Okay, You're Mad at Obama. Here's Some Very Sound, Practical Advice.

[Yavin4]

Instead of voting for a 3rd party candidate who has no chance of winning, work, donate, campaign for the most progressive candidates in your local, state, and federal elections.

The only way to get Obama, or anyone who is President, to be more progressive, is to surround them with strong progressives in the House and Senate.

Look to Wisconsin as your guide. The good people there didn't sit around and wait for Obama. They got to work, and they are moving forward to recall their sell out senators.

It's okay to be mad at Obama, just use your anger in a positive direction.

[LynneSin]

1. Best advice ever

:D

[FreakinDJ]

2. +1000

[Arkansas Granny]

3. Good advice.

[daleanime]

4. Oh hell yea...

and it does hurt anything to tell him (and everyone within range) just how pissed off we are!

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[bahrbearian]

6. +1

[ej510]

10. +2

[Yavin4]

15. Creating A Third Party from Scratch Will Take Much More Work

Instead, why not elect Russ Feingold as governor of Wisc. Why not work to Alan Grayson back into the House? Why not elect strong, tough minded progressives to local offices with the goal of getting them elected to higher office?

The one thing that you can say about Obama is that it is indeed possible to elect progressives for higher offices.

[Sirveri]

31. If I had the choice I would, but I don't live in their districts.

Bottom line, I got played by a bait and switch.

My rep, isn't horrible, I actually generally like him (D-CA-Miller). I like Boxer. I dislike Feinstein.

I'll vote for people when they've shown that they're not going to screw me. Can I primary Feinstein or Obama? I can try, and I'll probably lose. So if I already know they're going to screw me, why even bother wasting my vote, getting screwed by a republican or by a democratic, you're still getting screwed. No reason not to go third party.

[Yavin4]

23. Okay. You Win. Start A Third Party.

Go ahead. Just understand that a third party has to win elections in order for it to have any impact.

[Sirveri]

27. Because I'm having so much impact with my vote now.

If my vote doesn't fucking matter, then it doesn't matter if I toss it towards someone who ACTUALLY believes in the same principals I believe in. I voted for Obama, he said he believed in the principals I believed in. Well actions speak a hell of a lot louder than words.

[Yavin4]

32. Then There's No Way To Change Anything, Right?

It's all hopeless, right? Again, I point to Wisconsin.

[Sirveri]

34. While you're busy pointing, Walker is busy selling off the state to the Koch bros

Prosser was still re-elected.

You're right, it is hopeless. Fuck it. Burn the whole damned thing down, maybe the teadiots will realize how stupid they are (or they'll die en mass in the streets), and we can rebuild it so that it actually works again. Hard to have a peasant uprising without starving peasants.

[WhiteTara]

47. Get off the chair and join the party. Make a difference

yourself. When was the last time you went and stood on the street and registered people to vote? When was the last time you went to a progressive (or any candidate's event)? Calling for a 3rd party is easy. Working in the one we've got is work.

[Chan790]

74. And I point back at CT.

CT is fast becoming far and away the most liberal state in the US, with one House district that the GOP can successfully contest. 1. CT-5. That's the only Congressional race the state or national GOP will put effort or money into without seeing very real signs of contention from a GOP nominee...and it's a three-term Democratic seat and will likely remain so for the foreseeable future. The Governor race was close but only because the GOP tried to cheat and because the Democratic nominee (Dan Malloy) was a moderate (but, two points: He's the right kind of moderate (actually moderate as opposed to 3rd-way or corporatist) & he was the right choice to run following a centrist Republican in Jodi Rell and nearly 20 years of GOP and Independents in the Governor's office. He'll likely be followed by someone more liberal than he.) making voters less enthusiastic than they were for the Senate race or the House races. Every week CT is making progress on liberal social issues: little-by-little, issue-by-issue. In 2012, Lieberman will be retired, replaced by a liberal in either Chris Murphy or Susan Bysiewicz. Dodd was replaced by the aggressively-populist Richard Blumenthal.

