Obama primary challenge would be a good thing, liberal senator says

[The Northerner]

One of the Senate's liberal leaders said on Wednesday that it would be beneficial for President Obama to face a primary challenger from the left in 2012.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who has criticized the president for — among other things — brokering a tax deal with Republicans, said that it is worthwhile to have a wide array of voices in the campaign.

"If a progressive Democrat were to run, I think it would enliven the debate," he said during an interview on WNYC Radio. "They are free to do that."

Sanders's comments could revive talk of a primary challenge to Obama; many observers speculated that could happen after Democrats took a beating in the midterm elections, making the president look vulnerable for reelection in 2012.

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/149911-sanders-obama-primary-challenge-would-enliven-debate

[Bluebear]

1. He never really loved him.

:cry:

[Scurrilous]

2. Fancy that!

:o

[Tx4obama]

3. The 'only good thing' would be it would give Obama more TV coverage. n/t

[TheWraith]

4. Bernie apparently thinks that the entire country is like Vermont.

Nice if it were, but that's kind of like saying it would be nice if candy fell from the sky. It's a completely pointless fantasy.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. I agree with Bernie and I live in Washington.

[donheld]

25. I agree with Bernie and I live in Colorado.

[LooseWilly]

27. I agree and I live in California...

We have an assload of electoral votes....

[ixion]

5. I agree with Mr. Sanders

Obama proved he wasn't about change a long time ago.

[peace frog]

7. Thanks for speaking out for Bernie Sanders

My hero next to Howard Dean, may the gods bless them. And ITA that a liberal challenger would be excellent if it moved Obama even slightly leftward in response. Or a lot leftward, dream on, right? But a slight shift leftward is a good start.

[emilyg]

9. +1

[Hardrada]

10. I agree also but I wish there was more than one sane senator.

[ixion]

12. Indeed...as do I

[slay]

13. So do I! Most Dems seem more than willing to just give the Obama admin a free pass no matter what

they do that is out of line with traditional Democratic values.

I wish Bernie would run.

Someone MUST run.

Kucinich says he won't run either.

Perhaps Alan Grayson?

The point is not necessarily to win, but to force Obama to explain his actions - or lack there of - over his first 4 years.

[inademv]

6. If nothing else

a challenge from the left would give us all a good frame of reference to show just how conservative Obama is.

[yourout]

8. And at the very least it might pull him at least a little to the left.

[Cali_Democrat]

14. Exactly. n/t

[CommonSensePLZ]

11. But Obama's a far-left socialist, didn't he hear? It was all over Fox news.

Couldn't resist. :)

[Kingofalldems]

15. Unrec for anti-Democratic party tone

[inademv]

16. rec'd for pro-liberal theme n/t

[ixion]

17. double choco rations for you!

:woohoo:

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[CommonSensePLZ]

28. -1

Encouraging spineless get-nothing-done moderatism in democratic party.

[jwirr]

18. Or he should just start reading DU and see just how far he has moved

from his base. Presidents are way too isolated. They surround themselves with yes men and cannot see what is happening on the ground.

[xchrom]

19. Recommend

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. I hope Bernie will endorse whichever progressive runs against Obama.

Or, changes his mind and runs himself.

[Howler]

23. I agree with Bernie

And I live in Ohio.

[PSPS]

24. As a practical matter, it wouldn't make any difference.

Obama has already revealed his conservative corporate values. He's good at speechifying, but it's all a charade. And he has admitted publicly on the record that he's a Reagan acolyte.

Having a primary challenger would simply get Obama to make more promises or proclaim goals and ideals that nobody would believe anyway, given that he's already used up that trick. Outside of his cult of personality, he has no base anymore.

Unless Obama has a primary challenger from the left who defeats him, we're going to have a republican president in 2012. The same dispiriting ennui that kept democrats home in 2010 will be there in 2012 if Obama's on the ticket in the general election. Scary talk about "supreme court" and "women's rights" and what not isn't going to cut it. Obama simply can't win in the next general election.

[JoeyT]

26. A primary from someone on the left would probably cost Obama the general if he won the primary.

Mainly because truthful ads would completely annihilate support for him on the left.

Without a primary challenge he'll only have to face ads run by Republicans who can't touch most of his dirtier stuff because they agree with it and do it too. With one he'd have to face someone that would call him out on union busting, torture, war crimes, cozying up to the bankers, free trade, etc.

That's not the lefts fault, though. If he doesn't want his anti-labor and anti-poor attitudes exposed, he should try not being anti-labor and anti-poor.

[Jim Lane]

31. No, it would be the best insulation against Republican attacks on Obama as an extreme leftist.

You're right that some progressives, their eyes opened by the hypothetical challenger's attacks, would stay home or vote third party in 2012. Most of us, though, would vote for the challenger to send a message, and then gloomily trudge back into the Democratic fold in November. We'd wish we had a progressive President, but we'd recognize that even a Nixonian Democrat is better than a Palinian Republican. Therefore, the loss in votes would be small.

Far outweighing it would be the gain among centrists and independents. For months they would see Obama championing a continued U.S. presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, insisting that his stimulus package was not way too small, defending a health-care policy based on the for-profit private sector instead of socialized medicine, etc. That kind of campaign would make it much harder for Republicans to paint Obama as a socialist or extremist. Quite a few centrists would say, "No, the socialist was that candidate that Obama beat in the primaries. Obama's in the sensible middle, between Grayson (or whomever) on the left and Romney (or whomever) on the right."

The biggest problem with Sanders's scenario is that there's probably no one on the left who's willing to run AND who has enough stature to create a genuine dialogue. Obama would refuse to debate someone like Grayson or even Kucinich, and the corporate media would virtually ignore the progressive challenger.

[JoeyT]

32. Good point.

I didn't think about it that way.

[deacon]

29. Feingold/Franken 2012 :)

[bvar22]

30. We NEED a Progressive challenger.

We NEED a Liberal challenger to stand on the national stage and tell America what the "Democratic Party" used to STAND for.....and hopefully CAN stand for again.

The Republican Party and the Media have successfully framed Obama as a Liberal,
so the REAL Democratic values have been completely marginalized (silenced).

Most of America no longer knows that the Democratic Party traditionally supported Working Class Americans.
In fact, the Republicans are NOW claiming with some success that they are the supporters of the Working Class.



Who will STAND UP and represent THIS American Majority?
Platitudes, Rhetoric, Empty Promises, and Excuses are meaningless now.

"By their WORKS you will know them,"
And by their WORKS they will be held accountable.

[treestar]

33. He's not a Democrat

Why should we listen to a nonDemocrat tell us what to do?