Does the President realize how close he is to losing his progressive base?

[kentuck]

I think there are some folks here that do not realize how close these progressives are to falling off the edge?

But it is a real problem for the President. He continues to promote policies that progressives simply cannot support. The latest is the Social Security FICA tax cut. They realize the economy needs a jumpstart but this seems to be the last place to start, not the first. The President does not seem capable of presenting progressive solutions to any of our problems?

It's not enough to simply say he is smarter than everyone else and that he is playing chess and people just do not understand where he is coming from? He needs to explain it in simpler terms. The confusion feeds on itself.

Progressives are hesitant to criticize this President, although many may think he gets a lot of criticism from the left? There is a lot that is left unsaid and many are beginning to feel that their Party has left them. We can ridicule and mock that premise but to do so is at your own risk.

[DevonRex]

1. Jesus effing Christ. That sentiment has been posted ad nauseum here for 2 years. Nt

[demwing]

53. Yeah, haven't you learned that the answer is "Not Really..."? /nt

[elleng]

2. Do 'these progressives' realize the damage 'falling off' would do???

Damn!

[awoke_in_2003]

59. the left is not the group you should worry about...

we always vote "D"- what you need to worry about are the swing voters who, in 2010, voted "R" (but, of course, we are blamed for 2010)

[kctim]

94. So it makes more sense

to cater to the moderate majority than the far-left minority.

Couldn't agree more.

[Mr Deltoid]

105. It makes no sense

His catering to the right is ruining Obama and the Democratic party

[kctim]

109. No

President Obama catering to the moderate majority is only ruining the false progressive projection that the Democratic Party is theirs to run and control.

The progressives problem isn't that they are upset with President Obama for not listening to them, it's that they believe their views are the only ones that count.

[Mr Deltoid]

124. There is no such thing as the 'moderate majority'

He is playing to a non existent group. That is why he is in a total free fall.

Oh, and republican policies are by no means 'moderate.' They collapsed the economy once and they will collapse the economy again.

[awoke_in_2003]

112. The far left minority...

is the only anchor slowing the moderate "majority's" swing to the right. There is a good portion of this party that agrees 100% with republican policies.

[frazzled]

3. Not this progressive

Or apparently 85% of registered Democrats who describe themselves as liberal (as opposed to moderate or conservative). And after Thursday's speech and today's announcement plans to raise taxes on wealthy Americans, that number will probably rise.

I think he lost the FireDogLake crowd before the 2008 elections, and nothing is going to change their minds. There's a black lining in every silver cloud for them.

[demwing]

54. since the speech, the Prez's positives have gone down a point

and his negatives have gone up a point...

[snooper2]

92. The FireDogLake crowd are still bitter, and are insignificant

[dkf]

4. Did you realize he wants to tax the rich to pay off our social security tax tab this coming year?

Bet you didn't.

[sufrommich]

14. I posted this today, I see others have too. Sunk like a stone. nt

[dkf]

39. Which makes one wonder what people thought happened with the cut this year.

Too much detail.

[sad sally]

71. Do you seriously think the Republican-led Boehner/Cantor group

or the joint super committee will approve this "tax the rich" plan to pay for the Jobs Plan and send it to the President to sign into law? Some of us are skeptical.

The $487 billion in tax revenues to pay for the Jobs Plan will be seen by the Republicans as political grandstanding, campaigning, class warfare - you name it. Yes, a majority of people - including Republicans, Democrats and Independents - in the US say that the wealthy should pay more taxes, but the majoritys' voices don't seem to be heard by congress. Why will it be different this time?

$400 billion by limiting itemized deductions, including the one for charitable giving, for individuals earning more than $200,000 a year ($250,000 for couples).
$40 billion by eliminating tax breaks for oil-and-gas companies.
$18 billion by taxing “carried interest” income (common among hedge fund managers) as regular income as opposed to capital gains, which are taxed at a much lower rate.
$3 billion by adjusting the depreciation rate on corporate jets.

[sudopod]

75. And God wants us to all be happy.

Alas, earwax. (also tornadoes, hurricanes, and wildfires)

[Mimosa]

115. Link, please? n/t

[jaxx]

5. This again?

Really, it's gotten so old that it is not news.

