Those who think that Obama is upset because Specter lost...

[impik]

It just shows how very little you know about Barack Obama. It's hilarious.

[kjackson227]

1. Isn't it, though. Specter kept his promise, and Obama and the WH kept their promise...

to Specter, even though they held their noses while doing it. The best person won last night, so CONGRATULATIONS TO SESTAK!

[zipplewrath]

12. Biden held his nose?

Rahm, held his nose?

Did Rahm hold his nose while he was the head of DCCC and tried to block primaries so his DLC candidates could run unopposed?

Really. I'm curious. Where does this knowledge about "holding their nose" come from since of course both Biden and Obama were very friendly with Specter during their Senate days.

[kjackson227]

17. Wow, you really dislike Rahm, don't you??? So, I guess you and...

your friends see eye-to-eye on EVERYTHING, huh? By your standards, all Dems are monolithic, or should be.

[zipplewrath]

19. The DLC

He's just a symptom.

[roguevalley]

70. no, they aren't monolithic but it would be nice if they were dems.

[tavalon]

2. Hi, Rahm

I bet you didn't get much sleep last night, huh?

[jefferson_dem]

5. Cute.

Snark aside ... how, exactly, do you disagree with the OP?

[tavalon]

6. I haven't seen anyone mention that Obama is upset

I have seen plenty of people mentioning that he should pay close attention to what happened last night. And the poster's obvious close friendship with Obama, thereby allowing him to know exactly how Obama is feeling reminded me of Rahm.

I'm quite sure Rahm isn't reading DU. We're the fucking retards, remember?

[havocmom]

8. LOL

Fellow retard havocmom agrees with you

[jefferson_dem]

24. Ah, got it.

Thanks for clarifying.

Note: "We're" not the retards. I don't condone the disparaging label - but I didn't oppose sensible ... "progressive" ... health care reform.

[tavalon]

27. I'm not condoning it, I'm reminding people that Rahm never

apologized to the liberals he called retarded. He apologized to the folks at Special Olympics, and he wasn't even talking about them, he was dissing us.

[donco6]

Proud retard Donco6, concurs. n/t

[Cha]

57. I saw lots of posts last night how the White

House is losing sleep..HA. The White House always backs the incumbant and this was no excepton. We'll see how Specter votes until January.

They will be backing Sestak now.

[jefferson_dem]

3. It's all so silly.

It's also obvious to everyone who's been paying attention and knows politics. Specter's "endorsement" was payback for supporting Obama's agenda. Those promoting the "Obama's loss" narrative are full of shit and they know it.

[RoyGBiv]

7. "knows politics"

Aye, there's the rub.

So very many political junkies today do not actually "know" politics and so they build their self-affirming narratives that have very little connection to the real world.

It makes me wonder sometimes what people do with their lives. "Politics" exists outside the arena of government institutions. I don't know how anyone manages to do anything without some basic understanding of this and an ability to play the part. Politics is a game. Whether one likes the game is irrelevant. I certainly don't like pretending my boss is an intelligent human being, but I really do like to get the paycheck at the end of the pay period, so I do. I, in fact, do precisely what I have to do to achieve my own goals, which sometimes includes doing things that in an ideal world I wouldn't have to.

Haven't found that ideal world yet ...

[zeemike]

29. Perhaps you should start looking.

And imagining for yourself just what that would be...If we could all do that we just might be able to create it.

[RoyGBiv]

30. I have better things to do ...

Fairy tales were fun when I was a kid.

[zeemike]

45. then you will always be a slave to it.

And always have to kiss someones ass to survive.

