So what will be the Big Issues in the "Centrist" 2012 Democratic campaign?

[Armstead]

The GOP is on a dictatorial rampage supported by Bully Billionaires, the economy is on the skids, average Americans are on the ropes while a tiny handful of wealthy oligarchs get richer and richer, Monopolistic Corporations have taken over our economy and government,the labor movement is being gutted, we're fighting 2-and-a-Half Wars for reasons no one can remember, the environment is in big trouble....etc.

So, what will be the 2012 campaign "issues" now that it is becoming clearer that President Obama and the Democratic Party will likely run a "centrist" campaign (a la Bill Clinton's VChip campaign for a second term). How will they address the pressing problems, and the obvious abuses of the system by the wealthy and powerful that are occurring?

Global Warming? "It's important that we all use energy wisely."

GOP Takeover? "We have some differences of opinion with our friends across the aisle, but I am sure we can continue to work together."

The Robbery of Middle Class wages and benefits by the Corporate Oligarchs? "We have to all work together to make sure every American has a chance at the American Dream."

Any thoughts?

[Tippy]

1. I see more and more Dem's crawling out of their "oh well my vote won't

count, anyway...Are they seeing the light I sure hope so...

[Armstead]

2. Ah, at least 2 Unrecs with no substantial rebuttals.

Why not state what YOU think the campaign will be?

[ProudDad]

25. Because they don't have any ideas

just "blind faith" in their little tin god...

[golfguru]

3. Corporate Ogliarchs is the wrong target

The target should be INDIVIDUAL high income ogliarchs.
Witness GE made $5 Billion profit yet paid zero federal income tax.
A lot of that That $5 Billion ended up in pockets of the investor class.
Yet they will be paying taxes at the discounted rate for capital gains & dividends
as passed by the congress to extend Bush tax cuts and signed by president Obama.

GE accomplished this feat by outsourcing their operations and jobs abroad. That is
a result of having 2nd highest corporate taxes in the industrialized world. Soon to
be the 1st highest since the current title holder Japan is talking about reducing
corporate taxes to rev up the economy.

[Armstead]

4. It is a systemic problem

There are certain high-income oligarchs -- like the lovable Koch Brothers -- who may be easy targets.

But it is a combination of the perversion of our social values and perversion of laws and policies -- especially over the last 30 years -- that is the problem. We have allowed the oligarchs to get away with it because we do not challenge the policies and values that haver caused this mess, and which will make it even messier of it remains unchallenged in the political arena.

GE (the example you mentioned) used to be a merely bad corporate citizen, but until the 1980's they at least used to hire American workers and pay good wages and benefits (although those were often as a result of union pressures).

Now they are an ungodly evil empire and their former ceo jack welch was among those who perverted the values of society in terms of money, power and the role of business, beyond all recognition.

People are finally beginning to wake up to that, now that the chickens are coming home to roost. There is potent political power waiting to be tapped by the Democrats there....But only if democrats start addressing tghe roots of the problem and proving that it is on the side of the people.

[golfguru]

8. Another critical reason why Individual tax rates need to go up

and corporate rates come down...

Right now the higher corporate tax rates causes giving out more executive
payouts because the individuals pay a lower tax rate. If corporate rate was
much lower than individual rate, more money would stay inside and spent on
capital goods and expanding business.

You gotta always remember...corporations are ALWAYS owned by individuals at
the end of food chain. Those who are bigger owners (large share holders & CEO
types) should be paying more tax. Taxing the corporation itself also affects
every lowly worker in it and every small stock holder.

[ProudDad]

27. But what do you do about the majority of corporate assholes

who will (as they do now) take relatively small salaries (for walking around money) and...

the rest out in corporate supplied perks, etc.?

[ProudDad]

26. No, it is NOT the result of "high corporate taxes"

Which are the lowest since before WW II...

It's because of institutionalized, non-regulated greed...

If those bastards want to "go global" then we can put laws in place to make sure that they cannot comfortably live here...

We can put in tax laws that actually TAX corporate income instead of providing corporate loopholes...

I just love it when republican talking points blaming the victims of rapacious capitalism appear on this board :puke:

[msongs]

5. avoiding traditional democratic party values and letting repubs control the framing?

this Dkos diary sums it up:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/01/962478/-A-Rant-Regarding-the-Failure-of-Democrats-to-Stand-up-for-Liberal-ideals

[Armstead]

6. Sounds like a plan

[Telly Savalas]

7. There will be 435 Congressional primaries and about 30 or so Senate primaries

for so called "progressives" to offer up the superior alternatives.

But bitching about the centrists in the hopes that they change has been so successful thus far, I'm not sure why anyone would bother to switch strategies.

[Armstead]

9. I was referring to the presidential campaign, but I hope there are...

some "superior" progressives in the congressional primaries too...I also hope the DNC doesn't try to kneecap them in the primaries as it has done in the past.

(And,FYI, my own congressguy is a solid progressive so that is not a concern here.)

[ProudDad]

28. The DNC probably will

The democans, like the republicrats are creatures of corporate USAmerica...

I'm jealous though -- my congresscritter used to be Barbara Lee, arguably the best Progressive in Congress...

Now my congresscritter is in a temporary vegetative state (we HAVE NO REPRESENTATION) but she was a blue-dog, pro-corporate, pro-war DINO abomination before she got shot anyway...

