Obama would not have been elected had it not been for

[rateyes]

us "lefties."



Just sayin'.

[polichick]

1. What?!? You mean he wasn't elected by Republicans and Evangelical Christians?nt

[rateyes]

3. It's amazing to me how the word "left" is being used as a perjorative

on DU to describe people who busted their butts to help elect Obama when those same folk criticize POLICIES that aren't progressive.

[polichick]

7. They're looking for scapegoats since their pop culture hero is off limits. nt

[rateyes]

12. Yep.

It's amazing.

[avaistheone1]

14. Did Obama himself call us the fringe?

I think we have been dissed from the top.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

44. I remember he referred to us as

"My friends on the Left".

[QC]

20. The right wing takeover of this place has been a sight to behold, hasn't it?

Now there's more red-baiting here than at Joe McCarthy's Fourth of July cookout.

[rateyes]

33. Now, THAT's some red-baiting.

:rofl:

[truedelphi]

48. + 1.

[Odin2005]

53. There has been no "right-wing takeover".

It's just that a Democrat is in office now so the Naderites and Trotskyites have restarted their bashing of Liberals and Moderates.

[snake in the grass]

61. Parties are not carved into granite.

There's no arguing with the fact that the Democratic Party as a whole is closer now to Goldwater Republicans, than to Roosevelt progressives. The GOP has steadily moved further to the extremely, insane right of the spectrum, dragging the Democrats along for the ride. Keep in mind, Lincoln of whom they are so proud left the GOP and the demi-god Reagan wouldn't pass their purity test today. It wouldn't surprise me if the Democratic Party, as a whole, becomes the new conservative party, leaving a vacuum to the left to be filled by a viable progressive movement.

[Gman]

2. Obama was going to win anyway

and besides, who else would the "lefties" vote for? McCain?

[rateyes]

5. The "lefties"

were responsible, in large part, for his gaining the nomination in the first place. Let's not forget that huge primary battle.

[Gman]

29. Doesn't matter. Hillary would have won in the GE too.

My dog could have won the GE. And now the "lefties" that so loved Obama and hated Hillary, now hate Obama. That's messed up.

[rateyes]

34. Now, we're getting accused of "hating" Obama.

Nice try, no cigar.

[lazer47]

4. He'll only be a one termer anyway, at the rate we are going

[polichick]

15. Probably so, even if he is not primaried from the left. Once he owns this...

...idiotic war, he's gone.

[lazer47]

17. He could take a lesson from Bush Sr,, "watch my lips"

[jefferson_dem]

6. Yes, "lefties" turned out for Obama. What was the alternative?

Fact is, Obama built a winning coalition of voters ranging from the left to the center-center-right.

The key to his victory, however, were the votes cast by people (many who were "first timers") who don't give a fuck about the stale ideological bullshit divide. The same will hold true for 2012.

[rateyes]

10. Another person forgetting the primaries.

You'd think that the "lefties" (a term being used perjoratively on DU for progressives) would at least have gotten a seat at the table in the health care debate.

Keep knocking the progressives, but I'll tell you the alternative for me: staying home on election day. I'm damned tired of my vote being taken for granted by Blue Dogs like the one who serves my district. I'm damned tired of my family and friends being shipped off to fight in an ill-conceived war. I'm damned tired of the "we can screw the 'lefties' because they have no other place to go" style of governing.

We "lefties" are always "compromising" but getting nothing in return.

I'm damned tired of beating my head against a wall for Democratic principles and having little to show for it.

We "lefties" can't win.

Therefore, why fight?

[CTLawGuy]

because the Republicans want you not to fight

that's why they filibuster EVERYTHING and oppose EVERYTHING in lockstep. They want to turn 2010 into 1994 by causing the Democrats to fail and depressing the Democratic base. Is that what you want? Take a look at my sig for how it USED to be in this country.

[jefferson_dem]

18. Repug strategists would be clicking their heels and smiling broadly at the OP's threats.

Being played like a fiddle...

[rateyes]

36. Not being played.

That's what the Dem leadership is doing to you, my friend. When your insurance premiums don't go down, and you don't have the public option because you're not unemployed, which leaves you underinsured, I won't tell you "I told you so."

And, on edit: Neither will I say "I told you so," when we're mired even deeper in the quagmire that is Afghanistan.

[rateyes]

35. Great sigline. Yes, Obama could learn some lessons about

how LBJ negotiated with Congress. He figured that if the bills passed by a large margin he left too much on the table. That's why we got medicare and Civil rights. He wasn't afraid to piss off the people in his own party. He didn't get the votes of many in his own party, and he got it passed anyway.

Obama, it seems to me, is too much in the business of trying to please everyone.

[jefferson_dem]

16. Fine.

Stay home, knowing that you'll be helping boost Palin, Huckleberry or whatever other cretin the Repugs put up.

No...not forgetting the primaries. Candidate Obama was bashed by so-called "lefties" on DU and elsewhere, many of whom preferred Edwards or the King of Lefties (Kooch).

[rateyes]

38. Fine.

I can live with standing on principle.