[Cha]

58. No he won't ..that's your interpretation.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. So what you are saying is that Obama's word is not always

honest. That he endorsed, but that is without meaning, and so in the future, as in the past, when he says 'fierce advocate' he might, as you say, mean the opposite. This is amusing, because of the inconsistency. The religion that Obama and his wife claim is the reason that they support hate preachers and oppose equal rights very clearly says that one's word must be as honest, clear and direct as possible, that such tactics as you describe are horrible errors, condemned by the Christ, who said not a word against gay people. So you are saying that Obama does not have any respect for that faith in reality, that he rejects the most basic teachings of that faith, while claiming to follow it to the homophobic letter.
So his words and his faith are without actual meaning, and what he says is not what he means. This is your idea of 'defending' him over Arlen's loss? Arlen is a Republican. We are Democrats. That is what you see here. Democrats voting for a Democrat. Against the spoken, but according to you mendacious, wishes. He said he wanted Arlen, but he meant he didn't, because Christians are allowed to lie for advantage, or some such untenable crap.
He's the rabbi eating a pork sandwich, telling others to eat kosher. A hypocrite.

[jefferson_dem]

23. Exquisite rant

Mostly all nonsense ... but well drafted!

[zipplewrath]

32. Hyperbole, maybe

But he is making a reference to a larger problem around here. The simple explanation is called "rationalization".

When Obama does something unpopular, it is represented as some how being force upon him, or him being pragmatic.

When he does something popular, he is being principaled.

When he says something popular, he is being articulate, or forceful.

When he says something unpopular, he is just being pragmatic, or political.

The problem with that is when he says "he is an ardent supporter of gay rights", how do we know if this is the same as suggesting he "loves Arlen" or "supports the public option"?

[kjackson227]

25. Wow, you need to stop drinking the haterade, NOW! Well, ladies...

and gentlemen, it seems we're going ALL THE WAY BACK to the presidential campaign, AGAIN. Funny, I thought it was OVER and OBAMA won. Oh, he did win (and this country is better because of it)... so GET OVER IT!

[donco6]

50. You addressed nothing in the post.

Therefore, your message is without meaning.

[kjackson227]

76. The post isn't worth addressing...

this road has been traveled once before... No need in going back. This country is PROGRESSING, and that's all that matters.

I get that it's hard for you to understand, but try to keep up.

[donco6]

77. I guess you didn't follow the "I will not be condescending" thread.

No matter. It wouldn't apply to you anyway.

[frylock]

67. get over it..

sounds so familiar. hmmmmn...

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[JTFrog]

22. +1000

[Mass]

4. And you know what he thinks? How clairvoyant you are!

Or do you know him personally and did he tell you so? These claims, from one side or another, to know what people think, always amaze me. How childish of you!

[HereSince1628]

9. I was thinking about the clarivoyance and then I thought, nah

it's a social phenomenon--most of what we read around here of what Obama is thinking is invented as needed to suit the argument at hand...

[zipplewrath]

10. And from whence does your knowledge emminate?

I'm curious, considering that Specter is a personal friend of Biden's, and Obama was very friendly with both of them while he was a Senator, how you know this?

[Lord Helmet]

73. spell check is your friend

but it doesn't work if you don't use it

[Jennicut]

11. Obama backed Specter because he switched. That was most likely the deal.

He had to withstand backing the guy who lost in the primary but he kept his end up of the deal. I think Obama would like Sestak's background as a moderate Dem. Their views are not far apart at all. But something tells me Obama and co were not in love with Sestak's personality. Actually, that race was between two cold, unlikable men. I would have voted for Sestak because, well, he is not a former Republican.

[zipplewrath]

14. What Obama "had" to do

Specter needed to run as a democrat. Go back and review the press at the time. He was out as a republican, after his stimulus vote, period. An independent run was widely seen as a losing proposition because at best he'd split the democratic vote and barely pick up much GOP vote.

The White House only "had" to offer to not pursue a primary challenger. They didn't "have" to offer OFA. They didn't have to offer BOTH presidential AND VP appearances. They didn't have to offer overt fund raising.

And it's dubious, in the end, that they had to offer that much. Anything they offered would have been to get him to switch EARLIER. But the votes he made, he was going to HAVE to make in order to run as a democrat, and he had to run as a democrat.

