If Obama isn't Left enough for you...............

[27inCali]

hey, I understand the frustration. but maybe think about this.

If you can hold on and help make his presidency successful, you might just find that a very successful Democratic Presidency and some successful Democratic policies will start to earn the trust of the mushy middle and move the country to the Left, making it more likely to have a much more Liberal president (and Congress) in the future.

To me, the big question is, how do you seduce moderate voters into giving Liberal policies a chance? and to me the answer is, successful Democratic presidents and policies -success breeds confidence and trust: people are suckers for winners.

personally, I don't see how hobbling Obama's presidency with lack of support from the base does anything but make the nightmare of President Mike Huckabee a lot more likely.

we all get impatient, pissed off and gotta vent from time to time. I have too. I'm just saying, I think if we can keep this guy in office for a good 8 years he may not give us our entire Lefty wish list, but he'll give us at least a few big items and pave the way from someone more Liberal than him to pick up the job where he left off. That's why you'll never find me making post after post attacking him for not being as Left as me, personally, I accept that I'm really pretty Lefty compared to most people and I shouldn't realistically expect my Leftist vision of the world to come to fruition 10 months after electing a self-styled moderate.

[polichick]

1. It won't be lefties who vote him out of office - it'll be independents if it happens. nt

[Go2Peace]

14. exactly, moderation is the path to defeat.

[debbierlus]

2. Moderate voters don't want big bailouts, the health industry writing the health care bill, ...

Expanding the war in Afghanistan...

Okay?

So, PLEASE stop with the propaganda that we have to win this mythical middle. The policies that liberals are upset over are the same policies that the rest of the nation is upset over.

Obama could have WON the majority of the country by implementing the 'liberal' (ie sane) policies that would actually help the majority of it. Going RIGHT is what will be Obama's downfall, not us.

[BeFree]

8. Eh?

Propaganda? The middle of the country is centrist. They voted for pubbies a lot. They are scared of us on the left. (Mainly because they have been brainwashed.)

Your view that most of the country wants what we on the far left want is propaganda, with no real basis in reality.

We are a minority...for now. What the OP suggests is that given a good run at reforming the country, slowly and surely, the moderates will soon enough begin to see things our way.

Obama knows this, and that's how he's working things. (mostly)

Give him a chance, that's all we are asking, give him a chance. We will crush the pubbies in 2010 if we all work together.

[Go2Peace]

16. You do not understand the human mind, they are centrist because they have been told that is

all that works. Much of the country is living a false illusion. Primarily people want to feel safe and want to "go along", and they are completely suggestible. Republicans understand this, we haven't learned it yet.

If we want to move the center away from the right we have to inform them and come on like we have the better ideas. To some extent that is going on through the new progressive media, but Obama does not "gain" anything by trying to appear in the middle and you cannot "appeal" to them, you can only "lead" them.

[BeFree]

26. I don't?

Oh, sure i do. We even agree, mostly, about why the country is positioned the way it is. I say brainwashed, you call it suggestible.

Obama said we have a lot to do, and we may not get it done in eight years, but if we stay strong and united we will get to a better place.

Face it, he's new and untested, and he has lots of opposition right from the start. He is walking a fine line. He pisses off some of us, and he pisses off the other extreme, too. He said he was gonna be the president of the whole country, not just the blue. That's what he's doing, and so far, pretty good in that regard.

[Hippo_Tron]

11. If it were that simple why hasn't Obama simply done that?

Politicians want to get re-elected more than anything. If he could sew up his re-election by being a "true liberal" as you say he could've done it by now.

The reality is a lot more complicated and the mythical middle is not in fact a myth. Worse, people are misinformed and don't really understand exactly what policies benefit them and don't benefit them.

[Go2Peace]

20. The same reason the DLC screwed up elections until the DNC and BUSH "won" a majority

for the democrats. Obama did not win the last election, only in the sense of over the other democrats. It was **lost** by the republicans, and . And it was the head of the DNC (liberal side), Howard Dean, who helped solidify it with his 50 state policy.

The centrists are lousy strategists, but they have lots of money, so when the pendulum swinges toward the democrats, one of theirs gets traction over the more progressive candidates.

This also happened with Clinton, Bush I screwed up the economy and the country so badly that Democrats were able to come back.

