Tweet
Obama's support in 2008
The level of Democratic enthusiasm for voting for President Obama again has dropped noticeably in PPP’s recent polling. From Tom Jensen:
Only 48% of Democrats on our most recent national survey said they were ‘very excited’ about voting in 2012. On the survey before that the figure was 49%. Those last two polls are the only times all year the ‘very excited’ number has dipped below 50%.
In 13 polls before August the average level of Democrats ‘very excited’ about voting next year had averaged 57%. It had been as high as 65% and only twice had the number even dipped below 55%.
It had seemed earlier in the year like Democrats had overcome the ‘enthusiasm gap’ that caused so much of their trouble in last year’s elections. But now 54% of Republicans say they’re ‘very excited’ about casting their ballots next year, indicating that the problem may be back.
These people who were formerly “very excited” to vote for Obama will probably show up at the polls on election day and vote for Obama. The problem is that they aren’t likely to volunteer for the campaign.
The 2008 Obama campaign benefited from millions of manhours of free volunteer labor. And beyond official volunteering, being very excited about a candidate also makes people more likely to defend them in casual conversation and prod family and friends to vote. If this 10 point drop in excitement translates into, say, a 30 percent reduction in volunteer hours, that is serious blow to the campaign.
155 Comments
I saw on the nooze crawl this morning that Obama says his low poll numbers are because America is unhappy with congress.
LOL! Yeah, we are. However, the poll was about you, Benito!
Gee, I can’t imagine why the enthusiasm for Osterity as fallen to such lows.
This time around, he’s going to have to pay me to NOT campaign against him.
Let the games begin!
Hillary in ’12!
(Change you can believe in)
By Joe Battenfeld, Boston Herald
August 22, 2011 (excerpts)
Presidents who preside over recessions usually don’t get re-elected. A president who has presided over the most devastating economic crisis since the Great Depression has even worse odds.
But Democrats do have a good opportunity to keep the White House, and her name is Hillary Clinton.
The former first lady is still beloved by most Democrats, but more importantly, she has deniability. While the economy has been tanking, Clinton has been jetting around the world worrying about foreign policy.
Ha! Oristocrats don’t want us to understand this.
Shhh!
(Bangs pots and pans with wooden spoon)
There might be some solid vegetables/facts in there. Shhh!
“These people who were formally “very excited” to vote for Obama…”
Jon, maybe you mean “formerly” ?
Stand up to the Tar Sands POTUS!
Matt Damon for President!
John Mellencamp for Vice President!
Go, citizen representation. HUZZAH!
HELLO – I’m excited – about bad mouthing the lying duplicitous sell out EVERY chance I get!
anyone who wants to vote for him – ha ha ha. go ahead – and, make sure you come to me and complain when the lying sell out lies to sell you out
so I can laugh in your face!
8 times I voted Democratic POTUS, and I did NOT vote for lying stealing fascists cuz I expected to be ripped off and lied to about it.
What the hell did I get from this guy? A couple of coppers tossed on the floor, while they’re hoovering dollars outta my wallet for pigs.
rmm
She’s just another fuckin’ neoliberal leaning toward neoconservativism.
thank you
When I read the title to this piece my immediate reaction was “Good! He couldn’t be more deserving of it.”
How the hell can 48% still be very excited about voting for Obama? I’m very excited to vote for just about anyone else. (No, I won’t Republican. I’ll find a 3rd party to vote for or write in a name.)
O doesn’t need no stinkin free labor. He’ll collect so much in campaign contributions that he’ll be able to pay everyone, esp at the low wages that O’s economy is creating. Besides, working to reelect O might be the only jobs available in 2012.
Same here. The problem is that in my state the black boxes don’t allow a write in candidate. Oh, and the other problem is that in my state the black boxes have no paper trail. And one more problem, in my state the black boxes rule for the repugs.
Not the worst business model…
Abercrombie & Fitch has offered to pay Michael “The Situation” Sorrentino, a character in hit reality show Jersey Shore, to stop wearing its clothes, fearing its image is being tarnished.
http://mg.co.za/article/2011-08-20-please-dont-wear-our-clothes–well-pay-you/
:o)
yeppers, that was my thought when the campaign was touting the need to raise a billion this cycle
With that billion dollars from Wall St. he can just pay people to be “very excited.”
The answer is not a “better” Democrat but a better political party. Or, maybe, (gasp!), a better political system based on the needs/representation of the people and NOT on money! I know, I know…
That’s the best one yet!
Imo, Clinton is more “conservative” than Obama. She and Billy Boy have always been GOP Lite. It wouldn’t surprise me if Biden goes to State and Hillary runs with Obama. Whether we like it or not, it would be a formidable ticket, and lines Hillary up for 2016.
let’s not forget it was Madame Secretary who signed off on the Keystone Pipeline before it went to POTUS
I say no more Bushies or Bush Lite in the White House.
Osterity
For
America
No thanks.
It would be interesting to compare these numbers to the numbers from 2008 . I’m betting that his enthusiasm numers are way down form then, too,
I’m looking down ticket next year.
The people at the $35K/plate fundraisers get to schmooze with the prez and present his aides with their wish lists. The people who get free tickets to the mass campaign rallies have a better chance of schmoozing with Mick Jagger at an outdoor Stones concert than they do with Osterity.
His poll numbers are dancing like the get rid of Bush numbers.
Is this any way to treat a relationship. We are promised disappointment. But we get slavery to Wall street and Exxon? That is a dysfunctional relationship and beyond disappointing. Obama wants us to be battered partners and help him with his corporate masters. Not me.
One choice is massive cuts in Medicare. Oh the irony when we thought we were getting expansion of public health care. This austerity was not promised during 2008. The voters will reject it in 2012.
Mick for Prez!
I’d like to have a bumper sticker that has the big Obama O with the sunrise and red & white stripes that’s recognizable as representing him and draw a big slash through it and next to it have the words “No more Osterity.”
Mick?
Mulvaney?
