An Obama supporter knocked on my door today.

[Droopy]

Just a few minutes ago. It's the first time I've ever talked to anyone in person who was actually hitting the street and putting their money where there mouth is so to speak. The exchange was brief but enthusiastic. I wish I could get that fired up about a candidate. I haven't gone beyond donating money and voting, but I guess that's more than some people do. Maybe some day when I don't have to work 60 hours a week I'll try what that guy is doing.

I was originally a Kucinich supporter. After he dropped out I was an Edwards supporter. After he dropped out I didn't give a fuck for a while. I live in Ohio and on Tuesday I'm going to vote for Obama. I'm not all that thrilled about it and I considered doing a protest vote if Edwards or Kucinich was still on the ballot, but I'm going to make my vote count.

Here's the thing that bothers me about Obama. When I started researching the Democratic candidates I noticed that Obama likes to talk about "reaching across the aisle" a lot and something to the effect of working together in Washington for change. There's just a lot of talk from him that makes him appear to want to be friends with the Republicans up there on the hill. That's not a trait I'd like to see from a Democratic candidate. After what the Republicans have done for the last 7 years I want our leadership to just cram down the throats of the Republicans every piece of progressive legislation they possibly can. I don't want to be friends with Republicans and if Obama wins the nomination he's going to find that Republicans don't want to be friends with him.

[Emit]

1. Funny. I had a lot of concerns about Obama, too

but that particular one was the least of my concerns.

Being married to a Republican (who switched parties to support Edwards, then Obama in our caucus) for almost 20, I find it not so scary, that, lol.

[Unsane]

2. "I want our leadership to just cram down the throats of the Republicans"

That won't result in anything, except filibuster and deadlock. I support Obama's approach.

[goodgd_yall]

53. We can get results if we increase the number of Democrats in Congress

That's the only way either candidate is going to get things done.

[graywarrior]

3. He can reach across the aisle so we don't have to.

I will have republican resentment for a long time. Let Obama deal with them. He seems to be good at slamming them nicely.

[Sebass1271]

4. As an Obama supporter, I am waiting for Tuesday

For Obama to finally find out that republicans don't want to be friends with him. They are ready to go for the jucular..sp?

[TwilightGardener]

5. So...you want Obama to get nothing passed? Because we don't, and

won't have, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, most likely. SOME Repubs are going to be needed to pass anything on our agenda. If you are opposed to Repubs being enticed to vote for our major proposals--with minor compromises that still preserve the main intent of the legislation--and would rather hang on for ideological purity, you're not going to find that with Hillary, either.

[Onlooker]

13. So you like Bill Clinton?

That's the exact kind of approach that gave us NAFTA and "welfare reform." You don't negotiate with the public, you go to the public. The one time Bill Clinton did that, when the Repugs closed down Congress, the US went to his side and the Repugs had to back down completely. Now, with Obama's oratory skills, he should certainly be able to rally the public behind him, but if he instead goes right to the Republicans, he will be a weak president. That's a real danger based on what he's been saying. But, then again, we can hope, as I do, that he's saying what he needs to say to win the election. Once he wins, maybe he'll be tougher.

[MagsDem]

21. Obama's position on NAFTA is NO different than Clinton's

Not even a little bit. So get over that strawman. And what was wrong with welfare reform, exactly? After reform there were less people on welfare AND in poverty. BO supporters are about as uninformed on the issues and Bushbots were in 2000. It's sad.

[CTLawGuy]

56. Unless Obama is going to happily sign

watered down republican legislation, you can't compare the two. He wants to pass things like UHC and REFORM of NAFTA, but he is willing to compromise some minor points to get it done.

Bill Clinton pissed off Republicans by stealing their thunder and taking credit for stuff they liked and wanted passed.

[MagsDem]

19. You're so naive

... and he is selling you a pig in a poke. You BO supporters rail against the DLC, then turn right around and support a guy who is telling you he is going compromise with rethugs. We don't NEED a fillbuster proof senate if we have a dem president and a dem majority. All we need is to actually make them fillibuster, then pass it when they get tired of talking. Take a class in government, would you?

[Sebass1271]

24. Hey, I support Obama.. I am not naive.. i want him to fight with

tooth and nails.. I know how dirty repukes are...!!

[MagsDem]

28. So you're voting for a guy who says he won't fight them?

Makes no sense.

[Capn Sunshine]

35. HE NEVER SAID HE WON'T FIGHT

he says that legislation to fix things needs the support of both parties.

The paradigm will change with the coming landslide.

[MagsDem]

Oh you so live in a dream world

He's not going to win against McCain. Jesus, McCain is beating him in polls now, before it has even started. At this point in 2004 Kerry had a 10% lead over Bush. You are nominating a completely unelectable candidate.

[Capn Sunshine]

43. spout on amigo

You actually think polling reflects the reality of a 2:1 turnout ?

You can sit on the wire caw cawing but we have a clue, unlike you.

