we tried to warn everyone in november of 2010

[scheming daemons]

...what a GOP house would mean.

The left cried "we must teach Obama a lesson! We will stay home or vote third party. "

The middle screamed "we want divided government to keep Democrats in check!"

The few sane Republicans thought they could control the crazies.



The bottom line is that EVERYTHING is better when Democrats are in control.

To the left, it may not be as good as you want it, but it is better than the alternative.
To the middle, divided government can work if both sides are sane. The majority of the GOP is not.
To the dwindling sane right, this is YOUR freaking frankenstein.

Off year elections matter. Quit trying to "send messages". Dems are ALWAYS better, even centrist ones.

[FSogol]

1. Agreed. K & R. n/t

[Kaleva]

2. I remember some being very happy that so many blue dog Dems were defeated.

[Skink]

10. Yeah now it's time to vote out the crazies and install real dems.

[Kaleva]

24. I don't know what you mean by "real dems".

A person such as Grayson or Weiner (before his troubles) could never win in my district and the rank and file Dems here wouldn't support such a candidate in the primaries.

[derby378]

136. For starters, Democrats who don't sell out the working class

The Democratic Party is the party of labor in America. The more our political leaders fuck around with labor unions and workers in general, the worse off they will be. A Blue Dog Democrat who understands the value of strong labor unions and collective bargaining laws as well as decent protection laws for non-union workers is much better than any Republican who merely pays lip services to American workers during the campaign season.

[bigdarryl]

82. The first thing we better do is stop this voter suppression thats going on in some states

or we ain't winning shit

[joshcryer]

109. They still post to this day claiming the irrational illogic that they weren't left enough!

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

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

[JTFrog]

119. Its time to stop trying to justify and encourage defeat of Democrats

on DU.

[Empowerer]

135. Thank you.

[Arkana]

134. At least some of the Blue Dogs could be reasoned with.

The laws of sanity don't apply with the teabagger House.

[falcon97]

3. AMEN. n/t

[still_one]

4. Please explain to me how the liberals lost the blue dogs election in the red states?

[flamingdem]

5. Damn right nt

[Scurrilous]

6. K & R

:thumbsup:

[phantom power]

7. we tried to warn Obama that he'd lose the left in the 2010 election if he kept compromising.

:shrug:

[scheming daemons]

11. well... you sure showed him, didnt you?

[phantom power]

26. I voted straight Dem in 2010. Just like in 2008, and 2006, ....

The Dems held the presidency and congress for two years, and they spent those two years compromising with the same insane hostage-takers they're busy compromising with today.

They're doing the same goddam thing over and over again, and evidently expecting different results.

Wow, guess they're really showing us.

[treestar]

75. Wrong. Then they could compromise with Blue Dogs and Liberal Republicans

Now they have to compromise with the bat shit insane - or the sane Republicans, if you want to call Boner that, have to compromise with the tea partiers.

[TheKentuckian]

91. Liberal Republicans??? I want a big as bowl of the cRaZy Chronic.

[pnwmom]

14. And he'd have lost more votes from the moderate Dems and independents

if he hadn't.

No Democrat can win a national election without pulling votes from across the Democratic spectrum, and from the independents. When the progressives insist on no compromise, they are also insisting on not winning -- just as the non-compromising Rethugs are now.

[Armstead]

38. I think you are confusing compromise with surrender

You don't go into a battle or negotiations from the opponent's starting point. That leads to surrender from the start -- which is NOT compromise.

The GOP understand that. Obama and the centrists either don't understand that, or their own position is really the GOP position.

Either alternative sucks -- and it is not at all what compromise really is.

[pnwmom]

49. Watching the GOP now, it doesn't look like they understand anything.

They can't compromise with each other, much less with Independents and Democrats.

[Armstead]

52. I'll agree with you on that. But they're going to get what they want anyway.

After the dust has settled, there is likely to be a GOP budget attached to this (via the reid bill or some other "compromise") that will impose Draconian cuts on government programs with no new revenue sources.

I hope I turn out wrong and the Democrats actually start pushing for a "clean" bill -- but not looking likely at this point.,

[JustAmused]

84. Not quite the same

Compromise and capitulation are not the same.
In nearly every negotiation, he voluntary gave up the strength of his position before real negotiations had even begun.
As a poker player, that is like folding before even looking at your hole cards.
I didn't really expect him to not bargain and compromise, but I did expect him to fight for the things he claimed to believe in when he was running.

