I have not been Insulted. You Don't Speak for me!

[Perky]

You were not listening. you were not reading. This president has always has a Center-Left Agenda. With an emphasis on Center. He has had to negotiate an ugly lying opposition party; Blue Dogs; and still mollify the vocal antipathy of the "professional left" who disdain any hint of incrementalism in either policy or politics and tend to love the sound of their own voice and words far more than Honest to God change. Those who are insulted by the amount progress of the two years are stuck in their own myopic reality of what a Democrat is.

Just how would you define the base? Do Hispanic Americans think just like you? Rust Belt Dems? African Americans? Suburban Soccer Moms? The base of the Democratic party has many many different types of members across a wide spectrum of political views depending on the issue.

I grant you the right to be insulted by what this President has said and accomplished. But the statement that the "base of the party" has been insulted is both incredibly asinine and incredibly clueless.

The only definition of "Base" that is acceptable and accurate is "Everyone who is a dependable democratic vote, when they vote". While that may encompass a whole lot more people and a whole lot more of the political spectrum than you might want to admit, it is accurate. If you think it is not, then your tent is too small and you might as well start the "Tea Party Left" because you are not helping the party grow, you are imposing purity tests.


YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME ON DU OR ANYWHERE ELSE!

[corkhead]

1. AMEN! K & R

[ellie]

2. Thank you.

[TheWraith]

3. Amen Perky! Very well said.

Particularly "who disdain any hint of incrementalism in either policy or politics and tend to love the sound of their own voice". Bravo, and thank you.

[DevonRex]

4. As far as I'm concerned, if a person doesn't vote Dem, that person is NOT a Dem.

If they stay home or vote third party, they aren't the Democratic Party base. So I agree with you completely.

[young but wise]

5. Well said.

:yourock:

[jaxx]

6. Let me add my K&R to this.

Very well said....and thanks.

[nevergiveup]

7. I am not insulted either.

I find all the hullabaloo about this rather silly.

[Dawgs]

8. K&R. I'm not sure if it's sensitivity or ignorance, but some are too quick to react.

:hi:

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Dawgs]

15. Are you voting for Democrats in the midterm.

:shrug:

[mikelgb]

9. Well as part of the base it is my duty to deliver this reminder to you

on behalf of Vice President Joe Biden:

STOP WHINING!

[flyarm]

10. lucky you!!..but man many have been insulted!

Like a good portion of the Base..that now are Professional Dirty Hippy Retards who Whine. Many who have worked for and with the party for many many many years!


Howard Dean:

Addressing a telling moment in the health care debate, when White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (a frequent Dean critic) called out progressive activists for running ads against conservative Democrats, Berman asked the former DNC Chair for his reaction.



"I'm not looking to pick another fight with Rahm Emanuel, but the contempt with which he held the progressive wing of the party was devastating and incredibly demoralizing," Dean said. "That's basically saying to your own people -- you got us here, now FU."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/28/dean-called-ra...

[Hekate]

11. Obama laid out his centrist, bipartisan worldview in his keynote address at the DNC in 2004

He said that we are not a collection of Red States and Blue States, but one United States of America. What the hell did those who now complain about his bipartisanship think he meant?

As far as the current outrage goes: For once in our lifetimes we have two politicians who are telling their constituency the truth instead of pandering to their lowest instincts. Obama and Biden both are telling us the truth -- and like Fox Mulder used to say, "you can't handle it."

Kick and Rec.

Hekate

[flyarm]

14. I heard the truth loud and clear..

and I was a delegate at that convention..and was center stage for that speech..

Now I am called:

A professional dirty hippy liberal retard whiner!

nice truth.....

[Dawgs]

18. HE WASN'T SPEAKING TO YOU.

Unless you're planning to sit out the election next month or vote for the Republicans.

[flyarm]

26. the hell he wasn't!! He was talking to Move-on and Unions that worked against Blanche Lincoln

and for a candidate that was not a Blue Dog.


I have been a member of Move-On since it's inception and a 33 year member of a Union..these words were directed at two memberships I have long belonged to!

You go get your facts right. I have mine exactly right!

Oh yes and it was about the progressives , unions and liberals who who worked to replace Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln, who Joe thebuck it up.. just did Fund raising for in..drum roll please..BOSTON MASS!

