If Dems lose in 2012, who should get greater blame, progressive voters or corporate Dem politicians?

[yurbud]

Poll question: If Dems lose in 2012, who should get greater blame, progressive voters or corporate Dem politicians?

It is surreal to come to a discussion board where most people are progressive and spend so much time wading through and responding to attacks on progressives.

If the attacks were on the MERITS of policies rather than the PROCESS of getting things enacted, it would be a welcome and healthy thing.

But that is not what is happening.

Instead, we are called idiots for not understanding the process, which seems to mean Democrats cannot propose anything that some Republican hasn't proposed in the recent past because Democrats refuse to do anything to break through Republican obstruction or do the even simpler task of twisting the arms of the corrupt minority of corporate tools in their own caucus when that would have been enough to change the outcome.

We are also told repeatedly that Democrats lost in 2010 because stupid, idealistic progressives sat out the election, not because after we gave Dems both chambers and the White House they chose to agree with Republicans so often that voting didn't seem to make much difference.

Set aside for now the role Republicans, corporate money, and other factors would play in any victory or defeat--that's a separate question. I'm talking about WITHIN the Democratic Party.

If Democrats lose more seats in Congress in 2012 and/or the presidency, who would be more to blame, progressives or corporate Democrats in office let the GOP set the agenda and vote accordingly?

[izquierdista]

1. Progressive voters?

Progressive voter like dog laying on porch; easy to kick when roof leak or fuse blow.



Can you tell I've been watching old Charlie Chan movies?

[ecstatic]

2. It wouldn't matter. The result would be Bachmann or Perry

signing laws, picking justices, and assigning cabinet appointments. People need to get it together and stop the foolish in-fighting.

[Capitalocracy]

6. But it does matter, in terms of strategy

Should the Dems go left or should the lefties shut up?

Considering where the country is today, and everything I think I know about politics, I vote for taking a hard left. I think we're at a unique point in history where despite where all the money is coming from for the elections, the right thing to do for the country might also just be the right thing to do if you want to get elected... take a firm stand for progressive policy and principles.

The conventional wisdom is that the elusive independent voter is a fan of compromise. But I think there's enough evidence out there to show they'll respond better to leadership and strength.

[ecstatic]

9. They're not going to go left if people aren't consistently voting left

The left has shown itself time and time again to be an unreliable voting block.

[Capitalocracy]

16. Nobody's actually tried it.

You can't say they're unreliable if nobody's ever given them anything to rely on.

Look how they turned out for Obama. If he governed like he campaigned, maybe the left would be more reliable.

[yurbud]

23. if he governed like he campaigned, the GOP wouldn't bother to put up a candidate

since it would be a guaranteed landslide against them and for Obama.

Corporate Dems would rather be owned by the rich than win.

[muffin1]

26. Yes! What you said.

:thumbsup:

[yurbud]

35. I agree--and it's the corporate Dems who need to sit down and shut up

and remember who votes for them, not just who will gives them donations now and jobs when they leave office.

[texshelters]

3. This either or is too simple minded

and avoids some of the real reasons democrats will lose such as the Citizens United decision and voter registration laws pays by Republicans state legislatures that will limit democratic votes such as those of recent citizens and college students.

Peace,
Tex shelters

[99th_Monkey]

4. Obama will have no one to blame but himself. nt

[JoePhilly]

7. Sounds like a 10 year old who threatens suicide to teach his parents a lesson.

[99th_Monkey]

19. On the contrary, the buck stops w/ Obama, not me.

I see nothing particularly "mature" about your aiding and abetting Obama to evade responsibility for his actions,
a seemingly endless series of disastrous betrayals of core democratic values, principles and programs.

Neither do I see anyting vote-worthy about Obama only being slightly less mean about destroying America than
the Republicans. Never-the-less I WILL be voting for Obama anyway, holding my proverbial nose the whole time.

HINT FOR REALLY HELPING OBAMA WIN IN '12: Snarky and disrespectful slurs and accusations only make it that much
more difficult for O's leftist critics to follow through on any intention they may have to vote for Obama. Is
this not obvious to you?

[JoePhilly]

20. I enojyed your reponse ....

Particularly how you ....

1) Start by saying I am "aiding and abetting Obama to evade responsibility for his actions,
a seemingly endless series of disastrous betrayals of core democratic values, principles and programs."

And with that, clearly saying what the Tea party would also say about me (and Obama) ... that we don't have the "correct values". Too funny.

And then ...

2) After attacking my values, you go on to complain about "Snarky and disrespectful slurs and accusations only make it that much
more difficult for O's leftist critics to follow through on any intention they may have to vote for Obama."