[amb123]

60. We're not just "lefties" anymore according to so-called "Democrats".

We're now the "loony left", "extremist left", "crazy left", "purity left" and "secret supporters of Sarah Palin" now.

[imdjh]

47. I disagree with the narrative.

Obama did not win the primary by building a coalition from the left to center right. He won the primary through strategy, a large part of which was indeed the street organization which deprived Hillary of a decisive win and would have made it appear that she had won through insider politics (super delegated doing what superdelegates are supposed to do).

As for the first timers, from what I have read it's false. There was nothing special about the first time vote in the last election.

[jefferson_dem]

59. Right.

I'm very aware of Obama's genius 50-state strategy and the way his campaign worked the primary calendar and built insurmountable momentum that Hillary could not overcome. Plouffe's "Audacity to Win" is sitting at my side right now.

I was responding to the OP's point regarding ideology and the 2008 vote. Obama was far from the "liberal" choice during the primary contest. In fact, his message was built largely upon a post-partisan/ideological foundation.

According to exit polls, Obama won first time voters by huge margins, both in the primaries and in the general.

[imdjh]

63. This is from Michael Medved's site.

LIE NUMBER THREE: Barack Obama’s historic 2008 campaign energized millions upon millions of new voters, who turned out for him in unprecedented numbers and drove voter participation to all-time highs. This constantly repeated (and utterly false) observation continues to warp out thinking about politics, leading to dumb mistakes like the widespread suggestion that 2009 represented a sad decline from the glorious turnouts of 2008. Actually, this years election was more-or-less typical for off-years contest, and last years much ballyhooed race in no sense represented a high water mark in voter turnout or involvement.

In fact, the final, official numbers in 2008 show that turnout didn’t increase at all but actually went down slightly from the Bush-Kerry race in 2004. In 2004, 63.8% of eligible citizens cast ballots for president; four years later, despite all the press hysteria surrounding Barack Obama, that number declined to 63.6%. Its true that 5 million more Americans voted in 2008 than in 2004, but the citizenship rolls went up by more than 9 million, explaining the small decrease in the rate of participation. Exit polls also conclusively demonstrated the lack of substance behind the awe-struck rhapsodies concerning hordes of idealistic new voters inspired by the glorious contagion of Obamamania: in 2008, 11% of those who cast ballots qualified as first time voters; four years earlier, for the less than inspiring Bush-Kerry battle, an identical 11% of those who came to the polls did so for the first time. Among the youthful 18-24 age group, supposedly the heart-and-soul of the Obama revolution, 44% cast ballots in 2008, compared to 42% four years earlier; hardly a remarkable upsurge. Meanwhile, the participation for every other age group went down in the four years between 04 and 08, accounting for the overall decline.

In other words, Obama’s campaign largely failed in its efforts to expand the electorate. He won the presidency not because he drew new voters to the polls, but because he persuaded previously Republican voters particularly among Latino, Asian and suburban communities to switch their support (at least temporarily) to the Democratic side.


As for the source, you really wouldn't expect to find this on obama.com

[jefferson_dem]

64. You snark about Obama.com by posting spin from Medved?

LOL! You do realize his wingnut leanings, right?

I've studied these numbers very carefully and there's plenty to challenge in Medved's spin. Bottom line: It's important to know who the first time voters are. In 2008, minorities made up a larger portion of the electorate and an even larger portion of first time voters. Beyond the number of first timers (I take issue with Medved on this note but no time now), Obama won them by more than 2-1.

Whatever. This is an academic exercise that is way beyond the scope of the OP. :hi:

[liberalmuse]

8. And....

.........???

[ClarkUSA]

9. I guess that's why 85% of self-identified liberals strongly approve of Pres. Obama's performance.

Then there's the bitter 9% fringe who hate anything and everything President Obama says or does and
strongly disapproves of him as much as any freeper. :eyes:

Of course, if President Obama hadn't won the independent vote by such a large margin, he would have lost to McCain. Because of it
and a larger than normal moderate Republican crossover votes, he won the general election by the largest margin in decades.

:)

[rateyes]

11. We "lefties"

handed him the nomination. I could be complaining about HRC, I guess.

[ClarkUSA]

19. First-time young voters handed Iowa to him in Jan. '08. Not sure if they'd call themselves "lefties"

Also, he mopped up wins in the caucus states, most of which featured tons of new voters in red and purple states.
I'm not sure if they'd all call themselves "lefties" either. His insurmountable lead over his DLC opponent had
its foundation on those caucus state wipeouts. He also won because the most reliable voters amongst all the
factions in the Democratic base turned out for him in large margins: African-Americans. I'm not sure if they'd
all describe themselves as "lefties" either. Crossover Republican and independent voters played a known part
in his victories, too.

But liberals like me worked and voted for him. I'd say he built a coalition to win the nomination that went far beyond
the usual small band of historical primary voters. I haven't seen any data that includes self-identification of primary
and caucus voters broken down state-by-state so it's hard to be sure of the ideological breakdown. Most of them
would say they voted because they liked Barack Obama. I doubt most of the new voters would have been there if
he hadn't been running. It's safe to say that all the parts of that coalition combined to hand him the nomination.

