How does a primary challenge to Obama promote more Progressive legislation?

[27inCali]

I don't see how that works. It seems like it will accomplish just the opposite.

Right now, we have the beginnings of another wave cycle, energized Unions, college students etc tons of Independents turned off by the current R agenda which is amazingly unappealing to anyone with a braincell or two to rub together. Tons of vulnerable R incumbents across the midwest who could easily be knocked off by good strong Progressives. Dems only need 25 seats to get the majority back and a lot of those seats could be won by real Progressives. Any chance to do this would be destroyed by a primary challenge against Obama. It would fracture the party, and make us all on the Left look confused and weak to Indie voters, waste tons of money that could be spent fighting Rs, stifling the anti-R wave before it can gain momentum. So instead of having a center-left Pres with a heavily Progressive Congress, we have an fucking crazy R president with an evenly divided Congress full of corporate hand-maidens.

So am I missing something? Is the primary Obama thing really about trying to get more sweeping Progressive reform in America? or about punishing Obama?

[elleng]

1. It doesn't. It distracts Dems, and give repugs huge propaganda fodder.

Its b.s., imo.

[rpannier]

11. Disagree

That's similar to the argument on why HRC should have dropped her campaign in 2008 in April.
We were told it would damage his General Election chances.
It was pointed out after the election, rather than weaken him, he was forced to build up organizations in states he might have just abandoned as unwinnable.
Those organizations were viable and forced the Republicans to use resources in many of those states.

Every candidate for every office should have primary opponents.
They should be forced to defend their records, be challenged on their shortcomings and explain why they didn't succeed.

If a candidate cannot withstand a primary opponent without losing the General Election then they're probably a weak candidate to begin with and if they lose, they lose on their own failings.

on edit: Please do not take my position as dismissing your position or thinking yours is stupid or mine is superior.
I simply disagree with you.
But I do understand your position and you can claim historical evidence to prove your point.

[elleng]

12. Thanks. No 'fight,' we simply disagree.

Further, 'incumbent'is different from 'also ran' situation.

:hi:

[Clio the Leo]

2. The desire to primary Obama does not exist outside of cyberspace...

..... and even then they're in the minority.

[Life Long Liberal]

13. I agree. A primary does nothing to improve things.

[yurbud]

3. the theory is Obama would have to work to win progressive voters from the alternative candidate

the reality is, he's not going to give up Wall St. for Main St.

[27inCali]

4. Wall St. owns everyone who might have a chance to win

on either side. They have for the last hundred years or so.

if what we are waiting for is someone who isn't owned by Wall St. We'll be waiting a long time.

[sudopod]

8. so what do? nt

[yurbud]

15. the goal would be to move him a few degrees closer to FDR, not make him a saint

[NorthCarolina]

5. It's called Democracy. Unfortunately we don't have one. nt

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

6. Be careful. I've been asking this question now for weeks, and all I get is ad hominem attacks

on my character.

I still don't understand how "teaching Obama a lesson" by punishing him gets him to be more progressive. If there are MORE Republicans and Teabaggers in Congress, how does Obama get pushed to the left?

None of the naysayers have been able to answer this question. All they do is attack because they have no answer.

[jimlup]

7. I strongly disagree

It forces Obama to be accountable to the people. If there are debates he has to explain why his policies and positions are responsible. He'll win of course as long as he remains viable but a challenger from the left could help give Obama the message that he needs to answer to more than just the big money donors.

[msongs]

9. gee if this is a democracy it gives people with different views a chance to express them nt

[Jim Lane]

10. Yes, there'd be value in pressing Obama from the left. Other benefits:

If Obama were to fend off a primary challenge from the left, then in the general election he'd look like the centrist candidate, between whichever right-winger the Republicans nominate and whichever left-winger came forward to make the challenge. It would be harder for the right to smear him as a socialist when he's been all over the tube fighting off a challenge from an advocate of single-payer health care and a steeply progressive tax code.

It would also help some of those progressive candidates in downticket races, by making views like single-payer seem less far-out and more respectable.

Would it waste money? On the contrary, it would give Obama a better opportunity to campaign before August, instead of leaving the field entirely to the GOP during those months.

As against that, yes, there would be an issue of fracturing the party. Some downticket races might suffer because activists and donors who were on one side in the Presidential primary would refuse to support a local candidate who was on the other side.

Whether the net effect was good or bad would depend in part on who mounted the challenge and how nasty it got. At this point, it's likely that all of the people who could mount a challenge with at least a modicum of credibility will decline to do so. A challenger like Dean or Kucinich would of course be a heavy underdog, but would be more credible than a complete unknown. As it is, any challenger is likely to be someone like the mayor of a liberal college town who gets virtually no money, virtually no media attention, and virtually no votes. Obama will ignore him or her, refusing to debate. Such a challenge would be too insignificant to do any good or harm.

[mkultra]

14. It doesnt

Thats just an excuse that they think justifies their continued posting of that tripe here.