[MadHound]

6. I don't think many are close to leaving, many are already gone

I think at this point the question is whether Obama recognize just how many progressives and liberals he is going to lose if he continues down the path he is on.

[Cirque du So-What]

10. Where have all the progressives gone?

Gone to posting tripe on internet message boards, every one.
Oh, when will they ever learn?

[TheWraith]

11. Given his still 84% approval rating among liberal Democrats, apparently not many.

Some people still don't get that.

[MadHound]

19. Ah, still posting outdated material I see

"Obama's approval rating among liberals has dropped to 71 percent, the lowest point in his presidency."
<http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/22/cnn-poll-drop-in-liberal-support-pushes-obama-approval-rating-down/>

And it's just gotten worse since.

[Number23]

24. You post a link from JULY and you have the nerve to call Wraith's info "outdated?"

Wow. That's something special right there.

[MadHound]

25. Certainly more up to date that the Wraith's figure

Which is from January.

[TheWraith]

29. Actually no, it's from two weeks ago. Care to spin again?

In the most recent poll out today, it "dropped" to 80%.

Care to take another stab at denying reality?

[MadHound]

30. Got a link? n/t

[TheWraith]

32. It's right there on Gallup's site.

And I should correct myself, THREE weeks ago. And I misremembered the first time I typed, it was 83, not 84.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

[MadHound]

35. Perhaps you need to check your own link

Among liberal Democrats it shows that he is down to 80% this last week, and down to 71% among all liberals, which is what my CNN link showed as well. Drip, drip, drip.

[SidDithers]

38. Wraith clearly said liberal democrats in post 11...nt

Sid

[MadHound]

40. Yes, he did, and his number was wrong and out of date

I clearly stated liberals, and my number is holding up.

Any other inanities you want to make?

[TheWraith]

42. Keep trying to spin it away. That number has been solid as a rock for months.

Ranging from 80 to 86% among liberal Democrats. And as you know, and would acknowledge if you weren't trying to "win" through pedantry, my number from two weeks ago was correct.

The only thing dripping away is the credibility of the people who insist that the "left" is turning against Obama and the Democrats.

[ThomWV]

22. Think about how meaningless that statistic really is

So, this week you ask 100 people if they are liberal Democrats, 80 of them say yes. Then you ask the 80 if they approve of Obama, half say yes. So he has a 50% approval amont Liberal Democrats.

Then two weeks later they ask 100 people if they are liberal Democrats, but half of them have already left the Party, so now they have 40 people who say yes. Of the 40 that remain most are die-hard Obama lovers so now 35 of them say they approve of the job Obama is doing. So now with 35 people supporting him instead of 40 his approval rating among liberal Democrats has gone up from 50% to 88%.

See what I mean?

[TheWraith]

27. Little problem: your theory doesn't match actual reality.

There has been no such precipitous drop in Democratic self-identification, and the fact is that by segmenting Democrats among conservative, moderate, liberal, etcetera, you find that the MORE LIBERAL someone is, the more likely they are to approve of Obama's job performance.

[ThomWV]

28. So you are saying that the more liberal a Democrat is the less "progressive" they are?

???????

You don't think Progressives have left the Party?

[TheWraith]

31. Try that again, please, this time in some way that's comprehensible.

The polls show a clear story: the anti-Obama left is a tiny fraction of the party. And one which is primarily driven by bullshit and lies from people who profit off of creating anti-Democrat propaganda.

[BzaDem]

55. No, no non-negligible number of progressives have left the party. Denying that doesn't

change reality.

Of course there will always be some who will be dissatisfied with every candidate our party ever elects. The same is true in the Republican party, and in fact in every party in every political system. But this is nothing new or remarkable -- the only remarkable thing is how HIGH Obama's support is among the base relative to all Presidents in the past 50 years.

The problem (or rather, disconnect) is that some people seem to believe that just because they have an opinion somehow means a non-negligible fraction of the base also share that opinion. But the data does not bear that out in any way, and it never has. Some will grasp for reasons why their opinion does not coincide with the vast majority of the rest of the base. (Maybe people left the party! And if the data doesn't bear that out, maybe the data's cooked! etc etc). But none of those excuses is related to what's actually happening.

