President Obama's Base Will Vote for Him.

[MineralMan]

Those who will not are not part of his base. They may have voted for him in 2008, but thought he was someone else. They may have voted for him, thinking he would do something he didn't say he'd do. They may have voted for him, believing that he'd turn into another person once he was elected. Now, they're talking about not voting for him in 2012. They are not his base.

President Obama's base will be voting for him in 2012. They voted for him in 2008 after listening to him during his campaign. They paid attention to what he said, and they voted for him. They're disappointed, in some ways, with the actual legislation that has been passed during his first term, but they look at the makeup of Congress after the 2010 election, and understand. They watched as Republicans blocked every decent thing he tried to do. They shared his frustration. In 2012, they'll vote for him again, and try to elect a better Congress.

Those who will not vote for him in 2012 are not his base. They have never been his base. They may the base of something else, but they are not President Obama's base. They could be the base of liberalism or progressivism, but they are not President Obama's base. President Obama's base will be voting for him and working to elect Democrats to regain control of the House and to return a stronger majority to the Senate. That's what President Obama's base will be doing.

The other base? Who knows. Even they don't seem to know. They'd like a primary for the Presidency, but no such thing is going to happen. No strong candidate has expressed any interest whatever in running against President Obama for the nomination. They threaten to vote for some other party, but that's not going to produce anything except Republicans being elected. They might not vote at all, and that means bad news for Congress.

President Obama's base will vote for him in 2012, and they'll try very hard to give him a Congress that will work with him instead of against him.

[crim son]

1. No doubt.

That's how it goes, yes? Why mention it?

[MineralMan]

4. Why not mention it? Last time I looked, this was a discussion forum.

I've noticed some confusion over the use of the word "base." So, I wrote the OP in this thread. Is that a problem somehow?

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

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

[MineralMan]

182. I did not vote for McCain in 2008. I voted for Obama.

I also campaigned for him. I'm not sure where this misinformation came from, but it is simply incorrect.

[chillspike]

172. Is that true? Did you vote for McCain?

[Rex]

177. He claimed in a deleted sub-thread that he did not do such a thing.

I've seen more then one poster post that and am wondering how they know.

[MineralMan]

185. They do not know any such thing, because it is untrue.

I'm not sure what this is based on, but it is simply incorrect. I have never voted for any Republican, and I've been voting since 1966.

[MineralMan]

184. No. I certainly did not. I both voted for and campaigned for

President Obama. I handed out hundreds of pieces of campaign literature while walking my precinct in St. Paul, and convinced a number of people who had never voted to go to the polls and vote for Obama. I caucused for Obama and represented my precinct at three district conventions, where I also caucused for him. You can visit the DFL website for my precinct at the link in my signature line. I'm the chairperson for the precinct.

This statement is untrue. I'm not sure where it's coming from, but I have never voted for or supported any Democrat for office in my life. I started voting in 1966, and have voted for Democrats in every election since then. Whoever is spreading this misinformation is doing a very wrong thing.

[suffragette]

207. Did you make an oopsie?

"I'm not sure where it's coming from, but I have never voted for or supported any Democrat for office in my life."

Really?

[MineralMan]

216. Yah, stupid me. Brain fart.

[dionysus]

2. +1

[sendero]

3. A laughable..

.. tautology but knock yourself out.

[MineralMan]

5. Thanks for the permission. I'm very grateful to you for that.

[sendero]

10. You should be grateful..

.. I don't tear your idiotic argument to shreds which I could do with half my brain removed, but it's been done here a thousand times but fools still don't get it.

[MineralMan]

17. I thought the line was, "with half my brain tied behind my back."

But, what do I know?

[sabrina 1]

71. Only if one listens to Rush Limbaugh!

[RoccoR5955]

6. Duh! What other choice do we have?

I'm NOT voting for a RepubliCON. No way, no how.

[MineralMan]

12. Yes, of course. But, you see, there are a bunch of folks who

are discussing other choices, despite the inevitable results that come with them.

[GeorgeGist]

95. Anti-choice, eh?

Tough shit.

[RoccoR5955]

179. There is no choice in this 2 party system.

It's either Fascism or Fascism Lite, but either way, it's fascism.

[sudopod]

226. But it's only got 64 calories. nt

[TheDebbieDee]

52. I agree! There's just no frikkin' way I'd ever vote republican

either!

I'm counting on Pres. O to nominate people who are not morons to vacancies on the Supreme Court.

[bluestate10]

7. President Obama's base, just like Bill Clinton's base is African Americans.

So called progressives can debate that until they are blue in the face. The only group that stood with Clinton when republicans were trying to destroy him were african americans. The only group that solidly stands with Obama, even as many are disappointed with some of his policies are african americans. Progressives that are attacking Obama need realize that if they loose african americans, they loose the White House and Congress.

[MineralMan]

9. That certainly is part of his base.

A base is a broad group, not a group made up all of the same people. Black Americans are an important part of his base. They are not the only part.

[emilyg]

30. They are the largest part.

[MineralMan]

36. Go look at the numbers, please.

Seriously.

[EFerrari]

57. Barack Obama Losing African-American Support Over Economy

Though the African-American community has been Obama’s biggest supporter, the jobs situation is seeing that approval falter.
By Cord Jefferson
Posted: 07/27/2011 06:40 PM EDT

When African-Americans went to the polls in 2008, 96 percent of them voted for Barack Obama. In the years since, the president has seen his approval ratings rise and fall amongst every American sub-community. But his unwavering popularity amongst Blacks has always been remarkable. In August 2010, Obama’s year-low Black approval rating was still at a massive 85 percent, and it went up to near 90 percent within a couple months after that. A new poll, however, shows that Black voters won’t stick by Obama through everything. Everyone has their breaking point, and the African-American community’s breaking point is increasingly the same one on all of America’s mind: jobs.



According to a new Washington Post/CBS poll, “The number of African-Americans who believe the president’s actions have helped the economy has dropped from 77 percent in October to just over half of those surveyed.” Even liberal Democrats are finding it harder and harder to stomach Obama’s handling of the nation’s flagging economy—less than one-third of liberal Democrats now support Obama’s record on jobs. It would seem that you can only push people so far, and when you’re talking about their pocketbook, and the stability of their family, you have even less room to push.



Speaking to the Post, a self-described liberal Democrat told the paper, “We’re focusing on too many things right now. Our biggest issue is the economy. People are hungry; people want work. Honest to God, it’s tough times.”



It’s not as if Obama is trying to create a poor economy; nobody’s saying anything like that. It’s also pretty obvious that the obstinate GOP is the one playing ridiculous games with the nation’s financial future. That said, rational understandings of politics are not something people always have in mind when going to the voting booth. The lesson of this latest poll is that something is going to give, or Obama is going to lose the support of the people who have stood by him the longest. They’re probably not going to vote Republican in 2012, but they’ll most likely hold their nose while choosing Obama.

http://www.bet.com/news/politics/2011/07/27/barack-obama-losing-black-support-over-economy.html.html

[shellgame26]

93. K&R

I registered about 10 voters on the 'day of action' back in July. IT WAS ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS I'VE EVER DONE. The level of understanding the political process and basic government was SO INCREDIBLY LOW..I found myself doing a lot of teaching. It was fun actually...can't wait to do it again.

