even a dead Democrat could beat Brown hands down. So what is your excuse for such a bad performance?

No, it can't be the left exercising its muscle, it just can't be:eyes:

Good luck winning in the fall with your head stuck in the sand.

[jezebel]

16. Your quote of "The left is in full out open revolt against the Democratic party" IS total bullshit.

The Mass election if lost is NOT going to be lost because the Dem's are in revolt. It will be because the Dems are apathetic and have a crappy candidate. That is balanced against an enraged right wing and indies who whether you want to believe it not are voting for Brown not because he isn't progressive but because he is CONSERVATIVE.
I don't like it but its the truth.

[MadHound]

23. Hmm, what's going on in the country tends to refute your point

Hell, what's going on on this board is refuting your point.

Face the fact, the left is pissed. You may not like it, but if you simply stick your head in the sand on this one, you're going to lose badly in the fall.

The simply fact is, there are too many on the left to allow Brown to win as outline. It is simply the left, pissed off and staying at home that is going to turn the tide for Brown.

[dionysus]

39. uh, every poll out there, which shows obama has very high ratings amongst dems. are you pissed that

there aren't enough of you outside of internet message boards to even register in poll results?

hmmm?

[MadHound]

42. Umm, most of us on the left aren't registered Dems

That means that we're those dreaded/coveted independents. You want our vote, you've got to earn it, it's that simple.

[scheming daemons]

50. Then quit calling yourselves "Obama's base"... because he *IS* a Democrat

[dionysus]

51. in the OP he claims to be the base, then let's slip he's not even a dem.

well golly gee color me surprised...

[MadHound]

59. Yeah, I'm not a Dem, but I'm willing to stack up the money, time, sweat and effort

That I've give to the Democratic party over the years to your contributions any day of the week.

[dionysus]

66. well, you have been putting in a lot of work against the administration on here since the election,

i'll grant you that.

[omega minimo]

80. "well golly gee color me surprised..."

you two tag-teaming ........ :eyes:

[MadHound]

57. "Yourselves"? There is only one of me, thank you, and I don't have multiple personalities

As far as Obama being a Democrat, well that's debatable. Sure, officially he is a Democrat, but he governs like Clinton did, as a good old fashioned moderate 'Pug.

[clear eye]

76. He governs to the right of Clinton. Clinton had progressives in his cabinet

and sometimes threw us crumbs.

[Mojorabbit]

81. +10 nt

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

105. Huh?

:wtf:

[omega minimo]

82. many potential/previous Dems have re/registered I to send the D Party a message

the message noted by the previous poster.

[omega minimo]

83. also, since the D party has leaned R for so long, they have created their own "base"

of noncommittal voters. On the R side.

[sendero]

115. A distinction....

... without a difference. Get a clue.

[salguine]

69. I think responses that consist of no more than saying "bullshit" and "boring", and can't

offer up a well-thought-out, reasoned counter argument are pretty boring.

At least you didn't type "FAIL" as your entire response. Maybe you moved into double digits on your last birthday.

[Jim Sagle]

86. Bullshit to your bullshit.

People are getting fed up with Obama, and with those who still blindly defend him.

[BeFree]

98. heh

You sound like one of those who thought the US should have been feeding the Haitians two days earlier, and some here hated that, y'know?

[Jim Sagle]

114. Not at all...the US is doing about as well as could be expected.

Except for including a high-profile piece of unelected filth among the "helpers".

[BeFree]

120. I agree

And I think Obama is doing about as well as can be expected in the US.

[Jim Sagle]

121. There is a sense in which that position is defensible.

But I think he could be doing more, and better, and in the right direction. And it's not too late to start.

[BeFree]

123. Yep

Same thing they said about going into Haiti.

[Jim Sagle]

142. Not a good analogy at all.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NYC_SKP]

2. Oh, I've read these kinds of thoughts elsewhere. That a Coaxley loss indicates Obama Failure.

And that he's pissed on his base, yada yada yada.

Well, I disagree.

Care to explain why Mitt Romney won the 2002 gubernatorial race?

Was it because Bush was so Awesome???

Correlation is not causation.

Nice try, though.

[MadHound]

10. The only reason that a 'Pug wins anything statewide in MA

Is because the Dems fail to turn out, it's that simple. Whether that failure to turn out is due to a less than stellar candidate (O'Brien) or is due to the left's anger at the party simply depends on the issues of the day. Today, it is because the left is pissed.