[Jennicut]

16. Oh, Obama and Biden both liked Specter. They were friends.

Is that shocking to anyone? Dems and Rethugs used to get along better. Was Sestak what PA voters wanted? He is an actual Dem, so they rejected someone trying to play Dem. I would have too.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. And you know what the President is feeling?

Because you are so very close? Does Michelle know?

[rpannier]

15. I don't think he's upset

He may be disappointed.
That I don't know.
But the disappointment would be more on a personal level
Same with Biden

If they like Specter personally, then yes they are disappointed.
I'm sure Biden more-so than Obama

But they're politicians and everyone played their part
Specter went out fighting
Obama and Biden beat the drum and waved the banner
Sestak took the victory
Specter has agreed to support Sestak

It all worked out fine (at least for now)

[zipplewrath]

20. Thanks to mainline democrats

The local democrats weren't having any of this. Despite national support, including unions, the people spoke.

One would only hope that at the national level, people will take notice. I'm dubious they will though.

And make no mistake, Obama preferred to have Specter.

If that is your definition of "fine", well.... Okay.

[rpannier]

28. My definition of fine is

Everyone did what they said they were going to and Sestak won (Sestak being the guy I donated money to)

So 'yes' it worked out fine

Should Sestak win in November, and I believe he will, then I will remove the 'for now' caveat.

As to whether Obama is very upset -- I doubt that.
Very upset is a bit much

As I said, disappointed 'yes'
But it's not like Sestak ran on a platform that was anti-Obama or trying to be like Coburn

[zipplewrath]

31. Okay

Mine would have been "Obama now gets a clue". But whatever.

[rpannier]

34. I think the only way you will know that is to watch Arkansas for the next 3 weeks

If he jumps into that race with both feet then probably not

If he stays a respectable distance -- then he's playing the politician. Covering all bases

If he stays away -- He got the message

[zipplewrath]

39. I guess the forth is not an option

Suggesting that maybe the challenger would be preferred?

Guess we can't do that. Or does he really want Lincoln?

[rpannier]

72. I wish he'd support Halter

But I don't think that's gonna happen

[bowens43]

21. So you're saying Obama is a liar?

That when he showed support for Spector he was lying to everyone? That he really wasn't supporting him?

and you're ok with that?

[vaberella]

26. I thought the Democrat or Republican Presidents normally support incumbents of their party.

Not really for any sort of measure. When the Presidents tend to speak about the candidates it's in rather abstract ways. It doesn't make him a liar, it makes him a politician. Cause if he didn't support Specter and Specter won anyway he'd have problems with votes because Specter holds some chairs. Sestak is walking in as a n00b with no seats on committees...although O does need his vote.

[dionysus]

38. they'll find any reason, no matter how stupid, to call him a liar, republican, ect ect.

i wonder what it's like to loathe someone 24/7 and have to cry about it day, after day, after day, after day....

[zipplewrath]

40. Not exactly

In primaries, the White House rarely "takes sides", overtly anyway. Make no mistake, they recruit people to run, they help with fund raising, etc. But it is a tad rare to get involved directly with a primary, especially having the POTUS show up, much less have OFA send out letters. One "tool" presidents have is the ability to undercut you or support you in your relection, and they can do this without leaving any finger prints. Congressmen especially know this. It is a powerful tool of enforcing discipline within the party.

For many of the reasons you outline, getting openly involved is problematic. How can he now go into PA and tell folks "I luv me some Sestak"? Of course, Obama can still help Sestak raise money, and probably should since Obana ran up his primary expenses.