Obama 2012!

This was meant as a reply to ORIGINAL MESSAGE

[Number23]

189. LOL Let me help you out a bit

His OVERALL approval (everyone is pissed about the economy) among blacks is at 85% and has NEVER dipped below 80%. I know you searched long and hard to find a poll that cast things in a much more negative light, but that's the truth of the matter

July 31 - Aug 6, 2011 http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx

[yarn_chick]

88. African American and progressive are not mutually exclusive. And there are plenty of progressives

who are also African American who are not at all pleased with how Obama is governing.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

213. And there are plenty of progressives -indeed seemingly the majority -

who are very pleased with President Obama and how he is governing and who are irritated with the efforts of a small but vocal minority to destroy the most progressive Democratic President in decades and replace him with a right wing extremist

[NNN0LHI]

8. The same half million rocket scientists who voted for Ralph last time against Obama will do it again

Watch and see.

Don

[MineralMan]

14. I hope not.

That's all I can do. Aside from writing a lot and talking to people a lot, anyhow.

[NNN0LHI]

15. They are too invested to quit now

They have to prove Ralph was right even if it kills them.

Don

[EFerrari]

44. That isn't the problem, though. The problem is that blacks, Latinos,

youth, women and poor people increasingly agree with those rocket scientists.

[NNN0LHI]

48. And Bush the Idiot once had a +90% approval rating so I am not sure what your point is?

Lot of people can't tell the difference between their friends and their enemies.

We already knew that.

Don

[EFerrari]

53. My point is that there is an anti-incumbent spirit out there right now.

People are angry. You can beat up on Ralph all you like but, the last three years have only moved more voters in the direction of being disgusted with the system. And that's a problem for Democrats and their turnout.

[Hawkowl]

115. Obama has proven Ralph right

No need for voters to do so.

[robdogbucky]

75. "...voted for Ralph last time against Obama ..."

Don:

When did Nader run against Obama?

I must have missed that

[NNN0LHI]

84. 2008. Yea, you must have missed it. Slept right through it maybe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

[robdogbucky]

125. Thanks for the heads up, but I assure you I was not sleeping

On the Wikipedia page you cited, I found one reference to Ralphie in Par. 5, to affirm he was in it. I truly do not recall his being in it. I was riveted to the main cast, especially for the debates. Then down around Par. 25 they included pics of "Other candidates." Don't you think that was a flattering picture of Ralphie though?

When I perused the other 65 or so paragraphs on that Wiki page looking for any reference to him, I did learn that Ralphie did finish third, just ahead of Bob Barr and Cynthia McKinney, and oh yeah, Pastor Chuck. I was not aware they ran either.

You should be proud of your candidate, as I was so mesmerized by his aura I had no idea anyone else was running aside from McGramps and Caribou Barbie. You will likely have it that way again, no? That will be so wonderful to have a choice between batshit crazy and DINOs.

You should be a civics class teacher. Do they even have that class anymore?

I will pay more attention this time around, like you no doubt did.

[Enrique]

110. i voted for Nader but I think it was a mistake

that's my own judgement, other Nader voters may still think it was the right thing to do.

[JohnnyLib2]

11. What does that mean in terms of electoral votes?

I can see Perry holding many of the Bush states. Not good.

[MineralMan]

16. I don't know yet. Nobody does. Until there actually is a GOP

candidate, it's impossible to say. Once there is, then we can discuss it. It could be Perry. It could be Romney. Iowa is not the arbiter of much of anything. There's a long way to go, and the GOP is deeply divided. I think it will be between Romney and Perry, but that's just right now. Anything can happen.

[demwing]

37. In a sense, Iowa is a reverse indicator

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2011-08-11-Iowa-straw-poll-hype_n.htm

Start with the fact that the vote has a poor track record of predicting eventual winners. Only twice, out of five previous Iowa straw polls, has the winner gone on to capture the GOP nomination. And only once has the straw poll winner (George W. Bush in 1999) become president.

Of the top three vote getters in the ISP, one has already quit outright. The other two have just as much chance of ever sitting behind the President's desk...

[MineralMan]

45. Quite true. Bachmann and Paul haven't a prayer of being

nominated. I'm not sure why anyone's paying any attention. The only action yesterday was in Perry's announcement. Iowa was, as usual, irrelevant.

[villager]

13. There's definitely no question this election will be "base!"

Perhaps more base than ever before!

[MineralMan]

19. Very profound word play.

Who's on first base?

[villager]

31. I don't know!

:thumbsup:

[MineralMan]

35. LOL!

In the spirit intended.

[kentuck]

18. But many first-time voters and "independents" will not...

Which translates into a much closer election than last time, when students and first-time voters volunteered to vote and work for an historic candidate. I doubt they will be there the next time. That would make the base that much more important, in my opinion.

[MineralMan]

21. I met a lot of such voters in my precinct in 2008, while I

was precinct walking. I ran into them again in 2010. They voted in that election, too. I'll talk to them once again in 2012. My precinct turned out 60% in 2010. I'm going for 70% in 2012. I think I'll get it. How about your precinct? What's your plan?

[Rex]

20. It is posts like this that cause more and more liberals to turn away

from the party imo. You don't want liberals voting for Obama, keep up posts like this one. For the life of me I cannot understand alleged dems that love to divide the party up further and further, but I guess there has to be a point to all this. Just don't be surprised when we end up with Perry as POTUS and Obama didn't have the votes. And don't go blaming liberals for it either when it happens, you don't seem to want them to vote for Obama...now why is that?

[MineralMan]

22. That's just silly. It's just a post on DU. Its effect will be

minuscule, at best. I expect liberals to vote. Almost all of them will do that, and they will vote for Obama's reelection. If every DUer who has mentioned not voting or voting for someone other than Obama followed through with that, it would not affect the election one whit.

You overestimate the impact of what I write. I don't.

[Rex]

26. Your hatred for liberals is sad.

Why a few here want to hate on liberals is beyond me, you should be embracing them as brothers and sisters of the party.

EDIT - I was refering to your hatred and a lot of moderates that share it...it will hurt the party, just don't get mad at others when it does and Obama loses.

[MineralMan]

28. My hatred for liberals does not exist.

Clearly, you do not know me.

[Rex]

29. It is right there in your OP.

Sad that you cannot see it.

[EFerrari]

46. Apparently your OP is more revealing than you know. n/t

[MineralMan]

54. Apparently your understanding of it leaves a lot to be desired.

[EFerrari]

55. My understanding is just fine. Eventually, this passive aggressive tap dance

was going to stumble and it did today.

