General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI simply don't understand how voters can turn their backs on a President who brought us back from
the brink of total economic collapse, record unemployment, a miserable healthcare insurance system, oversaw the apprehension of bin Laden, and is now in charge of an economy that is growing at least 2.5 %, creation of millions of jobs lowering the unemployment rate to levels before the recession, increased affordable health insurance for millions, and fighting for increases in minimum wage, and fighting to remove tax breaks for employers moving jobs abroad.... I just don't get it. I really don't even understand how a lot red-neck bigots can in all honesty vote for the GOPers. It just boggles my mind. They will vote for people who really want to stop wage increases, social security, Medicare and Medicaid, and who want to keep a system that enables billionaires to pay next to nothing in Federal taxes as they keep outsourcing American jobs abroad, while not contributing anything to rebuilding the infrastructure that their businesses used to make zillions of dollars. I just really don't understand it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
PDJane
(10,103 posts)
Peregrine Took
(7,583 posts)As I heard a historian say yesterday Obama brought us to the mountaintop and then shoved us off.
madokie
(51,076 posts)He told us loud and clear we were the change we wanted
That he couldn't do it for us but he dam sure was willing to lead the way but we had to do the heavy lifting.
Shoved us off, What bullshit
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)If we don't change, If we don't lead the way, how can he help us? Or how can the next Democratic President?
People continue pumping money into corporations which use that money to trample our rights. To fund attacks against liberal candidates and to ignore the effects of climate change.
Unless and until people are willing to put their time & money where their mouth is, we will never see the change we desire. Until that point, we will be a party that says the right things but contains corporate conservative elements that work and invest for the status quo.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Right from the start he said he cannot do it alone, he cannot do it without us. We are the ones who are in charge of change. And most of us realize that, but the loud ones whinge while laid back on the LazyBoy playing commando on their keyboards complaining that papa doesn't do anything for us.
so I call your bullshit, bullshit.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)The fact is, when not enough people showed up in 2010 to preserve a Democratic advantage in Congress, any hope of Further progress was stalled. Look at his accomplishments... They mainly occurred in those first two years. WTF do people expect him to do with a tea-bagger Congress?
ReRe
(12,189 posts)... the reason that some Dems stayed home in the 2010 midterm. Do you not remember? I didn't like what had been done, but it damn sure didn't keep ME from the polls. But you need to put the blame at the feet of the person who caused Dems to stay home. Dems just don't blithely disregard elections. 
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)Midterms are traditionally low turnout. What the RW and their enablers (Kochs, etc) have been doing for decades is finding hot buttons to push to arouse a few reliable groups to turn out and now control many of the local, county, and state governments with a very limited number of votes.
That's the reason a lot of states have their races in the off years. They can tailor their messages locally or against the "Big Government" without having to deal with national coattails. A smaller "likely" electorate favors the issues candidate with a hard core following.
The problem this year is the same as in any midterm, it's easy for the outs to criticize the ins and run against the failings of DC in general as personified by the sitting Prez.
Our problem is making it clear to our voters and others how important every race is to turn us toward the light, but it's hard when lies and deceit are the underlying basis for our opponents.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I mean, letting the the Repugs take control of Congress is SO much more likely to make it possible to advance progressive issues.
FFS, when Obama tried to close Gitmo, he had significant opposition from his own damn party!
I'm sorry... this line of reasoning is freakin' madness.
ReRe
(12,189 posts)... withholding one's vote altogether in protest is pretty dumb. And of course, then there was the perfect Republican storm, re. the teaparty & the pact to not allow PO any legislation or any accomplishments in hopes of his not getting a second term.
I, myself, was disappointed in some of PO's actions during those first two years, but I'll be damned if that was going to keep me away from the polls. Look it... GWB's 8 years just drove allot of Dems crazy. They wanted justice and felt that PO let them down.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I'm not sure what they reasonably expected... criminal charges against Bush and Cheney? That was NEVER going to happen. I would have liked to see charges against some of the bankers, sure, but ultimately, the President's job is to govern, not satisfy a need for revenge. Progress is made incrementally. We need to pull the national conversation back to the left. We can only do that once the power of the GOP is reversed and we can hold enough seats in Congress and state legislatures to reverse DECADES of Republican scheming to maintain political power even when they've lost the votes.
I'm proud of what PBO has been able to accomplish in the face of monumental obstructionism and unrealistic expectations. Do I like everything he's done? Nope. But my guess is I'll feel that way about any President.
ReRe
(12,189 posts)... anything. What with the Republicans taking pledges against him right and left, a "librul" press that believes in anything BUT a free press, and Dems who are so broken they can't drag themselves to the polls and do the right thing. I'm going to cling to the hope that those Dems ARE going to get out and vote, because after all... they sure came out and voted in 2012, now didn't they? We all need to kiss and make-up for the good of the country, because the alternative is just tooooooo scary. We need to take our protest against the Republicans to the polls with as many as we can round up
and all push that straight Dem button! 
calimary
(90,021 posts)What happened to that magic wand I was JUST SURE I saw him holding, or maybe it was sticking out of his pocket or something? I just KNOW I saw it...
Faux pas
(16,356 posts)I don't get it either.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)it's not just "red-neck bigots" turning their back ... though I believe it's largely for the same reason.
ProfessorGAC
(76,704 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Anything for attention and clickbait.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)I agree with whoever you think they are 
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)is that the criticism aimed at Obama by, as you said, Dem. candidates, could only have Biden as its intended object.
As VP, he's expected to run for President, just like VP's always do. Unfortunately for him, there are others who also want to run, at any cost, and criticizing the administration is the best way to eliminate Joe. And the news comes out about his son's discharge, at this time, also, because...
...... if fewer Dems win in the mid-term election, and Obama loses the Senate majority, nothing will be accomplished in his last 2 years, except may an attempt at impeachment. Enter the Democratic Candidate of 2016, the only possible savior not tainted by his/her own, or Obama's "failures." Who will it be?
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)
FSogol
(47,623 posts)
valerief
(53,235 posts)
C Moon
(13,643 posts)So much so, that on election night, even ROMNEY thought he was going to win.
twenty-four - seven non-stop doom and gloom from the corporate media coupled with of course the political party of fear, obstruction, cuts for everything except the 1-2%ers, et al.
Yeah, I'm talking about the GOP/Libertarian/RWers.
BobbyBoring
(1,965 posts)The fucking morons that write the emails asking us for money.
Ineeda
(3,626 posts)Doom and gloom, hair on fire, 'We're begging you', 'We're disappointed in you...', 'Don't delete', etc., etc. To the tune of a hundred a day. DELETE, DELETE, DELETE!! I will never again fall for this blackmail. I've dealt with a few on the phone, too. They're relentless to the point of enraging me, and I let them know it.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)getting out today. Far too many flip the TV channels and soak up the propaganda MSM peddles out for a profit.
Triana
(22,666 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)"President who brought us back from". What happened is that we continued down the same path, the economic cycle is on an upturn, and too big too fail is now even bigger. The cycle will continue and nothing was done to change that except the emboldening of the banking system. What was accomplished was nothing more than a continuation of the statue quo. What Executive Orders were issued that brought us back from the brink?
Who knows how they can vote for r wingers. That boggles the mind. But some claims don't make it. The health insurance industry is all of the sudden not miserable? What happened to it?
riqster
(13,986 posts)If Obama didn't single-handedly change everything, then he changed nothing.
According to the Pony Platoon, anyway.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)What you are arguing against was said in the op. It was not said in my post in any way. The op did a one man saved us and you take no issue with it. Yet you do with mine. Please refute anything I said as your reply actually refuted nothing. Your reply would also be more accurate directed at the op and not me.
riqster
(13,986 posts)Or perhaps your post could be read as blaming Obama for making things worse. That is likewise untrue.
On edit: here is your post:
"President who brought us back from". What happened is that we continued down the same path, the economic cycle is on an upturn, and too big too fail is now even bigger. The cycle will continue and nothing was done to change that except the emboldening of the banking system. What was accomplished was nothing more than a continuation of the statue quo. What Executive Orders were issued that brought us back from the brink?
Who knows how they can vote for r wingers. That boggles the mind. But some claims don't make it. The health insurance industry is all of the sudden not miserable? What happened to it?
Pretty much what I said you said, innit?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Economically we are still in the same place. Not one person can deny that. I get it that you think the President brought us back from the brink. How I have no clue. I do find it interesting you find my comments to be wrong yet support the whole idea that we were brought out from disaster by one office. After all of this I am still waiting for where the President brought us back from the brink as the op stated. The cycle was allowed to continue just as it has since the seventies with some cashflow to get it started again. That is it. No magic pill. Where did I state or even allude to the President making it worse as you have attempted to claim in a passive aggressive manner?
riqster
(13,986 posts)You can try to shift the narrative to some meta-level above macro economics, but a lot has changed, measured objectively.
Obama didn't do it all himself, agreed. But he did a lot and deserves credit.
Not enough has been done, I think, and more needs doing. But Obama has worked hard and deserves credit for what he has gotten done.
Your refusal to accept evidence-based reality makes an excellent example of the phenomenon described in the OP.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)You completely left your previous argument and completely left behind the op in order for that to happen. I am not sure what evidence-based reality you think I refuse to accept. I refuse to accept the foolishness in the op. From what you have now written it is clear you do to. You had to add a number of things that simply weren't there in order to argue. There really was no argument there. Nothing I have said goes against anything you have written except for your last sentence here. You are seeing things that aren't there.
riqster
(13,986 posts)My goodness. You just completely contradicted yourself, and accuse me of doing so... 
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)1)"Obama didn't do it all himself, agreed. But he did a lot and deserves credit." - I agree
2)"Not enough has been done, I think, and more needs doing. But Obama has worked hard and deserves credit for what he has gotten done." - Once again, I fully agree.
3)Fundamentally the economy is in the same place. - No one disagrees with this.
I have been saying the same thing throughout. The economy has not fundamentally changed and I don't feel we have been brought back from the brink. The economy has gone through a cycle and it is on an upturn right now. No one questions that. The administration also had a hand at infusing the economy with cashflow speeding up its recover. We seem to agree but you don't want to. I get that you think we have been brought back from the "brink" and I don't. But your arguments are going along other lines. Seems the one thing we disagree on is the one thing you don't like to mention yet you keep arguing to the things we agree on. Interesting debate tactic.
brush
(61,033 posts)Which is total bullshit.
The president deserves credit for the things cited in the OP. Your original post seems to disagree.
Certainly you must be aware of the repeated historical trend — since you keep talking about repeating economic
cycles — that when repugs get control they institute policies like deregulation and tax cuts that favor the 1%, then when the dems get in they get rid of those policies in favor of ones that help the rest of us (as much as they can considering all the obstructionism by the repugs).
If you think about it, that's the repeating economic cycle you cite, you just don't seem to be aware of the underlying reason for the repeating cycle.
From the recent Great Recession to the Great Depression and downturns between them, and those before the Great Depression, it's a repeating pattern of GOP deregulation and tax cuts followed by Dems having to pull the country out of the destruction wrought by the selfish party.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)My post never said or alluded to Obama pushing us off a mountain. There is absolutely no way you can read something that is not there in any way. Since your whole post is based off words you are putting in my mouth and nothing I even insinuated, what follows in your post is also false. You really can't just make something up that was never said in order to make your point. Really a low way to debate.
brush
(61,033 posts)I said you seemed to agree with the poster who said Obama shoved us off the mountain.
I notice you said nothing about the repeating economic cycles that you cited or the underlying reasons for them.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Where are you getting these things from?
brush
(61,033 posts)Forget about the shoving off the mountain, You seem to be in agreement with Peregrine Took's inference that the president deserves no credit for helping us move from the brink of economic collapse as the recurring economic cycle was the actual reason for the economy's improvement.
Is that correct?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Even if it was just in a subthread of theirs and not directly to them. I have no clue who they are off the top of my head. From your first post to me on I am now under the impression you really mean to be responding to someone else. That or you are continuing to attempt to put words in my mouth or attach me to things simply because you want to. Where have I replied to a poster named Peregrine? That might clue me in to what in the world you are trying to associate me with. Right now it has been nothing but falsehoods coming from you.
brush
(61,033 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)You tried multiple times to claim I said things that weren't said. You tried multiple times to connect me to a poster I am completely unfamiliar with. Seems like making things up about me has been very worthy of your time. Unfortunately for you I don't just roll over when someone makes false claims against me. You didn't back up one single claim you attempted to attach me to. Not one, and you made many claims. Way to go.
global1
(26,507 posts)think of what he could do if he had cooperation. Maybe economically we'd not be in the same place as you state but far out ahead.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Has to happen. Without that no fundamental change will occur within the economy. I so wish he had the cooperation he needed. I personally think Obama outside of government is probably the furthest left we have had in a very very long time. He governs much different and I do not fault him for that in any way. He knows he must in order to get anything accomplished.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)tremendous cooperation, but sadly many have other priorities than the betterment of the country for all. I just don't think he envisioned just how many obstructionists there would be, how powerful, and they not working in the best interests for the future of the country. He has to play the game in personally unacceptable ways to him, I think, in order to accomplish anything. There are just so many working to derail him, and frankly with a large portion of the population that chooses not to be informed.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Anyone who seriously asserts our economy is back from anything is stuck in an echo chamber.
The economy sucks horribly, Wall Street is responsible, and Obama has done nothing to stop Wall Street's continued looting and pillaging not only of private wealth but of the public treasury as well.
The unemployment rate is a manipulated joke and has been for decades. Right now we're sitting on the lowest labor-participation rate ever recorded, and as an unmanipulated statistic it is far more reliable than the voodoo-economics of U-x measurements.
Wages are worse than stagnant and they have been for a long time. Obama has done nothing to stop the trend of constantly lower wages (in real terms) and constantly higher cost of living, which together are decimating the middle class and making the poor even worse off than they were before.
We lose good-paying, high-quality jobs and get part-time WalMart jobs instead, and that's considered an even swap by the Powers that Be.
Our college graduates have immensely more debt than ever before, and immensely worse chances of getting a job to actually pay off those loans.
I could go on and on and on along these lines.
All the benefits of today's economy are flowing to the 1% (really, the 0.01%). Take out their gains from the equation and what everyone else is experiencing is revealed to be a full-blown Depression, deeper than the "Great" one.
ballyhoo
(2,060 posts)for what purpose? Whatever is going to happen in November is now a done deal. I am predicting a Democratic slaughter like 2010. I hope I'm wrong... I'm just glad I'm old and not trying to make it again, choosing between a management career at Walmart or a Handyman Trainee putting in alarm systems. I don't like being told my God and Bible aren't worth shit either. I shudder what is going to happen next year if the Republicans get in the Senate. Whatever happens, this election will be a statement on Obama, though not necessarily the Democratic Party, which has let their thoughts be known.
Skittles
(171,713 posts)there are DUers who are distracted by shiny objects
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)because it's all true. On paper, the economy looks great, especially if you only look at the stock market and number of jobs. But in reality, there are major issues that, if not addressed, will cause the next collapse. As you said, things like wage stagnation are a much bigger problem than the media has let on, and a bigger problem than most people understand. Sadly, I believe the current 'recovery' is not much more than window dressing.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... for "bringing us back from the brink" (he did NOTHING BTW, he filled his cabinet with the malefactors who brought this on us, how is that helping?) it might be the one correct perception of reality that they have.
We are not "back from the brink". The economy is still in perilous condition despite the ridiculous UE and other numbers.
Tell you what, here is a simple metric even those too lazy to understand anything can follow. As long as interest rates are held near zero, there is no recovery, period. It is not normal, natural or even desirable to have interest rates near zero. They are only there because everything is still broken.
Make ZERO mistake, this economy could fall off a cliff at any time. The games the Federal Reserve has played for 6 years with QE and interest rate manipulation cannot go on forever. And every day that these games continue, more damage is done.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)sooner or later you'll hit a vital spot. Just ask Julius.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)What vital spot am I going to hit? Julius. lol
Dustlawyer
(10,539 posts)strategy to Wall Street. The previous administration and their war crimes got a pass, NSA gone wild, whistleblowers are hunted down, helped BP against the victims of the Gulf oil spill, TPP...
Sure Obama has done many great things, but he has also played the corporate supplicant to a T. I find it hard to believe the OP cannot understand this. This blind support without acknowledging serious problems with his administration is the reason the corporate Plutocrats are free to control our government without resistance. This makes the OP no better that the "Red Necks" who consistently vote against their interests.
I hear, "Don't vote for Bernie Sanders, you will split the ticket like Nader did and the Republicans will win!" This will happen too because Democrats like the OP are either blinded like the "Red Necks", or content with voting for the lesser of two evils while the country and the environment goes down the drain, just a continuation of corporate control!
If Democrats really want to fix the problems in the country they must start with campaign contributions. Bernie is the only one who is making this a priority. I am tired of this crap and will always vote for the best option available, not the most electable.
Our political system is broken, that is plain for everyone to see. Obama has not made this an issue at all. He should be raising hell with the recent SCOTUS ruling on voting rights in Texas. He should be telling Americans from the Bully Pulpit that legal campaign contributions and Super PACs have allowed the rich to unfairly influence our political system to the point that we no longer have Representative Democracy. In other words, he should be going all FDR on ther ass!
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)And to the previous poster.
Obama, as much as I like his personality, has done nothing to help the financial disaster that we are in, the strangle hold that Wall Street banks and the FED have on us, the 1% issue.
My additional gripes include his sub par performance on the environment, and terrible war policies, allowing our ME "allies" to create the ISIS threat, and other expansionist policies, Nato/Ukraine for example.
riqster
(13,986 posts)Mostly, but not exclusively, from the Right.
The right wing drives the discussion in this country one way or another.
They eviscerate democrats from Bill and Hillary to Dean, Kerry and Gore, they deride all that can be associated with anything beyond their miserable "conservative" fantasy world - San Francisco when from 06 to 08 when Nancy Pelosi was the most prominent democrat, CHICAGO POLITICS when BHO was elected, gays, teachers, union members, government workers, intellectuals ...
They puff their chests and wave the flag and scream about Christianity and enable a sense of superiority and enable the abject disregard of personal responsibility by allowing people to blame others for what they think their problems are. They create boogymen to rally people around in fear. GW Bush was a blathering idiot and failure on a level we have never seen in a President, but you had to respect him because he was doing what he wanted and was commander in chief, and despite allowing 9-11 "kept us safe."
Democrats cower in the corner, scared of their own shadow, refuse to stand for anything and most often bend in whatever direction the republican's are driving the discussion.
As long as Democrats are going to be worthless and people are willing to allow republicans to lead them around by their noses with their bullshit, things aren't changing.
notrightatall
(410 posts)
Pretty simple, unfortunately.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)"I don't understand" is a dangerous position to take because it flies in the face of reality. People aren't happy with current conditions (whether realistically or from fanned flames), and they blame Washington generically. Democrats are in charge so they're taking the bunt of the disaffection, but the fact that McConnell is in trouble too suggests that it's anti-incumbent vs anti-Democratic.
notrightatall
(410 posts)I believe, that racism is at the core of this problem. Many who voted for him have not given him the same depth of respect that he deserves.
Also, many people who voted for him had, because of his race, a misconception that he is /was more liberal than his presidency has played out. Many on the left had larger expectations, despite his record of being only slightly left of center.
So, he got blasted from both sides.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)The definition of apprehend is to take into custody; arrest by legal warrant or authority.
Bin Laden was executed on the spot, allegedly. There was no apprehension.
The source of your confusion is becoming clearer.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)You can't be serious.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)But boy, that was something to behold... people going on about the "poor little old man in his jammies, beloved by the neighborhood children"
...
It was a glaring example of the massively disconnected reality bubble a few folks around here exist in.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)but I'm pretty sure NOBODY was on about the poor little old man in his jammies. 
And if you are going to cite "glaring examples of the massively disconnected reality bubble a few folks around here exist in, please provide links. 'Cause otherwise you sound as silly as you claim they do.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I'm not gonna go searching for it, but it's there.
Like I said, I don't give a shit if you believe me or not.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts) OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)I mean, if assassinations are good enough for bin Laden, well gosh darn it, they're good enough for Americans, too!
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at Northwestern University School of Law
Chicago ~ Monday, March 5, 2012
http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html
Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. “Due process” and “judicial process” are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.
...
The Magna Carta is trashed, and all the ignorant followers can do is post smilies.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)
FailureToCommunicate
(14,605 posts)He was killed resisting capture. Others in that raid were not killed, they didn't shoot back...