[rateyes]

39. Ever thought about who would have won Iowa had Edwards

dropped out (been caught) before Iowa?

[FrenchieCat]

67. wasn't Edwards the "Leftie" candidate?

[rateyes]

68. I believe that Hillary would have been the nominee had

Edwards not been in the race from the beginning. But, hey, I supported Obama over Hillary. Now, I am beginning to realize that it wouldn't have made a dime's worth of difference.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Your 'bitter' meme is getting tiresome. Haven't you looked underneath Obama's bus?

It is getting quite crowded in there!

[ClarkUSA]

27. I was referring to a well-known polling statistic with an obvious conclusion. Did I hit a nerve?

:hi:

[Odin2005]

55. Says the bitter Trotskyite posterboy of the bitter 9%.

[treestar]

52. Exactly, the concept is just as nutty as when the right wingers claim

McThuseleh lost because he was "too liberal." As if the middle, who voted for Obama, would have voted Repuke had they only run their most right wing Fascist! :rofl:

[Odin2005]

54. The bitter 9% fringe think the rest of us are "not real Democrats". Fuck them.

[villager]

13. predictably un-recc'd by the Flat Earthers....

n/t

[frazzled]

21. And centrists, and Independents and disgruntled Republicans

No one gets elected without a broad swath of support. Are you trying to say your support was more important than someone else's?

Sometimes I think we have a very myopic view of ourselves. Or megalomaniacal. Or narcissistic. Or something. Whatever it is, we were not the only ideological stripe that elected BO.

[ClarkUSA]

22. Exactly.

:thumbsup:

[Cha]

37. That's precisely what they seem to

be saying.

[rateyes]

41. But, we're the only ones being ignored.

[treestar]

51. +1

The OP is simply incorrect.

The Independents would be the ones who made the difference. The soft middle that any candidate for President has to win.

[Odin2005]

56. The so-called "Progressives" deluded themselves into thinking they are "The Base"

Myopic is pretty much it. DU is significantly to the left of the average Democrat.

[IndianaGreen]

23. for people that voted for the first time in a long time, or first time ever

Those are the people that turned Indiana blue last year, and those are the people still in pain and still bewildered that things haven't changed in their lives. I doubt we will get them to the polls next time around.

[ClarkUSA]

25. Midterm elections never ever get near the same turnout as general elections for obvious reasons.

Thus, 2008 first-time voters are not going to turn out in the same numbers next year as last year. I doubt if all
those first-time voters believe that everything should've turned hunky-dory for them by now, only 10 months
of President Obama inherited eight years of BushCo's gross mismanagement of the economy. Pres. Obama has
travelled to Indiana multiple times this year and the stimulus money is still flowing, saving many jobs and creating
others. No one I know (teabaggers from the left and right aside) is blaming their jobless state on the Democrats
so much that they refuse to vote for them. If anything, they just aren't engaged in the relatively boring aspect
of midterm election dynamics due to the relatively lackluster candidates involved.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[onenote]

26. so does that meant that "lefties" are to blame for Gore and Kerry losing?

[rateyes]

42. No politician gets elected without the base of the party.

It would be nice if the base of the party got a seat at the negotiating table.

[Phx_Dem]

30. Bullshit. I'd give more credit to the Independents.

And if you "lefties" voted for him based on his stance to continue the Afganistan war, why are so disappointed now? He's doing exactly what he promised to do.

[Cha]

40. They must have had their

ears and eyes closed then.

[rateyes]

43. Well, then the "lefties" can stay home next time,

and it won't matter.


I call bullshit on the "bullshit."

[dkf]

31. You'd rather have John McCain? Or Sarah Palin? YIKES.

He's not perfect, but he is better than the alternative.

[rateyes]

32. You got me.

I'd rather have Palin and McCain. :sarcasm:

[dkf]

69. Lefties have to understand if the American people really wanted a progressive we would have picked

Kucinich. Even in the Democratic Party we got someone who is and has always been a moderate. Not a moderate like Blanche Lincoln or Mary Landrieu but a true moderate somewhere in the middle of the party itself.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

45. The "better than McCain" crowd

strikes again!!!!

[ClarkUSA]

46. As opposed to the "Obama = Bush" crowd, which strikes 24/7.

:eyes:

[cali]

49. And he wouldn't have been elected without centrists and independents either.

[rateyes]

57. Yeah, but centrists and independents get his attention.

[Odin2005]

50. The youth vote, moderate Gen-Xers, and traditional liberal voters elected Obama.

The self-proclaimed "Progressives" are what, 5% of the population? Kucinich was your guys' man. :rofl:

[Beacool]

58. Yeah, remind me to "thank" some of you...........

x(

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

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

[Garam_Masala]

65. Brillian analysis!! Simply Brilliant!!!

How did you figure that out?

[rateyes]

66. I see the point of irony about the term "left" being used as a perjorative

on DU got lost on you. Brilliant!