Dinger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:19 PM
Original message |
|
I'm talking to you Mr. President.:patriot:
|
FrenchieCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message |
Clio the Leo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:21 PM
Response to Original message |
2. OR WE'RE GONNA PRIMARY EVERYONE!!!! |
FrenchieCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. That would be so much fun! |
|
and will teach somebodies some bigtime lesson and shit! Can't wait! :bounce:
|
Clio the Leo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:24 PM
Original message |
CAUSE THIS IS A PROGRESSIVE NATION!!!! |
|
.... and tonight is PROOF OF IT!!!!
Yall ALL need to put your conciliatory pants on ... RIGHT NOW!!!! (I actually mean this part.)
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:43 PM
Response to Original message |
9. So if you're not a progressive, what are you doing here on this website? |
FrenchieCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. I was going to ask you the same thing? |
|
The negativity that you have posted day after day for the past so many months has ramifications too. If you think that some folks didn't feed the "I'm disappointed" mood for this election since day one, you're not being honest. Well, you got what you aimed for..... so this has got to be a good night for you.
|
Clio the Leo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. or the more important question, why isn't everyone in the US on this website? |
|
yes, they SHOULD be, but they aren't (BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ALL PROGRESSIVES)
|
Ter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
17. This board is only for progressives? |
|
Gee, I thought it was a broad tent for all Democrats.
|
KossackRealityCheck
(153 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
26. Jesus on a stick! Being progressive does not mean |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 10:53 AM by KossackRealityCheck
thinking delusionally that the entire country or electorate is progressive.
Pointing out that America is not the progressive left blogosphere does not mean a person is not progressive.
My mind reels at some of this shit.
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #26 |
27. Trouble reading? Comprehension problem? |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 11:22 AM by brentspeak
My post questioned the "progressiveness" of someone who actually thinks that Democrats should become more "conciliatory" when dealing with the corporate-sponsored RW mob that is today's Republican party. My post didn't make any other assertions. Thanks.
|
Kdillard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:22 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Are you serious with that nonesense? |
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
5. What is with you guys? |
|
The President is viewed by the American public as TOO LIBERAL. What happened tonight is ENTIRELY consistent with that.
You guys saying that this happened because the president is "too far to the right" or "Republican lite" could not have missed the point any more if you had tried.
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. What part of "enthusiasm gap" don't you understand? |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 12:06 AM by brentspeak
With a crappy, watered-down gift to the insurance industry HCR and absolutely no real political strategy other than "But we're not as bad as the GOP!", Obama and the Democratic leadership sucked all the life out of any base enthusiasm it had two years ago.
FDR's New Deal was a policy that Americans of all stripes could readily understand and like and rally around; the Frankenstein corporate monster that is Obama's HCR is a policy that few understand, fewer like, and even fewer can rally around.
When even your own base can't rally around your flagship domestic effort, you know you don't know what you're doing.
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. Do you have any proof to support your statement that Dem turnout was low? |
|
Didn't the polls just close? How the hell do you already conclude that it was the fault of the Dem base because they didn't turn out?
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 12:28 AM by brentspeak
I wrote that Obama and the Democratic leadership sapped the Democratic base's enthusiasm, not that the Democratic base is at fault for the losses due to low turnout. By the contrasting example of FDR's New Deal, I'm saying that if even a President's own base is unenthusiastic or hostile about his (and his party's) efforts, that should go double for the rest of the nation. We're seeing that take place right now.
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. The only logical conclusion to a "sapped base" is a reduction in turnout. |
|
Do you have anything to support that there was low Dem turnout in this election?
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #14 |
|
http://blogs.thetimes-tribune.com/borys/?p=1197">Even in Philly, turnout is low Now you can provide support for you contention that voters chose GOP candidates over the Democrats because the American public views Obama as too liberal.
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. Philadelphia is one city, in one state out of the entire country |
|
If you don't have any evidence to support your statement that Dem turnout was low, just freaking admit it. I won't bother sitting around waiting for your proof. And here's your evidence that the public views Obama and the Dems as too liberal. http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/27/Polls-Show-Voters-Think-Democrats-Are-Too-Liberalhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100614/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2586http://www.gallup.com/poll/121307/more-americans-see-democratic-party-too-liberal.aspx"Polls show that respondents ‘don’t know what the president believes in’. An astonishing 55 per cent of Americans brand him a ‘socialist’, and a majority say he is ‘too liberal’. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1325751/Midterm-elections-Obama-doesnt-share-Americans-core-values.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz14CIbr4TO"Obama splits the country almost exactly in two; and nearly half now say he's too liberal" http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/01/barack-obama-poll-numbers-down-cnn.html (and this is from January) "Americans See Obama as Too Liberal" http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2010/09/17/americans_see_obama_as_too_liberal_241958.htmlYou're welcome.
|
brentspeak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
24. Either answer my question or pester someone else who actually gives a damn |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 10:52 AM by brentspeak
I knew you weren't going to respond to my post in good faith as it was written (no surprise).
My challenge to you was this: Provide support for your contention that voters chose GOP candidates over the Democrats because the American public views Obama as too liberal. (my bold)
I already was aware of the stories you linked to, but I didn't ask you to provide evidence that a slim majority of Americans view Obama as "too liberal"; I asked you to prove that Democratic candidates around the country lost because voters considered Obama too liberal. Big difference, and all the unctious waltzing around the question and blatant misrepresentation on your part won't help you.
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
29. Oh good Lord. I can't believe you even typed that foolishness |
|
I have given you SEVERAL sources that back up my original point which is that the American public views Obama and the Dem party as "too liberal." You saw my post and decided to challenge me with that idiotic, made up "enthusiasm gap" crap and when I asked YOU to provide the numbers, not only could you not do that, you then tried to challenge me to give you numbers to back up my original point when what I've said is old news.
It's a darn good thing that I didn't sit around waiting your proof. I knew you wouldn't have any but for you to try to act like I'm the one "acting out of bad faith" is trifling as hell, even for you.
|
Skittles
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
19. stop arguing with a table leg!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
21. Better a table leg than a 70 year old zombied corpse! |
|
And will you do me a favor and PLEASE, for God's sake PLEASE put me on ignore like you have sworn to 46 times??
|
suzie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
18. African Americans are that disappointed in Obama? Really? |
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
22. Don't argue with the table leg or the matching throw rug underneath it! |
treestar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
25. Do you believe that the Administration will really say |
|
we lost the House because the base stayed home because we didn't somehow force Lieberman and Nelson to vote for single payer?
I'd be frustrated at how to deal with such an irrational "base." And aware that no matter how far to the left we went, that the base would still be dissatisfied.
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
28. ...and your repeated contribution to this "enthusiasm gap" has been noted |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 11:05 AM by Bobbie Jo
...and answered.
|
krawhitham
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Since most people think he is too left and left just got slaughtered |
Skittles
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
sucking up to repukes is what cost him
|
Jennicut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-02-10 11:24 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Obama is not that young, either. |
|
Sorry, it had to be said. I always laugh when people say we have a young President. Dude is almost 50.
|
Hannah Bell
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Nov-03-10 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 01:55 AM by Hannah Bell
average age of presidents at inaugural = 55, median age about the same.
clinton was 47 when he took office, obama was 47, kennedy was 43.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Mon May 06th 2024, 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |