Tweet
Over at First Read, they are reporting that the Obama campaign is going to “attempt to at least experiment with organizing” in Arizona, Georgia and Texas. While, in theory, I could conceive of how Arizona or Georgia might end up coming into play in a relatively close 2012 election, I agree with Jon Chait, there just isn’t any scenario where Texas is a decisive swing state.
It’s not impossible for Obama to win Texas. It is impossible that Texas could make the difference between winning and losing the electoral college. The only scenarios where Obama wins Texas — rapidly accelerating growth plus a disastrous Republican nominee, like Sarah Palin — are scenarios where he’s win easily without Texas.
If the Obama campaign actually ends up spending real money in Texas, it would be a strong sign that they are thinking of trying for an “Obamafication” of the entire Democratic Party in the 2012. Embracing a strategy of making many of the House and Senate elections around the country a referendum on Obama, as well.
This strategy might make sense for the House
Congressional elections often tend to be a referenda on the president, anyway, and the 2010 election saw this correlation increase. Incumbency was less of a benefit in 2010 than it used to be. Similarly, the strategy of maintaining an image as a parochially focused Representative, independent from the national party, which worked for many old bulls for decades, was not able to save many of them last year. The huge GOP wave basically washed out most of the Democrats in conservative House districts that would normally have objected to a push to nationalize the election, and left many districts where Obama will win the popular vote in Republican hands.
The Obama campaign also likely believes they are going to be the easiest Democratic political organization for which to raise money this cycle. It is probably true that it will be easier to convince people to give to the Obama re-election campaign than to the DSCC or DCCC. So, the Obama campaign paying for “Obama” field offices in a swing Texas district could be the best way to get money to funnel for increasing Democratic turnout.
The strategy might make even more sense for the Obama
Even if the Obamafication of many House races doesn’t turn out to be the absolute optimal political strategy for getting the most new Democrats elected to the House, it has the added benefit of being a great strategy for increasing Obama’s power over the Democratic caucus as a whole. Making many potential new House Democrats dependent on direct help from the Obama campaign, and having the success of the entire caucus more closely tied to his own success, will make members far less willing to buck the administration.
I see how much the Obama campaign actually spends in Texas both as a barometer for how confident they are in winning re-election, so they can afford to waste money on helping the rest of the party, and as an indicator of how good an idea they think it is to make many down-ballot elections all about Obama, as well.
100 Comments
Spellcheck: “Arizonia” Tag too.
~~mod note – fixed, ty.~~
How does Obama plan to get Mexican votes in Texas? What has he done for us? Jobs our are biggest issue last I checked and he has done nothing. We don’t show up on election day the GOP takes every office the Dems still have in Texas.
Referendum, not referenda. /editor
On the subject of the post. LOLOLOLOLOL.
Would love to see O waste corp donors’ bucks on AZ, GA, TX.
will be a Beltway Democratic consultant’s wet dream.
If you think the DCCC has sucked for years, just wait.
Agree.
Control freaks R us.
O & DCCC.
It’s my experience with control freaks that they don’t ever give up. They have to die (or be killed) trying.
L O’D stated that Obama is approved by 83% of liberal Democrats and only 77% of moderate Democrats, so there is no problem with the base.
Seems the media wants to pretend all is well with the base.
Indeed the comment was made about the liberals being more worried about the alternative – so the logic is for greater support.
The Brown election message was not received it seems – stay at home is apparently not an option in Obama’s mind.
Very little is an option in O’s (laughingly-referred-to-as) mind. For a guy who’s supposed to be so savvy, he seems totally oblivious to even small bits of reality.
stay at home is the third party in most American elections that often beats the other. Would love to see what happened if elections say didn’t count if turnout didn’t cross a set amount
Would love to see what happened if elections say didn’t count if turnout didn’t cross a set amount
Never happen.
Makes too much sense.
Obama does not do things to help progressives! enough said
(If Obama wanted Dems to win in 2010 he would have made the Bush tax cuts the main issue)
when one sees the Obama campaign trying to help Dems in Georgia, Texas and Arizona win, one must say Obama is seeking to develop a blue dog caucus, to fight the obvious PROGRESSIVE caucus coming in 2012
Obama the trojan horse fears a house full of Dems loyal to Unions and not to his neo-con agenda.
what is Obama going to do in Wisconsin? Ohio? Michigan? New York? California? Mass? to help Dems get elected? nothing! this is UNION country and Obama is going to stay clear of Union country.
the WH internal polls show that in 2012 a more liberal Dems will be coming to DC, and they will not be looking to work with Reps.
Gov. Walker and other GOP governors have woke up the Dem base like never before!
the last 3 years Obama has done everything he could to kill the Dem Base.
Obama does not want to be surrounded by Liberal and Progressives in 2012
thus his quest to find some blue dogs.
ask Nancy Pelosi how Obama feels about progressive house of representatives?
Obama also has huge problem, groups like FDL, PCCC, and others can hurt his campaign big time and his political team knows this.
Behind close doors Obama probably likes what Gov. Walker is doing.
In dictatorships, voting is often mandatory…
see 11
“Obamafication” is a perfectly apt phrase.
I watched up close and personal as the local Dem party wanted Romanoff as a challenger to Bennet be SWAMPED at the end by OFA.
At the end of this Prez cycle DNC, DSCC, DCCC will be gutted in terms of influence. I’m not sure that that’s a bad thing on a national level.
But screwing over local party folks who want to drag this whole thing leftwards? That’s a problem for us which I’ve just witnessed.
If there’s no primary challenge this cycle, there isn’t an opportunity in my state (caucus state) to make a case against Obama.
I’m one that won’t be voting for him, green or nothing.
The more I think about this, the more delusional is seems (on the part of Messina&Co., not Jon).
The country is in deep trouble and these guys are sitting comfortably in an office,
counting chickens that will never hatch.
Don’t see much distinction bet attitude of Walker in WI & O in DC (nor W before him: “I have political capital, and I intend to use it.”
Translation: I’m a gonna force my program down your throats whether you like it or not.
W succeeded. Walker, jury still out.
The Rs are trying hard to make it easy for him to drive turnout. Whether he takes advantage of the opportunity remains to be seen.
In principle, I would strongly favor putting money into shoring up the Texas representation; God knows they need it, and it might jump start the party in a state that gave us Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson. And if you think Johnson wasn’t fundamentally good for us, you should take a look at his legislative achievements, which are engraved on the walls at his ranch west of Austin. But Obama is basically building what the French call a fire of straw. Burns fast and bright, but burns out quickly. He might gain a few seats, but since he will be using them to push a basically Republican (old style) programme, they can’t be held, because people will still suffer and turn to the alternative.
This looks to me like a case of the corporations selling out the crazies on the Thug side in order to get a person who will rationally do their bidding on the Dem side. Win-win for them. For the rest of us, not so much.
great point!
Obama does not do things to help progressives or dems
Obama is trying to find some loyal Blue Dogs to fight a house full of progressives in 2012
x2
Then respectfully, you don’t know as much about Texas as you think you do. People hold Texas up as this deep red bastion but it just isn’t. It’s not even in the top ten. Texas has been Republican for so long because the Democrats have been conceding it for so long. Rick Perry managed to draw fewer than 200 teabaggers to a rally when the ‘baggers were popular.
Well put.
Obama did not want to drive up Dem turn out.
Obama wanted to campaign in the mythical center.
Dems need to be aware of GOP politicians jumping over to the Dem side in 2012, like they done in 2008.
Obama political team will be looking to turn GOPers over to the Dems in 2012, to fight progressives Dems coming to DC, who are loyal to Unions and the middle class.
Yes, but not for the reason your comment implies. Walker and the other GOP/TP Governors are going to allow Obama to exercise an aggressive electoral strategy.
McCain won Texas by a large margin than he won his own state. There are seven McCain states that Obama did better than Texas. It is a long way from being a good target. In 10-20 years maybe.