Besides, one bit of semantics on a long list you have trouble with does not negate the gist of the OP.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)http://www.salon.com/2011/05/06/bin_laden_13/
But what has surprised me somewhat is how little interest there seems to be in finding out what actually happened here. We know very little about the circumstances of bin Laden's killing, because the U.S. government has issued so many contradictory claims, which in turn contradict the reported claims of those at the scene. When I wrote about this on Monday, I said that the use of force would be justified if, as the U.S. Government claimed, he was violently resisting his capture. But that turned out to be totally false. It's now beyond dispute that bin Laden was unarmed when killed and there was virtually no violent resistence in the house. Still, the range of possibilities for what actually happened is vast -- everything from he was lunging for his AK-47 to he was already captured when shot (in front of his family) to the order from the start was to kill, not capture, him -- and I personally don't see how it's possible to assess the justifiability (or legality) of what took place without knowing which of those are true.
As for "turning our backs on Obama," we now have an administration that feels it can assassinate a US citizen (even a child!) without trial, or detain a citizen indefinitely (remember the NDAA?), in addition to recording all your phone calls, emails, Google searches, etc.
Obama also committed the US to another decade of war in Afghanistan, and he reignited the Iraq war (scratch "Ended the Iraq war" off The List.)
THAT negates the gist of the OP.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Then realize that half the people are more ignorant than that.
Garbage In, Garbage Out, people can't make good decisions with data that bear no resemblance to reality, it doesn't matter how smart they might be.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)My source is Neil Barofsky, the TARP inspector general.
Neil Barofsky, the former special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, has published a new book, “Bailout: An Inside Account of How Washington Abandoned Main Street While Rescuing Wall Street.” It presents a damning indictment of the Obama administration’s execution of the TARP program generally, and of HAMP in particular.
…
By delaying millions of foreclosures, HAMP gave bailed-out banks more time to absorb housing-related losses while other parts of Obama’s bailout plan repaired holes in the banks’ balance sheets. According to Barofsky, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner even had a term for it. HAMP borrowers would “foam the runway” for the distressed banks looking for a safe landing. It is nice to know what Geithner really thinks of those Americans who were busy losing their homes in hard times.
CONTINUED w VIDEO and links and more letters...
http://washingtonexaminer.com/video-geithner-sacrificed-homeowners-to-foam-the-runway-for-the-banks/article/2502982
Other than that, there's the matter of Lawrence "What would Goldman think?" Summers.
http://www.gregpalast.com/larry-summers-goldman-sacked/
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)On the one hand, I think some bankers should be in jail for deceptive practices and out and out fraud.
On the other I know a number of people who lost their houses because of their own greed. They took out these ridiculous balloon loans on a LOT more house than they could really afford and then complained that they couldn't meet the balloon payment because they couldn't flip the house for a massive profit (which had been the plan). Meanwhile some of them had teased me that I took a fixed rate late out on a house that I could actually afford.
I really don't have sympathy for those idiots.
I DO have sympathy for some folks who were snookered because they simply did not understand what they were getting in to, especially those who were actively encouraged by loan officers to lie about their incomes.
unblock
(56,198 posts)they would be starting a movement to rename hospitals across the country in his honor.
they would be talking about adding his face to mount rushmore.
they would have a debate about whether obama has replaced reagan as the most beloved and revered president in modern history or if we can love and honor both of them.
as he walked up to the mic before a press conference, they would say, "and here he comes, with that famous proud and confident stride of the man who saved the country, the world really, from an all but certain depression...."
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
BeyondGeography
(41,101 posts)The Bin Laden killing alone would have guaranteed sainthood. Factor in the stock market rebound and there would be no stopping them.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)one could say that besides his race he is very much a republican in dems clothing.
unblock
(56,198 posts)
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)I'm sure it has NOTHING to do with the color of his skin.
Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MontyPow
(285 posts)They have excuses not explanations
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)wanted to do, but it's quite another to realize he has made/is making things worse in some very important areas.
He has not only failed at his promise to make government more transparent, he has acquiesced to Gen Clapper and the ever growing powerful Security State. He has made strong moves to continue the Great Continuous Middle East War. He is unilaterally killing people via drones in sovereign nations. His administration has done more to silence whistle-blowers that all previous administrations. How secure is our democracy if the NSA/CIA Security State is more powerful than the President.
As far as the economic recovery, I believe statistics show that 100% of the "recovery" went to the 1%. The millions that lost their homes while the banksters and Wall Street made huge profits, won't get their homes back. The widening wealth gap must be dealt with or we will all end up smoking our weed in soup lines.
His administration has spent more resources persecuting marijuana users than pursuing Wall Street corruption. What's that all about?
We have made some gains but if we can't reestablish our democracy and get the growing wealth gap under control, the gains we've made can disappear quite quickly.
zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)Did ya happen to catch Travis on MTP Sunday? He said:
"If you are black or brown, what have the democrats done in the last 2 years to bring you back to the poles?"
This was after he mentioned that African American unemployment was STILL in the double digits.
Look, to a great degree I agree with you. But this really isn't anything new. Labor union members re-elected Reagan AFTER he crushed the ATC union. Same for Bush after he was known to have lied us into war. There is not a strong correlation between what happens on a Presidents "watch" and whether he gets re-elected. Even more so having any "coat tails" in the midyears, especially a lame duck.
Obama would have done better to not be so friendly to the banks and way more friendly to the unemployed. He would have done better to at least have PROPOSED an economic stimulus plan that wasn't half (or less) of what was needed. And what has "reaching out" to the GOP gotten him, or us for that matter?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Both are negative, and yet almost exact opposites.
The first is that he is a weak, terrorist appeasing, commie socialist. This one is designed to anger the right wing.
The second is that he is a warmongering corporatist. This one is designed to discourage the left.
The media regular plays both of these views on the same panel.
A pundit from the right explains why Obama is wrong on topic X, because he's a warmongering socialist commie.
The moderator nods, and turns it over to the pundit from the left. The pundit from the left then explains why Obama is wrong on the exact same topic X, because he is a warmongering corporatist.
The moderator nods, and goes to break.
The right wing viewer leaves mad that Obama destroyed America. The left wing viewer leaves discouraged that Obama hasn't fixed it.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)
Andy823
(11,555 posts)Nothing he does is going to change the way the media portrays him. The MSM is bought and paid for, literally, by the right wing 1%. Whatever he does it will be wrong.
The sad part is that some on the left buy into the BS. Just on this thread alone you can see the same posters, posting the same BS that the do everyday here on D.U., never anything positive, just the negative. I am sure that whoever wins they WH in 2016, democrat that is, will end up being bashed here the same as Obama by some of the same bashers.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)You get folks whining about how "disappointed they are" ... or remember ... "we need a primary challenge against Obama"?
Those dopes should have been building more "acceptable" candidates for 2016. But that takes effort.
Easier to complain from the keyboard. Which is where they will be if a Dem wins in 2016.
Same folks, same whining.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)break on to the other side....the real side, the real recovery, the real credit due to the most successful President in history....it is like 2009 never happened to the 1% that were bailed out and are now pretending they were not the moochers, and still are.
Control the message, control the debate, control the voters, it is so obvious.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)That plus some straight up voter suppression.
All it takes is a couple of percentage points.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)And "Mission Accomplished" ...
could be heard whispered throughout the land. (It seems)
GOP: "Government doesn't work" ... Check!
Libertarians (right and left): "Government is evil" ... Check!
Tea Party: "Government doesn't work and there is no difference between establishment republicans and establishment Democrats" ... Check!
"Liberals/Progressives": "Government is evil and there is no difference between establishment republicans and establishment Democrats" ... Check!
The media has played this narrative on a 7-day, 24-hour loop.
Result: Only 15% of the American people pay close attention to the only mechanism for change.
Nicely played, Oligarchs!
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)They'll even craft messages that are opposites, just so long as some segment will internalize it and be unhappy with the Obama administration.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Neither the left nor the right remotely hate the government, the right will happily use government to jam an ultrasound probe up every poor uterus in the nation and the left will use the government to ban smoking in private residences.
The real goal isn't domination of the right, it's divided government where both sides get to point to the other side as why they can't do what they tell their voters they want to do.
global1
(26,507 posts)
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)Bailing out banks, ACA-continued march toward privatization, military bombing campaign$
Meh, how hard is it to maintain the status quo?
Avalux
(35,015 posts)He didn't say "I" will do it, he said together, "WE" will do it.
The American people didn't hold up their end of the bargain. We bought into his message, but did nothing to help him do what needed to be done. Everyone just went back to watching tv and criticizing what they don't like.
It's completely idiotic for anyone to expect one man (I don't care who he is), to upset the status quo.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)He and the Democrats had solid majorities for TWO YEARS!! and they did nothing but squawk about Republicans
Avalux
(35,015 posts)If enough people had demanded a public option - hell, if a majority of people demanded universal healthcare it would happen. If everyone exercised their rights and responsibilities as Americans, we would have actual representation in Washington, instead of the circus.
The only way things will change is for US to demand it, and make it happen. We need to do is get over the victim mentality, and start working together in our collective best interests. Having a snit fit because Obama didn't live up to expectations isn't doing anyone any good.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)*This* is what happened when candidate Obama ran promising that he would not sign a bill without a public option. This is what happened when he ran on reining in the surveillance/security state and standing up for the 99 percent against corporate predators.
You really need to stop pretending here that Obama is really and truly a devoted liberal merely obstructed by Republicans or insufficiently enthusiastic Democratic voters. It is insulting as hell to Americans, and it's insulting to REALITY.
This administration had the perfect opportunity to push for a public option on behalf of Americans at the time of the passage of the ACA. Not only did Obama NOT do that, he made a point of not mentioning the option publicly *at all.* This despite the fact that that he *ran* on those promises....
...And this despite the fact that the country was polling heavily *in favor* of a public option and would have rallied to lend strength to his demand, had he chosen to demand it. Instead, it was as though all his campaigning on that issue vanished into a memory hole, and the public option was quietly dropped in a backroom deal. It would have been inconvenient to mention, because public response could have thrown a wrench into the carefully planned corporate scam we ultimately got. The sad, ugly truth is that the administration went silent on the public option BECAUSE the country supported it.
The administration's behavior in health policy, like in other areas, speaks for itself and has been overwhelmingly corporate. We were told that this would be a path to something better....They will always "fix it later"....but, true to form, the changes we*have* gotten have been consistently on behalf of the corporations and at the expense of the people:
The employer mandate was delayed...the mandate for Americans? Not so much:
White House delays employer mandate requirement until 2015
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/02/white-house-delays-employer-mandate-requirement-until-2015/
Out of pocket caps on costs for patients....also delayed...again targeting the *people,* not the insurance corporations.
