It's never not timely for a radical leftist to say this. Over and over again.

[Zalatix]

For the sake of saving America from the Plutocracy and environmental ruin, I want much bigger changes, many of which I've outlined in specific detail, than President Obama is willing? able? to deliver.

A short list:

A total ban on campaign contributions.
The immediate and total demilitarization and reorganization of all law enforcement agencies, both Federal and Statewide, to weed out control freaks, psychopaths, and serial abusers, and a rigid new set of laws restricting violence by the police.
The replacement of coal-fired power plants with solar power and infra-solar power (such as the night-time solar power plant running in Spain)
The immediate seizing of all abandoned or bank-owned properties for use as either housing for the working class, the poor, or for neighborhood farms. Abandoned commercial properties to be immediately taken for repurposing into vertical farm projects.
A rapid switch to electric powered cars.
A revitalization of the space program with emphasis on colonization research.

I know that's not going to happen even if we gave Obama 16 years. At the very least we've got the Republicans to obstruct him; and anyone with sense knows that there are Plutocrats standing over him threatening to gut the economy, tank the dollar, cause an oil supply crisis, or spark a world war if he does what he wants to do.

But let's just assume the worst. Assume that President Obama is simply a centrist who doesn't really want big changes by anyone's stretch of the imagination. It's silly to assume that Obama didn't want the Public Option but we'll give the naysayers that. Let's just go nuts for a second and assume that Obama supports those drone strikes and all the civilian casualties that have ensued.

Let's just assume all the things that the most radical leftists have said about Obama, up to the craziest (*cough* Nader-ites *cough*) statement of all: "the two parties are pretty much the same".

I will still vote for Obama. I'm still taking occasional time to GOTV, and will be doing it more often now.

Why?

1) It seems the makeup of the US Supreme Court is always at stake nowadays, with each successive 4-year term there's talk of someone retiring. Obama doesn't appoint corporate Statist judges to the bench.

You can just stop this whole thread right here and call that a decapitating blow to any argument in favor of staying home in November, much less voting Republican. But if that's not enough then let's go on to the other guillotine-level point:

2) If Obama loses, we get Mitt Romney in office. A man who clearly represents the threat of more wars, including potentially a nuclear confrontation with Russia. He is unstable, stupid and would be downright disastrous as a world leader.

3) Obama demonstrably stands more with the 99% than the 1%. He wouldn't have hit China with tariffs over their manipulation of the solar panel market and then whupped their ass multiple times in WTO disputes if he didn't give a shit about the 99%. He wouldn't be slamming Mitt Romney about outsourcing jobs out of the country if he didn't care. He wouldn't have started that whole health care reform crusade, if he didn't give a shit. The mandatory insurance blunder? That got forced upon him and all of us. I argue that he would have made the Public Option a reality if it weren't for the GOP. President Obama also pushed for laws punishing companies that outsource American jobs in 2010: another fight for the 99%.

Now I can go on for days about examples where Obama fought for the 99%, but it all boils down to this: I'm a radical leftist with radical ideas and I'm tired of seeing so little progress when so much is needed to save this country, but why in hell would I turn around and set America BACK by staying home in Election Day? How the fuck does that further my goals? How do I satisfy my agenda by taking steps backward and risking a Romney victory? Why would I abandon an incompetent shepherd to get mauled by the wolves? That does me no good. With him gone we're all wide open to the wolves.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face. There's a multitude of wise sayings that should just be common sense here. But everyone here knows there are some folks out there who feel Obama is just too much of a disappointment for the Left to stand with him. I'm one radical leftist who ain't one of those.


The point here? Anyone left who is listening to people like Ralph "Cowering Democrats face defeat" Nader... WAKE UP!!! Anyone left who listens to the "Democrats are no different than Republicans" nonsense... WAKE UP!!! They are different!!! And I hope that after November of 2012 all discussions as to how bad things could be under Romney remain purely academic. You don't want to know for sure how bad things could be. One way to avoid that is to GET OUT AND VOTE for Obama AND Congressional Democratic Candidates on Election Day.

And if by some miracle there isn't a single left-of-center American citizen who remains unwilling or reluctant to vote and get out the vote for Obama, and this thread is totally unnecessary... then my day is made and we are guaranteed a world without Romney as President.

[cali]

1. good post

A total ban on campaign contributions.
The immediate and total demilitarization and reorganization of all law enforcement agencies, both Federal and Statewide, to weed out control freaks, psychopaths, and serial abusers, and a rigid new set of laws restricting violence by the police.
The replacement of coal-fired power plants with solar power and infra-solar power (such as the night-time solar power plant running in Spain)
The immediate seizing of all abandoned or bank-owned properties for use as either housing for the working class, the poor, or for neighborhood farms. Abandoned commercial properties to be immediately taken for repurposing into vertical farm projects.
A rapid switch to electric powered cars.
A revitalization of the space program with emphasis on colonization research.

