Folks, get ready for it and stay calm - Obama's eventual steering toward the MOTR...

[HardWorkingDem]

Not long after Obama officially obtains the Dem nod, keep in mind that he will start drifting his campaign back toward the middle of the road to attract as many voters as possible.

So don't start up with the hyper critical comments and freaking out. This is something seen in almost all presidential elections.

Not only that, I hope Du members keep in mind that Obama probably can't emphasize many of the positions we most strongly want him to out of purely pragmatic politics.

So relax and keep a level head. But I doubt many will and will soon resort to comments that Obama has lost his way and is traitor to the left.

[floridablue]

1. Perhaps he has really

just gone left for the Primaries to lure you into your primary votes and will go back to his REAL position after the convention. Perhaps the primaries are just a smoke and mirror sham. Kind of like what McSame puts out every day.

[Buzz Clik]

16. Wow. You didn't even wait.

Nicely played.

[Buzz Clik]

..

[The Doctor.]

36. Hehehe... good one.

Unless you think he's been posturing since he left law school. :silly:

"As a member of the Illinois Senate, Obama supported a single-payer health care plan run by the state and voted for an increase in the minimum wage. He also endorsed embryonic stem cell research and, in 2003, co-sponsored legislation that would have banned discrimination based on sexual orientation.
He voted against allowing people to claim self-defense if they used a gun in their home. The measure would have affected only residents of towns where local handgun bans were in effect.

But he also voted in favor of allowing retired police officers to carry concealed weapons. Gibbs said that would be his only exception to a prohibition against the right to carry a concealed weapon.

On abortion, Obama voted against a measure designed to protect what supporters termed live babies born during abortion procedures."

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/01/obamas_record.html

So... not so much.

[Tinksrival]

45. Also, Obama was drafted to run.

He really wasn't planning an '08 run. He was petitioned by elected officials in Ill. and elsewhere led by One of my personal liberal heroes Senator Dick Durbin, one of the best Progressive leaders in the Senate. Interestingly, one of our most popular Republican State Senators, Kirk Dillard, was being raked over the right wing coals for endorsing Obama in the primaries and even appearing in spots for Obama in Iowa.
Senator Obama could very well be that candidate the Progressive movement needs to bring the rest of the country along.
But you can't effect change unless you get there! Please people use your brains!

Thanks Dr e!

[CC]

2. If he does such a thing wouldn't

that make him just like every other politician? Wouldn't doing what all of them do negate everything he stands for?

[SammyWinstonJack]

11. Yes it would, but this looks like that is okay with his supporters.

:rofl: Too damn funny!

Don't like him and don't trust him and this spin on why he might flip flop to the middle of the road is one more reason for me remain skeptical of him.

[Chulanowa]

54. Have fun with McCain, then

'Cause I'm afraid Clinton is going down with her ship (maybe she shouldn't have drilled all those holes in its hull...)

[Donnachaidh]

19. yeppers! But didn't you know it's OKAY when Obama does it?

And when he gets the nod and starts paying back all those *cough* corporate *cough* backers THAT will be okay TOO!

And those silly little people who sent their extra budget money will be waiting a LONG time to hear about what they've been promised. They will wait about three years before they start hearing how IMPORTANT they are to Obama. And of course, they will be asked to give their pin money AGAIN, because he REALLY *REALLY* will follow through on his promises to the middle class and poor in his SECOND term, as long as you keep sending him your cash. :sarcasm: :eyes:

[SammyWinstonJack]

32. !!!

:applause: Played and don't even realize it....YET!

[magellan]

3. Um, are you suggesting he's going to lie about his position

...to attract votes? Won't that kinda piss some people off when he gets into office and does something different to what they expected? You know, like Bush** did?

And personally, I wouldn't call where Obama is now anything but centrist...unless it's compared to where Bush** is at. But Bush** leaves a lot of room for movement left, he's so far right.

[SammyWinstonJack]

13. !

:thumbsup:

[Lorien]

4. He's not at all "Left Wing" to begin with

only Kucinich was:

[Fumesucker]

7. I wonder where most DU members fall on that graph?

That would be interesting to know..

[magellan]

14. Polls have been done several times

Do a search for them. Time and again, the majority of DUers fall in the Left/Libertarian green box.

[Fumesucker]

24. But libertarian principles are anathema around here..

If there's one thing I've noticed about DU it's that people here seem to hate libertarians even more than neo-cons.

I also find it kind of odd that there is so much hatred of Nader here but he falls right into that lower left quadrant with Kucinich.

[GaYellowDawg]

37. re: Nader

I also find it kind of odd that there is so much hatred of Nader here but he falls right into that lower left quadrant with Kucinich.