Either you learn from this lesson, or the party craters in the fall. It's that simple.

[cali]

24. no, it's not. and anyone familiar with MA politics would know that

they elected repub guvs for frickin' sixteen years before Patrick. It's more about the voters wanting to "balance" the heavy dem control of the statehouse.

you are clueless.

[Gormy Cuss]

55. But that's what's done with the governor's race and legislature slots, not Congress.

Ed Brooke was the last Republican senator and he left office thirty years ago. He was elected during the Vietnam war -- that may have been a sign of Democratic voter discontent there, or it may simply have been Brooke's popularity as AG against Chub Peabody who had lost his primary bid for a third term as governor, which means he wasn't that popular, not to mention Brooke was pretty liberal for a Republican.

[Ozymanithrax]

3. If Coakley looses, any chance of progressive legislation dies...

I think they will hear that message loud and clear.

Progressives don't want progressive legislation. They prefer Conservative answers to all problems.

That is the result of a loss, so it must be the message many progressives are sending.

[Skittles]

5. any chance seemed to be doomed before this election

[ibegurpard]

25. indeed

[Ozymanithrax]

122. Health Care is the most progressive piece of legislation since Medicare...

I know we will not see eye to eye on this.

[Grand Taurean]

7. All of that "don't blame us" regarding Nixon goes out the door too.

[MadHound]

11. Umm, then according to you, the situation would remain the same

Since we're not getting a single piece of progressive legislation up to this point in time.

So, nothing to lose, and perhaps everything to gain.

[Ozymanithrax]

124. Health Care is the most progressive legislation since medicare...

Republicans will happily kill that and return us to the status quo.

[MadHound]

128. Calling a mandated monopoly that will curtail women's right to choose isn't very progressive

Sorry, but I have a hard time calling anything that hurts the poor, working and middle class, along with curtailing civil rights "progressive".

[Ozymanithrax]

135. Expanding Medicare and providing health care to more than 30 million Americans...

is progressive. You just don't like the vehicle.

Fourty-five thousand Americans die every year simply becaue they don't have health care. Changing that is progressive.

[MadHound]

138. Get this straight, this bill ISN'T providing health care to 30 million plus people

It is forcing them, in many instances against their will, to buy health INSURANCE. By doing this, you are giving the insurance industry a mandated monopoly. And what does our study of economics show about monopolies? That the price of that monopolized good or service goes up dramatically.

That's real progressive. Better yet, we're asking women to have their right to choose curtailed in order to bring about that mandated monopoly. How progressive is that? You may be willing to throw women under the bus, but a lot of people aren't.

[Ozymanithrax]

145. Get this, these people will have health care...

many of them, especially the poor, will have expanded Medicare.

Mandates work in other countries, such as Germany and Japan. They will work here. And I am not happy about the abortion provisions, but we do not have a perfect progressive caucus. Those problems can be changed in time. This is vastly superior to the current system, and improvement is progressive.

Allowing 45,000 people a year to continue to die because they have no health care is unconscionable and not progressive.

[MadHound]

149. Mandates work in other countries because those countries have true public options,

If not outright single payer health care.

And what is this expanded Medicare that you speak of? Sounds to me like that option, much like the public option, is dead in the water. So we're back to forcing people to buy insurance or face the legal consequences.

And as far as limiting women's right to choose, you casually dismiss it like many a typical male. You're not happy about it, but hey, as a guy, if really doesn't effect you. Easy to put a group of people on the sacrificial altar when you're not one of them. Sure, those problems can be changed in time, but how long will that time be? Given the nature of this topic, it will be a long, long time. How many women will have unwanted children, or worse yet die in botched back alley abortions before this issue is re-addressed? Far too many, yet you cavalierly dismiss this as no big deal. Again, typical male.

[JoeyT]

153. Not really.

They'll have health *insurance*. There's a big difference.

"Allowing 45,000 people a year to continue to die because they have no health care is unconscionable and not progressive. "
So the solution is to force people that already can't afford to go to the doctor to pay money to an insurance company in the hopes that they'll be able to scrounge up enough to meet the deductible/copay? And that's progress?

[daleanime]

12. What progressive legislation?

Oh, all that stuff that was never 'on the table'. Still would like a democratic win, just enlightened enough to know it's not a win for me.:banghead:

[Ozymanithrax]

125. Health Care...

See above.