True, but at least she has a pair.
Wrong. it is not that they will not volunteer for Obama. They will NOT VOTE for Obama.
Your article is strangely similar to one in Huffington Post. Word for word it seems. I think you are promoting Obama propaganda to get people to vote for Obama, when you say they will vote for him but not volunteer. If people do not volunteer for Obama, Obama still wins. There is no damage there. The real damage is if his base does not VOTE for him.
If Obama wins, all Democrats in future will follow his agenda of dismantling the social safety net, as Obama will have shown they can do that with impunity and not face backlash from their base.
just last week alone -
the AA women in Detroit telling CBC ‘to get after him’
Latinos in California and elsewhere telling WH to give up their Secure Communities boondoggle or they walk
the NM/OFA Firebagger firestorm which swelled the I’ll-vote-for-him-but-wont-work-for-him-ranks to unprecedented levels
Numerous Labor organizations (the kind who volunteer, eg IBEW) formally announcing their plans to boycott 2012 Convention
and this week, it appears another solid base component; Environmentalists are about to have theirs eyes opened wide
and of course the coming attack on the safety net will deflate the 2012 GOTV ranks down to a rump of Blackwater Dog groupies
Obama campaign slogan:
“Vote for me! I’ll feed your lunch to the Republican Oligarchs, but at least you won’t have to share it with those Dirty Fuckin’ Hippies on the left!
Too bad he’s British. With Keith Richards at DOJ at least the price of weed might go down.
Jagger.
Having a pair doesn’t always translate into good things for the people. Stalin had a pair too.
Got a link to that?
I’m with you there. However, our electoral system mitigates against a real progressive from ever making it to the White House, and once there, being able to govern from the Left. The main stream corporate media would demonize them and chew them up. Dean was somewhat to the Left of Kerry in 2004, and when the press was finished with him he looked like a raving loon.
What effect does our growing and unmistakable disgust with Obama have on the Republicans? Will it make it more likely that they turn out at the polls, hoping to pull off a landslide? Or will it make them more complacent and supress turnout?
EDIT: I will NOT vote for him.
It would be better to fight against a Republican president than have Zero in office again, but I do wish I could get excited about a 3rd party or write-in candidate. It is hard, without the hope of actually electing someone who could really make a difference.
I loved Maxine Waters telling the Tea Party to “go straight to Hell.”
Gotcha!
I’m all for J. Melloncamp/Mellencamp. Not sure if you remember or not but the DC political heads went after him about his music not being nice.
I’m sure the Billion Obama raises for his re-election will cover the cost of a few call centers.
In India
Good luck getting hold of the youth contingent who only use cell phones and aren’t registered Vichycrats. Without that demographic Osterity just might be toast.
Never mind the not volunteering aspect of your conclusion. What about the ones like me that just are not going to vote? I certainly will not vote for Obama. Why would anyone? He has lied about everything he said he was going to do as a candidate. He has not kept one campaign promise. In fact he is worse than Bush. At least Bush was honest about where he was coming from. Obama is a shill for the corporations and the banker’s water boy.
Got that right. Can’t give those minimum wage jobs to American citizens. Give them to Indians for a couple bucks a day.
It’s his Stimulus II: Take donations from the rich — with low propensity to consume — and give it to the peons — with higher propensity to consume.
Call it GOTV multiplier! /s
Meant as response to eCAHN @13
Good point. Obama is like staying in an abusive relationship.
You are right, but then there hasn’t been a major population push to put a Progressive there. If we could manage to start the movement in secret then the media would come and search it out. You have to play games with those people. You should never expect them to do the right thing or in the right way.
You have to make them feel like they are missing a big story and are intentionally being left out.
O’s love affair with Wall Street fat cats has turned him into a third Bush.
“Obama Losing Base Enthusiasm and Possibly Millions Worth of Free Labor”
There’s no ‘possibly’ about it. And also, Jon, I would like to see an analysis of the following: “Obama Losing Base.”
We have no idea from the many polls being done what the actual strength in numbers is of either ‘main’ party. I’m betting the percentages are way, way down. You may be correct that most Democrats will eventually vote for Obama, but that’s not ‘the base’ that got him the White House. Very few, I am thinking, of those who have gone beyond lack of enthusiasm to casting about for alternatives would still have retained their Democratic party status. If I am wrong on that, then you are also wrong in predicting that the unenthusiastic but still Democrat faction will hold their noses and vote for the not-so-lesser evil this time around. For, if they are old school Dems, they won’t be able to do it. Not with the wars ongoing and the housing horror and social programs being dismantled and no jobs. What’s left for a true Democrat to love?
It’s down to the Martha’s Vineyard partygoers, I am thinking. Some base. Like to see those guys out knocking on doors, and it just might come down to that.
Do all you naysayers and Obama haters really want more Republicans in congress and in the White House? So he hasn’t been as progressive as you want. Get over it and get behind him!! I feel certain that the alternative is even less palatable to you.
“Osterity!”
Love that, SouthernDragon, bravo!
“Othority, Odacity, Othenticity…” ;~))
“It would be better to fight against a Republican president”
If the GOP wins the WH, them most likely they will win the Senate and retain the House. Bush won by 1 SCOTUS vote in 2000 and governed like he had a 50 state mandate. How is it going to be better to fight against a govt. controlled by the GOP? Because then at least you know where they are coming from? Like this makes sense?
The only thing GOP control would mean is a hastening to the destruction of this rotten edifice we have, so maybe that is what needs to happen , so we can start from scratch.
I can’t claim credit for that. Somebody here last week used it and I picked it up. Love it though.
And she’s done such a great job, hasn’t she – not!
Obama BECAME Hillary as soon as he strolled down dreamyeyed towards history’s podium.
But you knew that.
Sorry I don’t have a link for this, and I don’t know if it’s too long for a single post, but Hillary is not more conservative than Obama. I know, I know….votes aren’t everything.