[Rex]

128. I think it is to keep liberals in the crosshairs.

Even thought 80% of us support Obama, probably a much higher number then these alleged moderate/center of the isle people, we still get vilified for pointing out the obvious too many times imo. Funny how you can always tell these kind of OPs - always 0 recs and a 100 replies.

[EFerrari]

137. Most of these OPs are some kind of authoritarian follower defense

of error or failure.

It takes a liberal, with our different way of thinking, to understand you don't have to defend those things, you can change them.

[Rex]

140. That reminds me of a quote I read yesterday.

You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. - Malcolm X

[sabrina 1]

56. Your impact is probably zero, actually. I'm certainly not worried about

it. I am worried about the rightward swing of the Democratic Party causing people to choose real Republicans this time.

Voters will vote for the candidate who best represents them. I would not presume, as you have, to know what they will do in 2012. I am concerned, however, that the Democratic Leadership, which was responsible for the loss of the 2010 election due to ignoring the Progressive wing of the party's warnings, are headed in the same direction once again and will be blamed completely, as they should, if this country ends up with a Republican majority and WH.

Hopefully wiser heads than those currently running the party, will prevail and in spite of them, prevent the disaster of a Republican takeover.

[robdogbucky]

80. "...Hopefully wiser heads than those currently running the party..."

I wish it were the case but I fear the opposite. The Chicago Dem mob of OTLers will rule the day and the party will fail to address the issues that concern voters most and crash in flames wondering what happened to that "mandate," they received in '08.

Of course, they will again blame progressives, liberals, and others that won't vote because they see no difference in results for the debacle, riding off into the sunset to spend their BP, GE and Exelon gifts in their CofC letter sweaters.


Happy to be corrected if anyone can prove me wrong.

[sabrina 1]

91. Well, they can't blame Liberals. According to this OP

the Liberal base will be voting for them! Same thing happened in 2010. They were certain that the Party did not have to do anything to win, such as support progressive ideas. What they forgot about was the independent vote, which abandoned a party that they saw as little different from the Republican party. Research shows how they lost that demographic and how left-leaning many Independents are, on issues, like the rest of the country.

That didn't stop them from blaming the base though.

This time we will have to save OPs like this. Because if Dems lose, it cannot be because of the 'base', which is what most DUers are. :-)

[Rex]

133. 80% of liberals approve of Obama, wouldn't know it by the OP

and it is 'messaged' that way with the agenda to back it imo.

[LooseWilly]

215. I think you mean 'self-described liberals'... which I bet includes the OP author.

I would contest either the 'self-descriptions' as liberal in most cases, or the definition of 'liberal' itself.

People that I would personally consider 'left-leaning' are HUGELY disappointed in Obama... people I know that I would consider 'liberal' (in the left of left of center sense) are EVEN MORE disappointed in Obama.

On the other hand, I know corporate capital enthusiasts who consider themselves 'liberal' because they support civil unions... and those folks seem satisfied with Obama's performance.

I don't know that I believe "80% of {self-described} liberals" will even vote Democratic if they sense that the stock market is in even the vaguest of jeopardy ("MY 401K!?!?!").

Re-parsings of the meanings of "squishy" political terms will not result in more warm bodies showing up to the polls and checking the Party-Box.

I suspect third-party "neo-Nader" votes will be at a new high come 2012...

[Rex]

228. Yes I would have to say 'self-described liberals'.

True. They voted in the poll as liberals, doesn't mean they are by definition. I suspect Obama will win again.

[Aerows]

39. Amen

I've argued the same thing, time and time again. Why do some Democrats delight in calling "liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama does) disloyal, meaningless and most importantly insignificant - then turn around and moan at "liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama has done) because we didn't offer enough support in 2010?

You can't have it both ways. "Liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama has done) are either significant, or not. If Obama loses in 2012, I hope all of you "We are the base, you ingrates who wanted ponies are nobodies" will remember that it wasn't the "liberals" that were the problem, since you keep repeatedly pointing out how irrelevant the "liberals" are.

[spooked911]

132. the truth hurts, huh?

should we just ignore Obama's BS?

[EFerrari]

23. This is exactly backward.

Obama won in 2008 because he DID promise to attend to the economic needs of regular people.

He lost the midterms because he didn't deliver on that promise.

in 2012, those voters who put him over the top may vote against the Republican but they won't vote for Obama unless he changes course.

Obama may benefit from the anti-incumbent urge in the electorate but they certainly will not go out of their way to vote *him* a new Congress because most voters don't believe they work for the president but that he works for them.

[Rex]

32. It is his liberal hating base that hurts Obama the most imo.

Thankfully they are few, but boy do they hate liberals! Never seen anything like it.

[EFerrari]

38. Yep.

[sabrina 1]

65. I have. The far right hates liberals in the same way. However it is only recently

that this hatred has crept into the Dem Party. It needs to be rooted out imho. There is already a party for those who despise the basic principles outlined in the Democratic Party Platform. I keep wondering what they are doing in this party.

[YankmeCrankme]

171. They're here because the Republicans became too crazy, even for them.

The Democratic party took them in, basically, for two reasons; One, we generally are the big tent party and, Two, they did help to win elections. Now they are in positions of power because of reason 2 and want to remake the Democratic party in the image of the old Republican party.

[OKDem08]

24. wrong....an increasing number are realizing

that it doesn't matter who we vote for & are looking for alternative means to enact change


(revolution, anonymous, et al...)

[FBaggins]

25. There's no question that HIS base will vote for him.

The growing concern is that fewer and fewer members of the Democratic base are part of his base of support.

And, of course, even that base (by itself) is never enough to win.

[Melinda]

59. Spot on. Succinct and to the point, ty. eom.

[sabrina 1]

70. + 1,000 n/t

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ozymanithrax]

33. I am a liberal and not part of any individual's base.

I may vote for Obama in 2012. Haven't made up my mind as to what will best serve my needs, my families needs, my communities needs, and my countries needs except that I can not vote for any Republican.

[Morning Dew]

34. Sweet Jesus - I can only unrec this once? DAMN.

By the time the underbus is full, there will be 7 people left in the base.

[Melinda]

60. lol, I shoulda known that was you shoved under here next to me. Unrec as well. ;-)

[Morning Dew]

102. Melinda!

:hi:

[Melinda]

124. lol, backatcha mate!! ;)

I'm in an Amy Winehouse funk... spending my day off listening and bawling, so it was a sheer delight to read ya today. Love ya Kath!!! :hug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

If that's the case, he can save a lot of money, time, energy, and hot air not campaigning.

[caty]

40. I find it hard to believe

that anyone who voted for President Obama, in the last election, would vote for any Republican. We've all seen how the "Party of No" has obstructed a lot of what President Obama wanted to accomplish. We have to vote Democratic in the hopes of winning back the Congress so we can finally get something accomplished. If you are disappointed in President Obama, at least vote for the Democratic party.

[MineralMan]

43. +10

[robdogbucky]

68. Brave move, MM, giving a +10 to your own post n/t

[MineralMan]

76. Database error. Look at the thread tree.

The post I replied to doesn't have a message #. That happens sometimes here. When it does, the post refers to the OP.

