Who Is Responsible for the Progressive "Enthusiasm Gap?" by David Sirota

[Better Believe It]

Who Is Responsible for the Progressive "Enthusiasm Gap?"
by David Sirota
David Sirota is a bestselling author whose newest book is "The Uprising." He is a fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network-both nonpartisan organizations. Sirota was once US Senator Bernie Sanders' spokesperson.
September 20, 2010

One one side are Democratic partisans who insist the gap exists because some progressive activists and media voices (ie. the so-called "Professional Left") have been too critical of the Obama administration and too insistent that President Obama fulfill - or at least actually try to fulfill - his basic campaign promises. The underlying assumption on this side is that Democratic voters are largely stupid fools who simply follow voting orders from a handful of activists and media voices - and because those activists and media voices aren't more enthusiastic, those lobotomized voters are reflexively reflecting that lack of enthusiasm.

On the other side are those progressive activists and media voices who say progressive voters are demoralized because the Obama administration hasn't fulfilled - or even tried to fulfill - it's most basic campaign promises. This side sees voters as fairly intelligent - or, at least intelligent enough to make voting decisions based on an analysis of concrete issues, rather than simply on orders from activists and media voices. As just one example, this side sees this story in the New York Times (Excerpt posted below) about union members being unenthused about the election as a reflection of those union members' displeasure with the Obama administration's weak economic policies and failure to champion the Employee Free Choice Act - not as a reflection of those union members being under the mesmerizing spell of the tiny handful of bloggers, columnists, activsts and MSNBC hosts who have dared to report the inconvenient truths.

I, of course, happen to believe that the latter side is correct, and I believe that because I think A) Democratic voters are pretty smart and B) the handful of progressive voices/activists that have substantively criticized the Obama administration have far less power to shape public opinion than the national Democratic Party machinery, the White House political apparatus, and the bully pulpit of the presidency. The idea that, say, Glenn Greenwald or Jane Hamsher or Bill McKibben or Rachel Maddow or me or anyone else slandered as the "Professional Left" is somehow responsible for public opinion trends among the national Democratic electorate - and the White House, the Democratic Party and others are not - is, to put it mildly, quite preposterous. Sure, it's nice to imagine a world where principled progressive voices have as much or more public opinion power than the President of the United States and one of the two major political parties (not to mention their big corporate backers), but, alas, that's not the world we live in.

As Firedoglake reminds us, the president campaigned on the public option and as president cited it as one of his three foundational principles for real health care reform. Let's also remember that the White House quietly negotiated away the public option and cut deals with the pharmaceutical industry to weaken the health care bill. Let's remember, too, that the White House openly fought progressive efforts to seriously reform the Federal Reserve bank - one of the key actors in the market meltdown. The president also abandoned the cause of the Employee Free Choice Act, and, of course, didn't just fail to achieve "world peace," he massively escalated the Afghanistan war.

Read the full article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/20-6


--------------------------------------------



Unions Find Members Slow to Rally Behind Democrats
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
September 17, 2010

Labor leaders, alarmed at a possible Republican takeover of one or both houses of Congress, promise to devote a record amount of money and manpower to helping Democrats stave off disaster. But political analysts, and union leaders themselves, say that their efforts may not be enough because union members, like other important parts of the Democratic base, are not feeling particularly enthusiastic about the party — a reality that, in turn, further dampens the Democrats’ chances of holding onto their Congressional majorities.

“The problem for us is to really re-excite the rank and file to the greatest degree possible,” said Gerald W. McEntee, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees and chairman of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.’s political committee. “They’ve been disappointed that the House and Senate haven’t done more, especially to create jobs.”

Patricia Elizondo, president of the 2,000-member Milwaukee local of the International Association of Machinists, fears just that.
“People have been unemployed for two years, and they’re unhappy that the health care bill was not as good as they expected,” she said. “Two years ago, I had many members going door-to-door to campaign. Now they’re saying, ‘Why should I? We supported that candidate, but he didn’t follow through.’”

For the union brass, turning around voters like Mike DeGasperis, a steelworker from Martins Ferry, Ohio, could prove difficult; two years ago he was motivated by his “anti-Bush” feelings.

“We heard everything was going to change, but there hasn’t been much change and the unemployment is still bad and the area we live in is still really depressed,” said Mr. DeGasperis, who was laid off for 10 months last year.

Read the full article at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/18/us/18labor.html

[golddigger]

1. Oh oh, this might call for another

strongly worded statement from gibbs about the "Professional Left."