Well, it's because the dumb son of a bitch kept things close enough in 2000 for the Republicans to steal the election with impunity. It's also because the dumb son of a bitch claimed that a future Nobel Prize winner was the equivalent of a future warmonger. Anyone with half a grain of sense knew that Gore was a far superior man and leader to Bush, but Nader painted them as the same out of pure self-interest and it gave BushCo just enough room to steal the election. Fuck Nader. He's tainted forever.

[Fumesucker]

46. So it really doesn't matter what political positions someone takes?

I'd be quite surprised if Gore weren't in that upper right hand quadrant along with virtually all the rest of the politicians too.

And Gore gaveled down the Congressional Black Caucus that wanted to stand up for him..

Do you really and truly think Nader believed he had a chance at winning the presidency?

[GaYellowDawg]

51. Of course it does.

And although Gore might be in the upper right quadrant by that measure, he's certainly not in the upper right corner of the upper right quadrant. Besides which, I'm not sure I agree with that particular graph at all.

Do you really and truly think Nader believed he had a chance at winning the presidency?

No, but I think he believed he had a chance to fuck Gore over, and he didn't care if he fucked the country over to do it. Without Bush, there is no 9/11 (I think Gore would have paid attention to the intelligence, quietly picked up the terrorists, and hardly anyone would have even known about it), there would be no oil war, there would be no wholesale gutting of environmental and financial regulations (and we'd all be a hell of a lot better off), and most of the world would kind of like us instead of hating us. Nader was the most crucial Bush enabler. Without him, the Republicans would not have been able to convincingly pull off election theft. So fuck him.

[Chulanowa]

58. The graph's questions are rather stacked

The goal is to put everyone who takes the quiz into the "libertarian" level of the graph, thereby making them think "oh hey, I'm a Libertarian, I guess I better start reading up and supporting causes they label as "libtertarian." it also puts pretty much every politician right next to each other to further the libertarian meme of "they're all the same, except for us!"

The trick to that is, just by being members of government, all politicians are "authoritarian" and government is EVIL EVIL EVIL! All hail Saint Reagan the Deregulator!

[magellan]

60. Utter BS

It gets so tiring hearing the same twaddle about Nader. Never do any of you Nader-haters mention the fact that 17,000 votes went for Buchanan (votes that should have gone to Gore), 16,000 went for the Libertarian, over 2000 went to the Natural Law/Reform party, and 1300 went to the Constitution Party.

The difference between Gore and Bush** was **537 votes**. Any -- ANY -- of the candidates above could be legitimately blamed as spoilers in FL 2000, never mind THE REPUGS STOLE IT by purging 50,000 voters from the rolls, among other things. Yet you guys always point to Nader. Nader is somehow more responsible for those missing votes for Gore than even the Repugs. Why is that, I wonder? Is it because he tells the truth about the Democratic Party and how it seems happy to follow around in the Repubs' shadow anymore? Or is it simply because it isn't bad enough that the REPUBS FUCKING STOLE IT?

Honestly, grow the fuck up.

[DaDooRonRon]

64. Of course he did no such thing, but

one does what one has to do in order to keep the hate ramped up.

I almost feel sorry for the Nader haters.

Almost.

It's got to be tough hanging onto straw men.

[reggie the dog]

38. libertarian or libertarian

Libertarians on economic issues are despised here. No one here wants to privatize schools, drinking water etc. Libertarians tend to want to do away with all public owned industries and put them into the private sector. On personal freedom issues many of us here are libertarian. Libertarians see gay marriage as a right and demand equality. Libertarians want to end the war on drugs and let adults use the drugs they want to (many of us here are ok for legalized cannabis, but there is no way a majority here wants all drugs legal like I do, sad to say, so the mafia is happy with that). Libertarians support legal prostitution, so do many of us here (if only to do away with pimps). Libertarians generally see discriminatiion as anti american, we agree. Libertarians generally support letting people carry loaded guns, we usually do not. These square polls pit libertarian against authoritarian for non economic issues. On most non economic issues we agree with libertarians, on economic issues we usually disagree.

[magellan]

55. You're not understanding how the graph works

Take a look at Political Compass.

[Chulanowa]

56. Because the only difference between a Libertarian and a Neo-con...

Is that the libertarians want the privatized military to be on the home shores willing to stifle and crush any unionization, boycotts, and protests against their employing corporations, while the neo-con wants them overseas doing that.

Libertarians sometimes share cursory goals with progressives. But htye do it for vastly different reasons. Liberals want pot legalized because it makes no sense that someone faces 25 years for owning a bag of harmless roadside weed. Libertarians want pot legalized so they can see one of their buddycorps buy the patent to its genome and make a killing by adding addictive substances to it and selling it to the public at "luxury" prices. Progressives want recognition of and health care for sex workers because it's only compassionate. Libertarians don't want health care, but they do want legalization, and they furthermore see the sex-workers themselves as human chattel who "chose o work for their pimp"

I know we have a few self-professed "libertarians" around DU... thankfully they seem like mislabeled progressives more than actual libertarians. Libertarians are two-faced, disengenuous, freepaholic dumbfucks who have no concept of how a market works when you add actual people to the mix, who think you deserve to be a slave due to your own "choices" (did you know you choose to develop congenital illnesses?) and I will take a knuckle-dragging Republican over one of these geysering boils on the scrotum of humanity any day.

