I'm pretty sure "far left activists" are among the most likely to show up and vote Democrat.

[howard112211]

Sure, there are a few that go green on occasion. But those "professional far left" people who are routinely slammed for undermining the Democrats, as a whole, are the most reliable voting block the Democrats have.

It always make me cringe when I read those "so would you be happier with Palin?" posts. It is precisely the "moderate independents", i.e. those who think the "far left" is "too extreme" who weren't sure whether they were going to support Obama or McCain.

No activist I know would ever sit out an election. There are a couple who are idealists, who think they are making a statement when going third party. But zero who would support the other side, and zero would miss a chance to cast a vote.

It seems to me like the people who are fine with Obama giving up core principles are, ironically, exactly the people who might also have been fine with a person like McCain as president.

[polichick]

1. Well said - k&r

[Selatius]

2. That's why I say that no matter how much abuse Obama hurls the left's way, the left will vote ...

for him. They simply have no other choice, even if he comes up short on delivery time and time again. Because nobody wants a repeat of George W. Bush.

[Drale]

5. It would be about 100 times worst them W's presidence

if a republican won now. Since Obama got elected, the right has jumped off the right wing.

[Bandit]

24. And the Obama Administration is very content with that thought.

I am not sure how much validity it has but who knows. :shrug:

[JoePhilly]

3. Um no.

I'm a strong Obama supporter, and I'd hate a McCain Presidency.

What bothers me about the endless whining is that nothing Obama does every gets a positive response from part of the left.

I agree with you that the far left, will for the most part, vote for Obama.

The issue, I think, is this.

Lots of the folks in the middle, moderates of both sides, they don't follow the internal debates. What they hear is the tone, the core messages.

And what do they hear from the right? What is the core message .... "Obama bad".

And what do they hear from the left? What is the core message ... "Obama bad".

Moderate republicans will be motivated to vote based on these messages. Moderate Democrats will stay home based on these messages.

[polichick]

7. Quit peddling this tripe about liberals day after day.

[JoePhilly]

15. What happned to that announcement of huge SS and Medicare cuts today?

Oh wait ... didn't happen.

Oh, and I'm not talking about "liberals" ... I'm talking about a small but loud group of what are better described as "anti-Obama knee jerk liberals" for whom every Obama action is an evil one.

This week's fake outrage was about an announcement of SS and Medicare cuts that did not come. It was oddly reminiscent of the SAME predictions preceding the State of the Union. That time too, the predictions feel flat.

But the outrage, that carried on with no pause. It just changed topics.

That time, it shifted to "Obama is working secretly to keep Mubarak in power". Of course when that outrage failed to be true ... so what ... just move the outrage to something else.

[progressoid]

13. .

:boring:

[JoePhilly]

16. True ... fake outrage is much more exciting.

[Exilednight]

26. You're telling me! Here's a link to the best faux outrage of the day

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=885504&mesg_id=885544

[JoePhilly]

28. There is no outrage in that. Its an observation.

But nice try.

And again ... where was today's big announcement of huge cuts to Social Security and Medicare???

Or did I miss it?

[Exilednight]

29. You're right, there is no outrage. It's faux outrage - just like I said. And to answer your

question: I never stated that he would announce cuts to SS and Medicare - only that I would be highly disappointed if he did. Maybe all those petitions I signed were finally listened to.

[JoePhilly]

31. Ahhh ... but you did enjoy posting on the many threads making the

now incorrect prediction.

You don't have to write the OP quoting "unnamed sources" to play. All you have to do is jump in and add your own outrage. That is how the outrage machine works. So what if the OP, the prediction turns out to be WRONG ... who cares ... we get a solid week of people screaming that Obama is terrible ... and when he doesn't do the awful thing predicted, so what.

Just move on.

And that's what I observe, and point out. As a psychologist, I find it fascinating. There is a group here on DU who can predict anything they want, and get numerous others to scream like crazy about something that has not happened. The only effect to is to increase the anger directed towards Obama.

And then, when it doesn't happen ... they simply move on to something new.

The fact that they were wrong becomes irrelevant.

[Exilednight]

34. Just like he didn't sign a bill that didn't have a public option.

Oh wait, yes he did.

Actions speak louder than words.

[JoePhilly]

35. Hey ... look over there ... a moose.

That's the fun part of this game.

I am always curious at what point will one who wants to attack Obama on issue A, JUMP to issue B, and use it as a reason to not care about what he did or said about issue A.

To your "public option", I could respond "pre-existing conditions" (which TODAY ensures my niece who had cancer at 2, can't be denied).

But that's not THIS debate is it. The PO has nothing to do with whether the predictions about today's speech were wrong.

But you can't defend prior screaming about false predictions today, or admit to joining them, now that they turn out to be FALSE.

And so over to HCR you jump, grab the PO and then use it as an excuse to not consider each policy decision on its own merits.

It is very easy to take ANY policy objective that Obama has not achieved, and then use that to claim that he is evil on all others, or to deflect the discussion when the predictions about how he is about to do something terrible on issue X turn out to be wrong.

[Exilednight]

36. It's not a "look over here". It's establishing a pattern of behavior. For a

psychologist, you're pretty bad at diagnosis.

[Exilednight]

38. I didn't post on any of the threads you mention. I never said he would cut SS, but hey, why would

you need facts when you can falsely accuse someone of something?