[clear eye]

49. You only get to spend that money once,

and it's been spent.

We didn't have even a voice at the table w/ this WH in either policy on the bank crisis or on HCR, nevermind a deciding input. There were outstanding progressive experts ready w/ useful, creative solutions and reams of substantiating data, but none were or are welcome to provide their knowledge.

You can't threaten people with what has already happened.

The Party better hope people have other reasons to come out for Coakley than that non-starter.

[sendero]

118. Any chance of progressive legislation...

.. died the day Obama took office. Please, what has he done that is actually progressive? More Iraq war. Escalated Afghanistan war. More wiretaps. More secrecy. More banksters feasting off of main street.

Really, what the FUCK has this asshole done for progressives?

[Ozymanithrax]

126. We are on the verge of passing a health care bill that will cover

more than 3o million people.

This is the most progressive bill out of Congress since Medicare.

[sendero]

148. By asking the public to make.

... serious sacrifices (mandates) and the industry to make none. Please don't compare this SHIT to Medicare.

[bobbolink]

130. He has housed all the homeless people.

Oh wait...

He hasn't even mentioned it......... It hasn't shown up in his stellar speeches

:nuke:

[tbyg52]

4. K&R

:patriot:

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MadHound]

15. LOL, a wimp, right.

Sorry, but you're simply trying to pull out the bully boy argument, ie the left didn't get their candidate so instead we have to support the corporatist. That's not how either a democracy or a big tent coalition like the Democratic party works. Everybody in a big tent coalition is supposed to get something thrown their way once in awhile in exchange for their support. The left hasn't gotten a damn thing thrown their way for not just years, but decades. You honestly can't expect any group, right, left or center to stay in a coalition without getting rewarded, that simply isn't realpolitik.

But then again, you don't deal in realpolitik, you deal in a fantasy where Obama and the Democrats are gods and we should simply be grateful when they look in our direction:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

20. When you scream as loud as you without any results

and never get anywhere,
it makes you a wimp; ineffective, and a tool for the other side.

At least, whatever I am, I helped get something done.
You ain't done jack shit, but given a seat to the real enemy
in order to send out a "Message"....
and you know what, a message don't mean jack shit.

60 or 59 or 58 or whatever,
Obama always knew he wasn't guaranteed an easy go....
because he was always going against the odds,
and he still is.....
and he is well aware of it.

In the end game, it is those who are most passionate
who will lose.

The pragmatics will take what they can get,
and well, the rest will just have to wait.

[Luminous Animal]

133. I am starting to feel that pragmatism is a euphemism for expediency.

[MineralMan]

35. Realpolitik? You're accusing him of not understanding realpolitik.

It is to laugh. Realpolitik has nothing to do with this, and I don't believe you understand the term at all.

[MineralMan]

18. +10

[goclark]

37. Frenchie you are making too much sense

If the Democrat is victorious, we all win unless we are Republicans.
Since there should be just Democrats on this Board, we all win if the Democrat wins!

[jpak]

9. So Mass. progressives are going to vote for Brown to teach Obama a lesson?

my my

and Obama is splitting the base too?

:wow:

[MadHound]

17. No, actually my bet is that the left is simply going to stay home in droves

And hand the election to Brown by default. Of course there are those on the left who will vote for Brown out of spite. After all, 400,000 self described liberals and 200,000 registered Democrats in Florida voted for Bush over Gore in '00 because Gore was supporting offshore drilling, so it does happen:shrug:

[Walk away]

13. What kind of idiot would vote for a teabagger because Democrats aren't...

far enough to the left? Even staying home and not voting is moronic if your intention is to move anyone farther left. If Coakley loses then the only message the Dems will get is that Independents are tracking right.

[dionysus]

14. sounds like you're cheering for a dem loss eh...

why am i not surprised?

[MadHound]

40. Sounds to me like you're reading what you want to see into my post

Point out anywhere in my post where I'm stating that I want Coakley to lose. Oh, yeah, that's right, you can't.

All I'm doing is pointing out the political reality of what this election is all about. You can deny this reality if you want, but you do so at your own peril.

[dionysus]

41. bullshit. you're practically gloating. you're not fooling anyone here.

:rofl:

[MadHound]

45. Projection seems to be what you're into

Again, point out to me where I stated that I wanted Coakley to win. Point out to me where I'm gloating. I'm waiting. . .