[MagsDem]

46. LOL -- if you had a clue you'd realize there is no reason

for rethugs to turn out. McCain has been in the bag for a long time. You'd also know that primaries are no predictors of anything when it comes to the GE except demographics of who is voting for who. And those don't look good for Obama, even within his own party when plugged in to the GE scenarios.

[Capn Sunshine]

58. Tell you what- I'll release the note of our campaign post-primary session at a later date

because, you seem to be operating under the premise that no one has given any thought to the general which is about a million miles from the truth.

This stuff isn't happening in a vacuum amigo, and it most certainly isn't happening because of luck

[totodeinhere]

25. Under current Senate rules they won't get tired of talking.

They don't have to hold the floor anymore like Jimmy Stewart did in the movie.

[MagsDem]

31. The do if the dem majority says they do

I know you've been taught, by the media, that is isn't so, but it is.

[totodeinhere]

37. They would need a super majority to change the Senate rules.

It's not gonna happen.

[TwilightGardener]

32. You need 60 votes in the Senate for cloture. Unless we have 60

solid votes (and Lieberworm is unreliable), they WILL filibuster, and they already have all last year and this year. The GOP is hell-bent on obstructing our agenda for political advantage, UNLESS our legislation is crafted in such a way that it either gives them a political benefit, or damages them politically not to go along with us. THAT'S the sweet spot, and it does involve some compromise, and some arm-twisting, and good PR/press manipulation. We have passed bipartisan Dem-agenda legislation this year, even with a GOP prez, because of compromise. That's the way it works, and Hillary will have to do it too. That doesn't mean selling out core principles or giving up--it means, say, passing the stimulus package WITHOUT the LIHEAP but WITH disabled veteran's rebate checks, etc. Or passing SCHIP with a lower maximum age or wage range--that's how you get things passed. It will all be tweaked, no matter who's President--that's political reality. Better than complete gridlock while America's problems go unsolved.

[goodgd_yall]

54. When you get these wonderful well-crafted pieces of legislature passed

Progressive voters will be pissed that Obama sold out. This is what's happened with Clinton with DADT, Welfare reform, DOMA, ---the very issues Obama's supporters bring up to criticize the Clinton administration.

[boston bean]

6. Don't expect O supporters to understand this. They think this bipartisanship thingy is gonna work

they don't a fuckin clue. they are naive.

[Unsane]

8. Right, because Clinton's "partisanship" worked so well.

The only time he ever got anything done was when his efforts were bipartisan in nature (see welfare and budget reform).

[MagsDem]

26. This is such an ignorant statement

Clinton got nothing done? Let's see:

- The family medical leave act

- 22 million new jobs

- 1 trillion in deficit reduction

- The brady bill for handgun control and the assault weapons ban

- Expansion of the earned income tax credit that decreased taxes on 15 million working poor

- Americorps

- Huge increases in the availability of student loans

The list could go on and on. But fuck if any BO has a clue about any of it. Hell, you don't even have a clue about your own candidate.

[Unsane]

30. It's so ignorant that I didn't even write it!

You dufus.

[MagsDem]

36. You wrote...

"The only time he ever got anything done was when his efforts were bipartisan in nature (see welfare and budget reform)."

And that is just bullshit.

[Unsane]

38. It's also not what you accused me of "stating"

yawners

[totodeinhere]

41. He got things done like...

DOMA, DADT, DMCA, so-called welfare reform, Rhwanda, NAFTA, and the list goes on.

But fuck if any BO has a clue about any of it. Hell, you don't even have a clue about your own candidate.

You are good at insulting the intelligence of Obama supporters aren't you?

[Sebass1271]

11. I do understand bipartisanship don't work with republicans....

it only works when we, Democrats, have to bow them.. but Republicans have never endorsed any of our agendas or bills.. that's why Pelosi has not been successful, she is still trying to get along with them and attend their bbqs....

screw bipartarship.. Hit them hard Obama!!..

[TwilightGardener]

17. That's absolute bullshit. Repubs have cosponsored, and helped pass, some

key Democratic legislation this year--just not enough to keep the bills/amendments veto-proof. My own Repub Senator, Hagel, gave us the winning margin last spring to pass the Iraq funding bill with a timeline for withdrawal (later vetoed)--he also cosponsored the Webb-Hagel amendment to limit troop rotations, and the current new GI Bill improvement with Webb, as well as the Dodd-Hagel Infrastructure Bank bill and the Global Poverty Act cosponsored with Obama--most of Hagel's legislation is bipartisan. Charles Grassley, next door in Iowa, has cosponsored the SCHIP measure, and a lot of Repubs voted for it. McCain has done a lot of bipartisan legislation. Biden and Sam Brownback and Kay Bailey Hutchison cosponsored the Biden plan for Iraq. You're not dealing in the facts. The House has even more examples of bipartisan legislation, I'm sure.

[Recursion]

61. Really? What about the Obama/Lugar nonproliferation bill?

Or the Obama/Coburn transparency act?

[OhioBlue]

7. do you want them to spend all their

energy fighting and not accomplishing anything?

I don't.

