Who here considers himself/herself to the left of Obama? And if you are, will you support him?

[mvd]

I am to the left of Obama and will vote for/support him, though not with a lot of enthusiasm. I'm one who thinks some progress was made, but there's a lot more to do. And I personally would have had a much firmer attitude. I am not convinced Obama is just an incrementalist anymore - he may be just a centrist. Anyway, my answer is yes, I will vote for him because I could not imagine a Repuke Presidency right now. And I hope to get more progressives in Congress - that way, maybe we get a better 2nd term.

[RKP5637]

1. Same here ... n/t

[Angry Dragon]

2. Yes and Yes

[Sedona]

3. yes and yes

nt

[Brickbat]

4. Me. Define "support."

[mvd]

7. Vote for and support his candidacy over the Repuke

I'm not talking about donations or GOTV - just being with him during the campaign.

I think it's interesting to gauge the left's thoughts.

[mvd]

14. A little more about that

I probably will donate a little if I have enough, but I really mean will you be on his side and be relieved when he's re-elected. I meet both those criteria.

[teddy51]

5. I am far to the left of Obama, but will be voting for him. n/t

[southernyankeebelle]

243. I am disappointed but I will support him. There is no other person I could support. I

consider myself a social democrat. I am sure left of Obama.

[donquijoterocket]

268. definitely

to the left, but fortunately for him- and I'm sure unfortunate for the country for others- the alternative especially one of the klown kar kast of repcons is unthinkable.

[southernyankeebelle]

291. You are so right

[Greybnk48]

6. yes and yes n/t

[joshcryer]

8. Support.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

102. That's exactly where I'm at.

Are you my twin?

[joshcryer]

274. Do people call you an imperialist apologist...

...paid CIA asset?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

282. Only on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

[TBF]

120. that's about where I am as well -

support with caveat - I don't put a lot of stock in voting.

more important to educate and agitate (resist) but yes I still vote just in case they are counting

he's slightly better on social issues & I can support the recent environmental regs

[Skelly]

134. I laughed

"just in case they are counting"...

then I cried.

[joshcryer]

273. Eh, I don't put a lot of stock in the entire political process...

....but I'd be remiss to ignore the ultimate potential outcome of different politicians, and I think I would be wrong to completely overlook the suffering of others who do think it means something to them, even if the difference is meager at best. I think Obama in particular is easily swayed by whichever way the House and Senate go, and if they're split or if they're even, he's going to compromise to heck and back to get both sides to play. I don't like that type of governance (and thus was never enamored with his election). But what can you do?

[TBF]

295. Exactly. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

283. "I still vote just in case they are counting"

Perfect!

Yeah, quoted for truth. I have to vote for the lesser of two dick parties and still maintain the illusion that I have a choice.

[Hawkowl]

9. Yes/No.

After 28 years of voting, I will no longer vote for the least harmful candidate.

[joshcryer]

11. A perfectly reasonable position for the privileged.

[abelenkpe]

26. Thanks for Helping republican efforts

[Xicano]

214. And thank YOU for helping republican efforts.

How many more Bush tax cuts for the 1% and republican policies Obama will sign?

n/t

[Shoe Horn]

64. I understand your position, thanks for the support in the past.

I live in Texas myself, so my vote is like fighting the waves in the ocean.

[Tx4obama]

77. Regarding Texas, this should help to make you feel a little better ...

Obama won ALL of our largest cities/counties in Texas in 2008 except for one.
Obama got more votes than McCain did in Dallas, Houston, Austin, San Antonio, El Paso, etc.
The only large city McCain got was Ft. Worth.

Texas to me seems to be more purple now than red

Take a look at Obama's 2008 'red' state margin percents on the chart on the link below (the last column on the Chart):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Presidential_Election#State_results

p.s. When looking at all the states on the Chart it shows that Obama's margin of loss in Texas was much less than in the majority of the other red states.

[Shoe Horn]

79. Yes, thank you.

I always remind my wife, as bad as Texas may seem...
there are more backwards and Paleolithic states than this.

As the chart you linked to points out:
Wyoming .......-32.24
Oklahoma .......-31.29
Utah ..............-28.02
Idaho ............-25.30
Alabama ........-21.58
Alaska ..........-21.54
Arkansas .......-19.85
Louisiana .......-18.63
Kentucky .......-16.22
Tennessee .....-15.06
Nebraska .......-14.93
Kansas .........-14.92
Mississippi ....-13.17
West Virginia .-13.09
Texas ..........-11.76


Of course, Texas has the population of all the others combined (just about).
Which could be a good thing if it keeps tracking left. With more 'Hispanic' lefties.
(fingers crossed, as I'll be here a few years more)

[hfojvt]

220. I get a population of 40 million for the others

only 24 million for Texas. So not - just about.

Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Louisiana, and Tennessee have a population of 23.1 million - just about the same as Texas.

[JDPriestly]

263. Whereas California, which went strongly Democractic in 2008 and 2010

had a population of over 37,250,000 in 2010.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html

Californians lose out in influence because of the electoral college and the two-senator-limit for each state. We are not represented as well as we should be in Congress or in the White House.

The discrepancy between our population and that of Wyoming is appalling.

Wyoming has a population of 563,626.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/56000.html

If Californians had fair representation, Republicans might have a much, much harder time.

[hfojvt]

264. true enough

and yet it is the more fairly distributed House that is in Republican control whereas the Senate is in Democratic control, and the same was true during 2000 - 2006 - the House was Republican while the Senate was split, leaning Democratic. For a while there tiny red North and South Dakota had 4 Democratic Senators.

[Shoe Horn]

297. Texas is big, and growing. That's my take away message.

Sorry if it hurt your feelings.

[img][/img]

[Fantastic Anarchist]

284. You know one thing about that list?

Everyone of those states with the exception of Texas takes more money from the federal government than they contribute. And they want to call me a socialist?

I laugh at those pathetic free-loaders.

I'm from Texas, so I have a special place in my heart for that state ... at least it's trying to turn purple while cranking out nutjobs.

[stevenleser]

198. So you are going to vote for the most harmful candidate then?

Regardless of who you pick, it will be the least harmful candidate. Kucinich, Nader, they would all be the least harmful candidate when compared to the Repuke.

[emilyg]

209. I'm with you.

[unionworks]

10. I can see the headline now

"Far left supports Obama".... go fish.

[qb]

12. I am way to the left of Obama, but I will vote for him.

[baldguy]

13. I consider myself to be an unabashed liberal socialist, and I will unabashedly vote for Obama.

Because the alternative is a billion times worse.

[tomp]

90. a billion?

surely you exaggerate.

[Kahuna]

91. Yep. That's what nader voters thought in 2000. They thought bush would

be a harmless alternative. Look at how that turned out. The man ruined our entire country. He left no stone unturned, as far as the damage that was done. We will be paying for that election for many years to come.

[Wind Dancer]

122. Hardly!

Why blame Nader for the coup that occurred in 2000? I suggest reading Greg Palast about what happened in Florida. Have you also forgotten Al Gore won the popular vote and Bush was put in office by SCOTUS?

This Nader blaming is pure nonsense.

[grantcart]

176. Even if you accept that Nader didn't have an impact

You are still left with Nader's lies that he said that he wouldn't contest in swing states.

This Nader apologizing is pure nonsense.

[stevenleser]

200. Not to mention the lies that Gore would be no better than Bush. Thats the big one.

We all SHOULD know better than to believe logic like this now.

[Frances]

211. Agree 100%

I can never forgive Nader for arguing that Gore was a corporist.

[grantcart]

256. We have to stop meeting like this.

[Kahuna]

307. DING DING DING! That was my point. Not how bush wrangled his way in...

The fact is enough people bought into the not a dimes worth of difference meme to make it possible for bushco to steal their way in.

[Wind Dancer]

217. The poster...

... I replied to has totally ignored the fact that Bush did NOT "win" the presidency by normal means. Again, it was a coup and Nader is not responsible for THAT.

Nader's character had nothing to do with Al Gore being robbed. You're using a strawman so I'm done with this debate.

[grantcart]

254. Nader increased the opportunity for the GOP to get away with a non democratic vote and he knows it.

The proof of that is that he MADE the promise to not contest swing states.

If he didn't want to be a factor then why would he have contested in FL the way that he did.

Nader wanted to be in the middle of it and he used his campaign resources accordingly.

You apparently have a binary based logic system that allows for only A or B.

Just because A is true doesn't mean that C is also true.

So lets reduce this to its simplest form

A = The Republicans engineered a result that was against the democratic will of the people = true.

B = The Republicans did not engineer a result that was against the democratic will of the people = false.

C = Nader said that he wasn't going to contest in battleground states and then turned around and spent time and resources in Florida, known to be the closest of states. In doing so he made A easier. = True.

Now someone who helps my enemy is my enemy. Now you may understand why people that support Democrats hate Nader so thoroughly and logically.

[Kahuna]

306. Ha ha! That's not even my point. Somebody has a guilty conscience. nt

[tomp]

303. first off, it's lame that you bring nader into this.

second, you can only speculate on the outcome of a gore presidency.

third, even if you accept the premise that obama (or any democrat) is a better choice than romney, gingrich, paul, etc., i still assert that to say they are better by a factor of a billion is gross exaggeration and does nothing but deny the obvious complicity of the two parties in maintaining the status of the rich over the poor, working,and middle classes which is much closer to being disparate by a factor of a billion than democrats are from republicans.

[Kahuna]

308. It's not about Nader. It's about the voters who failed to use good judgement

when they went to the voting booth that day. The lack of judgement was to allow TWO, not one, but TWO oilmen in the Whitehouse, while giving them control of Supreme Court nominations. Brilliant!!!!! Think how different things would be today, if those voters had used better judgement. No, 9/11. Check. No Iraq or Afghanistan invasion..Check!.. No Roberts or Alito on the Supreme Court. Check! Ergo, no Citizen's United. Check!

