Obama’s 2012 Game Plan: How can the president rev up and mobilize his demoralized liberal base?

[woo me with science]

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/06/26/2012-how-obama-can-mobilize-his-liberal-base.print.html

Obama’s 2012 Game Plan
How can the president rev up and mobilize his demoralized liberal base?
by Michael Tomasky
June 26, 2011


It was a rare confessional moment for Barack Obama. At a Miami fundraiser in mid-June, the president acknowledged that it’s “not as cool” as it was in 2008 to support him. It isn’t just a matter of fewer hip posters and viral videos. It’s a matter of votes. Rekindling the enthusiasm of African-Americans, educated white liberals, Latinos, young people, and union members—the Democratic Party’s most loyal and progressive members—will be a huge challenge. After all, you can only elect the first African-American president once, and the past two and a half years have deeply disappointed many liberals. “I know a lot of the kids who worked hard in 2008,” says Hodding Carter III, adviser to the last one-term Democratic president (Jimmy Carter) and now a professor at the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill. “They walk around like cattle who’ve been hit with stun guns between their eyes. This isn’t how it was supposed to be.”

....
Unfortunately, making tough, partisan economic arguments has never been the president’s strong suit. “Since the beginning of his candidacy in 2007, Barack has struggled to put together a sustained, winning economic argument,” said Simon Rosenberg of NDN, a Washington-based think tank. “With ‘Morning in America’ not really a viable option for 2012, he is going to have to draw brighter lines with the GOP, and particularly do much more to discredit their failed and reckless economic approach.”

The base vote can still emerge in large numbers, but the dominant factor this time won’t be hope and change. Instead, the factors will be fear of the other side, state and local political conditions (think of how motivated Democrats are to regain control of their politics in Wisconsin), and demographic changes that are still redounding to the Democrats’ benefit. And because we elect presidents by states, the place to assess Obama’s prospects is on the ground.

(Specific analysis of counties in Ohio, Colorado, and North Carolina - worth reading)

That’ll be about the strongest argument Obama can make to base voters: it could, and will, be a lot worse if you don’t vote for me. That’s true, and fear is usually a pretty good motivator in politics. But it still isn’t what people were hoping for, and it seems inevitable that some percentage of the most loyal Democrats will stay home. In these three counties and others like them, that percentage will be the difference between reelection and retirement.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

No, running on his anemic record and arguing that the other guy will be worse are NOT the only (or best) options open to Obama at this point.

There is a third possible option: Speak out and fight like hell for progressive ideas and policies. Nobody seems to realize that the electorate is hungry for someone who will actually fight for their interests.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[Tesha]

1. Changing course would still be the best option to pull us back in, and there's still time.

They won't do it, of course, because they're perfectly happy
with the "Third Way" politics that they're practicing and the
results it's producing: a government small enough to drown
in a bathtub.

It's a shame, really; so much could have been done!

Tesha

[TheWraith]

35. Given that 86% of liberal Democrats approve of Obama's job performance, I call bullshit

On the "demoralized base" crap. The only people who have reason to be demoralized are the ones who thought, or pretended to think, that Obama was the messiah, and he'd rapture away all the country's problems.

[krawhitham]

91. +1

[SDuderstadt]

92. Agreed wholeheartedly n/t

[Chan790]

106. There is a problem with that statistic...

when they called and asked me, I said I still approve of him and his job. I believe in the importance of high poll numbers. I know a lot of liberals who when polled do the same thing. I've been polled a lot over the years, my poll answers are based on the letter after your name. Those answers do not actually reflect my political feelings. Polling as a metric is by-and-large useless...it garners only topical easily-categorized data reflecting almost nothing.

Do I really support him? Not much. Just about any primary challenger would have my vote over Obama barring a hard left-turn.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[alc]

2. electoral votes

"Hope & Change" resulted in a few EV surprises in 2008, but I don't think there's any reason to expect those next time.

That means it will come down to 5-7 states to get the necessary EVs. The rest are already guaranteed D or R unless a very charismatic candidate can get non-voters to vote or voters to switch sides. Those swing states are not liberal (or they wouldn't be up for grabs), so don't expect a liberal-focused campaign.

The liberal base can be disgusted in 20+ states and D will win. The conservative base disgusted in 20+ others and R will win. The president needs to focus on the rest and that means focusing on the middle or focusing on the candidate and downplaying policies.

Yes, he needs money and volunteers. But it sounds like he's doing ok money-wise and he can buy the "volunteers" with a billion dollars.