[Kaleva]

35. Kucinich is more liberal then Obama but he can't make it thru the primaries.

[zalinda]

36. He couldn't make it through the primaries because

the media never mentioned him. They didn't mention anyone except Clinton and Obama. When I was talking to someone about politics I mentioned Edwards, she had never heard of him. The only two that she knew about was Clinton and Obama, and she would be your average (non-political junkie) voter.

zalinda

[Kaleva]

38. Liberals, the arguement goes, don't rely on MSM for their info.

If liberals make up only a small minority during the Democratic primaries, I can see your point.

[goclark]

68. I love Dennis but he is not the most inspiring person on the stump

I also like to think what will the voters look like in four years, who would inspire the young voters?

Don't think Dennis would, Just My Opinion.

[salguine]

47. Because there was a virtual media blackout imposed on him; he wasn't even allowed

to participate in some Democratic Party forums even though he was on the ballot.

[DJ13]

3. how do you seduce moderate voters into giving Liberal policies a chance?

I really think the voters thought that was what they were getting when they voted for Obama and his "change" message.

Sadly, it looks like the opportunity to move the electorate leftwards may be passing us by now, as I doubt voters will give another politician who runs as somewhat liberal another chance after this.

[msallied]

60. Campaign Finance Reform, return of the Fairness Doctrine (or something similar),

and perhaps a repeal of the deregulations on the Telecom industry. That is how you get Americans to start accepting liberal policies again. When the forces of greed own your representatives and a media that eschews truth in favor of entertainment, you have a stupid electorate.

[noamnety]

4. No.

It's a myth to believe that an effective strategy for moving the country to the left is for the left to accept centrist positions, and stop holding politicians accountable.

[Cha]

5. Thanks for attempting some logic, 27 in Cali.

PO is focused on what he thinks is best for our country and that's more of a concern for him than getting elected again.

If he does that will be brilliant, imv..if he doesn't, well, I know he gave it his best.

This is a rough time and we will come out of this hole.

[Clio the Leo]

6. Makes sense to me. NT

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[Cha]

15. "A disrupter"? "GoTOHELL"? What kind of insane insults are those

to a poster who is laying out their thoughts on these issues we have?

You're the one who is disrupting.

[rhett o rick]

42. OK, maybe I am wrong, but this poster pushed a lot of buttons.

With statements like:

“I understand the frustration. but”

“If you can hold on and help make his presidency successful,”

“I don't see how hobbling Obama's presidency with lack of support”

The poster seems to be blaming the left for not being supportive. I am getting sick of these posts that say if Pres Obama fails, it is the fault of the left.

And finally:

“I accept that I'm really pretty Lefty”

I agree that my gotohell comment was inappropriate.

[HughMoran]

83. Arguing with "Deleted Message" again?

:)

[Go2Peace]

22. Relax Rick, he is being genuine.

Why offend him, so you just succeeded in pushing us back toward more infighting.

The logic on the progressive side is sound. We just need to explain to others who are not quite there yet why sicking with the centrist DLC mindset will never get them where they want to go. We are all on the same side.

[rhett o rick]

43. Sorry but the continuous attack on the left is getting to me.

Please see my response 42 above.

[spoony]

48. You're not alone there

and I think the whole idea IS to get to us. The browbeatings and scoldings and telling us we'll cause a Palin presidency. It's all ridiculous but over time they hope to erode reasonable criticisms of bad policies by making it too much of a bother to post because we know what the responses will be.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. It's Never Getting Better Than This

"Democrats" have the presidency and super-majorities in both houses of Congress. We won't have a second chance. This only happens once in a generation.

70% of Americans want a public option - they don't need to be seduced, they're already in the sack and ready to go. But "Democratic" politicians won't give it to them, they're busy flirting with lobbyists. The President won't push for it, either. But if the bankers need cash - he's all over that with the urgency of James Bond trying to defuse a nuclear bomb.

Stick a fork on this thing. It's done.

[Cha]

17. It's always DOOMGLOOMDOOMGLOOMDOOM..

ad infinitum for you.

[MannyGoldstein]

19. It's A Very, Very Sad Situation - Sorry That You Don't Like It

I don't like it either.

Do you disagree with my post?

[Cha]

21. Yes, I disgree..We will get out of this shit hole.

[Go2Peace]

24. and you really think we get out of this by letting inertia take over?

You haven't gotten it yet Cha, what you are seeing on this board is simply how politics works. Obama understand this. I wish folks here would get it.

And do you really believe that by protesting and making out those who want more change to be "anti-democrat" etc, that you will even affect anything? Haven't you been listening to the radio or watching the blogisphere? I guarantee you the same debate is going on even in Washington. This is a MAJOR movement. Amongst activists, I believe your a minority.