CANDIDATES’ VOTING RECORDS COMPARED — January 2005 through 2008 (while all three were Senators)
Fourteen of the most significant, most prominent, and/or most revealing votes taken during this period. (NV means “not voting.”)
(1) Confirmation of Condoleeza Rice to be Secretary of State
Vote taken: 1/26/2005
Analysis: Neo-con, war criminal
Clinton: Yes
Obama: Yes
McCain: Yes
(2) Tort “reform” (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Vote taken: 2/10/2005
Analysis: Opposed by more than 68 consumer, civil rights, environmental and labor groups, it was described as the “final [Republican] payback to the tobacco, asbestos, oil and chemical industries, at the expense of ordinary families whose health has been compromised.”
Clinton: No
Obama: Yes
McCain: Yes
(3) Dayton Amendment (S.Amdt. 31) to the 2005 Bankruptcy Act
Vote taken: 3/3/2005
Analysis: Would cap credit card interest rates at 30%. Senator Dayton provided examples of predatory lenders charging vulnerable people more than 1000%/year interest. Republicans argued that “free-markets” should set interest rates, and government should not interfere.
Clinton: Yes
Obama: No
McCain: No
(4) Energy Policy Act of 2005
Vote taken: 7/29/2005
Analysis: Often referred to as the Dick Cheney Energy Bill (industry lobbyists wrote it in secret in his White House office), this corporate-welfare bill was called “bad policy” by Public Citizen because it gives “billions of dollars in unjustified subsidies to the fossil fuel and nuclear energy industries,” rolls back environmental regulations for the oil and gas industry, and “repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA), an essential consumer protection that ensures that electric utilities exist to serve the people, not the profit interests of large corporations.”
Clinton: No
Obama: Yes
McCain: No
(5) Dorgan Amendment (S.Amdt. 1665) to the 2005 Commerce Appropriations Bill
Vote taken: 9/15/2005
Analysis: Would prevent future NAFTA-like trade deals that allow “dumping” of products into the U.S. at prices below their cost of acquisition (harming U.S. farmers, ranchers, businesses and workers), by prohibiting the Commerce Department from weakening current countervailing duties and antidumping laws.
Clinton: Yes
Obama: No
McCain: No
(6) Confirmation of John Roberts to the Supreme Court
Vote taken: 9/29/2005
Analysis: Hard right-winger
Clinton: No
Obama: No
McCain: Yes
(7) Confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court
Vote taken: 1/31/2006
Analysis: Hard right-winger
Clinton: No
Obama: No
McCain: Yes
(8) USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization
Vote taken: 3/1/2006
Analysis: Allows the government to spy on citizens in “fishing expeditions” without probable cause or a court order, including listening to telephone calls, intercepting emails, accessing private medical records, library records and bank records, and searching homes and businesses without permission or knowledge.
Clinton: Yes
Obama: Yes
McCain: Yes
(9) Nomination of Dirk Kempthorne to be Secretary of the Interior
Vote taken: 5/26/2006
Analysis: Hard right-winger who received an overall score of zero from the League of Conservation Voters during his six years in the Senate.
Clinton: No
Obama: Yes
McCain: Yes
(Hillary and just seven other Democrats voted to block Kempthorne’s nomination.)
(10) Feinstein Amendment (S.Amdt. 4882) to the 2007 Department of Defense Appropriations Act
Vote taken: 9/06/2006
Analysis: Outlaws use of cluster bombs in most cases, in order to protect civilian lives from unexploded cluster munitions.
Clinton: No
Obama: Yes
McCain: No
(11) Iraq withdrawal timeline goal (2007 Supplemental Appropriations Act)
Vote taken: 3/29/2007
Analysis: Provides that, “The President shall commence the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat forces from Iraq.”
Clinton: Yes
Obama: Yes
McCain: No
(12) Kyl-Lieberman resolution on Iran
Vote taken: 9/26/2007
Analysis: Tantamount to a declaration of war (Sen. James Webb, former Secretary of the Navy).
Clinton: Yes
Obama: NV
McCain: NV
(13) Feingold-Reid Amendment (S.Amdt. 3164) to the 2008 Department of Defense Appropriations Act
Vote taken: 10/3/2007
Analysis: Requires the President to safely redeploy all U.S. troops from Iraq by June 30, 2008, except for those needed for al Qaeda operations, security and training.
Clinton: Yes
Obama: NV
McCain: No
(14) Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) amendment (H.R. 6304)
Vote taken: 7/9/2008
Analysis: Legalizes warrantless wiretapping of, and spying on, Americans by the federal government in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. Covers up and excuses more than 30 felony crimes committed by President Bush when he authorized the illegal wiretaps. Provides retroactive immunity to lawbreaking telecom companies and terminates all pending lawsuits against them.
Clinton: No
Obama: Yes
McCain: NV
A good progressive would have voted as follows:
(1) Condoleeza Rice: NO
(2) Tort “reform”: NO
(3) Cap credit card interest rates at 30%: YES
(4) Energy bill: NO
(5) Prevent unfair trade deals: YES
(6) John Roberts: NO
(7) Samuel Alito: NO
(8) USA PATRIOT Act Reauthorization: NO
(9) Dirk Kempthorne: NO
(10) Outlaw cluster bombs: YES
(11) Iraq withdrawal timeline goal: YES
(12) Kyl-Lieberman resolution on Iran: NO
(13) Iraq withdrawal timeline requirement: YES
(14) Illegal wiretapping: NO
Here are the candidates’ progressive vote totals:
Clinton score: 10 of 14
Obama score: 4 of 14
McCain score: 1 of 14
If folks are gonna work for campaigns imo it should be for House and Senate candidates. If we can wrest control from the neoliberals/neoconservatives in those two *cough* august *cough, gag* bodies we don’t have to worry about who occupies the WH so much.
Probably “formally” is correct, allan. Sort of points one towards the Martha’s Vineyard crowd.