As for your list, President Obama has no power to do anything but use his office as a bully pulpit.

[Zalatix]

2. Yes, he can push those ideas using the bully pulpit, but other than that he can't just do it

by himself.

He has, however, used the bully pulpit in a very classy way, moreso recently than in his first 2 years. Again, that's far better than we'll get if leftists sit on their hands on Election Day.

[rudycantfail]

4. A radical leftist does not point his finger at leftists

as the group solely to blame if Obama goes down.

The OP is the same guilt, fear and other emotional button pushing repackaged in an unoriginal way.

[quaker bill]

7. You get to pick

A government run by President Obama and some repugs that does little is far better than a government run by Romney / Ryan and some repugs which starts doing things. The absence of moving fast in the wrong direction can easily be a bonus here. These guys really think Bush* did not succeed because he did not go hard enough, fast enough, or far enough.

[Zalatix]

15. This is all about trying to push a third party without actually saying it outright.

"Pointing fingers at leftists" is a masquerade for just that agenda.

Leftists sitting home and not voting on Election Day, or voting third party, just because they dislike Obama, is outright betrayal. They want to believe they're sticking to their beliefs - but in all practicality, they're setting themselves WAY back. This is an inescapable fact.

So yeah, I point the finger at people who won't stand with Obama because he's not perfect enough. At least the Republicans won't shoot their own LEADERS in the back! They know how to accept an inch forward to avoid being forced into big steps back... why can't some in our camp understand that?

[Zalatix]

8. I point the finger at people who stay home.

If Obama goes down, people on our side who helped make that happen, are more blameworthy than the enemy.

Look up 'betrayal'.

[lovemydog]

3. The left has to vote -

it's the least one does to move us forward. The rest of the time, I try my best to live a life that supports the causes you mention. Great post!

I'm also in favor of:
restoring top marginal tax rates to Eisenhower level of over 50%
closing all tax loopholes for large corporations, with strong enforcement
cutting the military budget in half
ending the costly & punitive 'war' on drugs
free & good public education
free universal health care
(the second two are funded by the first four)

[dougolat]

5. Love your ideas!

Add:
- Instant runoff voting (first and second choices) as a key to making vote counting open and honest as well as bringing more voices and ideas to the democratic process
- A serious look at corporate charters, and their role in enabling / limiting bad-acts by "externality factories"

[Zalatix]

10. I'll see that and raise ya an end to private prisons. And privatization in general.

[viguy007]

22. Welcome to my liberal republican world

It is too bad liberal republicans all died out with the election of Nixon. Did you know Mitt Romney's father committed political suicide when he said he was brain washed into supporting the war in Vietnam. He liked and worked with Unions. It is too bad the fruit has fallen so far from the tree. Boy, how much America's political landscape has changed in the last 50 years, it is a shame.

[tavalon]

6. Well spoken

As an extreme left leftie, I can't see anything you left out.

[chknltl]

9. Dental, I would add some kind of cheap or free dental. eom

[bread_and_roses]

11. How VERY "radically left" of you ...

... to present an analysis based solely on the election of one Party over another! What insight! What penetration!

However, I would beg to put forward one incee weenee little demurral - the Oligarchs running the show will not let Robot Romney start a "nuclear confrontation" with Russia. It would be bad for the bankrolls.

[Zalatix]

12. You think they could stop him? Good deal, I hope so.

But your knees should still be knocking over what Rmoney could do with the Supreme Court. Did you forget that I pointed this out?

As for my analysis that is based "on the election of one Party over another", what is your beef with that? Are you proposing that we vote a third party? That's called a PPR right there, so let us just accept that your argument is going absolutely nowhere and move on, shall we?

[bread_and_roses]

13. I am not interested in "argument"with you

As for the SCOTUS, we've been listening to that since at least 1968 when I cast my first vote. For me, its usefulness has expired.

I have no interest in convincing you of any point of view. The pleasure of message-boards is the opportunity to express one's own opinion. It is possibly the most solip'sistic of any form of communication, and I would be surprised if it has had any change effect at all in more than 1% of those engaged in it.

I wish you well in your chosen path.

[Zalatix]

14. Of course you're not interested. You don't have any case. Are you with Obama or not?

Why don't you just be a stand-up person and answer that? Yes or no, are you voting for Obama?

Of course I don't expect you to answer that. It nails you down to an actual stance, which you have yet declined to take.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Loyalty oaths are sooo 1950s.