[Tesha]

3. How, exactly, does a billion dollars "buy" volunteers?

Remember, most of that billion will be pissed away
on media buys.

Volunteers show up at campaigns they're enthused
about and they stay away from campaigns they don't
care about. And it isn't the "centrists" (Turd Wave)
people who volunteer; for us, it's the lefties.

Tesha

[alc]

7. phone & neighborhood canvassing

We'll see which way they go. If they focus on the entire country they can spend a billion dollars in media buys. If they focus on 5-7 states, they won't be able to spend a billion in traditional media and will have enough left to buy "supporters". There may be enough volunteers between those who support Obama and those who hate republicans but there are other options if the message/direction the campaign comes up with doesn't excite traditional volunteers.

But, plenty of out-of-work people can make calls, canvass neighborhoods, set up signs, even fill chairs at campaign events for minimum wage. People who aren't quite enthused enough to volunteer could be enticed to do it with money. Others who do it just for the money will have real disdain for republicans and can even fake enthusiasm.

The campaign won't be paying people directly. They'll be paying the same groups they've paid in the past but the may need to pay those groups more since those groups will need to some pay people instead of depending mostly on volunteers provided by the campaign.

[Tesha]

8. Ahh, so no, they wouldn't be volunteers; they'd just be poorly-paid staff.

How Republican!

Tesha

[alc]

11. depends on the message

Columns advising the campaign how to excite the left are meaningless if the campaign decides to go with the swing state approach. There need to be people like Trukma making demands "We can’t simply build the power of any political party or any candidate. For too long we’ve been left after the election holding a canceled check and asking someone to pay attention to us. No more!"

Our message can't be "here's how to excite us" but has to be "here's what will happen if you ignore us". I'm pointing out that they have a way to ignore us and still win. You can hope they don't go that route or you can let them know it won't work.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. A this point, it's all about allowing him to win, but by a margin lower than Bush got.

We'd do better to start thinking about 2016 and start vetting Democrats to take the presidency away from the people that control Obama.

And by vetting, I mean, right now start paying attention to their Twitter accounts so we can avoid the next Democratic October surprise.

[Vinca]

5. If he stood strong on Democratic principles re the debt ceiling talk

and told Republicans to go to hell, he would rally the liberal base. The Republicans will not allow the economic havoc not raising the debt ceiling would cause. Their corporate base won't allow it.

[robcon]

6. He doesn't need to revitalize his base, He needs to attract independents.

Democrats will vote for the president.

Repugs will vote for the Repug candidate.

The election will hinge on independents, not party members, as always.

[mazzarro]

9. How are you sure that dems will vote for Obama when they are disillusioned with him?

Demos are likely to stay home and I don't think that the independents alone can do it for him without the democratic party base coming out to vote!

[JTFrog]

10. No. "Demos" are not likely to stay at home.

There is no lack of Obama enthusiasm.

Except amongst the fringe of the fringe left and the right wing.

81-90% of Democrats have approved of Obama's job performance from day one to now.

This little echo chamber where the same subset recycles any and everything negative really has no effect on the thinking of the overwhelming majority of Democrats. Obama's overall approval ratings remain higher than Clinton or Reagan's during their second year and they both went on to win second terms.

Thank goodness for reality.

[rurallib]

17. I must be the fringe of the fringe left then

The only thing that is motivating me to vote for Obama right now is total fear of what a disaster a Republican would do.
That is a hell of a thing to run a campaign on.
If I even thought he was fighting for us, I would fight for him like a tiger.

[ChiciB1]

26. DITTO HERE! I Already Smell The Stink Of HOW I'm Going To Be FORCED

to vote! You know RAHM was correct when he said "screw the liberals" or something to that effect. What he forgot to add was "screw the Democrats too!"

Obama was a right leaning moderate who has morphed into an "almost Repuke" and I'm so sorry I didn't see as clearly as I do now.

Another filing under "shit happens." And the list grows longer and longer, day by day.

[rurallib]

29. living in Iowa we had a real good look at all of them

I got on the Obama bandwagon only after it was down to he and Hillary. Frankly, I did not see much difference between them.
I kept telling his staff that he was 'way too conservative for me.' I was especially concerned about his talk of more troops in Afghanistan and more money for the Pentagon.

Sadly once again we will have a choice between a Republican lite and a crazy fucker.
Thom Hartmann has said over and over that the GOP has been picking the Democratic candidate since 1972.

[okieinpain]

56. yeah your right he does fight for the people, just the fat cats.....