[grantcart]

65. No he wasn't he was talking about FDL and the other habitual nut jobs

The President has an excellent relationship with the unions and MoveOn.org

Here is from their recent front page about Warren: http://pol.moveon.org/warren_fivethings_share.html?rc=homepage

MoveOn and the Unions are adults and know that when it comes to working in the trenches sometimes the President has committments to fulfill based on legislative agreements that you are going to end up on other sides in a primary.

Now you can whine all you want, yes that is exactly what you are doing but you should be aware of one thing;

You are on the opposite side of the Unions and Move-On if you think he was dressing them down.

Again the President was referring to "professional bloggers" like FDL and had nothing to do with Unions or Move-On.

I work with unions every day of the week. Some of the local presidents are even Republicans (i.e. law enforcement unions) and every single local president (including the Republican ones) have expressed relief at the tremendous change in administrations, even if there are still things that they want accomplished.

[Exilednight]

69. The only people the President needs to fee committed to are the people ...............

who voted him into office based on his legislative campaign promises.

Anyone who doesn't understand that doesn't understand representative democracy. End of story, PERIOD!

[Hekate]

19. Don't call yourself names. It's not nice.

[Hansel]

22. A rather extreme interpretation of the text, wouldn't you say? nt

[Whisp]

63. stretching it just a tiny bit, isn't she?

:eyes:
normal foam behaviour here for too long.
and they are pissed off raging mad that Obama is not the loser they have been claiming all along.
they stick to the same stinky script the media whores do.

*sick of it.
and glad it will be over soon.


yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Gobama!!!

[Raine1967]

27. Who 'exactly' called you that?

I'd really like to know.

[Phx_Dem]

13. On this, you speak for me too, Perky!

:patriot:

[mzmolly]

16. Hear hear!

:toast:

[Lorien]

17. Center Left? Try Right Wing agenda

Name ONE position of Obama's that's "Left".

[Perky]

20. He's Pro-choice

[rhett o rick]

50. Yeah just like he was against DADT. nm

[Dash87]

108. Pro-choice, wants to end DADT, ended war in Iraq,

trying to end the war in Afghanistan, wants Health Care reform, among other things. :)

♥

[Dr.Phool]

21. Where did this shit start?

I hear all of this whining about people threatening to not vote. Yet, I have not heard one person threaten to not vote.

[MadMaddie]

41. There have been quite a few people on DU making those

statements.

Those same DU people make destructive comments towards the President and the Democratic party. No accomplishment not one is good enough....these are the people he is talking about.

No one said this was going to be easy, in fact President Obama said it was going to be hard. It has been hard but we have to keep on plugging away.....

[rhett o rick]

51. If there are people on here that are making those statements, then respond to them not to all.

OP's like this are just as destructive as the ones they are railing against.

[MadMaddie]

64. When we respond to those individuals our responses

are deleted from DU.

[Perky]

68. Yes Sp destructive it has 40+ net recommends

I never said people did not have the right to be offended by the lst two years.I simply siad those who have been and attempt to ascribe it to the "base" have a mistaken definition of the base and if they think other wise they are arrogant and clueless.

[rhett o rick]

81. Please tell me you arent posting for numbers of rec's. nm

[Perky]

83. Of course not and quit trying to deflect the point

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. He got elected with a center-left agenda.

After the election he followed a center right agenda.

If you don't see that, then it is you who is incredibly clueless.

And you sure as shit don't speak for ME. I'm an Democrat who supports progressive ideas, equality for all citizens, the rights of the laborer to organize and for all workers to get a fair wage.

I understand that's a little complicated for the New Democrats to comprehend, but hey, I don't have to qualify my 'Democrat' as 'New' to distance myself from the principles of FDR, Truman, Kennedy and LBJ.

[Perky]

24. Or Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton?

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. Carter belongs to the first group. Clinton was one of the founders of the

New Democrats, a Democrat who gave us Republican policies like 'welfare reform', NAFTA, CAFTA, DADT, DOMA, the dismantling of Glass/Steagel...all the hallmarks of neolib imperialism.

My only problem with Carter is that he brought religion into the political debate as none before him did - and the result was the rise of the religious right. But to this day he remains the only President in my experience who did not lie to us.

[Perky]

33. Wow! NEOLIB IMPERIALISM? Carter is responsible for the Religious Right?

Really? No I mean Really?