(Sorry, Martha’s Vineyard good guys, I mean you no harm. If you are reading here, you are among the enlightened.) :~)
Hillary is not in the Senate any more. What has she done as SoS? Looks a lot like just what Bill Kristol and the PNAC folks wrote up in “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.“
I think we would see something like we have seen in Wisconsin. At this stage, we need something to rally around. And it might be that all we’ve got is our shared repugnance at the Republicans’ vision for the country.
Well, lets look at the options available to our Establishment:
Option 1. Put up a candidate in primaries to run against BO, and BO beats him.
Option 2. Put up a candidate in primaries to run against BO, and the opponent beats BO.
Options for American people: zero.
Do any of you think that an independent minded candidate can beat the Establishment? You are not running against BO, you are running against the Establishment. And look who you mention most often: Hillary Clinton. That is as Establishment as can be. And do you think people like Bernie Sanders, or Dennis Kucinich are presidential material? I don’t think so. Maybe more like Alan Grayson, but I am not convinced about his moral fiber. I believe Russ Feingold has the moral fiber, but I am not sure he has the stomach for this. But just look at our political landscape? It is a wasteland. Not a single person in the Democratic party that has the tenacity to fight for his convictions, someone on the level of Ron Paul on the other side.
Winner? Establishment.
Looser? American people.
Want to waste time voting? Go ahead.
So you think it won’t be long before the elites start fighting amongst themselves? They might start attacks against each other for what is left? Hmmm.
Maybe why they are so behind the bankstas and Kochroaches.
Not surprising that you’d endorse Hillary Clinton. I guess even Obama isn’t enough of a neoliberal corporate whore and warmonger to satisfy you.
I should get used to using those terms, SD. They certainly don’t just pertain to Republicans any more.
Actually, I think that some of these people who were formerly excited will vote for Obama come 2012. Which means that some won’t. I think that the portion of “won’t”s is significant and growing significanter.
It’s not just that he isn’t doing what we want. It’s that he betrayed us, and exploited our energies in the most callous way possible. It’s hard to forgive that, particularly when he hasn’t asked for forgiveness.
We DEFINITELY have to do a clearing of congress, both branches and both parties!
Zero IS a rebublican, Bush III
Do you mean that it would be more difficult for Obama and his policies to rape us if we’re behind him rather than in front? Obama is such a corporate tool that he couldn’t even spell progressive if his life depended on it.
I’ll try not to shout, SouthernDragon
but
WE DID THAT
That is why he keeps urging us to lean forward.
I know, but she’s not Obama. And I’m, like most people, not a Democrat so I’d like to watch such a contest. The last time it happened was when Teddy Kennedy challenged Jimmy Carter, and now it’s time again. Let the games begin!
The one party.. that brought us bush and obama.. is going to bring us obama again.. this is ensured by only allowing clowns and fools to run against obama. there is NO choice this election.. especially when the guy on the left is actually the most effective pusher of republican agenda to ever hold the office.. It matters NOT
You’ll see: he’ll commute Jane’s sentence to time served, and for Thanksgiving he’ll pardon Monsanto’s Tofurkey.
That’s the trouble. This isn’t a GAME to real people.
Preview of coming attractions: Banksters vs. military/industrial fighting over whats left. Cracks in the Murdoch 4th estate, Wikileaks, … ‘Used to be guns and butter but now with finance crowding out the economy it’s “Finance, Guns & Butter,” FGB. Too many oinkers at the trough. There’s going to much more pitched squealing especially when they have to keep hauling all that feed upstairs for the one percenters.
And, (so I don’t double post) this is interesting:
“In the Race to Succeed Weiner, a Surprising Anger at Obama” – NY Times
No we didn’t. We elected more neoliberals/neoconservatives running on the Democratic ticket. They talked all progressive an’ shit then followed the DLC/Third Way agenda once elected. We got snookered. We’ve got to force their hand before we vote, not after.
I’m not a Democrat, a liberal or a progressive. I’m a revolutionary and I don’t play games with peoples’ lives. Viet Nam broke me of that habit.
Thankfully, virtually nothing. She brought zero diplomatic capability to the job, was completely unqualified for it, and spent most of her time jetting around and criticizing other world governments, but at least she didn’t help cause any major world problems except Libya.
He’d better come back from vacation a changed man. Long term Democrats like me (Democrat since 1968) will still go to the polls and vote for him.
But he didn’t get his majority from people like me. He won because he brought out young people, Hispanics, blacks and others who never voted before. They’ll stay home this time( like in 2010) but you can bet every Republican will be there.
What DB said about you. x2
Blind faith is a killer and denial is not a river in Egypt.
*blush*
Back to work.
Namaste
1. Obama deserves to lose because of his lies and his lack of character.
2. In order to lose he needs an opponent.
3. It doesn’t matter who is president — that’s been proven.
Hillary and Obama ar one of the same.If one’s imagination can’t get beyond the Clintons and Obama or some other DLC stooge who will advance corporate globalization at the expense of America ,then how can change ever occur without a bloody uprising.We’re one step from unprecedented economic collapse and still some wish to vote for more of the same. Amazing.
Right On to the Ninth Power!
The way for this country to win against the oppressor, the elites, is to divide and conquer. Not all the elites have same interests. So the elements of the elite that have the welfare of the country at heart must be isolated from the elements that pray on this country. For example, you have elements that make huge money overseas, and those elements must be isolated from companies making money here, such as banks, telecoms, cable companies, health insurers, defense contractors, etc. businesses dependent on their existence on domestic markets. An intelligent politician would try to form alliances to advance the interests of the country by setting different parts of the Establishment against itself. An organization can be formed to represent companies dependent on the domestic markets, that realize that healthy domestic markets mean their own survival. That no such a figure has emerged only shows the level of intelligence in politics in this country, as politicians try to shake down anyone they can.
I want labor to tell Obama to fuck off as well.
Exactly. Run their game against them. Untie the fascist bundle and these pasty little scared fear mongers will freak out over their loss of control. There is no honor among thieves, especially among these ego-maniacal ass clowns!