Limit on Consumer Costs Is Delayed in Health Care Law
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/us/a-limit-on-consumer-costs-is-delayed-in-health-care-law.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
And the administration is carving out loopholes to allow insurance companies to shift even *more* costs to patients.
Obama administration quietly approves new Obamacare loophole benefiting insurance companies.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4970298
Obama's deliberate silence on and dealing away of the public option, along with the subsequent emphasis on changes to help insurance companies rather than patients...EVEN when Democrats already controlled the Presidency and half of Congress, and EVEN when the country clearly supported the public option and could have been rallied behind it... and his repeated lies about not having run on these things....are indefensible but also entirely consistent with the overall, aggressively corporate direction of this administration.
Enough. This constant drumbeat of 2+2=5....the constant bids to accept a brazen rewriting of history in which we are expected to ignore the flooding of corporate money into both parties...the constant bids to pretend that Obama did not proactively fill his own cabinet with corporatists and has not worked aggressively and PROACTIVELY on behalf of a corporate agenda in virtually every major area of policy important to the One Percent....to pretend that his own Justice Department has not been working relentlessly and aggressively to entrench and legalize the very worst abuses of the Bush years....
It's Orwellian. It's like living in Oceania. Look at the real record:
We are facing a crisis in this country. Our government is purchased. Both parties. It is SYSTEMIC.
And NONE of it changes as long as we continue to tolerate this ABSURD, hyperpartisan victim-blaming and denial of reality. We are bullied and hectored constantly ignore what we see and live every single day and to cling to this crazy-making, wagon-circling, suicidal delusion that the corporate takeover is only happening in the other party.
Enough. 2+2=4, period. The Third Way propaganda has ZERO credibility anymore.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)Obama had more political capital than any Prez in our lifetimes
I really don't think we'll see it again
840high
(17,196 posts)leftstreet
(40,680 posts)Were you not following the polls at the time?
Avalux
(35,015 posts)Here's how our system works: the so-called majority elects Representatives and Senators who legislate what the majority wants. Just because a poll shows that a majority of Americans want something, it doesn't mean that the 'want' will be translated into any sort of action to make it happen. Ghandi didn't cause a revolution by himself. The people had his back.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)Maybe you have a point, I don't know
I do know Obama campaigned vigorously on things like a Public Option, Jobs Programs, etc. What he failed to say, according to you, is that his massive support from voters - and people all over the world really - may prove to mean nothing
Avalux
(35,015 posts)I'm saying that not everyone votes. If all Americans were well-informed and exercised their right to vote to get what they want, I think we'd have a completely different country. The reason corporations run everything and elected officials are nothing more than their puppets is because WE THE PEOPLE have been lazy and allowed it to happen.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)Now you're changing the subject
Yeah, people were lazy and apathetic when it came to Obama
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)1. 1/07 – 12/08 – 51-49 – Ordinary Majority.
2. 1/09 – 7/14/09 – 59-41 – Ordinary Majority. (Coleman/Franklin Recount.)
3. 7/09 – 8/09 – 60-40 – Technical Super Majority, but since Kennedy is unable to vote, the Democrats can’t overcome a filibuster
4. 8/09 – 9/09 – 59-40 – Ordinary Majority. (Kennedy dies)
5. 9/09 – 10/09 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 11 working days.
6. 1/10 – 2/10 – 60-40 – Super Majority for 13 working days
Total Time of the Democratic Super Majority: 24 Working days.
http://mauidemocrats.org/wp/?p=2442
Obama didn't have the Dem votes for a public option, let alone the Republican votes. The blue dogs wouldn't budge--they were in fear of their red districts back home. And they were quite prescient. Most of them were turned out in 2010.
One of the standard right wing talking points is that Obama has been a failure even though he "controlled" Congress for two years. That is of course a lie. They say this to deflect from the fact that he has been obstructed at every turn by Republicans and blue dogs. What is amazing is how much he has accomplished despite that.
The 'blue dogs' kept that majority from being effective. Just ask Pelosie and Reid. They stabbed Obama in the back just as regularly as the rethugs stabbed him from the front. All this selective memory stuff is old, tired and worn.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Because there weren't the votes for a Public Option.
It would obstructed by republicans in the House.
No we didn't ... not even for 7 weeks.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)He made some unpopular decisions that were tough to make and yet it was not enough from many here. The ACA is not perfect but just what do you think he could have gotten out Congress with the Public Option still on the table?
He bailed out the banks...yes he did and that alone kept many working class folks from losing tons of money and savings.
Glass-Stegal is still with us...but his term is not over ..especially if the Dems hold on to the Senate.
And please explain to me how we were going to leave ground troops in Iraq...even on an advisory basis without agreement from the Iraqi government? People here who cry about GOPers pushing imperialism but want Obama to have done the same thing in Iraq. And just think what and who would be crying the loudest had we forced our way in to stay and then some atrocity happened and the Iraqis took us to the IC. Who would be screaming "how dare they!?
And no matter what he has or hasn't done he's still not getting the support he deserves IMHOP.
The greedy hoarders will turn loose all the money they are impounding until Obama is out of office and they will let the good times roll and most people will be led to believe that Obama was the worst President we ever had. And that is exactly what the GOPers want. And if we don't get out and vote and encourage others to do so, we will be helping them.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)**Other than when he's campaigning - obviously**
If he believed the public option was in danger (or something) why didn't he get on the tv and ask his supporters to call, email, blitz the offices of their reps?
That's right, he never did. Never has.
Enormous political capital totally wasted
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)But no amount of calls from progressives would have changed the minds of the blue dogs voting against the public option. The blue dogs knew there were not enough progressives in their red states to get them reelected if they voted for the public option. They knew they were risking a lot just to pass the private insurance-based law we have. Even that got most of those red dogs voted out of office as "commies."
Obama had to use every ounce of political capital he had just to get the ACA we have....and it barely passed.
The ACA is an important step toward single payer. It greatly expanded Medicaid, which is single payer. Most important, it enabled people to get insurance who were uninsured their whole lives, like my brother. It saved and will continue to save thousands of American lives and prevent untold misery. Before the ACA, 45,000 Americans were dying each year for lack of coverage. http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)You're right...I totally missed that
Now I DO recall the phony healthcare 'town halls' where Obama and the Democrats helped the GOP look like an actual player (after voters had soundly defeated them)
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)See my post #53 above.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)When expectations were very, very high - no dissenting GOP or GOPLite Dem would have risked losing his/her seat by going against Obama and the people who just put him in office
But you know all this
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)Public pressure does not work in the twisted, Koch funded world of red state politics. 90% of the public wanted background checks, but we didn't get it, even though Obama was all over TV about it and even though it was right after Sandy Hook.
But you know this.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)How many times in history has there been a larger one? A handful.
No, we went from electoral army to inside baseball bullshit. Instead of pressuring and pushing to replace weak leaks the Turd Way leadership circled the wagons hard for the corporate taint lickers and stifled the left and within a year the grassroots army had been defanged and deemed retarded by the Chief of Staff and mocked by others in the corporate stooge and neocon cabinet (whose appointments should make it clear as crystal what the real agenda was and is.
Take away Lieberman and Bernie along with Kennedy and you still have a rare majority.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)I assume you understand what a filibuster is in the Senate. The GOP leadership met in secret (now not so secret, but apparently you are unaware of the pact) where they agreed to block everything Obama tried to do, so that they could then turn around and say he was a failure (counting on folks like you to run with their meme). They then proceeded to filibuster everything. That treasonous pact is what is unprecedented and rare. The GOP used the previously rarely used filibuster procedure to block everything Obama put forward. There were only 24 working days where Obama had a filibuster proof majority of 60 Senators.
Contrast that with the huge 64-seat filibuster proof majority FDR had in the Senate (and 73 percent in the House!) when he got in office that allowed him to push through his initiatives. Now THAT was a rare and generational majority. Plus FDR had no treasonous Tea Party -fearing GOP pact to deal with.
Like I said, considering what he was up against, Obama got an amazing amount of things done, not the least of which was the ACA, which is saving thousands of American lives each year. To say that is "weak" or "minimal" is ignoring reality--and the value of these American lives.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)There was nothing the least bit secret about the TeaPubliKlan agenda, McConnell's "plan" was public and clear before the inaugural and before the Congress was seated but "leadership" insisted on pretending they could "reach across the aisle", "meet in the middle", "find bipartisan consensus", and that the batshit crazy TeaPubliKlans "had the nation's best interests at heart" and could be "partners in governing" despite three fucking decades of an all out effort to bankrupt and de - legitimizing government proceeded by even more decades of trying to gaffle anything in the commons and the wages of working people.
BULL FUCKING SHIT! Bricks aren't that dawn stupid and a baby isn't that gullible to believe any such nonsense that would allow ANYONE to buy it for a second.
As for FDR there was an actual coup effort and yes their was strident opposition from the same puppet master types running shit today. Granted he had the greatest majority in the history of the nation but that does not negate my point an iota, Obama had one of the largest majorities in history and the largest since LBJ's time.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)The filibuster numbers under Obama were unprecedented. It literally went off the charts. Google "filibuster chart."
And you're dead wrong about Obama having the largest majority since LBJ. Carter had 61 Dems in the Senate, a filibuster proof majority and more than Obama had. The Senate Dem numbers Obama had in his first term were comparable to the 57 Clinton had in his first term; more than a simple majority but not a filibuster proof majority, as I detail in post #53 above. So no, the Dem numbers in the Senate under Obama were not "rare majorities."
What was rare and unprecedented was the Republican obstructionism. It's too bad you don’t have your facts straight. If you did, you'd direct your venom at the GOP instead of your fellow Dems...assuming you're a Dem.
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)since 76.
I think their obstruction has fair precedent. The previous session they really got the ball rolling in that direction and before that they had the majority or they'd be doing the same shit they started under Clinton.
Anyone surprised is dense. Anger? Totally reasonable response. Surprised? That shows an extreme lack of vision.
SunSeeker
(58,283 posts)Last edited Sat Oct 25, 2014, 11:51 AM - Edit history (1)
http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/republicans-unprecedented-obstructionism-by-numbers
Obama did not show "extreme lack of vision." He managed to get us healthcare reform that is saving thousands of American lives each year. All of the presidents before him going back to FDR failed to do it, despite larger, filibuster-proof majorities than Obama had. But you sure have that Republican talking point down pat.
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Willy T's post today garnered six times the recs this OP did. Willie T's OP is about how the Middle Class has lost all their accumulated wealth from 1940's on. Well, the reason people have lost total confidence in Obama is because the people he helped are the One Percent. And he'd be in bigger trouble if some of the people with their heads up their butts came up for a breath of air, but they have ingested the mantras. I am so sick of friends saying, "Obama did the best he could - Republicans overr powered him. Wait till his third term." That is in one breath, then their next breath they say, "I can't afford groceries, and utilities."