[apocalypsehow]

19. "or, worse yet, voting for the RW yahoo out of sheer spite" - Says it all. How childish can one get?

:thumbsdown:

[cali]

21. what nonsense. you're suggesting that die hard progressives are

going to vote for brown. then they clearly are not progressives but fuckwad frauds.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Exhibit A, Ladies and Gentlemen

The OP is, and has been, out of control for quite some time.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

127. And about half the posters on this thread have been acting like ConservaDems

for quite some time.

[coti]

26. I wouldn't vote for Brown, but I agree with the rest of your post.

Dems have an undeniable right to be angry.

[Matariki]

27. The problem is, we will ALL be suffering the consequences. n/t

[Adelante]

28. So if Coakley wins, it means the left is not revolting

I see.

[cali]

29. proud to unrec this moronic swill.

[Codeine]

30. Yes, we hear you; a piercing whine that cuts through all reason.

Your "all-or-nothing" philosophy will get us all nothing. Enjoy your purity party.

[cali]

31. zing.

:rofl:

[salguine]

54. Wow, such snotty dickishness. Ignore list for you!

[Codeine]

58. Ignore list FTW! nt

[omega minimo]

93. you pegged it

:thumbsup: smart not to inflict it on yourself, it's constant.

[jaxx]

32. Gimme the megaphone....

I can hear you, the whole country hears you...the teabaggers and the rightwing fringe hears you. And they like what you say. I don't. I've never read such swill in my life. Who the fuck do you think you are threatening the Democratic Party with your whiny assed "pay attention to us" shit?

What I see are a bunch of people who never liked Obama to begin with and now are on the fail mode because their so called progressive candidates got the boot early on and never had a chance to start with. So you whine and you threaten and you stay home and you vote for the pub. Because you're the know it alls who are just sure your person would have gotten it all done and by gawd gotten it done your way.

Absolute bullshit!

[cali]

34. +1

[dionysus]

38. are you insulting the mighty kucinich juggernaut?

you don't want to piss off all 20 of them, sheesh.

;)

[jaxx]

47. If they're insulted they can whine "pay attention to us" .

So in the language they can understand.....you betcha! wink wink

[MadHound]

48. No, if the left is insulted or pissed, we just stay home

And as in the case of Gore in Florida, or perhaps Coakley tomorrow, the Dems go down in flames.

[jaxx]

52. Taking your football and going home......bad sport?

Gonna sulk?

Gonna threaten some more?

What will you do when you find out you're not as important as you think you are?

[MadHound]

61. The key question is what are you going to do when you find the party going down in flames this fall

Because the left did stay home? Gonna pout? Gonna blame the left for not marching in lockstep? Or are you going to take an honest look at what the party has done over the past twenty years and realize that it has become a corporately controlled party that has drifted so far to the right that nobody who is to the left of Attila the Hun can still came any moral integrity and vote for the Democratic party.

[jaxx]

72. Oh so now you back off it's all Obama's fault and go back 20 years?

Go ahead and stay home. Do it. I won't be threatened. I'm going to say this slowly so it'll sink in..........

You and yours are not the whole Democratic Party. You do not control congress and you do not control the president. There is a reason the far left fringe candidates do not win, they're scary to the mainstream and like it or not we need the mainstream to get elected. You will never get everything you want, it's not in the cards. No matter who's dealing in any year, it's not in the cards.

That is going to piss you off but I really don't care. You've pissed me off one too many times today so call it karma. The more you demand the more you will be resisted. The more you put down everyone else the more you will be resisted. Until there are fewer and fewer of you and you will have destroyed yourselves with your attitudes of superiority. The Democratic Party will survive, we have before.

[MadHound]

75. LOLOLOLOLOLOL!

(Deep breath)

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

(Another deep breath)

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Thank you so much, you've just proven with your superior ass attitude why the Democratic party is pissing off the left, and why the left is in revolt. Keep that little superiority complex going there pal and you and the Dems will lose badly.

LOL, textbook, just textbook, thank you so much. I couldn't have done a better parody myself.

[jaxx]

77. Gotcha didn't I?

That's way too many haha's for a real laugh.

Uh huh.

[omega minimo]

88. Your profile indicates your longtime support for Sen and Pres. Obama

Could you offer some insight in the changes as a candidate and representative? Can you understand the disillusionment of those who didn't expect his adminstration would be so aligned with the concerns of corporate power over the public?

