The majority of Democrats support and really like Obama - the left is not

[old mark]

large enough to matter very much. I believe the tax "deal" will pass, and that it will turn out to be a good thing - stimulate the economy and keep more cash in the hands of the low and middle class, who WILL spend it. It will extend UC to many millions of families who rely on it. The inheritance tax already has Democrats supporting it - they wanted a $7 million cut off, Obama got $10 million. Not really a big deal. The left is making noise, but in the end, it is pointless whining and posturing.

I have slammed Mr. Obama for some time for being anti-union and anti worker, but I think he is right this time and those who oppose this "deal" are wrong.
This actually supports working people as well as the millionaires we all seem to hate.


mark

[DJ13]

1. Fine, let him run in 2012 without any support from the left

Isnt that called being a Republican?

[Phx_Dem]

6. No, that's called getting the independent vote which will win him the election

without the far left.

[w4rma]

10. Independents don't volunteer. (nt)

[CakeGrrl]

47. But much hay has been made of people who STILL don't vote

If push comes to shove, that untapped potential could be tapped to offset the reduction in votes, coupled with the Independent vote, if a segment of the far Left opts to sit out 2012 or vote 3rd party.

I'll allow that there needs to be some improvement in communicating what is at stake in 2012, but it can be done as much as the far Left is expressing their being "done" with Obama.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

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

[martymar64]

57. They don't donate money either.

[Fruittree]

94. And you know this how??

[elizm]

100. Oh, YES they do!

[DJ13]

12. So you agree with Obama that an entire segment of our party should be ignored?

[Phx_Dem]

23. Much like the Republicans should ignore the teabaggers.

[w4rma]

25. Republicans can't ignore the teabaggers. They are knocking them out in primaries. (nt)

[Phx_Dem]

52. A number of progressives lost their seats as well, becoming an even

smaller group.

[w4rma]

54. Half of the DLCers lost their seats. Something like two progressives lost seats. (nt)

[GoCubsGo]

79. Those DLCers who lost their seats lost them to people to their right.

Some of them lost them to teabaggers. If Bob Ingliss, a republican, couldn't hold his seat here in South Carolina because he "wasn't conservative enough", what makes you think a progressive could win it? It's not that cut-and-dried.

[quakerboy]

68. I think you got that backwards

They actually became a much larger group, proportionally to the democrats in congress.

[treestar]

74. And then losing the general election

In fact the left would have us do exactly what the Republicans did to themselves. The Senate would have a Republican majority if the teabaggers had not shot their party in the foot.

[Meshuga]

85. Are you kidding?

The Republicans win elections because they embrace the tea party. They created an energized based that enables Republicans to win elections no matter how coo coo they are.

And comparing progressives to tea party is ridiculous. It is nothing but an ad hominem.

[Capn Sunshine]

42. Attention entire "segment" Guess what: You're NOT IN THE PARTY

if you would rather see the right gain power, along with all the damage and soul sucking than go vote you're really not "IN" the Democratic Party. Sure, you're around the Party, but you didn't come IN when we needed you most. We believe in advancing humanity, not political suicide.

It's interesting that many on this site actually think they are Democrats in a party sense. IF you want power in a party, you have to demonstrate you are needed. You have to work with the party to keep the right wing bastards at bay. Letting them win "to teach them a lesson" had NEVER resulted in the party, or the country, moving farther to the left, but the exact opposite. It's just farther down the hole we have to climb out of.

SO...since Obama, and the Democratic Party, cannot count on your turnout like the right wing can count on theirs, we must look elsewhere. The election that just happened----that was an object lesson, and the results clearly did not sink in among those who are in that "entire segment". Hey "Segment", you had a chance to remain in the game, but now, you'll all have to be content to howl from the sidelines. We need votes. We'll get them somewhere, but apparently, not from the "segment".