Look at Iceland - they jailed their bankers and set up a system wherein the same economic implosion cannot happen again. Meanwhile their middle class is witnessing prosperity.
Here we let our bankers go, continued a policy of no taxation for the rich (Obama extended the "Bush tax cuts" and tomorrow or next week or next year, the entire economy could melt down once again. And our middle class is hurting, but once again, we would be bailing those bastards on Wall Street out. Prices of food are out of sight, but as long as Safeway has "Buy one 800 ounce container of soda pop and get 30 bottles free," the economic index is screwed and doesn't measure the real inflation most of us who are not living on soda pop see every day of the week. (Things I buy are 75 cents more expensive than they were in the Spring of 2014.)
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 21, 2014, 02:11 PM - Edit history (1)
if you were in Iceland you might be right, but here, IF he jailed any bankers of note or tried, he would be where Jack Kennedy ended up, with a fucking bullet in his head. Go tell your garbage to someone who can change this system and stop complaining about a POTUS who's done a lot for a lot of people. No, he couldn't live up to all the promises he made, NO politician in this system ever has or ever will. They are limited by this system and when you add a bunch of hateful people grinding against him, both R and D, he never stood a chance. Wake up and look at reality and the american system. Money rules, not principle, ethics or promises. MONEY!!!! Obama and NO POTUS, will ever change that.
I'd be willing to bet if a republican was in office, those items you're paying more for now than in september would be double that .75cents.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)S-N-O-O-Z-E!
heaven05
(18,124 posts)hope you wake up soon.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Actually attempted to make things okay for the middle class? So okay, if that is the case, then what is the friggin' point of going to the polls?
That meme is hardly a "Get Out The Vote" type of meme. It is more like "stay at home and hope the corruption doesn't end up with you and yoru family being carted off in the middle of the night" philosophy.
Because what you are describing is a damn banana republic, and in that scenario, people do get rounded up and carted off in the middle of the night!
heaven05
(18,124 posts)it is no stretch to imagine it happening again. The MIC is the real power behind the throne. I don't care whether you believe it or not. And even with knowing how corrupt our system of 'democracy' is, yes, I'm going to vote on principle and nothing else. This 'democracy' is verging on a banana republic. SCOTUS corrupt, police departments nationwide filled with corrupt murderers, in our vaunted Congress money determines the laws that are passed or not. At one time americans had a chance to change the direction of this country and we tried. Then BAM!!!! Reagan and nancy ascended the throne and we were done as a democracy. You can pretend to not see the writing on the wall, yet realize not everyone tries escape or deny the reality of what this country stands for now.
Per your last description of a scenario describing this country. No, they don't get rounded up and carted away in the night here, they are just shot down in the street and left there for hours for walking in that street or they are slapped on the wrist for a "melee" involving looting and rioting at some 'pumpkin festival'. Just to name a couple of examples, recently. Your choice.
I live in the real world and have been all my life. Good luck.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)If it is true that the current resident of the Oval Office decided to not do the things that have been needed to be done, but instead refrained, then what?
Did he remain a really sweet crusader for the public and the middle class, inside his heart of hearts?
Or did he then decide to totally sell us down the river?
Given his appointment of just TimGeithner alone, a man who has totally sold us down the river, and who boasted to foreign economic officials for most of one summer that "The President works for me," I don't think that I can see Mr Obama as someone who is loyal to the public in his heart but just can't bring himself to die for his beliefs.
And beyond Obama's appointment of Geithner, you have Obama appointing Mike Taylor to head up one division at the FDA, to ensure the complete control that Monsanto and other Big Gm firms want over our seeds, crops and foods. (Bill Clinton was the first one to install Mike Taylor in the government, so I guess he was under the gun too.)
And let me remind you, we have had many Presidents who were willing to die for BOTH their right and their desire to help the middle class. Teddy Roosevelt, (although he survived his assassination attempt) John Kennedy, and then two men who perhaps might have been Presidents had they too not been cut down, Martin Luther King Jr, and Bobby Kennedy. Also Senator Wellstone.
Someone remarked on the OP I put up yesterday (that OP then got entirely blocked,) anyway they remarked to the effect that getting to choose between going to Hell quickly or slowly was hardly a choice.
Someone else remarked on the OP that if the public allows for such an attitude, that a President should acquiesce to the needs of his or her safety, then we will not see the likes of FDR again. Of course, maybe I misread that - maybe they were saying that as long as the public is now so cynical that they don't mind the erosion of any morality on the part of the Top Executive, and are willing to just accept whomever the "D"D Party puts up to run,a s long as they make for a pleasant and charming Corporate Spokesperson, -well, if most Democrats are willing to settle for that, then that is what we Will et.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)never again see a person run for the presidency who would be willing to sacrifice their life for our democracy. We will get, no matter the person occupying the presidency, what the bankers and MIC want. Nothing more and probably much less for me as a retiree. I'm not fooled by the pretentious nature of our so called democracy. I vote on principle with no real expectation of any change in the destruction of the middle class, the ability of the rich to get richer and the MIC being able to have perpetual war around the globe or a change in lobbyist money having the power to create and steer direction of laws and their passing or not. Nothing, in general, will ever pass that will be in our, the citizens, best interest(s). That is power that the average voter in this country will never have, vote or not. Did I mention SCOTUS? I better not, I will be banned for the use of very foul language.
I understand what you are implying and I wish we had a POTUS willing to get his/her head blown apart because she/he stood up to the MIC and bankers. WE WILL NOT EVER HAVE ONE AGAIN. I vote because too much blood has soaked into american soil for that right even as the immense money involved has made it an almost meaningless exercise. I really don't have much disagreement with you, I just cannot stop seeing the smoke and mirrors this 'democracy' is.
leftstreet
(40,680 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 21, 2014, 02:08 PM - Edit history (1)
of our political system that has ALWAYS been bought and paid for by the 1%ers, Barack Obama has done some good things regardless of your, he's done nothing BS. No POTUS has a chance to be a Roosevelt or a Lincoln anymore. Money is too much a part of who gets elected and what that elected person can accomplish. He or she really tries, in this system, they are marginalized or assassinated. The sooner the idealist come out of the clouds and walk on solid ground, the better off all of us(D's) will be.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)a lack luster presidency with few actual accomplishments and several real failures. Every year the divide between republican and democratic politicians narrows. the republicans have been moving steadily to the right and the democrats are following them there.
if you say so, but I can't get past your agenda to believe you.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)raising the minimum wage, extending U/C, promotion of infrastructure repair (i.e., jobs) and green energy, and Paycheck Fairness ... initiatives that affect working class folks (and far more than, jailing the banksters, raising taxes on the wealthy, or the vast majority of the things DU advocates) ... right-center?
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)but doing things like this cooled my enthusiasm for him:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/us/politics/obama-could-reaffirm-a-bush-era-reading-of-a-treaty-on-torture.html?_r=1
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)Now as for this thread....
The economy is in better shape but banks are still more concentrated and not separated into the categories of "retail" and investment.
Glass-St is not restored so the problems that brought on the collapse are still with us.
But the essence is, NOT ONE BANKER OR HEDGE FUND MANAGER OR 1%-ER WHO CAUSED THIS IS IN JAIL. That is the result of Holder and would not have happened if Obama had put pressure on him to uphold the laws against fraud.
As I have posted in other threads, I didn't expect much from Obama and I wasn't disappointed. Kuchinich would have been better but he is not photogenic.
This brings us to another topic....Hillary.... Things will not be better if she wins.
modestybl
(458 posts)"It could have been worse" is NOT a compelling argument. Obama decided to listen to Summers and Geitner over Stiglitz and Reich early on, and made Wall Street whole while giving little or no relief to millions of underwater homeowners.
People feel that Obama doesn't stand up to the Repub bullies near enough, the he is an appeaser, even to the worst of the political meth addicts. They fear the worst if the Senate should go Repub. They are tired of rhetoric not backed up with fight.
What did Obama gain by blowing off the progressives and reaching out to the Repubs?
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)"Most people" i see are on the roads enjoying falling gasoline prices, more money in their pockets, using their ACA insurance, happy their children can get coverage, rush hour is crushing, factory orders are up and some items in HomeDepot are on back order. Restaurants are full as well as grocery stores. My family members in other parts of the USA are reporting the same things I am seeing from CA to FL from WS to Maine. But then they go into their homes at night, turn on FOX and are told how miserable they must be.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)They're underemployed or unemployed. If they have insurance, they can't afford to use it. And they have no logical reason to believe things will get better for them, especially when other people float by in their happy bubble and declare that things are swell.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)together. Ya'know, one Country. But alas you have over 30 states that are run by the GOPs. They subsequently counter most if not all productive and positive legislation that would help their constituents out of poverty and keep a strong middle class. These states have instill more coverage for rich at the same time screwing the other classes. These states work against what Pres O and Dems are trying to do. Maine, WI, Michigan, PA, KS, NC, SC, MS, FL,TX to name a few. This on top - GOP controls the house of representatives (house controls the purse) and then the senate - GOP filibusters.
If the government worked together for the betterment of the country (750 thousands lost per month - Bush), and the stagnate worker's wages (which Dems are trying to raise the minimum wage with complete opposition), more job development, et al., we as a country would be moving faster forward than slowly moving forward. Voting is important. Soon or later, if this country allows more GOPs in office, voting rights will be gone for minorities and women. Women rights, civil rights.
The United States supreme court (5) justices are in the pocket of the rich. Their decisions are against Americans.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)I was a Democrat before Barack Obama started his political career, and I will continue to be a Democrat long after he retires ...
I am a Democrat BEFORE I am an Obama supporter ...
Obama is a wonderful person who does NOT exemplify the perfect liberal/progressive Democrat ... I needn't lick his boots, thank you very much ...
kentuck
(115,406 posts)The truth cannot keep up with the bought lies. Uneducated and uninformed voters are rather easy to fool.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...of apathetic, un- (or deliberately mis-) informed morons casting votes would seem to be the answer at first glance.
AndyTiedye
(23,538 posts)Must... Obey...
Never underestimate the power of the Mighty Slime Machine.
Peacetrain
(24,288 posts)facts, make things up out of whole cloth lies.. and there are people who just eat that stuff up.. it helps them get through the day because they have invested so much of their personal self worth into hating the President..