[elleng]

63. HE is going to lose?

:wtf:

It is OUR country, and if 'progressives and liberals' are 'lost,' we are ALL DEAD!

Join the real world, please, folks.

[TheWraith]

7. "Progressives are hesitant to criticize this President" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

RIGHT.

The people who insist they represent the "real" Democratic Party have been nothing BUT criticizing from before he set foot in the fucking office, everything from complaining about the inaugural's speakers and carbon footprint to having a temper tantrum over him not doing things their way and only their way forever.

[treestar]

67. +10000

Even Republicans are more hesitant!!

[book_worm]

8. No, but 'progressives' on DU have been saying this since he was elected.

[ThomWV]

23. I don't think that is true at all. Progressives gave him time

You may recall that the expectation of many of us who voted for him was that he would at least respect the progressive wing of the Democratic Party if not agree with it completely. As it turns out he turns to the Republicans for ideas instead of supporting competing plans and ideas that originate within his own party but we all gave him time to show that side of himself. So it is not all fare to say that this sort of thing was being said of him right from the time of his election. I do not recall it being that way at all. The Republicans might have tried to eat him alive right from day 1, but his fellow Democrats for the most part gave him at least the obligatory 100 days.

[fascisthunter]

9. nah, he knows and is gambling that it won't matter

all that is important to his admin, is that they change our economic system into a corporate friendly one, and make us all dependent on that corporate system. No more social services, is the end game. He has brought us closer, and I think his aim to to get us as close as possible along with these other 3rd Way Dems. All of FDR's programs and the pseudo-socialized safety net is to be destroyed. And they are doing so using dishonesty. As far as I'm concerned, these so-called deems are really corporate trolls who are changing the democratic platform to suit their briber's( corporate constituents) desires.

[sufrommich]

12. Judging by the polls, not close at all. nt

[H2O Man]

13. I don't believe so.

I think the White House views it in the context of "where else are they gonna go?"

[Solomon]

50. And I think from Obama's context

It's "what else can I do" given the circumstances.

[Poll_Blind]

15. Kentuck: He doesn't care. Progressives aren't his base and aren't what he's aiming for.

Period.

PB

[B Calm]

16. He totally lost me with those right wing free trade deals. . .

[Raine]

17. He doesn't care, independants are going to make up the difference

and take the place of any lost progressives.

[Mr Deltoid]

106. Obama's polls among independents mirror those among republcians

Good luck having them save him.

[teddy51]

18. You certainly have your work cut out for yourself. Finding a suitable candidate

that would be willing to Primary a sitting President and beat him and beating the Repug candidate.

[DesertFlower]

20. so if his so called base stays home we

might have president perry. i don't think any democrat wants that.

[Le Taz Hot]

41. Who says we're staying home?

:shrug: Progressives are the most active voters out there. We're not staying home.

[DesertFlower]

51. sometimes i worry with what i read here.

[Le Taz Hot]

72. We not only vote but we're the activists.

What we don't do is vote blindly for anyone with a specific letter next to his/her name -- especially when he/she is virtually indistinguishable from his/her Republican opponent. Now, if they'd like to go back to being FDR Democrats, their progressive base wouldn't be pouring out the door in droves. As has so often been said here, WE didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left us.

[DesertFlower]

74. so does that mean you won't be voting for obama?

[Le Taz Hot]

80. Cute. n/t

[DesertFlower]

82. great answer.

:sarcasm:

[Le Taz Hot]

83. Thanks!

I thought it was adequately evasive. :evilgrin:

[snooper2]

96. Numbers aren't on your side...FYI

[Le Taz Hot]

97. What "side" is that?

And to what "numbers" are you referring?

[snooper2]

99. The FireDogLake crowd...The folks who post from wsws.org

[Le Taz Hot]

100. I've never been to either of those sites.

:shrug:

[PufPuf23]

126. I have never been to the site wsws.org and have been at links

less than 10X to FDL from DU.

