Nancy Waterman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:45 AM
Original message |
Second two years has a different goal |
|
The first two years was about pushing through as much progressive legislation as possible. (See Rachel's show last night if you don't believe he did). The second two years needs to be about aggressively framing the issues and making the public see what the GOP really is and who funds them. The goal is to counter FOX news, right-wing radio, and the Republican plutocrats and theocrats with loud, clear, concise and effective framing, starting tomorrow!! Obama can use the new GOP House Majority as a focus to make his narrative more effective.
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:49 AM
Response to Original message |
1. What do you think held them back from aggressively framing + countering Fox before now? nt |
Nancy Waterman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I think they just didn't get it. They thought bipartisanship would rule and then they got caught up with governing. Obama assumed people would see all the things he had done and appreciate them. Instead, they believe all the crap on FOX news and don't even know what Obama has done for them. Pushing legislation will now be almost impossible, but aggressively framing will save the Democrats and the administration for future effectiveness.
|
flamingdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. I'm trying to discern if they simply had to do what they did |
|
If so not much will change, but if they do a postmortem and really do see errors I expect the next two years to be interesting and effective, in spite of repukes gaining ground.
I think so much of this situation is generated by Fox and Citizens United. I want them to attack full force on that.
|
krkaufman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. I'd put more weight on stupidity ... |
|
... as in being led by Rahm and DLC/Third Way types. But then Obama selected Rahm. The buck stops with him.
|
Whisp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
o they get it alright. Obama is not naive. ;)
Why would they waste time wrestling with the likes of Fox creatures when they knew they only had a small window of opportunity of time to get as much done as possible?
I don't think that Obama thought for one second that he could change the repugs into comrades or that he could some how declare war on the media and come out the winner. He has often enough mentioned how obstructive they are, etc., - what else could be done with that message I don't know.
He put his head down and got to work - that's what he was there for.
Now we will see what Chapter 2 has in store for us all. I think we will be seeing another side of Obama that he hasn't let known because he was too busy working.
|
vi5
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:55 AM
Response to Original message |
|
If they dems want to continue to be Charlie Brown running after the football that Republican Lucy is holding and keep falling flat on their backs then they can. But I'm done being the Dem's Charlie Brown. "No really, after THIS election then we're really going to start sticking it to ther republicans. Then we'll really fight!!!!"
We can all agree to disagree on the benefits or lack of benefits to what has been done so far. But I'm no longer going to take it on faith that this time it's going to be different.
I voted today, straight Dem ticket for the 24th time in a row in my life. It will in all likelihood be my last.
|
krkaufman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The goal needs to discard the Rahm way, the Kaine way ... |
|
... and get back to Howard Dean's approach: taking the fight full-throttle to all 50 states. No surrender. And get back on board with the Democratic base.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 12:29 AM
Response to Original message |