The question is how did CT get there? It wasn't by change within the Democratic Party, the major driver was the strength of CT's Working Families (a labor party) and Green Parties throughout the nineties and early 2000s. By being viable, liberals had somewhere to threaten to go, challenging the mainstream of the Democratic Party. The dynamo of the change within was pressure from outside. Alliances were made between Democratic liberals and liberal third-parties to oust a mainstream too cozy with the national party and increasingly not responsive to the voters. The Democrats who survived were either liberals from the get-go (Larsen and DiLauro, for example) or they moved left because they were astute and saw the tide (Blumenthal). The rising stars of CT's Democrats made their names in the state legislature (like Chris Murphy) or in municipal office (like Malloy). As many of the next generation of rising stars (the one after the current one, the people you'll see running for state and national office in 5-10 more years) came up through Working Families as came-up through the Democratic Party.

[Cal33]

64. Think of the long-term gain: If Obama wins in 2012 and remains

the same way he is today, the positive thing about it is that he would, at
least, be preventing a Repub. from being president for 4 more years.

And during those 4 years, we'll have the chance to make as sure as possible
that the next president would be a Progressive. I believe a Progressive
would do more for our country and attract more people to his side, because
a Progressive will demonstrate more sharply the difference between
a government of, by and for the people, as opposed to the Repub. government
of, by, and for the few rich owners of corporations.

OTOH, If a Repub. president were to be elected in 2012, it would be the
death-knell of democracy in the USA. GW Bush tried to destroy our
Constitution and didn't make it. You can be sure the next Repub. president
is going to continue where GW Bush left off. And with the help of the
corporations, the Neocons, and the Teabaggers, the chances of killing
our Constitution look frightfully good.

If the Repubs. win this time, there might never be another election again.
Or if there should be elections, they would be the Stalin-type sham
elections, which amounts to the same thing as having no elections at all.

Which thinking American would want that to happen?

[Lyric]

57. Wrong. A third party doesn't have to win elections to have impact.

It just has to be strong enough to keep one of the OTHER parties from winning. I assure you, if we had a strong liberal third party that the Democrats simply could NOT win without, or if the right-wing had a third party that the Republicans simply could NOT win without, the two major parties would start paying a lot more attention to those "third-party" views.

You don't have to win in order to matter. You just have to be able to spoil it for someone else.

[Jim Lane]

77. That's true. Nader proved that.

The Democratic candidate was an environmentalist denounced as "Ozone Man" by Bush the Elder. The Republican ticket was two Texas oilmen. Some people said there was no real difference between them and therefore voted for Nader. Bush became President. If all the Nader voters had voted Democratic, then Gore would've become President.

What lesson did practical politicians draw from this? That they needed to tack hard to the left to appease the Nader voters? No, the lesson most of them drew was that the Nader voters were purists who would never be satisfied by any platform that wasn't so radically left of center that McGovern's loss in 1972 would look good by comparison.

The rational response of the party establishment to something like 2000 is to say, instead, "There's a couple percent on the left that we're just not gonna get short of calling for banning the internal combustion engine and nationalizing all major industry. Screw them. Instead, we'll try to pick up a few more votes by moving to the right."

Furthermore, most states don't allow fusion voting. A candidate can't aggregate votes on the Democratic line with votes on the Green or Progressive or IWantMyPony line.

[WhiteTara]

46. politics isn't for the faint hearted. In my life, I've seen

a few 3rd parties. They only help one side or the other. If there were true multi parties, then there would be coalitions. But 3 parties always splits the vote.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. (Quoting someone very wise whose name I can't remember in the moment.)

[LoZoccolo]

52. You would have to do at least the same work to get a third party to win as you would

to get progressive Democrats. You still have to convince the majority to vote for that third party, and in the meantime you could have convinced those people to vote a progressive Democrat in via the primary. And that would be if you faced an absolute best-case scenario. More likely you would spend years putting the country in the hole and alienate other Democrats in the meantime, for an indefiniate period of time, until the work was done to get your third party to win, if ever. The worst case would be the collapse of democracy while everyone's waiting for the third party to gain traction.

[Unvanguard]

55. If we had a real third party, we would split the left-wing vote like in Canada and the UK

and hand the country to the Republicans.

No, thanks.