I'm kind of surprised that you missed the ironic hypocrisy in your post.

As for how you vote ... that is up to you. But I will say that if you make any part of your voting decision based on disagreements on an internet discussion board ... you may want to rethink your voting strategy.

[99th_Monkey]

21. Happy to oblige.

The only irony I see is you seem to expect me to not only vote for Obama, but to do so weathering a shit-storm of
dismissal and disrespectful insinuations (for having disagreements with Obama) in order to make my way to the
voting booth.

[JoePhilly]

27. To be clear ... I don't give a #$@$ who you vote for, or even if you vote.

Only about 40% of Americans vote in Presidential elections. And I care far more about the other 60% and what it takes to get them to vote for Democrats.

So stay home. Or ... go Vote. Write in your cat's name. Do what you want.

As for the "shit-storm" of insults you face ... spare me ... nothing that anyone on DU says to you, or about you, will be as bad as what will happen is we get a GOP President in 2012.

[99th_Monkey]

34. Thanks for clarifying.

I guess there is another irony after all: the irony of Banksters, disaster capitalists and the wealthiest 1% laughing all the way to the bank
having used the GOP to fleece Obama, and create such bitter division between you and I in one fell swoop, thereby hobbling the hopes of progressive
Democrats and the Left in general. or maybe less ironic than just Sad really. :-(

[yurbud]

25. thank you for at least paraphrasing the talking point. That could earn you a promotion.

To writer instead of just copy and paster in your PR firm.

[cherokeeprogressive]

40. AND a raise. n/t

[scheming daemons]

5. which group is more likely to vote 3rd party or stay home?

There's your answer.

As to your point about being troubled that progressives get bash here, I would argue that our DEMOCRATIC President gets bashed here at twice the rate that progressives do.

There is already a site called progressiveunderground. This site is called democraticunderground, and the DEMOCRATIC president gets bashed more here than he does on conservative sites.

What's really surreal is not those that attack Obama get bashed here... but that they get bashed far less than the president himself.

You want to be above gettin criticized... while all the while kneecapping the president. That's what's "surreal".

[sabrina 1]

8. The President doesn't get bashed here. His policies

are critized. Real Progressive Dems support Real Progressive policies and when a Democratic politician chooses to work against those policies, s/he better expect to be criticized.

This can all be fixed by the President and his staff, after nearly three years of caving to Repubs on some pretty important issues while refusing to speak to the Progressive wing of his party on those issues, finally acknowledging the concerns of Teachers, Union Members, Seniors and everyone else who helped to get him elected and who have been constantly bashed by his Staff, publicly.

When millions of your supporters are telling you the same thing, and now even members of Congress from your own party, maybe it is YOU who is wrong, not all of them.

[LoZoccolo]

11. I love that attitude on their part.

"I'm going to threaten to unleash the Republicans on the general public like I'm some sort of terrorist...but DON'T CALL ME ON IT or make fun of me because I'll get my feelings hurt and go and do it! You better coddle me!"

[LoZoccolo]

13. I'll add that this sort of dynamic is more prominent on the Internet.

There are a few guys that showed up at our Illinois Dem Net meetings here and there that would pull the same tactics that you see here who seemed to have problems, and real Democrats would chuckle at them. One guy started talking about how the politicians should do everything he wants as if no one else voted for them; it was all talk, and it was done in front of a lot of people who actually put in the work to gain the consensus needed to get what they want.

Serious, if anyone's reading this and agrees with me and the Democrats in this thread, click the Democratic Meetup link, or the Drinking Liberally link in my signature line and get in touch with some real Democrats in your area that go out and do stuff; you'll find it's a lot less unnerving then these people who sit and home and try to troll the Democratic Party (from the left or right, it doesn't matter) on the Internet.

[muffin1]

29. I am very critical of President Obama - and with good reason.

I DID vote n 2010, though. And I will *probably* vote for Obama in 2012, but like many here, I will be holding my nose.
In 2008, I was THRILLED to vote for him. It's certainly not MY fault that my feelings toward him have changed - I still hold the same principles I did then.

[Ignis]

32. Why is this so fucking difficult to understand?

President Obama is an elected public official, and is not at all exempt from criticism.
DUers are private citizens, and "bashing" them is not even remotely the same as bashing a public figure.

[LoZoccolo]

10. Every Democrat has a significant partisan voting record.

I'm assuming that the progressive voters have the mental facilities to figure that out, and they are responsible for their actions as well.

[FrenchieCat]

12. The better question is who will be the people who will suffer the most......?

and based on that answer, what is your point?...
knowing the negativity that you have been actively posting
at this site for 2.7 years?