[tomp]

316. gore failed to win them over.

that's not nader's fault. he has every right to run, as every natural born citizen over 35 does.

gore also failed to effectively manage the vote counting efforts in florida. in fact, if we actually lived in a democracy, gore would have been president, irrespective of nader's running.

as far as people's bad judgment...welcome to brainwashed america. 50 million plus voted for george bush. and you're worried about nader.

and the membership of the supreme court that put bush in power was a biprtisan accomplishment that preceded gwb. in fact, gore voted for scalia.

[SteveG]

15. Yes and Yes

Yes, I am to the left, but will have no qualms about voting for him next year. The alternative is just too dreadful to contemplate. If one of those loonytoon, neo-fascist cretin's, that are running for the Republican nomination, wins the Presidency, the result for this nation will be much worse than Shrub's Presidency.

[NCTraveler]

16. To the left of Obama

I will vote for him but my time and money will go elsewhere.

[Prophet 451]

17. Can't vote for him

I'm British. I'm a leftie by British standards so I'm probably a screaming commie by American standards.

[MH1]

18. My ideals are to the left of Obama's achievements.

However I am also a pragmatist.

I am disappointed with a few of Obama's failures, but I'm not convinced that all of them ... or necessarily any ... occurred due to him being to the right of me on ideals. I don't think he's ideologically a centrist any more than I am. I think he's a liberal at heart (on many issues if not all) but not the kind of politician we are used to.

I think along with many here, I hoped for and expected more effective execution. But he hasn't had an effective liberal congress behind him, ever. (The very brief period of 60 Democratic senators included such as Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu.) And he is more of a negotiator and organizer than a ball-breaker. My biggest disappointments stem from his a) compromising too much too soon (such as the health care bill) and b) inexplicable deference to some executive branch functionaries who are doing shitty things. (Like the MMJ raids for one big one.)

That said, I am 100% a supporter and will vote and campaign for him. I think on a) (early over-compromising) there's a good chance he's learned a bit and will be better in a second term On b), well I'm not holding out a lot of hope but even his loose-reined minions are less bad than what a jacka** republican would put in there.

[mvd]

21. I really feel President Obama needs us.

If we don't vote or care, I feel we'll see results like 2010.

I appreciate all posts and opinions here, though.

[pscot]

171. He surely doesn't act like he needs us

but of course we'll vote for him. What choice do we have?

[JoePhilly]

25. I really like the model you used.

Separating Ideal versus Practical.

I tend to use the terms, Strategic versus Tactical.

What you want, versus what you can realistically get. And over what time periods.

The GOP's right wing base recognizes the split. They have long term goals, and then immediate tactical targets.

We on the left seem to suffer from political ADD. Anything good that happens is also not the ideal, and so it is also bad. And we tend to wallow in that.

I'm with you in most respects on this ... and I think in a second term, while he still may not be able to get us to the "ideal" (in fact I know he can't), I think he will be able to become a stronger advocate for it.

And if he gets reelected, which he should, the GOP's implosion will continue ... and THAT should be one of our long term goals.

[emulatorloo]

212. Well said

[Zalatix]

52. Well said! "To the left of Obama's achievements, but a pragmatist". That's me, too.

[joshcryer]

69. This is a very good post, and I agree with you.

I think ideologically, it's damn near impossible for me to accept that Obama is right wing or even center, I think at this point in time he's probably pretty fairly left wing. However, I knew, from when he was being really shifty on marijuana in his campaign, that ultimately he, as a politician, as a pragmatist, has to play the middle road to get anything done.

I think that he's learned his lesson over his compromising behavior and with a second term he's more likely to give them hell.

[Blaukraut]

187. Well said, MH1. Exactly how I feel about Obama's presidency so far. n/t

[emulatorloo]

213. Excellent post. Thanks for taking the time to make it.

[greiner3]

19. "will you support him;"

DUH!

[Old and In the Way]

20. Succintly well put. Yes/yes.

[Vincardog]

22. I am and I doubt it. I expect him to be reelected in spite of me

[w8liftinglady]

23. yes and I am already working on 2012.

I am very pro-lgbt,universal health care,workers rights,environmental health...but I need to make changes locally before I can consider them nationally. I'm working it.

[Ineeda]

24. Left-er, yes.

But I support him and will enthusiastically donate and work for his campaign (and down-ticket, too). There's way too much at stake and the rethugs will be pulling out every dirty trick in their arsenal. Plus they have extremists and low-information, bigoted, moronic Faux-watchers who'll vote for anyone but him. I'm very optimistic that President Obama will win a second term, hands down, but I'll do anything within my power to prevent the lunatics from winning.

[RainDog]

27. yes n/t

[BlueToTheBone]

28. Here's how you can help the most progressive Democrat

running for Congress (except maybe for Elizabeth Warren) But he is great!
www.Aden4Arkansas.com
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/campaigns/4286 We need 150 supporters by the end of the year for DFA money! Please help! It on takes a minute or less.

[proud patriot]

29. I'm to left of his first term of his Presidency

I enthusiastically will vote for him Already sent him 10 bucks

[UnrepentantLiberal]

30. Yes and we'll see.

[dimbear]

31. Yes, yes: reason: live in reality. n/t

[Louisiana1976]

32. Yes and yes. n/t

[DesertFlower]

33. i am much further left.

i realized along time ago that obama is a centrist. he'll still get my vote.

[MineralMan]

34. Depends on the subject, really.

I'm to the left of him in many areas, but realize that my philosophy is not possible just now. So, I support him and hope to help get a more progressive Congress for him to work with in 2012 and 2014. Progress has always been an slow, step-by-step process. Even today, the things I fought for in the civil rights movement in the mid-60s are not all in place. Patience is a necessary thing in politics. That, and hard work to keep the wheels turning.

[mvd]

35. Yeah, I agree that single payer will not be a reality tomorrow.

I just wish that the President AND Democrats in Congress would have high goals and not meet the Repukes more than halfway towards the Repukes.

[MineralMan]

36. Unfortunately, government must act to keep the system running and to fund it.

When there are deep divisions, that always leads to compromises that nobody much likes. That's the case right now. We can help with that by electing a more progressive Congress. Until we do, the compromises will continue, because there is not alternative.

Without continuing funding, there is not a single government-run program that continue. That is why we got what we got in Obama's first term. Let's work to give him a Congress that will be more cooperative and see what happens. What do you say?

[mvd]

37. I don't agree so much on the extent of compromises, but of course do on getting more progressives in

That is important.

[Laelth]

113. Let me suggest, alternatively, that progress has never been slow and incremental.

Rightward shifts in American government have been, historically, slow and incremental, but leftward shifts, when they have occurred, have been rapid and dramatic.

I have a whole essay on that subject, if you're interested.

http://laelth.blogspot.com/2011/01/turning-american-ship-of-state.html

-Laelth

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Yes. I will support the most progressive, anti-war, candidate on the ballot.

Last edited Fri Dec 23, 2011, 01:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Which is what I did in '68 and '08.

[Jamastiene]

39. Yes and yes.

The alternative is so much worse that it is worth fighting to keep him. He's to the right of me, quite a bit, but he does do some good things. The Republicans/Tea Party assholes would NOT do any good things. So, I will be voting for him even though I am quite a bit to the left of him.

[Betsy Ross]

40. yes and yes n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

41. He's to my right, especially on social issues like equality for all, and I am not interested

in his stupid religious theories and all of that ignorant, superstitious thinking he spreads that holds people down and back. He is of course way better than any Republican So unless he unleashes a new round of hate preaching rallies I will continue the tradition of going with the nominee of my Party. That could be a deal breaker, but I think that sort of thing is not nearly as accepted as it was a few years ago, the flaming hate speech of the McClurkins and all that is now sort of Tea Bag territory....

[Iggo]

42. I'll vote for him.

[HeiressofBickworth]

43. I'll vote for him

and for Democratic candidates for the House and Senate. Yes, Obama isn't as progressive as we had all hoped, but what progressive plans he had were thwarted by a right-wing, teaparty Congress who voted no or filibustered everything in an effort to destroy his presidency. So, along with re-electing Obama, we need to change the face of Congress to give him the support he needs.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

44. Yes, and No, respectively

I do want him to win.
I do not plan to vote in the presidential race.
I will vote on all of the downballot races.
I live in CA, and Obama will win all of our electoral votes.

[izquierdista]

45. Yes and maybe

If it looks to me like Obama's opponent will get more opposition caving in to corporate America, I may just sit this one out. There was a lot Bush couldn't do (like privatize Social Security) that's back on the table as a negotiating chip with Obama.

Sometimes I think I prefer the Republican steam roller to be out of gas than to have the Democratic jalopy running with its unreliable steering system that only turns to the right.

[NorthCarolina]

46. Absolutely to the left of Obama here and was hoping for a Liberal/Progressive primary challenger.

Still hoping for an alternative but will probably, reluctantly, vote for Obama if there is no true progressive choice.

[XemaSab]

47. I'm to the left of him

and I'm in California so my vote probably won't matter.

We'll see what things look like closer to the day.

[joshcryer]

70. I'll probably be in AZ, so neither will mine.

[NorthCarolina]

48. What do they call it when you keep doing the same thing over and over, hoping

each time for a better outcome?

[The Doctor.]

175. They don't call it anything. Because that's not the quote.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

And it doesn't apply here because we know what the results will be if we don't keep Obama in the WH. We may not get better results with Obama, but we sure the hell don't want the 'different' result of a Republican in office.

Now that would be 'insanity'.

[Modern_Matthew]

49. Might as well vote for someone while I await the proletarian revolution. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

285. The revolution will be neutralized ...

... every time someone votes for one of the capitalist candidates.

Remember, FDR talked a lot of socialist rhetoric ... only to save capitalism from itself. At that point more than anytime in our history, we were ripe for a proletarian revolution.

In comes the New Deal - which is designed to stave off such a revolution, wait 40 years to even undo that, and now we're basically a third world country with an uber-wealthy elite.

[unkachuck]

50. I am to the Left of Obama....

....and I would love to support him if the alternative is to the Right of Obama and Obama doesn't do something that makes it impossible for me to vote for him....

....fortunately/unfortunately, 2012 is an election year (in over century) in which true populist change may actually take place if cosmic forces align properly....

....I promise to go to the polls and vote even if it means me writing in a candidate....like our Congressional Dems, it's now my turn to 'keep my powder dry'....