[piratefish08]

73. they won't vote republican. they simply won't vote.

[polmaven]

101. Unfortunately,

we have not all seen that. What they see is that the president did not accomplish 100% of what he wanted to do, and is, therefote, not really a Democrat.

[meow mix]

41. lol

:rofl:

[Aerows]

42. Divisive politics work so well, don't they?

Why do some Democrats delight in calling "liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama does) disloyal, meaningless and most importantly insignificant - then turn around and moan at "liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama has done) because we didn't offer enough support in 2010?

You can't have it both ways. "Liberals" (or anyone that disagrees with anything Obama has done) are either significant, or not. If Obama loses in 2012, I hope all of you "We are the base, you ingrates who wanted ponies are nobodies" will remember that it wasn't the "liberals" that were the problem, since you keep repeatedly pointing out how irrelevant the "liberals" are.

Because that's what happens when you make some people the "culprits" and others the "champions". We are all in this together, and driving a wedge between us with sanctimonious postures of "I'm the base, you are a nobody" isn't doing the party any favors whatsoever.

[LooseWilly]

47. So a politician has no base, until votes are cast?... and by their votes, they are defined?

Some of us were his base, until some decided that Obama wasn't representing them... then "they" weren't his base anymore?...

So, you're saying that a politician's "base" are those who will follow wherever the politician leads?

Funny... used to be that a politician represented some group first and foremost, and that group was considered the "base"—but maybe you're right... maybe Obama never represented "progressives", maybe he doesn't even want to represent them. In all likelihood, he fucking hates progressives (judging by what he pushes for policy-wise, and ignoring the rhetoric).

It's an interesting electoral strategy to highlight this and piss on shoes as a sort of loyalty test. :patriot:

[mmonk]

49. Sorry I missed so much.

I missed expansion of surveillance, targeted assassinations, health care reform without a public option and with mandated private insurance, expansion of conflicts beyond Afghanistan, keeping CIA black sites, deficit commissions and social security reforms, charter school expansion and attacks on teachers and promotion of private funding, freezing government worker pay and "shared sacrifice", extending the bush tax cuts in a deal with Republicans without Democratic party participation, etc.

If I had not missed so much, I would not have supported him and have been an Obama state delegate. Forgive me for being unreasonable now for my missing all those things please. I understand it's my fault. The responsibility does not lie in his speeches as a candidate.

[moksha]

50. This seems to divide the left into those who are loyal to personality and those who

are loyal to liberal positions. I don't understand, at all, those who are loyal to political personalities over policy.

[sabrina 1]

69. Maybe that's the point?

I wouldn't worry about it though, it's been going on since around 2004 and has only highlighted how important it is for Progressives to take this party over and make sure that it adheres to its platform. We are far more aware of who does not deserve support from the base, and of how false the argument was that we vote for people simply because they have a 'D' after their name just to get a majority. It's far better to have the lines clearly drawn as to who the enemy is, as we have seen.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[robdogbucky]

58. Voter apathy due to disgust with "Both," sides also appears to be a factor

Boycott Campaign Donations!

By JOE NOCERA

Published: August 12, 2011


"...In effect, Schultz thinks the country should go on strike against its politicians. "The fundamental problem," he said, "is that the lens through which Congress approaches issues is re-election. The lifeblood of their re-election campaigns is political contributions." Schultz wants his countrymen - big donors and small; corporations and unions - to stop making political contributions in presidential and Congressional campaigns. Simple as that. Economists like to talk about how incentives change behavior. Schultz is proposing that Americans give Washington an incentive to begin acting responsibly on their behalf. It's a beautiful idea.

To Schultz, the debt-ceiling crisis - so destructive to the country, yet entirely manufactured for political gain - was merely the final straw. "The debt crisis is really the symbol of a larger problem, which is that our leaders are not leading," he said. The real crisis, he believes, is a crisis of leadership, both in the White House and in Congress, which is draining confidence. "America's leaders need to put their feet in the shoes of working Americans," he said. " Instead, all they think about is their own political self-interest."

Schultz began doing some research. In 2000, he said, total campaign contributions, to all politicians, amounted to $3 billion. Four years later, it was $4 billion. In the 2008 election year, he said, "it went up another billion, to $5 billion. I was astonished." He soon began to connect those numbers to a question he'd been asking himself: "What is it going to take for Washington to listen to us?" The answer now seemed obvious: money. "It is a sad state of affairs that the only thing they'll listen to is money," he acknowledged. But if that is what it takes, so be it.

The contribution boycott, as Schultz envisions it, would be completely bipartisan; indeed, it would have to be for it to work. Schultz isn't calling on Washington to come up with solutions that are aligned with his political leanings (which are Democratic). Rather, he wants solutions, agreed to by both parties, that will help get the country back on its feet..."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/13/opinion/nocera-boycott-campaign-donations.html?_r=1&ref=joenocera

[Melinda]

62. This needs to be its own OP. :-)

[robdogbucky]

67. It is, but hardly anyone noticed it but some nervous OTLers that showed up

to condemn the idea, smear the owner of Starbucks (a Dem) and to generally allege anyone advocating such an idea is a Repuke, etc., etc., etc.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1731194




Yesterday

[ecstatic]

61. k&r. lol because the truth hurts around here nt

[ixion]

63. If you all want to vote for war crimes and neocons, that's your business

I'll have none of it. And YES, I understand the alternative. Both suck, and I can't endorse war crimes.

[CakeGrrl]

64. I'M the base and I'm voting for him in 2012.

[MineralMan]

72. Thanks! Me, too, along with voting to regain control of congress.

[CakeGrrl]

168. Yep. Congress is KEY. Tea Party HAS to go.

I don't know how anyone thinks things could be improved by swapping out POTUS and leaving the Tea Party in with a GOP House majority.

[MineralMan]

186. If we can get people to turn out to elect Democrats to Congress,

President Obama will be reelected with no problem whatsoever. It is Congress, and regaining control of it that is my goal for 2012. It's a job that is more than just a good idea. It's essential.

[yarn_chick]

202. What difference will having control of the congress make? The Democratic party had control of the

congress and didn't do a damn thing with it for all the time it spent placating Republicans.

[Broderick]

218. It always seems we start

from a Republican platform no matter who is charge. It is like they control the foundation of all debate.

[shellgame26]

210. Me 3!

Very very pleased with President Obama and will work my butt off to get him reelected.

Obama 2012!

[scarletwoman]

66. Hey, you want him for yourself? Go for it, he's yours.

You've done a great job marking your territory, diligently pissing all around the perimeter.

[Capn Sunshine]

74. The contingent on DU that thinks they are his base would disagree

But belief in every hysterical statement about the President and misinterpretation of on ground realities together with twisting of Statement by President Obama to meet their questionable end game is just the internet equivalent of Free Republic.

Of the 66 million votes for Barack Obama in the last election, perhaps 50,000 number themselves as opposed to his reelection. Many of them post here, at last estimation 1,000 or so.