Whatever. once you're the president, you're the president for all people. president bush played the president of the repugs for 8 years and you see how that turned out.

[Mimosa]

82. "If I even thought he was fighting for us, I would fight for him like a tiger."

Rurallib, I agree with your eloquent comment.

[quakerboy]

81. I get the feeling you are wrong

And i will explain why.

First... When I get asked by a poll, I give Obama a good rating. Be damned if I will give the R's another tool to manipulate the president into going their way. Even though I am lacking enthusiasm. I know others who do the same. So I do not set much stock by the polling on enthusiasm at this point.

Second, When the OFA called me to see if they could count on me to come in and donate and volunteer like last time, I had a nice talk with the young lady who was calling. She was very polite as I explained some of my concerns and that I was riding the fence and staying out of it until I see Obama protect the new deal programs, and she stated that while "I dont feel that way, but I have been hearing that from a lot... er a few people".

Both anecdotal, but that is my experience of the truth underlying the situation.

In addition, I suspect that a lot of the new voters and the young voters who came out for him last time will be sitting this one out, barring something to draw their enthusiasm and trust back in the middle of massive unemployment and underemployment. And all the other things that they cared about.

[Kaleva]

21. Is there any imperical evidence that a significant majority of Dems are disillusioned with him?

[FrenchieCat]

23. If repeated enough by those interested in just that happening,

then yes, it will happen just as predicted.

Remember when the media told us a year before the 2010 election
that the Republicans were gonna clean up, and then they kept saying it,
till it happened? Well, that same plan is in place.....
And we will be stupid enough to believe it, cause that's what we do....
and then we will look around and talk about how stupid everyone else was......Doh! :hi:

[woo me with science]

24. The problem is that it doesn't have to be a majority.

It just has to be enough to affect turnout in some closely contested areas.

There is some evidence:

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/11/rasmussen-liberals-losing-enthusiasm-for-obama/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/26/970028/-Daily-Kos-SEIU-poll:-Republicans-more-excited-about-2012-presidential-race


I think we have a fierce disagreement here about whether Obama is more likely to be derailed by being criticized during the election, or by his own record of validating Republican policies by compromising, adopting, and endorsing them.

I hear and understand the fear by some that criticism could make him more vulnerable in the election. There is also a strong argument to be made that this economy can't wait. We will not get policies that will actually revive this economy until he stops accepting and validating Republican framing of issues through constant compromise and capitulation (e.g., massive tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, supply-side measures). IMO his best chance at reelection will come if he seizes the progressive mantle, argues strongly for policies that will actually work, and and fires up the country to change the national conversation before the election.

[tekisui]

13. It is the activists that get Dems out in numbers to win.

The party actives are usually stronger liberals.

They need to be motivated to donate and volunteer. Obama does need to energize these people if he wants to win.

[woo me with science]

20. +1

The article has some interesting discussion of the factors at play in competitive counties/states.

[qwlauren35]

54. I'm not sure about this.

I think a lot of the people who rallied for Obama in 2008 would not call themselves active liberals. Many of them had never gotten involved in a campaign before in their lives. Many were young people who have not embraced a liberal agenda. Obama may not have many liberal ground troops this time around. But he WILL have seasoned campaigners from 2008 who want to see him re-elected. "Compromised" or "Caved"? He's definitely compromised. A lot. Denotation vs. connotation. "Caved" is a word being used by those who are disappointed in him. Some, but not all.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

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

[krabigirl]

67. Good luck with that one..he will need more than luck IMO.

[Hand_With_Eyes]

87. Lets hope Obama does NOT agree with you

Because if he does, he will lose.

[CrazyBob]

104. Oh brother

That sounds like a recipe for bad government and for politicians to take their supporters for granted.

Not me. I am going to vote for the candidate that most closely agrees with my principles and values.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[apnu]

25. I know a deep roted conservative who will never pull the lever for a Dem say...

"I'm still waiting for Obama to LEAD." His exact words. And I agree. All Obama needed to do is boldly stand up for what he believes in. Its not that he has to win every fight, but he needs to show he's willing to fight for the right things. He has, instead, spent his time caving and negotiating from weak positions that he, himself alone, put himself in.

I'm afraid that anything he does now to change that will be too little too late. If he does show boldness, leadership, decision making and defending core Democratic values I, and I'm sure many others, at best will think: "Where was this guy in 2009? 2010?"