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

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

[Enthusiast]

122. Compromise on what issues?

I think you're off on this. No one is insisting on no compromise except on CORE Democratic Party principles. Dismantling protections for organized labor, social security and medicare will cost you votes from across the political spectrum.

Two issues were very demoralizing to the electorate in 2010. One was the failure to enact a public option, the other was failing to end the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Both things were favored by the entire electorate but especially by Democrats. When you say "compromise" exactly on what issues and who are you compromising with. Adopting Republican positions will encourage voters to vote for a Democrat?

The following show poll results of ALL Americans, including independents. So, again, who are you compromising with?

[tridim]

19. This fiasco is your fault. Congrats.

Politics is the art of compromise. I don't want to live in a dictatorship.

But you can't compromise with crazy people, which is what your short-sightedness helped deliver in 2010.

[phantom power]

34. They were crazy before 2010 too. GOP crazy isn't a recent development.

[tridim]

36. In different degrees, yes.

That doesn't excuse your short-sightedness.

[pnwmom]

57. The teabaggers are a recent development. We've had crazies before,

but no significantly large group willing to bring down the economy to make a point -- as these people are.

[Creideiki]

117. There's a road that leads right where the fault lies.

It's called "Pennsylvania Avenue."

[Phx_Dem]

69. Obama didn't lose shit. The only losers were the Democrats and the American

public. Nice job.

I'm guessing you voted for Nader too. Well, that was a big success! Emos aren't much better than tea baggers.

[Zenlitened]

102. We've been warning these "pragmatists" since 2009 that they're putting us all in jeopardy.

They refused to listen.

They learned nothing from the special Senate election in Massachusetts in January 2010.

Learned nothing from November 2010.

And now seem intent on losing in 2012.

They've taken the wrong path from the very start, choosing passivity, pitifully reduced expectations, and an utterly hollow notion of "bipartisanship" that has utterly squandered the years of work that put Democrats in control of the House, the Senate and the White House.

It's been a disaster, a failure of both strategy and tactics, to this very date.

And now they want to re-write our own, very recent, history? It's ludicrous, like Sarah Palin telling us the "real" history of Paul Revere.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

108. Sure, and now he's MORE liberal, right? You're real smart! n/t

[msongs]

8. this assumes the people u think are democrats are ACTUALLY democrats nt

[Control-Z]

9. I agree!

"EVERYTHING is better when Democrats are in control."

[frylock]

12. revisionist history bullshit..

your sorry ass conservadems lost in 2010. real liberals got out the vote. knu

[still_one]

15. The blue dogs in the red states did NOT lose because of the liberals /nt

[scheming daemons]

16. Obama supporters like me didnt stay home

Those who didn't think Obama was "progressive" enough did.

[Prism]

22. Actually, they did. You're factually challenged here.

Two of the demographics most likely to support President Obama - youth and African Americans - had their turnout numbers decline the most in the 2010 election.

So, your theory doesn't hold up. The problem is essentially that people turned out for the politician in 2008, but did not come out in force when the future of actual policies were on the table.

And therein is the problem. When people only give a shit about the politician, we all suffer when that politician isn't running.

Liberals in general turned out just fine. It was the vast switch of Independents from D to R that swung the election.

But hey, I know many Democrats invested in the politician are trying very hard to paint the failures of this administration into a martyrdom piece with the President pinned to The Cross That The Left Built.

By all means, carry on.

[Forkboy]

53. This reply will be ignored.

[Prism]

58. Hey, I'm just happy we're Important today!

Usually the Left is less than significant because 4,527% of liberals support the President.

I consider being The Cause of All Doom an upgrade.

[Forkboy]

61. It must be Friday.

By Sunday the left will be "irrelevant" again. :)

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

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

[woolldog]

60. wow

Very powerful response, Prism.

[muffin1]

25. I didn't stay home either - even though I KNOW he isn't progressive.

I'd be willing to bet that very few DUers stayed home.

Why don't you peddle that shit somewhere else?