[omega minimo]

85. That really was a remarkable display

of exactly what you are talking about. For that guy, it'll be a Win/Win. Priggishly continue to blow off the Left, R-Litess and Repukes get to run things and STILL blame "the Left" for whatever they like -- and as that post shows, they're not big on taking responsibility for anything...

It's the same game and I'd take it back 30 years, not just 20. Not sure which part of "voters ain't fallin' for this shit anymore" the people attacking you don't understand.

I wouldn't advocate people not voting tomorrow in MA, but I can see why they may not, out of apathy, BS fatigue, or to send that message to the D's. Since it's a special election, it may be tempting to do so.

I've read the whole thread and don't see any convincing arguments against your premise -- mainly lots of vitriol and assumptions.

:shrug:

[MadHound]

90. Yeah, there are people around here who simply don't like hearing the truth

I'm not advocating that people for vote Brown, or stay home, etc. What I'm doing with this piece is using my experience and education to show people why the Dems are facing such a rough road, and why they had better take this wake up call. If they don't, this fall is going to be a rough one for the Dems.

But God forbid, any such reality talk, any suggestion that the party moves to the left is treated as heresy by many. And that in and of itself is part of the problem facing the Democratic party.

I suppose some people only learn by repeatedly running into brick walls:shrug:

[omega minimo]

96. All these changes have come quickly

in the past year. The Hope and Change folks are still shellshocked and digging their heels in or bailing ...

I was surprised only by how fast and how far the corporate embrace subsumed whatever populist will Barack Obama had in the first place.

After reading this and other threads today and previous ones about this shifting bar of left/center/right, it seems the resistance is partly people who want to be believe they are more different from R than they may be. Corporate power has become the great equalizer.

:yoiks:

[MadHound]

99. I'm not all that surprised,

Obama gave a pretty good outline of path he was going to take early on. And when he started filling in his cabinet, I knew that was it, not a good sign at all.

But he does give a great speech, and I think that's what blinded a lot of people. Hell, I was never a big fan of his, but did greatly enjoy his speeches. Sadly there is little substance behind them in most cases.

[omega minimo]

110. Striking

you have few allies or opportunity for real discussion here and you wanna be topdog?

"I was surprised only by how fast and how far the corporate embrace subsumed......."

I wasn't surprised either -- as I said only by " ...how fast and how far ..."

Didn't comment the first time I read it but on second glance, ya know, ya might not want to kill your own discussion. :hi:

[dionysus]

63. uh, whine some more? maybe in all caps next time?

:D

[omega minimo]

89. "What will you do when you find out you're not as important as you think you are?""

So not all votes are important?

[cali]

60. lol. you don't speak for anyone but a few mad dogs.

inconsequential little squealers. real progressives don't act like YOU.

[MadHound]

67. My guess cali

Is that you have very little real world political experience. That you sit in your comfy home and engage in pure theory. After all now, how many campaigns have you worked? How many hours, miles, and money have you put into campaigns?

You show your ignorance of real world politics all the time in posts like this, you think that you're being clever and insulting, but what you're really doing is simply showing your own ignorance.

[cali]

73. haha . you guess wrong.

first of all I grew up in a very political family. My mother was head of the CT League of Women Voters for some years in CT and we were all drafted to work on campaigns. I worked on the Carter campaign, volunteered for Dukakis and Clinton and Obama. I've worked on local and state campaigns.

You're the delusional one, thinking progressives vote for teabaggers. those are not progressives. and frankly, people sitting out an election such as the one in MA, are piss poor progressives.

[MadHound]

79. Oh, there it is,

CT League of Women Voters, how very la te da. How very, oh what is the word, ah yes, establishment of you. Geez, a political streetfighter you're not.

Sorry, but your experience still sounds very ivory tower, very academic, when was the last time you went and organized in the 'hood? When was the last time you unionized a workplace? When was the last time you got down in the goddamn gutter and played for keeps?

Sorry cali, given your upbringing I'm sure that you've given a lot of money to political causes. But you simply have no fucking clue about how the rest of us live, how real life politics work, and how people with nothing to lose are willing to fight and fight hard for their place at the table.

[cali]

84. wtf? I said I grew up in a politically active family

and had been working on campaigns since I was a kid. and there was nothing very la ti da about the League in the 60s and 70s. Your ignorance is showing. The league, as a matter of fact, sponsored the presidential debates for years- and did a damned fine job.

