Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Americans Are Outraged Because in Voting for Obama, They Thought They Were Rejecting Bush [View all]bvar22
(39,909 posts)223. 2) "give him a more liberal congress to work with"
This one pisses me off more than the rest of the propaganda today.
WE TRIED to do exactly this in the Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010,
by replacing DINO Anti-LABOR, Anti-healthCare Blanche Lincoln with a Democrat that would work with The President.
Guess what happened?
Our biggest enemy wasn't the Republicans,
or the Conservatives.
Turns out, our biggest obstruction was the Obama White House who pulled out ALL the stops to rescue Lincoln's Failing Primary Campaign.
We did everything right.
White House Resuces Blanche Lincoln's Failing Campaign in Democratic Primary
"So what did the Democratic Party establishment do when a Senator who allegedly impedes their agenda faced a primary challenger who would be more supportive of that agenda? They engaged in full-scale efforts to support Blanche Lincoln. Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure. Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests. The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just dont have the votes for.
Ordinarily, when Party leaders support horrible incumbents in primaries, they use the electability excuse: this is a conservative state, the incumbent has the best chance to win, and the progressive challenger is out-of-step with voters. That excuse is clearly unavailable here. As Public Policy Polling explained yesterday, Lincoln has virtually no chance of winning in November against GOP challenger John Boozman. And while it would have also been difficult for Halter to beat Boozman, polls consistently showed that he had a better chance than Lincoln did. Thats unsurprising, given how much better non-Washington candidates are doing in this incumbent-hating climate than long-term Washington insiders. And its rather difficult to claim that Halter is out-of-step with Arkansas given that they elected him their Lt. Governor. Whatever the reasons Washington Democrats had for supporting the deeply unpopular Lincoln, it had nothing whatsoever to do with electability.
What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse weve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesnt have 60 votes to pass good legislation, its not Obamas fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face. Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you dont support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but well support a primary challenger against you. Obamas support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"
<much more>
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/
Ordinarily, when Party leaders support horrible incumbents in primaries, they use the electability excuse: this is a conservative state, the incumbent has the best chance to win, and the progressive challenger is out-of-step with voters. That excuse is clearly unavailable here. As Public Policy Polling explained yesterday, Lincoln has virtually no chance of winning in November against GOP challenger John Boozman. And while it would have also been difficult for Halter to beat Boozman, polls consistently showed that he had a better chance than Lincoln did. Thats unsurprising, given how much better non-Washington candidates are doing in this incumbent-hating climate than long-term Washington insiders. And its rather difficult to claim that Halter is out-of-step with Arkansas given that they elected him their Lt. Governor. Whatever the reasons Washington Democrats had for supporting the deeply unpopular Lincoln, it had nothing whatsoever to do with electability.
What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse weve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesnt have 60 votes to pass good legislation, its not Obamas fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face. Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you dont support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but well support a primary challenger against you. Obamas support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"
<much more>
http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/
Repeating a critical piece of information:
Lincoln had NO CHANCE against the Republican in the General Election
Adding Insult to Injury,
a White House Spokesman ridiculed and Taunted Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots
for doing exactly what was asked of them.
Ed Schultz on White House insults to LABOR and the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Primary
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ed-schultz-if-it-wasnt-labor-barack-obama-
Walking away from the Arkansas Democratic Primary,
the only a rational person could conclude that [i[the LAST thing this White House wants is a Congress that will work with him.
I was on the ground in Arkansas in 210,
and it was worse than the Salon Article describes.
As Pro-healthCare, ProUnion Lt Gov Bill Halter pulled ahead of Lincoln in the Primary,
we were all very excited.
THEN, President Obama's face appeared on the TV giving Lincoln an Oval Office Endorsement with a plea to all good Democrats to vote for her in the coming Primary
because she is helping him with his agenda!!!!
Remember, this is the woman who CROWED about being the one who killed the Public Option!!!
This played 24/7 in Arkansas the week before the Primary election,
and if that wasn't bad enough, they sent the Old Dog (Bill Clinton) back to Arkansas to ice the cake.
It was disgusting.
But as I typed this, I had an epiphany.
Obama was telling the truth when he said that Lincoln was helping him.
She was rewarded for her help perpetuating the myth that it was Congress blocking his agenda!
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
233 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Americans Are Outraged Because in Voting for Obama, They Thought They Were Rejecting Bush [View all]
kpete
Jun 2013
OP
So he had the liberal view through the key primaries & then switched to the authoritarian view?
limpyhobbler
Jun 2013
#158
So you are telling us that "things can change" and not that things did change?
rhett o rick
Jun 2013
#127
That was certainly Bush's excuse too. 'Everything changed after 9/11' and he got the Patriot Act
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#184
But much of what's he's doing is making us less, not more, safe from terrorist attacks.
freedom fighter jh
Jun 2013
#195
The law is the law because Democrats like Obama shamefully voted for it. You clearly do not recall
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#55
The FBI and police departments have been spying on Americans for years and years.
