Over the next two years, which is more important?

[jgraz]

Poll question: Over the next two years, which is more important?

[NJmaverick]

1. None of these above

Most important is that the President does what's best for our nation and its people, as well as the rest of the world.

[tekisui]

6. The question is about our motivations, not the President's actions.

[NJmaverick]

13. Support is an action, not a motivation

[jgraz]

7. In other words, he should support *us*

By doing "what's best for our nation and its people, as well as the rest of the world". That's exactly what I mean by "support us".

[NJmaverick]

12. No that's not it. It's not about support, it's about all of us working together

to make things better. Anyone sitting around trying to figure out if they are getting or giving enough support is more likely to be part of the problem, rather than the solution.

[tekisui]

15. I don't understand you last line.

How is someone wondering about their support part of the problem?

[NJmaverick]

18. If you have to wonder, than you are probably not doing enough to make a difference

[jgraz]

22. Or, you're speaking in meaningless platitudes.

[NJmaverick]

29. Not meaningless to many people, especially the ones that want to make a positive difference

[tekisui]

43. That is nonsensical.

I guess you know that you are doing your part? That is warped thinking you have.

[NJmaverick]

51. It may be "nonsensical" to you, but to myself and many others

it's what we are all about- making a positive difference in the world. You have a right to consider that desire as "warped thinking" if you wish.

[tekisui]

54. Your statement that those who ask if they are doing enough are

part of the problem is what I am talking about.

I desire to make a positive difference as well. The warped thinking is suggesting if you ask if you are doing enough, you are part of the problem.

[grahamhgreen]

66. No, he needs to do what we tell him - he represents us - hence representative democracy.

[FrenchieCat]

2. That we make good solid progress, and that we continue to do so......

imperfect as it might be.

[PBS Poll-435]

3. Winning the fucking midterms

Keeping both the House and the Senate is more important than anything at this point.

[jgraz]

31. Yet if we elect politicians who don't support us, what have we won?

See: Lincoln, Blanche.

[PBS Poll-435]

36. Someone who has our backs 60% of the time rather than 0% of the time

Works for me. Plus Congress is all about the numbers.

[jgraz]

57. And who has our backs 60% of the time?

Certainly not any of the parties I'm familiar with.

The choice is between marginally sustainable corporatism and scorched-earth fascism. Not much of a choice if you ask me.

[dionysus]

33. language!11!

;)

[PBS Poll-435]

39. Casual Friday.

:P

[dionysus]

40. fuckin A!

:hi:

[ProSense]

4. Who is us? n/t

[golddigger]

5. The little people...

:shrug:

[ProSense]

11. Which "little people"?

There are some "little people" in the Gulf right now who we are badgering him to support, but who support offshore drilling.

Whose interests should the President support?

[Uzybone]

14. the true "left"

the 6% of liberals who are unhappy with his performance are those he should exclusively support.

[dionysus]

27. !!

:rofl:

[tekisui]

16. If they support offshore drilling after it is destroying their way of lives,

they are idiots, and shouldn't be given much consideration.

[Uzybone]

21. Thats a whole lot of idiots in the gulf

dailykos/index+" target="_blank">http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/6/15/876174/-Lou... (Daily+Kos)

"The first thing you see in the cross-tabs is that attitudes towards the response are sharply split along racial lines. While 75% of whites disapprove of Obama's response, 82% of African-Americans approve.

This is largely reflective of Obama's overall job approval ratings (71% disapproval among whites, 90% approval among blacks). As with the country at large, Obama's approval on the spill is a bit worse than his approval overall, but the gap is fairly narrow.

The racial divide is not unique to Obama or the BP spill. On the response to Katrina, Bush's approve/disapprove rating was 41%/50% among whites and a staggering 6%/90% among blacks.

Even on support for drilling, there is a large racial gap. 82% of whites support offshore drilling while 8% oppose it. Opinion among blacks is more mixed: 58% support it while 26% oppose it."

[jgraz]

26. If it quacks like an idiot...

[ProSense]

23. "they are idiots, and shouldn't be given much consideration."

Are you saying the President should write off the people in Gulf states?

The problem with this poll is that it's simplistic to claim that not supporting the President and demanding that he support "us" will somehow produce the desired results.

Results come via support, which includes pushing, not sitting back and demanding the President support us as if somehow your vote means you own the President. He still needs your support.

[treestar]

68. The 6 to 14% who don't approve of Obama from the left

They are the only ones who work in elections, did you know? And they deserve a reward - a POTUS who says everything they want him to say and who forces Congress to comply. :sarcasm:

Everyone else should be ignored - they would not have voted for Obama had the progressives not worked so hard and made them vote and made them vote for Obama. Obama apparently promised that in return for delivering these pansies, he would pull out of Afghanistan immediately (without regard to consequences) and put in single payer. (If congress did not go along, he would strong arm them and use the bully pulpit until they were forced to go along).

