We are in the internet age

[Harmony Blue]

as a result we need to bombard the WH with E-mails about what us on the "professional" left truly think of the current administration. My personal opinion, is that, the President should push for more liberal perspectives, such that when he does tend to convey some conservative talking points, the net result is that he is seen as a moderate at the very least. But when the President only conveys constantly the right wing talking points, this gives the impression to the left base that he isn't interested in the liberal perspectives, although there are signs that he does. Furthermore, the centrist position the administration is taking isn't working given that Independents don't look at the long term ramifications when they vote, rather the short term. Hence, why they voted for Democrats in 2008, and against them in 2010, so I think it is foolish to chase this demographic heading forward. I would hope, that, regardless of the circumstances the President sticks with what HE believes in. And if he believes in some liberal principles, he shouldn't be afraid to express it in fear of losing the I's. Losing your Democratic base is much worse, because they are the ones looking at the long term picture unlike the swing voters.

[swilton]

1. I agree with your assessment that the internet age can

enable/facilitate unprecedented transformational change...I disagree that the WH should be the target as I agree with Galbraith that Obama is a closeted conservative - trickle-down economist who listens only to elites and corporate Democrats....

Save your internet time to promote a primary challenge or third party candidate.

[FrenchieCat]

2. Sounds good,

but also defeatist and narrow in scope.

to say...."...Independents don't look at the long term ramifications when they vote, rather the short term. Hence, why they voted for Democrats in 2008, and against them in 2010, so I think it is foolish to chase this demographic heading forward."

Why would you discount their vote, when it is a vote...and they will be voting? Why advocate
defeatism on your part by saying that we should stop trying to reach them?

Also, if you are gonna call for action, and discuss the age of Internet, why not mention that
we should write not only to the WH, but to congressional members, including Republicans? How
is one supposed to pass bills by simply pressuring the President, and not pressuring the ones
that actual vote on bills for passage?

[Harmony Blue]

5. I simply disagree, and I will briefly explain why

The 2010 Mid term elections was a combination of apathy Democratic voters were feeling and the I's voting the other way. There is a possibility the I's don't vote Obama's way in 2012, which is why the Democratic base needs to be rejuvenated. It isn't defeatist to state the current circumstances now are different than 2008, and the 2010 elections should have been a wake up call. The recipe for 2008, will more than likely not work in 2012, so the approach must change. If apathy in the Democratic party continues, it doesn't matter how many I's votes are picked up as it will not be enough to win the Presidency under such a scenario, especially if Romney is competing with Obama with the centrist, swing voters.

Sending E-mails to Republicans is a waste of time, as their ideology is based on the idea that 1950's Americana is under attack. In other words, it is better to try to appeal to those who have lived through the same revolutionary cultural principles (Obama). Obama I would categorize as a centrist, but he is starting to be perceived in being center-right which is a big gamble, because Romney is a center-right candidate, and he does appeal to I's like Obama.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Sending E-mails to Republicans is a waste of time you say...so they get a pass?

They don't need to know what their constituents' positions are because they are going to go against them anyways?

I don't buy that. At the end of the day, if ordinary folks are willing to show that they care enough that they are willing to send letters and communicate, congress members are forced to take that into account especially the closer to election we get, no matter how they act. If a congressperson in a district that is purple and who is a freshman whose seat was previously held by a Democrat before 2010, they cannot ignore a tide of letters that appears to change what the majority opinion is as we inch toward the election.

Choosing to preach only to the choir is an easy thing to do and it doesn't change hearts or minds or votes.

That's like saying that Civil Rights activists should have stayed home instead of protesting in the streets, because most of White America was quite content with the way things were. That's not how progress is made. It is made by taking a chance and making your voice heard by those who possibly disagree with your views. That includes the President, if you believe he disagrees with you, but not only him.....cause he is not a dictator or the only person with power to change things. In fact, changing congress is a better bet, since they are the ones that write, debate and pass legislation. To believe that all of your energies should be aimed at him is not a wise strategy in terms of getting what you want in the end....although it may personally make you feel better.

[CakeGrrl]

3. "only conveys constantly the right wing talking points"

He has REPEATEDLY emphasized that we need to include tax revenue in dealing with the debt. That is NOT what the RW wants to do.

What RW talking points have you heard him push?

[JoePhilly]

4. If you are a member of the "professional" left ... who pays you?

I mean, if you are part of the "professional" left, then some one is paying you to write articles, blog, go on TV and act as a pundit, right?

So who's paying you?