Yes, here is the link to a similar Huffington Post article I saw today making the same point. I think it is coordinated Obama Propaganda, saying people will not voulunteer for Obama, but they will vote for him. No, the real damage is if people do NOT vote for Obama. if Obama wins in 2012, it will prove he can pursue his agenda to take down ss with impunity.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/19/obama-liberals-unions-latinos_n_931667.html
The AFL-CIO leadership just jumped back on the 0sterity Float! Their membership is pissed but this is the same business unionism we saw backing the Viet Nam War. And, they pretty much haven’t changed for the past thirty years. ‘Worked really well didn’t it?
Yes, all we have to rally around is the over reach that the GOP Congress and the Governors have shown since November. People worked like hell in WI and still came up one vote short of taking the state senate. However, it’s hilarious seeing that thug Kasich back pedal on SB5. While this has been happening over the last 6 months, Obama has stood on the sidelines and never once forcefully supported the efforts in WI and OH.
Nobody said it wasn’t going to be hard work :)
Yes, one vote short, but 2 votes closer than they had been the day before.
“They’ll stay home this time( like in 2010)”…
I don’t think so. Off year elections always have less of a turn out – older and whiter.
Despite the handful of people here who will vote Third Party, almost all who voted for BO in 2008 will vote for him again, and there are plenty of new voters that have become eligible since 08. These aren’t Perry and Romney voters.
See PCCC delivers a credible political threat to Obama
Obama has lost about 2.6 million volunteer hours, just from PCCC members. As his support from independents is collapsing, he probably needs more from centrist Democrats.
I suppose his best option (given that he’s not likely to give up his crypto Republican ways) is to get Hillary Clinton as his VP. Don’t see what’s in it, for her, though. She’s already 63. In 2016, she’ll be 68. That’s not too old to run for President, but I guess it depends more on how old she feels, and how old she looks.
I think she’d do the Democrats a favor if she ran in 2012, against Obama. Of course, how many betrayals she’d pursue, after getting elected, may mean that the ‘fix’ wouldn’t last very long.
I’ll buy that, but what I think what has happened in Ohio is even more significant than what happened in WI. It’s too bad that Ohio doesn’t have a recall mechanism so they could throw Kasich’s sorry ass out of office so he could go work back at Fox.
If obama is as far left as the choices go.. there is no choice at all. Vote neocon.. or vote neocon. Only thing that changes is how quick the rest of the constitution/middle class is destroyed. At least if it’s a republican there will be an outcry. Obama sticks the knife in from the back.
You are so right. It is time to show these Representatives that if they lie to us to win an election, they will “pay the piper”.
Don’t I know it. I’m with you on that.
Many of us at FDL are “Long Term Democrats”. Please join us and DO NOT VOTE for this man again in 2012. If you do and he wins, we will pay miserably for the next four years with further enactment of his policies that are aimed at hurting the middle class. Help us make an attempt to turn the tide on these cut throats that lie to us to get our vote. It will be painful for awhile but in the long term I think will turn.
After taking a longer look at things ..I am not too thrilled with her either. Remember, good old Bill gave us NAFTA which we are feeling the effects of now. And do you remember a few months ago Bill was caught on tape giving Paul Ryan advice to “keep up the fight” on Social Security and Medicare while telling Ryan that he is concerned that the Democrats will not follow through on “putting the “big 3″ on the table. You want him whispering in the ear of his wife should she run for Pres and win??? Not me.
OmAli I work at the Airport and talk to people with all kinds of political ideologies and they are so hungry for a new party to vote for. I think a new party would sweep the election next year if they ran just on the “big 3 and health care alone”.
Everything you said hit me in the “gut” because you are right but what do we do? We have to try something….just walk away with our tail between our legs? Hey nobody is perfect and the public has seen their share of candidates lacking “moral fiber”. They should be used to it by now and consider this the “norm” for a candidate. I mean Obama admitted to using drugs and no one blinked an eye because they were so sick of George Bush they were ready for anything new. Why couldn’t that happen in 2012 with new candidates under a new party label running on the issues of SS, Medicare and Medicaid and real “middle class issues”.
Thank you …this was great info
“It will be painful for awhile but in the long term I think will turn.”
Whose “pain” is it going to be, someone else’s or yours as well? You going to tell that to someone who is about 57 years old and has been out of work for two years, or a single mother working two jobs and scraping by, or a grad student who can’t get a student loan?
What’s the long term? 10 years, 20yrs? There’s no time left.
We are circling the drain.Voting for a GOPer will only hasten the inevitable, whereas voting for a Dem will somewhat cushion the blow.
Third party candidacy is not viable, they will never win. The entire concept of American political system is semblance of choice, without a choice. You are always “guided” in certain direction. But you have no choice, because the whether you you pick someone in column a or column b, the result is always going to be the same. The problem is the constitutional foundation of our country, which we gave to our courts to interpret. Unfortunately, the courts are now the tools of corporations and money, and they always interpret the constitution in a way that will benefit the same. Therefore, the solution is public financing of elections, and total ban on private donations to our politicians. I think this principle must be absolutely sacred, with death penalty for accepting bribes, just as you have it China. And it must be spelled out in the Constitution. This is the bedrock of the country, and must be treated as treason when violated. We must be able to establish a parliamentary democracy here, and the more points of view, the better. The place to begin is a campaign for the constitutional amendment, because money is the “mother” of all problems.
Otherwise, read my post #89.
Also, when I said that that these men lack “moral fiber” what I meant was incorruptible and truthful, fearless, and also having the strength to sway other people’s minds, has the power of character to do what is right for the country. Obama has difficulty convincing himself, and the man is totally corrupt. Actually, having said this there is one person I really like: Elliot Spitzer. The only reason was crucified, is because he went after Wall St. and was crucified by the press as a payback for that, with the help of Bush DOJ. I am sure of one thing, Obama would do exactly the same thing to Spitzer, as evidenced by news items are beginning to show up about DOJ putting pressure on Schneiderman. These guys won’t stop.
