You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The mistake we made was believing Obama could fulfill his promises (even if he wanted to) [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
DaveofCali Donating Member (434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:36 AM
Original message
The mistake we made was believing Obama could fulfill his promises (even if he wanted to)
Advertisements [?]
We should've known better, that the radical change that Obama as a candidate and the Democrats wanted to do was simply not possible with the way that Congress is structured. While the House of Representatives is structured to reflect public opinion, the Senate by design is supposed to circumvent popular rule, and especially with the filibuster put in, is I believe supposed to have a moderating effect, so that it is much harder to pass dramatic legislation through without making concessions, and make it very hard to pass radical legislation, thus in reality favoring a conservative worldview of change happening slowly rather than abruptly, and thus probably the greatest barrier against a progressive agenda from happening in Congress.

The mistake that we made is in believing that Obama could really get all the stuff that he promised through the congress, because Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats in the House of Representatives got Obama's agenda through, the whole problem has been in the Senate, and the Senate is by design supposed to be a barrier against popular rule. Remember, the Senate was itself a compromise during the writing of the Constitution (The Senate is supposed to represent the states, in recognition of their sovereignty, not the american people in general) and is also supposed to be a check against the House of Representatives.



I guess its not our fault though for not knowing that the modern filibuster is not a real filibuster and that one only has to say that they are filibustering to filibuster and require cloture to break the filibuster. When the hell did they change that rule in the Senate, someone has to find out....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -The mistake we made was believing Obama could fulfill his promises (even if he wanted to) DaveofCali  Dec-13-10 12:36 AM   #0 
  - Obama over promised, it's that simple. bush got alot done because he didn't solely  craigmatic   Dec-13-10 12:49 AM   #1 
  - FWIW: Obama ran on escalating the war in Afghanistan.  laconicsax   Dec-13-10 12:59 AM   #2 
  - But he also ran as the nominee who would end the war in Iraq, and anyone who  Exilednight   Dec-13-10 09:03 PM   #23 
     - But it is change we can be duped by. n/t  laconicsax   Dec-14-10 03:36 PM   #24 
  - Hey, but he is managing to  RaleighNCDUer   Dec-13-10 01:47 AM   #11 
  - What do you mean "we"? And....  boppers   Dec-13-10 01:03 AM   #3 
  - I'm talking about Senators not having to do a real filibuster  DaveofCali   Dec-13-10 01:08 AM   #5 
     - Cloture became a proxy.  boppers   Dec-13-10 01:33 AM   #10 
  - All Obama could do is promise something and try to deliver on this promise.  Life Long Dem   Dec-13-10 01:05 AM   #4 
  - I think most Presidents get in there and get a cold dose of reality, Bush/Cheney  gateley   Dec-13-10 01:13 AM   #7 
  - All Obama could do  Cherchez la Femme   Dec-13-10 07:26 AM   #19 
  - The promises weren't radical. The system is corrupt. eom  Hello_Kitty   Dec-13-10 01:13 AM   #6 
  - Unless there is Campaign reform this game will go on till the US is bankrupt  sciencewins   Dec-13-10 01:14 AM   #8 
  - I'm not an Obama apologist, but...  DaveofCali   Dec-13-10 01:27 AM   #9 
  - Not bribery - horse trading.  RaleighNCDUer   Dec-13-10 01:56 AM   #12 
  - Who has been experienced when they become president? A former vice president?  Tunkamerica   Dec-13-10 03:50 AM   #14 
  - Yes he was  zipplewrath   Dec-14-10 04:04 PM   #25 
  - FDR and LBJ...  dennis4868   Dec-13-10 07:08 AM   #16 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Dec-13-10 02:47 AM   #13 
  - Hello?  dennis4868   Dec-13-10 07:03 AM   #15 
  - But he Does. Not. TRY.  Cherchez la Femme   Dec-13-10 07:31 AM   #20 
     - Yep....  dennis4868   Dec-13-10 07:39 AM   #21 
        - Oh puh-lease!  Cherchez la Femme   Dec-13-10 08:52 PM   #22 
  - unrec for glaringly obvious reasons.  cornermouse   Dec-13-10 07:10 AM   #17 
  - Unrec, for you've got to be kidding me.  harun   Dec-13-10 07:19 AM   #18 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC