Can we get a Progressive to Run...Please?

[The Sushi Bandit]

Obama has failed me

now we are in 3 wars
will not reduce the military budget
keeps gitmo open
keeps the patriot act
will not put bush area criminals in jail
will not put bankers and wall street in jail
did not pass single payer heath care
did not support the unions in Wisconsin
did not jail BP executives
did not keep people from losing their homes

and this is the short list....

Can we get a REAL Progressive to Run...Please?

[monmouth]

1. Suit up and go for it....n/t

[Skittles]

2. they run; people just don't vote for them

they prefer glamour and pretty words over substance

[dflprincess]

28. That's because the media only covers the corporate approved candidates

and most people get their information from the MSM.

We all need to pay more attention to the candidates the media ignores and convince our less political family and friends to do the same.

[Skittles]

30. all you have to do is pay attention

all the media love in the world couldn't make me see Obama as a real progessive

[dflprincess]

47. I agree

but most people don't pay the amount of attention we do. It is up to us to keep on our less involved friends and families to pay more attention and remind them that the MSM will only report on corporate approved candidates who do not have their best interests at heart.

[FrenchieCat]

3. Progressive Utopia ain't fucking running.

Next.....

[tanyev]

16. LOL.

:thumbsup:

[wndycty]

29. Plus 1,000,000

:kick:

[Wait Wut]

56. +1

:toast:

[paparush]

63. Closing Gitmo is hardly Utopia.

Disengaging from the longest wars in US history is hardly Utopia.

Taxing the rich and a massive solar power tax incentive that's Utopia.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[RBInMaine]

7. First, he hasn't announced for the 50th time. 2nd, my cat could actually win sooner than him.

[vaberella]

20. Does your cat happened to be named Tucker? n/t

[FrenchieCat]

8. United Citizen thanks you!

They love it! I can hear them cheering!
You are their hero....the kind they want to multiply
and grow as big as possible....

So this means you won't have shit to say afterwards,
or will you still be opining about all that's wrong,
pretending that you somehow made a difference beyond
helping stick some knives in our backs?

[provis99]

5. they run every election.

But consider how ruthlessly the progressive candidates are mocked on DU: Kucinich, Feingold, Nader et al. aren't even popular on DU. A progressive has no chance of winning. Obama is the best we can do.

[RBInMaine]

6. Can you get real please. Will Sanders win nationally? Kucinich? Or anyone so far left? NEVER!

You are stuck in ideological purity. YouTube Maddow proving Obama is the most progressive since LBJ (who did Vietnam too). GET REAL !

[elocs]

17. If you are looking for reality at DU you have come to the wrong place.

At least Russ Feingold was able to be elected as a U.S. in the state of Wisconsin. Kucinich could never even be elected to a statewide office in Ohio.

We have those who are so orgasmic about a progressive running that it wouldn't matter to them if their pet candidate lost every single state. Ideological purity is everything to them.

[krawhitham]

73. +1

[Cali_Democrat]

9. The corporate media will never allow a progressive to win

However, getting a real progressive to run will hopefully push Obama to the left because the voters will realize how far to the right Obama has moved since candidate Obama won the primaries.

[mkultra]

48. neither will the electorate

because of democracy

[jefferson_dem]

10. Do you want a so-called progressive to run or do you want "progress"?

Truth: Those are two mutually exclusive options.

[NorthCarolina]

42. We already had a "so-called" Progressive win in 2008. Now I want a real one. nt.

[Rowdyboy]

11. Which progressives career would you like to end? Anyone stupid enough to run would lose and make

serious enemies. His or her career would be over to satisfy your need for.....whatever.

Not happening-no serious progressives are that tone deaf.

[Tx4obama]

12. Need some cheese to go with your whine?

Obama created a new program for home owners and funded it with $75 BILLION dollars.
The protesters/unions in Wisconsin did NOT want Obama to come to Wisconsin, they wanted to do it on their own. He was supportive because the union heads said so.
There weren't enough votes in Congress for single-payer.
Which BP executives committed a criminal offensive? Please link to proof of a crime.
Obama signed an executive order to close Gitmo, Congress blocked the transfer by defunding the move.