[Zalatix]

24. Didn't expect a stand-up-straight answer on that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. Tsk. Tsk. You must have the archaic notion that your vote, opinions, belongs to you.

And, not to any party or politician.

[Zalatix]

25. Are you proposing on the DU that we should vote for a 3rd party?

Do you have a PROBLEM with voting for Obama?

I do, of course, expect an evasive answer... or none at all. Both of which confirm your attempt to attack the idea of voting for Obama.

[leftstreet]

27. Why are you going all McCarthy on members here?

I used to like your posts

Jesus

[Zalatix]

29. Are you proposing on the DU that we should vote for a 3rd party?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. I'm proposing that my vote belongs to me to use (or not use) as I see fit.

I don't have a PROBLEM with anyone voting (or, not voting) as they choose with their votes. Nor do I feel the need to inquire about how they are going to vote.

[Zalatix]

31. Then we'll never learn one of the two lessons taught to us by the 2000 election.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. The lesson that Gore failed to get the votes of the left?

Or, that moving to the "middle" for votes didn't pay off for him?

[Zalatix]

33. That voting for Ralph Nader most certainly HELPED George W Bush by splitting the Anti-W vote.

A house divided never wins.

I know you probably don't like that, but that's life, and it always will be.

[rusty fender]

16. I'm a leftist who is voting for Obama

despite everything corporatist and right-wing leaning that he has done. Yes, despite the incessant droning, and yes, despite Susan Rice's untrue, ass-covering assertion that the attack on the Ambassador to Lybia was not premeditated, despite all the nonsense this admin. is guilty of. Why? Romney and the insane Repubs. Period.

[Flying Squirrel]

17. A total ban on campaign contributions?

Wouldn't that result in only rich people who can fund their own campaigns running?

[porphyrian]

18. I could never not agree with that today. n/t

[viguy007]

19. Ralph Nader's heart is in the right place

But his head is in the clouds. By not dropping out of the race in 2000, he gave us George Bush. We all know how well that worked out. The political system is rigged so that there can only be 2 major parties, it is called the electoral college.

[hfojvt]

23. I have to call you out on strikes

strike one - in practice it is not good to embrace the label "radical". It makes you that much easier to defeat. Peace, love and understanding are radical concepts and radically different from the way most people live today, but they are NOT radical as things that people honor in principle.

strike two - size does not matter to me, as much as direction does. A "bigger change" in the WRONG direction is not a good thing. Is it? So why demand bigger changes? Why not "better" changes? And why call them "changes" at all?

Take the first item. "A ban on campaign contributions". The point here is that we need to RETURN to the principles that America is supposed to have been founded on - things like one person, one vote, things like a government "of the people, by the people and for the people.". So to limit campaign contributioins is NOT a "bigger change" as much as it is a "change back" to a government which is not bought by the corporations and the rich and run for their benefit.

strike three - Who is this Obama fellow? Is he Superman? Atlas? The Lord Jesus Christ? Is he gonna save the world all by himself? Right now polls are saying that the country will re-elect Obama, but will also re-elect a Republican house, and is perilously close to a Republican Senate.

I cannot say this enough. It is NOT all about Obama. Republicans need to be defeated in the Senate. Brown needs to lose in Massachusetts and win in Ohio. Republicans need to lose in the House. Bachman needs to be defeated. Ryan needs to be defeated in his house race. Jenkins needs to be defeated. Yoder needs to be defeated too, but unfortunately nobody is running against him. Of 435 Republicans running for the House, I would say about 410 of them need to be defeated. Maybe 25 of them are decent, or at least better people than their opponents.

Probably though, you are a younger person than I am. In my younger days, I embraced socialist and said "damn the torpedoes" to public opinion.

But I lived and I learned. I jumped on that windmill and got slammed to the ground.

As such now, if all my friends are jumping on a windmill, I am not gonna join in.

[theinquisitivechad]

26. Very sexy litotes. n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

30. Here's an argument in support of your position that should appeal to all leftists: Even

if we grant that Obama is a center-rightist, that does not obviate the fact that Romney is all but a self-declared fascist, seeking the complete merger of corporation and state into a single seamless entity.

All leftists who are registered to vote today are presented with the opportunity to cast a vote against fascism this November by voting for Obama. Only the most childish, self-centered leftist will fail to take advantage of that opportunity to deliver a rebuke to fascism by voting for Obama and, by so doing, nipping that incipient fascism in the bud.

It is a leftist's civic duty to stand against fascism, whenever and wherever it rears its head and lays bare its visage. A vote for Obama is a vote against fascism.