E.J. Dionne today:
Oilbummer will likely be reelected and we’ll have high unemployment and stagflation for another 4 years. It will test the Messiah’s mettle. But knowing Barry he’ll advocate more tax cuts for puffy white men corporatists and cuts in social programs. This is what we have to look forward to.
You paint a much more sunny scenario under O than is likely to happen. And that is not snark.
LOL
I can’t wait to see you genius “progressives” tell black and brown folks how dumb they are for voting for Obama.
Raven !
What’s up, pal?
Butler up 3.
I’m aware of the numbers thank you. I’m also aware that Texas turned bluer in 2008, not redder. I am old enough to remember when Texas was reliably Democratic and it wasn’t until the huge influx of people from the Rust Belt that it became Republican. I stand by what I said: The reason Texas is still Republican is because the Democrats have abandoned it.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t that the D party racist days?
Yeah, you are probably right. There will be a huge campaign to kill what’s left of the unions.
Gas and food prices are out of control. Plus you have stagnant wages. Inflation and deflation. Oilbummer is way over his head.
MSNBC has become an Obama cheering section – as the mainstream networks treat Ryan’s fixing the budget by destroying health care coverage as a sane option.
I’m limiting myself to Tom Hartman on most days on Satellite Radio
I hope we get a Dem judge in Wis tomorrow – it is time for some good news.
my old friend the obama lover
what did Obama do in 2010 to drive up dem turnout? nothing
in 2010 if Obama and the dems would have made the bush tax cut an issue,
scared people to death about the GOP plan to kill social security they would have kept the house.
Obama does not do things to help liberals and progressives.
Gov. Walker hurt Obama,Gov. Walker ended all the talk about Dems and Reps working together.
what Dem is going to run a campaign on saying I like working with Gopers?
Gov. Walker and other GOP Governors made it very clear, they don’t work with Dems so the new Dems coming to Dc in 2012 will not work with GOPers
You & me both…
Hartman is an Obamabot, though. Just like Norman Soloman. Useless people, really.
Partly of course but Texas remained predominately Democratic until the 1990s, loooong after the “southern strategy”. Until Tom DeLay’s illegal redistricting in 2004, Texas had more Democratic representation in Congress than Republican.
Now you’re smokin’.
OG, fwiw, how would you answer the following question from E.J.:
Good point. The Dems are being diluted with more right-wing “moderates” who are anything but. The strategy, which began in earnest when Reagan beat Carter for the benefit of financial, oil and energy interests, remains to this day: lean to the right, then lean some more.
The D’s don’t need more R’s to be any more anti-union and anti-American worker than they already are.
Where is our third-party and who is their candidate?
Hmmm… Maybe we should all gang up on someone like Cornel West to run right out and start one.
(Stirring up trouble again…)
% incumbents vs. challengers? I’m thinking about Ds like Charlie Wilson, whom progressives would prolly have some issues with, not only Afghan war, but military more generally. Kinda like Murtha. May have been a registered D & voted with Ds on a few issues, but not progressive Ds.
I appreciate there were some gains. At this rate, if the Texas ever turns reliably blue, it’ll be because California moved there.
“It’s the economy, stupid” — and for most of us, that means jobs and support from Gov’t sources. But because there won’t be nearly enough of either, the question is: who PREVENTED the jobs from being created and who wanted most to CUT Gov’t services? We know it’s the GOP and their overlords, but neither political party is innocent.
So the next questions is: who are the masses of voters that might go to the polls, who otherwise wouldn’t bother to play the game unless they could see it in their interest?
The answer is: Hispanics and Young People! Keep an eye on them. I think they are the key to the next election across the board. Dems better take notice: promote progressive immigration policy, and you’ll reap the benefits (even if legislation doesn’t pass). Help the younger potential voters and those who have nearly given up, by opening new opportunities for productive work at decent wages, and you’ll get a whole lot of votes.
Stay on the deficit-cutting jag, and you’ll only get the support of the GOP and Tea Party voters (far fewer). Most Independents will see through this, as this anti-middleclass policy impacts their neighbors and coworkers and fellow “Joe Plumbers”.