MrScorpio
(73,772 posts)R.Quinn
(122 posts)Foreign policy.
In 2008, we elected George W. Obama, and then re-elected him in 2012 to keep the wars coming.
Iggo
(49,927 posts)
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)And there lies your problem. First why the name calling! Second so if someone does not like this preident they are biggots. The Democratic Party needs to learn how to talk to these people without insulting them.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Then maybe you might have a point ...
I, for one, refuse to extend courtesy to those who would spit at us when given the chance ...
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)With no clue what your talking about. First, do you classify all republicans this way?
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Ok ... you win .... I hereby now offer apologies to ALL right wing, Nazi bigots in your name ...
Me? ... I would still tell them to take a flying FUCK at a rolling donut ...
You have a problem with that? ... fine - run back there and give those right wing bigots a big hug ! ... You will feel better!
(it's bigots ... BIGOTS!)
Iamthetruth
(487 posts)I would say my family is redneck to a point but I would also say my mother is as hardcore democrat as it gets. Of my two brothers, one is as republican as it gets but as first a soldier and now as a cop he would lay his life down to save someone like you, you would never have such courage. So while you want to label every group as the same, I'm sure you would be the first to cry about such treatment.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)has met my expectations.
Many times, Pres. O & his Admin. exceeded my expectations when it looked on surface so many RW piled on their crap layers, he was totally locked out of any progress.
I think he really must be superman! 
riverbendviewgal
(4,396 posts)may not support him. Usually they voted Democratic mostly but this time around may not. Some are holding their noses but will be voting Republican because the Republicans say they will repeal FATCA.
I love Obama but not his signing of FATCA. I relinquished my US citizenship decades ago. I never had a US passport but I did root for the Democratics. I share the same concerns and causes as you on DU. I am not a Progressive Conservative supporter but will support the NDP, Liberal and Green Party in Canada.
The whole world is Resident based taxation while Eritrea and the USA are citizen based taxation.
The way to describe it is as if you were born in Pennsylvania but moved to NJ when you were a kid and then moved to Ohio as an adult. Pennsylvania would be claiming that you must file state taxes forever until you die. You may have to pay if you make over a certain amount. Plus you must report to the Pennsylvania state all your banking accounts for the rest of your life any that you have anywhere outside of Pennsylvania. If you do not you will be fined very big penalties. Just for not filing and also a high percentage of what you might owe. It could end up ending up wiping out all your hard earned savings for your retirement..
I am glad I do not have to make the choice to not vote or not. I hate the Republicans and have seen them descend to such a hellish party. They are evil as far as I am concerned.
I think Obama was duped and perhaps not aware of the full extent of FATCA and FBAR. It was meant to stop tax cheaters but the majority of Americans abroad are not rich. The rich who are abroad have many tax accountants who can fill these forms properly and timely. They would be aware of the law, while many Americans Abroad who have lived for decades or that are children or spouses of American born are not aware they must file. I did..through a fluke. I was under the impression that the whole world was citizen based taxation.
It would be best if the USA said if you move to another country you have x amount of years to live there otherwise, become a citizen of that country and renounce your US citizenship. Perhaps make it automatic after living out the country for a certain amount of years.
FATCA has made a wall around the USA, to keep its citizens living only its borders. Only the rich can afford to live outside of the USA now.
Oh, I know some of you have already told me..."don't let the back door hit me when I leave." I have left decades ago. No regrets. I would have been a bankrupt widow if I had stayed in the USA.. My husband and son were struck with Lymphoma and Glioblastma multiforme brain tumour two months apart. There were no medical bills. They had the best of care and treatment in Canada.
Canada Health care was one of the reasons I chose to stay in Canada and become a citizen.
You all deserve one payer.
DonCoquixote
(13,961 posts)The whole world is Resident based taxation while Eritrea and the USA are citizen based taxation.
Yes, because the rich like to move abroad and get all the benfits of US citizenship but none of the flaws. You may be middle class, but the folks at burger King are not...enjoy your whoppers, as surely as you will enjoy the Tim Hortons donuts that will probably be sold with them
riverbendviewgal
(4,396 posts)your poke at inversion is funny. You do not understand what inversion is. BUt most Americans do not. When you were in high school did you learn about inversion or Ciizen based taxation/resident based taxation. I did not and I was an A student.
It is very sad. And I do love my Tim Hortons and will continue to never eat a Burger King anything,, which is the worst of all the burger franchises..even Mcdonalds.
DonCoquixote
(13,961 posts)if we went the other way, then tons of US creeps would simply move to the border, and then rule from abroad. Granted, we shoudl simply tax the rich higher, instead of focusing on the middle class, but that does not change the fact that rich Yanks would gladly colonize canada, and that harper will allow it.
as far as Inversion goes, do NOT defend that. When you do, you are defneidng the idea of taxing individuals, while allowing corprioations ro rape and pillage.
riverbendviewgal
(4,396 posts)Citizen based taxation is practiced by Eritrea, an African country ruled by a dictator. The USA is the only other country in the world that also practices citizen based taxation.
Why do you like it? It puts a wall or curtain around America. No other country does that.
DonCoquixote
(13,961 posts)I do nto want Billionaires movign across the border, to either Mexico and canada, where they will drop into NYC, and hoard there money in foriegn banks.
and yes, only an african country does that, which does not mean it is bad. As I said, I would rather have Taxes that srtecthed across borders to affect the middle class. I coudl even say to waive such taxes under a certain incomes (which is probably where you will fit) but the idea that just because other countries are doign somethign is not good, nor does it disprove the idea that Canada and mexico will wlecome people to hide Taxes.
riverbendviewgal
(4,396 posts)most other countries do as well. America should look at the states of Delaware and Nevada that are money laundering and harboring tax evaders .
Billionaires can go anywhere they want.
I like this other DU thread where the USA should go back to taxing the rich one percent at 90 percent like in the days of President Ike.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Since the first $500K is exempt from this tax.
I think most people would disagree with your definition of middle class.
riverbendviewgal
(4,396 posts)It is sad how most US citizens are
SpankMe
(3,720 posts)And he did everything in your list - and more - with a completely intransigent, obstructionist and hostile congress.
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)For most people the ACA had little effect. We are a little better off if we get a Pink slip now than we were before with regard to healthcare. But since 2007 the prospect of finding a replacement job at anything close to what we have been making has been and continues to be poor. Most are desperately trying to cling to what they have and hope the other shoe doesn't drop.
Show us an economy where we can walk out the door of our employer and be back to work at equal or better wages within a month. Maybe where grown kids don't have to live with Mom and Dad just to survive.
And since you mentioned the great collapse. Why are the perpetrators not rotting in a federal prison?
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)be put into prison AFTER he is elected. We all knew about this criminal behavior BEFORE Obama took office.
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)We are not surprised to learn shrubs justice department is owned by the likes of Goldman Sachs, et al. Many of us were hoping that a Dem justice department would actually give a crap about main st instead of wall st.
randome
(34,845 posts)Obama did well.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]
taotzu
(44 posts)When I first joined DU I was surprised that there was a site online that had meaningful and insightful exchanges of information, now it has become a blog that has been infiltrated and over run with a majority of egotistical opinion. There are very few of you who are enlightened or even try to see both sides of any opinion and there in lies the rub. Everyone is so in need of inflating their own objective rather than looking to the whole of the country. What I have learned during my time on this site is that everyone has an ASSHOLE and they all smell like SHIT. There are too many of you who want to be the next media darling and conduct yourselves in the same manner as those of whom you so gleefully try and melt down on a daily basis.
You have turned this into a Competition of the Irreverence with a minutia of stale humor that borders on the slapstick of the 1930s. It now reminds me of the MSM that you try so hard to disavow yourself from but only find your way back to mimicking. I know that no one here will miss anything that I had or have to say and that is alright, this is a journey that I now know that I will have to take myself. You have turned this exchange into the very thing that you so very hated and I have become know DU as the More Shit Media. Somewhere down the line hopefully you will find the real within you and I hope that may happen soon. Goodbye and I hope that you all enjoy the smell : )
real.
Historic NY
(40,037 posts)and unicorns.
DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)Record number of people on food stamps, record number of people on disability, healthcare costs still increasing for most Americans, cost of food increasing. But at least the Fed has inflated the stock market bubble to all time highs for the millionaires.
Mister Nightowl
(396 posts)
DonCoquixote
(13,961 posts)Did people have the knives out for Obama long before he became president. YES, everyone from Mitch "one oterm president" McConell, to Nancy "impeachment is off the table" Pelosi. Everyone from Medea "I love Ron Pual" Benjamin to the whole cast of Fox news, CNN, and a damned good protion of MSNBC. Fron the redneack that hates Obama, to the PUMAS who hate Obama from the Pro Palestinians who hate Obama, from the Zionists who hate Obama. From the Gun haters who hate Obama from the Gun Lovers who hate Obama.The one thing that unites Americans is a ruthless selfishness, the ability and eagerness to turn anyone and everyone into a bloody mess if it means advantage. All America is disgusting in that respect.
On the other hand, did Obama follow the idea of Third Way poltics, even to the point where he supported the people who spat upon him, yes. Did he dispatch those comfrtable shoes and abandon labor, yes. Did he let himself get talked into war, yes.
The thing is, neither of those sets of fact contradict eahc other, indeed, they overlap a lot.
The ugly fact is, we would need someone in office who is willing to fight, and we would also need a populace willing TO fight. If Obama got on his bully pulpit, called for a public option, took troops out of Iraq, made a stimulus that was huge, the bottom line is, CONGRESS WOULD HAVE KILLED EVERY BIT OF IT, especially the Blue Dogs tyhat many on Du will defend like Paladins trying to save a princess from a Dragon.
Yes, Alison grimes has every right to hide her vote, but it is no secret why she is doing so.
Yes, mary landrieu has to work with a state that, despite being treated like SHIT by the oil industry, treats Louisiana worse than a hog fattened for slaughter.
But let's not pretend that their tweaking Obama's nose has anything to do with principle.
The only revenge I will have is seeing the PUMAS ben over bnackwards when Hillary is in office. No wait, they will blame Obama, not Hillary, and not the Blue Dogs, and most importantly, not the American brand of Capitalism which says you are either the Butcher or the bacon.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)President Obama was never going to ge alliwed to be the transformational figure we so desperately need, but it is undeniable that he has been seen to turn his back on many of our concerns.
He's compromised, but the system itself is so wholly compromised that we will hever know how much blame to assign him for his failures. I'm just grateful that he has done so much good.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)Minnesota is about to reelect another Democratic Senator and another Democratic Governor. My congress critter is Keith Ellison.