[derby378]

53. Mercenary politics are so unbecoming

Democratic politicans are about issues and principles, and any such politician who forgets that does so at his own peril.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

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

[treestar]

72. Yep, too high maintenance

Never going to be satisfied. Yep. Go join the socialists or some other pie in the sky party.

Yes we can win without the left. I'm sick of their claim they do all the work and get to call all the shots. That insults the voters. The left does not deliver huge flocks of sheep voters - votes that don't count and voters who views don't count to the left, who claims to have just delivered them up.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[Exilednight]

73. Because it worked so well for Al Gore. nt

[Meshuga]

84. This is the United States of America

Where the independent vote matters but the most crucial segment that needs to be energized to go out to vote is the base. Without the base the presidential nominee is toast.

I mean, I could agree with Obama and be supportive of him no matter what but I would not suggest that he should ignore the progressive base of his party. That would be electoral suicide.

I want Obama to be elected in 2012 and I will vote for him. But it will all be in vain if the base is ignored.

[WI_DEM]

34. Oh come on, Liberal democrats who used to be considered "the left" support him by better than

80% in all polls, so its stupid to assume that the president doesn't have the base of the party. DU is not the base of the democratic party.

[martymar64]

62. We'll see in November of 12 if they still like him

Until then it's stupid to predict what will happen.

[treestar]

70. We're sick of that one

We can get him elected without "the left." Quit trying to claim you are the only voters who count.

In fact why form any coalition with people who drop out as soon as they don't get exactly what they want on 100% of their issues? They will never be around next time anyway.

[Uzybone]

2. the actual left will continue to support Obama

the whiny internet/cable addicted "left" will do what it has done since January 2009.

[Dawgs]

5. YOU'RE talking to others about addiction?

You respond to every thread.

[Uzybone]

11. is there a limit sir?

Who made you the nanny?

[martymar64]

63. The same person that made you Spokesman For The Left

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Ikonoklast]

31. This.

The rest don't matter.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Dawgs]

3. The majority of Democrats have their head up their ass.

Just like most of America.

[Life Long Dem]

4. They don't seem to support him anyway

[Phx_Dem]

8. Exactly. So what difference does this bill make?

None.

[madfloridian]

7. You are correct. We do not matter.

That is the bottom line.

[AndrewP]

44. Absolutely true.

We don't matter one iota to this crowd. They will rely on the moderates to carry them to victory. They hope. I do hope it works, if only because the alternative will be one of those thugs on the right.

But I've given up that we have a collective voice with this administration.

[niceypoo]

9. "the left is not large enough to matter"

That is the most ignorant thing I have ever read on DU.

[old mark]

18. Thank you - do I get a plaque? nt

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[old mark]

46. THANKS!!! Looking forward to it....nt

[Milo_Bloom]

13. How does this "deal" "stimulate" the economy exactly?

[SomeGuyInEagan]

16. My understanding is that something will trickle down upon us.

And we are to be grateful.

[emulatorloo]

19. That is not the idea. The idea is that you will spend your tax cut on goods and services

That will create demand and jobs.

The rich won't do anything but invest, everybody knows that except for those who pretend they don't (Republicans)

[Milo_Bloom]

29. Are you talking about the 2% regressive tax cut?

[emulatorloo]

33. Bush cuts for middle class, individual tax credits, payroll tax holiday, unemployment benefits.

As to Bush tax cuts - works out like this.

$383 billion for 250,000 and less
$75 billion to top 2%

(and trust me that top 2% pisses me off)

[Milo_Bloom]

39. That's all status quo, except for the 2% regressive tax cut.

This doesn't give people extra money to spend in any amount that would matter.

The vast majority of the regressive tax cuts goes to those making the higher end of the scale, who don't spend.

[TheKentuckian]

92. How much of that is 50k and under, where almost everyone lives?

Then how many people are sharing that pie?

The whole deal is a bill of goods. No one cares about taking care of the little guy this is a few crumbs as a fig leaf to sell continuing to funnel the wealth and future wealth of the nation to those with about everything we had that wasn't nailed down and their minions who think they are going to be wealthy one day and foolishly believe they are "in the club".