And you just watch, Obama's policies will start moving to the left, at least if folks keep it up, and we will start to have victories. This is part of that "grassroots" upswell we want. You should be encouraging it, not trying to stop it.

[Cha]

27. No one is asking for inertia. Just the facts..

No hysterical rhetoric, no bogus speculation written to incite hate, ..I won't even ask for patience, but no one understands what PO is going through except the White House.

No inertia.

[MannyGoldstein]

31. Facts? How about 1% Of Americans.

That's the % of Americans for whom the proposed "public option" will be useful for, according to the GAO.

1%

In exchange, the insurance companies got all sorts of gifts - for example, sure they can't deny covereage based on a pre-existing condition: but they can charge anything they want to write the policy.

This is why insurance company stocks are doing quite nicely.

But if Goldman Sachs gets a mosquito bite, Obama will turn on the money spigots.

Those are facts.

[Go2Peace]

34. You're not interested in listening Cha. My response was reasoned

and you still persist in insisting we should not be voicing our feelings. OK. whatever, tells me where you are coming from. But good luck. You aren't going to stop this train from rolling. It has long been out of the station. Been listening to any of the left media lately? It isn't a "DU" phenominon.

It is a movement.

[boppers]

49. "voicing feelings"?

Uhm, to me, "voicing feelings" is "voicing automatic reaction, untempered by logic".

This is why the ideological left has never totally owned the (D), because, well, logic is kind of required for government. Heck, that kind of silliness is mocked by Colbert and other comedians who recognize that "feelings" are a piss poor way to communicate, or advance, dialog, and a really bad way of managing rational thinking.

Oh, and yes, it has been a movement in America to "go with one's gut". Look at the last 30 years to see what it's done for us.

[rhett o rick]

79. Are you a supporter of Sen Sanders, or do you think he is too left? nt

[Go2Peace]

10. "If you can hold on and help make his presidency successful"

That is where I believe most of those who are critical are at. I think there is also a fundamental difference in how people think politics works. If we don't stand up and argue and push for stronger measures and more change it simply will not tend to happen.

It just hasn't been on DU that this is going on, it is all over the progressive blogoshere and on the progressive radio as well.

I think where the "support makes success" group are mistaken. If a politician is not listening and following through or you feel they need to make changes, you HAVE to speak out and loudly. I also think those of us who are outspoken are likely a little older and have been in the process much longer, and realize that we are in danger still even with a Democrat in office, as long as the clock is not severly rolled back.

[rhett o rick]

44. Well put. You are much more diplomatic than me. When some asks the left for "support" what exactly

do they mean by support? Sit down and shut up? If someone expects the left to ever sit down and shut up, doesnt know the left. The only way to ever counter the heavy influence of the right is to continue to fight for progressive issues.

[treestar]

56. Not sit down and shut up but keep supporting them with rabid enthusiasm

Just like the right does. That is why they get what they want in disproportion to public support. The left just undermines its own states desires. But you never see right wingers doing that, and that's why the country is so far to the right.

The left just doesn't get it, or prefers to be permanently pissed off. There's a certain superior attitude to being too good for this world.

[rhett o rick]

65. You suggest that the left act like the right? Pullese

You are obviously not "left", as you so definitely attack the left. So please explain on what issues you disagree with the "left".

Public financed elections?

Universal health care?

Ending unnecessary wars?

Lobbying reform?

Ending torture?

Fair and honest elections?

Please explain how you disagree with the left on these issues.

[treestar]

76. You are confusing methods with substance

I was so clearly talking about their enthusiasm and the way they work at what they want. That is a separate issue from what they actually want.

If I applied the same chop logic to your statements, I'd be accusing you of saying we should just complain on message boards rather than do any campaigning. Since freepers campaign really hard, we should be superior to that and not do it. We should stay home and just feel superior rather than go out and vote or organize or march enthusiastically for what we want, since freepers and the right do those things, and that makes them wrong.

[rhett o rick]

78. The Democratic Party may not be as efficient as the republicant party

but I'll take it any day. You say we should emulate the republicant's "enthusiasm and the way they work at what they want". I completely disagree. They are enthusiastic, as we see with the tea-bagger rallies, but blindly following a ideology that most dont even understand.

If Pres Obama doesnt work to provide decent health care, I will speak out. If he fails to end the illegal wars, I will speak out. If he continues to give my money to the big banks, damnit I will speak out. The fact that he is better than the Idiot King isnt enough for me.