[eridani]

51. Same here

I sure wish that more on the left took the long view on electoral politics.

[DesertRat]

53. I am and I will

[ThomWV]

54. To the left, yes, will I vote for him again? No.

[donco]

55. Of course

Cant have any of the repug clown show appointing anymore supreme s.

[customerserviceguy]

56. Hey, we have no choice

Whoever the Repukes nominate would be far, far worse for this country. But I have to admit, my heart is in keeping the Senate, and getting back the House. If both go Repuke, we will fail to see any progress whatsoever out of a second Obama term, all we will be able to hope for is to stop the bleeding.

I sure hope that the President figures out how to ease Joe Biden out, and find a decent heir apparent. That's where the Repukes failed, with Darth Cheney still in the VP slot, it was a free-for-all where they simply shot each other's feet. If we don't, then look for Hillary to try one more grab at the brass ring.

[Marrah_G]

57. I am far to the left of Obama- I will not vote for him

Last edited Fri Dec 23, 2011, 09:10 AM - Edit history (1)

I will instead most likely vote against whatever asshat is his opponent.

[pnwmom]

74. Makes sense!

[Fearless]

58. Yes, and time will tell.

[FlaGatorJD]

59. Far Left and Yes (n/t)

[dorksied]

60. Yes, and Yes... and I'll just have to hope for a TRUE progressive liberal candidate in 2016

These damn centrists and bluedogs are what are enabling the shift towards the right that this country is undergoing.

[Daemonaquila]

108. So will your vote for Obama.

It'll prove to the DLC that the left will vote for whatever idiot the run. If you want that good candidate in 2016, the left has to vote it's conscience instead.

[griffi94]

61. left of obama

i'll probly vote fore the most progressive candidate even if it's 3rd party.

my position is no longer strong enough to be able to afford the luxury of things not getting worse.

[Lunabelle]

62. Yes and I will vote for him

That is not the same as supporting him. Although, he seems to have found a stronger voice lately.

[Ecumenist]

63. Me, me, me!! I'm at least 20 feet left of obama!

and that thing about getting a better 2nd term and more pogessives, ....HELL YEAH!!

[Douglas Carpenter]

65. of course, there is no choice

[Shoe Horn]

66. Yes / Yes (but I live in Texas so it really doesn't matter)

Still, I like to think maybe one day....one day....Texas will go back to being Democratic.
The Valley is one of the longest held Democratic Regions in the US.

Even when that dude from Minnesota ran...so...we're no fairweather friend, like Colorado, Vermont and such.

:puffs out chest:
:struts a bit:

[Tx4obama]

78. See comment #77 n/t

[Shoe Horn]

80. I like looking at elections where we got TROUNCED, and see who stood by us then.

[image][/image]

[bluestateboomer]

67. Ditto

and Ditto.

[coalition_unwilling]

68. As a Democratic Socialist, I'm far to the left of Obama. I support his re-election because

all the Repukes are insane sociopaths, except for maybe Huntsman who's a bit of an enigma to me.

We don't need an insane sociopath anywhere near the White House, thank you very much

[joshcryer]

71. +1, I support the people it will help by choosing the side that at least tries to care...

...every now and again.

[coalition_unwilling]

162. Oh, I'm under no illusions that the Obama\Democratic cohort cares about

working people much more than the Repukes. But at least the Obama\Democratic cohort are sane and non-sociopathic.

If you need further convincing, just watch or listen to one of the Repuke debates. I did and it scared me straight

[AnotherMcIntosh]

72. He indicated that he doesn't need the left (ie, "professional" left). Shouldn't this be good enough

for all of us?

For those who want to join in President Obama's criticism of us, do so. You don't need us. It should be sufficient that you have more than enough "centrist" votes to help him easily coast to a win.

How about pulling out the "list of accomlishments" and convincing more potential voters with that?

[emulatorloo]

180. Are you a highly paid blogger or television talking head?

If not you are not a professional and you were not being addressed.

Gibbs was making an attack on the media. A lame attack perhaps.

You and I are amateur Leftists. We are passionate and don't draw a paycheck when we express our opinions.

The stuff about Obama saying he doesn't need Leftists is your opinion, but is really not supported by actual facts. Gibbs bitching about some paid bloggers and talking heads certainly does not support your opinion.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

195. Obviously, if he doesn't need the "professional" left, he doesn't need the amateur left either.

When White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs publicly disparaged the "professional" left, and then re-affirmed his disparagement at his next press briefing, he did so with the authority and approval from President Obama.

It was a signal, and one of many, that those of us who don't enthusiastically line up behind a "centrist" strategy just don't get it. And the White House is not going to go along with anything that seems to be too far left. And that the White House doesn't need us.

Do you really think that Gibbs went off the reservation when he publicly showed his true feelings? You're welcome to that belief.

Some say that they are going to vote to re-elect him anyway. If you are, good for you. That's your choice. He's better than Gingrich. Or Palin. Or whoever the 1% is going to trot out to scare the bejesus out of the easily scared. They'll get a sufficiently nutty candidate. As a result, the issue of whether sufficient liberals or progressives actually show up to vote is moot. It doesn't matter to the White House. And it shouldn't matter to us.

[emulatorloo]

207. Continue to willfully misinterpret if it makes you feel better

In this world there are a handful of people who are paid to deliver their opinion. That is the fact.

If you wish to pretend otherwise, that is your prerogative. But you should expect to receive pushback each time you repeat it.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

221. Are you being obtuse on purpose? My reply didn't disagree with yours.

You say that there is a difference between the "professional left" (those who are paid bloggers and paid talking heads) versus the "amateur Leftists" (who are not paid for our opinions when we make our views known).

You say that there is a difference. OK. I agree with you. So what?

How is it that you cannot understand the concept that I am agreeing with you on that point?

Spend your time doing other things.

[emulatorloo]

226. My disagreement with you is your insistence that "It was a signal."

I find that is an over-reach, and it is unsupported by Gibbs' ill-advised statement.

You take Gibbs very specific statement and then make a lot of unsupported speculative statements as if they are facts.

Hope this clarifies a little.

On edit: maybe this will help clarify a little more:

I don't have much use for bloggers that in my opinion make oversimplified oversensationalized posts as a strategy to drive up ad prices on their blogs. That does not mean I have no use for the left as a whole. I am on the left myself. Any one who were to claim that that my dislike for hyperbolic sensationalism was "a signal" would be incorrect and over-reaching.

[greyghost]

73. yes and yes

[pnwmom]

75. I'm significantly to the left of the compromises Obama's had to make.

For example, my preference would be Medicare for all; then a public option.

But I'm going to support him because I think he's done as well as anyone could under the circumstances of a Rethug Congress that would rather hurt the country than let the first black and Democratic President succeed.

[tavalon]

76. Funny you should mention this. I just wrote a facebook post that I'm going to put here because it's

pertinent.

I adore George Clooney and I adore Matt Damon. I think they both are very intelligent, cogent men who have vastly different opinions about how Obama has done. As dipolar as they seem, I agree with both of them.

Clooney needn't worry, though. Obama will be elected to a second term (I will be voting for him as one who was thrown under the bus really early and often) and I, for one, hope he goes for a liberal legacy. If he does, he will have regained my respect.

If he doesn't, well, at least he'll go down in history as the first black President. I wish that weren't such a big milestone but in our racist and sexist country it is. Someone will be the first female President eventually and someone will be the first homosexual President.

All I want is a really, really great President, just once in my lifetime. One who makes FDR look like a slacker.

[quakerboy]

86. What a positive way of looking at things

I enjoyed reading it. I agree with most of the sentiment, though I have a more cynical and apocalyptic feel myself.

[Ineeda]

94. Don't forget that FDR had 12 years (!) in the White House, not just 3.

But with eight years and a more supportive Congress, our first black president could also achieve greatness.

[Romulox]

111. FDR was well on his way by year 3. :( nt

[emulatorloo]

238. And he had a very good congress to work with :) nt

[tavalon]

312. Worry not

I blame this Congress every bit as much as I do our Right leaning Democratic President.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

197. Maybe FDR had 12 years for a good reason. He was a Democrat, not a Centrist.

[stevenleser]

281. Maybe there was another reason, like 70 real Democrats in the senate + a huge majority in the house

It's easy to not make compromises when you really have no reason to need to make one.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

288. With whom did he compromise when he appointed Geithner?

With whom did he compromise when he discontinued his promise to filibuster the telecom immunity act to give immunity to the Telecoms that spied upon all of us for the Bush/Cheney Administration?

With whom did he compromise when he put Raytheon's former top lobbyist in charge of the Pentagon's day-to-day management (William Lynn) after he saying that he would not hire former lobbyists in his Administration to work with issues favoring their former employers, and do so just days after being sworn in as the President?

As you say, "It's easy to not make compromises when you really have no reason to need to make one."

I agree with you on that point. It's too bad that he doesn't have any reason to compromise with us.

[urbuddha]

81. Yes and yes. I'm a Democratic Socialist and will NEVER vote Republican.

I'll be voting for Obama.

[DinahMoeHum]

82. I do and I will. . .

There is no fucking way I will pull the lever for a Republikkkan in 2012.

Having said that, I'd rather concentrate my $$$ donations towards candidates who will kick Repuke butts out of Congress. Right now the House is a major embarrassment in our nation.

[tomg]

83. Yes and Don't know.

I am very far to the left of President Obama. There is no question that the Republicans are insane. I will vote Dem down ballot, particularly my Rep. As far as the Presidency goes, I feel like I am facing a well-meaning physician from the 18th century who has decided that I need a good bleeding. While it might -and I emphasize might - not kill me, at best it will weaken me and certainly won't cure me. I am 62 years old - have never once voted for a Republican for anything ( even on a local level for relatives I personally love) - but have always voted for the lesser of two evils. All it has done is pushed the country further and further to the right.

[quakerboy]

84. I am to the left of President Obama's current policy and actions.

I don't know the man personally, and I don't know if his policy/actions match his personal beliefs. I'd like to think that he is more to the left than he has governed. But even if so, I am likely to the left of him.