Do the math folks. If you're one of the hysterics posting here, you are free to do so, but don't think your numbers are vast.

And doing the work of the opposition- discouraging voter turnout, not supporting the President at the time we need to close ranks and do so most, these things are not new. It's a shame true progressives get tarred by the same brush, it makes it harder to advance that agenda. But it's a primary reason that progressive values haven't made a bigger dent in the mainstream. Because you just don't play well with others.

[MineralMan]

78. Thanks. I appreciate that, and agree.

[Capn Sunshine]

86. You're welcome. I admire your posts.

And your ability to put up with the deluge of nonsense that makes this board unreadable to many such as myself. Since 2001 I used to live here. Right after the primaries it was apparent to me it wasn't just the left that had a problem with a black man being President.

You know, it reminds me of a very chummy company I used to work for. One day, we had a black guy come to work there and he was GOOD. Among the best. I was too. Yet no one ever cut him any slack like they did me. As the top producers in the company we had a friendly competition. We became fast friends.Yet there was a segment of our company that was always coming to me, offering to help "take that guy down" because they were rooting for me to be number one.

President Obama gets that same treatment here on an ongoing basis.

[MineralMan]

107. That's very kind of you to say.

I just post what I think. Lots of people disagree with me, but that's OK.

[inna]

159. "it wasn't just the left that had a problem with a black man being President"

wtf are you even babbling about.


malicious (and thoroughly idiotic, too) smear directed at the left, that's all that nonsense amounts to (and speaks volumes about your intentions). how do you even get away with this crap on DU?

[Rex]

164. Yep, they always expose themselves by their hatred for the left.

I can tell you, all my Lefty friends were elated to have a woman and a African American man running for POTUS! Yet, reading that post makes one wonder why that certain person is spouting right-wing talking points. They can barely hold it together imo. And it is beyond pathetic, how their hatred mirrors the RWings. Funny that...

[Number23]

192. Cap'n, I think you mean it wasn't just the "right" that had a problem with a black man as Pres

[Rex]

229. Yeah, I mean what else could he have meant. A littie oopsie!

[sabrina 1]

85. That explains the loss of the House in 2010?

Have something to back up those pretty specific numbers? This administration has lost the Independent vote along with many of its own party members. That adds up to a little more than 50,000 I think.

It isn't just DU. Go anywhere, in Real Life, to other Democratic blogs and real life Democratic organizations and people who voted for him in 2008. You are deluding yourself by ignoring what is going on. Otoh, you all made the same claims before the 2010 election also. And when you lost it for the rest of us, turned around and completely contradicted yourselves, attempting to blame it on the all-powerful DU contingency. So, which is it?

I hope someone will get the message to this administration that they will not win in 2012 by supporting Republican ideas. It really is that simple.

[Capn Sunshine]

98. swing voters made the difference in 2010. That is correct.

Yet any attempts by the President to accomodate them to retain power are met with howls of disgust and threats of a primary opponent.

Wake up, it isn't to late to emerge from your dream state. Like I have mentioned before, America does not view the world in the same terms as the far left. In 2010, this was used to triangulate voters into voting fo a pack of loons who were talking about jobs.

Mainstream middle of the road voters are easily spooked by the excesses of the left because of our post FDR history of anti-communism. They are constantly compared to this boogeyman.

So has the left tempered their excesses to make footholds for their views into the poltical theater?
No, because that just isn't in their DNA.

[sabrina 1]

108. More anti progressive, liberal drivel.

So now we are 'commies' too. Wow, I never thought I would see these rightwing attacks on regular Democrats here. I've seen them often enough on rightwing boards and laughed at them there too.

This country polls liberal on issues overwhelmingly. I know that bothers righties, but it's a fact. The problem Dems have been having winning, is because they have abandoned the American people and decided to be the other wing of the Republican Party catering NOT to the liberal-minded American public, but to Corporate America.

Your above comment is exhibit #1 for the point I am making. Thanks for helping me do so.

Now, when the Party starts catering to the American People again, they will not have to worry about winning. Over 80% of the American public supports the FDR/'Commie' issue of a national healthcare system eg. Same thing with SS/Medicaid/Medicare and NOT bailing out Corrupt Wall St. bankers, among other liberal ideas.

Wake up, you've been listening to the scare tactics and propaganda of the right, which has sadly crept into the Dem Party lately, too much.

We on the left have the very best ideas. The proof is in what is happening to the rightwing run US and Europe over the past ten years and just look what happens when Liberal ideas, those supported by an overwhelming majority of ordinary people, are abandoned, by both parties.

[Capn Sunshine]

114. I didn't say that

but this is typical of discourse around DU. I mentioned the left and why they haven't made more inroads into the American fabric. Yes, progressive ideas poll very well. I'm a progressive, and I helped get those ideas into the mainstream of the party.

But you are just dying to lump me in with some cabal because I don't agree with you. That's really more of a tactic from the right.

I think socialism is great. But in your little pigeonhole, that idea does not fit your perception of me. I want victory and the power that accompanies that. You want, well, what you want.

[sabrina 1]

120. The left has not made inroads because of the huge

amounts of money poured into stopping them by far right multi-billionaires and corrupt Wall St. entities. Even with the huge resistance, the smear campaigns, the billions of dollars spent to discredit their ideas over decades, they still cannot defeat them nor change the opinions of the american people. Considering the effort put into defeating them, and the complicity of their Party, the Democrats, it is amazing that they are not only still around, but can still win elections, WHEN they are HONEST and willing to FIGHT for those principles.

What the enemy has succeeded in doing is scaring the political class from being bold enough to fight them publicly. From taking a stand, from mounting a huge campaign to expose them. Instead we are told we must 'compromise' with them, be 'bi-partisan' in our dealings with them. And 'pragmatic' etc. etc.

And that is why we fail. Anyone who will not stand up and clearly state their position, is either a coward, or they do not hold those positions and therefore cannot fight for them.

But the weaselly, cowardly position taken by the 'left' leadership in this country will never, ever accomplish anything. All it does is hand victory to the moronic far right idealogues, who so badly need to be stood up to.

[Capn Sunshine]

126. I'm glad you have that all worked out

Our work here is done. congratulations on your electoral victory.

[TheKentuckian]

109. You aren't "accommodating" those voters but rather running them off.

Of course you are an "excesses of the left" type so what you think is serving the needs of the people is a distortion that is in opposition to actual reality.

If you think excesses should be tempered then you would have to define them and defining them will define you and that won't do if the snow job is to work at all.

[Capn Sunshine]

112. wow how very conspiratorial

You probably shouldn't go outside when it's raining , wetness will result.

Funny how easy it is for some to put us in a catch-all basket of types.

[sabrina 1]

167. What are the 'excesses of the left'?

That was the question. Speaking of putting people into catch-all baskets. I thought it was the right that was 'excessive' in its policies. But I would love to hear what the excesses of the left are.