[treestar]

80. What good does your speaking out do?

That is, if you can't do it without slamming the President. You aren't one of the ones saying his speeches aren't good enough, are you (They're just speeches, not action, and that whole theme)? Because you are claiming that you speaking is doing some good.

If he's better than the Boy King why not encourage that and the areas where he is better?

And efficiency does have something to do with winning. It's almost as if you'd rather be pure on methods than get what you want.

[xchrom]

12. right -- 'the left' is any problem at all?

i don't think there is any shred of integrity 'left' in moderates at all.:eyes:

[Go2Peace]

13. "he'll give us at least a few big items and pave the way from someone more Liberal than him"

That statement is where the danger lies, there is a HUGE risk in that approach. Not to mention that is what we we did with Clinton, and it didn't work. The system must be FUNDAMENTALY changed. We are currently still driving on a road on the side of a cliff, sure we can continue to fix a few potholes and possibly make it to the other side, but we risk disaster until we build a new road. So far Obama is mostly talking "potholes" and many cars are going off the cliff in the interim.

[Cha]

18. Naturally a few are misreading what you have to

say..kinda like they misread Everything..willfully.

[rhett o rick]

67. I would love to know how you differ with the "left" on the important issues.

You are obviously not "left", so, if you would, please explain on what issues you disagree with the "left".

Public financed elections?

Universal health care?

Ending unnecessary wars?

Lobbying reform?

Ending torture?

Fair and honest elections?

Please explain how you disagree with the left on these issues.

[LooseWilly]

23. What "few big items and pave the way..." do you imagine will be produced?

Health Care Reform was supposed to be a "big item". It's being pretty thoroughly undermined, and from what I've seen... it looks like it was & is the Progressive Caucus in the House that kept it from being completely sacrificed in the "deal making" to get the votes of... Democrats. Stupak is a Democrat, and his amendment to the House Bill is an affront to women, and people who support women. If you imagine that things will be better if the left ceases it's "wails of frustration and discontent" ... well, I'd like some of what you're smoking/drinking/mainlining... because, from where I'm sitting, it looks like a cessation of criticism from the left will just allow the old-school Clintonites (the ones that settled for DADT and signed on to NAFTA and Welfare Reform) to settle for Blanche Lincoln-esque versions of these "few big items" that you speak of... and the electorate will not be impressed.

And while we're at it... as far as the "center" was concerned, the Clinton presidency was a "very successful Democratic Presidency"... and that ushered in... Bush. The notion of "incrementalism" is ridiculous... the liberals, especially the young liberals who will be voting in the future, will only show up if they can be energized... and a Public Option that is available to 3% of the population (us independent contractors, only, from the sounds of things)... at a higher price than most private insurance... and with a Stupak-esque roll back on access to reproductive rights for women... that's not going to energize any liberals... it's not going to provide any model of success for "liberal" policy successes for future campaigns... hell, with the mandates it's almost worse for all us unemployed/underemployed/self-employed folks... and with the economy in the shape it is in the number of "us" is only going to increase.

I tell you, if We of the Hellraising Left shut up and let the politics of "realism" get its way... I predict that a lot more people will be investing in dime bags (which now cost 2 dimes) and getting stoned while watching professional wrestling, because there won't be a whole hell of a lot else to bother doing.

So maybe those who want a "successful Democratic Presidency" should consider adding their voices to the choir...

[bertman]

28. Yeee Haaa, Willy. That was PERFECT!! Thank you very much. nt

[Go2Peace]

32. exactly. +1

[tekisui]

25. The covented moderates or independents as they are called

are politically ignorant. They pay little to no attention to politics or how things are done. You are right about producing successes to win them over again. In 2010 and 2012, it will be a referendum on Democratic majorities and President Obama.

It really depends on the definition of success. Passing legislation is good. But success is not guaranteed with bills going into action. It is about the results. If Obama can show results--improved job numbers, improved housing numbers, expanded health coverage and troops coming home from Iraq--these will be seen as successes. If the unemployment stays around 10%, if the health insurance reform doesn't result in clear improvements, if troops just get moved from Iraq to Afghanistan and Afghanistan gets worse--it will be harder to tout success.

So it isn't enough to support the Democratic Party in enacting legislation, it is more important to make that legislation good and the policies the most beneficial.

[Go2Peace]

29. It is about results but it is also about using the "bully pulpit"

The dialog has to be changed as well. We are so shell shocked our leaders are afraid to be bold. But by not we risk ceeding it all to those who *will* be bold, like the Corporatists.