[Sirveri]

72. We might hand one or two offices to them.

I doubt we'd hand them every branch, and the presidency. But maybe tearing the whole damned rotting thing down is better.

[fredamae]

7. Sound, Calm, Logical & Correct Advice! Thx! n/t

[yardwork]

8. Agree. Oh, and call and write the White House. Make noise.

[ej510]

9. I agree, about working locally, but Obama is a lost cause. Sorry

to tell you.

[Yavin4]

21. Okay. Fine. At Best, He's President for Five More Years

Then what's next? It's not about Obama. It's not even about who is president.

It's about who is your city councilman, your state senator, your U.S. Rep., your U.S. Senator, your state Supreme Court justice.

It's about all of these other elected officials, some who will have decades in office, that will have a greater effect on your life than Obama or anyone else who is president.

[MineralMan]

11. Excellent advice. I agree 100%.

It's time to get moving for the 2012 elections. We can do it!

[deacon]

12. I agree, but now we may have to get a grass roots going for another dem for 2012 too. n/t

[msongs]

13. people "wait for Obama" at their own peril nt

[RainDog]

14. kick n/t

[Ozymanithrax]

16. So when my President and my party dump long standing policies that...

support the middle class and the poor, I should just become more selective about which betrayer of the public trust I vote for?

Unfortunately, in our system they only way a party can be punished is to remove it from power. If the President chooses to negotiate away Social Security and Medicare benefits, I cannot support him. If Democrats vote to pass that bill, I can't support them.

Just moving my support to more progressive Democrats doesn't really work, because parties control power in the Congress and the Oval Office.

I call on no one else to take that pledge.

But there is a line that Democrats must respect or they will not get my support.

[Yavin4]

22. There's A Great Documentary called, "Hot Coffee"

It's about the tort reform movement in America. In the documentary, it was revealed the Karl Rove is head of a business group that seeks to elect pro-corporate judges to state supreme courts.

These state supreme court judges can do more damage to your life than Obama, or any other president, can do.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[Coyote_Bandit]

17. Well you've got one thing right

I will not require an Obama bumper sticker or yard sign or campaign literature during this election cycle - and I will not be contributing time, effort, money or any other resources to his re-election effort.

I will not support a candidate who will not serve to advance and protect my needs and interests. Obama has demonstrated time and time again that he is not my champion.

Obama's political future is not a high priority to me. The only difference between a Puke that does not serve to advance and protect my needs and interests and a Dem that does likewise is one of degree. And sometimes the measure of that difference is very small.

[MadMaddie]

18. Now that is just too much common sense!

Those that are pissed want a repeat of 2010 to prove that they can fuck the country over. Mind you these are same voters/non-voters who can't believe what is happening in states with these Facist Republican governers.

[fascisthunter]

19. That's Where I am At

stay within the party and work for progressive/liberal policies. Get someone in office who supports these ideals.

[fivepennies]

20. The only reason a third party candidate can't win

is because of the stranglehold the RNC and DNC have on the election process: who gets the money, who gets the media exposure, who gets to debate, who sets the ridiculous rules of a third party candidate to qualify for ballot status, the vote count. More.

If we had "none of the above" on our ballots, that's who'd win in a general election, by a landslide. Guess who won't let us voice our frustration over their handpicked "choices" in any way that counts.

The other reason a third party candidate can't win is because everybody says they can't and tell us to keep pushing those levers for the lesser of two evils, who always turn out to be evil twins.

edit: grammar

[Yavin4]

25. So, There's No Hope At All?

Tell that to the people of Wisconsin.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[JTFrog]

78. Then I guess your time is very limited here. n/t

[theaocp]

24. Yea, I heard Hal Sparks say this on Stephanie Miller's show yesterday

to an angry teacher. I agree wholeheartedly. Obama can play games with his Republican buddies, but we can work for real progressives around the country. Educate yourselves on all those judges and county representatives that nobody ever knows anything about, but vote on. I know that's often the case with me! I want to be the change I want to see in the world. Let's do this thing.

[daa]

26. Do you really think McCain would have started more wars

and cut social security and Medicare, really?