I have been a Democrat, anti-war, and pro-social safety net and environmental protection since before I could vote.

My first vote for POTUS was McGovern. I was old enough that I could vote before age 21 but could not drink and was a lottery number in the Vietnam draft. I protested against Vietnam in the streets of SF and Berkleley and was not let in the SF Humphrey rally because I looked like a hippie -- this was on a high school field trip. I went to the McCarthy and Wallace rallies. Wallace was at the Cow Palace and there was lots of SF SWAT and more there to jeer than support (another high school field trip). In 1964 I manned card tables in a then rural but now ealthy East SF Bay suburb with other members of my Boy Scout Troop supporting LBJ/Humphrey. I still have a bunch of buttons.

I wish the neoliberals did not control and set policy for the Democratic Party in 2012 and that the GOP is batshit crazy rabid. I wish Candidate Obama had the integrity to to state he was a neoliberal when a candidate.

I would rather another Democratic POTUS that POTUS Obama after the 2012 election because he appointed neoliberals and retained GOP and apparently believes or is bought or misinformed for these policies.

POTUS Obama still has the upper hand and had more of an upper hand until 2010 midterms.

Call me an asshole but POTUS Obama has betrayed what could have been a transitional time towards more effective policy and a society and world of justice and not violence and corruption.

Give me a choice between Perry (and other GOP) in 2012 and I will vote Obama and be bitter. Then I will focus on 2016 or die (I am getting older and health is not perfect lol).

[snooper2]

95. You shouldn't...there are only about 5000-10,000 unique posters

Number of posters making 1 post in about 60 days, 5-10K unique users...


What you read here is one little micro World.

Shit, 2.5 million people watched the Jets/Cowboys game out of 330,000,000


Numbers give perspective :)

[Dragonfli]

21. They have often signaled that they don't care, the base is for punching to impress indies. nt

[SidDithers]

26. He can lose his base only so often...

What you think is "his base" is starting to sound like the boy who cried wolf.

Sid

[MineralMan]

33. The "progressives" left a long time ago.

I doubt President Obama is all that interested. The Democrats still support him. They're his base. The "progressives" never liked him, and have been whining about him since 2008, before the election.

[Bonobo]

34. You should take the quotes off "Progressives" and put it on your "Democrats".

Your complaint, it seems to me, is not with the position or sincerity of the Progressives, but with the fact that they won't shut up.

[MineralMan]

36. I "should," eh? You know, I'm perfectly capable of thinking for

myself and deciding on the punctuation I use. You can do as you please. :shrug:

[Bonobo]

46. My posts are my opinion and you are free to take or leave my advice.

I have no power to force you to do anything, thus I chose the word "should" instead of using "must" or the imperative form such as "Move the quotation marks!".

[MineralMan]

84. I'm also free to reply to your post with my own opinion, which I did.

:shrug:

[H2O Man]

45. Respectfully & strongly disagree.

I endorsed Senator Obama on this forum in early 2008. No progressives had a problem with my doing so. Other non-progressive forum members engaged in an effort to have me banned from DU.

I campaigned a great deal in 2008 in my area in upstate NY. This included working at the Democratic Headquarters (a family tradition since 1960 in that particular city); going door-to-door; and speaking to groups from the Democratic Left that are not within our party.

President Obama has done some good things, and some disappointing things, as well. I think that many Progressive Democrats, such as myself, think of the King quote, "I will not make a butchery of my conscience," when it comes to Barack Obama in 2011. I believe his support of the "tar sands" bit was more than wrong politically, economically, and socially. I think it violates spiritual and moral law. I am not planning to do anything against him in the coming year, but I cannot in good conscience support his campaign. And I did not move away from him: he owns responsibility for his actions.I am still a Progressive Democrat, who will do at very least as much for the party in 2012 as any member on this forum.

[BzaDem]

58. Nothing you do for the party will be effective if Obama doesn't win. We can elect veto proof

majorities in Congress, and it STILL won't matter if the Supreme Court justices appointed in 2013 rule much of progressive policy unconstitutional (as they did for 30 years in the early 20th century).