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#146
'I support the Patriot Act'. That says it all to me. Did you support it when it Bush was president?
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#190
Lol, you've got a point, even Britain has, or had before Blair, a fairly responsive government.
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#191
Horse hockey. It ain't the rapist, it's the dress she wore. Blame the victim, no.
grahamhgreen
Jun 2013
#66
Victims my ass. Americans elected all those assholes who voted for the patriot act.
lumberjack_jeff
Jun 2013
#85
No, you are very wrong. The elected representatives did not represent the will of the people.
grahamhgreen
Jun 2013
#232
Voters also elected Wyden, Merkely, Udall, Feingold and many others who have attempted to
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#110
It's an uncomfortable reality that we elected (and then largely re-elected) the people who did this.
lumberjack_jeff
Jun 2013
#224
Obama - Protecting The Status Quo Daily - Hope He Enjoys Our Telephone Conversations
cantbeserious
Jun 2013
#10
Listen Good President Obama As I Know Your NSA Is Reading This --- As I Type!!
LovingA2andMI
Jun 2013
#156
"Americans" implies most or a majority are outraged, or that more than usual are outraged
arely staircase
Jun 2013
#16
he has an 83 percent approval rating among democrats, so it isn't emerging yet.
arely staircase
Jun 2013
#20
It's old and not news like Benghazi, IRS, AP, Reston and what ever I'm forgetting.
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#72
Buyers Remorse Is An Ugly Revalation - Turns Out That Obama Was An Ad Campaign For The Status Quo
cantbeserious
Jun 2013
#8
nope, college age and otherwise twenty somethings, and they love our president
arely staircase
Jun 2013
#211
You don't need to justify yourself to the newbe Ava. As a well known "young person" here
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#123
Young people are outraged? That's where his highest approvals come from, combined with
JaneyVee
Jun 2013
#25
hasn't let me down once. I don't care nor follow Ron and Rand Paul and what they think.
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#30
They are part of team Bush. Looking to fracture. And NO Obama core supporter is outraged.
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#36
You don't know shit about Ava, she is no "team Bush" player, the opposite in fact
Dragonfli
Jun 2013
#126
Don't bother to argue with this poster, ask him instead about "first they came for the rich" :)
idwiyo
Jun 2013
#135
"Like a freaking tax attorney who knows the laws so they can get around them."
blkmusclmachine
Jun 2013
#54
^THAT^ I voted for him because I trusted him to do the right things and I think he is.
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#77
Yeah, you go ahead and trust and have your faith. Me, I'll pay attention to what he DOES.
Demit
Jun 2013
#94
I don't vote for someone to micromanage them and I'm comfortable with the decisions he makes.
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#141
And the sock puppets come on liberal/progressive websites to blow more smoke about how
blkmusclmachine
Jun 2013
#59
well they should be, but most Americans are not outraged about this. In fact the public has been so
Douglas Carpenter
Jun 2013
#35
you keep claiming that the people demanded that which was done without their consent.
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#87
please try to grasp the over all point people try to make when they say something
Douglas Carpenter
Jun 2013
#102
I do. You claim the people demanded something they were not told about and which this person's
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#108
my blood boils everytime I hear the words from campaign Obama vs the real Obama
xiamiam
Jun 2013
#37
The President could erase many of the past policies with the stroke of a pen, yet
SlimJimmy
Jun 2013
#93
Never naive enough to believe he'd be ABLE to end programs institutionalized before
blm
Jun 2013
#57
TeaLeft irrational purityism. 1 issue doesn't mean he is Bush. And no one is being listened in on.
RBInMaine
Jun 2013
#68
Seriously. "TeaLeft", "Professional leftists", the "Where's My Pony?" brigade....
YoungDemCA
Jun 2013
#80
So his support of Bush on Iraq is damning, but Hagel's is reason to make him Sec of Defense, is that
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#97
Skittles said mine in post #9...this "news" is not "new", and I certainly witnessed 'teh ponies' bc
LaydeeBug
Jun 2013
#152
I think that folks here are upset because they hoped that Obama was a liberal
Rhiannon12866
Jun 2013
#177
Keep your substandard expectations for the United States to yourself
DisgustipatedinCA
Jun 2013
#180
Yep, and besides that, we are not going to get 65 (D) senators and 260 Reps in the near
Doctor_J
Jun 2013
#228
Many Voted for Pres Obama not once but twice mainly for change but Pres Obama
YeahSureRight
Jun 2013
#193