We've heard this pitch before, from Bush's bullshitting ass. It sounds just as fucking stupid no matter the presenter.

This is some really stupid policy and a sham for the majority of people. The working class everyone is crying about most likely will actually pay more than this year.

Stop the bullshit. Some motherfuckers can have a Saul on the road to Damascus moment with the blowing of the wind.

Why in the world are we pretending we don't know these cuts are possibly a net drag on the economy and certainly aren't fueling it.

[Life Long Dem]

20. Trickle from the middle class

[emulatorloo]

17. Puts money in the hands of the poor and the middle class. They spend it to buy goods an services

Without the bill apparently the lowest bracket would see their taxes raised by 50%,

[Milo_Bloom]

26. That's STATUS QUO... not stimulus.

Stimulus means significantly MORE MONEY pumped into the economy. The 2% regressive tax cut he is offering isn't going to pump much money into the economy, since it will dispproportionately go to the upper incomes.

And no... it wouldn't raise taxes on anyone by 50%. It would eliminate the 10% bracket, on the first $8K made above the standard deductions, meaning all income above the standard deductions would be taxed at 15% up to 34K, instead of 2 tiers that break at 8K.

[emulatorloo]

32. CNN has a breakdown of the whole thing, which I have been looking for

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/07/news/economy/tax_cut_deal_obama/

Bush tax cuts: $458 billion. The package would extend the Bush tax cuts for everyone for two years, including two years of relief for the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax. The estimated cost would be $458 billion, according to earlier numbers from the Treasury Department.

The bulk of that cost -- $383 billion -- is for the extension of cuts for families making less than $250,000. The rest -- roughly $75 billion -- is attributable to the extension of cuts that apply to the highest income families.

The cost of extending all the tax cuts over 10 years would have been $3.7 trillion.

Unemployment benefits: $56 billion. The package would also leave in place for 13 months the option to file for extended federal unemployment benefits -- which go as high as 99 weeks in states hit hardest by job loss. The White House estimates it would cost $56 billion.

Social Security tax break: $120 billion. The package would also offer workers a payroll tax holiday worth 2 percentage points next year, so that instead of paying 6.2% on their first $106,800 of wages, they will only have to pay 4.2%. The White House estimates the measure would cost $120 billion.

Individual tax credits: $40 billion. The compromise framework would also extend for two years the increased value of a number of tax credits that benefit low- and middle-income tax filers, such as the earned income tax credit, the child credit and a revamped tax credit for college costs. The measure would cost $40 billion, the administration said.

Business tax breaks: Cost unclear. It is still not clear how many business tax breaks are in the package. Some, like an extension of the research and development credit, has drawn bipartisan support and is typically renewed annually. But also included is a new temporary option for businesses to write off 100% of their expenses in 2011. A cost estimate was not immediately available.

But Tax Analysts reported that earlier this fall the administration estimated that a 100% expensing provision proposed by Obama would cost $30 billion over 10 years. It also estimated that making the R&D credit permanent would cost $100 billion.

[Milo_Bloom]

38. So again.. where is the stimulus?

I see a bunch of Status Quo and whole lotta BS such as this line, ", including two years of relief for the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax" No one in the actual middle class has to worry about the AMT.

Extending an existing tax credit doesn't change spending habits.

Now we actually have no revenue in which to offer a REAL stimulus package.

How many times does it have to be proven that tax cuts DON'T PUSH THE ECONOMY.

Obama has left no room for new spending, since this package just puts us further into debt for non-stimulative items.

[DesertFlower]

14. i'm part of the left -- not so far left

that i would vote for kucinich for president. i do support single payer.

i still like obama. he made the deal so the unemployment would be extended and the middle class would keep the tax breaks.