Your OP is a big fail.

[FrenchieCat]

13. We got our loan modified......

IT really wasn't that difficult....
although one has to have some income coming in.

Also while modifying one's loan, one doesn't have to pay
the mortgage, which can be for as long as a year,
if they play their cards right.

[WiffenPoof]

33. There are as many examples...

...of successful modifications as there are failed (or bad) modifications.

My loan was modified and we saved a grand total of $123.67 a month. Not a huge modification under anyone's standards.

And, Frenchie, did you fail to mention that in most cases, not paying your mortgage for several months will destroy your credit.

From my research, the home modification program has been less than successful. Banks are NOT cooperating. And the money set aside by the government has only helped a very small number of Americans...something less than 10%. If I were President Obama, I wouldn't be touting this as one of his successes. Just my opinion.

-PLA

[FrenchieCat]

38. We've done modification for clients.....(I'm an accountant)

Bank are looking at 31% of income,
and modification are for those who can't afford their mortgage as it presently is,
and most would have already skipped payments so their credit scores are
already in the toilet- Just my experience.

The Modification program is not as successful as it could have been, because yes....
banks didn't push them, and many people didn't know how to get it done, or if they even
qualified....only now are they starting to understand better.

[WiffenPoof]

52. Well Put Frenchie n/t

[Sheepshank]

51. ohh you realize you are undermining....

...a perfectly over used meme? The op has nothing to do with reality or not, it's the 'rant' that seems to count.

OP earned a neg-rec from me, for attempting to pass on misleading and inaccurate assumptions of Obama's work done so far.

[Phx_Dem]

14. Want some cheese to go with your whine?

:puke:

[emulatorloo]

15. This is about the tenth version of this kind of post in the last 4 hrs. It never goes well n/t

[Mid_FL_voter]

18. Are you crazy?

It is either Obama or a Republican. You decide. For me, I am all the way in - Obama in 2012. I cannot imagine how much worse things would be at this moment in time had McCain/Palin won in 2008. And the R's have gone even more to the right. It's Obama or something I can't stand to think about.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[NYC Liberal]

21. LOL, even the darlings of the anti-Obama crowd

here are supporting Obama next year. :rofl:

Cannot wait for President Obama to be re-elected next year!

[JoePhilly]

22. If those on DU who dislike Obama, spent half as much time trying

to find or build there preferred candidate, rather than attacking Obama day after day here, they might just have their candidate mythical by now.

[cliffordu]

24. Ding Ding Ding, WE HAVE A WINNAH!!!!!

that's right.

[TMED]

69. You're probably right about that

Over at My.Firedoglake.com, though, one of the community members, Anthony Noel, took it upon himself to start a process that, hopefully, will lead to a progressive primary challenger to Obama. This challenger is expected to lose, but what will happen next is where it will get interesting. See http://my.firedoglake.com/newprogressivealliance/2011/03/10/pick-up-the-cry/">Pick Up the Cry! for more info about the New Progressive Coalition.

Cindy Sheehan is on the steering committee, btw.

[cliffordu]

23. Hmm....

:hurts:

[Logical]

25. I would LOVE Alan Grayson or Franken but in 2012 we need to support Obama.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

26. Get them elected at the local level. Then, come back and let's discuss. n/t

[lindalou65]

27. Real Progressive

I am not sure a "real" progressive would be electable even if one would run----Even if we assume a progressive could run and win, how likely would they be able to implement progressive goals? I would say between slim and none.

[Shiver]

58. Exactly.

Even if, by some miracle, Kucinich managed to win a primary and then go onto win a national election... he wouldn't get a thing done. Not with Congress the way it is right now. He'd talk a good game like he always does, but that's all it would be.

The only way Kucinich would get anything done as president would be if we had a Congress that was tilting much further to the left. So people championing a primary opponent for Obama really should be working on congressional seats that can be overturned.

[NorthCarolina]

70. Obama ran as a progressive and won. So why can't a real progressive win, if a phony one can? nt

[frazzled]

31. Like the last "progressive" this board went gaga over?

That would be John Edwards, the dah-ling of the so-called progressive boards. He was considered progressive, I suppose, because he told you he was going to put an end to poverty as we know it. Despite the fact that he had one of the most conservative records in Congress and had never done Jack Shit to address poverty in actuality.