As to support, I guess it depends on what you mean. Will I correct people out in the wide world when they repeat one of the RW lies about him? Yes. Will I defend him against warranted criticism for his mistakes, particularly against the people harmed by them? No.

Will I donate money or phone bank or go door to door like I did last time round? Not likely. Will I vote for him? Almost certainly, given the apparent absence of any practical alternative. I just gotta keep saying "scotus" and gritting my teeth, apparently.

But I don't agree that "some progress was made". It was one step forward, three steps back. Better than 6 steps back under bush, but still not progress as such.

[PDittie]

85. I live in Texas

so a vote for Obama won't really matter. I'm considering the Green Party candidate or Rocky Anderson as protest votes.

[LeftishBrit]

87. I always did consider myself to his left; always wanted him to win.

Like Prophet451, I'm British and can't vote for him, but would if I could.

I've been to the left of everyone I ever voted for, with the possible exception of Michael Foot in 1983. And despite a couple of major betrayals (Blair! Clegg!), anyone is better than a Tory. With one exception: your Republicans are even worse than our Tories!

[Justice wanted]

88. OHHH!!!!ME!!! ME!!!!! ME!!!!!

I will vote for him unlike 2004 I'm not going to be excited. The way I'm looking at it --He's the lesser of two evils.


My husband on the other hand is refusing to vote at all. Dems Repubs are two sides of the same coin and that coin only works for the 1%.

[mmonk]

89. In other words, will I be voting against Republicans again

instead of voting for someone? If there is an primary opponent, I may cast a protest vote before the general election. I don't expect a great future ahead yet. But most of my votes are defensive in nature on the premise the other party in office is worse.

[Jim Lane]

92. I'll vote for him unenthusiastically, but not quite at the "lesser of two evils" level

I don't think he's evil. I just think he missed a huge opportunity by not modeling his first term more on FDR's. If he had pushed a far more sweeping (and more leftist) agenda, he would have gotten some of it. The parts blocked by the Republicans would be the basis for a hard-hitting partisan campaign in 2010 that would have produced Democratic gains, not huge losses, in the midterms.

So, I'm well to his left. I will:
* vote for any progressive challenger in the primary (to show the flag, not because I think there's any chance of denying Obama the nomination);
* vote for Obama in the general election; and
* direct my money and volunteer time to progressive candidates in downticket races.

[quaker bill]

93. Well to the left

Obama was as far left as anyone we could have actually gotten elected in 2008. He will be the the most leftward viable candidate in 2012. In fact this places him not very far from the center. Some would argue right of center, some would argue a bit left of it, this would depend on your definition of "center".

If the definition of "center" is based on abstract political philosophy, he leans a tad right. If the definition of "center" is found at the median of current politics, he is a bit left of that.

Regardless, the only other viable candidate, regardless of which insane clown among the posse the republicans pick, will be working hard not to fall off the right edge of the flat world they believe in.

I know where my money, time, and vote will go.

[HowHeThinks]

95. Yes, and........

I probably won't make that decision until I'm actually in the voting booth. I, too, am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.

[leveymg]

96. Obama is proving to be to the right of Nixon. I'm not knocking 4,000 doors for Barack again.

But, I'll vote, do election protection again, and work for local candidates who ARE good Democrats.

[handmade34]

97. I will vote for Obama

and every Democrat that is on the ticket... it is time for the Democrats to take the House back and increase their majority in the Senate... the only hope for more immediate change...

**but longer lasting change must come from us, from the Occupy movement, from Civil Disobedience and other acts by courageous citizens

[Survivoreesta]

98. I'll be voting for him too>

Whatever his faults, he isn't a neoconnutcase!

[cate94]

99. I don't think that there is any choice

but to support him. I am hoping that in the second term he doesn't compromise before negotiating and that he doesn't back down in the manner of his first term.

[nradisic]

100. Right with you on this one...

totally agree...

[Fantastic Anarchist]

101. Therein lies the problem.

You are forced to have the illusion of choice.

That said, I'm hijacked. I have to support the guy who is going to fuck me slightly less. That guy is Obama - but isn't that indicative of the inherent bankruptcy of our system?

[RoccoR5955]

103. I will vote for him, but

I will do NO work for him. I WILL work for my local Congressman, Maurice Hinchey, who is also to the left of Obama, as well as others, outside my district who are to the left of the current President.

[RevRN]

104. Never Again

I just cant fall for the "I suck slightly less than the other guy strategy". He is all Mr populist now that the election is coming up, in fact he sounds like the other Obama who ran for President in 2008. I wonder what ever happened to the to the other guy? I thought he won.

Lets face it. The too big to fail banks are bigger and have more power. His "Justice" Department engages in these political theater settlements where the offenders are slapped on the wrist, no one goes to jail, has to admit guilt and even get to keep most of the money they stole.

As a health care provider in MA who see the flaws in RomneyCare every day I dread when this mess is moved nationally. The real nightmare will be in 2018 when the Cadillac tax dumps everyone into the individual market )make no mistake that is the way the insurance industry is writing the rules) at the mercy of the insurance parasites. At the same time he working for his "grand bargain" to cut Medicare and Social Security.

I had tears in my eyes the day he was elected and now when I see his face on TV I have the same reaction that I had for Bush. I immediately change the channel.

[4dsc]

105. Most moderate republicans are left of Obama..

eom..

[Kahuna]

118. Really? Can you name one moderate repub (as if one exists)...

that is to the left of PBO, and give a couple of examples of how you have determined that?

[kenfrequed]

142. Have to agree

I personally can't think of any that are moderate by even the most absurd strech of the imagination. I certainly can't think of any that are left of anything.

Of course by reasonable standards I wouldn't place President Obama as 'left of center' either, but that is another conversation.

[Romulox]

163. I don't think the GWB comparisons are accurate, but I can see a resemblance to GHWB.

Barack Obama is, to my mind, similar to the "Yankee"/Northeastern Republican branch of the party.

You're right--those "moderates" don't exist in the Republican party any more. Many of them became "blue dogs" and took over much of the Democratic Party.

[Daemonaquila]

106. Nope.

I'm done supporting the lesser of 2 evils. Obama had the opportunity to do real good, but is just continuing with more of the same failed policies that got us in this mess. He'd better hope the rethugs keep self destructing, because many of us will either be making a "worthless" write-in vote for someone we believe in, or staying home. It's more important to me that Dems realize the left will not keep supporting crappy candidates. If Santorum or Bachman wind up at the top of the rethug ticket and seem like they have a serious chance, I might reconsider. Aside from that, I'm done with Obama.

[Le Taz Hot]

107. I am to the left of Obama. n/t

[randr]

109. Still hoping someday he will join us

and sending encouragement by voting for him.

[Romulox]

110. Y/N. nt

[Progressive dog]

112. enthusiastic support

Yes, I will vote for and support him not just as the lesser of two evils but because he is a stark contrast to the neo-fascists on the other side.
Yes, he has compromised too much and too soon, but we are slowly moving in the right direction.

Maybe I should just not vote and let the Teapublicans take away that right permanently.

The President is not a dictator. He has to get laws passed by the Congress that we elected. Then the Roberts court can still overturn those laws.

It is childish to expect instant gratification.

[Ian David]

114. I am, and I will. n/t

[eilen]

115. Why would anyone answer this post with "No"?

This kind of question baits people into breaking the rules of the New DU.

[Romulox]

116. I've read a lot of the meta-discussion. I think the admins are more broad minded

than you may think, and I also think that they understand this discussion ultimately will out.

The structure of DU3 proves the above, imo.

[motely36]

117. yes and probably

[krucial]

119. Same Here

Last edited Fri Dec 23, 2011, 12:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I have always been to the left of Obama and most so called Liberals.I see Repbulicans as the same type of people who supported Jim Crow and can never get myself to see them any different from the same type of people who used to have us riding the back of the bus ans supported the governments action of usnbg water cannon Dogs and violence againt peacefull protestors just marching for simple human and equal rights.

As an African American male myself, I am also totally dissapointed with many of the Black so called Christians and churches, who are happy to discriminate against Gays and Arabs.
For a people who have been so maligned and treated like dogs and worse for many years in America it is not good.

It is disgusting to see Blacks taking a page out from the same book as thir former oppressors,
And what is bad is that most modern day Republicans, are anti everything Blacks,the poor,minorities,and others are for and want,except when it comes to the religious aspect, they align themselves with people who still hate them and would not want to be around them.
Religious brainwashing that leads people to talk about love but to hate Gays and others.
I am a rare African American,I am one who do buy into the Creationst theory since i became old enough and could not be forced to go to church,even though my whole family is Christian,I am over 60+ years and have yet to meet and African American Atheist,or non believer,Eh eh,eh.
Most are shocked, and get close to a heart attack when they ask my faith and I tell them,I dont believe in mythology or fairy tales,so they dont like my views on the mid east problem either because they think I should be 110% in Israels corner,I tell them I have to call it as I see it,and will not let ancient biblical stories cloud my honesty or judgement.
I also dont believe that America should have military bases in every corner of the world,or occupying Arab lands,I believe America glorifies war and the military,and thats why we always have enemies, and are always in perpetual wars,but we use all kinds of Bogus reason to justify it,like "Defending ourselves,"'Defending Strategic Interest,"Spreading Freedoms,and defending the free World,but almost all the people we are killing are Muslims,because we dont like their religion,but mainly because they dont like Israel.
Obama is not and was never a real Liberal ,or leftist to me,he talks liberal, but acts most as a centrist Democrat,and once in a while might do something peoplee consider left,but I have no clue how anyone could call Obama a Socialist,or a leftist or a Liberal.
If Obama was any of those,and followed up on his promises,Bush/Chemney war criminals would be under investigation for war crimes,and he would not in half the trouble he and America is in today.
But I see no other alternative but to vote for him, and hope he does whats right for all america

[Beavker]

121. I do want to hear my Tea Bagging Coworkers squeal

when Obama wins a 2nd term. They'll say how our country is full of idiots, because he hasn't done a thing to help our country.

After all, they are all knowing (sarcasm from hearing their ever so brilliant thoughts on Obama whenever he's on TV).