[ladjf]

40. I will vote for any Democrat that is nominated except Obama. I'm

not going to make the same mistake twice. nt

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[Bluerthanblue]

22. "all you're accomplishing is pissing people off who should be on your side"

yes, they SHOULD be on "our" side. And they're already pissed off. So pissed off they're willing to let people without jobs suffer so that the "purists" can posture.

"trashing those who find fault"- oh the irony "with his latest show of capitulation".

Please listen to yourself.

:shrug:

[paulk]

41. do you have a point to make?

I think this whole "purist" argument is absolute bullshit...

what about the 99ers? what about the self employed who don't qualify for unemployment insurance? Speaking of posturing, Obama doesn't seem to be above it. Is this compromise going to help create jobs? There are not too many economists I've read so far who think so.

Most of the dissatisfaction I've seen involves Obama rolling over for the pukes again. It's going to be damn hard to put lipstick on this pig, and it's going to be even harder a year from now when unemployment is still at 10% and in 2012 when the tax cuts for the rich come up again - this time with a Republican house.

[Bluerthanblue]

45. we live in the REAL world. If you think that it is so simple to get

things done in Washington how do you explain the rise of the tea-party and the republican sweep in Nov.?

What is your plan, should we round up all the people who support republicans and destroy them? Because like it or NOT (I don't) this isn't the Democratic states of America.

The republicans, tea-party people and too many democrats on the edges don't share your wish list. They DO have a share of the power though.

What do you honestly think can be done- not for the sake of principal, or because it's the 'right' thing- what viable realistic solution do you have?

There is no way in hell the republicans are going to support any programs which will do what we need done, yet you expect Pres. Obama to somehow wave some magic wand and make it all good.

:shrug:

[Hello_Kitty]

51. Interesting how often DC is being described as "the real world" these days.

It's about as far from the real world as you can get IMHO.

[ProudDad]

69. The Republican "gains" in November

Were NO sweep -- they just regained the House...

They regained the House thanks to Dem perfidy and impotence for the last 2 years...

That's the explanation for the rise of the tea party as well...

Most Working Class folk got very little help while Obama was pandering to the Banksters...

[paulk]

75. let all the tax cuts expire

bring up the middle class tax cuts and unemployment extension in the new Congress. Bring it up over and over for the next two years. Show the American people what the Republicans are really about. Show some spine. The American people respect someone who will take a stand - even if they don't agree with it. What they won't accept is Obama's capitulation routine.


And instead of trashing the left, Obama should be out there waging war on the real enemy - the Republican Party. This milquetoast "bipartisan" routine isn't going to cut it anymore. The Republicans have publicly said they want to destroy his presidency. He needs to act accordingly.

[DJ13]

24. Yes it is disingenous by the WH

Especially when even the majority of the Independents Obama craves for a reelection dont support the tax cuts for the wealthy.

[Union Scribe]

21. Okay so that's another vote for "the left doesn't matter"

I have to say, the race between that and "the left is destroying the party" is getting pretty close. Hard to tell which is winning.

[Hello_Kitty]

49. LOL!

[tledford]

80. I love this "far left" crap.

If Richard Nixon were alive and on this forum today, there are people here who would label him "far left." *THAT* is how far to the right this country has moved in thirty years. The legacy of Ronnie666Raygun - Lucifer has prevailed.

[ProudDad]

28. A Tax Deal Fit For The Gilded Age

President Barack Obama and Congressional Republicans are ready to mortgage the American economy to billionaires in exchange for a few months of unemployment benefits. This deal is easily the gravest economic outrage of the Obama presidency to date, and signals that other political assaults on the economy are ahead.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x551755

[w4rma]

65. Obama is President Hoover's protege. (nt)

[ProudDad]

66. There was an article to that effect in an issue of Harpers last year...

Too prescient...

[lamp_shade]

30. Well said, old mark.

:hi:

[WI_DEM]

35. Liberals support Obama more than any other group except African-Americans according to polls

so the "base" if liberals are considered the base does support Obama. It's a vocal minority of DU that doesn't.