He's a smart man and his heart is in the right place, he believes in the right things. But he's unwilling to act on those right things because his leadership style just won't work with a hostile opposition party clearly bent on destroying any and all things he does. You can't speak to that, you can't be "President to all people" and make them all happy. The GOP has no interest in being happy with Obama, their only interest is hate. He needed to quit being nice with them on the first day of his office. The only thing the GOP understands, and the past 20 years have shown that to me, is hard knocks to the head. The only tool they have in their bag is a hammer, and its the only thing that gets through to them is being hit with a hammer. Its all they know how to do.

The past two years have shown that you can't be subtile with them, you can't horse trade with them, and you certainly can't golf with them and expect anything but a hammer in that bag.

Also, I'd like to see Obama come to the defense of his party from time to time, not ignore them, marginalize them, or tell them to STFU. Who's side is he on? Putting liberals and progressives in the corner is no way to lead.

Obama, be bold, stand the fuck up and be counted, man!

[frazzled]

99. I see you fell for your conservative friend's advice and opinion

That's precisely the problem discussed in another long, contentious thread here.

Look at the things Obama has gotten passed in his first two years (forget this year, with the Republican House), plus the things he has been able to do through the Executive branch alone. I swear it's more than Bill Clinton accomplished in in his entire two terms. And all this during the worst economic downturn in my lifetime, and a completely hostile political environment.

I rather think you simply don't like Obama's leadership STYLE. He's not a fist pounder (which, by the way, accomplishes nothing). He's a doer. He's led plenty.

[1stlady]

105. I couldn't agree more!!

Obama has accomplished so much in the face of so much hate and adversity, from both the far left and right. His approvals are still very high among democrats. Were are the polls showing that Obama's base isn't enthusiastic? Please, just another Obama hater article, throw in the pile with the rest of the irrelevant anti Obama BS.

[msongs]

14. to "fight like hell for progressive policies" you have to believe in them in the first place nt

[woo me with science]

19. I'm not sure, but...

you may have identified the core problem here...

[Davis_X_Machina]

15. What the hell...

...is Tomasky talking about? It should at least turn up in the polling before it becomes an excuse for pearl-clutching.

[theaocp]

16. Why would he need to?

He's at 80 billion % approval with tha Libz. Game. Set. Match. Right? :sarcasm:

[woo me with science]

18. Bwah!

:rofl:

[FrenchieCat]

22. Fuck it!

Let the people stay home! That will show him!

Like politics is really about what folks have tried to make it about these last 2.6 years.....
about this President and what everyone wanted from him, and what they didn't get.

Classic American electorate; wants everything, and believe that someone owes it to them,
and they don't have to do shit to get it but sit on the Internet typing out their displeasure...
and providing step by step instructions on exactly what and how and when it should be done (like they fucking know anything beyond knowing what they would want if the world could be completely remade after decades of total fucked up everything).

I almost hope enough stay home.....cause I realize now, that may be what we truly deserve!
Reality will bite hard, it if some think it's ugly now....well grab a seat and a mirror,
cause that will be your own life you've just totally fucked up; that of yours and of your children!
I just hope it will be personally satisfying and totally worth it.

The 2012 election driver will be common sense (not fear), and who has it,
and who just simply want to make a point and is willing to sacrifice everyone
including themselves and their family just so they can make it.

[ChiciB1]

27. Not To Worry My Pretty... Obama Will Get His Votes... He Just Won't Get

RESPECT from too, too many! Aretha Franklin won't be singing that song for HIM!

Color me, disillusioned and totally disappointed. Still the hand writing in on the wall and I know my hand is being forced. Not liking it and it WON'T get me anything much, but the alternative is indeed worse.

[great white snark]

31. Oh the drama. Nobody is forcing you to vote for him.

If you think he's a Republican then just vote Republican. There's no difference. Just think of all the good things that can be done with a Repub president and a repub congress!

No more right to choose, no more unions, conservative Supreme Court Justices, tax cuts for the rich made permanent, cut Social Security, cut medicare and medicaid, reverse DADT, invade Iran, add troops instead of keeping the time table withdrawls, reverse health care and wall street reform, enact repressive immigration reform and so on and so on.

No difference at all.

The 80%-85% of liberals who approve of Obama are just sheep. Maybe they will see the light before the election.

[ChiciB1]

36. What Light? Bark Away, It's Posted Here ALL THE TIME. I Speak My

mind, just as you have the right to speak yours... so far.

Now mind you, I DON'T think the Constitution will be erased or fade away, but I do object to much blurring of the words. But then the Bible also isn't supposed to be taken "literally" either.