Then, we'll get a super liberal President after him. Then the Baggers might commit suicide right at their desks!

[newspeak]

128. I don't consider this a football game-yeah our team

especially when so many american lives are at stake. It would be nice to have a crystal ball to see who would be his choices for his cabinet next time around. Because his choices last time, especially for economics and education truly sucked.

My main goal is to get as many democrats in both houses. Then there will be no excuses like we didn't have enough majority, those mean repugs just beat us to the ground-no filibuster, no fight. Unlike the repugs who have used the filibuster to obscene levels.

Obama has publicly stated he is a new democrat, I am not a new democrat, I'm an old democrat with the old democratic platform-pro-labor rights, pro-environment, pro-regulation, pro-public education. I don't believe selling the american people to the corporate wolves, does anything but allow the corporate wolves have more power in government over the people.

I'm not committed at this time; however, there is no way in hades I'd ever, ever vote for a greedy, sociopath repug.

[Beavker]

319. I wonder if he can get any really 'good' appointees in right now.

Seems like he has to settle for a re-hashed, half assed candidate just to get those abstruction whoring Senators in the GOP to allow the President of the United State to staff his cabinet.

Seems if he get's anyone that might lean toward what we would consider a quality pick, those bastards apparently (one man at times) have the power to keep it from happening. It's crazy.

The press has been horrible bringing to light the fact that Obama has had a record number of appointees help up by partisan bullshit. I mean just that fact alone not only shows the GOP doesn't care about running the country, and that it's hard to run a country with so many areas still un-manned.

Ugh!

[Yon_Yonson]

123. I forget which is my left or right?

I am not sure what I will be doing with my vote but rest assured my dilemma does not include any NEOCON RAT TURDS, teabaggers, libertarians, communists or fascists!

[Not Me]

124. Yes and Yes...I can't wait

for the second term. I think he has a whole lot of pent up frustration with the Repubs, and that's when the gloves come off.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

125. Yes and of course

what choice do we have? In modern politics the party in power has never removed its own person for another candidate

[Roy Rolling]

126. Real

I'll vote for the real in the absence of ideal.

[MsLeopard]

127. Exactly

And I believe he is a corporatist through and through, but he's better than any Republican around.

[mntleo2]

129. WAY left of Obama

...and yes I am voting for him. I cannot see any better alternative.

Cat in Seattle

[ananda]

130. I'm way to the left of Obama . . .

. . . but I will never vote Reep.

[green917]

131. Yes I am and yes I will

[Demonaut]

132. yes and yes but I've been on the left of every president before and after my birth, with the

possible exception of FDR

[hifiguy]

133. I am well to the left of Obama

and consider myself to be a Scandinavian-style Social Democrat. But I will vote for him in all likelihood because the alternatives are not plausible or tolerable. I will not be voting with even a small percentage of the enthusiasm with which I voted for him in '08. I will, in fact, be holding my nose as I mark my ballot.

[barbtries]

135. i know i must be to the left of obama

because i would have ended all the gawd damn wars ages and ages ago...and yes, i do and will continue to support him for the presidency.

[tosh]

136. Yes and yes. nt.

[kenfrequed]

137. An interesting question

I am significantly and massively to the left of President Obama, but I will probably vote for him.

That said, the absolute worst possible thing he could ever do from a governing standpoint or a strategic election-winning standpoint is to take the left for granted. He could spend everyday from now till doomsday playing bipartisan and trying his damnedest to pull in white, upper middle class, middle aged men but he would be pulling a loser strategy. He could spend all day long extolling on his moderate cred adn moderate virtues and he would be making a ridiculous mistake.

If he wants to win big and get back a chunk of the house and senate he (and the democrats) will have to run to the left a great deal. Bear in mind the biggest losers of 2010 were DLC/Blue Dog Democrats like Evan Bayh, who spent most of the time from 2008-2010 stabbing us in the back and trying to derail the 'Hope & Change express.'

[madmom]

138. Yes I'm more left than Obama, and

I will still be voting for him because I realize he cannot do this alone. He has had nothing but road blocks put in front of him, and the dems aren't helping.

[528 hz]

139. Not a snowball's chance. Nyet. Nope.

No way in HELL!

[datasuspect]

140. this thread smells like teeny bopper crap: "who is more dreamy, Paul or John" type stuff

cult of personality much?

see a lot of loyalty oath/dear leader crap here lately.

[mvd]

148. Didn't mean it that way. I know there have been lots of pro-Obama threads lately..

but I really mean to get everyone's opinion and that's it. If you read my posts, I've probably made the pro and anti-Obama people differ with me at times. Thing is, I'm not a big fan of his approach but I don't want a President Romney.

[Scuba]

141. I'm far, far left of Obama....

... maybe a little left of 2008 Obama.


I'll vote for the "lessor of evils" again, darn it.

[racaulk]

143. I do and I will. n/t

[primavera]

144. Do we have any choice?

Many, maybe even most, of us here on DU, are to the left of Obama, but so what? It's not like we have any alternative to supporting him. The powers that be within our own party ensure that no there's no primary challenger and it's not like any of us are going to go out and vote for any of the barking mad rabid dogs that make up the Repuke ticket. So what choice do we have? Unfortunately, our government of the people, by the people, and for the people has our number - they know they can blow us off and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it.

[RobinA]

145. Left of Obama

I am left of Obama and I will not be voting for him, although I plan to vote for other Dems. I have been pragmatic about voting most of my life. I don't think it is doing any good and I think its time to turn up the heat on the frogs.

In fact, I am starting to think that a full scale (fuller scale) war on the middle class is the only thing that is going wake people up. Death by a thousand cuts is killing us. I think the only hope is a repub sweep which will put in office a bunch who is going to start slashing throats so that the voter will see the carnage and finally take the necessary steps to put people who can save us in positions of power. Obama is neither bad enough to wake people up nor good enough to help the situation. And no I am not well off.

[The Doctor.]

160. While I would like to agree, you're dead wrong.

Sure, I'd like to believe that letting the Republicans finally destroy the middle class and turn the nation into a feudal slave-state would finally wake people up. But I know better. The media has too much control of too many people's minds. They will be told that it's the 'liberal's fault' and any and every measure that they took was to 'avoid socialist communism'. Shortly thereafter, they would convince a few million wingnuts to don black boots and round up 'liberal sympathizers'. All it would take would be one more false flag operation blamed on the 'radical left', and the all-too-eager-to-blame-liberals-for-something wingnuts would march the country lock-step into fascism.

You can bet your life that's what we're headed for if we don't do everything possible to stop it.

One of those things is to keep Obama in the White House. Not because his being there will necessarily stop it (I have hope still), but because a Republican in the White House will accelerate it.

If a Republican lands in the WH in 2013, I will blame the media, I will blame election fraud, I will blame Obama, and I will also blame you and those like you for having such selfish impulses that you would let your country fall into Republican hands again.

[primavera]

170. And so we boil to death by degrees

Which is not to say that you're necessarily wrong, but cooking to death slowly is just as sure as cooking to death quickly.

[The Doctor.]

172. Every extra moment we can buy is a chance

to derail this train to hell.

Given the choice, I'll opt for every chance we can get rather than a quick death.

[primavera]

252. And what will we do to "derail this train to hell"?

We devote all of our votes to supporting candidates who endorse the train to hell because we believe they're the only ones who are electable...

[The Doctor.]

271. Voting is not the only thing we are doing.

Finding candidates that will take steps to restore the US to The People is a huge part of it, but there are many other things to do.

OWS is a good start. Suing the bejeebus out of corporations who have taken advantage, putting pressure on current politicians to put the brakes on the corporate agenda, trying to wake up all the brainwashed masses, finding new information, new strategies, and any new scandals or angles or whatever can be taken advantage of....

We need to do all of that and more.

The more time we have, the better the possibility of hitting some kind of a solution or at least buying more time. We just have to.

I'm working on things from my end, but just keeping my head above water is a pain in the ass right now. I have great ideas, just need to get them implemented. Problem is that I can't get the attention of anyone in a position to help implement them. So I have to go it alone.

We need more time and failing to elect Obama will only get us 'proper fucked'.

[newspeak]

201. that's it, do we have any choice?

and every time we vote for the WS crowd instead of main street; we get hurt by increments. I guess I'm an idealist, instead of the realists-I've seen our labor go down little by little; I've seen one trade agreement after another weighing heavy for the global corporations against labor; I've seen deregulation of WS, business and banks to the point of scamming the american people till it hurts. But, hey it can't be as bad as the full deregulating rape by the repugs, right?

[The Doctor.]

302. Of course we have a choice.

We can choose to deliver democracy a swift death by letting Republicans win or trying to buy time by keeping democrats in office while we work to save the nation despite them.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

286. You will blame us for exercizing our democratic rights and hoping for a choice?

Really?

[The Doctor.]

296. Not at all.

You are allowed to spend your vote in any way you wish. You are welcome to exercise your democratic rights and hope for whatever you want.

Your spending your vote in a way that could give Republicans the White House and deliver the nation into deeper catastrophe will be subject to the ridicule it deserves. Just as I would blame anyone who votes Republican for bringing pain on our nation, I will blame you for being short-sighted.

I don't blame you for exercising your democratic rights, I blame you for being selfish, myopic, and ignorant.

If you think there is a realistic way to support a third party candidate without helping a Republican nominee, I'm all ears.

Please, lay it out for us.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

298. First of all, sir ...

I've already demonstrated that I would vote for Obama ... and I'm going to hate every second of it.

What I want to illustrate is, I don't really have a fucking choice. And I resent that. I don't like being told I live in a "democracy" and having to pick one of the two crime syndicates masquerading as political parties.

So, blame all you want.

I'll point out the systemic problem. You blame. I point.

[The Doctor.]

301. It would behoove you to notice, sir...

That I also routinely and disparagingly point out the horrible systemic problems. It's part of the package of being realistic. On the other side of pointing out the systemic corruption is pointing out that we only have two choices for president; one of which will bring about the end of what little democracy we have left more swiftly than the other. I can guarantee you I am as loathe to point it out as you are resentful of having to hear it. It is an ugly truth, but the unbending truth nonetheless.