[Cant trust em]

17. I'm in the southwest corner. NT

[reggie the dog]

35. when I took the polls

I nearly always end up about as far left as Nader but 3 or 4 more squares lower nearer to the libertarian side. Basically I am a socialis on economic issues and a libertarian on issues like gay marriage, drugs, etc.

[barbtries]

42. i'd probably be

left of ralph nader. dunno

[mike_c]

53. on that graph I'm absolutely left of Nader...

...and more libertarian as well.

[Algorem]

5. so he's going to go left?

[izquierdista]

6. If it bothers you

Read about the 1932 election. Roosevelt said absolutely nothing about the specifics of the New Deal. Nothing about minimum wage, nothing about Social Security, zip, pip, nada. He gave a lot of feel good speeches, told people they could hope for a better future, promised to put the country back to work.

Before you open your pie-hole to criticize, go back and see what happened on the same day in 1932.

[Donnachaidh]

21. and you really think Obama is going to do a new New Deal?

Oh puhleeze!!! :rofl:

[EOTE]

47. Care to tell me why not?

Not since the Great Depression has the country needed it so badly. We're in a position where we've got tons of new job making possibilities on the horizon with regards to new sources of energy production. I see no reason why Obama couldn't help to promote energy independence while simultaneously stimulating the economy. If you're too jaded to see that as a possibility, so be it.

[madokie]

8. Obama is right for America right now

I'm a late comer to the dance but I know a winner when I see one and let me tell you this man is a winner. He can't change to be anything else but what he is so I worry not what may be, I worry what they, neoCONs, will do to try to stop him. To them he is a train barreling down upon them fixing to run them over like the snakes they have proven themselves to be. Yes this is the right person to lead and the right time for some serious changes. America is good down deep, we've just been sidetracked these last 80 or so years.

[Bluebear]

9. OMG so *this* is his liberal side? With all the religious pandering etc?

Say it isn't so. I can't fathom him swinging more rightward.

[Buzz Clik]

20. LOL! And you had the gall to tell me you're an Obama supporter?

Too funny!

[Bluebear]

22. Of course I am, I support our nominee.

The fact that he has run a churchy campaign and now I'm being warned that he intends to move farther right doesn't change that.

[Buzz Clik]

65. Claiming that you'll eventually vote for him (maybe) if nominated is not the same as supporting him.

None of your words here at DU would give the slightest indication that you support Obama.

But, it's nice that you'll vote him.

[Tinksrival]

40. Being labeled a Muslim in hiding......

can you blame him, I don't think he had a choice and it was a wise move. I am a proud atheist and a realist!

[Cant trust em]

10. It's not like he's that liberal to begin with

He's liberal enough.

[Zywiec]

12. "Obama probably can't emphasize many of the positions"

So if no one knows his real positions, how can people make an educated decision?

:shrug:

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. Good question.

[Donnachaidh]

23. when exactly HAS he emphasized his positions?

He's never been very specific about anything, other than grandiose non-committal speeches. :shrug:

[HardWorkingDem]

26. Okay, for the sake of pure pragmatic politics imagine...

if he came out tomorrow and say listed about ten things he really wanted to do in America. I think everyone here can imagine ten things they'd love to see done in their dreams.

But let's just start with a few.

One could be a huge media break up bill. Hm, where did we see that one go south? Still, I'd love to see it, but we know he can't hit it real hard.

Another one could be a real, fair economic income redistribution effort.

How about a true progressive tax scale.

How about the type of harsh environmental regulations we really need?

How about pushing congress to enact truly great labor union laws?

Following Kucinch's Department of Peace.

My point is, soon Obama will start reaching out to ALL voters in America and with no doubt, members here at DU will chastise him for being a traitor to the cause. People here are all readying doing it. In other words, we are hamstringing our best agent for change before he has even knelt down to the starting block.


Hell, look at the bitterness of the HRC supporters (and to you people I suggest you go to Olberman's special comment and read the last third of it dealing with how many "forgives" she has recevied - and you don't even have to acknowledge the Kennedy flub).

[mike_c]

18. well, then he likely won't get my vote....

That depends, of course, on the stances he takes on the issues that are important to me. I don't vote for anyone just because they're running-- I vote for candidates who promise to represent my social, economic, and political interests. I'm really hoping that will be Sen. Obama.

[EOTE]

48. Who will receive your vote, then?

Does the thought of a McCain presidency not scare the shit out of you?