[chill_wind]

2. I think they're finally worn out the insults and proxy's.

Sirota refuses to line up for the lobotomy.

As I wrote in an earlier newspaper column entitled "Whither the Sacred Campaign Promise," this tactic of denying the very legitimacy of expectations has become the standard political tactic of this White House. Rather than acknowledge expectations' basic legitimacy, this administration seems to think it can just tell voters that it either never made promises it clearly made or that voters are immature children the minimal things they expect. The calculation, as mentioned above, is that voters are so stupid and lobotomized they will submit to pure historical revisionism and brainwashing - they will, in short, feel crazy for even thinking more could be done than the White House is doing.

[Ken Burch]

53. From Gibbs? Oh, you mean "The Professional Schmuck"?

n/t.

[Edweird]

3. David Sirota went under the bus when he compared Candidate Obama to President Obama.

The truth can be painful.

[sabrina 1]

51. He's got a lot of company under the bus. Glenn Greenwald

and so many other previously respected Progressives are all now 'whiners'!

After the way they pretended that Obama didn't 'run on' issues people clearly remember him running on, do they really think anyone is going to trust anything they say this time?

The attitude has been 'you voted for him so you should have known' is not a good way to get people enthusiastic the next time. They simply can't be trusted now.

[tavalon]

61. It's getting damn crowded under here

I wish a few of us could get a little help getting out from under this damn bus.

[blindpig]

4. All the talk in the world don't mean shit.

It is actions, or lack thereof, which have brought this about...

The continued sucking up to the financial sector when they should be stomping on it...

The hideous health care plan which takes more than it gives...

The humiliating subservience to British Petroleum....

The 'semantic' withdrawal from Iraq and expanded aggression in Afghanistan...

The Deficit Commission packed with reactionary gas bags....

The frenzied feeding of the teachers and school children of America into the maw of Capitalism...

Unemployment, unemployment, unemployment. Where is the massive jobs program, a modern day WPA?

Where is the motivation for enthusiaism?

[bobbolink]

31. We told them this the last two years, and in return we got shit on.

They dug the hole, let them figure out how to extract themselves from it.

[phasma ex machina]

64. Unfortunately, the powers-that-be actually dug that hole for the masses.

They want little people to just shut up, go into the hole, and die. On a good day the powers-that-be might even shovel some dirt on top of the corpses. To mitigate the stench, you see.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

5. I agree with Mr. Sirota --

It's as plain as day to anyone who has been paying attention.

[EFerrari]

26. I have the solution right here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp_6k-mdNT0

[hfojvt]

6. much as I like m-m-m-my Sirota, he goes off track in his first paragraph

"The underlying assumption on this side is that Democratic voters are largely stupid fools who simply follow voting orders from a handful of activists and media voices - and because those activists and media voices aren't more enthusiastic, those lobotomized voters are reflexively reflecting that lack of enthusiasm."


That's a nice bullshit line, and it sorta illustrates the problem. What does Sirota do there? He creates a strawman where the underlying message is that "Obama, and other leading Democrats, hate and/or have contempt for people on the left".

Nobody ever said, or implied, that leftists are "simply following orders". No, what they are doing, what you, dear reader, are doing, is either swallowing or being drowned by a rising tide of propaganda. Propaganda from people who are trusted because they used to be eloquent voices against the Bush administration and Bush/Republican policies. But now instead of bashing Republicans, these voices have spent twenty two months bashing Obama, from his cabinet picks to Rick Warren to the stimulus to Sotomayor to HCR to Kagan to the deficit commission to CC reform to wall street reform.

Yes, people do get worn down by the daily negativity as it is once again pointed out that the glass is less than completely full, nay, that it has been sprayed with chemical dispersants and dumped in our laps. And yes there is a reason for our anger because we ARE really getting beat by big money and their Republican stooges. Our team is losing, but instead of directing our anger at the opposing side, we are instead encouraged to be Monday morning quarterbacks. If only, we say, Obama had stood up for single payer it would have passed last year in August. Obama would have much higher approval ratings, we say, if only he had called more American voters racists.

Okay, those are strawman arguments, but hey, what is good for Sirota is good for me too, and mine are only slight exxagerations for effect (and also some comic relief and plus I am admitting it).

As for the power of the professional left. No, it still cannot sway enough people to stop a war in Iraq, but it can discourage enough people to lose an election (see: Nader, Ralph A). Plus, the M$M and the RNM have been on the same side as the professional left pounding at the general public about how important and riled up the tea party is and they have been making the somewhat self-fulfilling prophecy of a Republican landslide since the victory of Scott Brown.