For your sake, I hope voting your conscience is worth it. Because when the above outcome comes to pass, I know many people who would not easily be able to live with themselves if they knew they did something to cause it. At least speaking for myself, if I knew that I was partly responsible for the deciding vote that sets the available options for policy back to the early 1900s (for potentially a generation), it would be difficult to look at myself in the mirror in the morning.

[H2O Man]

69. Again, I respectfully disagree.

Everything that I do will be effective. It will not be the deciding factor in anything -- except that realm I refer to as my conscience -- but the only failure possible would be to not do what I know I must do.

And I agree in large part: a republican President, appointing republican federal judges at any level is a horrible concept. I believe that President Obama should be doing all he possibly can to stop that possibility in 2012. That includes not advocating for the very things that some of us are presently engaged in the legal challenges to that are likely to be decided by those very federal courts.

President Obama is an intelligent, and capable person. But he is not supporting what I consider to be the essential positions on a number of key issues. I'm not so unaware as to not realize that politics is most often the game of the possible. People compromise with others. It's when people compromise themselves that it is a real problem. As this is so common among politicians -- both Democrats and republicans -- perhaps we should ponder how they can stand to look at themselves in that mirror you mention?

When dealing with a human being who is a slave to drugs (legal or not), sometimes one really has to step back. It doesn't mean that you don't love that person. But it does mean you can't enable their current dfestructive behavior. I think that might be true in the case of politicians who are slaves to corporate powers. Doesn't mean we don't love them. We just aren't going to be their enablers anymore.

I'm confident that neither of us will convince the other. But I surely appreciate that you made some valid points, and raised only sincere concerns. peace.

[TheKentuckian]

57. Seems light on truth, plenty of us where on and/or leading the bandwagon.

If by "whining" you were referring to FISA vote or being upset about his stance on gay marriage, I would say those are some very serious issues, as serious as they come and I wish I had paid more mind rather than attempting to make excuses based on political tactic concerns.

We all should have been listening to the "whining" as the cabinet was put together as well because if our eyes were open we'd have forced a different direction before the TeaPubliKlans started their shit and commanded the frame.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[FrenchieCat]

44. Why lie? What does it bring you?

1. Obama never called anyone a retard
2. His Chief of staff was talking about the idea of a liberal group buying ads to
criticize Democratic politicians was a retarded idea.

so why deliberately lie?

Does it make you feel that much more vindicated in having joined the
suicide brigade while threatening to take us all down with you?
That doesn't sound very progressive on your part. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

47. It's not much of a leap at all to take someone who goes on Fox to brag

about angering his liberal base to someone who allows his CoS to insult Democrats in public.

Does it?

If you want to upbraid the "suicide brigade", you need to take it up with the White House.

[SidDithers]

49. Keep telling that lie..

:rofl:

Sid

[indepat]

43. This administration has continued many of junior's

ruinous policies and actions, retained many of his appointments and, for lagniappe, largely adopted RW solutions as a panacea for dealing with the disastrous problems created by former RW policies and actions. Please tell me I'm wrong, that the proper way to achieve deficit reduction and get the national debt under control is by austerity and setting the framework whereby each succeeding administration will be tempted to further gut social security and Medicare while maybe not addressing the root causes of the out-of-control national debt: inequitable tax cuts largely benefiting those who own earn most of the money and have most of the wealth, perpetual unfunded wars, and a near financial meltdown and near depression precipitated by massive fraud in the housing mortgage market by players who have largely not been held accountable. :patriot:

[tblue]

48. Dear Kentuck, About "his base."

People get up in arms here when someone points out the rift between the president and "progressives" or "his base." "Progressive" must be a misnomer for the group he is losing, hence this blowback now and whenever someone wants to talk about it. Some folks who support everything the president does also call themselves "progressives." So, okay. We can use a different word if they want us to. I don't really care.

In any event, it's a fact that the president has lost some chunk of his previous supporters. I don't personally know a soul who has not expressed profound dismay with this president. And all my friends and blood relatives are diehard progressive Dems who voted for Obama.