PLUS we gave comedic relief for the past 12 years with Marcus and Michelle.
I will never understand how poor states consistently vote against their own best interests.
Tatiana
(14,167 posts)How do you think people respond?
My husband, for instance, lost his government job after the sequestration fiasco.
Several former neighbors lost their homes when the housing bubble burst.
Unfortunately, many people are still hurting. Even though the economy is recovering, many do not feel it.
Fairly or unfairly, Obama gets blamed for presiding over these events.
Instead of compromising, he should have been putting the Republican obstructionism front and center. But he rarely exhibits that killer instinct to go on the attack against the enemy. I don't even know if he views Republicans as enemies (they are!)
Economically, I'm definitely worse off. I'm paying about $2400 more per year in insurance premiums that have larger co-pays and higher deductibles. My insurance company was happy to mail me a letter stating the new pricing structures were due to the implementation of the ACA.
Now, I wouldn't be caught voting Republican EVER. But for the wishy-washy "swing" voters and the Independents... I can totally see them blaming Obama and thinking they were worse off with him as President.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)So no, I'm NOT better off. My assets-beyond a house that I can't sell for enough to buy anything are pretty much gone.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)And my 401(k) made a ton. I didn't lose a single penny in 2008 having already moved my 401(k) into the stable value fund (for, admittedly, all the wrong reasons; better lucky than right). So after the crash, I was able to move my money back into the market while everything was low.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 22, 2014, 03:10 AM - Edit history (1)
I don't understand how your income fell 65% since Obama was elected.
uponit7771
(93,532 posts)colsohlibgal
(5,276 posts)Obama was 100% gung Ho for the TPP - I'd read up on what was in the TPP before I'd question or complain about some of us having problems with more than few things about his presidency.
flamingdem
(40,891 posts)Remorselessly. Then imagine this same type of brain in Fox. It's a lack of critical thinking, rampant in the US and expanded upon by an easily $wayed media.
JHB
(38,213 posts)You brought 'red-neck bigots' into it, so you're covering a lot of ground.
Right-wingers?
Fox watchers?
National Review readers?
The Breitbart Batshit Bonkers Brigade?
Freepers?
Do you mean the "I'm not a political person" types who don't pay much attention to politics except for presidential elections? The political equivalent of "only show up for church at Christmas"?
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)More than 92 million people are not in the workforce. That is a huge number, and a record setting number. While the news trumpets the unemployment number, people see the signs that can't be right. On the drive to town, there is a sign on the side of the road at a mans house. It says Need Work, will accept low wages.
The Stock Market and Politics are both fueled by Faith. The Stock Market is based upon the faith that the value will increase. Think about that for a moment. Every day there are hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of stock trades. Everyone buying thinks that the market is going to go up. Everyone selling thinks that particular stock is going to go down. One of them is going to be right. One of them will have their faith reassured for a day, or so, and then they decide it's time to back out a bit.
Politics is also based upon faith. Either you have faith that your candidate, or your party is going to do the right things, or you don't. For people who's friends, family, neighbors, and towns are suffering because the unemployment situation is no where near what is being put out there, they have lost faith. They feel ignored, they feel betrayed, and they feel like the politicians are taking advantage of them.
So imagine this. You've moved in with your parents because your job/career/life has gone away. Then you hear how awesome things are and you should be grateful that all things are going so well. What would you think? What would the average person think? Could they reasonably believe that the Republicans are at fault unless they spend hours online reading? They would look at the people making the statements, and consider them idiots, fools, or liars.
People are living in Storm Drains and sewers. There is a huge homeless camp in Silicone Valley.
Now a higher minimum wage seems like a decent idea, unless you don't have a job, and can't get one to begin with. Or unless you're convinced you're one of the half million people who will lose their jobs if the higher wages go into effect. Having next to nothing is bad, having nothing is the only thing that is worse. These are the forgotten among us. The least of us for whom the best they can hope for is harassment by police, and possibly severe injuries and even death. But at least the Appeals court has ruled that the Homeless can live in their cars.
So the people who see this happening turn to listen and hear silence from those same elected leaders that are telling them how wonderful it is out there in America today. And even if it isn't, we can't do anything because the Republicans control the House.
So the average person looks at this and wonders what the point is? Even if the Democrats manage to hold onto the Senate, they won't even talk to the Republicans, so the very best that can be gained is two more years of gridlock. Two more years of being ignored, two more years of being lied to. Two more years of how awesome things are in America today with record breaking DOW reports coming in every month.
This is how the average person sees the situation. This is how the Average Voter sees the world. The Democrats are not even pretending that they have the proverbial snowball's chance in hell of taking the House. But if elected and allowed to control the Senate, we promise two more years of resisting the Republicans in the House and doing nothing for the least among us.
So you ask yourself. Were things better for you individually under Bush? If you had a house, and a job, some benefits, and you have none of those things now, the answer is yes. We can point to all the statistics we want, but it doesn't change the reality for more than a quarter of our population.
So we look to build a coalition of groups to get ourselves into the majority. We do so by eschewing the populist side of how many issues? People are sick of the war on drugs. They're sick of the SWAT raids in the wee hours of the morning blowing up babies with stun grenades. They're sick of the death, the violence, and the insanity. The constant escalation like if we have this tank to raid the drug houses, we'll start winning the war on drugs. If we were smart, we would end the drug culture simply. We would legalize it. Then the lawsuits on product safety would flow like water and the drug cartels would go bankrupt in a new york minute just on legal fees. There would be no reason to threaten farmers in Peru to plant Coco. There would be little market for the poppies of Turkey and Afghanistan.
If you want to know why the people aren't supporting us, ask yourself what we're doing to help them. We have a lot of propaganda numbers that a quarter of our population knows is untrue. We have a lot of platitudes that don't change the fact that mothers are serving ramen to their children and calling it dinner. They may not have had a living wage under Bush, but they have less than that now.
Stop ignoring the people, and stop trying to convince them that the water falling on their backs is rain. That is step one. Stop making any acknowledgement of their situation contingent upon some fanciful filibuster proof majority. Senator Ted Kennedy made some of his best speeches when Reagan was President, about the poor, about the Children, and about the needs of America's families. There could have been no less receptive audience in the White House at that time. But he gave some great speeches, and made some great proposals. Speeches and proposals that got America talking about the issue. Now, it's ignored, never to be mentioned by the Press. Never to be discussed in polite society.
This is why the people are going to vote Republican. Because we are taking our supports for granted, and telling them that things are wonderful all over.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)them out of mental health institutions and cut off services. Harassment by police is part of the GOP plans for government and depend on state and local laws. Just let the administration come down with rules for local law enforcement outside of the laws already on the books and there will surely be a move to impeach the "fascist President." You folks want the President to control NOTHING and blame him for EVERYTHING.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 22, 2014, 12:45 PM - Edit history (1)
Really? You Folks?
You ask why and get angry and insulting when I answer asserting that I want the President held accountable for what he doesn't control and insisting I want to impeach him? I have never insinuated anything like that.
Some more of the obviously Right Wing BLS statistics for you to consider. First, the assertion that the reason for the people who are not in the workforce is a percent of the growing population. This graph is the historical data from the Employment Participation ratio. In other words, the percentage of the population that is participating in the economy, in other words working.
You're angry that people who have been ignored might not turn out and vote. You're angry that the Democrats are on the unpopular side of several issues. That's not my fault, I did not tell the Democrats to embrace the unpopular side, the cowards in the party did. They are the ones afraid that if the party cuts funding and support on the war on Drugs that we'll be painted soft on crime. So because of fear, we become as bad as, if not worse than, the Republicans are. Oh no, we can't do that, we will be labeled as soft on crime and get killed at the polls. How's that working out for the DNC?
The reason that the Party hasn't gotten behind the Marijuana legalization is the same thing. Reigning in the NSA? Nada, despite more than fifty percent popular support for both things. Why? Well we could be blamed if the Terrorist launch an attack. Afraid to do the right thing because someone might blame them for not doing something? Are we starting to see a pattern yet?
So how is this working out for us, our Parties effort to avoid taking any position that might upset the voters? It's upset the voters.
All the crap the DNC expected to win the election for them hasn't worked. The Shutdown, Sandy Hook, Fukushima, Minimum Wage, and all of them. The months long War on Women meme has gotten us squat. How many hundreds of millions of dollars has been poured into that meme in every race in the nation. What's the result?
We've lost ground with women voters. Yes, our effort to enrage the women has lost us support with women.
You're mad at the voters who are rejecting the asinine nonsense from the DNC. You're angry at the Republicans because they pulled the candidates aside and told them to keep from saying stupid things like "Real Rape" and you're angry at me for telling you the truth.
You expected nothing but cheers, and got a harsh dose of reality. Well sorry to disappoint, but don't you ever again say that I am part of some group that wants the President impeached. That would be the worst possible thing in my opinion. To even suggest that I want the Republicans to win when I was chastised for saying there was danger of that very outcome in the Spring of this year. To say it's insulting is putting it far too kindly.
You don't want the truth, then start a thread where everyone checks in and cheers the President. You want a loyalty check, then host one of those asinine poll threads where people choose between President Obama, Adolph Hitler, and other.
But when the question of why is asked, don't blame me for answering and giving you the truth. Read that article and see what the Republican efforts has gained them. People still think they're only slightly better than pond scum, and don't trust the leadership in Washington, but they trust the Republicans more on some pretty key issues. Because all of our advertisements followed by the usual "I'm Bob and I approved of this message" discussed none of those issues, except how they fit into the larger war on women meme.
Stop shouting at the guy who was trying to warn you this day was coming months ago. Stop blaming the guy who pointed out that the economy was the biggest issue, and we were fumbling it, or ignoring it. We had our chance, and instead we relied on the Republicans not learning about how to groom their candidates enough that they didn't say stupid things like "Real Rape."
But the biggest thing you need to do is this. Stop pretending that the Republicans are going to roll over and die just because you hate them. They want to win too, and they're working harder for it than we are.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)TV talking heads cut him no slack at all and that has poisoned a lot of minds. Then there are those who can't see past his color. And to some extent he's the victim of his own oratorical skills, since he promised a lot of things he couldn't deliver.
Considering all that, I'd prefer an Obama third term to any of the likely presidential candidates from either party.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)I totally agree! It blows my mind!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Chathamization
(1,638 posts)The stimulus being too small and the pivot towards deficit reduction are two of the reasons why the labor market is still fairly terrible. These were huge mistakes that also played a major role in the 2010 defeat, which then kneecapped the possibility for anything to get done.