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[Doctor_J]

51. But some of the "centrists" claim that we lost because not enough centrists

voted D. So you're attacking the left with arguments that are 180 degrees from each other. Which is it?

[ProSense]

13. Bernie Sanders: Elections Have Consequences

Elections Have Consequences

<...>

Our right-wing friends in the House of Representatives have given us an option. What they have said is end Medicare as we know it and force elderly people, many of whom don't have the money, to pay substantially more for their health care. So when you're 70 under their plan and you get sick and you don't have a whole lot of income, we don't know what happens to you. They forget to tell us that if their plan was passed you're going to have to pay a heck of a lot more for the prescription drugs you're getting today. They we're going to throw millions of kids off health insurance. If your mom or dad is in a nursing home and that nursing home bill is paid significantly by Medicaid and Medicaid isn't paying anymore, they forgot to tell us what happens to your mom or dad in that nursing home. What happens?

<...>

[tridim]

17. Great post. Exactly right.

[Sheepshank]

18. Now tell me agin who it is that learned a lesson when Dems sit out a mid term?

While I'm sure Obama heard the shot....who again is living and learning a lesson? I'm pissed at the Dems that let this happen. No not pissed at Obama, pissed at the Dems with little to no foresight, little ability to think out the consequences. While I realize it's their right to vote or not as they please, you know a ton of them are here bitchin' at the fall out of their collective actions, without acknowledging their actions contributed to where we are today.

[muffin1]

20. Fuck that

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[lillypaddle]

28. Guess you think

who chooses the members of the SCOTUS isn't very important.

[frylock]

80. not when those members of SCOTUS side with roberts and alito

[WI_DEM]

23. BUT statistics show that the left/progressives did vote and voted democratic

and it was independents who reversed coarse and voted GOP. It's about time we stop blaming "the left" for 2010

[JAnthony]

29. GREAT POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!

The stupid people and the racists woke up, and realized they were out of work, and they couldn't remember who the last President was, and all the mess he had created, so they blamed the black guy in the White House who was still cleaning up after the Texan's messes.

[falcon97]

33. Detroit turnout was 60% in 2008 and

31% in 2010. According to the quick check I did there were 160-thousand fewer voters, which means about 152-thousand fewer Democratic votes in just one city.

[fishwax]

104. delete -- wrong spot

[Davis_X_Machina]

27. You're acting as if...

...politics was about policies. Take a hard look at DU -- not that DU, or the left, is unique in this regard.

For a whole lot of people, politics is primarily about self-expression. It's about telling your friends and family and the world how you feel, by your choices in consumer products political parties.

If you could go down to town hall and re-register as "Dolce and Gabbana" instead of 'Democratic' or 'Carhart' rather than Republican, half the people in this country would do it in a heartbeat.

[Empowerer]

41. What an absolutely brilliant observation!

You are so right that for many, politics is about self-expression, not actually accomplishing any real good.

Hence the constant complaints that political leaders are too focused on "compromising" rather than "standing up and fighting," the expectation that television news shows be helmed by hosts who "speak for us" as loudly and confrontationally as possible rather than with people who will actually illuminate and inform, etc.

Thank you for making it so plain - you nailed it!

[Davis_X_Machina]

42. Don't get me wrong. Some measure of this..

....is necessary, because democracy only works if people are involved in the process, and invested in it, but there's a serious risk of confusing the sizzle with the steak.

[Empowerer]

70. I agree . . .

But I think that for some, the sizzle is the means AND the ends . . .

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

:applause:

I'm still confused about "the message" that was being sent. Was the message, if I don't get a hundred percent of what I want, I'll blow up the country? :shrug: Sure, it wounded the president politically, but it paralyzed the nation. The professionals on the left who speak directly to the activist base, and who actively participated in voter suppression, have much to answer for; not to the POTUS, but to the American people.

As for people like Glenn Greenwald, who can lob grenades from Brazil, and really could care less what happens here, I'm sure he gets paid quite well for the scribblings of his poison pen, which affords him the luxury of dual citizenship. I wonder how many of his readers can afford to do that?
Ironically, the very people they claimed to be fighting for are the ones who will suffer the most.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Blue_Tires]

32. kick

[Logical]

35. A lot of this is Obama losing his base enthusiasm by not starting the debates on the left!

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. Bullshit.