[tabbycat31]

28. I agree

And another thing about working locally--- get the most progressive candidates elected IN THE PRIMARIES. The general election is not the time to express anger about how progressive your Democrats are because the choice is either them or a teabagging wingnut. There are also many candidates who are more progressive than they appear to be because of their districts. I worked for a Blue Dog who barely won last year and I can tell you that a Dennis Kucinich or Alan Grayson would have been creamed in that district. He's as progressive as the district allows him to be.

Also change starts at the municipal level. Look at your school board, city council, mayor, etc. Think of your local government as a farm system for the state and county government, and the state house as a farm system for congress.

I work on campaigns for a living and I'm not sure what next year's will look like. I'd personally rather work for my senator (who is up next year) instead of for the president. Knowing what I do about state and local politics, I'd much rather work down the ticket, but unfortunately a mayor's race does not pay the bills.

[Tatiana]

29. That's my philosophy. And that's the reason why I won't be donating to Obama's re-election campaign

I think he will have more than enough donors from Wall Street and corporate America.

More than ever, good progressive candidates need our funds to even attempt to compete with the corporate stooges of both parties.

I honestly think we need to have a grassroots effort to start recruiting more working-class candidates in the mold of Paul Wellstone. There are some teachers out there that would make wonderful representatives.

[Yavin4]

30. +1

Exactly. There are hundreds of thousands of laid off state and local workers that can provide a nice pool of candidates from which to choose from.

[Bluenorthwest]

35. Out West we keep doing that, it does not seem to help.

Obama chided my Democratic Rep the same day he called Grassley and honest broker. Of course we will elect our Democrats, it is the executive that should not be counting on the support they had last time here in Oregon.
The only people on DU I have ever seen advocate for 3rd Party are the folks who pushed Charlie Crist over the Democrat Kendrick Meek so long, so hard. The man the Republicans had just rejected. The people who did that were promoting a Recent Republican Reject. They were 'moderate centrists' and 'conservative Democrats' and all of that lot. Those are the ONLY posts I have ever seen here promoting a 3rd Party vote, and they were legion and they went on for months and months. Anyone concerned with 3rd Party voters should speak with that group, specifically and individually.

[WinkyDink]

37. "Mad at" is hardly the issue. It's a profound concern as to Obama's fealty to Democratic principles

and Democratic programs.

[Shagbark Hickory]

38. Good point except it's easier to throw your support behind one person than it is hundreds of people

all over the country in areas where there are no progressives.

[Yavin4]

39. Well, That One Person, No Matter Who It Is, Has Very Limited Power

Second, the "hundreds of people" will have much more power and much more impact on your every day life than the one person who is in office.

[loyalsister]

40. Yes!

Also... get on boards and committees that have influence over local governments. There is a pipeline for potential candidates that starts with any kind of civil service. (ie, union organizers)
It is a great way to recruit and groom the candidates who are closer to the ideal office holder. Last year a local candidate took on the Chamber of Commerce and was elected to replace a historically right leaning seat on the city council.
However, just because she was not endorsed by the COC does not mean she is totally unfriendly to businesses I don't like- or even large corporations. In this case, a large enjoined university and healthcare system.

[JoeyT]

41. Yeah, so how do I primary all the people he surrounded himself with by choice?

Can I primary all those Republicans? I already worked to help defeat them in 2008, and I could have sworn we had until he brought them all on board anyway.

Edited to add: I'm not even mad at Obama. A year and a half ago I was shocked and horrified. A year ago I was mad. Six months ago I was just tired of it. I don't know what the word for what I am now is.

But yeah, I agree with you about working for lower offices. It's one of our biggest weaknesses that we work ourselves to death for the big races, but kind of ignore smaller ones way too often.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Yavin4]

43. Ignoring The Smaller Offices and Focusing Solely on the Presidency

is one of the greatest political failures of American Progressives in the last 20 years or so.

[TalkingDog]

45. I vote liberal/progressive in EVERY election big or small.

I've always assumed that's what other liberal/progressives do too.

If they don't, then somebody needs to educate them. Where's the website?

[Yavin4]

60. Here's The Website

http://www.americancivicliteracy.org/

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[Better Believe It]

44. Will the recalls stop the cuts?

[Bryn]

48. We all should start political process in each precinct, all over USA

"The immense power of the precinct political process means the left is like a huge elephant, trumpeting and stomping its feet, at the end of a string."