I said it many months ago and I will say it again to Sirota and whoever. Don't spend all your time saying "Obama sucks. Obama sucks. Obama sucks" as Sirota does here and then think you can wash your hands of a democratic electoral defeat this fall. No, you were not an Atlas moving the entire world, but you sure as hell were not part of the solution.

[Hello_Kitty]

12. Ah yes, the "blame the dirty fucking hippies" meme has started.

I see you're all ready to go with it.

Say, what did YOU do to help elect Dems this past weekend? I canvassed for local and statewide Dems both Saturday and Sunday. You?

[hfojvt]

19. I think of myself as a hippie

and Nader as a millionaire celebrity.

I do things, here and there. For starters, I ran for congress http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=153x9552

This week, I worked at the local Democratic headquarters on Wednesday from 11-1 and 3-5: 15, Thursday from 11: 15 - 5: 15, Friday from 11 to 5 and Saturday from 11 to 4.

I also maintain this website, which I created and sometimes pay for http://www.lvcodem.com/1.html and have duties as treasurer and send out the email notices, and wrote this letter to the editor http://www.leavenworthtimes.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x863079978/Press-not-doing-job

Not that it matters much, because we are gonna lose most races probably except for the state legislature. The point is not so much about me and you as it is about me, you, Jane Hamsher and David Sirota. What did Sirota do this weekend besides write this piece which claims "Obama has contempt for and has betrayed the left"?

[Hello_Kitty]

21. Glad to see you're active

Most of the time when I ask the scolds what they're actually doing I get crickets or a nasty response.

[phasma ex machina]

66. Others think of me as a hippie. nt

[tavalon]

62. I've seen and heard the contempt for the left from this administration more than once

Should I believe them or my lying eyes and ears? Hmmmmm?

The Democrats are getting my vote just to spite them. But they aren't getting any of my GOTV or other help. I know abused spouse when I see it and my even voting for them is a line I know I shouldn't cross but I am. My line in the sand is right there, no further. To vote for the ones who continually verbally abuse me and only occasionally slap me around instead of the ones who beat the shit out of me every day is pretty much as far as I go. If I had a third option, I would go there. But there isn't, so I can't.

[Better Believe It]

16. Those damn professional left-wing propagandists should STFU. Go get em!

Not that's a real strawman!

[hfojvt]

43. that is not the only alternative

I'll repeat myself

at the risk of being rude

there must be 50 ways to leave your lover


"Look, I share a desire to move both Obama and the Democratic Party to the left. I really do, but I don't think a strategy of constantly castigating them for not being progressive enough is a way to accomplish that. I think that if people came to DU and got information, they might walk away thinking "wow, single payer really is better" or "wow, Reaganomics really does suck (if I may put forward my own not so humble attempts in this regard http://journals.democraticunderground.com/... ). Instead they walk away thinking things like "wow, Obama and Democrats really do suck (thus why bother electing them)" or "wow, liberals really are arrogant and hateful". It seems to me we are our own worst enemy in moving the country in the right direction.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127

What if the professional left, instead of stirring up the left with stories of "How does Obama hate and betray you? Let me count the ways." What if, instead, they fought against the real enemy - the Republicans and the corporations and ultra-rich?

"Those data describe a social revolution. In the 1970s, the top one percent received eight percent of national income. By 2007, their share had tripled, to 23 percent. Herbert went on to state a concomitant point: “A male worker earning the median wage in 2007 earned less than the median wage, adjusted for inflation, of a male worker 30 years earlier.”

The rich have gotten a great deal richer. Everyone else has stood still.

At Slate, Timothy Noah has completed his series about this massive rise in inequality. We’ll likely discuss his work in the coming weeks. For now, we’ll only suggest that you ask yourself this:

In the face of that staggering social revolution, are you aware of any politics or political messaging on the left which has tried to encompass this revolution? Have liberal entities even tried to make the public aware of this change? Have liberal entities tried to build political frameworks in which average people of the left, the center and the right can see their obvious common interest in confronting this revolution?

Actually, no—you have not. And by the way: Average people of the left and the right are the joint victims on this vast grab of wealth at the top. Progressives will never be able to address this revolution as long as average people are split into two warring camps, with big dumb nuts like Ed Schultz and Sean Hannity encouraging the two rival tribes to despise one another.

Hannity serves the interests of wealth and power. Whose interests does Ed Schultz serve?"