[Bluenorthwest]

18. You need to do a rewrite, at least, it is getting spammish

and repetition can seem so symptomatic. These 'moderates' sound like cranky old style Reagan Democrats. Those people were Republicans, because that is how they voted.
I've never really had much good to say about Reagan Democrats. To me they are Republicans.

[PVnRT]

42. So, we must not only vote Obama, we must be ORGASMICALLY HAPPY too!

:eyes:

[Egnever]

4. Voting third party is effectively the same as not voting

I would love to see a viable third party candidate but I have yet to see one in my lifetime and throwing your vote away on a third party candidate with no chance of winning has exactly the same effect as staying home.

[BlueJac]

9. Then you don't believe in change

[kenfrequed]

6. Kickety kick kick and rec too

I completely agree! I find it is the infernally irritating moderates that are mostly likely to switch sides and vote Republican.

Even if there was the slight possibility of a few angry lefties sitting out an election the moderates that jump ship are far more of a problem and probably need more reminding than we do.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Then you don't really give a shit......

about the issues.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlueJac]

12. then tell me about the issues that I have been lied to about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JoePhilly]

17. Du spent the last week telling you the lie that today was the day that

Obama would announce cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The folks promoting that had "sources" and everything.

And as we now know, that was a lie. It didn't happen.

That evil Obama.

[davidthegnome]

25. Actually "DU" didn't

Some people may have expected cuts to be announced - and from what we were hearing from media sources it was not unreasonable to expect it. Some went too far in saying outright that cuts to SS and Medicare WOULD be announced. I don't think that it was a deliberate lie in either case - and in any event those statements do not represent the whole of DU, only those particular posters opinions.

[JoePhilly]

30. A loud part of DU was declaring that it would happen today ...

to make that prediction, they posted numerous articles usually based on "unnamed sources" who declared "Obama to announce ... blah blah blah".

Each time such an OP popped up (and there were many), a stream of folks joined in the collective outrage, screaming that Obama was evil.

Now that those predictions turn out to be wrong (just as they were in the weeks prior to the State of the Union, during which the same breathless predictions flooded DU), those who screamed loudest are moving on. The fact that their prediction was wrong, or that it falsely increased anti-Obama sentiment as a result, is a non issue.

The outrage machine will simply move on to something else.

[FrenchieCat]

22. Why waste my time on a Green who wants to help Ryan & the GOP enact the destruction of Medicare?

[walldude]

14. So someone voting for the person they believe will do

the most good is a bad thing.

Ok I get it now. This isn't a Democracy and we have no CHOICE. Vote for who we tell you can win or you are proving that you don't really give a shit. Wonderful. Lovely. Eat a shit sandwich or a turd taco, and if you don't like either of those choices you are just an asshole who doesn't understand the system. Thanks for the info.

[FrenchieCat]

23. So much passion on defending one who will indirectly help the GOP achieve their goal!

[Zorra]

19. We are the "hostage voters". In many cases I only vote for some Democrats

because they might at least slow down the spread of fascism a little bit, even if they are actually moderate republican DINOs.

And there are some real Democrats out there that I am overjoyed to vote for, or would be overjoyed to vote for if they were not out of my disrtict. I send these good Dems that are out of my district money for their campaigns.

When the only alternative is a fascist, which to me is no different than a republican, there is no alternative but to vote for the lesser of two evils.

FDR defines fascism below. By that definition, republicans are, by definition, fascists, because they support ownership of government by private powers. As a left activist, it seems to me that FDR is a good example of what a real Democrat says and does.

"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. "

-Franklin D. Roosevelt, "Message from the President of the United States Transmitting Recommendations Relative to the Strengthening and Enforcement of Anti-trust Laws

[Bluenorthwest]

20. That whole 'moderate' or 'swing voter' thing is just the latest

way to speak of what used to be called 'Reagan Democrats' or in some cases, just easily lead or emotional voters. Those who are thinking about both the Republican and the Democrat are clearly confused people, particularly in Presidential races. I mean, good god! 'Swing voters'? Try wandering, lost simpletons. They are not 'moderate' they are just unable to remember what they think from day! Being all over the map does not make a voter 'moderate' or 'in the center' is makes them floundering and in the weeds. I call them part time pubs or semi-dems when I have to call them at all.

[treestar]

21. Why do they rain so much on every parade?

They are just helping Republicans. Their few votes won't matter. They put that negativity out there.

[davidthegnome]

27. K & R

This "far left activist" will be showing up to vote Democrat. Thanks for this post.

[ddeclue]

32. You'd be wrong. Obama can NOT count on my vote.

He's not a progressive he doesn't get my vote.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

40. The Republicans thank you for your support

Any vote NOT for Democrats is, well, it sort of counts as a half-vote for Republicans.

[TransitJohn]

33. The centrists in charge of the Party vilifying the activist left are the ones who voted for Reagan.

n/t

[bluethruandthru]

39. They aren't even "Centrist" Democrats!

If you really look at what they're in favor of..or at least willing to live with...they look much more like republicans. Those "centrists" seem very comfortable with abandoning the core positions of the Democratic party.

[white_wolf]

37. I agree!

The Left is Obama's base, the moderates are just as likely to go for the Republicans as they are the Democrats. Have we forgotten the Reagan Democrats?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

41. True, since we have no viable left/liberal party

So although there may be more appealing choices, I vote Democrat.