[TheKentuckian]

8. He goes to the wall for us then the people will back him far beyond his time

He has to lead out front and he'd find die hard millions right there with him.

[CakeGrrl]

9. What's eating Gilbert Grape?

A thread and now a poll on this topic today...

[tekisui]

10. I don't think you can have one without the other.

[phleshdef]

17. "Supports Us" means support a million different variations of a million conflicting opinions..

Which means he doesn't win no matter what he does.

[NJmaverick]

20. true

[Sebastian Doyle]

25. Bullshit.

82% of the population would clearly recognize it if the President was doing something that supported the people.

Why 82%?

Because the 18% who still approved of Dick Cheney on January 19, 2009 - they're just fucking hopeless no matter what.

FDR was elected four times because he did what was necessary for the PEOPLE of the United States of America, and in return, the people had his back. If the Bush Crime Family and their fellow fascists had found a military leader who would have been a willing partner in treason (unlike Smedley Butler, who told them to go fuck themselves) I don't believe the coup would have been successful, because the people would not have tolerated it.

President Obama needs to study a lot more FDR and a lot less Bill Clinton/DLC failed horseshit.

[phleshdef]

64. FDR had a senate that would give him anything he wanted.

FDR was also a complete prick that locked up Japanese people in internment camps too.

This is why comparisons to a guy thats been dead for 70 years, at a time when there was no mass mainstream media and no way for various viewpoints to reach an entire country, is extremely stupid and pointless.

To hell with studying FDR. I admire his accomplishments but this isn't even the same country. FDR probably wouldn't be able to survive in today's climate if he insisted on doing everything his way. The situation at the time gave him more political capital than is possible now.

[treestar]

69. Today things are not nearly as bad as they were in the Depression

Totally different situation.

[Phoonzang]

19. I chose "shut up." It's your fault for presenting me with the option.

;)

[jgraz]

24. I put it there to give some people an out from what is a very awkward question for them.

And, to give smartasses another choice besides "Pie" ;)

[Phoonzang]

53. We smartasses appreciate it. nt

[Aramchek]

28. awww, your other thread wasn't working out like you'd planned so you had to make this to feel better

buck up, dude, the end is not yet.

[dionysus]

30. the palpable frustration is precious, isn't it?

[Aramchek]

35. reminds me of George Costanza

"It's not a lie, if you believe it."

[jgraz]

37. Good, stick with Seinfeld references. Finance is a bit beyond you.

Nice to see you've found your level. :hi:

[Aramchek]

42. a mistruth is a mistruth, Dr. Economics.

your efforts might be more effective if you weren't so pissy.

[jgraz]

45. Yes, but you have to be bright enough to know which is the mistruth

Again, stick to Seinfeld.

[Aramchek]

46. you still haven't proven your claim that proxy access equals CEO pay limits. try again, Doc.

[jgraz]

49. Oh. My. God.

You are seriously embarrassing yourself.

Proxy access would allow shareholders to limit CEO pay. Which part of that don't you understand?

[Aramchek]

50. You don't understand that a possibility is far from a certainty

You pretend that CEO pay limits are assured with proxy access.
But they aren't.
That is where your disconnect is.

[jgraz]

55. So... you're just playing juvenile semantic games?

Your entire argument is that the limit wouldn't be GUARANTEED? You've been wasting all our time on that tiny, little non-issue? Pathetic.

Riddle me this: how much of a GUARANTEE is there now that Obama gutted the provision?

[Aramchek]

58. the difference between actual language describing limitations,

and betting on stockholders to do the right thing is far from semantics.

there was no provision for an actual limit. it was all discretionary.

you have been acting as if Obama stripped language describing actual salary limitations.
that's just not the case.

[jgraz]

62. No, I'm acting as if I've actually been paying attention to the process.

When Obama talked about limiting CEO pay, THIS was the provision he referred to. You come in late, point out the painfully obvious fact that this is not an ironclad guarantee of a hard limit and then act like you suddenly discovered quantum gravity.

For those of us who have been aware of and involved in this process from the beginning, the proxy access provision *was* Obama's attempt to (minimally) reform excessive executive compensation. No one who actually understands this bill would raise the objections you do.

[Forkboy]

72. Not many thought the palpable frustration was precious after Nader.

As a Dem I don't find anything about this split funny, especially as I watched it unfold once already in the 90's, and now I'm watching the party walk down the exact same road. And all I see in reaction is basically a shrug of the shoulders and an "oh well, we don't need them anyways". Until we do. And then we blame them for looking elsewhere, like an abusive spouse that wonders why his wife finally left for another man. They never understand what they did to make the conditions ripe for such an event, and instead blame anyone and everyone but themselves.