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh091710.shtml

Actually now we are four warring camps. Not just the Jets and the Sharks, but the Jets are split into Woodchucks and BOGs and the Sharks are split into teahadists and old guard.

[Better Believe It]

46. ""How does Obama hate and betray you? Let me count the ways." I missed that story. Provide a link

Or is it just exaggerated political rhetoric you're posting?

[hfojvt]

47. to quote the old Palmolive commericals - you are soaking in it

the OP is an example of such par excellance

Right in the first paragraph he states that Obama, or defenders of Obama think the left is stupid. Then he brings out this handy-dandy list of Obama failures/betrayals

"As Firedoglake reminds us, the president campaigned on the public option and as president cited it as one of his three foundational principles for real health care reform. Let's also remember that the White House quietly negotiated away the public option and cut deals with the pharmaceutical industry to weaken the health care bill. Let's remember, too, that the White House openly fought progressive efforts to seriously reform the Federal Reserve bank - one of the key actors in the market meltdown. The president also abandoned the cause of the Employee Free Choice Act, and, of course, didn't just fail to achieve "world peace," he massively escalated the Afghanistan war."

And there are several threads a lot like that making the greatest page and the front page of DU every day - there have been for most of the last year.

"Let's remember" every day how bad Obama is doing as a President, because, apparently, it will inspire us to go out and win this fall.

If you check my earlier link, it would be possible to remember too, how much a certain baseball player sucks. Let's remember how many double plays Hank Aaron hit into. Let's remember how many times Reggie Jackson struck out. Let's remember all the bad, because in this way people will be inspired to never bother voting for or supporting Democrats ever again. And we will all live happily ever after.

Sheesh. If Sirota and FDL didn't already exist, the RNC would be wise to create them.

[Better Believe It]

50. The Obama singles have been few and far between. Still waiting for a home run or two.

If the average American working person disagres with progressives and believe that Congress and the White House have done a fine job for working people the Democrats will pick up more seats in the House and Senate this November.

The people will decide.

Not you.

Not me.

Not a few liberal/progressive internet bloggers and commentators.

Progressives don't "control" the Democratic Party.

Your guys (and women) do.

How do you think they'll do in this election?

If not well, don't blame progressives.

Look at the people presently leading the Democratic Party.

We didn't create this mess.

[BzaDem]

65. You are ruling out the possibility that independents are voting against us 2-1

because we are not conservative enough (not too conservative).

Of course, I don't think we should become more conservative. But that doesn't mean the reason doesn't exist. The magical large group you keep speaking of (that is voting for Republicans because Democrats haven't been progressive enough) simply doesn't exist.

[EFerrari]

34. No, it's not a straw man to say the White House has shown contempt for the left

and by extension, for the voters they believe are magically spellbound by the "professional left". It's only a straw man if it isn't true.

[hfojvt]

42. it's only true if "magically spellbound"

is the only possible theory

Yet note how many here will rush to defend Sirota's spurious argument. Note how many here are all goo goo eyed about the useless LarryO. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/130

This is what I wrote 8 months ago, and I still think it is true

"How do progressives get disillusioned? They come to DU where they can read about how bad the Obama administration is.

Did I say bad? That's not nearly a strong enough term. The Obama administration is not just bad, according to many threads and front page articles on DU. The Obama administration is corrupt, sold out, just like the Bush administration. Worse than worthless, because instead of accomplishing nothing, they accomplish giant giveaways to the corporations. Plus, they lie all the time.

This negativity is bound to build on itself. Let her read twenty or thirty negative stories per day and even Pollyanna is gonna turn into Cassandra."

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/130

Gloomers and discouraged people on the left do not have to be "spellbound". They could just be overwhelmed.

[BlueCheese]

45. I enjoy your posts...

... and admire your activism.

Perhaps you're right. I think liberal criticism of Obama comes from two vague groups of people--first, those who think that the current crop of Democrats can still be a force for good if only they were pushed enough, and second, those who have become disillusioned to the point they tend to be skeptical about Obama and Congress by default. Maybe the second group is simply farther along the path than the first. I don't know. It's all a mess right now.

[rusty fender]

56. Yeah, it was people like Sirota who escalated the war

in Afghanistan; it was people like Greenwald who abandoned the public option purposefully; it was people like Jane Hamsher who still defends DOMA. They're the ones causing the dissent, not the disillusioned Obama voters.:eyes:

[mulsh]

7. um perhaps "journalists" like Sirota are responcible.