Just can't get myself back into that "we shall overcome" mode these days. And, I freely admit that I long for days gone by, sometimes wishing I had not experienced some of them. OTOH, I can recall much upheaval in the days of yore and this country was able to weather the storm. My problem at this point in time is the worry about APATHY and how prevalent and pervasive it seems to be.

No, there is no actual demonic force in the flesh making my hand shake, and one can produce a list of things done, but there are weaknesses within those lists. However, all I need do is "think" of the alternative to realize that there is a "little" bit of butter on one side of the bread.

This argument will never be won, we only speak words we feel. In the end, action is what counts, half-hearted as it may seem.

What I see with my eyes, isn't what I feel in my heart. From a Jackson Browne song.

[FrenchieCat]

32. Nothing new in what you are saying!

Pres. Obama hasn't gotten respect forever, and I'm thinking at this point,
he doesn't expect any! After all, most believed they had voted for their own
personal savior that was gonna change every motherfucking thing, and do it in
record time too (cause the cryin' started about a week after the '08 election!

Like I said a long time ago......many saw him as their all-powerful janitor!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/www//seattletimes.nwsource.com/counterpunch.org/www.travelblog.org/VC/www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/depts.washington.edu/sswweb/policyw/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=258x8066



That's how stupid we are compared to how stupid they are.
Although we'd like to think so, they don't own the cornermarket on stupid...that's for sure!
Bush stayed in the 90% approval for 16 fucking straight months
after 9/11, and Obama got 5 points for killing the guy who made it happen.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/www/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=672716&mesg_id=672716
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=258x10881


In my community, whenever we talk about the Right, the "disenchanted" and the Media,
we simply call them haters hatin' cause that's all they know. Many just hate that they
didn't elect a messiah-like Malcom X swaggered driven Dictator....but then, no one like that
was running in the first place.

[rusty fender]

69. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

When one is wedded completely to the person rather than the principle it becomes the personal. For the person wedded to the principle, it's about the policies, the issues, what is right. It's not personal for me. I don't have emotional capital invested in one politician. I do have a politcal investment in principle. If the guy isn't working for principle, then I look for someone who will. :shrug:

[Chan790]

107. So you concede he's fucked and the quisling wing of the Democratic Party is too?

Maybe they'll cut their losses and leave.

I can only imagine what a tent made up entirely of people who actually and fully support Democratic ideals and reject demagoguery might look like.

I have goosebumps.

[WI_DEM]

28. Simple you either get Obama or you get some nut case with a nut case GOP congress

it's an easy decision--Barack Obama.

[polichick]

30. You're right of course - there is a best-case third option, but it assumes...

...that the prez wants what the people want.

[boxman15]

33. While Obama deserves some blame for watered down bills,

to say it's completely his fault is being disingenuous. At this point, I'm fairly confident President Obama will be re-elected if only because the GOP has completely gone off the deep end. Has Obama been disappointing in some regards? Yes. No doubt about it. But at the same time, the political climate in Washington has never been worse for a Democratic president to push for progressive legislation.

The real power lies with Congress. In his first two years, Congress was filled with Dems, yes. However, Blue Dogs and unified GOP obstructionism ensured that things like health care reform, the stimulus plan, and financial reform were watered down. Now, with a TeaPublican House and a small Dem majority in the Senate, there is no way that any progressive legislation will come out of Congress. the most we can hope for is moderate, watered down legislation, and even that isn't a sure thing.

Could/Should Obama have done more to keep his base mobilized and active? Yes. He is the most gifted speaker of this generation, and yet he seems to be reclusive. He has done little to keep his base energized. He should be outside Washington more often, pushing for supporters to put pressure on Congress to pass liberal legislation. He hasn't done that, and he deserves to be criticized for it.

But, even if he did do that, do you really think that the GOP/Blue Dogs would suddenly be willing to help the President? Hell no. They are committed to making sure Obama looks bad no matter what, and to make sure that nothing positive occurs under his watch. The president has gotten all he could've out of the two Congresses he's been dealt with. He'll continue to do so. But, honestly, what do you expect the president to get out of these Congresses? Congress, last I checked, is where laws are made.

If we want TRUE change, we need to fill Congress, along with state capitals, with liberal Democrats. Not Blue Dogs. Not Republicans. Not Tea Partiers. Then, we can get the change we all hoped for back in 2008, as opposed to the small steps toward change we've gotten the past 2.5 years. We won't get anywhere with a Congress filled with Boehners and Bachmanns. If we fill Congress with true liberals, then the possibilities for change are limitless.