Well, we know how that turned out. He took your money and sent it to his mistress, whom he was seeing while his wife was dying. Turns out he was never interested in poverty, except as a slogan with which to get elected.

I'm sorry to be so blunt. But I think a lot of people wouldn't know a real progressive if one fell into their lap. We only chase the latest person who says the right thing or yells the loudest.

[FrenchieCat]

32. Isn't that what being a real progressive is about....?

Yelling real loud saying things that people want to hear, while getting nada passed?
That some not very useful "principles" there, but hey.....it is what makes some people's
boat float.

[Norrin Radd]

34. Pretty certain DU is liberal AND progressive; it says so on the "about" page.

[FrenchieCat]

35. But is it real?

[PassingFair]

41. No. Progressives represent the poor and the working classes.

You must really hate what's left of our
Democratic House, because the Progressive
Caucus is our largest.

[frazzled]

45. No, I've considered myself a progressive and liberal for 50 years

That is, since I was old enough to be political in any way.

I just understand the difference between yakking and getting something done in the world.

And by the way "representing the poor and working classes" is not the definition of progressive. That would be populist progressive. Progressives have to deal with everything from foreign policy and general economic issues to all kinds of social agendas and legal issues. And I've done my fair share of working with and for the poor and working classes. There's no reason to point your fingers at me.

[PassingFair]

46. You're the one who called John Edwards a "progressive".

Although he never ran as one.

I never considered JE a progressive candidate.

Howard Dean ran "progressively" in 04,
if you recall, he ran AGAINST John Edwards.

"Populist Progressives" are still "Progressives"

[frazzled]

53. That's what quotation marks are for: sarcasm

I made it quite clear in my post that he was anything but "progressive." But thousands of posts touted him as just that on this very forum.

[PassingFair]

54. For what it's worth, I wasn't "pointing fingers" at you, I was responding to another's post.

"Progressives" backed Obama, by a large margin
in the last election, not Edwards.

[karynnj]

40. + 1

I have always been stunned that people flocking to find a "progressive" are so eager to find a charismatic leader who says what they want that they absolutely don't look at records. I still don't get how people did not question that Edwards 2008 was SO far from Edwards 2004. (It was disguised a little as the K/E program was far more liberal than the Edwards primary one.) The funny thing is that I waited to hear an emotional Edwards speech where he spoke of how traveling around the country seeing the pain of poverty and seeing his wife deal with cancer, had led him to push for a platform that filled these needs. It could have bridged his various positions - and he could have claimed that he had grown.

The funny thing is he did not need to do that. The progressives fell for him anyway - ignoring all the red flags of hypocrisy.

In addition, I am not sure there is even a clear cut definition of Progressive. What I have seen is that it is not a synonym for liberal. Looking at the various indexes that scored Senators on that, what is clear is that they don't agree on what a progressive is either - as their results are not consistent. (One seemed to me to being looking for a libertarian on social and economic issues.)

It would seem that the first thing that needs to get a definition - likely a broad one - of what being a progressive is. Until then, I would suggest that some people like Sherrod Brown likely meet the criterion better than some of the flavor of the month heroes, who are often there just because they said something controversial. I honestly do not get the appeal of Grayson.

[Shiver]

60. I don't even know who Grayson is...

Ignore politics for two years to work on a novel, and you come back to find half a dozen darlings have come and gone...

[MadBadger]

36. I look at some of those things on there, and I think you want Obama to be a dictator

[Douglas Carpenter]

37. first start trying to win seats on the school boards and city councils

and then work up to state legislatures and then make a real presence in the U.S. Congress and State Houses while simultaneously developing a media that is able to effectively preach to more than just the choir. That's how the right-wing took over the Republican Party and then eventually most of the federal government and the majority of state governments.

Without changing the political culture of the country as whole - as the right-wing very successfully did - no progressive presidential campaign has a snowballs chance in hell of even being taken seriously - much less winning the White House, controlling Congress and affecting permanent change.