“Lean forward” is Obamaspeak for bend over.
Add me to that list as well. Oppose the “Vast Machine”.
She’d certainly do one thing that Obama hasn’t done, as yet. She’d attack Iran.
March 2012
” Therefore, the solution is public financing of elections, and total ban on private donations to our politicians. I think this principle must be absolutely sacred, with death penalty for accepting bribes…”
Death penalty to white collar crooks? I’m in with that.
The only way you could conceivably have public financing of elections is do it state by state and make it a state referendum. It would take about ten times the effort that it took to get SB5 in Ohio on the ballot because the vested interests would go to court to fight it.
Micki,
Thank you very much for preparing this and injecting actual facts into the conversation. I wish I had seen this analysis in 2008 — at the time I thought Obama was the progressive and Hilary the DLC stooge — I would have fought a lot harder for Hilary.
I would love for Hilary or Al Gore to primary Obama and make the case for raising taxes and protecting social security if we can’t have an actual progressive run against the big O. I’d prefer a neo-liberal to a neo-conservative Obama. But others are correct that the blog post is wrong, Obama is losing votes, not just volunteers and donations. His supporters who stayed home in 2010 are going to stay home again in 2012.
Again though, Micki. Thank you for that thoughful analysis.
Re the “no jobs available except with the Obama campaign:”
Maybe people could sign up with the Obama campaign, collect their “wages,” but do a really, really crappy job.
Sorta like the President himself.
Money is the source of all power in this country, and the elites will fight a constitutional amendment tooth and nail. And more that likely you will have to go through state legislatures. I am not sure which are more corrupt, the state legislatures, or the U.S. Congress. The only thing is that the process of amending the Constitution is so difficult, that it may take a revolution to amend the Constitution. But courts must be taken out of the process through the constitutional amendment, particularly because they are not so politicized and corrupt that they will always decide for money, not justice.
** Or be pounding the pavement for other candidates;
** Or be urging folks to vote for Anyone But Obama;
** Or be educating fellow voters re, for example, the Tar Sands Pipeline & Obama’s support of it.
I think it’s not unlikely that some portion of folks will “evolve” from “staying home” in 2010 to active opposition in 2012.
Obama & Friends seriously underestimate the anger and energy of those he’s scorned and sold out so cavalierly.
Oh yeah, by all means lets vote in Hillary Clinton.. the woman who voted to authorize the Iraq war and then later claimed she was “misled” into doing so.
She’s either a liar or an idiot. We’ve had enough of those, thanks.
This comment about dividing American corps from transnationals is good idea and I think the chamber of commerce is already doing this to some extent. Large Corps and Banks sit on each others Boards of directors so they aren’t compartmentalized, and they also have seats in advisory positons of ∅bama’s Administration.
Your other posts have logic problems because there are more options than you have considered, and more possible outcomes.
that ship has sailed – she will refuse any request to run – she was promised support by many in the black community and the left – and they turned on her. She doesn’t need a second round of that kind of treatment.
Indeed the Obama planted mis-information about the Clinton years of 22 million new jobs and 4 % unemployment are still repeated on FDL (“Clinton tried to kill Social Security” is stated when the truth is that Rubin, the GOP, Greenspan, Mornihan and other still in office Dems pushed for that “carve out personal savings” and Clinton said no way and instead proposed in his State of the Union a voluntary addon savings account that was tax free like a 401k. Why the hell would she want to go back into that through the looking glass world of the left saying they would vote for a women but just not this women?).
Obama will get 4 more years because the left and the Black Caucus would rather have Obama than Hillary Clinton. Indeed even a token primary is dying fast.
how did Obama vote on the Iraq war – oh right, he didn’t vote.
And the “anti-war” Obama is your man because of what ? – perhaps his trying to get away from Bush’s agreement to get totally out of Iraq?
The pretend over Pakistan has ended. Women’s rights advance around the would with US support. Nothing has blown up (the main job of the SofS) and she has implement Obama’s policies.
Now the folks at State tell me they thing she is great – what has she done that shows no ability?
Clinton is more “conservative” than Obama?????? LOL I want what you are smoking!
refusing a clean debt deal so as to gut Social Security/Medicaid/Medicare sure is more liberal than Hillary, isn’t it?
I would like to hear of logic problems, and would certainly love to hear your solutions. Just dismissing something with a blanket of “logic” is not enough.
I would not trust the Chamber with anything, and any solution must be done by a separate organization outside the Chamber. The Chamber is to invested in keeping things the way they are, and is probably the worst offender in the department of corruption. They are only in perpetuating the current order. As far as I am concerned, Chamber is one of the cancers pervading American politics.
I’ve got to say that we are really screwed and demoralized when the welfare of the country depends trying publicize what is good for Obama’s self interest (and his backers) and not the country, to get him to change direction.
He’s now actively interfering in court cases to affect the outcome for corrupt bankers. When he did that in spain and Britain at the beginning of his term in order to persuade them not to prosecuted for torture, kidnapping and rendition it was carried out secretly, and we found out through cables.
Now the behavior is so brazen they don’t even try to hide it. We’re so far through the looking glass we as a country can’t even judge what is outrageous, immoral and egregiously illegal behavior anymore. Death Squads anyone? And Darrel Issa (GOP) has a Goldman Sachs Employee working as his aid who changed his name to avoid exposure. He’s in charge of investigating waste, fraud, and abuse.
Anyone who would want Ms. Clinton, or anyone else for that matter, to run against Obama is just doing the handiwork of the GOP. She had the support of the conservative Reagan Dems in almost all of the primaries of 08. The terms “liberal” and “conservative” are thrown about with imprecise abandon, but temperamentally I think she is more “conservative”, and I don’t smoke anything. Just drink too much.
The California Democratic party is not allowing even a vote on a primary and has put the Progressive caucus on ice. It’s charter wasn’t renewed, and the party actually broke the rules when they did this the PC. How many other State Democratic parties are doing this? It’s like the damned comintern.