For that to happen, we need to get out and VOTE. Don't stay home and moan about how slow progress has been. Make progress come faster by voting for progressives and re-electing President Obama. If we can get the House back and keep the Senate, we will have the White House, Congress, and eventually the Supreme Court (possibly the most important reason to vote for Obama). As long as true progressives are in Congress, change will come quicker, and a better America will be there for future generations. If we don't, get used to even slower change, or if a GOPer gets in, expect the middle class to continue to shrink and for our country to move in reverse yet again. (First post here at DU, long time lurker)

[woo me with science]

34. What you said here:

"Could/Should Obama have done more to keep his base mobilized and active? Yes. He is the most gifted speaker of this generation, and yet he seems to be reclusive. He has done little to keep his base energized. He should be outside Washington more often, pushing for supporters to put pressure on Congress to pass liberal legislation. He hasn't done that, and he deserves to be criticized for it."

Bingo. That is exactly the problem. I don't think anyone here expected Republicans to roll over and vote for progressive policies, zam boom. However, Democrats did hope that Obama would not capitulate to and participate in Republican framing of the most critical issues of our time. He has not only joined the Republicans to fret about the deficit, he is also coming up with and introducing supply-side ideas of his own.

He had over two years, not just to fire up the base, but to shift the national conversation and build a nationwide push for more effective economic policies, and he failed to do that. It's certainly not because of an inability to speak and persuade...

At a certain point it becomes difficult to judge those who question where his true loyalties lie.

[boxman15]

37. I agree to a certain extent

I do think that part of the problem is that the Republican Party is still framing the debate. And Obama deserves a lot of the blame for it, like you said.

But, to say he has sided with the Republicans on so many issues is just false. It's always amazing to me how so many on the left are quick to blame and criticize Obama, yet fail to see the bigger problem is with Congress. Even if Obama did shift the debate to the left, I really doubt we'd have more liberal legislation by now (like a public option, for example). The right is hellbent on bringing Obama down, and I doubt that because the Democrats framed the debate, they'd suddenly back down. We'd be met with the same results that we have today. We need to shift Congress to the left. It hasn't been truly liberal for years and years now. It's time that changes so that there is a true opportunity for change.

I don't see that happening, in part because of Obama's failure to keep his base active and energized, and also because of the fervor of the Tea Party. I hope I'm wrong. We need a more liberal Congress. That way Obama can pass liberal legislation.

[ChiciB1]

39. Yes, There Are People Here Who Think That When One Criticizes Him

that we "thought" he would solve all problems. That thought is completely false, at least for me. I had no illusions about what he was up against after THE IDIOT.

When you play a game of poker, you don't lay your cards on the table and THEN bet. Nobody wins all the time, and it DOES take a team to win. But most winning teams have a strong leader or one that shows leadership to pull them through. Even so there ARE times you win, times you lose and times when it's a tie.

Perfection was never expected by me, nor do I think many of us who feel betrayed want to voice any objections. I want him AND our very own Democrats to succeed because it's GOOD for our country, I simply don't see them fighting the good fight and money seems to be driving it all. The old "I got mine, you get yours" isn't something that makes me think good thoughts.

It's difficult for me to lie to myself and then compound it by putting blinders on. How long we can go on this way is something I don't know, but when it hits the fan I don't think many of us are going to like it, and I don't think we're in for a soft landing.

[Ignis]

45. Welcome to DU

:hi:

Nice first post.

[Telly Savalas]

62. Welcome to DU!

Please post more!

We could certainly use a lot more posts like that.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[Ice Number Nine]

40. Obama's real base is not demoralized.

[Tesha]

41. That explains the Democrats' stunning victories in 2010.

Frankly, I'm stunned by the number of people here who
think there's no problem.

Tesha

[FrenchieCat]

42. Oh there's a problem allright!

and those who aren't willing to be part of the only solution
that would be effective in this political climate know who they are!

[Tesha]

47. No, I really don't think they know who they are. (NT)

[Ice Number Nine]

48. you're right. Those who attempt to hamstring Obama feel that they're righteous, somehow.

They can't tell a springboard from a stumbling block.

[CakeGrrl]

44. And how is that voter apathy working out for them now that

some of them are enjoying Republican governors?

Apparently people have forgotten how laws are made in the U.S. If you want good policy, don't let more R's in Congress.

It's not the President's sole responsibility to educate these people. What were the ousted Dems doing to help themselves get re-elected?