I know that in my case I'm sick of all of the so-called "journalists", pundits, talking heads, etc on all sides of politics. I'm even sick of guys I enjoy reading, admire and tend to agree with like Mr. Sirota.

[Fumesucker]

8. The drug testing will continue until morale improves..

Thank you sir, may I have another?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdFLPn30dvQ

[nashville_brook]

32. yoink!

:rofl:

[stray cat]

9. Blame anyone you want but the better question: Who loses if the GOP wins

is not my fault worth living under GOP rule

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. The voters wanted "Change and hope". They got pablum and politics-as-usual.

Obama lost the voters when the nifty slogans and promises proved to be false advertising.

[bobbolink]

36. Those slogans were a national ink-blot test. Everyone could project on them what

they wanted.

It got him in office, but the followup was missing, and people can only be focused on ink blots for so long.

It is all very tragic.

We missed the one chance we had.

TRAGEDY.

[Mojorabbit]

58. +10000 nt

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[Ozymanithrax]

15. Actually, if Democrats should lose the House and the Senate...

It will feel like 2004 all over again. We are, after all, united by our misery and prefer bitching at the Republicans in power to putting people in power that might do a tiny bit of good.

We will be brought together to bitch about our powerlessness. Isn't that a good thing?

[Better Believe It]

17. Doesn't it seem that we're pretty much powerless now?

Who is calling the shots in Washington?

Wall Street or Main Street?

[Ozymanithrax]

23. No we are not.

We control the agenda and have done a little good. I oppose the very idea of people voting for a Republican with their ass. (That is what sitting out an election amounts to.) I will, instead, vote for a Democrat with my ballot. The worst possible Democrat will be better than the best possible Republican. The message sent by a Republican victory in November is that Democrats were too liberal. I am working under the assumption that the post I answered was sarcasm. So answered with tongue in cheek, for though people would be united around here if Republicans won, that winning would be a very bad thing indeed and will send the wrong message.

[Better Believe It]

27. No matter how much any Democrats run to the right they will be called "too liberal" by Republicans

That's a given.

I mean, they call President Obama a socialist!

I don't think anyone here wants Republicans to win elections.

But, the state of the economy will dictate how this election and the 2012 election turns out.

Now I'll make a safe prediction.

If President Obama and Congress fail to end the economic crisis and Great Depression by November 2012, the Republicans will win control of Congress and the White House no matter who their candidates are.

A Democratic candidate for President, no matter who they are, can't win in 2012 if the nation is still in the grips of a Great Recession anymore than a Republican candidate for President could have won in 1932.

Who was it that said: "It's the economy, stupid!"

[Ozymanithrax]

35. The message the Democratic party will take is it was too liberal..

It doesn't matter what Republicans call us. A Republican win rewards the Republican party for going far right, for being conservative.

Anyone who does not vote wants the other side to win, they just don't care enough to get off their ass and cast a ballot for them.

And by economic definition, we did not go into a depression, we experienced a sever depression. Calling it a depression is inaccurate.

Yes, I remember the "Ragin' Cajin'."

Should a majority of those who vote elect Republicans, we poor and middle class get just what we deserve, and that is to be kicked in a hole and told to "shut the fuck up."

[bobbolink]

37. Maybe YOU aren't powerless.

But if you aren't willing to hear those who ARE powerless, then you forfeit their votes.

[Winterblues]

13. A lot of Democrats/Liberals are very disappointed in Obama but just as they(Administration) believe

We have no where else to go. Most people that pay attention would not think of not voting. Those that don't pay attention, well they don't pay attention so they are neither diappointed nor pleased..Democrats will do better than the MSM is currently prediciting but it will be in spite of Obama and not because of him...IMO

[Ozymanithrax]

14. Why are demoralized Progressives and Liberals ready to kick Fenigold out of the Senate.

Bad News for Feingold
Or the polls used in the Rasmussen version of electoralvote.com.

Note: The De-Rasmussenized version of electoralvote.com has a date of June, over 2 months old.

I mean, if this were progressive malaise against Obama, it wold seem that the last remaining progressive lion would be sitting pretty. As far as that goes, my own Senator, Boxer of California, who has fair credentials for a progressive, only recently began to beat out Fiorina in the last couple of weeks, and only by about a point, which is inside the margin of error.

Is progressive disenthusiasm so deep that it will cut off its nose to spite its face? Or is something else at work.

[Better Believe It]

22. Glen Greenwald was smeared on DU for interviewing and supporting Senator Feingold!

A card carrying member of the "professional left" was smeared and attacked on DU for interviewing Senator Feingold and writing an article urging people to donate money and time to Feingold's election campaign!