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. How old are you? Do you REALLY not remember him injecting

"I am a born-again Christian" into the debate, something NO president before him had done?

Before Carter there WAS no religious right. They were created by RW organizers, astroturf groups before there was any such designation, in a response to Carter, and put to work a little bit under Reagan, then turned loose whole hog under Bush I. Then, like the Teabaggers of today, they took off on their own.

If Carter hadn't started it, we might not have any such thing today. A fine example of 'unintended consequences'.

[Perky]

36. So the Religious Right was the result of Jimmy Carter's faith?

wow I would like to read more from your sources on this....LOL

and again what is NEO LIB Imperialism?

[RaleighNCDUer]

37. Google it. Then check back. nt

[Perky]

39. UMmm..No. You Made the claim. Defend it with facts or sit back down N/T

[RaleighNCDUer]

76. If you don't know what neo-liberalism is, why are you in this conversation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

Read it and weep - I sure as shit do.

And, re Carter, ignoring the facts does not make them go away. There was NO religious right political movement until Carter made a big issue of his religion - and the predictable response to a religious statement is a RELIGIOUS counter-statement. Nobody much made a big thing of Nixon being a Quaker while also being a war-monger. I don't even remember Reagan making any big thing of his religion (his proxies were doing it, but not him), but even St Ronnie - who I suspect was actually agnostic - seemed to feel it was a little distasteful to wear your religion on your sleeve, and he never made personal claims about religion, only the typical generic "in god we trust" kind of crap. But in response to Carter's "I am a born-again Christian" statements, meant to imply that 'of course you can trust me', the disparate religious issues people coalesced into the politicized Moral Majority in 1979 - the likes of which we hadn't seen since before the Civil War. Even the prohibitionists at the turn of the last century were not so politicized into a single party as a religion-based organization. All as a response to Carter putting it front and center in his administration.

[Perky]

80. Are you trying tp say that Neo-liberals are the same as new Democrats or DLCers?

[SwampG8r]

88. they used to call it a brontosaurus

but now its an apatasaurus

[RaleighNCDUer]

90. LOL

[SwampG8r]

98. thanu thank youk yo

shows at 7 and 9 and if you come to the midnight show i work blue
i will be here all week folks

[Mimosa]

85. Some of us remember Carter...

Raleigh, I know what you're talking about. I was paying attention back then. ;)

I find these egotistical proclamation OPs are divisive and silly.

[Perky]

57. Yeah I thought not.

[SwampG8r]

87. interesting take

i always felt carter showed the political power of the religious in america but did not exploit it
he was the religiously approved candidate against the divorced ford but the democratic party could not capitalize on this bbecause of womens rights issues (abortion and era) this left the religious as easy prey for the right
and vice versa too i guess

[boppers]

95. "FDR, Truman, Kennedy and LBJ"

Ah, so, Warfare Democrats, who liked drafting people to be killed on far away shores?

[Radical Activist]

107. He pushed a left agenda and some of it was blocked by the Senate.

I think you're confusing what Obama pushed for with what was able to finally become law. Those are two different things, and it means that the Senate is our main problem, not Obama.

[Skittles]

109. CORRECT

and I am seriously getting tired of "progressives" who find that just A-OK

[TreasonousBastard]

25. Absolutely spot on!

[Wednesdays]

28. Haha. The base.

[onenote]

29. +1

[uponit7771]

31. AMEN!!!!

[vaberella]

32. !

You said it all Perky.

[Tarheel_Dem]

34. OUTSTANDING!!!!!

:yourock:

[slay]

38. Since your other thread about defining the "base" and who's a real Dem got locked, I'll say

It's his lack of vision and lack of real change while working more with Republicans than liberals that bothers a lot of us. Interesting to see it doesn't bother you though. Hrmm..

But it is nice to know I don't fit your definition of "base" so I guess I don't need to go out and try and campaign for them huh? Good luck with all your centrist buddies if you try to make it without us liberals cause yall just aint very motivational. At all. Obama has been a HUGE disappointment and if you don't see that, I don't think I want to be a part of your "base".

[Perky]

40. Obama'a problem is that he allowed people to project on him what they want him to be.

Yet if you read his books or read his spwwches you see the centrist thematics throughout.