You know, if I were a coporate power player right now, I would be heavily investing right now in stealth DLC candidates. The Republicans are not the best investment right now and Obama may win again by default even if his popularity is not riding high. The smart thing to do would be to continue to try and take over the democratic party. Come to think of it, isn't that kind of what the DLC has been about all along?

[Kermitt Gribble]

30. I have an idea on how to make his presidency successful.

And, it will win over so-called independents in droves. How about enacting policy that helps the working class? Affordable health care for all? Infrastructure jobs that pay a living wage? Some real banking reform to show we will no longer tolerate the crooks?

Give people a chance to earn a living, feed their families, and keep themselves healthy and you will have earned a massive loyal voting block. Cater to the corporations, and you will deservedly lose those same voters.

[MannyGoldstein]

33. +1

The best thing he could have done, for his own political career and for The People, is to quickly show tangible results for the average Jane and Joe.

[Lindsey]

39. President Obama has been in office for less than one year

and people are expecting him to clean up almost a decade of total shit - in less than one year?!?!??! WTF???????????????

[MannyGoldstein]

41. He's Done Plenty.

It just hasn't been helpful to the average person. It's been great if you're a banker or CEO of a member of the military-industrial complex.

We'd like him to turn his efforts to the other 99.9% of us, who are being damaged worse.

[rhett o rick]

45. Hey, those sound a lot like "lefty" ideas. The OP suggests you, "hold on and help make his

presidency successful".

[Life Long Dem]

37. The media starts up all this.

The first one was with Clinton to her new cabinet position. The media jumped in and shouted the left is leaving Obama! And so when you hear it over and over again, maybe you will drop out, - it's real news anyway isn't it?

[LWolf]

40. I'm not getting my big items:

Universal, single-payer, not-for-profit health care

An end to military presence in the ME

Authentic support for public education that doesn't attempt to further privatize or union-bust


I realistically expect that I should get SOMETHING constructive on my top issues. At least put a stop to moving the wrong direction.

[MadHound]

46. earn the trust? Earn The Trust? EARN THE FUCKING TRUST OF THE "MUSHY MIDDLE"?

How goddamn insulting, the one group, unlike the mushy middle who have gone all Reagan Republican, all Bush Republican (twice now), the one group that has hung with the Dems through thick and thin now has to "earn the trust" of the very people who keep hopping on and off the bandwagon?

FUCK THAT!

I've put in my time, paid my dues, and for once in my thirty plus years of supporting the Democratic party I would love to see the left thrown a serious sized bone, you know, the size of the ones they throw to the DLC and those inconsistent, inconsiderate moderates all the time.

The left has been the heart and soul of the Democratic party for generations, and to have the nerve to say that we've got to "earn the trust" is an insult, and frankly the attitude of that statement is a huge part of the problem that the left has with the Democratic party.

We've manned the trenches, given the money, walked the walk and yet for the past forty years we've seen nothing in kickback, not one damn crumb. Instead, we are told we must wait "for just a little while longer", or "until the next election", and now until we've "earned the trust"

Do you realize how goddamn patronizing that sounds? Do you realize just how insulting that statement of yours is? You are saying, despite the miles on the shoes, the money put down, the votes gotten out, the work and work and goddamn work now we have to "earn the trust" of the very people who switch from Reagan/Bush to Clinton, back to Bush, etc. etc.

What the fuck ever happened to rewarding loyalty? What the fuck ever happened to rewarding those who have stuck by you through thick and thin. Jesus H. Christ on a pogo stick, what ever happened to having the common decency of giving a bone to those who have been there for you.

Fuck that, the left should go Green, after all, it seems that the only ones in this goddamn party who get rewarded are the ones to jump from one ship back to another, getting the best rewards they can from which ever party is willing to pay them.

[LooseWilly]

50. Satan-Amen, brother!!

:headbang:

[saracat]

51. +1 I wish this was an OP. Brilliant!

[Ysabel]

75. whoo hoo...!

- madhound i think i love you...

[shadesofgray]

81. APPLAUSE!!!!! ICAM with you more if I tried!

[rhett o rick]

82. Bravo, bravo. nt

[depakid]

52. "how do you seduce moderate voters"

You DON'T.

That's a chimera- and the single biggest reason for the Democrats repeated failures over the last 25 years. That people STILL -after all these years fall for such non-sense today only goes to show how far this nation has fallen. And how much further it has to fall.

[avaistheone1]

53. I think the crumby health care legislation topped off by the escalation

in Afghanistan will be deal breakers for Obama. People are very, very unhappy on both fronts.