Assumes that all Americans are Democrats:
Not considered:
Option 3. Independent candidate
Option 4. Vote for a republican
Assumes that Democrats conviction are the same as yours:
They are fighting.. us
If only there were an anti-establishment candidate out there, or one that the media is trying desperately to ignore.. hmmm… or Gary Johnson.
See, you didn’t ask anyone to help you brainstorm for more ideas. You worked your way through a limited set of options and came up with perhaps a flawed answer: Nothing.. or revolution. The caveat “perhaps” is because we haven’t tried or considered all the options, and their unintended consequences yet.
There is the national Chamber which is a problem but there are Local chambers that stopped participating because of the attack on Labor. This was during the beginning of Zero’s presidency.
HIllary would just be more of the same.
No where in my post did I suggest that we vote Republican. I am suggesting we not vote and take whatever comes. I am 64 years old, I suffer from Rhumatoid Arthritis and medicate myself daily so I can get to work. I stand on my feet throughout the day but I consider myself to be lucky I am working I have an adopted son who is 24 and in college. He is actually my grandson and I took him when he was 3 mo old. I am paying his tuition. My daughter who is the mother was ill for most of her adult life and past away last year. My husband and I took care of her also. My oldest son lost his construction job and had to move in with us. We had to pick up his auto payment and insurance because he could no longer afford to pay and I did not want him to loose his vehicle or go to jail for driving without insurance. He now has found a job making $10.00 and hour and cannot afford to move out of my home so we continue to take care of him. My husband is 65 and neither him nor I plan on retiring soon and are in jeporady like everyone else of losing our Social Security and Medicare in some way. I know whats in store for me and all of us with a Republican president but I am not doing well under Obama. Why should I reward him with another 4 years of living in that beautiful house, a personal airplane, servants to care for him children, wife and mother in law, and a life beyond what anyone of us can imagine while he dishes out shit to me and my family. I am willing to take a chance to dump this jerk and try to rebuild , not for me but for my kids.
I’m in the same aging Baby Boomer bracket as you. Yeah, yeah, I know, before anyone else can say it – “It’s all our fault.” I’m self employed, and I see no near term possibility of retiring. The corporations in this country control the election process. There will not be in our lifetime a true progressive in the WH. There would have to be a total unraveling of the socio/economic structure and on the verge of chaos for that to happen. Anyone who seriously wants to change how business is done is usually eliminated with “extreme prejudice”.
It’s just my gut, but I think Obama’s temperment is more progressive than he shows. However, if he “rocks the boat” he and his family won’t be breathing very long. That’s the way business is done in this country.
Let’s contribute to the small “d” democratic process and support a small party in 2012.
Well of course I for one will not be convincing 10 others to vote for him this time. Multiply that by the millions of people who are disappointed with this president and you can bet he will be a one termer.
I do take personal blame for this guy getting elected. I worked very hard on the streets for him and at work and then I voted for him. But I was foolish when I did not check out his voting record in DC. It was very obvious where his heart was. I was desperate to shed the burden of George Bush and rushed into judgement about Obama. I won’t do that this time around.
If Obama has been “holding back” to take action on things he would do “in his unencumbered” second term – well, he can act NOW. He has NO SECOND TERM.
Point well taken…..and I am with you on Spitzer. I think he is great.
Sounds like you bought into that Messiah message that the GOP liked to push against him and his supporters. What did you expect, that one guy was going to transform this whole rotten socio/political culture over night? I had no such illusion when I voted for him. I just look at what he followed and what the alternative is right now, and it makes me go to the polls in 2012 and hold my nose, or maybe not even going to vote at all.
That was exactly my point: no matter what, the Establishment wins, the deck is stacked.
Independent candidate not an option: no access to media, or money, Establishment strangles one way or another, by hook or by crook, the candidacy. If a candidate of Ron Paul’s stature is unable to get any media attention, how do you expect someone the Establishment does not want to be heard to get any exposure? In politics you need leverage, you have to have dirt on someone, or threaten to use force, and by use of force there are many manifestations of brutal force. That is why CIA is such a dangerous agency, and probably why Herbert Hoover was a director of the FBI for such a long time, he probably blackmailed many of the politicians.
If you vote for a Republican, it is the same as voting for a Democrat. You have a one party system in this country. Possibly, again, if you have a candidate of Ron Paul’s stature, who is sincere enough, that is one thing, but these Republicans of the likes of Bachmann, Romney, and Perry, they are corporatist stooges. I am not quite sure what to make of Huntsman, seems somewhat more sane, but possibly he is faking sanity.
The solution to all our problems is money, or more to the point how to control it. Everyone seems to be dealing with symptoms, but no seems to go deep enough to see that the problem lies at the source: the Constitution, and namely, public financing of elections. There is no other way out. If you don’t solve the problem at the Constitutional level, it then becomes too complex to deal with. We tried to solve it with
laws, but the SCOTUS will always declare them unconstitutional. You might as well topple the edifice and begin from scratch. I just wish amending the Constitution had been made easier. If you don’t create a valve, you have an explosion in the end.
Hilary had the support of the Reagan Dems because they, like too many of us, me included, didn’t realize Obama was lying about what he intended to do
Hi: I’m one of those formerly enthusiastic (well maybe somewhat enthusiastic 2.5 years ago) and I don’t care what happens I am not voting for Obama. During the primaries I saw that Obama and Clinton were virtually the same except that Obama was lying about how much more rightwing he actually was. If Mitt Romney wins, I’ll vote for him because he’s to the left of Obama. If some batshit crazy person wins, I’ll vote for Eugene Debs. I stood in line for 2 hours to vote for Obama but I’ll never vote for that conservative (neo-liberal–funny how they’re the same) asshole again.
EDIT: WRT to Mitt Romney, etc.–if he wins the primary.
“If Mitt Romney wins, I’ll vote for him because he’s to the left of Obama.”
Then how come every statement out of his mouth is to the Right of Obama?