[proud2BlibKansan]

43. +1

[NorthCarolina]

92. Your post is well stated, my sentiments exactly....

and it gave me an opportunity to add another DU member to my buddy list. :thumbsup:

[firedupdem]

42. K&R!!

YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME ON DU OR ANYWHERE ELSE!


Amen!

[Cognitive_Resonance]

44. Damn Right! nt

[rury]

45. K&R to the max!!

[depakid]

46. Unfortunately millions of others among our constituencies have a considerably different opinion

And find outbursts like this to be unhelpful, to say the least.

[Sheepshank]

47. I'm oblivious to the insult...

I don't internalize that which clearly wasn't addressed to me. But then I also don't consider myself a political martyr either...one who looks for great offence and redirects comments to justify an outrage.

[depakid]

48. I rather agree with the way Greenwald put it today:

Obama supporters often claim that those who object to this White House messaging are reacting emotionally and personally because they're "offended" by these criticisms. Speaking only for myself, that has nothing to do with any of this. I'm not the slightest bit "offended" when Obama officials and their apparatchiks voice these accusations. They have the same right to condemn their critics as their critics have to condemn them, and it's hardly a surprise that Obama officials harbor these thoughts about the "left." Contempt for the left is one of the unifying beliefs of the Washington establishment, which is why most conventional establishment journalists -- Maureen Dowd, Ruth Marcus, Dana Milbank -- cheered Gibbs' outburst about the "Professional Left." None of that is new; none of it is a surprise; and none of it is "offensive."

What is notable about it is what it reveals substantively. The country is drowning in a severe and worsening unemployment crisis. People are losing their homes by the millions. Income inequality continues to explode while the last vestiges of middle class security continue to erode. The Obama civil liberties record has been nothing short of a disgrace, usually equaling and sometimes surpassing the worst of the Bush/Cheney abuses.

We have to stand by and watch the Commander-in-Chief fire one gay service member after the next for their sexual orientation. The major bills touted by Obama supporters were the by-product of the very corporatist/lobbyist dominance which Obama the candidate repeatedly railed against. Rather than take responsibility for any of this, they instead dismiss criticisms and objections as petulant, childish, "irresponsible whining" -- signaling rather clearly that they think they're doing the right thing and that these criticisms are fundamentally unfair.

That is what makes these reactions significant: not that anyone's feelings are hurt by the name-calling, but that they believe that this record merits gratitude rather than valid condemnation, and that anger over the state of the country is nothing more than irresponsible whining. It's fine to tout accomplishments and try to unify the base behind them -- it's election season and they ought to be doing that -- but it's just mystifying that they think they're going to accomplish anything other than feeling better about themselves with these incessant, name-calling attacks on those who are dissatisfied with their behavior -- their policies -- in power.

Talk about "self-pitying and self-indulgent." It's just amazing to read about how union members are reluctant to work for Democratic victory because of the economic suffering they are experiencing -- or how young, first-time and minority voters see little reason to work for Democrats -- and then hear Joe Biden dismiss those concerns as "whining" and Obama deride them as "irresponsible." Democratic voters aren't unenthusiastic because they're reading too much blog criticism of the President; they're apathetic because they see what has happened in their own lives over the past 2 years and see little reason to work for those who have been in power during that time.

And it's even more baffling that they seem to believe that insulting their disappointed supporters -- rather than addressing the source of their critiques or, even better, doing something about them -- will generate enthusiasm to go vote.

More: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/2010_elections/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/09/28/obama

[Perky]

53. And posts that the entire base is insulted are just fine?

I specifically said that individuals have the right to be insulted and say they are. But it is asinine and clueless to think that the base of the party is solely composed of the ideological left and that their voice is the only ones that matter.

If you want to be the majority party, it requires a really big canvas An a reall good pole in the middle otherwise you are going to force people out from other its covering.

[polmaven]

72. Well, certainly...

Outbursts like OBAMA IS A HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT are much more helpful. I consider myself to be center/left and I have been largely pleased with the president's accomplishment to date. I also consider myself to be part of the Democratic base. Those who proclaim, on a regular basis, that he is just absolutely ineffective, and is a "disappointment" do NOT speak for me! They can complain all they like, but they complain for themselves and not in the name of "the base".