The condition this country will be in by re-election time will be worse than today as result of all the money and resources that will be squandered in Afghanistan. As a result George Bush's dismal numbers were look pretty good compared to Obama's at that point in time.

[Hawkowl]

54. Nonsense.

Bill Clinton was perhaps the second best Republican president of the 20th century. We all bent over and took it from this "moderate" ass clown and now we are getting our first republican black president. So your assertion that success of "moderates" will give us a liberal president and policies is absurd.

Obama is already out of touch with the MAJORITY of American voters. The majority wants the wars ended now. The majority wants the corporate giveaways ended now. And the majority wants single payer health insurance NOW!

All very progressive views, so you're premise of NEEDING to persuade the majority of Americans is a false one.

I get the impression that you are rather young, i.e; under thirty. If you want to know what real Democratic presidents sounded like before ass clown Clinton, I suggest you peruse the internets and listen to some of FDR's, Truman's and even LBJ's speeches. They will knock you on your ass. The American people are still as mainstream now as they were then. It's just that now, corporations, aka big business, controls the MSM and blatantly bribes elected officials.

If Obama chooses conservative, republican policies, I will do all I can to weaken the presidency and strengthen the democrats who support traditional, progressive, pro-labor, anti-corporate policies.

[rhett o rick]

55. Well said. You said this so much better than me. I let my emotions get the best of me. nt

[mitchum]

63. +1

[IndianaGreen]

64. K&R n/t

:kick:

[ClassWarrior]

57. "'Centrism' is the creation of an inaccurate self-serving metaphor, and it is time to bury it."

"There is no left to right linear spectrum in the American political life. There are two systems of values and modes of thought -- call them progressive and conservative (or nurturant and strict, as I have). There are total progressives, who use a progressive mode of thought on all issues. And total conservatives. And there are lots of folks who are what I've called "biconceptuals": progressive on certain issue areas and conservative on others. But they don't form a linear scale. They are all over the place: progressive on domestic policy, conservative on foreign policy; conservative on economic policy, progressive on foreign policy and social issues; conservative on religion, but progressive on social issues and foreign policy; and on and on. No linear scale. No single set of values defining a "center." Indeed many of such folks are not moderate in their views; they can be quite passionate about both their progressive and conservative views..."

http://www.alternet.org/story/60164/

NGU.

[avaistheone1]

58. ^5

[ClassWarrior]

62. "The losing strategy is to move to the right..."

"...to assume with Republicans that American values are mainly conservative and that the Democratic party has to move away from its base and adopt conservative values. When you do that, you help activate conservative values in people's brains (thus helping the other side), you offend your base (thus hurting yourself), and you give the impression that you are expressing no consistent set of values, which is true! Why should the American people trust somebody who does not have clear values, and who may be trying to deceive them about the values he and his party's base hold?"

NGU.

[rhett o rick]

69. Well said. nt

[spiritual_gunfighter]

59. Once again

It's not the left wing of the party's fault that our president isn't a liberal.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

61. The people you are lecturing are miles ahead of you

[rhett o rick]

66. Please explain where you stand on the important issues of the day.

You are obviously not "left", as you so definitely attack the left. So please explain on what issues you disagree with the "left".

Public financed elections?

Universal health care?

Ending unnecessary wars?

Lobbying reform?

Ending torture?

Fair and honest elections?

Please explain how you disagree with the left on these issues.

[QC]

70. Issues???

[rhett o rick]

73. I have asked this question of a number of these posters that attack the left.

And never once have they answered. It is my guess that they are afraid to reveal that their stands on the ISSUES is the same as the right wing-nuts. Just a guess.

[QC]

74. That is an excellent guess. n/t

[MissDeeds]

71. A bit too much of "if" and "might" in the op

to engender much "hope" for "change".

[vi5]

72. What we have now is as good as it gets....

..We have the presidency. A large house majority, and effectively a super majority in the senate. There is no way we are getting more of either. The numbers and the mathematical reality just are not there.

So if this kind of half-assed, mealy mouth, barely there, idiotically centrist and conciliatory action is what we get in this situation then what is the damned point? As we lose our numbers (and we will) they(the repugs, the "moderates", the corporatists) will succeed in chipping away at and eroding what we accomplished. So what is the point of settling from the start and coming out with legislation and action that will by it's very nature and definition be small, moderate, and middle of the road. When they get done with it once they gain any semblance of power back we may as well have done nothing and worked for nothing.

[rhett o rick]

77. Do you consider Sen Sanders a lefty? nt