While you choose to see Obama as a willing enabler of TPTB, there is more than sufficient evidence that he is merely doing the most the system will allow him to do. If the system is as corrupt as we suppose it is, then it would stand to reason that no president will advance any agenda that would meaningfully fix it.

Here's what I want to see happen to save the nation:

- Instant Run-off Voting. I have yet to see a reasonable case made against using this.

- End corporate personhood.

- No corporate ownership of media by entities with interests other than journalism.

- No more corporate/lobbyist money in or around campaigns.

They might seem simple on the surface, but the hurdles to implementation are many and high. We all want the same thing, and right now we have only the choice between a slow death and a quick one.

At least with a slow death, we can buy time for miracles.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

304. I agree with those on your list ...

... and I consider them a great start.

I've always said that <most> of our problems stem from the money influence. Break that first, and then the rest should be an easier task to handle.

That's where we want to pull the weed.

Glad we're on the same page.

[The Doctor.]

309. Indeed we are.

Now about the rest of the country...

[primavera]

310. It does sort of seem like something's gone wrong here

I mean, no one in this country is allowed to vote their conscience, either on the left or the right. Our whole voting apparatus is calibrated around a choice between the lesser of evils. Maybe what we need is a multiparty system, or maybe the European are doing it right by having a Prime Minister hold the real power while the elected President is free to be the moral conscience of the nation, I dunno, but I think we're definitely doing something wrong when so many support a candidate unhappily, out of fear of the alternative more than enthusiasm over the representation they hope to have through their chosen candidate.

[DutchLiberal]

311. How would far-right wignuts march the country into fascism?

Under Obama, there's already indefinite detention and extrajudicial executions. That's fascism already. The US doesn't need Republicans to introduce it.

By the way, Republicans and Democrats are two hardly-to-distinguish faces of the same Party anyway, the Corporatist Party.

[The Doctor.]

313. You think *this* is fascism?

Those policies are fascist, but the US has yet to see full-on fascism. Did you really not understand what I meant by 'marching us into fascism' or do you really believe we're already at the end point and things will remain as they are?

[DutchLiberal]

315. If you don't think this is fascism, you're being delusional...

And I believe you're being willfully ignorant or you're just in a state of denial... just because the president has a 'D' after his name. You put your party, your right-of-center, conservative party (which is what the Democratic Party is nowadays) before your principles. Guántanamo was supposed to be closed, but now we see more of the same in the form of indefinite detention. The US government can lock you up indefinitly for no other reason than them wanting to, and it will be signed into law by your 'D' president! Or hw could just decide you, a US citizen, are an enemy of the state and have you executed.

How is that not fascism?

You really need to wake the f*ck up and lay off the wishful thinking that Obama is any better than the Republican candidates. Because that's exactly what the powers-that-be want: for you to cheer on *their* man (= Obama), even if that's against your own interests, just because they have tricked you into believing the alternative is "worse".

[The Doctor.]

318. Wow. If you truly believe that all of our Democrats are fascists,

including Obama, then I can't talk you out of the delusion. Even if you can acknowledge that there are a few good Democrats, you will never acknowledge the good that Obama has accomplished despite the corporate forces you're so convinced he's in league with.

Your fear of the overwhelming and pervasive 'fascist foes' clouds your reason. Actually step back and think about why things are happening the way they are.

[tledford]

146. Yes and yes (reluctantly) eom

[mlevans]

147. agreed n/t

[GoneOffShore]

149. I'll be pulling the lever for Obama -

I'm torn on a VP choice however - I'd like to see Hilary Clinton as the VP even though she is the best Sec of State we've had in ages.

[emulatorloo]

150. I am to the left of Obama

I will vote for him and do GOTV, it is very important to get back House and increase Dem majority in Senate.

[Tikki]

151. We are and yes...

The Tikkis

[relayerbob]

152. Yes and Yes

[The Doctor.]

153. I sit on his left by virtue of his circumstances...

or lack of virtue.

I'm certain he would do a great deal more good if there was not so much stacked against him, but even those that disagree would be fools to think any Republican is a better alternative.

[connecticut yankee]

154. If we don't

we will wind up with a Repuke in the White House. Is that what you want?

We must also work hard to get a Democratic majority in the House and a filibuster-proof Senate.

[wryter2000]

155. Yes and Yes n/t

n/t

[obietiger]

156. Yes and Yes - n/t

[frazzled]

157. I think you're asking the wrong question

What you or I think in our heads (i.e., believe, but never have to implement), and what Obama thinks in his head (partially unknown but subject to all kinds of constraints when he has to enact something) is not an appropriate measure of anything.

The rest of us (you, me, and everyone else) can believe whatever we want; the other guy (the president), despite whatever beliefs he may harbor, has to get things done for the country, which involves a vast array of legislative hoochie coochie, both with his own party and the opposing one. What he ends up doing is not necessarily what he "believes." His belief structure is probably well to the left of his governing outcomes in this polarized setting.

Example: the president clearly believes that Guantanamo should be closed, and he signed an executive order to do so on his first day in office. We all probably believe this was the proper decision. The rest of us, however, don't have to deal with actually getting it done. The president has had to deal with a Congress (and foreign countries) that has blocked his efforts to do so from the beginning.

In the end, I'm saying that (a) since we never have to actually do anything, we can be as left as we want; and (b) if Obama were in the same position, he would possibly be more left than you. He said something to that effect in his 60 Minutes interview the other week (that he would have great approval ratings and be really popular if he decided not to be president, but that wasn't his goal).

I was more opposed to Clinton's "beliefs" and actions when he was president than I am to Obama's. But I understood what a hostile and sometimes impossible environment he was working in, and I supported him willingly, despite a lot of shit.

[The Doctor.]

167. ...

[chemp]

158. I have been to the left of EVERY democratic presidential candidate since I could vote

I have NEVER vote republican for president.

Ever.

[emulatorloo]

169. Same here

[La Lioness Priyanka]

159. yes to both.

not very happily though

[crim son]

161. Yes

and yes, but only in terms of my vote. Given the clowns vying for the rethug nomination, this is not the right time for a revolution. Too bad.

[McCamy Taylor]

164. Marxist for Obama, checking in.

I've always been to the left of anyone. If that kept me from voting, I would never have pulled a lever.

[T S Justly]

165. I consider myself and everyone else ...

Left of Obama and his supporters. Those supporters do include Republicans with whom and for whom he routinely compromises Democratic principle.

[emulatorloo]

177. Reality Check: Obama Job Approval amount Republicans 15 percent, Dems 82 per cent

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/12/20/obama.poll.pdf

I am posting this to help you refine your thinking about Republican "support" for Obama.

Additionally I hope you will begin to understand from both those Dem numbers and answers in this thread is that many people here consider themselves to the left of Obama and also consider themselves Obama supporters.

[T S Justly]

192. Are progressive Democrats even responding to your poll?

And are you making an argument for group-think? Thank you, ahead of time.

[emulatorloo]

216. First, you are not the arbiter of what makes a Democrat a "true democrat"

In polls such as CNN's, respondents self identify. If you get a chance to read the internals of the poll I linked to, you can also see how the data slices up by moderate, liberal, and conservative. There is a lot of interesting stuff in that PDF that won't get reported in the more generic web stories on the poll.



Second, claiming I am making an argument for "group think" is putting words in my mouth.

I am simply posting these numbers so that you can have data other than DU GroupThink.

You appear to beleive Obama has a lot of support from Republicans and little support from Democrats. However that is not the case.

It is helpful to remember that DU is a bubble, we are a self-selected group.

[T S Justly]

245. Nor are you or any other person I know of. The rest of your characterization of my post ...

Makes possible the likelihood you didn't comprehend it. That's a minor reason not to
support Obama and, instead, support some other Democrat for the nomination. But, I'll certainly give the sincerity of his supporters, as well as Obama's, some additional thought, in determining his appeal and electability. Thank-you.

[emulatorloo]

290. Your post seemed to imply that your believe Obama's support comes from Republicans

That is why I posted the information, which I clearly stated in my first post to you.

I don't want us to post at cross purposes, so if I misunderstood you I apologize.

Best Regards.

[T S Justly]

294. I admit that's what I meant. But, only so far as the GOP's support for "bi-partisan" ...

... legislation goes. Though, I have to wonder, with every last one of their candidates being a buffoon, the Republicans just might like to see President Obama returned to the White House.

Thanks for allowing me a chance to clear that up. Peace.

[emulatorloo]

305. ...

Hope you and yours have a peaceful and happy holiday.

[Martin Eden]

166. I'm to the left of Obama. I'm very disappointed in his presidency. I will vote for him.

A president will be inaugurated on January 20, 2013. He or she will be the nominee of either the Democratic Party or Republican Party.

The latter would be an unmitigated disaster for this country.

[MjolnirTime]

168. No need for the drama. Just vote for the man.

[Little Star]

173. yes & yes n/t

[unc70]

174. I'm Wellstone left of Obama. All Dem presidents during my life are left of him, couple of Repubs.

I really hated Obama using RW TPs against other Dems during the primary. I was insulted and got mad as hell for him saying it was time to move on, that Boomers wanted to keep fighting those same battles from the 60's because of our egos.

My journal archive has my rants.

Saddened, disappointed but not really surprised by what Obama has done or failed to do. All that posturing regarding health care got a bill worse than I had expected. Without some "medicare for all" type option we got rid of state insurance requirements and consumer protections.

I don't remember Truman well enough, but I think Obama is to the right of the other Dem ones and maybe Ike and Nixon.

I will try to think of it as my first time voting for a Socialist for President

[Fiendish Thingy]

178. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to the left, and no, won't be voting for him.

I don't even consider Obama on the left of the political spectrum; he is at best, center-right.

[nineteen50]

179. When you continue to vote for the lesser

of two evils you will continue to get the lesser of two evils to chose from.

[jimlup]

181. Yes and Yes...

I'm basically in the same boat as you. I too am becoming convinced that Obama is a centrist. But I'll go further in saying that he played us a bit in 2008. I'm a bit annoyed with him for that but I know that I have no choice but to fill in the square for him.