[ProudDad]

67. Progressives don't... (n/t)

[Robbins]

36. Me

I consider myself liberal Democrat.

I oppossed Iraq war from begining
Don't support escallation In Afghanstain since no matter har bad Taliban Is they did not attack us on 911,and don't support
crooked government
support Public opotion for health care reform
ProUnion
ProChoice
Support repeal of DADT
While I am fence on subject of Gay marrage oppose any effort to make It illegal
oppose Tax cuts for rich
Opposse Death Penalty

All this and I support the President.I have disagreed with him on things like no Public opotion and afghan escatilation.

What some forget that despite what some IN MSM have told people No Taxes have been raised,and the deal allowes no taxes on those
making $250 thousand or less be raised as he has campagined on.I certainly don't like the rich keeping tax cuts for 2 more years
but our side did get something out of this.

[Capn Sunshine]

43. I agree , Mark, The "LEFT" is not a real big statistic

Ever since 2001 I have continually asked, at Antiwar demonstrations, at Union actions, at "progressive " readings at Libraries and Universities, and at actual Party Meetings "Who here is a member of, or has heard of, DU?" The statistical sampling is pretty steady at 1%. ONE PERCENT. Do you understand that? Hey, there is a huge online popularity and websites like DU and FDL. But in the real world, they just don't really matter, because no one online is translating into real life. Those of you who do, save yourself some time.You don't need to post. I'm not saying you don't exist. I'm just letting you know what your numbers are nationally.


Randi Rhodes, who is, by the way, NOT a registered Democrat, says it better than me:

As for leftwing discontent, Obama’s approval rating among Democrats has held steady at about 80 percent for the past year. But you’d never know that because of Obama’s seemingly dismal approval rating among Democrats with TV talk shows or blogs. It seems Obama has a silent majority. Or maybe they just seem silent compared to all the noise that’s being made by the leftwingers who are angry with him. The people who are upset with Obama are the starry-eyed types who projected all their hopes onto him. The people who just elected him to run the country realize that he’s doing that… quite well, actually. After all, we elected Barack Obama to lead, not to go where he’s told to go.

[old mark]

48. Statistically, somewhat less than 20% of voters self identify as "liberals"...

the extreme left/progressive would be a fraction of that.

mark

Gallup poll in October stated 18% of "likely voters" call themselves "liberal"...54% self identify as conservatives.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[Hello_Kitty]

50. I like Randi and she's entitled to her opinion

But she's every bit as obnoxious as she's accusing Obama's critics of being on this. I sat and listened to her entire show where she told me what I thought and what was motivating me. She actually said of Obama critics: "It's not that you're crazy. You're just not living in the real world like I am." Which happens to be DC. She's sounding more and more like a Villager every day despite her protestations that she's an independent outsider.

[martymar64]

64. Then in 2012 we don't want to hear a peep out of you asking to donate to Obama's campaign

Since we're so irrelevant, I don't want you asking us to donate, vote or knock on doors or phone bank or anything like that for Obama.

Since we're irrelevant, then you shouldn't care what we have to say about Obama. Wew could call his Administration Bush's Third Term and that would be AOK with you because, hey, we're irrelevant!

Actually it's kind of liberating, being irrelevant. I'm sure you'll find that out soon enough under the Romney Administration starting in 2013.

[ProudDad]

71. She appears to be reverting to her roots...

her old man DID run with Goldwater...

Sounds like an authoritarian follower to me...

[tledford]

83. You're confusing Randi Rhodes with Stephanie Miller. eom

[ProudDad]

86. Ah, yes... So I did...

I got tired of Randi -- she won't let ANYONE else talk -- she just goes on and on...

She should join that 12 step group for compulsive talkers: On and On Anon...

[ProudDad]

87. Big enough to deprive the Dems of the House last month

By staying home and not working for blue-dog slime...