So, I hear ya. To asnswer your question, I really don't know if he knows. But if he does, then I guess we are not considered his base, and maybe he never did consider us that in the first place. -- But I haven't changed what I stand for, have you?

Let's stay in touch.
tblue

[ProSense]

52. Utter

"But it is a real problem for the President. He continues to promote policies that progressives simply cannot support. The latest is the Social Security FICA tax cut. They realize the economy needs a jumpstart but this seems to be the last place to start, not the first. The President does not seem capable of presenting progressive solutions to any of our problems? "

nonsense. Many economist support the http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=769472&mesg_id=769472|payroll tax holiday>

Here's why the fear mongering is silly, it requires a hypothetical scenario in which Republicans continue it permanently.

Why Extending Payroll Tax Cuts Makes Social Security's Future More Uncertain

Here's the problem with extending the payroll tax cuts: They're unlikely to ever be restored. And if they're not restored, you've done what Republicans have been trying to do for decades: turned Social Security into a welfare program that no longer pays for itself, but comes out of the general fund and for the first time, adds to the deficit.

So when you hear people saying it's a good idea for the economy, they're right -- for the short term. It's additional stimulus at a time when it's badly needed. But for the long run, it will politically undermine the long-term future of Social Security -- which the administration probably considers a feature, and not a bug:

<...>

The argument is basically don't implement an idea good for the economy, "badly need stimulus," because Republicans will likely do something negative in the future.

Republicans are going to attack Medicare and Social Security in the future anyway. Bush tried to privatize it. House Republicans passed the Ryan plan and "Cut, Cap and Balance," and they're likely going to continue to push these plans.

"They're unlikely to ever be restored"

Fear mongering! The extension is for one year. It would require a new bill. If Republicans have the power and the numbers to dismantle Social Security, they will likely go the route of Bush's scheme or Ryan's plan.

Why is there such concern about what Republicans might do...and in the future? Maybe it's time to stop hyping the flawed notion that Social Security is being jeopardize when it's not.

[BzaDem]

56. Where do you get the idea that the base is close to not supporting Obama? The data shows a higher

approval of Obama among the base than any President in 50 years.

[TBF]

60. Define "base". nt

[BzaDem]

61. Look at any metric.

Democrats, liberals, liberal democrats, whatever you want. Obama's approval is very high relative to past presidents. Clinton was in the low to mid 60s among self identified liberals at a similar time, and Carter was even lower (not even bringing up LBJ). Among Democrats, you can actually graph the support among Democrats on Gallup for every president going back to Truman. Obama beats every single President except for JFK (and is only a few points behind him).

[jeff47]

62. It's not the fact that he's running against his base that's stupid

It's the fact that doing so has won him absolutely nothing from "independents". In fact, dem-leaning independents are extremely unhappy with how things are going.

One could excuse the strategy if it offered some results. However, it demotivates the base while not winning any new converts.

[jimlup]

64. Depends on what you mean by losing support...

If you mean campaign contributions and volunteer work - he lost me months ago.

If you mean my vote - he couldn't lose my vote since I would not vote for a Reptilian and I will not vote 3rd party if my state is in play. So I guess he's done with me. I have nothing left for which to bargain. I don't care. I can't "support" via $ or work. I just can't after what has happened.

I can still work for my Senator and Congressperson but the top of the ticket is lost to me.

[KoKo]

65. 80%$$$$$$of his Liberal Base Support this President. It's the latest Polls...

There's no problem whatsoever.

[treestar]

66. I thought it was already lost?

Like several ultimatums ago?

From his speech, I think he's decided he is going to do what he things right, regardless.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[lib2DaBone]

70. Obama step down... if you dont respect yourself..at least save the Dem Party

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. I know what I hear in real life

from people who are not on DU and have never even heard of DU but were avid Obama supporters in 2008. These were people who wore buttons, went door to door, and came back from rallies all star-struck.

Their current moods range from sad bewilderment ("Why is he always caving in to the Republicans?") to outright disgust ("I think he's a Republican mole").

And I'm hearing these kinds of sentiments from people I'd never expect to hear them from, all in the last couple of months. The "last straw" is different for different people. For some it was the botched health care bill. For others it was widening the war in Afghanistan. For others it was appointing Arne Duncan and seeming to support school privatization. For others it was caving on letting the Bush tax cuts expire. For others it was Libya. For others it was the tar sands issue.