[Harmony Blue]

10. The strategy of the Obama administration

to appeal to centrists I am inclined to agree is a bad choice this time around given how polarized the country has become. Furthermore, the right is moving to the extreme right, and to counter balance that sudden movement, the left most move to the extreme left to bring balance to our democratic republic. The country was polarized in 2008, but it seems to have worsened since then mainly because the concerns, and warnings, have gone unheeded for the most part by the administration. But, this administration has focused a lot on world policy, which is no surprise that the United States' image world wide has been restored, but also improved. So, I think the strategy will be to focus on issues at home, but given the surge in anti union sentiment by the right lately, I can't see how the Obama administration can tackle this issue without taking a hard line stance to the left. And you know what? Most centrists ironically would support a hard line stance to the left to protect unions in this country.

[Armstead]

11. I'm not really as concerned about right and left as I am about....

right and wrong.

I don't think a strong position on protecting the interests of the middle class and poor against the assault against them by the Corporate Oligarchy is "hard left." (That includes defending the role of unions.) It only seems so in today's brainwashed climate in which "centrist" means continuing to enable bad corporate behavior.

People want to shake things up, and the trick, IMO, is to aggressively sell the principles of progressive populism as common sense (and enlightened self-interest) and common decency.

[Harmony Blue]

12. You may be right

that it truly is about what is viewed as right and wrong. Which is why many centrists would be in support of unions despite their leaning. But it is up to the administration to make sure this message is loud and clear to all Americans. The problem is the message of right, and wrong can become muddled when misinformation is used, which the right is infamous at orchestrating.

[polichick]

13. It's not about what the people want anymore - that's the tragedy.

[ProudDad]

29. Exactly what Progressives hoped that Obama would do

"aggressively sell the principles of progressive populism as common sense (and enlightened self-interest) and common decency."

Unfortunately, as usual, he went in the opposite direction...for expediency's sake...

Unfortunately, (but not unpredictably) the country "elected" another authoritarian follower instead of the Progressive Leader that appeared to campaign for the office.

[Armstead]

32. Unfortunately I agree with you

[Safetykitten]

14. Economy, gas, economy, jobs, economy, gas, economy, HC, economy, SS....

You know, the stupid stuff. Oh and how we are stupid because we wan't that taken care of, but it will be told it's all good.

[Armstead]

16. Whjat is annoying is they always run on "the economy" without ever really talking about the economy

[JoePhilly]

17. I heard Obama talk about the economy yesterday.

[Armstead]

18. So did I......and ?

The problem is that all talk about the economy is based on goosing the present system, rather than the underlying structural problems and trends.

[JoePhilly]

19. The jobs trend was discussed yesterday too. Its moving in the right direction.

[Armstead]

20. Short-term trends vs. underlying long-term trends

Yes it is good that the official unemployment rate is starting to go down, and that there is somewhat more hiring.

However, as long as those short-term superficial fluctuations remains the sole barometer in our political messaging, we're going to continue to fall into deeper and deeper trouble.

If someone had, say a middle-management job, but after two years of looking has to take a job pushing coffee over the counter at Dunkin Donuts, that's not real progress....Or perhaps, even worse, is if that person has to take a job with the same responsibilities he had before but at a much lower salary and no benefits. (That is especially egregious if the corporation that hires him is stashing away huge profits, while lowering the living standards of its workforce.)

What I am saying is Democrats should be addressing that instead of just enabling the continued siphoning of wealth from the lower 75 percent of the country to the top 25 percent (and with a huge proportion of that going to the top 5 or 10 percent).

[JoePhilly]

30. From Dec 2007 to March 2011 is "short term" ... ??

And since anecdotes are now "facts" ... here are mine.

I have a friend who was in a job he hated prior to, and all through the recession. He just took a new job, with a promotion, and a salary increase.

Additionally, prior to the recession both my wife and I would get regular calls from head-hunters asking if we were "looking" ir if we knew folks with similar backgrounds who were. Those calls stopped all during the recession, but started up again at the end of last year. A very good sign.

[Armstead]

31. Yes -- Do not judge the larger picture by the experience of a few

You may be especially desirable as an employee, and your friend is fortunate that he ended up with a better job.

But you have to look at the larger trends on a longer term. The basic economic foundation of the working and middle class -- and the ladders upward -- are being eroded for a whole combination of reasons.

That is not to say everyone is screwed. But in overall terms, increasing numbers of people are being screwed by the loss of opportunities for a reasonable standard of living now and opportunities for upward mobility.

That has been a trend for the last 30 years. And it will continue to get worse unless we actually acknowledge and begin to deal with the reasons for it at all levels.

[polichick]

15. They'll steer clear of anything controversial (anything important) - so we'll get a lot of...

...pretty words and empty rhetoric.

[EndElectoral]

21. Hope More and Change Less!

[Armstead]

24. Bingo

[Enrique]

22. winning the future

Obama's for it.

[Armstead]

23. Maybe hire Charlie Sheen as a spokesman.... "WINNNNNNN-ING"

[Enrique]

34. Helloooo.....WINNING .... helloooo... the FUTURE!

:rofl:

[Autumn]

33. Bipartisanship. It's worked well

for Obama so far.:puke:

[BlueIris]

35. The neocons will take advantage of our shamed and humiliated POTUS and go for Iran.

They'll either pick two hawks or two shill candidates to give it to them. Our nominee will spend the entire time on the ropes, defending himself against accusations that among his many sins, he can't protect us from more terrorism unless he authorizes a full blown invasion of Iran.

What issues? I sincerely doubt the MSM will cover much of anything else besides our scandal and the Iran-mongers last ditch effort to secure more war.

[NorthCarolina]

36. Same as the GOP...'Fixing' Entitlements...lowering taxes for the top 3%

gutting/killing social programs, encouraging new trade agreements, wars, wars, and more wars. You know, the usual stuff.