Trying to justify your actions via this poll,
doesn't make the possible eventual results
of what you have been working so hard to achieve
any more bearable to those you profess to care so
much about, till you scout the Internet each and everyday
to aim at only one person; the President.

You say you are about principles and progressive policies,
and yet, the only I see you do is to work so hard along the side of the
opposition in helping them gain what it is that they have also
been working hard to achieve since 1/20/09.

How is that going to get out the vote,
when at the end of it all, there won't be any do-over?
and why work so hard and devote so much energy and be so passionate
at doing nothing beyond eventually bringing on more grief to those who need
the most help? How is your daily vendetta against the one man who would not
be king help them truly?

[polmaven]

14. How about

Anyone who does not vote for the president?

[Liberal_in_LA]

15. we wont' lose

[AndyTiedye]

18. We Cannot Take Anything for Granted

We will be outspent by some huge margin, we will never know how much, because they never
have to disclose anything.

That "Citizens United" decision gives them access to billions of dollars in corporate cash.

They have the absolute loyalty of every tee vee station in America and almost all the radio
stations and newspapers.

They have control of the state governments in 27 states with a total of 270 electoral votes.

27 Teabagger governors. 27 Teabagger Secretaries-of-State. 27 state legislatures controlled by teabaggers.

In 27 states, they will be doing this on election night:



It's going to be a hard fight.

[Lyric]

17. Progressives wouldn't be upset if the elected Dems had done a proper job of caring for the nation.

Obviously it's the fault of the elected Dems, along with the right-wing election thieves. Anything else is just bashing the victims.

[blkmusclmachine]

22. This is 11-Dimensional Chess/rope-a-dope BS:

See how that's working out..

[Fumesucker]

24. Progressives are such an insignificant voting block that their concerns are routinely ignored..

But then when a Democratic politician loses an election it is solely due to those uber powerful progressives having a poutrage snit.

[yurbud]

28. that sums up the conventional wisdom in DC.

[ThomWV]

30. the person to be blamed is Obama, for not standing up to Republicans

A strong party needs a strong leader. We are a weak Party with a weak leader.

[BzaDem]

31. Um, by definition, the voters that pick the elected officials are responsible and accountable for

the results. That is what it means to have elections. When X makes a choice (of whether to vote or not vote and who to vote for and who to enable), X is 100% responsible for the outcome of that choice. It doesn't matter who X is or what the choice is.

ANY other response to the question makes about as much logical sense as "up is down."

[yurbud]

36. and if X refuses to do what those voters wanted him to do, who is responsible for that?

[Melinda]

38. *crickets*

[BzaDem]

43. It depends on whether the candidate/official has the power to do what voters wanted him to do.

I would say that Obama is responsible for actions he takes if he has the power not to take them, and actions he does not take if he has the power to take them.

But that has nothing to do with the question in the post, which is about who would be responsible for putting a Republican in office.

[yurbud]

45. Have you noticed that presidents are infinitely powerful to do what the already wealthy want but

powerless to do what mere voters want?

Or at least unwilling to use those powers for the benefit of mere voters.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

[Major Hogwash]

37. You don't understand the process.

But, that doesn't mean you're an idiot.
I would never say that about you.

[quaker bill]

39. Everyone who fails to cast a ballot, no excuses.

[pwb]

41. It won't be a democrats fault.

It would be McConnell's and Boehners fault for obstructing all of our Presidents plans. I hope we do the same to them if they do win. IMO.

[Blasphemer]

42. Firstly, I strongly believe in a person's right to vote, or not vote, as they choose

Nothing upsets me more than those who push the idea that somehow a politician or a party is entitled to a vote. A person can vote, not vote, vote third party, vote for a write-in candidate if they believe that is the right thing to do with their vote. It is a right afforded to a citizen and should not be abridged in any way, whether on legal grounds, moral grounds, religious ground or political grounds. To believe otherwise is to not believe in democracy. A person running for elective office is not supposed to be doing so to serve political interests, but to serve the public interest. They are being elected to be public servants. If such an individual does not (or is not able due to the unfortunate financial realities of our system) convince enough people that their positions and leadership ability will serve the public interest, they will lose. An individual who is presented with choices can either decide amongst the choices presented or elect to choose "none of the above". It is absolutely right and proper to refuse to make a choice if an individual believes that no one amongst the choices presented will serve the public interest. So, to answer your question, no individual or group of individuals (progressive or otherwise) can be blamed for their vote or lack of vote. "If you don't vote, you can't complain" is nothing but propaganda that supports an extremely flawed political system.

[LWolf]

44. Clearly, it will be the Democrats who didn't earn the votes. nt