This gambit of assuming everything we do as a Party is correct is a dangerous one, and shitting on those who want better just compounds the foolishness. We accuse these people of acting out of spite, but it's our spite that's the problem. Centrist Dems honestly seem to respect the Right more than the Left, and frankly that's just sad. And until we show some respect leftwards I see no reason to expect them to give it to us in return. And no offense, but the Dems have been anything but respectful to the Left for many a moon now. I see many centrist Dems talk about bipartionship, but that always seems to go with those inherently opposed to the (supposed) Dem beliefs. We agree with the Left on about 80% of everything, yet we treat them like lepers more often than not...all the while playing up to those RW scumfucks who share maybe 5% of our beliefs. This is the virtues of that "pragmatism" that we here so much about.

You can all celebrate as more and more left wing posters leave and get banned from DU, but that doesn't erase the problem these people represent for our party. It's rather tiring to watch people who think of themselves as being good Democrats so eagerly go along with something that weakens the very party they claim to be defending.

[jgraz]

34. awww, you got pwned in my other thread, so you thought you'd stalk me for a while?

Good show, Skippy.

[dionysus]

38. one man's pwner is another man's pwnee.

:shrug:

[jgraz]

44. Yeah, but stalking is pretty easy to define.

Should I PM you when I post again, or have you already set up a google alert? We wouldn't want you to miss the opportunity to carry your whine into yet another thread.

[dionysus]

47. faux stalking accusations are so stale. pssst, your posts are at the top of the page...

[Aramchek]

41. It seems you're as confused on the definition of 'pwned' as you are on 'proxy access'

and, don't flatter yourself. nobody's stalking you.

[jgraz]

48. How many threads do you want to display your ignorance in?

I can post another one if you feel there are still a few folks who haven't seen you crash and burn.

[Aramchek]

52. your arrogance is all that's on display, Doc

[jgraz]

61. Seriously? You're just noticing NOW that I'm arrogant?

Really, where the hell have you been?

[AndyA]

32. I think we've already done our part by getting President Obama in office.

Now he must do what he promised he would do during the campaign.

At the same time, we have to support him and keep the pressure on Dems to stick with him. It is a challenge when he's compromised on so many important issues, though.

Obama needs to get it together and make sure he's taking care of the people who got him where he is, and so far there are some pretty big gaps in that. But he can still fix them if he wants to.

[jgraz]

56. I disagree

We also have to kick his ass every day to make sure he stays on course. After all, he did ask us to do that.

[Uzybone]

59. this I agree with, without the venom

saying we did our part by getting him in office is nonsense. He isn't a king. There is still plenty of work for unelected citizens to do.

[jgraz]

60. IMHO, when Obama pulls something like this CEO pay BS, he deserves a little venom.

Not sure why we have to be nice about it...

[treestar]

70. Taking care of the people who got him where he is sounds just

a bit like payoff. If we work to get him elected POTUS, we don't deserve payback. We did it because we wanted him to hold the office. Hell, he's even President of the freepers now. He does not have to ignore the rest of the nation, like Bush did, and just pay off the campaign workers. If they campaigned solely to use that as a bludgeon to have their way (and they are varied among themselves on what their way would be) it was not in good faith to campaign for him.

[IndianaGreen]

63. Other

Elect an honest county prosecutor this year, and oust the moron we have as mayor next year. Reelect LGBT friendly Andre Carson to the House this year. Find a candidate to run for governor next year whose name does not end with Bayh. Support the hotel workers attempting to unionize the Hyatt in Indianapolis (this is coming to a head later this summer). Other community issues.

[Dr Morbius]

65. I voted for pie. I think we need to stop worrying about it.

Deal with the now. Think in the now. Act in the now. Take the positions you feel are correct and appropriate and if you think the President is in the wrong, go ahead and say so. If you are convinced he's a horrible President and needs to be replaced, work towards that. But to simply attack, accuse, undermine, without actually trying to accomplish anything... we can do better with our time.

[DailyGrind51]

67. Progressives support a platform not a candidate!

Only to the extent that a given candidate carries out the platform is he/she worthy of support.

[Autumn]

71. I freely and happily gave my last vote to Obama,

I have written him to let him know my next vote, he has to earn. I'm still waiting for a reply.

[Jennicut]

73. Support only takes a President so far, public pressure only works to a certain extent.

A President needs backing from those in his own party and the public to push things along to make it happen. Can't have one without the other and people who don't get this are arguing about the wrong things.