"The Left" whatever the hell you mean by that, are the most reliable and determined to show up and vote on election day group of voters who the Democratic Party depends on, unless you mean Trotsyites when you refer to the Left and I doubt that is what you mean. Most of DU is part of "The Left" and you can pit our voting record against any other constituency who tend to support Democrats. "The Left" not only reliably votes Democratic, there are no other Democratic voters who turn out as large a percentage of those registered to vote each election.

Obama wasn't on the ballot in 2010, you know that. There was no resistance on the Left fromn voting in the 2010 Congression elections because of disappointment about Obama. You know who didn't vote in 2010? By and large the same voters who rarely vote in so called off year elections, the less dedicated voters, and that is NOT "The Left" Just because some of us predicted that there would be less enthusiasm in the electorate in general to turn out and vote for Democrats in 2010 doesn't make "The Left" responsible for trying to "send a message" to Obama by staying home. If anything it makes us right in our predictions. People pulled into the electoral process by Obama's mantra of hope and change (the young etc.) were losing enthusiasm and were less likely to turn out again. That isn't "The Left", we show up to cast ballots.

People on DU constantly cite polls showing how much "Liberal" support Obama has always had as proof of how "insignificant" leftist dissatisfaction with Obama is - how non reprentitive of the Democratic base we actually are. Well you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either we are somne unrepresentative fringe or we are a mighty voting force that can make or break Democrats. Which one is it, it can't be both.

[Parker CA]

40. +1. nice post. nt

[Prism]

47. "It can't be both." Exactly. It's so absurd on its face.

We're either insignificant peons or Mighty Titans of Democratic Fate.

It's like being in that bad relationship where the other person keeps saying "I don't need you!" and then proceeds to blame you for every bad thing in their life long after you moved halfway across the country just to get away from their psychotic co-dependence.

I think some partisans just won't give up the drunk dialing.

[hootinholler]

56. There is little I would add

Except the words complete and utter before the bullshit in your title.

Perhaps I would point out that "blame the loss on the left" is a right wing (blue dog) meme.

I would also like to know how many liberal representatives were defeated by the tea party candidates? I can think of one off the top of my head, which is Grayson. He was outspent something like 3 to 1 by the moneyed elite and the talibornagain.

-Hoot

[Art_from_Ark]

121. Obama actually campaigned against a liberal Democrat

(Bill Halter) in the Arkansas Democratic primary for Senator. He had no freaking business sticking his nose in the primary, especially given that he had lost the state by a wide margin in 2008. Just what did he hope to accomplish by that? And when the dust settled, and Blanche Lincoln came out on top, she was ignominously defeated in the general election. No incumbent Democratic US Senator had ever been defeated in an Arkansas general election since Reconstruction. Yet she had her ass handed to her on a platter. And even though I voted for Halter in both the primary and the run-off election, I still held my nose and voted for Lincoln in the general election.

[hootinholler]

124. Thank you for that tidbit n/t

[dana_b]

79. great post

people like us who are dissatisfied but pay attention STILL vote! People like my friends and family who aren't "into" politics, don't vote. They were aware in 2008 but not so much in 2010.

[Jokerman]

112. How dare you interrupt their circular firing squad...

with a sane and rational view.

:toast:

[Enthusiast]

123. PLUS ONE!

You're just being divisive. :rofl:

[VeryConfused]

39. It's bad enough so many of the liberal elite cut their own noses off to spite their faces

they cut our noses off as well

[Fire1]

43. I wish I could rec this a thousand times!! Maybe they'll

believe it coming from YOU cause some of these people actually don't believe this is why we lost the house. They shot themselves in the fuckin foot and NOW WANNA BLAME OBAMA!!! Another version of the lunatic fringe.

[JoeyT]

44. Huh.

You're completely irrelevant, no one cares about you because they don't need your money or your votes, now stop being mean to Him!!!!11 is "warning" now?

The left didn't sit the election out, the "center" voted for teabaggers and Republicans. There's no amount of money that could make most of the left vote for a teabagger or a Republican. The real meaning behind the 2010 election is that most people are woefully uninformed and have absolutely no idea what's actually going on in politics. It wasn't a referendum on Obama either way.

