"Obama has governed as a conservative. So, the question for progressives is, “What do we do now?”

[jeff47]

247. The problem is it's delusional.

The first paragraph claims that candidates will govern exactly like they campaign. You have to be utterly naive to believe that.

The second paragraph is just LOL. If Occupy was gonna have such a massive effect on Obama, it would have had an effect before now.

Fundamentally, their entire thesis fails for two reasons:

First, Obama isn't dictator. Obama could be a socialist and there would be little change, because Congress is full of Republicans and Blue Dog morons. "But he could LEAD!", you say. Well, he's been trying to get an infrastructure bill to reduce unemployment for 3 years. Such a bill is very middle-of-the-road and very frequently done during economic downturns. But he hasn't gotten one, thanks to the Republicans and Blue Dog morons. So you really think he's going to get single-payer, pro union and other populist legislation by "leading"?

Which means if you want a more progressive Obama, you need to get a more progressive Congress.

Second, the only actual influence you'd have over Obama is to withhold your vote. So either you're going to help elect Romney, or you're not going to actually withhold your vote. Since the authors state they aren't willing to withhold their vote, they can be ignored.

But they'd have a fantastic time saying "I told you so" while we suffer under a Romney presidency.