Read Greenwald's article and interview.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9157903

[Ozymanithrax]

25. I think Glen Greenwald is a piece of crap, but Senator Feingold...

is much, much better than anyone the Republicans would elect, and his record as a progressive (I define a progessives as someone who consistantly champions legislation that attempts to expand individual freedom and improve the lives of the poor and middle class) is pretty good. I disagree with some of his votes in the Senate.

[Better Believe It]

28. So do you think it was fine to attack Greenwald for urging people to support Feingold?

That sounds like irrational factionalism and extreme sectarianism to me.

[Ozymanithrax]

38. No, I think Greewald is a piece of crap, not that he was wrong for urging...

people to vote for Feingold. Even a pile of crap can, occasionally, be right.

[nashville_brook]

33. why do you think "greenwald is a piece of crap"?

[Ozymanithrax]

40. His tinfoil hat oppoisiton to the Health Care bill brought him to my attention...

I also think that FDL is crap. Though, if FDL supports Feingold, FDL is correct in this one instance.

[Better Believe It]

41. Well, I don't support taxing health care benefits and do support single payer or at least a strong

public option.

How about you?

[Ozymanithrax]

48. I support the Health care bill. It will do a lot of good, and is a progressive piece of legislation

A public option would have been nice but was doomed in the Senate as it existed. That much was clear from the beginning. I suspect, that in the future a public option, or better, Medicare for all, will eventually become the rule. Our system is designed to change slowly, and in this very polarized climate, the change we have seen has been close to miraculous. But we will need a lot more in the future, and that won't happen because those who claim to be progressives vote with the asses for Republicans. We are a government elected by a majority of those who vote.

[Better Believe It]

49. Well, it was pretty much written by the health insurance industry and big pharma so how could it not

be a wonderful piece of legislation.

Oh .... Obama cut a deal early on in closed door meetings with industry leaders to kill any kind of public option early on and he also agreed to tax employer based health care benefits which is a real kick in the ass to workers who enjoy decent health care coverage.

But, I guess we should just ignore the really bad points in legislation that's been called the "Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act".

30 million or more new mandatory customers for the insurance industry parasites! Nothin wrong with that!

[krabigirl]

18. Nothing Obama does surprises me...it was pretty obvious that he was for the status quo.

And escalation of war.

[bobbolink]

20. Sirota himself is partly responsible for *my* "Enthusiasm Gap"

Offline, I found out the hard way, he can be quite nasty.

I asked him to talk more about homelessness, and he was abusive about it.

It becomes clear that his main issue is marijuana.

[Better Believe It]

24. Do you have a link?

He's nasty.

Oh?

OK.

I'll believe whatever it is you claim he privately said to you.

[bobbolink]

29. You know what... I just don't do DU snarky anymore.

Believe it or don't believe it.. I really don't give a shit.

PROGRESSIVES DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT HOMELESSNESS OR POVERTY, AND THAT AIN'T GAINING THEM ANY SUPPORT FROM POOR FOLK.

Deal with it.

[Better Believe It]

39. Some people who describe themselves perhaps don't, but, most I know do care about poverty and

want the politicians to do something about it .... like put millions of fricken people to work at decent paying jobs, increase food stamps, provide shelter for the homeless, etc.,

The politicians don't seem to be paying much attention to us.

[bobbolink]

44. You can keep telling yourself that, if you want to feel better.

Don't expect poor people to buy it.

We're poor, not dumb.

[Jim Sagle]

59. We're not all like that...just the ones in power, and their sycophants.

;(

[nashville_brook]

30. big f'n k and r

[larwdem]

52. door to door

They don't need crazy liberals like me,

[RandomThoughts]

54. Welcome to DU.

Your comment is great.

it points out.

It is not about what they need.

[Better Believe It]

55. Yes. Welcome to Democratic Underground

[tavalon]

63. Nor me, not for GOTV

"Hi, Mr. ___________, I'd like to ask you to vote for ________________(D)on Novemeber 2nd, not because they have or will do a damn thing for you, because, well, let's be honest, they won't, but because __________(R) is more likely to fuck your eyesockets until they bleed."

[AtomicKitten]

57. Your mom?

[tavalon]

60. Oops, Mr. Sirota is violating the sacred agreement we all have to pretend the Emperor does

have clothes.

I suspect this won't sit well with many, but from what I've seen, the clothes, if there, are pretty flimsy.