Edited to add: If the left had really been what swung all those elections, there would have been historic turnouts to vote for people like Grayson.

[Tippy]

45. This is the best post I've seen in a long time BIG K&R......

Thank you!

[MilesColtrane]

48. K&R

[ClarkUSA]

50. Thank you. We were right, scheming daemons. Those who are threatening to not vote in 2012...

... or plan to vote third-party had better not whine and blame President Obama after we get a Republican Senate and Romney becomes President with Marc Rubio, Chris Christie, or Bob McDonnell as his VP.

[Forkboy]

54. If they do whine, what are you going to do?

[ClarkUSA]

64. You'll have to wait and see. I hope it doesn't come to that.

[Forkboy]

66. Will you whine back? Beat them up? Hunt them down like mangy dogs?

C'mon, give us a hint.

[treestar]

77. We will be on the same side again like during the Shrub's terms

Though at first there will be a lot of finger pointing.

Funny thing is the leftward side will make the claim that Obama lost for not being liberal enough - just like the republican extremists said McCain lost because he was not conservative enough - a point which defies logic when made by either said.

[Forkboy]

83. I think we're more on the same side now than you think.

But using words like extremists, and taking a thread that was a dump on Republicans and making it about the Left (as you did the other day) does not help. I know the Left pisses you off, but at least they're going after people to their right (that's not to say that all the complaints from the Left are automatically valid). You have enemies on both sides of you, and that's the way it goes being a centrist. You can complain about people on either side of you or try to co-op them. Which do you agree with more, liberal ideas or conservative ones? If you don't like being stuck in the crossfire then pick a side and stand for it, strongly. That's all the Left is really asking for. Truly.

That doesn't mean you have to convert to a Kucinich fan, but there should be far more common ground between him and you than there is between McCain and you (and I'm guessing there is, as you don't strike me as much of a McCain fan, or much of a conservative). As I said, I think we're on the same side more than you think, yet you consistently try to equate the Right and the Left as being the same. It's flat out wrong, for one, and intellectually dishonest, for two. Liberals don't ban books, they don't promote wars, they don't take away rights, they don't do the shit that the Right does, period. You are saying this to protect a politician you like and admire, and that's understandable, but the end result is still flat out wrong.

And neither of those comments you spoke of are extremist, and neither defies logic. Given the influence that the Tea Party has gained it's clear there was a demand for someone who appeared more conservative (I say "appeared" because to me McCain was already there). I also believe that the message that Obama ran on appealed greatly to many on the Left, but there are many instances where what he said and what he's done don't mesh, and that's where much of the trouble is coming in. The Left is still taking the exact same stance it has all along. The Left was against warrantless wiretapping, they were against the wars in the Middle East, etc. They still are. But there are many centrists who said they hated these things when Bush was doing them, and now no longer seem all that bothered by them. The Left has been consistent, the center not so much. If it was allowed I could rattle off many names of people here who were very vocal about these issues when Bush was in office, but who now defend them.

The Left didn't abandon Obama in 2010, despite a lot of the rhetoric online. Liberals, which includes those like me on the left, turned out to vote in excellent numbers in 2010. Obama lost many independents however, who are a notoriously fickle bunch (which is why I believe it would be best to shore up the Left flank before trying to appeal to them...it provides more wiggle room when you have a solid flank). As Independents are all over the political spectrum, both the claim that he was too liberal and not liberal enough could apply depending on which Independent you ask. They should be sought after along with the Left, not at the expense of the Left.

Neither point defies logic at all, and just because you may not personally agree with an assessment doesn't mean it's extremist or beyond logic. You can open your mind without having to agree with said position.

[treestar]

89. the far left and right sound the same when they are talking

That does not mean they would actually do the same thing while in power.

They both make the illogical claim that politicians toward the center could get more votes from the center and the opposing party by going more to their own extreme.

I've seen both sides make that illogical claim.

The center is the center for a reason. I also can be a leftist too and just realize that it's not going to help the progressive cause to abandon the Democrats because they aren't liberal enough, because that lets Republicans win. I don't want Republicans in power. I want Democrats in power. Maybe I'd like to see the Socialist Worker's party take Congress and the WH. I just don't think that it is going to happen in this lifetime.