[Ice Number Nine]

49. They taught Obama a lesson by letting their Union rights be stripped away?

[qwlauren35]

55. A lot of Obama's base...

Only votes every 4 years. A lot of Obama's base is not politically savvy, and doesn't understand the importance of aligned executive and legislative branches. So yes, Obama's base "let 2010 happen". And it will happen again in 2014 unless they learn a bit more about how politics is played.

[pstokely]

64. And a lot of his base may not vote again for a long time

They actually believed the hype. These are people who are more interested in what's going on in Hollywood than DC. They will just stay home for the next few elections until they age into Republicans. They don't really have any political beliefs. A lot of his base that helped him in 2008 was never really the Democratic base to begin with or ever will be. Obama doesn't have movie star celebrity status anymore. A lot of this people will still come out but not in the large numbers as they did in 2008. A lot of these people didn't even look at the rest the ballot in 2008.

[Ignis]

46. No True Scotsman, eh?

That'll definitely GOTV.

[kath]

50. No, they think it was money well spent - very happy with what they BOUGHT.

[Tarheel_Dem]

57. +1 mil

:thumbsup:

[treestar]

58. +1

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[bigdarryl]

43. This talk of THE BASE is a myth there is no base when voting for President

[BlueIris]

51. Nothing can be done. Best he can hope for is a Palin nomination, which is why

the GOP won't nominate Palin.

[hughee99]

52. As I understand, there's a lot of "stimulus" money that hasn't been used yet

perhaps it's time to stimulate the base by spending the money in key districts.

[EndElectoral]

53. I'm not sure he can win the base back He'll get fear of other side votes, but I doubt like in 08.

[treestar]

59. Among those who call themselves the demoralized base, probably nothing

There's nothing he could do to make them happy. The goalposts just move.

They are determined to be demoralized. And probably always have been and had little to do with his election the first time.

[RBInMaine]

61. Spot on perfect reply. See mine below yours.

[Tarheel_Dem]

68. Hammer meet nail? Spot on analysis.

:thumbsup:

[Hand_With_Eyes]

74. I bet if Obama stopped making deals with the far right extremists

Many many would flock to his side. Short of that, you are probably right.

[RBInMaine]

88. Ever had to actually govern anything? Know anything at about American history? If you think you can

actually achieve much without compromising in our system, then you live in fantasy land.

[Logical]

101. Starting from the middle does not seem to work! Notice that? n-t

[RBInMaine]

60. "Demoralized Base" - In other words, the ultrapurists who'd rather whine and bitch than see all the

positive. Those who live on some other planet with unrealistic expectations, who do not understand political reality, who have never governed anything, and who would rather piss and moan and threaten to stay home or waste their votes on nuts like Nader instead of getting out there and smashing down the right wing TeaWhackos.

[krabigirl]

66. Sorry if I don't like being in six wars. Lmao.

[BklnDem75]

71. LOL!!!

That number keeps rising and it reinforces the point that many are determined to be demoralized. 6 wars? Really? Do you expect an intelligent conversation with that argument?

[Hand_With_Eyes]

75. I think you have it!

You have struck on the formula that will have them rushing back to Obama's side in droves! Call them names, insult them and basically call them crybabies! You should call the white house immediately and have them start a new ad campaign based on your post!!

Brilliant!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

77. "Democrats" should not have to come up with a "formula". They stayed

home in 2010 because they were "demoralized"? WTF? Pres. Obama shouldn't have to "rev you up" after what we've seen in WI, OH & FL. When Repukes took over state houses nationwide, they immediately set out to butcher up Congressional districts to give themselves the advantage for 2012. Some of the "demoralized" may get to the voting booth and find that either they can't vote, or their vote has been diluted to the point where their favorite House member doesn't stand a chance of winning his or her newly drawn district.

And if you think self proclaimed "progressives" had no voice before, you ain't seen nothing yet. Aside from bitching about everything Pres. Obama hasn't done yet, they've only weakened their standing, which only hurts the people they claimed to be "fighting for". WTF sense does that make?
:shrug:

[Hand_With_Eyes]

86. Case in point

[MouseFitzgerald]

63. He cant and hes not going to

He will play the lesser of two evils card until the very end. He is not going to make any attempt to appease liberals because he isn't one and hasn't governed as one. To appease liberals he would have to do a complete reversal on many different policies whether its foreign policy, education or trade and hes not going to do that.

[krabigirl]

65. Lol, he could start by not starting any more wars, oh and that dea memo isn't going to help.

[NC_Nurse]

73. meh. the fear vote is what hes getting from me. Im done hoping for better from

these corporate cocksuckers.