[great white snark]

39. +1

Even St. Kucinich would be a very ineffective President with a congress full of Republicans and Blue Dogs.

[treestar]

79. +100

They focus on the POTUS because that's easy. but without a progressive Congress, it wouldn't matter at all. Even if he could get elected, the Progressive President would face the same problems as President Obama. Looking too much to one person - that's not how our government works.

[Life Long Liberal]

43. Let's wait until 2016!

[Arkana]

44. Sure, just tell us which Republican you'd like to occupy the White House

after 2012.

[JoePhilly]

49. If half the effort spent whinng about Obama was spent on finding this awesome ...

super progressive, you'd have one by now.

[Tom Rinaldo]

50. I oppose a primary challenge to Obama

Not only do I believe that it would fail, not only do I think it would make a Republican victory in 2012 more likely, but I also think it would weaken the progressive movement in some ways akin to how Ralph Nader stoked hostility toward Greens among Democrats by running against Gore in 2000. And yes I understand the difference between a primary challenge and an election challenge, but my conclusions are not changed by that distinction. If there is a primary challenge to Obama from the left, it will lose, and if Obama loses the election after that (which history shows is much more likely when a President is challenged in a primary) the Left will be blamed.

I think it would further our goals more to mount primary challenges where feasible to Democrats at the Congressional level who have earned them - and in that way work to reframe political dialoge. And I think it is time for us to begin seriously deciding who to support for President in 2016 and finding ways to help that person or persons become viable Presidential candidates.

[onenote]

55. Does the OP qualify as a "hit and run" or a "hit and whine"?

[JoePhilly]

57. How about a "Whine By" ??

[onenote]

62. I like it!

[Sheepshank]

59. I was thinking more of a "punt and hide".

no actual substance delivered for change or suggestions on how to find this ellusive, winning progressive. Nothing that names a progressive or what a "progessive" could realistically and radically change the current outcomes on the list.

[zalinda]

61. What's really funny about these posts

Let's just say, those that have a problem with Obama, attack Obama, not another dem.

zalinda

[Phx_Dem]

64. Why, so we can lose?

Dennis Kuchinich runs just about every year.

[shayes51]

65. A Leader

A real leader is what we need.

[The Sushi Bandit]

66. Below are five of the biggest campaign pledges Obama failed to keep

1. Health care for all
If you're an American making less than $30,000 a year, chances are you still have trouble seeing a doctor, despite the passage of President Obama's health care reform plan. In 2007, then-Senator Obama said he wanted to make sure no American is without access to vital medical attention and proposed using revenues from the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts to fund it. When the campaign laid out their specific plans in 2008, they included a "public option" that would be paid for by the public at large and made available to anyone who could not obtain coverage through their employer or other public program.

Ultimately, the debate in Washington became so heated and rife with disinformation that the administration and its allies in Congress agreed to forgo the public option, using it as a bargaining chip to ensure other proposals, like ending the "pre-existing condition" exclusion in private insurance policies, were passed in the final bill. They also gave in to Republican demands and extended the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, promising to take on the issue again in 2012. In spite of the modest legislative victory of actually getting health reform passed, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that even after all the elements take effect in 2014, over 22 million Americans will still lack access to basic health services.

2. Close Guantanamo
As a symbol of everything that liberals thought to be wrong with the Bush-era, closing the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba should have been an easy target for the new and popular president and his Democratic super-majority in Congress -- and, in fact, then-candidate Obama promised to do just that. But as he soon found out, strategic and political calculations have made it almost impossible to shuck.

Today, Obama has turned away from his promise to close the facility and embraced the controversial terror war symbol, ordering the resumption of military tribunals and even moving the accused 9/11 plotters' trial from a civilian court in New York City to the secret military court at Guantanamo.

3. Defend labor rights
"Understand this," Obama said during a campaign rally in 2007. "If American workers are being denied their right to organize and collectively bargain when I’m in the White House, I will put on a comfortable pair of shoes myself, I’ll will walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States of America." (Watch.)

Despite efforts by state-level Republicans in Wisconsin, Tennessee, Michigan, Ohio, Maine, Florida and Indiana to curtail collective bargaining rights, the President has yet to appear at a single protest or picket line.