Of course, he wants his party’s nomination, but unless you know what Romney really believes, then your statement turns left and right on its head.
Let’s see how far “left” he is with another corporate tool appointment to the SCOTUS.
It’s primary season, he has to pander to the crazy to win. But really I don’t give a shit. Anyone trying to scare people (OH NOES! The SCOTUS!!!) to vote for Obama is dubious at best.
It’s arguable whether anything said is to the right of Obama’s ACTIONS, which are the measure I use. Obama wants the safety net cuts, he wants free trade agreements, he wants supply side solutions which will put off any type of recovery.
Well, I have voted for Ralph Nader I think twice. Last election I voted for Cynthia McKinney just because she had the balls to deck an armed Congressional guard with just her fist for touching her without permission. I still think she’s really hot.
But the idea that anything but the sacred 2 part “SYSTEM” is un-American is total bullshit. Coalition governments seem to work far better, or at least have far brighter promise.
Obviously I am not as “politically savy” as you appear to be. But one thing I have not lost at my age is hope and belief that someone out there has good intentions and will do their best to do the right thing. It appears that you don’t have any hope or belief in anyone.
“Obama wants the safety nets cut”…
You really don’t know precisely what ideas he has about SS and Medicare, except that there have to be adjustments, like get the rich who don’t need either out of those programs, or have a means test. It’s called “tinkering.” Whereas, all the GOP candidate would love to dissmantle both programs and leave things to the whims of the private sector, especially clods like Ron Paul. The terms Right and Left mean something, but apparently not in your Alice in Wonderland world.
Actually I do know. Obama was offered a “clean” debt ceiling increase without cuts to SS/Medicare by McConnell. He refused and pushed for the cuts–PUBLICLY. The “tinkering” you speak of consists of: in a time of record unemployment focusing on the deficit and appointing a bipartisan debt commission chaired by conservative, anti-SS/Medicare hacks, pretending he really believes in these programs while undermining them with a payroll tax cut, and exploiting the so-called fake “crisis” to get those cuts. Remember less than a year ago when the Democratic Congress and Obama didn’t push for a debt ceiling increase when the controlled the relevant branches of government? Furthermore, you ignorantly restated Obama’s mistaken assumption that SS is in trouble or had anything to do with the debt., especially when SS is the largest fucking creditor to the general fund.
It’s less that he’s losing the support as much as more are seeing he is undeserving.
This is how an average Obama (ex) supporter feels like:
President Fuck You: Raising Medicare eligibility to 67 is a “modest reduction”
Fri, 08/19/2011 – 8:55pm — lambert
Oh no it’s not.
Hey, any Obama supporters still out there? The clue train is leaving the station….
NOTE About the headline… Using the word “Fuck ” is a proud tradition in the lefty blogosphere. But really, Obama says “Fuck you” to the left all the time. “Little single payer advocates.” “Fucking retarded.” “On drugs.” Yet the left is just as powerful, numerically, as the Tea Partiers, if not more so. And yet nothing we say or do has the slightest impact on anybody in the legacy parties at all, including Obama. We are completely unrepresented. Even though we keep being, ya know, right about stuff. And handing $16 trillion dollars to the banksters, no questions asked, no strings attached, and then dicking around with medical care for old people is an asshole move anyhow. So, “President Fuck You.”
http://www.correntewire.com/president_fuck_you_raising_medicare_eligibility_to_67_is_a_modest_reduction
The full weight of the justice system comes down on the rest of us while Obama, his fellow rightwing counterpart warmongers and financial terrorists are free to continue what they do best.
If the fellow in the White House was worthy he wouldn’t be fighting those who seek justice.
I really don’t think anyone having an honest conversation about someone proven to be more politician than president and party leader would associate the word belief with him. So at worst, you may just be messing with the firebaggers for the hell of it. Save belief for a deity or cult leader.
SS will be close to insolvent in 25 years, so whether one wants to realize it or not, there have to be adjustments made to keep it solvent. That’s a good deal different than abolishing the system which the GOP would do. I could apply for SS today, if I could afford to retire. I want to see it exist for my kids, so why wait for 20 years before it’s fixed?
As for Medicare, the costs of healthcare is reaching an unsustainable point, so ultimately we will see single payer, as long as we can keep the Right Wing from the levers of power.
From your statements it just seems to me that your anger, and, perhaps the frustration that Obama hasn’t been the be and end all,leaves you with supporting the true enemy, the GOP , who are just errand boys for the multi nationals, as the Dems are, but they aren’t so flagrant about it by talking a good game.
Where are you getting your information that SS will be insolvent in 25 years?
In more honest times, a true statesman or woman would tell you to come back in 24 years.
Rather what this is really about is manufactured crisis and shock doctrine perpetrated by those on top who intend to steal everything. Unless there is any confusion, Obama not only enables the thieves, he’s an active participant.
It isn’t whether Obama has been a be all end all. Instead he has been corrupted, if he hasn’t always been, by those the rest of us expected he would challenge. It’s not a matter of disappointment as much as eyes wide open to the failure, complicity, and corruption of the man in the White House. How can anyone talk about being disappointed? Disappointment was taken off the table by his merger with Wall Street, the military industrial complex, and the too big to fail banks.
I wistfully remember being disappointed. I wish I could be disappointed or think of him as just not living up to my expectations. What I see instead and with all honesty it is my perception of the man, he is Bush’s third and will be Bush’s fourth term.
The talk from sheep that this person or that person is frustrated makes me sick to my stomach. Some people have no trouble betraying the bottom 99% of us and for them they have a President who agrees with them, more human sacrifice.
Obama is a REPUBLICAN can you understand that fact.
I’m writing in Spitzer, what’s the worst they can call him a whoremonger ?
Bless you.
In 2016, Hillary will be 69 going on 70. While she could try to run, that is getting a bit old and will work against her, no doubt.
Minor detail. The corporate CEOs and hedge fund managers will take care of all that for him. They always reward good help.