The ONLY thing that may prompt them to vote for Obama is the scariness of the Republicans, but that is a mighty poor motivator, don't you think?

If you burn too many bridges, you can end up stuck on an island.

[CakeGrrl]

76. Personally, I don't much care about the 'motivators' as much as keeping the GOP

from getting more power. Some here want people to be ashamed that that may be the only reason a vote is cast for the President in 2012. The only thing I care about is keeping the crazy out of the WH. Whatever gets us there.

[amborin]

78. same here

there's widespread discontent among even the most formerly ardent Obama supporters; as you discussed, some got disallusioned early on, while others held out much longer and only now are deflated;

if approached by pollsters, these people still express support for Obama, but privately, they don't.

[xiamiam]

79. Yes..in real life..people are not happy ..with the wars, with the economy, jobs, tar sands

social security threatened, etc. They do ask ..always.."but who are we going to vote for"..the only consistent supporters I ever hear/read are here..and while they are vocal, I know their names as there are not really so many of them

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

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

[Whisp]

120. they probably watch too much tv. 'cavers' is a dead giveaway.

the media started that and it got infected into people's minds, as they wanted.

the same media that protected the Despicable Chimperor is now pummeling Obama at every possible turn - do you thikn k the media has suddenly gone honest or do you think they are still carrying the Republican message?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

128. These aren't people who who watch Fox or much TV at all

These are people who have been disappointed in Obama's unwillingness to fight for ordinary people and over-eagerness to "compromise" with the Republicans.

[Robeson]

130. That is my experience, as well...

...other than some posters on this board, I don't know anyone "fired up" for Obama in 2012. And my social circle is all Democrats.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

131. Right, compared to the red-hot enthusiasm of 2008, the responses of Dems

whom I know personally range from

1) "Oh, well, I guess he's doing the best he can, but I wish he had more guts"

to

2) "I think he's a corporatist, but the Republicans this time around are scary."

to

3)"Fuck that, I'm voting third party"

to

4)"Fuck that, I'm not going to bother voting if I'm going to get a Republican either way."


Now the Beltway conventional wisdom is that most voters are in categories 1) and 2), but I'm hearing a surprising amount of 3) and 4) and from people I wouldn't expect it from.

(In my experience, if the Beltway's conventional wisdom says one thing, then its polar opposite is usually the best course of action.)

[Indykatie]

77. When I Saw the Post Headline I Already Knew The Writer Was

most likely one of 3 DUers that seem to thrive on posting anti Obama sentiments. It never gets old apparently. The progressive base is not deserting Obama despite these daily claims. Not all progressives are against the FICA cut and some of understand any package will include some things we don't like.

[Le Taz Hot]

81. NO progressive believes in FICA cuts.

The Democrats, however, seem to be all too willing to sell out our future in the name of "bipartisanship." There are progressives (who vote with their feet) and there are die-hard Democrats, who would vote for ANY office holder with a "D" next to their names -- regardless of how odious.

[DesertFlower]

90. no one should support cuts to FICA especially

when the solution is simple. remove the CAP. of course, the rich would have to pay more and we can't have that can we?

[NorthCarolina]

85. I think there is some great misconception as to what a "Progressive" stands for.

If what you say is true, then there are obviously many befuddled Conservatives who, for whatever reason, choose to identify as a "Progressive". True Progressives would be against the FICA cuts period,end of story. I think you will come to discover that shrouding a conservative in a progressive cloak in an attempt to coerce true progressives to join in a march to the political right will backfire miserably. Just my 2 cents.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

86. "Progressive" as in "Progressive Policy Institute"--a misnomer if there ever was one

(They're the think tank for the conservative Democrats.)