Would that be the same Cornel West who sold out to the beer summit.
Do you have some historic record of such people turning out to vote when their interests are threatened?
I agree – I’d do not recall any downside to minimum turnout rules that do exist in some places.
Indeed parliament type systems for multiple rounds of balloting as in the French system of vote allocation would be better than ours, as would recording second and third choices, with reallocation of the votes of those that fail to get some minimum. We need multiple party coalition building if we are to get real change a chance to pass.
The GOP majority of the majority for any bill to get to the House floor did nothing for good government.
I do not follow the logic that our system only allows for 2 parties. Increase the House to a 1000 or more members based on no member representing more than 300,000 folks, and we could get some real difference of opinion – and some great coalition building for change.
I am sure we have enough rich folks that we can fill all those slots in an Expanded House! /s
Re: Blue Texas
The key here is going to be the Hispanic vote. Right now the Democrats are relying on their traditional “We suck less” strategy, which is sort of easy to do when the Republicans are talking about shooting Hispanics from helicopters.
If the Democrats can ever convince Hispanics that their home is with them, and get them to turn out and vote, I expect that I will be able to see a Blue Texas from my front porch.
One thing the Obama campaign did in 2008 was voter registration. If they do that again in 2012, especially in Hispanic-rich areas, it could make a big difference.
Whatever you say but you’re wrong. Lyndon Johnson passed the civil rights act of 1964 and Barbara Jordan is still an icon in Texas politics. I think you’re confusing Texas with the deep south and it’s just not the case. Comparing Ann Richards or Lloyd Doggett to Charlie Wilson is frankly insulting.
If you can stand watching the rerun of Chris Matthews tonight, he has poll data showing that with change in demographics he will not have to get that many non-Hispanic white votes in those states. I think the figure for GA was 25%, no more than 30. So his strategy is to go for the dark skinned. I seriously doubt he could get even 25% white votes in Ga. however. In the rural North and South Ga counties the last time he got less than or near 20% of all the vote.
In Texas McCain had 4,479,328 votes to Obama’s 3,528,633 votes.
Republican Pesidential candidates have carried Texas 8 elections in a row by big margins.
In Presidential politics Texas is a reliably Red State.
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/historical/presidential.shtml
I just got a letter from the DNC with Obama’s name all over it and a wonderful letter from the President:
“When you sent me to the White House, I pledged that I would always keep the lines of communication open–and I meant it. I believe it is crucial for Americans like you to know the challenges we’re facing, how we intend to meet them and how we can win the future for our children and grandchildren.
Likewise, my ability to lead the country depends on listening to you. Understanding what’s going on in neighborhoods is critical to my job as president. It was something I valued when I was on the campaign trail, and it is equally as important to me today.”
And….yada, yada, yada…..
“Now I have some ideas on how to move our nation in the right direction–and I welcome the thoughts and insights from others within our party and from those on the other side of the aisle”
And more yada, yada, yada….
“We need responsibility. We will never win the future if we’re buried under a mountain of debt. All across the country, families sacrifice to live within their means. You deserve a government that does the same, and you’re going to see the federal government taking responsibility for its deficits by investing in those things that strengthen our country and cutting those that don’t.”
And yada, yada some more.
I’m guessing he means more war, more tax cuts for the wealthy and more cuts for the middle class. We have a deficit and all.
There’s a wonderful comments card on the bottom of the donation form.
I guess he doesn’t listen to phone calls and emails.
Dang! I spell too well. I meant to type teh Texas, LOL!
That answers part of my Q in 48. The rest of my Q is, just bc they’re registered, what will make them turn out to vote? BC they think O is such a great supporter of Dream legislation or other issues of importance to them? Or just bc the Rs suck more?
I’m a neophyte on political analysis, always voted, usually against the other candidate. But as I’ve learned more, can’t see that as a big motivating factor to turn out.
I can’t speak for Texas but in the deep south progressive Democrats are an endangered species. And in Georgia the state and many local parties are controlled by Blue Dogs. (This year we have yet to see how the state Party will go. There are a few encouraging rumbles.)