[Capn Sunshine]

170. that question deserves its own thread

but certainly the opposition to American Capitalism ( not pirate capitalism, well regulated American Capitalism), embracing Mao or N Korea's leadership (recently seen on this board) , communist party membership for starters. These things are a bit off putting to the MOR American swing voter.

[sabrina 1]

176. ????

Democrats WON, in the 21st Century, 2008, both houses of Congress and the WH, in spite of your claim that 'people are put off'. That kind of blows your argument. And by a mandate.

But that was when they were talking about Liberal ideas to replace the rightwing ideas of the previous eight years. But those ideas never became a reality. And it's going to be hard for a Party that swung to the right after that election, away from the Liberal Ideas that got them elected, to convince the Liberal American public that they really mean it this time.

'American Capitalism' IS pirate Capitalism! It is despised just about everywhere in the world, including by Conservatives now that we have seen what it has done to the economies of this country and every other country that made the mistake of adapting it. All 'isms' fail eventually.

Common sense is what people want, they don't want Ayn Rand/Greenspan economics.


So sad to see how rightwing propaganda has infested the Democratic Party.

[Rex]

178. Indeed.

That liberals would hate regulated capitalism says a lot about said poster imo. Sounds like the bunch that loves to watch Glenn Beck and spout all his bullshit.

[Capn Sunshine]

212. :sigh:

Not into Ayn Rand, Greenspan or otherwise. American Capitalism is NOT pirate Capitalism. Pirate Capitalism is unregulated. Its what we've had lately but that doesn't mean American style capitalism isn't cool. THAT is common sense. Yes, Democrats won, but the leftists didn't. They have been against Obama since before he declared. To not see that and the dynamic it creates is, well, just foolish. And there's no percentage in arguing with fools.

[Rex]

230. Total garbage, liberals supported Obama to get him elected

and we were elated at the time to do so! You spout rightwing crap, just like your friend above.

"Yes, Democrats won, but the leftists didn't."

What kind of bullshit statement is that?

:eyes:

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[WillyT]

77. Well I Should Hope So... He's Surely Gonna Need Them...

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[H2O Man]

79. True, yet

President Obama has decreased his base from 2008.

[MineralMan]

81. Perhaps.

I'm not sure that's clear yet. It's not even November, 2011 yet. We'll have a clearer picture as time goes on. DU isn't reflective of the general population, anyhow, or even of Democrats. I think we're far from being able to figure out the direction of things at this point.

[sabrina 1]

97. DU is and always was very reflective of the general population.

Clearly you have not been around the Democratic blogosphere for very long. As an observer of the both the right and left blogosphere for ten years now, there is no better way to gauge the political landscape.

DU predicted eg, the loss in 2010 because of the right swing of the party under the current leadership. Not just DU but most of the left blogosphere. Independents were who DUers were worried about. The DLC crowd dismissed those concerns, making the same claims made in this OP. And they lost the Independent vote as predicted in the left blogosphere.

Then an amazing thing happened. The DLC/New Dem/Third Wayers switched arguments and blamed those who actually did go out and vote, for progressives most of whom held their seats.

So, the DU you are now claiming has no significance, same as before the 2010 election, has been accused of being so powerful they lost that election.

This is called stupidity and it is this kind of childish refusal to accept the responsibility for what they did to lose the last election, that is very likely to be the cause of a repeat of that loss. The base as always, will vote for Democrats. And as always will be blamed, falsely, for the irresponsibility of the leadership of a Party that foolishly believes they can support Republican ideas and still demand votes from real Democrats.

[MineralMan]

113. Actually, I've been online in political forums since the early 1990s,

so you're quite incorrect. I was very, very active on the Compuserve political forums during even the 1200 baud modem days, and I've been active in Democratic and liberal politics since 1965. I've only been on DU since 2008, but I've been very active here, as well. You and I differ in opinion most of the time. That's fine, but you don't get to tell me what my experience is and has been. You're not qualified to do that.

[sabrina 1]

138. Yet you feel qualified to tell the rest of us how irrelevant DU

and the online left community is. While you claim to be 'very active' here, a waste of time I would think, if you are correct.

I never agree with people who denigrate ordinary Democrats, the real people who ARE the Democratic Party and who make up the DU Community in general. Especially relative newcomers who were not here when the major battles were being fought.

DUers were forefront in those battles, during the Bush years. They were out front when many others were afraid to take on the Right, their Forums, their Leaders. It was here on DU that many people gained the courage to start fighting back. I don't remember you from those times. I remember lots of other DUers though.

And in fact, I remember many other Democrats from other Democratic boards who were fighting to preserve our democracy when it was under attack back then. I was on many Dem boards, reading, participating and I don't recall noticing you there, unless you were using a different name. Those people I do remember gained credibility and many are still very active and have become prominent in politics. It's easier now of course to speak out against the right, now that the work was done by others who at that time had reason to fear consequences, and I know some whose fears were realized, for speaking out.

Your OP, as pointed out by others, drips with disdain for this community whether it was intended or not. So for all your 'experience' online, if you did not intend that, you have not learned much about communicating effectively and gaining support for Democrats so you might want to listen to those who have been far more successful at doing so. DU was very successful in getting support for this President in the last election.

[H2O Man]

151. Not "perhaps."

And certainly not based on DU alone.

[Aerows]

82. "I am a champion"

"You are a culprit".

That's so helpful in a political process where we need to all work together.

A champion leads, a culprit divides.

[MineralMan]

83. That's very true. Perhaps you don't recognize just how true

it is. I said neither of those things. You did. I'm not sure why you put them in quotation marks. Who did you think said that?

[Aerows]

90. Both "sides" of the same side would do well

to understand that this is a political consequence of attempting to dominate the message. Being middle of the road does no good if you are middle of the road between your party and the other one. Middle of the road means being in the middle of your parties ideological elements, namely moderate and liberal.

Republicans know this. Democrats have yet to figure it out, mostly because they pander for corporate donations just like Republicans.

[lame54]

87. I may have to vote for him - but don't call me his base

[hulka38]

89. OP sounds more like a command than an opinion. n/t

[shellgame26]

99. Oh yah

the Op is just twisting your arm with his keyboard
:eyes:

[hulka38]

131. I didn't claim it would have any effect on me.

[pintobean]

105. An elder passing on wisdom

;-)

[EFerrari]

118. That's how Polonius thought of himself, too. n/t

[MineralMan]

117. I have no power to command anyone to do anything.

I have a voice. That's all I have. You can listen to it or not. Your choice.

[hulka38]

144. True

and I'm just pointing out that this comes from the same place that tries to send progressives on fear and guilt trips.

[MineralMan]

146. It comes from my keyboard, and from there alone.

Thanks for reading.

[hulka38]

157. Right,

the same place that tries to send progressives on fear and guilt trips.

[dameocrat67]

92. Yes wallstreet will no doubt vote for him n/t

n/t

[shellgame26]

96. K&R

this time..intended recipient

[Romulox]

100. Soothing words, whispered into the kings ear... nt

[Exilednight]

103. You're right, Obama's base will vote for him, but will the liberal and

progressive base?