I've worked on Bernie's campaign's and on my friend's for the state house. True, all I've done is the regular grunt work, no fisticuffs or street fighting, but so what?

I'm poor, genius. flat out poor. I wasn't always, but I have been for quite a few years. I know what it's like to budget every penny.

You haven't a fucking clue about me. you are pathetic.

[Luminous Animal]

140. And why doesn't the League sponsor them anymore?

Oh yes, this is why...

The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.

[blogslut]

92. You have no idea what you're talking about

The League of Women Voters is an earnest, respected organization. It isn't the Junior League.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blogslut]

104. And you prove my point that you don't know what you're talking about

The LWV stopped hosting presidential debates when they were pushed out in favor of the Commission on Presidential Debates in 1987. The LWV were pushed out primarily because they would not bend to the spin machines of the candidates.

The fact that you would compare them to the KKK tells me you are incapable of shame as well as cogent thought.

[Luminous Animal]

141. They weren't pushed out, they pulled out in disgust at both the Dems and Reps

On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a dramatic press release:

The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election_debates#Debate_sponsorship

[scarletwoman]

33. I'm very sorry, MadHound, but I have to disagree.

This election isn't about the "left" at all, it's about independent and swing voters who absolutely loathe the Health Care Reform bill and are therefore flocking to Brown in hopes that a 41st Republican vote in the Senate will scuttle it.

There are disaffected Democratic voters, to be sure, but they are not particularly the "left", they are more likely just ordinary working class voters who see the DC Dems as not doing a damn thing to improve their lives. They won't be staying home to send a message about "moving left", they'll simply be staying home because they're disgusted with the whole stinking swamp of DC politics.

The people voting for Brown are NOT unhappy lefties hoping to send a message, they are people who are, in fact, wildly enthusiastic about delivering a RIGHT WING MESSAGE to Washington. And if Brown wins, THAT will be the takeaway message. Not to move more LEFT, but to move more RIGHT.

I think you are too much projecting your own feelings on this race, and too little looking at the actual facts on the ground.

Sorry, I don't like disagreeing with someone who I consider a friend and ally. But I honestly think you're wrong about this.

Peace,
sw

[omega minimo]

106. Good post, SW, thank you for elevating this to actual discussion

:yourock:

[NorthCarolina]

36. Like it or not, the OP is correct. eom

[ddeclue]

43. BEAUTIFUL! +1!! nt

[depakid]

44. It wasn't a good sign when phsysicans were arrested at Baucus' hearing

Not sure what the administration and Senate had in mind by excluding them from even being heard but suffice it to say, it wasn't a bright move.

[gleaner]

46. Very clear shout out ....

whether the Obama administration hears or cares is another matter. They haven't been listening very well or they would have heard before now. The question, I guess, is how much they really care. Maybe they like living in a right wing swamp. I, for one, do not. I hope they are listening too. Not enough to have Mr. grin and bare it as a Senator, but I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.

[blogslut]

53. Why do you hate progressives?

You paint them as revenge-seeking abusers who would rather see their partners dead than free from their beatings.

[MadHound]

62. Wow, now that's a new perspective

Strange, skewed and irrational, but a new perspective none the less.

[dionysus]

64. you just got described to a T.

:rofl:

[blogslut]

68. Oh, something's strange, skewed and irrational

....but I don't think it's my response to your OP.

[Pryderi]

56. Unrecommended.

[O is 44]

65. How is rooting for the party of NO

helping? Yeah we will suffer the consequences all right of another NO vote against progress. I guess the Republicans did not do enough damage for ya. Try to focus your anger on conservative dems in the senate.

[MadHound]

70. Not rooting for the 'Pugs,

Just stating the consequences that the Democratic party will face this fall if they don't wake up and fast. After all, it is all laid out before you in this MA Senate race.

[Pryderi]

74. yeah...because we don't need a nose.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

71. If she wanted the Left's votes she should have gone after them. K&R

Of course, they won't tack to the left. That would mean "change".

[omega minimo]

91. anyone know why the race is so close?

[omega minimo]

78. "... or will they continue to pursue their corporate friendly rightward course?"

How much more "corporate friendly rightward' can they possibly go? Aren't they there already?

[treestar]

87. Sick of this claim

that could hardly be.

If Brown wins, it means effing massachusetts sent a teabagger. They'll take the message that Republicans are gaining again and that the voters are becoming more conservative.