Sounds like a good Republican fund-raising letter.
I’m just asking Qs. I didn’t bring up any TX D icons.
The historic record is 2008, but it doesn’t refer merely to interests being threatened, but also to their expectations being inspired. Since we probably can’t count on Blacks to turn out again in large numbers, it’s the Hispanics and Young People who could turn the tide.
If we could only find a likely challenger to Obama, there might be a chance for an upset in the Dem Primary. That is not impossible. It could motivate voters just like Obama-the-faker did. And maybe this time, he/she would make good on promises made.
He is the Cornel West who gave this interview.
He engages, but not to the degree that will please either you or me.
HEH. You just TYPE too well!!
Yeah, I said that genius.
That would be 1980.
I know. And I’m just trying to dispel stereotypes. :)
I’m aware of West’s retraction of his support for O bc I regularly catch democracynow.
However, I have a longstanding skepticism of peeps who change sides, like Krugman. Too morally and intellectually convenient for my tastes.
I’m not about stereotypes, but about the behavioral model behind them.
So, in your frame, LBJ and Ann Richards are the TX model. In my outsider’s frame, the voting results are my model.
this letter shows how out of touch Obama is with reality!
obama you endorse and got dems to pass the Bush tax cuts? Obama you were not worried about the deficit that day
obama you just attack Libya? Obama no deficit problem here
Obama you endorse bailing out Wall Street! what day are U going to make ultra rich sacrifice? the fed has given wall street about 13 trillion
main street got what? 0
me thinks Obama may want to write another letter,
No, no, I’m not saying they are the Texas model. I’m saying Wilson isn’t. That’s all.
Athenae is upstairs!
Late Night: How Did YOU Get In Here?
Moving a few flights up to late night.
Uh oh, is it de riguer for commenters to owe drinks to LurkingMods?
At the risk of gauchery, what’s your pleasure?
I have never had a ‘Chocolatini’, but naturally, I am interested.
/~~~
Please list those men and women.
And I was considering Cornel as one who could start a third party, not as its candidate.
It’d be wonderful to read a politician’s mind and realize their intentions. We could use a Bodhisattva about now, but the last guy who applied for the job got crucified and I haven’t yet seen his name on the ballot since his resurrection. He wasn’t too keen on being a member of the Roman body politic so nothing has changed in that regard.
Of course, there were many who felt O was that guy.
Personally, I’ve always had a soft spot for Angela Davis, but something tells me she wouldn’t carry Texas, either… ;)
OK, that’s great.
I actually made chocolatinis some once. They weren’t great, but the Godiva liqueur was outstanding on its own.
So here’s the recipe I came up with. I have the ingredients and have been working diligently in the kitchen, so now sliding down the bar in your direction…
Godiva Liqueur? It really is break time.
Thank you/~~~
Listed Krugman, also Sachs.
Jury is out on Stiglitz, who was, when he worked for Clinton, was firmly intellectually barren.
But, unlike Hugh, I haven’t kept track.
Until I read eCahn’s recipe, Godiva liqueur had never occurred to me. I suppose I need to hang out more often in bars.
Aha. So having embibed the mod, I am now free to usurp FDL for my nefarious purposes. Burp…
One profoundly disturbing limerick, on the house.
Wait. Wait.
Obama has always created his own reality, that’s how he got to the presidency, and there is nothing in his experience of things to suggest it won’t work, again. He’s more like Reagan than he knows. And Yves Smith at nakedcapitalism put paid to the brilliant meme, in very short order: she ran into a Harvard classmate at some conference or other and got an earful.
Can we trade President O in for a slight use politician that in the window at Macy’s? Even a use mannequin is better than what we have now.
““We need responsibility. We will never win the future if we’re buried under a mountain of debt. All across the country, families sacrifice to live within their means. You deserve a government that does the same, and you’re going to see the federal government taking responsibility for its deficits by investing in those things that strengthen our country and cutting those that don’t.””