[martymar64]

56. Tax cuts to billionaires do not stimulate the economy. Stop spreading supply sider bullshit.

[old mark]

78. Continuing the tax cuts TO EVERYONE ELSE will add to the economy, and

I don't know anyone who wants their taxes to increase. This was coming for 10 years, and Obama and the Democrats were idiots to let it get to this point, but they did, and this might be the best thing we will get out of the mess.

Evidently, Obama still thinks the GOP cares about helping America...

You can complain about my post all you want, but at least learn to read...


mark

[polichick]

58. "The left is not large enough to matter very much"?? The prez must think so too. nt

[Umbral]

76. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the left is irrelevant, unless someone needs a scapegoat. nt

[old mark]

77. Oh, I think we will become relevant around election time, but not for long afterwards...nt

[craigmatic]

82. Without the left the party is just in it for the power. The dems need the left and vice versa.

[mikekohr]

89. And the left needs centrists and independants

Progressives account for 20% of the electorate, conservatives approx 40% of the electorate, the remaining 40% are somewhere in the middle. Do the math.

[craigmatic]

96. Where did you come up with those figures?

The millinials are going to be a liberal generation there are 78 million of them and they've shown that they vote. That is the future of this party meanwhile the number of conservatives are dying off because they're old. We have to set the ground work now to build up our base and the independents/moderatres will respect our strength and come along because we'll be in stark contrast with the republicans.

[mikekohr]

98. These Numbers Have Been Consistent For A While Now, -here's a link-

Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group Compared with 2008, more Americans "conservative" in general, and on issues

by Lydia Saad PRINCETON, NJ -- Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.
read full article:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123854/Conservatives-Maintain-Edge-Top-Ideological-Group.aspx


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You don't have to be smart to succeed in politics, but you have to be able to count." -Robert F. Kennedy-

[niceypoo]

90. Without the left, there is no party

Dont fall for the OP's idiotic premise

[frustrated_lefty]

91. Then you have absolutely nothing to worry about in 2012, no?

[Raine]

93. So I guess lefty votes, money and drudge work like GOTV

won't be missed in 2012 since we aren't a large enough group to matter ... uh ok.

edit: added word

[olegramps]

95. The support that Obama has from fellow Democrats doesn't reflect the situation.

There are a number of people on this board who label anyone who is critical of Obama's inability to deliver a better health care plan and more effective financial reform as far left liberals. I have little doubt that many Americans are not very well informed on these issues due to the failure of the Fourth Estate. But, those who are critical of President Obama it appears to me are those people who are very well informed about the issues which are not limited to the two that I have mentioned. I don't see how the tax breaks for the most wealthy can be justified when the deficient is so staggering. The nation is headed for bankruptcy yet 2% of the citizens are amassing staggering wealth as the nation appears that it may very well be on the way to becoming little more than a Banana Republic of have and have nots. How can this be justified in the name of compromise.

I believe that a far more important measure of what is transpiring is the fact that the vast majority of Americans don't believe that the country is headed in the right direction than asking Democrats if they like Democrats. It should be apparent to even the minimally informed that the very extremely wealthy who actually control the Republican Party are determined to virtually impoverish the working class by destroying the Fair Deal policies that created the Middle Class. While the worker class Republicans and Democrats entertain themselves is ridiculous debates about big government versus small government the wealthy continue to consolidated their power at the expense of the working class.

[Major Hogwash]

97. Some of the people posting here, not all but some, have little understanding of economics

They keep thinking that large deficits and the large federal debt is a bad thing, and that we should balance the budget on the backs of the unemployed who have recently lost their unemployment benefits.

Which makes no sense at all. The unemployed, upon getting their unemployment checks, have to spend that money, they can't save it or hoard it like most of the really wealthy people have been doing.

So, this deal is just like the government pumping money into the economy.
And anyone who has ever studied economics at all, would know that the money multiplier would make that money expand many times over in the economy.

So, I'm a little surprised that so many of the members here don't understand the basic concepts of economics.

[ncteechur]

99. I'll vote for him. I will not vote for any primary challenger.