[mike_c]

52. most likely Cynthia McKinney if she's on the ballot in California....

Frankly, I'm hoping Sen. Obama doesn't sell out the democratic left. I'd love to vote for him. But Cynthia McKinney is a perfectly satisfactory alternative *for me.*

[Warpy]

25. He's going to suffer for our overly high expectations

for the next four years, if he's elected.

He'd be swept into office by an electorate that wants change, a lot of it, but how much is he going to be able to accomplish with a Congress that has been bought off for years?

Also, this mess has been 40 years in the making. When Johnson went out of power in 1969, so did the liberals. We've had nothing but conservative administrations by both parties since then, conservative administrations that focus on helping institutions and cheating individual people by keeping wages low and lying about what that has done to us. Both parties have been complicit and Reaganism was upheld by Clinton, who had 2 years of a friendly Congress in which to undo at least some of the damage. There's no way one administration can undo it in four years.

I'm afraid the government of this country is forced to do the right thing for the people only when things become so desperate that they fear being overthrown.

Unless we get that desperate and real change happens, Obama will be blamed for business as usual.

[JohnnyLib2]

27. Wise words. IMO, time will prove you right.

And to some extent, that would happen to any incoming president.

[CC]

30. Not sure anyone can fix the mess we

are in in 4 years but as to the expectations, Obama raised those for himself. I am hoping he has a lot to back them up and can make changes for the better. I am not going to count on it since there is so much that needs fixed and so many that do not want change. I will kind of feel for him if he disappoints his rabid followers (as opposed to those that support him but are not rabid) because they will turn on him and go after him just like they do Hillary. His "I misspoke and will most likely misspeak again" is not going to carry him very far then.

[blondeatlast]

61. Exactly; the Left is as apt to be disappointed with him as is the Right.

Frankly, there were only two candidates I thought were remotely close to having the guts to do what was needed to fix the country and both dropped out early.

[Truth2Tell]

28. I'm already hoping he's just pandering to the right.

Our only hope is that Obama is more progressive than he has already let on. If not, we're screwn fer sher.

I just hope the "rightward" swing isn't of the war-mongering variety. I can accept some vagary about domestic issues, but any more saber-rattling about Iran or Pakistan, or any more promises of bigger and bigger military budgets would be very disturbing.

[harun]

49. There is no chance he will do that. That would be WAY over the

line. Instead it will be subtler. We know who Obama is and he will be a great President.

[Forkboy]

29. And once he wins we start to drag him back to the left.

[reggie the dog]

39. exactly

[EFerrari]

63. I'm not waiting that long.

:evilgrin:

[paulk]

31. he's always been in the middle of the road

he's just sold the left wing of the party a used car with a tranny full of sawdust and four bald tires.

[SammyWinstonJack]

33. ...

:spray:

[northzax]

34. ha

yes, it is interesting, isn't it? the liberal blogosphere goes nuts over a candidate that doesn't represent their interests much at all.

and people thought Bill Clinton triangulated too much. I am afraid we ain't seen nothin' yet.

[smiley_glad_hands]

41. I think most here understand that. eom

[no limit]

43. We only need to know one thing. He is 1000 times better than McCain is

and everyone needs to accept that and not make the same idiotic mistake they made in 2000.

[JCMach1]

44. Not steering- always was...

[niyad]

50. I am going to watch his supporters trying to justify him acting just like any other

pol trying to win an election, watch them twist and turn to make his behaviour acceptable.

he is going to be doing exactly what I anticipate him doing, since, unlike his supporters, I don't see him as some sort of "above it all" man of the people. but then, my expectations are very low after decades of watching our political system go down the toilet.

[moondust]

57. Maybe not so much this time.

He already has a lot of Republicans planning to vote for him.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

59. Though I'm liberal, I do appreciate Obama's pragmatism...

When I heard him speak in Harrisburg, he warned voters that he will disappoint people from time to time. I like the fact that he isn't promising everything to all people.

I also have a doctorate in political science, so I do acknowledge that it is inevitable that candidates must run to the center in order to appeal to the American voter, who is centrist.

Don't forget, too, that McCain has to run to the center as well, and he's in a much more precarious and sticky situation than Obama. Why? He has to distance himself from Dumbya but he needs Dumbya to help him raise money. By running to the Center, he'll piss off conservatives who already hate him. He'll appeal to some Indies, but his stance on Iraq and Iran will cause some of them to turn off from him.

I don't know how he'll distance himself from Dumbya without flip-flopping (like he's already doing), while at the same time, appealing to the conservative base.

That is why I get frustrated with the media and The Enablers, as well, who keep asserting that Obama has problems because he doesn't appeal to blue collar workers. McCain has a lot more problems, and his problems are much bigger than those of either Obama or Hillary.

[EFerrari]

62. What do you mean by this "back"?

:)

[pinto]

66. GDP topic.

Thanks.