I'll take the consequences. The left has lost me.

[MadHound]

94. You may be sick of it, but the fact is that it's the truth

Really now, in a state as blue as MA, what other explanation is there than simply the fact that the left is either staying at home or voting for Brown out of spite. Hell, there are polls out there stating that upwards of twenty percent of Brown's support is coming from Dems.

You may not like the truth, but it is still the truth. So the question becomes what are you and the Democratic party going to do about it? Blow it off as an abboration? Get pissed at the left? Continue with more of the same ol' same ol'? Or will the party wake the fuck up and realize that they need the left and actually start throwing the left a few bones to chew on, like they do with every other single constituency under the big tent except the left.

[treestar]

111. The left has lost my completely

Maybe you can thank DU. If they stay home and let Brown win or vote for him out of spite - I want them to leave the party.

[MadHound]

119. Ah, so rather than actually throwing the left a bone and winning

You would rather kick them out of the party for making any sort of demands. Now that's a winning strategy. And people say the left are purists:eyes:

[treestar]

147. I want the purists to leave like they say they want to

they aren't that numerous. I'm tired of their demands for obedience and that we all bow down to them. That they must be "thrown a bone" no matter what the consequences politically, just because they are some sort of royalty entitled to get what they want, allegedly for having worked so hard (yet abandoning us when the political process does not allow us to meet any of their extreme demands).

They say Obama is no different than Bush/mcCain, then why don't they leave? If it makes no difference to them, why have they picked this party rather than the other? Or they can go and form their irrelevant third party and dream of perfection, a party that never has any elected representatives that actually have to vote on real bill.

[MadHound]

150. And again, as we've seen before and as we'll probably see again today,

The Democratic party needs the leftists. If they leave like you want them to, then the Democratic party becomes another footnote in history.

As far as throwing them a bone, well you know what, they richly deserve one, better yet a big fat steak. Considering that it is the left in this party that regularly provides the foot soldiers in any campaign, it is the left that does the dirty work, it is the left that GOTV, I would say that the Democratic party owes them. Yet the party seems to only recognize the left during the campaign, afterward the left gets stuffed into a closet, with the party hoping that they never see them again until the next election. Meanwhile, the centerists, the corporatists, the DLC and Blue Dogs all get rich rewards, time and again, yet you castigate the left for wanting what is their just due? When is the last time the left was rewarded? Certainly not during this administration, nor during Clinton's tenure. Hell, all Carter did was symbolic rewards, nothing of substance. So that really only leaves LBJ, who gave us Civil Rights and Medicare. Forty five years is a long time to go without getting recognition.

But you might just get your wish, the left is disgusted beyond words. We're seeing that in the Coakley race and we'll see the same this fall, unless Obama and the Dems change direction quick. And that means that 2012 will be a debacle. Where are you going to get the foot soldiers to replace the left? Where are you going to get the votes to replace the left? Oh, that's right, you're not. Be careful what you wish for, it might just come true.

[DonCoquixote]

97. Catch 22

If Obama tried to go left, the Independent vote would run as they truly hate and fear anything that smells of socialism.
If Obama goes to far right, the left revolts,
How would you say he can go left without making the independent vote run away in droves?

[MadHound]

101. One thing that you and a lot of other people are conflating

Are the notions of "independent" with "centerist". The fact of the matter is not everybody, perhaps not even the majority of people who are independent are in the center politically. Most true leftists I know are also independent, they don't belong to any party. This notion that independents are a group of people who are in the center politically is simply wrong, and it is skewing our elections and electoral process greatly.

[DonCoquixote]

116. No not everybody

But many are, and as much as some people want to believe that 2008 was a clear victory for the left, it was not. Now, that Obama should have been hard selling ideas like single payer, yes, but that does not change the fact that the only reason some people did not vote R is because Bush had failed so miserably that no amount of honey copuld make him go down their throats.

[closeupready]

100. Look. Losing this seat is exactly what Blue Dogs want. Do people not get that?

They WANT a more conservative Senate - all the easier to go back to progressive constituencies and say, "our hands our tied! We need to win first, and then implement change!" Yadda yadda. :eyes:

As it is, our legislation should be sailing through Congress. The fact that it's not simply demonstrates how ineffective the current crop of Blue Dog Democrats are. Personally, I would rather not lose this seat, but I don't think it will be so disastrous in terms of representing a watershed change in direction.