This is just FUCKED.
Obama’s administration is printing money to BUY garbage assets from banks, GIVING them money. People without jobs NEED SUPPORT (a NEW DEAL) from THEIR government, and this little son of a bitch says ”we’ gotta live within ‘our’ means’. Fucking little Hoover.
Fuck you, you disgusting little punk.
Kelly Canfield @ 13…
seems like hickenlooper’s been obamaficated too
This is an insanely shitty strategy. Democrats running in alot of places don’t want to be associated with the party at the best of times, and, brother, this ain’t the best of times. There probably won’t be a single house candidate who doesn’t outperform obama in his district.
Vote Democratic, against Obama. It’s too dangerous to have him in the WH where he can orchestrate the ultra conservative plan.
The idea of making Texas competitive is EXACTLY the right thing to do. Statistically, Texas is without a doubt encountering so-called “demographic drift”. it won’t be a swing state in 2012, but softening it up for the future is the right thing to do. Hispanic immigration increases in TX, it is now a minority-majority state. And the GOP is openly hostile to the hispanic population.
The principle is simple: the larger a population base, the more large cities will be built. Large cities tend to be bastions of liberal thought (see: NYC, Chicago, LA). Large cities turn red or purple states into blue states. So, though democrats my moan about the fact that TX now has 38 electors, just imagine how the GOP will shake in it’s pants once the day comes where this state (uh, secessionistic republic) is no longer in the secure GOP column. It is not a matter of if, it is a matter of whem.
In 2008, Obama’s take of the vote in TX (43.63%, a -11.76% losing margin for Obama) was the best democratic take of the vote since 1996, and comparing to 1996 is not really possible as 1996 was a three-man race, while 2008 was a two-man race.
In terms of percentag of the popular vote, Obama did better in TX in 2008 than Kerry (2004), Gore (2000), Clinton (1992), Dukakis (1988), Mondale (1984), Carter (1980), McGovern (1972). As a matter of fact, the race in Texas is statistically practically identical to 1956 (Eisenhower vs. Stephenson, Round II). It says something when a black northern democrat does better in TX in 2008 than a white southern democrat did in either 2000, 1992 or 1980.
Another excellent example is Colorado. If you examine the electoral county by county map of CO, you will see that the electoral majority in this now blue state was built starting in 1988. Dukakis sunk time and energy into this state even as he knew he was likely to lose it. The slow demographic progression that led to a +8.95% winning margin for Obama is due in part to the “softening” up of the state in 2000 and most notably, in 2004.
So, yes, setting up a war camp in TX is extremely intelligent on the part of Obama.
On a related topic, this is the very reason why a very republican controlled bicameral statehouse in Nebraska continues to fail to push through a law repealing the “winner per CD” situation in Nebraska (as in Maine), for the GOP knows damned well that the day will come when TX may want to split it’s electors as NE now does. Without TX, the GOP is shut out of the White House for at least one generation, guaranteed. If Nebraska repeals elector splitting, then TX will have not a rat’s chance in hell of passing it. So, this side story in Nebraska is telling me a great deal about TX.
If statistical precedent holds out, then Obama should improve his national percentage by roughly 3% and his winning margin by between 5%-7%, depending on the third and fourth party smattering of the national popular vote in 2012. If Obama even improves the democratic vote to around 46% in TX, this would be a very good sign for the democratic party come 2016 and 2020.
Life is better since I turned off all media with regard to politics. I get all my news from this site. This was at the suggestion of someone from this site. Best advice I have received in a long time.
I really like the comment left by jedimsnbcko. And I heartily agree with his analysis of Obama’s campaign strategy. I think Obama wants to nationalize House and Senate races to increase the number of Blue Dogs and make them loyal to him. He wants to distance himself from progressive Democrats. His approach to health care reform revealed this strategy. However, it did not work so well for all of the Blue Dogs. People in Arkansas wanted the public option. If the national Democrats had stayed out of the primary, Bill Halter would probably be the Arkansas senator now. Instead, Obama and the Clintons were determined to shove Blanche Lincoln down the throats of people who were disgusted with her; they gave that Senate seat to the Republicans. Obama’s 2012 strategy could backfire on him.