[rhett o rick]

49. Why are you going on and on about this. Every day there is a similar post. You are upset because

somebody used the word "base" not in accordance to YOUR definition: "The only definition of "Base" that is acceptable and accurate is.." The only definition???

I try to understand what your motivation is here. Are you trying to unify the party? No way. Maybe you are trying to upset a faction of the party. But why?

And why would the President let so many of his administration tell Democrats (any Democrats) to get in line and shut up? What possibly could be the motivation?

[babylonsister]

54. Why do you define what Biden said as 'shutting up'? This is

the money quote: he's not asking anyone to shut up, but to be more aware.

Democrats should "remind our base constituency to stop whining and get out there and look at the alternatives"

[Perky]

56. Precisely.

People want to feel betrayed just because that is what they want to feel.

[rhett o rick]

60. I intend to support Democrats inspite of you that continue to tell me to "stop whining" and sit down

and shut up. Do you really think that telling someone to "stop whining" will accomplish anything but build resentment?

[Perky]

62. THE OP Never said that!

[RaleighNCDUer]

91. You want to look at that?

"remind our base constituency to stop whining ..."

By that quote, it would appear that HE thinks that those who are 'whining' ARE the base.

How could you interpret it any other way?

[JoeyT]

52. Nor do you speak for us.

He's accomplished further erosion of civil liberties. That isn't center left or center. It's far right police state crap.
Breaking a whole bunch of campaign promises didn't help either. (Restoring the rule of law my ass.)

[RBInMaine]

55. POLITICAL PURITY = ZERO SENSE OF REALITY

[HughMoran]

58. Hear! Hear!

Outstanding post. :toast:

[Scurrilous]

59. K & R

:thumbsup:

[rhett o rick]

61. I have always supported Democrats* and will continue in spite of those that continue

to talk down to me. I will stop whining when we stop killing children in Afghanistan, repeal the Patriot Act, the MCA and DADT. I will stop whining when we end domestic spying that violates the Constitution, Medicare for all, and we get JOBS JOBS JOBS. We Democrats now own these things.

I will support Democrats as I have *since Nixon in spite of those that continue to go on and on about "stop whining", sit down and STFU, etc. You cant think that will be effective if your goal is to unify the party.

[grantcart]

66. nobody expected you to stop whining

[rhett o rick]

74. When Democrats stop whining, the game is over. nm

[Perky]

75. Yes.. that's a Party Message that would resonate. "Democrats: the Party of Whiners"

:sarcasm:

[rhett o rick]

78. I guess it is all in how you define whine. Some try to define "speaking up" as whining in order

to shame those speaking up into shutting up. When Democrats shut up, the game is over. I would love to know what your intent is? Do you actually think that all Democrats should follow along and not speak up? Is that what Biden and Rahm think?

[Perky]

79. I don't have the slightest problem with vigorous debate within the party

Maybe a consensus can develop or maybe it can't.

The problem I have is when any portion of the base claims that its position represents the view shared by the base as a whole and that any position taken that is a moderation of that view is a betrayal. I think it can be if not done correctly a whiny tantrum devoid of any real thought given to the political realities of the moment of the political calculus that gets played out every day up and down Pennsylvania Avenue.

Again, it is not that the position held is wrong, but rather that it is an idealistic abstraction that ultimately given the stakes involved in the midterms are best tabled. I think that what Biden was saying when he said "Buck up" It is fine to be opinionated about policy -- about where we should go -- but there comes a point where the political realities require us to suck it up for the good of the party. I think Rahm was typically unartful in his views on "Primarying" Democratic incumbents like Blanche Lincoln. But then again Rahm has never been artful...ha.

MY OP was a response to another OP which basically claimed that the whole base has been insulted. I thought it was a tantrum and one that was uninformed as to the true nature pf the base. The base is not simply made up of those holding the views expressed in "The Nation" Or on Olbermann, Maddow, or certainly Schultz on MSNBC. They certainly are not on DU or Daily KOS, or TPM. The great majority of the base, whether we care to admit it or not. is not nearly as engaged or as progressive as we might like or hope.

So when we talk about the base either in terms of "being insulted" or in terms of "getting them out to vote" we need to understand how large and diverse the party is. and at a point internal food fights need to be far more rational...Now there is obviously a point where you can't stomach the policy perogatives any more. and at that point I would say you need to find another place to hang on the internet and maybe another party, and that is ok too.