[vaberella]

52. However in most of the cases..

Let's be realistic here. You know as well as I do that major votes are coming up. Obama wants to get a lot done just in case the elections go sour in November for Dems. Specter is a loose canon. For political reasons he went from being a Repub to being a Dem. Yeah, many of us would look down at the President because Specter has something over him. But anyone knows politics, knows very well that some of these measures I needed and he needs all Dems on his side. If he didn't come when Specter needed him---like during the primaries---he could very well turn of us. Of course we can't be sure he still won't do that--but Obama upheld is promise and I suspect Specter is a man by his word, even if he's not one by his political leaning (he should have been an independent). Anyway, I hold him in higher standing than Lieberman.

[zipplewrath]

54. I don't know why

Go back and watch his performance in the Anita Hill hearings.

Obama willingly gave him way more support than he had to.

I think it is absolutely hillarious how his supporters want to claim he was somehow forced into these activities by a guy that was desperate to get re-elected.

I've never seen so much straw grasping in my life.

[phleshdef]

48. Only if every politician that supports someone they didn't endorse is a liar.

Your absurdity fails.

[Beacool]

66. No, he's just a politician.

They are all full of sh***.....

:shrug:

[cherokeeprogressive]

74. More truth cannot be found in any post on this thread n/t

[Tailormyst]

33. I don't know what he thinks.

and I no longer care.

[bigwillq]

36. Congrats to Sestak!!

The Democratic nominee for PAs senate seat!!! :bounce:

[saltpoint]

37. There were hints a couple weeks ago that the White House was aware that

Specter was in trouble.

A flurry of phone calls to Dem County folks across Pennsylvania from the White House likely painted the picture in the weeks prior to last night's big win for Sestak.

We heard tell of Rendell's influence and the "Rendell machine" on behalf of Specter, but it seems that Pennsylvania Democrats, especially undecided ones, just broke for Sestak. I didn't hear any of them begging Arlen Specter to change parties. So he was in some respects an uninvited guest suddenly given first-class seating on the plane. County Dem chairs would have taken an early sounding of their crew and likely told the White House privately that not everyone is on board with this Specter thing, and that Sestak enjoyed considerable support.

[QC]

41. I meant to do that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJXU7EVXs2A

[tekisui]

42. Vulcan Chess!

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

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

[harun]

43. I don't care if he is upset about it or not, just that he got the message.

[Cha]

59. The White House backs the incumbant

and it was quid pro quo for Arlen..now it's over but they still have his vote until January and they'll be backing Sestak to get fresh Democratic blood in the Senate.

[freddie mertz]

60. And LOSES!

Good times!

:headbang: :fistbump:

[Renew Deal]

46. I agree.

;)

[Fire1]

47. True that! n/t

[freddie mertz]

49. He should be upset.

His political operation got squashed.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Clio the Leo]

53. Sure is. NT

[Arkana]

55. Yeah, I don't think anyone in the White House is shedding any tears this morning.

There's a reason they cut Arlen loose a few weeks ago.

[freddie mertz]

61. Not on the TeeVee they didn't.

It was " I love Arlen Specter" every ad break all week.

History: Get me rewrite!

[Arkana]

62. I was talking more about Obama's refusal to fly to PA and hold a rally

for Specter, but carry on with the angry train.

[freddie mertz]

63. That is when they knew he was losing.

Pure damage control on the part of the president and his team.

Nothing noble about it whatsoever.

IMHO, he could (and should) have anticipated the revulsion so many of us felt when they tried to ram this down our throat.

[Cha]

65. Life is good

and it only takes having a sea of ignores to look at with Lots of Oases like you and the others on the thread.:fistbump:

[cherokeeprogressive]

75. A few weeks ago? Didn't VP Biden go on the radio in PA last week in support of Specter?

Was Joe going rogue?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

64. Oh well

I think he'll be more interested in our Democratic Party candidate winning in the next election.

[Jade Fox]

68. Sitting Presidents are obliged....

to support incumbents, in the interests of a public show of Party unity.

It doesn't mean much.

[NJmaverick]

69. K & R!

[Dr Fate]

71. Yes- it's obvious that he would have been happy no matter who won.

;)