[NorthCarolina]

89. Proof that Conserva-Dems are simply trying to co-opt the term Progressive

for public manipulation. "80% of Progressives approve of the FICA cuts" reads the headline...sure they do. :eyes:

[Shagbark Hickory]

87. A post on DU should cost $1.95

[Common Sense Party]

98. Right. "Free speech for you--if you can afford it."

[Shagbark Hickory]

108. Everyone here can afford $1.95

To borrow a quote from the Sprint moble phone contract....
Free speech does not mean unreasonable speech. :-)

[Dragonfli]

113. I can't, I have 67 cents to my name and I am also in need of other things I have no money for.

I suppose I should stop posting, tell me, should the poor be allowed to read or am I being a drain by doing that as well?

[Shagbark Hickory]

114. ...

You got me.

[Mimosa]

116. Sounds like something a Republican might say. n/t

[Shagbark Hickory]

125. I definitely do think replies should be free!

[BlueIris]

88. The bigger problem

is the encroaching explosion of corruption. He will have no defense for it, no justification. And without the Party's support, he does not have a prayer of escaping the consequences.

[Safetykitten]

91. He's not getting re-elected so it's rather useless at this point.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[SwampG8r]

102. so now after all else will that be the new strategy?

threaten skinner?

[Mr Dixon]

103. IMO

He is in good shape, look at the choices out there; can we stop the armchair Quarter backing?

[Octafish]

104. Coming from you, kentuck, this means something.

You've been as active, progressive, liberal supporter of President Obama as there is.

Thank you for spelling out what he needs to hear -- for the sake of his presidency and our nation.

Kick and Rec.

[HappyMe]

107. He hasn't lost my support or vote.

"Progressives are hesitasnt to criticize this President.."
Really?

[Bandit]

110. I am about as far left as one can get and I have reached the point where I no longer care.

It apparently makes no difference which Party has the Majority or the Whitehouse...Democrats have it and they do what Republicans want and Republicans have it and they do some of what they want. Democrats are sometimes able to stop the Republicans when they are in the minority, but when a Democratic President says to jump they simply ask how high and don't ask what they are jumping for. At least with a Republican President they ask first....

[girl gone mad]

111. He lost progressives long ago.

You can see the anger and frustration in the posts from his diehard supporters as reality rears its ugly head. It will only get worse.

[cali]

117. wait a minute: you actually think posts on DU are relevant re whether or not

he's lost progressives? LOL. Look, most of us progressives aren't fucking stupid. We'll hold our noses and vote for him. And polls reflect that.

[girl gone mad]

123. What's relevant is that the President has failed to bring meaningful, positive change.

I'm commenting on the reactionary response to this new reality from his staunch supporters. Instead of confronting his many failures, time and again they lash out at progressives.

[BzaDem]

127. How is something that is false relevant to anything?

If you poll the base, the vast majority would disagree with what you said.

Of course there will always be SOME people (on both sides) that never think anyone their party elects brings "meaningful, positive change." But beyond being a simple fact about political systems in general, that isn't really relevant to anything else. The only relevant thing about it is how high Obama's support among the base is relative to past Presidents.

[Whisp]

118. buh bye! to all those 'progressives'

:sarcasm: that word has been improperly fucked and hijacked, imho.

we need help to re elect a Democratic President Obama, we don't need your constant insults.

good!

[kentuck]

119. I'm happy ...

you are insulted..

:sarcasm:

[Whisp]

121. and I am elated you are happy

wouldn't want you to be anything else. . . otherwise..... you know what can happen if a Democrat upsets a 'progressive' that uses RW messages about how awful Obama is... you know that they will not vote.

we must be nice! or else! We must all hate Obama, for the good of the Party!

[kentuck]

122. We must all be Democrats...

or Republicans...or whatever...

It really doesn't matter. We choose our poison.

[NoodleyAppendage]

129. Losing? How 'bout LOST. He was losing it way back during the health care debate.

He LOST it when he and his corporate cronies REPEATEDLY disparaged the liberal grassroots and progressive ideals.

When Obama loses in 2012, he will have no one but himself to blame.

J

[Evasporque]

132. to who?.....nt

[randr]

133. The minute a real progressive democrat steps up to the plate

he will have the support of many who worked hard for Obama.
The real problem, as I see it, has always been the two party system and MSM manipulation of the political arena.
Until that is changed we will always have inept leaders.