"The precincts are the roots of liberty in the American political process. We nourish them with our engagement. Because 50% of that elected body is empty, the tree now withers and dies."

"The precinct political process is the interface between american politics and the american people. For the most effect from the least effort, the precinct political process is the fulcrum of the people's liberty."

All by Joseph Cardwell, my facebook friend

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[bigmonkey]

50. Well, sure, if...

-If you want the Supreme Court to get even worse.
-If you loved the Bush years, except they didn't go far enough.
-If you think that spite politics is the wave of the future.

then sure!

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

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

[bigmonkey]

56. You are seriously asserting that there is no difference between Obama and Bush?

There may be some similarities and some continuities, but to assert that they are no different is a rhetorical move, not factually based.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

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

[bigmonkey]

59. Again a rhetorical move?

Now Obama is worse than Bush? You actually must long for the Bush era, then? Unitary Republican rule was so much better than the current situation?

I can understand it being difficult to process that there are structural failures we're all facing, and it's disappointing that Obama wasn't able to reverse them (and may not see some of them the way you and I do), but it's just clinging to a "great man" view of history to lay this all on Obama's purported "superior" evil nature.

I don't believe you believe that, it's just rhetoric.

[IndyMaine]

62. Well, let's see. In the Bush era we had....

Just the Iraq and Afghanistan wars going on (and by the end of his second term Afghanistan was only simmering on the back burner). Now we have Iraq, Afghanistan on Steroids, Libya, Yemen, Pakistan... (if I'm leaving anything out, please let me know). Military spending is WAY up since Bush was in office.

We had more Constitutional freedoms, because while Bush took some away, Obama took even MORE of them away.

We didn't have a president going after Social Security and Medicare.

Yes, I'd say we were much better off then, relatively speaking. We were on a slippery downhill slope, but under Obama the slope has gotten slipperier.

(And when you say Obama "wasn't able to reverse" the things Bush did, you're referring to the Bush Tax Cuts??)

EDIT: And I almost forgot, we had the Gulf of Mexico. I liked it when we had the Gulf of Mexico.

[bigmonkey]

63. A weak case.

You want to craft a case that Obama is worse than Bush. This means you would prefer Bush to Obama. You can't possibly mean that.

You're making a case based on omens. Obama is making ominous moves. We need to be more practical. The motivation of Democratic politicians doesn't seem, to this observer, to be fear-based. Why not use a carrot instead of a bigger and bigger stick?

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[bigmonkey]

68. Insults.

Thanks. I guess we're done.

[Dawgs]

71. That might be the only way to wake people up.

Eight years of Bush obviously wasn't enough.

[dissidentboomer]

53. I've got a BETTER suggestion. DEMAND.... I mean

ABSOLUTELY DEMAND from EVERY candidate that ALL PRIVATE MONEY be FORBIDDEN from ALL public political campaigns. Only then do you have even the possibility for change.

[mitchtv]

61. I've done that for more than 40 years

IT ain't working

[Yavin4]

65. Let Me Give The Doubters on this Thread a Perfect Example of What I Am Talking About

We have marriage equality in New York state. We got it as a result of the vote of our legislature and our governor, not a state supreme court case.

We got it because folks went out and elected state legislators to our state house, and we nominated and elected a governor who will sign and enact the law.

That's how it is done people.

Our struggle is far bigger than one president.

[rbnyc]

76. + 1

[Love Bug]

66. Keith Ellison and Al Franken represent me so I'm not about to stay home on election day

I'll vote for Obama again, probably with little enthusiasm, but no way am I going to stay away from the polls altogether. Sometimes you just have to concentrate on local races because those spawn the larval form of national politicians.

[Jim Lane]

69. K&R, but I reserve my right to vent at the first Obama volunteer who phones me for a donation. (n/t)

[WCGreen]

70. Here Here!!!! K&R

[EFerrari]

73. This is really, really good advice.

:)

[we can do it]

75. Thank You For This

not one minute of my time, not one dime- Obama if you do this.
Will work for Sherrod Brown