I don't even have to admire Obama that much. I'd be saying the same about any Democratic President stuck with a Republican Congress. I'd be defending Hillary this minute with the same fervor, because Hillary is a Democrat.

[onpatrol98]

110. +1

[CakeGrrl]

72. If that happens, the luxury of whining will be a thing of the past. -nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

55. You do realize , don't you...

... that no one urged anyone not to vote Democratic in 2010, and most Blue Dogs took pride in boasting about how they did not answer to the left.

But mroe important, what we were warning about in 2010 was that the Demcoratic Party under Obama's leadership was starting to drift away from traditional Democratic moorings that had defined our Party sine the New Deal. And guess what? Not only were we right then, but today the Democratic Leadership in the House is worried about the exact same thing. Not just worried about it, they are worried that weakening Democrats time honored reputation for defending medicare medicaid and social security could hurt our chances to make gains in Congress in 2012. Among other things they warn it would hurt our ability to attract good candidates. And I'm not just talking about Pelosi, Hoyer has been pushing back hard against Obama's proposed deals with the Rwpublicans also. And the Democrat in charge of coordinatind Democratic House races in 2012 has expressed concerns also.

That isn't "The Left", that is main stream Democratic leadership in the House of Representitives making warnings about the 1012 elections in the House that mirror what "the Left was saying before the 2010 elections.

You are engaged in the ancient fall back face saving stragey of "blaming the messanger". That never leads to positive results and often leads to more pain.

[zalinda]

59. Have you MET the average guy on the street?

That's the person who didn't show up, or voted the "bums" out. No matter how much you try to make the left responsible for Obama's failures, we aren't. It is strictly Obama's mess. He is the figurehead of the dem party. He and his team knew (and if they didn't, they should have) that mid term elections have light turnouts. Neither he nor the dem party head, did ANYTHING to drum up enthusiasm for the band wagon voters that Obama got in 2008.

The repubs have Obama's number, they knew he is a dud of a leader, and lit a fire under their voters. With the election rigging, which the dems STILL haven't addressed, and more and more people living in tents, where voting is the LAST thing on their minds, face it, the dem party was absent in the 2010 elections.

And, now the left are taken to task AGAIN, for doing something or nothing (we are pretty much blamed for everything bad that happens), that the dem party failed to do. Take a look at what Obama has done the impacts the average person, and he had done very, very little. Take a look at what he has done for the rich and corporations, and he has sided with them on just about everything. He knew damn well, that he had to do as much as he could in the first two years of his Presidency. He should have had a plan, and hit the ground running, and he didn't. That is a poor leader.

zalinda

[bvar22]

62. Harry Truman tried to warn you,

but you wouldn't listen.

"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign."
---President Harry Truman

QED:2010



IBTL

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[aaaaaa5a]

65. Outstanding!

I hope those screaming for a Bernie Sanders primary FINALLY UNDERSTAND!

[awoke_in_2003]

67. "The left cried...

"we must teach Obama a lesson! We will stay home or vote third party. " "

We did?

[ZombieHorde]

68. A leader's job is to lead and rally moral. President Obama failed to do that.

Politician should have earn our votes.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x726065

[Ikonoklast]

73. Obama wasn't running in the mid-terms.

Our job was to get out the vote and give him a majority in both houses.

In that, Democrats failed.


I would have taken every Blue Dog unreliable vote instead of every Teabagger that replaced them.

[ZombieHorde]

76. President Obama is the leader of the Democrats.

He has a responsibility to lead, and those running have a responsibility to inspire voters.

I voted straight Dem, but I am a political junky, most people aren't.

[treestar]

78. So you're going to rely on the politicians to lead and rally?

Why do anything then? Don't knock on doors. Just wait to see which one rallies the best.

[ZombieHorde]

81. The one that rallies the best will probably be the one that inspires the most door knocking.

Doesn't that seem likely to you?

[treestar]

87. So what if it's the Republican

And they have an easier time of it, too. It doesn't take much to inspire tea party nuts. They will even knock on doors to go against their own interests in the long run.

Politics really is the lesser of two evils. The other side is always there, threatening to win and do things we do not want at all.