Though it certainly will be well short of the enthusiasm I had back in '08. I was desperate to elect a democrat and had no particular illusions about Obama - I knew he would move to right after he was in office - but I am actually a bit surprised at some of his lack of enthusiasm for our agenda and for us.

[scentopine]

182. "Hope" is the leading to fascism. Republicans move right, democrats play follow the leader...

Meanwhile liberals say "what else can we do... we can only vote democrat or republican so I guess we just have to go along with whatever democratic leadership says and hope for something better". There's always hope that the virgin Mary will descend from the heavenly skies and shine her beacon of celestial goodness over Washington. At least we have that, right?

You want change? Then get in the face of Washington and Obama and the sensible centrist lobbyists on this board who get paid to spin lies no matter who is in power. Otherwise keep on hoping as democrats back up a truck and haul away the freedoms and liberties that promise a fair and just existence.

It's getting harder and harder to register legal protest. As long as democrats keep demanding that democratic leadership AND Obama keep following in the shadow of the republicans (the sensible centrist compromise) then you get the debt, the shitty working conditions, the out sourced jobs, and fucked up corporate style education system and wall street CEOs ripping off your tax money, you deserve.

For the record, Obama is endorsing a bill that allows the military to hold the virgin Mary (Our Lady of Hope) indefinitely and torture her.

[freedom fighter jh]

210. Exactly. nt

[Dragonfli]

239. You are correct, Democratic Ideals have nothing to do with party leadership anymore

The parties are two management firms that work for the same fascist corporate collection of moneyed interests. Supporting either neo-cons or neo-liberals leads to the same end, why would one volunteer to help them install their fascists oligarchy? Because "our team" can install it better than theirs?

I would define the current and last few administrations as fascist, but perhaps a country ruled by business interests is really something else.

I will only vote for candidates that will work for the Ideals of the old Democratic party that I believed in enough to register as a party member. There are very few left and only they will get my support.

When I want conservative corporate rule I will vote for the Republican or the stealth Republican in (D)rag running against him, I doubt I will ever want such a thing so I will have to write in a Democrat or a Socialist or something.

[DissedByBush]

183. That would depend on the issue

But of course I'm voting for him, unless someone else beats him in the primary.

And I have more hope for the second term too, when he's comfortable in the job and doesn't have to worry about reelection, no need to pimp for corporate campaign dollars anymore.

[liberal N proud]

184. Not sure if Iam left of Obama but I fully suppor the President

And I will work to see him reelected in 2012.

[Tippy]

185. I am to the left...and yes I will support Obama

[drmeow]

186. Yes and I knew he was centrist the first time

I voted for him and will still vote for him.

[ramparts]

188. How far is left?

Hear no dead people, See no dead people, Speak no dead people.

[Tumbulu]

189. of course I will vote for him

but I will not send any money to the campaign.

In fact I am so sick of the campaigns and it is way past the time to switch tactics.

But the money towards dental visits, doctor's visits, homeless shelters, anything that directly helps people and forget giving it to advertisers and media of any kind.

[cmd]

190. I'm left of pretty much everyone

I will be supporting Obama in spite of the fact that I frequently disagree with him. Heck, I'm just a disagreeable person, but I'm not a miserable person because I understand that I'm not always going to get my way.

[bvar22]

191. I don't consider myself "to The Left of Obama."

I consider Obama way to The Right of me.


I'm a Mainstream/Center FDR/LBJ Pro-Working Class UNION Democrat.
Neither FDR nor LBJ would recognize today's NeoLiberal "Centrist" Party Leadership.
They would believe they had mistakenly stumbled into a Republican Convention.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[NOLALady]

193. Yes and Yes.

[sorrybushisfromtexas]

194. I am left of him

and will vote for him. My mother a staunch Democrat, always told me, "Never, cut off your nose to spite your face." We definately need to win back the Congress, and that will not be a possibility unless President Obama is re-elelcted.

[ProfessorGAC]

196. Yes and Yes

Yes, i'm left of him, but yes i will support him completely.

I really don't understand the "objection" to the lesser of two evils. One may not like some of Obama's positions, but the opposition is so radically right that the difference is profound.

Being a bit right and being extragallactically right are different enough for me to never even think about undermining a democratic nominee.

And, voting for someone who has NO chance of winning seems like tilting at windmills. This is real life, not an ideal world.

[Demoiselle]

199. I'm to his left and I will vote for him.

[stevenleser]

202. I really like this reasoned and level headed approach to criticism and strategy

Well done.

[DFW]

203. I do, and hell yeah, I will

Anyone who doesn't mind someone like Mitt Romney (or Jeb Bush) picking the next Supreme Court
justice can afford to be noble. As for me, 'tis the season to be pragmatic. A choice between a clone
of Robert Bork or a clone of Sonia Sotomayor is no choice at all.

[geckosfeet]

204. yes x2

[zentrum]

205. Any real Democrat

...is to the left of Obama.

Rahm Emmanuel, the DLC and Clinton dragged the party into the right-lite Center, but the Center had already been dragged wa-a-ay right by 12 years of Reagan/Bush.

To be left of Obama now, is to be a regular, mainstream Democrat in 1970''s terms.

[DainBramaged]

206. Why would you put people on the spot with this thread?

[Wind Dancer]

218. Good question!

I was wondering the same thing. I have my theories.

[emulatorloo]

219. I think it this thread helps through the recent horseshit going on in GD

The flame threads where a poster tries to generalize from a handful of posters that either:

"all Obama supporters are morally bankrupt"

or "you should just vote for Republicans."

This thread shows that those threads are ridiculous characters.

This thread also encourages DU'ers to actually talk to each other rather than hurling invective at one another.

[Major Hogwash]

250. Why not?

[DainBramaged]

270. Of course, weed out those of us who are to the left of the new Reagan administration.........

[Major Hogwash]

280. Ah-ha!!

So, you admit you're a weed!

"We hab wayz of makking yu talk!"

[dembotoz]

208. yes and my other options are?????

if there was a primary and the other candidate was more position friendly to me..... and that would not be very hard.........

[subterranean]

215. I will have to vote for Barack.

He is not nearly as progressive as I'd like, but unfortunately, we are only given two real options in presidential elections in this country. The prospect of a 7-2 far-right majority on the Supreme Court is reason enough for me to vote for Obama.

[ooglymoogly]

222. For my part I will vote for whoever vows to stop all wars including the drug wars, vows to

dump laws overriding the constitution and the bill of rights and vows to get money out of politics and to prosecute the robber barrens and war criminals....to uphold civil and women's rights...and has a long track record to prove it.

Only one thing is sure....if it is 0 v/ Gingrich or Bachmann or any other screaming rw loon, the answer is, hold the nose, yes....otherwise, all bets are off.

[a2liberal]

223. you are going to get skewed results with this straw poll

because we're not allowed to advocate third parties. just wanted to point that out.

[Politicub]

224. I'm to the left and support president Obama enthusiastically n/t

[wwytchwood]

225. wayyy left of Obama

but then, I have always been Democrat. Cannot vote for or support him.

[jwirr]

227. I am left of President Obama and I will support him because I am a hell of a lot more left of anyone

in the gop. If we had a winning choice I might think differently.

[freedom fighter jh]

228. Not sure and probably not

I'm a little unclear on what's left and what's right. Some said Obama was being conservative by signing NDAA. But don't conservatives believe in civil rights? Some said Obama was leaning toward socialism (that is, left) with his health care reform. But health care reform guarantees a whole lot of business to insurance companies. Aren't conservatives usually the ones to promote corporate welfare? So I don't want to say how far left or right I am, because I'm not sure what that means.

And November 2012 is too far away for me to know with certainty what I'll do. But if things look then the way they look now, I can't vote for Obama.

The biggest challenge we face is climate change, though it seems to be off the radar screen for most people. A couple of weeks ago there was an international meeting in Durban, South Africa, to try to hammer out a worldwide strategy to deal with it. There the U.S., a major greenhouse gas emitter, refused categorically to agree to any binding limits. The U.S. was perceived as the big obstructionist to any agreement. Not that the U.S. is the only obstructionist -- I'm sure other countries have obstructed as well -- but the U.S. should be leading here, rather than helping to seal the planet's fate as a place uninhabitable to anywhere near the number of people that it supports today.

Then there's nuclear power. Not once, but three times simultaneously, we have seen the worst case scenario for nuclear power played out, leaving Japan severely, frightfully, contaminated and the whole world slightly contaminated. Until Fukushima, the worst case scenario seemed to be just a hypothetical, a nightmare baseline against which to judge any accident that might really happen. Now that it's clear that that scenario can play out, nuclear power looks a whole lot more dangerous. Worse, we know the same thing can happen here any time. Yet Obama wants to allow more nuclear power plants to be built in this country.

And the mortgage crisis. Many of the very many foreclosures going on are illegal. Homeowners are often defenseless, unable to hire a lawyer, because they've spent their last dollar trying to pay the mortgage. Obama participated in the effort to bail the banks out (yes, I know, he was not yet president then, but as a senator he did push for the bailout), but he doesn't seem to be able to help the homeowners in any way.

I suppose any run-down of Obama's first term has to mention health care. There is something wrong with any wealthy, industrial society that cannot care for its sick. Yet I can't see that health care reform has accomplished that. Many people are still unable to afford health insurance. Will that get fixed in 2014? Insurance companies are forced to cover some who were not covered before -- but that cost gets passed on to the rest of us. My monthly premium for next year is up $100 from this year. I would not mind paying to support the healthcare of my countrypeople, but a big cut of my outrageously high premiums goes to the insurance company. I can't see how Obama has does anything to change that. Health care reform just seems to lock in the insurance companies' profit.

A better second terms seems to me wishful thinking. The assumption -- correct me if I'm wrong -- seems to be that Obama has really wanted to do the progressive thing all along, but has done otherwise because he feared that the powers that be would undermine his reelection effort. If that were the case, why wouldn't he just give up on getting reelected, so that he wouldn't need that support, and do the progressive thing in his first term? I have no faith that a second Obama term will be any better than the first.