[omega minimo]

103. Yup

[woo me with science]

102. Yup.

This is the final straw for many. I would add that it's not just the far left that is angry. Moderates and independents hate this health care bill, too, which is why they are breaking at least 2 to 1 for Brown.

Progressives were right on this one. The American people were solidly behind health care reform when they thought it would actually control costs and afford them health CARE rather than just health INSURANCE. When the Democrats stopped listening to the people is when the people started to revolt.

I could not believe my ears when more than one Democrat pushing this disgrace had the gall to say that, because people on the Left hate it and people on the Right hate it, "that proves we are charting a good middle course."

The people didn't want a "middle course" in this case, and this was not a "middle course," nonetheless.

This is, quite simply, a wake-up call on responsive government.

[omega minimo]

107. jinx. dammit

:hi:

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

108. This is, quite simply, a wake-up call on responsive government.

Or better yet no healtcare reform what so ever. Insurance companies will still be able to deny those with pre-existing conditions.

Look I agree we don't get everything we want on this healthcare bill but it's better than the status quo.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

112. phony baloney

nice try

[MadHound]

117. Ah, now that's certainly a way to win votes and influence people

You know, instead of simply calling the left traitors, perhaps you should actually listen to the left, and perhaps the party should make some attempt at actually responding to the left's wishes. After all, FDR did just that when he was faced with a serious threat from the left and look what happened, he went on to become the longest serving president in history.

[JI7]

129. It's the Independents who are supporting Brown in larger than usual numbers

[MadHound]

131. People are conflating the ideas that "independents" equals "centerists"

That's simply not the case. Independents are simply people who aren't registered with either party. That doesn't mean that they're in the center politically. In fact many, if not most independents inhabit the edges of the political spectrum either on the left or right.

[JI7]

132. well, if they are going Scott Brown than they must be more right

[MadHound]

136. Not neccessarily,

Somewhere around here is a thread stating that twenty percent of Dems are supporting Brown. Given that number may vary, it does show one thing, there is lots of anger on the left towards Obama and the Democratic party.

This has happened before, where Dems and liberals have crossed over and voted for the 'Pug out of spite. Happened in '00 in Florida. Gore was supporting more offshore drilling in Florida at the time, which pissed off 400,000 self described liberals (independents in political parlance) and 200,000 registered Dems to the point where they voted for Bush.

These things happen, and one can't automatically assume that it's all support from right leaning people. A pissed of group of people will do almost anything to get their point across.

[JI7]

137. i don't know any liberal like that, if they are angry and want Republicans to win

they certainly are not liberals.

just a bunch of attention whore jackasses who like to feel good about how they made a statement .

[MadHound]

139. Well just because you don't know any doesn't make it any less true

And I've seen it in action many times before. Nor does it make them "attention whore jackasses". It just makes them people who are willing to resort to desperate measures in order to make their voices heard.

[JI7]

143. they remind me of freepholes

[DonCoquixote]

144. I am not calling names

However, I have to ask this, if you want to slap the democrats, how do you do it in a way that does not empower the GOP? I am not trying to be nasty about it, I am sincerely asking if there is a way to do protest votes without them being misused. I ask this because I know Fox will try to seel any defeat tomorrow as a sign that people want Obama to go to the right. You and I know that is bull, but most people watching TV do not.

[MadHound]

146. Well that is the thing,

You really can't do so in an effective manner. The key is in the analysis of the voter turnout. Faux will say it's a 'Pug victory, but most other analysis will take a look at the number and see that it is the left sitting this one out.

[DonCoquixote]

154. OK, well

I do understand that Obama, Rahm et al have given the right too much, granted, but if we know that the GOP will gain ammo, do we just say "oh well, that is the price we have to pay?"

I myself think the only way we really have a chance of changing politics at all may involve the media more than anything else. As long as Fox has that Megaphone, black will become white, war slavery, etc. The one good side of that is that every day, people become more frustrated with the media.

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[invictus]

151. K&R

[Vinca]

152. I think the OP's points are right on the mark and I've been wondering

during this latest election brouhaha why the topic never seems to come up when all the talking heads are seated around the table. I haven't heard anyone discuss the fact that Democrats in power have moved away from their base and have spent months on end trying to please a handful of Republicans so, I guess, they can all sit in a circle, sing kumbayah and Obama can run on bipartisanship in 2012. Baloney.