Reply #178: I did address your points ... [View All]

[JoePhilly]

Let's take that Obama sided with the banks and the rich over the other 95%.

As a candidate, Obama said that he WOULD NOT raise taxes on the 95% making under 250k. And to KEEP that promise, he allowed the tax cuts for the rich to remain for 2 more years.

From that, many on the left IGNORE that he kept that promise to the 95%, as you do now, and CHERRY PICK the fact that he allowed he tax cuts for the rich to extend as well. You IGNORE that he protected the 95%.

Both the right and the left do this.

This is not about being "critical". It is about being nothing but critical. It is about the difference between using what 'we did not get' as the next goal, versus using it as an ANCHOR.

And again ... the moderate Dem, the one who isn't following this debate about the NUANCE of tax cuts for the rich and the middle class.

All they hear is "Obama bad". And they will stay home. And the GOP will gain even more control.