[Bucky]

104. The OP's a tautology. I'm part of that base BECAUSE I'll vote for him. And yet...

I really worry that independents won't. He's not doing a great job of leading. He's doing a lousy job of defining the terms of the national debate.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

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

[spooked911]

130. exactly-- he just has NOT turned out to be the president he campaigned as

Repub house or not.

[Enrique]

111. you seem to think there is one right way to vote

there's not. It's up to each voter to decide.

[MineralMan]

129. No, I don't. I'm telling you how I'm voting, and why.

Nowhere did I tell you how you should vote. You seem to be reading something into my words that is not there.

[Odin2005]

116. Intellectual dishonesty and fallacious special pleading. UNREC.

[pintobean]

119. You aint seen nothin' yet

Wait until this time next year.

[dana_b]

147. holy crap

we'll all need a break by then. I'm already getting sick of this election b.s.

[TransitJohn]

219. You're so right.

:banghead:

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

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

[MineralMan]

134. Nope. I've never even met President Obama.

The only people who pay me are the people for whom I write web sites. And they don't pay me what I'm worth, but there it is. It's interesting that two people in this thread have implied that I'm a paid poster. You disagree with what I post, so you assume I'm paid? How strange.

I've been posting about political issues since the early 1990s. I've never gotten a penny for doing so.

If you have some evidence that I have been paid to post, present it. You cannot, because there is no such evidence. There cannot be, because I am not paid. Otherwise, I'll thank you to discuss issues, not your speculations about me.

[sufrommich]

122. Of course the democratic base will vote for Obama. They're called

the base because they can be counted on to vote for one party as opposed to the other,same as the republican base.

[NoodleyAppendage]

123. 0 Rec level for a post with this pro-Obama content should tell everyone something.

The grassroots are PISSED and will not be cajoled into "stepping into line" this time around. Obama better throw some red meat to the liberal/progressives if he wants to count on his "base" to turn out in 2012. Somehow I doubt he will...if anything he will continue to talk down to us and crap on our wants/needs.

J

[Aerows]

135. You'll never convince those

who didn't give a damn about politics until Obama became President, and now they are the "faithful" no matter what he does. You'll also never convince those who value personality over principle AND party. There are a lot of those among the Obama faithful. Among loyal Democrats, who have voted with the party election after election? Not so much because we aren't in the Obama party, we are in the Democratic party.

[MineralMan]

136. Recs on DU are meaningless. Surely you've figured that out by

now. What isn't meaningless is thread activity. On that count, this thread is doing just fine.

[Aerows]

139. If the opposite of your premise was your goal

it is very much a success. You managed to get Obama supporters standing strongly against Democratic supporters.

If you haven't figured out by now that doing that doesn't gain Obama support, it loses it, you are misguided. I think, however, you know exactly what you are doing, and it is a losing strategy to pit Democrats against Democrats.

[inna]

152. "to get Obama supporters standing strongly against Democratic supporters"

exactly. it's clearly a flame bait, imo; whether it is deliberate or not is another question.

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

154. 1000% n/t

[pintobean]

149. Wrong. rec/unrec is DU approval/disapproval.

The sentiment in this thread is running parallel to the recs. No matter how many times you post in your own thread, you don't change that. You keep it kicked and exposed. Claiming that is some kind of approval is hogwash.

[Aerows]

156. Well stated

Most of us aren't blind to the purposes of this thread, and the unrec's represent that we know exactly what the OP is attempting to do.

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

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

[Aerows]

161. Ramen. n/t

[NoodleyAppendage]

174. Better, though I'm due for a biopsy Wed. Yikes! n/t

J

[robdogbucky]

180. Good luck on that and keep on improving.

I have had a couple of those in my life and they can be traumatic depending on location. At least I get good drugs when they biopsy my liver every 3 years. My new gastro tells me he does not believe in them in my case, so yeah, I am happy with my new gastro.

Again, Noodley, good luck on Wednesday, I will chant for you.

Be strong, there are many here pulling for you.





rdb

[NoodleyAppendage]

203. Thanks. It means a lot to know that I have support.

You are kind.

Warm regards,
J

[yarn_chick]

201. Is it really Pro-Obama? If the goal is to make people feel good about the choices for 2012 it seems

like a massive failure.

[spooked911]

127. this is bullshit. You're just defining his base as those who will vote for him in '12

no matter what. ANd you're discounting people who should be his base-- good democrats-- who have gotten totally turned off by what he has done.

[Marr]

141. That's a tautology. But thanks for noting that the Democratic base and "Obama's base" are two

different things.

[BzaDem]

194. They are really not that different though, notwithstanding the message board venting going on now.

They were never that different to begin with, and the remaining holdouts will mostly come on board once the campaign has had time to focus the mind.

[inna]

142. pretty vile OP, imo. unrec.

[Marnie]

143. It's not the Democratic Congress who has betrayed

Obama, it is Obama who has betrayed the Democratic party, by being a Republican,even to the point of using Republican talking points,and starting 2 more Bush like wars, that are also unwinable and devastatingly expensive.

Obama won't end those wars because it would upset the Republicans, not the Democrats, and would raise unemployment, which would make him look bad statistically.

So he does what is bad for his party and for his country because it helps him look better.

[Erose999]

145. Yep, I'm sure Prez Obama's base of Goldman execs, hedge fund managers, CEO's, and other Wall St.

insiders will vote for him. Screw everyone else, right? I mean they were foolish to think that a "Democratic" administration would work to protect social safety net programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Shame on those "progressives" for supporting a foolish agenda of equal rights, economic fairness, and social justice.

Yes, lets all abandon our principles and vote for Obama and a bunch of DLC blue dogs because corporate America, global "free trade", and the Free Market care about us and have our best interests at heart.

This message brought to you by: Americans for Prosperity, Koch Industries, Goldman Sachs, AIG, FreedomWorks, Blackwater, BP, General Electric, and the Republican National Convention.

[inna]

162. +1000 and thank you

[ThomWV]

148. You may be satisfied to vote for any hunk of meat the Party puts on the table, but I will not.

Apparently you see no need for a sitting President to earn a second term. And by the way, your initial rant is just plain full of shit. He did indeed make promises he ran from after election. You could get away with the kind of shit you're peddling before the days of video tape, but for about the last 60 years we have had the ability to go back and see what they said and compare it to what they have done. So don't hand me a line of shit that I heard what I wanted to hear three years ago - I can go back and watch tapes of Obama making campaign promises that mean as little to him as my opinion does to you.

[Erose999]

150. The only guarantee at this point is that I will vote AGAINST the Republicans. Whether or not Obama

is one of the republicans I vote against is entirely up to him.

[hulka38]

187. That's a great way of putting it.

[Name removed]

153. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[panzerfaust]

158. 'Bama Base: Former moderate Republicans.

Traditional Democratic Base - Workers, Unions, Teachers, Liberals - need not apply.