Say he has insulted the LGBT community, say he has insulted the anti-war crowd say that his policies are wrong. Shout it from the rooftops for all I care. But to say that the President or his Lieutenants and surrogates have betrayed or insulted the base as a whole is uninformed and juvenile and arrogant.

[rhett o rick]

84. So who is the base? Why are we quibbling over that? It is a distraction from our goal of winning in

November.

You said: “The problem I have is when any portion of the base claims that its position represents the view shared by the base as a whole and that any position taken that is a moderation of that view is a betrayal.” If you have a problem with someone claiming to speak for the “base”, then please address your response to them, preferably on their thread. If you write an OP please make it clear who you are chastising. You see some here are sensitive because Rahm made it clear that he was targeting “the left”. He has an agenda and my guess is that it isn’t nice. I think he deliberately (the man isn’t an idiot) wants to berate “the left” to mollify the “New-Democrats” that used to be Republicans. He wants to make it clear that Pres Obama isn’t a “lefty”. I know it sounds paranoid, and I will listen to alternate explanations.

If Biden and/or anyone else is accusing someone of “whining” they should provide concrete examples. If people say they are disappointed that we are still killing children in Afghanistan or because we cant seem to do anything about DADT, is that whining?

To me the bottom line is that we desperately need to unify Democrats to defeat Republicans. I see nothing in your OP that is working toward that goal.

[Mimosa]

86. Same here, Rhett O Rick

One thing I've figured out is that many 'new Democrats' were formerly Republicans who were repelled by the knuckledraggers who had taken over the GOP. They lean that way, so they are trying to drag the Party over to where they are more comfortable, including the 'no whining, no questions' type of authoritarian mindset. It's understandable. ;)

[Perky]

94. I appreciate all the kicks, but I think I have made myself abundantly clear in the OP

You don't unify Democrats by saying "the base is insulted" Because it is factually inaccurate, self serving and arrogant as hell. It invites disagreement on policy when we ought to table the disagreements until after the midterms.

[rhett o rick]

96. And I've made myself clear. You dont unify the party by attacking. nm

[PassingFair]

103. I'll take it over..."Democrats: the Party of Mindless Followers" n/t

[Perky]

70. I am not sure some of us want to unite the Party at all

except on their own terms and with their own agenda.

[rhett o rick]

73. That's my feeling exactly Perky. That's what Rahm has been trying to tell us. nm

[mkultra]

67. I AM THE BASE. and I am ecstatic regarding Obama.

if you don't like it you can stick it in your giant SUV, put your flag pin on and go straight to hell.

[depakid]

71. LOL- thanks for that

Needed the laugh because the assessment I'm working on is a bit depressing.

[jonnyblitz]

89. I suspect your avatar guy isn't all that ecstatic over your hero.

:crazy: :rofl:

[mkultra]

93. I suspect he sees you as a part of the right wing machine

The "angry left" is nothing but a farce created by the right to create division among the people. Now take your money and go buy a giant LED tv and a dodge ram.

[rhett o rick]

97. Angry left is a figment of your imagination. Why are you trying to disrupt the Democratic Party? nm

[mkultra]

101. its a product of someones imagination, thats for sure

republicans are an evil bunch.

[DeschutesRiver]

77. +100. Thanks for speaking up. nt

[SeattleGirl]

82. Amen, Perky!

:fistbump:

[Vinca]

99. Guess I'm just a petulant child for getting upset when I'm told to stop whining.

After all, I'm just one person and if I lose my mobility - as it appears I may - before 2014, well . . . I'm just one person. And a whiner at that. I should shut up and find some money to invest in health insurance company stock. But I'm not insulted. Hurt is more like it.

[rhett o rick]

102. It's not personal, it's politics. It's important to win over the "New Dems" at the risk of lossing

the left. Rahm isnt stupid. He hasnt been doing this just because he is nasty.

[tallahasseedem]

100. Word

;)

[niceypoo]

104. Problem is, there is no center

So, 'center left' means all alone

[angee_is_mad]

105. THANK YOU!!!!!

kick and recommend!

[Radical Activist]

106. I think he stands for taking the next step forward.

And I believe he'll keep pushing for steps forward as far left as this country is able to go in the next 6 years.