Many have said they'll vote for Obama because they don't want to vote for a Republican, who would be worse. I agree that given the present Republican field, a Republican would almost certainly be worse. But at the same time, given two unacceptable choices I can't pick one. The only option left to me is to say I'm not playing this game. I feel that this option is a whole lot more viable now than it was four months ago, before the Occupy movement was born. I want to say that if many, many people refuse to vote for either major-ticket candidate (but could vote for a minor-party candidate, or could show up at the polls and vote for other offices but leave "president" blank) then the message would be sent that the American people will not accept the false choice between two candidates who will both promote the interests of corporations over people. I want to say that but I'm not sure I believe it. But I can say that I can't believe the change we need in our political system can possibly come from choosing the slightly friendlier face of corporatism.

That's why I can't vote for Obama.

[FrenchieCat]

231. What your writing here demonstrates....

is that you really do blame Pres. Obama for the past 30 years.

So if you can't vote for Obama, in all reality, after everything is said and done,
you don't really give a shit about any of the issues you've just rambled on about.
One Supreme Court ruling can change the world in a way that you can't yet imagine,
but obviously you don't care as much as you allege.

[freedom fighter jh]

234. Please support your generalizations

I'll list them:

* Blame Pres Obama for the last 30 years

* Don't give a shit about issues.

* Don't care as much as I allege.

You seem to be very good at making accusations. I don't see any support for them at all.

Why do you accuse me of rambling?

[freedom fighter jh]

249. That's what it feels like.

But if it happens again I won't feel it, cuz I just put her on Ignore.

[Puglover]

251. What is astounding to me is

that "supporters" like this actually feel they are doing Obama a favor by ripping into anyone who dares to have anything but praise for the guy. It took me awhile to finally figure out that I really did not have any more issues with Obama then I did with Clinton, or Franken, or Klobachar(sp?). It was the guard dog thing that totally put me off. When people "tear into" me I tend to tear right back.

[freedom fighter jh]

257. So do I tend to tear back.

It's the first time I've used Ignore, and now I appreciate that that's what it's there for. I need only enough self control to end the conversation, so I'm less likely to tear back.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

287. "You are free to vote for whoever we tell you to vote for!"

Which is really what they are doing. Two wings of a crime-syndicate screaming, "Place your bets, place your bets!" All the while, we're playing with tricky dice.

[certainot]

253. you're forgetting the part about there being politics involved and relative bargaining power of

liberals sucks because they allow 1000 radio stations to shit all over their candidates and reps and ideals all day long with no organized opposition to it.

every reform you would like is practically impossible and it hardly matters what dem is in as long as liberals ignore RW talk radio. and with global warming we don' t have time for legislation to fix it.

as soon as americans stop giving the RW radio gods a free speech free ride the perceived and real political center will shift left and the roves and corporations and kochs and their think tanks will lose their most effective weapon. until then your evaluation of dems and obama and what they can do in a 'democracy' against the obstructionists who do't believe in democracy is very faulty and unreal.

[freedom fighter jh]

261. I agree with you about radio

I don't know what you mean about my evaluation of Dems and Obama and what they can do. I haven't talked about what they *can* do, but about what they have and have not done.

I don't have anything against Obama. He may well be the wonderful guy that he comes across as being. The issue is not the man but his presidency. Regardless of who is to blame for the problems with Obama's presidency, to reelect Obama is to choose more of the same. And that is the problem.

Maybe it's not Obama but just the system that gives us a non-choice that pretends to be a choice. Whatever the cause, I don't want to play the game anymore, because playing the game lends it legitimacy.

[certainot]

267. not voting gave us 2010 and most of this obstruction and 2 more years lost on global warming

it's just not an option until media and elections are reformed and not voting for the party that's been trying to pass regulations and reforms for the last 20 years.

getting that party to be more progressive is a function of where we allow the corporate media to paint the perceived center. we've just gone through the debt crisis and this last shit because enough teabaggers believe the limbaugh and hannity and fox. we've lost many years dealing with climate change because we let the same stations that broadcast our university sports do global warming denial 24/7. because the 'left' allows it. that's my point- we're not going to get any meaningful reforms as long as the 1% keeps getting that free speech free ride on 100o radio stations.

some people really do have very high principles, strive to never compromise, and dedicate themselves with strong ideals, but aside from that i just don't understand how anyone can not vote these days.

[mikekohr]

229. with un abashed pragmatic enthusiam

[Texas Lawyer]

230. I'm left of Obama (and every other nationally electable candidate). I'll DEFINITELY vote for him IF

it appears that my vote could conceivable have any impact on the outcome.

If my vote is more symbolic (as it might be if there is no possible hope that Obama has any small chance of winning my state), and if there is a worthwhile protest candidate to the left of Obama available for consideration, it is possible that I might cast my vote in protest.

However, I need to emphasize that if there is any possibility Obama would need my vote to win, I will certainly vote for him.

[OnionPatch]

232. Yes, I'm way to the left of him but will support him.

There is simply no other acceptable choice for me, being the pragmatist I am. My failure to vote for Obama will enable the Republicans, who are a million times worse, to have power. I know everyone is fed up with having to choose between bad and worse, but that's the reality and I'm not going to throw a tantrum and jump out of the frying pan and into the fire.

By the way, when I say "support", I mean I will do what I can to help him get elected, including voting for him myself. It does NOT mean I agree with everything he does. Far from it.

[whathehell]

233. Far to the left of Obama but will be both working and voting for him..Consider the Supreme Court,

for one thing.

[Seedersandleechers]

235. Yes and Yes

[FedUp_Queer]

236. Yes/No

[Fair Witness]

237. I know some Republicans that are to the left of Obama but they aren't running...

I'm a committed Democrat so I'll vote for Obama assuming he's the candidate but not very enthusiastically. I'm not even sure he's a real live Democrat anyway...
shrug

[bitchkitty]

240. Hard left

but I'm not an idiot. I'll be voting for Obama. What other choice is there?

[workinclasszero]

241. More left, yes..support, yes

The president and his party have been a disappointment in many ways to me but I sure don't want to see a koch/fox/7 mountains heretic take over the white house!

I'm much more jaded now of course but still voting straight democratic ticket. No choice in the matter at all.

[siligut]

242. I do and still, I will

Defeating the repukes is first on my list and Obama is the candidate who can do it.

[SunSeeker]

246. I do and I will! With Enthusiasm!

I love Obama. I know he's doing the best he can with what the voters have given him to work with in Congress. Vote him a better Congress and you'll see him go waaay more progressive.

[bobthedrummer]

247. Yep, that's me, today.

RECALL WALKER/KLEEFISCH!!!

[boxman15]

248. I do and I will.

I support him enthusiastically. He's the best chance this country has of moving us forward, especially if we can get him a liberal Congress to work with.

[AtomicKitten]

255. Flypaper.

[truebrit71]

258. Yes and no.

I cannot vote so obviously I cannot support him at the polls, and having given as much as I could financially last time around I will not be doing the same this time 'round. If he wants to fill his coffers he should go back to his base, you know, Wall Street, Big Oil, and "clean" coal...

[SaveOurDemocracy]

259. I like turtles. n/t

[snooper2]

260. where is he sitting right now?

[JDPriestly]

262. Yes, yes. I hope to get more progressives in Congress.

My Congressman is a leading progressive.

[colsohlibgal]

265. Way, Way To The Left Of Him But....

I'll vote for him or more correctly I'll vote against Romney or whoever it is running against him.

[Hanks]

266. no

you are not (to the left) of him. You are simply a supporter of a corporatist if you do vote for him. I am to the left of him as are many other lefties in my group and the thought of voting for such a vacillating, weak kneed, compromiser like him would be tantamount to slitting our own throats. You can justify anything you want and vote for whomever you'd like but please do not insult the social/leftist movement in this country.

[solara]

269. Yes and defnitely yes

I am not disappointed in him.. I think he is doing an admirable job even though I am far to his left. I think he will catch up, so.... you betcha I am going to work for him and vote for him

[OverBurn]

272. I'm further to the left than I originally thought, but I'm still voting for him.

What other choice do I really have, Obama or batshit crazy, I'll take Obama.

[BobbyBoring]

275. which Obama?

Obama the candidate or Obama the president? I'm way left of Obama the president. Obama the candidate and I were pretty much on the same page.

That being said, I will support him against any of the right wing whack jobs that are currently vying for this spot. If someone primaries him it might be a different story.

[joshcryer]

276. You're a moderate centrist?

[Warren Stupidity]

277. yes and yes

and also 'not with a lot of enthusiasm'. Really we need a new plan. One that doesn't end up with another caretaker/cleanup administration installed only to give the nation a breather before the next round of insane loon republican pillage commences.

[rawbean]

278. yes and no

Vote for BP/Goldman/Sachs!

[fifthoffive]

279. I am

to the left of President Obama.

I will vote for him, but will be sending my money to progressive/liberal candidates for the House and Senate.

[cantbeserious]

289. Yes And Not Many Options For Progressives

eom

[MrSlayer]

292. I am certainly left of the President. I will vote against the Republicans.

Which means I vote for Obama by default. I would love for there to be a real alternative to this centrist bullshit.

[yardwork]

293. I agree with everything in your post except the part about Obama being incrementalist vs. centrist.

I knew that he was center-right when he was elected in 2008. I voted for him anyway and will again. He knows it and that irks me but the reality is what it is.

[cpwm17]

299. Yes and no

If we vote for Obama we're asking to repeat this cycle. "Democratic" politicians then know that Democratic voters are suckers. We need to break this cycle and only vote for actual liberals.

Plus I can never vote for any war-monger. That won't be right.

[existentialist]

300. upset but supporting

Irrespective of whether I am to the Left of Obama or not, I am upset with him and his administration on a number of issues.

But those ********** Republicans have me so angry that I would walk 20 miles to vote against any of them.

[Vinca]

314. I've come to realize I'm a Bernie Sanders socialist.

Far, far to the left of the POTUS. I will, of course, vote for him to keep the crazies from taking over.

[Neoma]

317. There's no choice in the matter, but I'll vote for him anyways.

Very left from Obama.

[StopTheNeoCons]

320. Yes and yes...nt

[Rex]

321. The sky is blue.