This was known as the “Fifty State Strategy” in ’06, as espoused by Howard Dean, and it seemed to work pretty well.
Oh, I get it – Obama is doing it, so let’s trash it. Carry on.
Or in my case, barf bag in hand, vote against Obama for whatever crazy reich wing assclown is on ballot.
Angela’s brother, Reggie, was my high school history teacher. One of the best teachers I ever had. I’d vote for a Davis, but I don’t live in Texas.
This was known as the “Fifty State Strategy” in ’06, as espoused by Howard Dean, and it seemed to work pretty well.
Until the Congress convened, that is.
The utter stupidity of this statement cannot be measured.
Voting for the crazies does not send a message; it does not conjur magic unicorns pooping bacon; it does not make Karl Rove cry; it does not end the war in Afghanistan, Libya or anywhere else; it does not give us single-payer. It just puts crazies in power – period, end of story, that’s all she wrote. I, for one, have no intention of suffering through a possible Tea Bagger Renaissance because you and those like you behave like a bunch of petulant children who didn’t get their dessert.
You know why Obama doesn’t take “Progressives” seriously? This is why.
The utter stupidity of your lack of vision or understanding is what cannot be measured here. I have to really laugh at you strawman blathering about unicorns. Especially this “it does not end the war in Afghanistan, Libya or anywhere else; it does not give us single-payer”. Hellooooo, anyone home?! Who had commanding majorities after 2008? Who never gave single payer a hearing and sold out the public option? Who ramped up the war in Afghanistan and started one in Libya? The cowardly corporatist ass, Obama, and the spineless Dems, that’s who. They didn’t end it either and further cemented in and advanced the Fascism already in place. Alas, that seems lost on you while you blather on about ” magic unicorns pooping bacon”. Do you even read what you write? Do you comprehend what you write? Cripes!
You’re welcome to keep on hitting your head with a hammer hoping for a different result this time. I have gotten over this insanity. I am not “sending a message”, you miss what I am saying. I am hoping to wake up enough people to effect real change to the system at the ground level. Scott Walker did it in Wisconsin, but he had to get in to do it. All the talk about the scary boogeyman in the closet so keep on voting for the spineless sellout corpro-dems is for suckers, like you, apparently.
Oh, you know why progressives aren;t taken seriously? Because too many who think they are keep on selling out the long range goal to short term bullshit from people like you. So what happens is the death of a thousand cuts. One step forward, three steps back. Do you have any concept of what has happened over the last 40 years?
People are catching on the Democratic party and the current sick joke of a President. They are part of the Kabuki, keeping the heat on, but not full boil so people acclimate to their continuing reduction in living standards and further impoverishment. So, let the crazies go full bore and see if it wakes the somnambulant rabble up. I believe it will.
It’s hard to imagine anything good coming from the next election. If Obama wins or loses the people are screwed. So I hope he loses because he is such a detestable asshole.
Allow me to quote TBogg :
This is politics, you simpleton. You don’t affect change by sitting out elections, you do it by working to elect officials – in numbers – who will bring critical mass to your issues. You do it by working inside the system.
Holding your breath until Daddy gives you your lollipop doesn’t work here.
“You do it by working inside the system.” — good thing the founding fathers realized the futility of this. Too bad you still don’t. You are simply too clueless. Keep on expending all your futile efforts working inside a broken and corrupted system, thinking that you will somehow overcome the unlimited wealth and power being poured into the process to isolate you like a cyst in a body. I pity your delusional naivete. I suspect one day you may wake up, as I did.
in the meantime, I will also be working to shove the crazy shit down peoples throats until they wake up and say “enough”. I seems you have not learned a thing from what happened in Wisconsin or the continual crap Obama’s shoveled since elected. Keep on letting Obama and the Dem party fucking you because they have lube, but, in the end you are still fucked.
Trying to support your pathetic drunken stepfather won’t stop the abuse.