[Jakes Progress]

76. You're assuming he cares about us and not just our money.

He can't expend any political will for those who elected him. He's just going to fall back on the old "Look at the republican bogey man". How sad to live your life and conduct your career with the motto "I'm not as bad as that other guy".

[ClarkUSA]

78. Do you also know what he had for dinner?

:rofl:

[Jakes Progress]

89. Perhaps some prime steak and an endive salad.

I know it was a hell of a lot better than what they served today at the center where I worked. The unemployed and hungry there would love to have a nice white house meal.

What did you have?

[ClarkUSA]

90. Why only "Perhaps"? You seem to know Pres. Obama's every thought and intention.

Doesn't your crystal ball know as surely as you can predict what he's thinking and planning to do?

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

94. That's false. You have created a strawman argument now.

<< Where did I say that I knew his "every" thought and intention? You said I do, so prove it. Copy the words where I said I knew the president's "every thought and intention". Those are your words. >>

Prove it. Quote?

[Jakes Progress]

96. Stop avoiding your own words. Oh, and learn what "strawman" means.

[ClarkUSA]

98. I know exactly what it means. And what were my words, exactly?

Link to them and provide a full quote.

[Jakes Progress]

102. Read your own headlines. And no you don't know what a straw man is.

Perhaps you do know, but chose to misuse the term here. It would be consistent with your posting behavior.

Oh. In case you missed your own words: "You seem to know Pres. Obama's every thought and intention." Are you saying that that does not mean you were trying to accuse me of knowing Pres. Obama's every thought and intention? That would take a really convoluted reading, but I'm sure that you can manage to turn your own words into pretzels.

[Jakes Progress]

95. Prove your statement. Don't duck your own words.

You say that I know the president's "every thougth and intention". Where did I say that? Show me the words that said I thought I knew the president"s every thought and intention.

You said it. Now prove it.

[ClarkUSA]

100. Again, that's false. You have now duplicated your strawman argument on two different subthreads.

Provide a full quote of exactly what I said and furnish a link to that very quote as a crosscheck as I am doing here with your duplicate strawman argument:

'You say that I know the president's "every thougth and intention".'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=696814&mesg_id=700583

I know I did not say that, of course. What were my words, exactly? Hmm?

[Jakes Progress]

103. No. You are wrong. And you have now misused the term strawman in two different posts.

I provided the quote for you above. Here is is again.

"You seem to know Pres. Obama's every thought and intention." Are you saying that that does not mean you were trying to accuse me of knowing Pres. Obama's every thought and intention? That would take a really convoluted reading, but I'm sure that you can manage to turn your own words into pretzels.

[Amonester]

79. It's still 'too early' to say (wait 14 months...).

In 14 months, the cRazy 11!!11's will be known, heard ("oh, the $tupid$, it buRn$... oh, the awful$, if they win, they'll trash what's left of the country, which is not much"), 'debated', polls will be out on a daily basis...

I predict DU will be extremely 'active' for the President.

Wait.14.Months.

[21st Century FDR]

80. Do what the last guy did when faced with a Great Depression

And yeah, we're in one, no matter what the corporate media tells you. Renew the New Deal. Restore each and every policy of FDR's that was killed over the last 30 years.

President Obama seems to buy the Republican lie that "government can't create jobs", but it sure as Hell can, and sure as Hell did in the 1930s. And since you can't build roads, bridges, high speed rail, wind/solar projects, etc. without the proper materials and equipment for those jobs, then there would also be private sector jobs created to make that stuff.

Apart from that, you need to tax the rich and the corporations their fair share, and get money back in the pockets of working class folks who will actually SPEND it, and further help the economy.

[Mimosa]

83. ^ Recommend the post above ^

Todays's DLC Dems would fight that more than they'd fight Republicans, don't you think?

[21st Century FDR]

84. It's been their mission from the beginning to do so

In the inaugural issue of Blueprint magazine (January 1995) DLC founder Al From said that the 1994 Republican take over of Congress would allow the DLC to "liberate" the Democratic Party from FDR and the New Deal.:eyes:

I'd have to say that "liberation" worked out about as well as the "liberations" of Afghanistan and Iraq.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

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

[mitchtv]

97. Let's see . How about some more marijuana busts?

"he's not as bad as the other guy" has a certain flair

[JustAmused]

108. Another option

He could switch to Democratic party, but might jeaporize his funding.

Wait....what?????

Oh sorry.....nevermind