Progressives were tearing out their hair in 2009 saying that we needed to use the time we had to act on a number of issues, instead of tepid halfway measures meant to mollify the press rather than fix the problems at hand. Krugman’s posts from that time are a good reminder.
The stimulus: “But Mr. Obama’s prescription doesn’t live up to his diagnosis. The economic plan he’s offering isn’t as strong as his language about the economic threat. In fact, it falls well short of what’s needed…To be sure, a third of a loaf is better than none. But right now we seem to be facing two major economic gaps: the gap between the economy’s potential and its likely performance, and the gap between Mr. Obama’s stern economic rhetoric and his somewhat disappointing economic plan.”
Saving the banks: “The real question is why the Obama administration keeps coming up with proposals that sound like possible alternatives to nationalization, but turn out to involve huge handouts to bank stockholders… How would nationalization take place? All the administration has to do is take its own planned “stress test” for major banks seriously, and not hide the results when a bank fails the test, making a takeover necessary.”
Response to kelliekat44 (Original post)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Clinton did well, paradoxically, because the GOP hated him so much they threw impeachment into the mix, and caught a backlash. But that was an outlier.
But in the grand scheme of things, maybe turn off the tv and just wait and see how the actual election plays out. We were always extremely unlikely to regain the house, the question is what happens with the Senate.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Obama did not inspire courage and fearlessness.
The financial gains have gone mostly to the upper class, and everyone else fears for their job.
Nobody wants trade agreements. People feel that the country is not going in the direction that is good for them or the country.
Obama did too much for the banks, too little for everyone else.
The Republican trick of just refusing to do anything constructive made Obama look incompetent.
It's about fear.
cali
(114,904 posts)In no particular order: a certain amount of "fatigue" with whoever has been in the White House for 6 years, is predictable. Then there's racism. I don't know how anyone can deny that that's a factor. Also, hopes were unnaturally high for President Obama; this isn't wholly the fault of the electorate who voted for him. Obama's own rhetoric and the MSM plays into this as well. There is the widening inequality gap, which many feel on visceral level, even if they can't articulate it or have never heard the phrase. There's a feeling of treading water regarding foreign policy. Back to the MSM: good news doesn't sell, and speaking of selling, democrats have not been good at articulating the successes of the ACA. Things like the apprehension of bin Laden fade against the backdrop of ISIS. And I think Ebola and the massive overreaction to it are symbolic of the inchoate fear of the future so many have- and when fear guides voters, they go republican.
that's some of it.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Plus, we're barred from knowing how the vote "tabulators" work...that's "secret," "proprietary," "none of your goddamn business."
"But trust us, though...all your good guys lost."
Demeter
(85,373 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Your selective recounting of dubious accomplishments aside, I tend to draw the line at the murdering US citizens, abolition of due process and oh yeah, murdering babies in their mother's arms upsets me too.
How bout The Billions For Billionaires Program of 2009 run by the very architects (Obama's appointments) of the financial meltdown no less? Liked that one, did ya? It's worked so well, that at least now hookers and blow has finally gotten the recognition for its impact on the global economy that is deserves since the EU now requires its member states to add up their estimated level of sin. That's how bad they need the cash.
How bout one out of three American adults being on file in the FBI’s master criminal database. And it seems that we're now arresting teens in high schools for skipping classes and not turning in homework. I know, they probably deserved being tazed for sassing the teacher, but you know. I'm sure it all makes you feel more ''safe'' though.
Well then how bout TPP? It's coming you know. All thanks to the secret negotiations advanced and provided by, whoops you guessed it. The Change Merchant, himself. Get ready to do nothing. It's already too late. It's as inevitable as Hillary.
How about a Syrian ''sort of'' war? (no boots included) Hmmm, not sure? Maybe this'll help.
The innocent slaughter of Palestinians? Old hat, I know. Just Israel expressing their ''rights.'' He said so.
How bout Iraq? Again? No? Yeah, well we may have to hold onto Iraq. It's a sure thing for generating and maintaining corporate cash flows. And the way this thing is going, we might need another war if this Syria-ISIL thing doesn't work out. I mean it's not like mercenaries give us warranties for the wars we secretly pay them to wage throughout our domain of vassal states in the Middle East.
Then how about our leaving billions upon billions of dollars worth of armed forces equipment in Afghanistan. In one case selling 4 planes, worth $435 million, as scrap metal for a measly $32K? Now there's a bang for our ol' tax bucks, eh? Balanced budget here we come!!! And to think that he did all the while ''reducing the deficit.'' What a guy!
I know, I know. All that military stuff's run by the MIC. And Obama is just a measly president -- so he has absolutely no control over the MIC. Right? Commander-in-Chief is really more of a ceremonial post now, I think. You know, for parades and such.
Well has that rung any bells for ya? Has it clarified things any better? You get it now??? Hmmmm......
I know that I could go on and on, but why bother? Right? I don't think you want the truth, do you? The TRUTH scares most people, which is the reason for teevee - to keep timid minds numb and occupied with the banal. Because here's the TRUTH:
- ''Obama nor anyone else can get us out of this mess we've allowed to happen -- only we can do that.''
Russell Brand - The Inevitability of Revolution
heaven05
(18,124 posts)true. I hope Brand keeps being able to say what he says. I'm beginning to like this guy.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)local, the murders you refer to are part of the wars started long before Obama came into office and the result of US love of war.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)...no one seemed to have any trouble attributing to him all the things that happened on his watch. And actually all the things I mentioned he had a hand in starting or continuing. Either he has what it takes to lead and will act as a true president of the people, or he's just another chump like the rest.
Obama doesn't get a pass. He ran for it, he got it, he bought it. His name's on it.
Inalienable means it is not alien to us. It is natural. Inherent. And yet we seem to think that others control our rights. As if the Constitution gives our rights over to these bozos to dole back to us at their whim.
Well that's BULLSHIT.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Just one...myself.
For myself? I've never had Barack Obama's back. Why? Because he's never had mine. I'm a woman, a teacher, a union member, a mother with adult sons who can pay premiums through the ACA but still don't get care because of the deductibles and copays, and a left-of-center, non-neo-liberal Democrat. He tossed me under the bus before he even won the general election in '08.
At this time, with the mid-terms, with more war, with an economy that, in my location, is still in the tank, with all of the issues we're facing, I'm not sure why I'm supposed to suddenly do an about face for a lame-duck president that hasn't represented me from the beginning.
What is it that all these voters are doing that you perceive "turning their backs on" the POTUS?
Voting? I voted already. Every D on my ballot got a vote from me. My voting choices had nothing to do with the POTUS.
merrily
(45,251 posts)as THE issue for this election and then running away from the President they've supported for almost six years.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, head of the DNC, ffs, would not even say "Obama" on TV this morning. Ludicrous.
ReRe
(12,189 posts)... have turned their back on the President? Is this about someone walking out during a speech the other day? Personally, I don't think Democrats HAVE turned their back on the President. We reelected him in spite of Citizens United, didn't we? Compared to recent elections being so close, I would call his 2nd election 'pertnear a landslide. 53%-47%.
As for the lemmings who march to the polls and vote against their own best interests, I think it's and education problem. There's a considerable number of people in this country who abhor education. They cling to their closed minds.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)I'm not employed on Walls Street, neither are most other Democrats.
If you need further explanation, I can't help you.
Botany
(77,323 posts)..... pushing the meme that the people are angry @ Obama and his failures.
The truth means nothing.
PatrickforO
(15,425 posts)The American people have too short a memory because we've had decades of corporate propaganda, dumbing down the schools, a corporate owned media where ratings are king, and a popular culture that caters to the lowest common denominator. Still, I think Warren's populist message might be getting through. We'll see how the elections go.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)In your words you stated this...... "I really don't even understand how a lot red-neck bigots can in all honesty vote for the GOPers."
Did that answer your question? Did you sit and think that the racism of this country out ways any real thought process of this country. Did you sit and think that even though the right wing basically uses their voters as puppets, they promise them the world and never deliver, because of racism in this country.
To many in the deep red states, the Democrats are the party of the black, lazy, welfare abusing, too many kids, sucking off the government voters. This is the reason the "red-neck bigots vote for the GOPers."
You want to change the votes, change the gerrymandering rules, get the democrats to lead....yes lead, get the democrats to stand up for their core principles, their values, not just caving to the voting state they are in....don't push "Obamacare" to the back, this will save lives...tell them this will save your life.... get the democrats to put up better candidates, get the democrats to go deep into the voting neighborhoods and get these people to the poll, not just asking, but get them there. Get the democrats to tell the voters the truth, true facts, prove them to the voters, be honest... if it sucks, tell them it suck, then tell the voters how we are going to fix it.
Do all of this, then we win the country over, then our country becomes the country we want...
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)should address this with them because conservative/centrist Democrats in the house and Senate contribute to the year over year decline in our wealth and quality of life.
From war, to record levels of poverty, lower wages, fewer benefits, education and health care inflation, to millions of jobs to India and China, fracking pollution, citizen surveillance, weaponizing the public, militarizing the police...
To be fair, you can't just blame one man for promoting principles against the public's well-being. It takes a large well coordinated political organization to do that.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Response to NorthCarolina (Reply #202)
ann--- This message was self-deleted by its author.
marble falls
(71,926 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)kentuck
(115,406 posts)If the Democrats can't tell it, then it will not be heard. Simple as that.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)cannot be underestimated.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Being "the adult in the room" is not a very compelling story. You have to explain the differences to people -- every day -- ruthlessly. You have to do it in terms that are clear cut, even if (especially if) that ruffles the Republicans' feathers.
If you don't (can't) do that, people assume there isn't much of a real difference.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Offshored and have seen their family's once steady job replaced with many short term no benefitted positions? Thousands of jobs just like mine were moved to canada and the uk where subsidies lure US companies to open offices overseas and abandon US workers. It might not be so bad if the president didn't then also come visit LA, proclaim the execs who offshored our jobs successful and their business model something he hopes is duplicated across the nation. But hey, if you're doing well I can see why you'd look at the administrations successes and not be able to see the lingering problems. The problem is still for many jobs. No one, no party is offering to do anything to keep good paying jobs in the US. Workers continue to live with stagnating wages and insecure work. So I'm disappointed. I'm still a democrat but I'm not better off today. My family is worse off and continuing to struggle. Don't see democrats offering any serious policies to make it better either. But at least democrats aren't promising to make it worse which is what republicans would gleefully do.