4. Reform the Patriot Act
Contrary to popular belief, Obama has never actually argued for a repeal of the Bush administration's sweeping, post-9/11 security initiatives, which were passed with a mandatory "sunset" clause to overrule the concerns of civil libertarians at the time. Instead, Obama has consistently said he favors enhanced judicial oversight and a pullback from some warrantless searches -- like the provisions that allow the FBI to access library records without a warrant.

But every time the emergency laws have been due to expire, President Obama has pushed to extend them without any reforms. Most recently, the administration sought an extension of the Patriot Act that was even longer than the one Republicans wanted. They gave it to him and continued the sweeping spy powers through 2013, ensuring that the next extension doesn't become an election year issue.

5. End the wars
Even as a candidate, Obama maintained that Afghanistan should be "the focus" of Bush's terror war, and he pledged to make it so. But the president was also swept into power on a wave of anti-war fervor behind his calls to end the occupation of Iraq. Iraq has calmed down quite a bit as U.S. troops steadily stream out of the country, but Afghanistan is more violent than ever amid Obama's own "surge."

Even though the president promised his Afghan occupation would conclude in July 2011, military officials have admitted that sometime in 2014 is more likely. Elsewhere, American forces are dropping more bombs on more countries today than at any point during the Bush administration, with continued occupation forces in two massive countries even as they stage aerial bombardments of Pakistan, Libya and Yemen.

[ncteechur]

71. Are things really that simple for you? Cause that ain't how it really works.

[Cursive]

67. I don't agree with you, but

I enjoy the pics on your blog sometimes. :evilgrin: Peace!

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[krawhitham]

72. I am fucking tired of people bitching about gitmo

He signed an executive order to close gitmo, CONGRESS FUCKING block it from closing

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ClosureOfGuantanamoDetentionFacilities/
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2009/01/61754968/1

http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/05/24/house-kills-plan-to-close-guantanamo/

[cliffordu]

74. LOL.

[KoKo]

75. It might take a long time...but some of us would really like to work for one..and not lose money.

or be made sick after we voted for one of the "many" we thought were progressive. It will be a long time coming. Maybe ...one day.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[Proud Liberal Dem]

77. He/she had better be hurrying up and announcing

to have any impact whatsoever. All of this hypothesizing and speculating is pretty pointless IMHO unless somebody steps up to the plate and actually announces their candidacy. We could debate this issue all day long but it's really nothing more than an academic exercise until or unless a real candidate emerges to challenge Obama. I hope that if there is a primary challenge, he/she is able to articulate in plain english how they would do things different in terms of fulfilling the promises left unfinished by President Obama and that once the primary is concluded that we all unite as a party like we (largely) did after the fractious 2008 primary between Obama and Hillary. If somebody really wants to challenge President Obama for the 2012 Democratic nomination, they are within their rights and legal means to do so, however just because something CAN be done, doesn't mean that it SHOULD be done, particularly since any challenge would almost be purely symbolic and very unlikely to succeed either in being nominated (and, more importantly, elected).

Instead of focusing on trying to primary Obama for the top slot, might I kindly suggest that we instead throw the bulk of our efforts into electing more (and better) Democrats at the local, state, and national level- not only to help get some better legislation in the states but to also be able to check all of those "psychotic stepdads" running several states? I would also add that whatever "shift" to the left might happen to Obama as the result of a progressive Presidential primary challenge, isn't going to be worth much of anything IMHO without the means (i.e. Democratic Congress) to enact whatever "new" promises he might make during the campaign- and then- assuming he wins. If we don't win back the House next year and/or lose control of the Senate (but Obama still manages to be re-elected), it won't matter how many progressive promises or "mea culpas" Obama makes during the campaign and we'll basically be right back here for the next four years complaining some more about him being a closet Republican and about his "betrayals".

:shrug:

We should be focusing on where we can do the most good and primarying Obama isn't where it is IMHO.

[AlinPA]

78. Any ideas who can beat the republicans?

[KoKo]

80. Not NOW.....but it's something to work towards...and, it will come...eventually. n't

[Teaser]

81. he failed *you*, huh?

you must be pretty important.