[ZombieHorde]

103. I'll take that as a "no" vote.

So what if it's the Republican

Then the Republican wins the election.

Politics really is the lesser of two evils. The other side is always there, threatening to win and do things we do not want at all.

You can look at it anyway you want.

[treestar]

127. OK just keep looking for your ideal leader then

Once that person has the Presidency, the other branches will fall in line.

[glowing]

71. Seriously, who on this board didn't vote? I did... I dragged my hubby

who never wants to vote.. out to vote. It was that important in FL to find everyone to vote against that worthless teabag Prick Scott... If you want to scream that in the middle of a grocery store, then good, do it... otherwise, I'm thinking most people here did vote.. I even GOTV as unenthusiastic as I was about the Dems, pukes scare me more.. Case in point look at how much more destructive its gotten to live in a "red" state.

[treestar]

74. Highly recommended

:kick:

[Jakes Progress]

85. And yet the party leaders kept running off voters.

Guess they wouldn't listen.

Can the hear us now?

[Union Scribe]

86. Now that multiple posters have reduced your bullshit argument to rubble

are you going to be a big boy and apologize for smearing and attempting to further divide your fellow Democrats?

[scheming daemons]

129. Really? I see a thread with +69 recs

[Moosepoop]

130. Make that +70

K & R!

Oops, too late to rec... but kicked anyway!

[Union Scribe]

132. Apparently you don't see all of it

Or else you'd feel foolish for the claims in your OP. And if you want to judge legitimacy on rec numbers, then you're going to have to admit some painful things about Obama based on what's been posted on this site.

[eridani]

88. The left voted as usual. The people who did not vote were the infrequent voters who were inspired

--in 2008, but saw their lives continue to turn into shit in the intervening two years. And a president and party who were more interested in the deficit than in jobs, more interested in cutting spending than in using government spending power to increase aggregate demand.

[PragmaticLiberal]

90. I couldn't agree more....

[graywarrior]

93. Yep

[jenmito]

94. Yup-and that includes Ed Schultz who urged people to stay home. Thanks, Ed. n/t

[MH1]

95. Replace "the left" with "some on the left" and you'll be spot on.

[rury]

96. K&R!!!!!!!!

[liberalla]

97. K&R

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

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

[Tesha]

100. *WE* Tried to warn everyone in January of 2009 what a compromising centrist President would do...

...to our Party in 2010. But the centrists decided to "teach the left
a lesson".

Worked great, didn't it?

Tesha

[Time for change]

101. The left did not advocate staying home in 2010

[fishwax]

105. who is the "we" if it's not on the left and not in the middle and not sane republican?

[dflprincess]

106. Sooner or later you my party right or wrong types are going to have to make up your minds

Most the time you claim we're irrelevant and our opinions don't matter then you turn around and try to blame us when the center right "new" Democrats lose elections.

You can't have it both ways.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

107. Well, Obama isn't liberal, so we'll stay home and allow Republicans to win!

That ought to teach him. Maybe NOW he'll be more liberal and stop compromising with Republicans, even though they control the House!

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

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

[cascadiance]

114. Yep, even many of us that were unemployed said passing the tax cuts was a BAD idea!

and that even those that would suffer from not getting unemployment are now going to suffer a lot more from the bigger cuts they're going to rationalize they can do without the revenue we would have had with them not passed.

You could just see this happening. And the Rethugs didn't have to suffer ONE bit for having to "own" passing an unemployment extension (or not) themselves at the beginning of their "reign", thanks to us giving away the store for them at the end of 2010.

[Creideiki]

115. I have a Democratic CongressCritter

Do you?

[Creideiki]

118. Hope in one hand, crap in the other

See which one fills up first.

[Jennicut]

120. Independents really blew it. Hope they are happy with what they got.

Divided government with the crazies on one side and the reasonable on the other never really works.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

125. what gets me is that when we controlled both houses we

couldn't do anything meaningful. It's like they outsmart us no matter what.

[mikekohr]

126. A Ginormous Kick and Rec

the most bestest post EVER!

[SidDithers]

128. Good post...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[Bobbie Jo]

131. Huge K&R!

:kick:

[whatchamacallit]

133. What a horse shit covered joke! Un-fucking-rec!

[Empowerer]

137. You're exactly right