[LoZoccolo]

190. Obama is most popular amonst liberal Democrats. n/t

[Name removed]

163. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

165. Deleted message

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

[gulliver]

169. And they get the carrots.

Those who vote Dem get the Dem carrots, however many there are. A vote for Dems, be they Obama or any member of Congress, or any state seat, or any school board seat, is a vote to increase the liberal/progressive "carrot allotment." The Republicans for their part will try to vote us a "stick allotment."

After the election, it's simple. We count up carrots and sticks. The liberal/progressive carrots go to constituencies that voted for Dems. The Republican sticks go to the rest.

[Skittles]

173. his FANBASE is a sure shot

his base - though disappointed and SICKENED at the choice of Obama and GOP clowns - will also vote for Obama

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

181. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

204. Deleted message

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

[upi402]

183. nope, just the 'battered wives' syndrome folks

the rest will move on

[whatchamacallit]

188. I can tell you I'll never vote for any republicans - including the ones with (D) after their names

:)

[BzaDem]

191. Most Democrats who say they won't vote for him will actually vote for him, even if they don't know

it yet. While venting is therapeutic, things will change after several months of the oppositions' campaign.

[MineralMan]

193. I think you're probably right.

I'm more interested, really, in promoting the idea of putting maximum effort into taking back Congress. That, it seems to me, is the key to getting progressive legislation and measures implemented. I cannot think of any downside to that. It's where my energies are going to go. We need the strongest possible majorities for Democrats in both houses, and in our state legislatures, too. We can do it. People are pissed at the Republicans right now, so we should be taking that to them, starting right now.

[grahamhgreen]

195. No Doubt you mean the Obama base of banksters, not the Dem base.

[SidDithers]

196. Yes, they will...

and those pouting and withholding their vote, were never part of the base to begin with.

Sid

[swilton]

197. Now that Obama has been shown to favor Wall Street

Is that the base you refer to?

Who exactly is Obama's base now?

[Autumn]

198. I am not his base, I am a Democrat, a life long

Democrat and I will only vote for a politician who stands for the Democratic platform and values.

[rapturedbyrobots]

199. So, his base...

are loyalist sycophants? sounds like you're advocating personality cult instead of policy.

[whatchamacallit]

200. Yes

This OP is like the "Real Americans" meme the republicans are so fond of.

[paulk]

205. "They voted for him in 2008 after listening

to him during his campaign"

I know you'll dismiss it as anecdotal, but I know plenty of people who listened to him during the campaign and voted for him because the alternative was worse. Especially after Palin was named as VP.

No doubt the same thing will happen in 2012. I know I'll vote for him, even though I think he's a lousy President and a worse leader of the party.

ps - your OP is bullshit and offensive. I think it's little more than flamebait.

[joshcryer]

206. Can someone explain to me how posting the obvious truth garners two hundred posts?

:shrug:

[Name removed]

208. Deleted message

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

[SidDithers]

209. deleted...nt

Sid

[ismnotwasm]

211. I certainly am n/t

[girl_interrupted]

214. Just who is Obama's base?

Seniors? They have received no increase in their incomes, while their costs have gone up and were sweating bullets whether or not Obama would throw them under the bus during the debt ceiling crisis.

Young people? they have college loans to pay off, and maybe you haven't noticed but there aren't a lot of jobs available for them to do that. This is far different from the 90's, when jobs were plentiful. Between loans, housing and now a possible mandate to buy health insurance, it's become a frightening prospect.


The Middle class? The cost of living has risen, salaries haven't. Their expenses have doubled. Health insurance premiums have gone through the roof. Banks have added all new fees to their customers. Companies are laying off or cutting benefits. Workers are worried about whether or not their pensions will be there when they retire. Not a pretty picture when you are raising a family & have mouths to feed.

These are groups that should be Obama's base, be they liberal or moderates, they are ones that need him to fight for them. And so far, he hasn't done anything to alleviate their situations.

Obama did have a majority at one time and still refused to raise taxes on the rich.


So as always it falls on the ones that can least afford it to make up the difference.


So do you mean "base" or "fan cub"? You know the voting public isn't made up of Democrats alone. He may not have to convince his "base" but he sure has a lot of other people out there to convince that do vote. And a lot of those people are not loyalists to either the Democratic or Republican party. They aren't political junkies worried about the next Supreme Court justice appointments. They are worried about their families and making ends meet.

Obama would do well to broaden his "base" by doing things in the next few months that help people in and out of his "base".

[Chimichurri]

217. 2010 was lost because Dems didn't show up to vote.

Perhaps the intention is to vote for Obama, if they find the time to make it to the polling place that day.

[Broderick]

220. It's a lull right now

Politics is a slow moving creature in my humble opinion. People will bray at this point, stray a bit at times because not everything Obama has done fits the mold they created in their mind. Eventually, they will come back home because the alternative is unthinkable. If the senate flips and the congress remains under Republican control, there is no way the American people will put a Republican at the top of the Government. Maybe folks will come kicking and screaming, but ultimately those that don't vote for him - were like you say; never a part of his base. His base transcends many different types of democrats and liberals, all of which have their unique passions and interests. It's the collective part of what is important in his re-election that will fire up folks to do the right thing, and come home.

[eilen]

221. Define his "Base" -- at least those he has not sold out.

If you think a bluse state like NY would fit your bill, you haven't seen the latest Quinnipiac University Poll, which polled Obama among "his base" and found that he is a negative in NY for the first time.


http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1318.xml?ReleaseID=1636

Charlotte is the National Headquarters for TBTF Bank of America.

That really says it all doesn’t it? Wasn’t BOA one of Obama’s largest campaign contributors last election? There's his base!

[Broderick]

223. That will swing back

once the Republican primary is a bit clearer.

[boston bean]

222. Well for me, I'm undecided about what to do at the top of the ticket, but I'm sure as hell not

undecided on how to vote down ticket.

I will vote straight D down ticket.

[MineralMan]

224. Good. Thank you.

Please also consider working for down-ticket candidates to help them win. I'm fine with letting the Presidential election take its own course. If enough people turn out to vote for Democrats down the ticket, President Obama will win handily. So, any work anyone does to get Democrats to the polls will be beneficial.

[sudopod]

225. lol, guilt trips totally get out that vote.

I am super fired up and stuff.

[Scurrilous]

227. Kick

:kick:

[Zorra]

231. I'm a lifetime Yellowdog Democrat.

Obama is some kind of Third Way, right-leaning whatever.

Maybe he's a Bipartisan.

But he's definitely something other than a Democrat.

At one time, back when I believed that Obama was a Democrat, I genuinely thought that I was part of Obama's base.

But you're absolutely correct, I'm not part of Obama's base; I'm a Democrat.

I'll probably vote for him if he doesn't spit on me again, but honestly, I really, really don't want to vote for him.

Yeah, I know all the reasons for which I am forced to vote for him, and I don't like being backed into a corner without any options.

If Obama screws me again, I will still vote for all the other Democrats on my ballot.

I just won't vote for him.

I can only take so much abuse.