[theHandpuppet]

20. What I want is a party...

... that doesn't spend most of its time trying to placate Republicans.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

9. Same cycle through the candidates for me.

Of the remaining two, Obama has a definitive edge over Clinton. I share your reservations as well, but there is no other choice that I can see.

[Pirate Smile]

10. Would you read this Diary and see if it alleviates some of your concerns?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/27/113430/088/759/465029

I think I'll post it as its own thread also.

edit to add - I posted it as its own thread on DU:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4835932&mesg_id=4835932

[Donna Zen]

42. So simple and yet so darn hard to accept

Understanding Obama took me a long time. Maybe because I wasn't listening, or maybe because the concept was so different from the top down way of thinking. We like to call it "grassroots."

From the Kos link above:

We've criticized Democrats for years on triangulation: moving themselves to the middle. What I love about Obama is that he does the reverse: moving the middle to our values.

Bipartisanship has recently been the act of caving to the republicans; it doesn't have to be. Turn a few of those solid red districts purple or blue, and you will find republicans ready and willing to follow Obama's lead. When he tells you that he can't do this alone, he means it. I've accepted that Obama in the WHouse means that I'm signing up to e-mail, write LTTEs, and make lots of phone calls. If we want health care, an end to war, and better things for living, then, like all important change, the energy must come from the bottom.

I'm fully signed up for the 50 states strategy, and hope that you will join us. That's the meaning of "Yes, we can!"

[Pirate Smile]

47. I'm glad you understand him now. Who were you supporting initially?

[Donna Zen]

60. I had no candidate

and I liked it that way. I still try to stay out of out arguments, but I will weigh in when someone invents crap. As someone who has watched this nightmare settle in--I've been here since 2001--I feel some foolish need to correct revisionist history about the IWR and other issues that demand a clear head. Who was standing up with us and who sold us out is important to remember and in some cases honor for their leadership (not many of those.)

We have endured too many lies to have to STFU when a sack of lies gets dumped on a long-time discussion board.

[greguganus]

12. I support Obama reaching across the aisle to make change happen.

At least he will try to work with the republicans. I have repug friends that are fired up for Obama, and I believe there are some repugs in Washington that Obama can work with.

[goodgd_yall]

55. I wish Obama would spend as much energy talking about voting for Democrats

for congressional seats as he does talking about working with Republicans.

[LiveLiberally]

14. If there is one thing we've learned about Obama....

is that he is an amazingly quick study. If bi-partisanship isn't getting the job done, he will switch to something that does.

[donheld]

15. Good plan. Let's keep the country as divided as possible

filled with as much hate as we possibly can. Let's not work with anybody and see how much we get done.

[Droopy]

23. Well I'm not running for president, donheld

But what if working with Republicans means that you have to sacrifice any progressive values you might have?

[writes3000]

16. I think Obama's reaching across the aisle...

Has much more to do with style of execution than substance of ideas. In other words, he will be friendly, warm and strong when we speaks to Repubs. He will listen to their ideas and their concerns. But he won't waiver from his plans. He will get things done. He'll just do it in a way that makes the reasonable Republicans feel good about it.

[bigbrother05]

18. Edwards is on the TX ballot, but too important for a "protest" vote

[Forkboy]

22. I agree so much it's like you picked those last 2 paragraphs right out of my head.

:)

[Droopy]

33. Thanks

Most people just think I'm a goofball. +)

[Forkboy]

48. Then we're even more alike.

:D

[Divernan]

27. Bush is down to a 19% approval rating.

There are many, many Republicans who want someone to clean up the multi-faceted disaster Bush has wrought on our country. I think that particularly those GOP Reps & Senators who do not face election next November will very much want to and need to show their constituents that they can support Dem. legislation and generally work in a bipartisan way aimed at cleaning up various messes.

[Capn Sunshine]

39. EXACTLY

What we are articulating at a national level is a landslide, and this reality will remove a LOT of the partisan resistance from the ensconced neocons in DC. With a lanslide as the goal, we certainly can create a convincing margin of victory. A landlside would be nice, but either way, it won't be close. Because there have been plenty of post-primary discussions about having an aggressive AG chase down all these wackjobs Bush has installed in the past eight years.

People post here all the time that we're naive, but the facts are we have a plan to accomplish everything we have proposed, and it accomodates more depths and layers of DC than the posters even are aware of.

We're old pros , not neophytes. We know what it is.

[casus belli]

50. Agreed.

Wouldn't hurt them at all to side with us for a change and actually do some good for the country, either. If they just want to be obstructionists for the sake of towing the party line, then they do so at their own peril. Bipartisanship is the only chance they have of acheiving some sort of relevance in the wake of the Bush legacy.

[stillcool]

29. I think it is his modus operandi...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303_pf.html
Judge Him by His Laws

By Charles Peters
Friday, January 4, 2008; A21

People who complain that Barack Obama lacks experience must be unaware of his legislative achievements. One reason these accomplishments are unfamiliar is that the media have not devoted enough attention to Obama's bills and the effort required to pass them, ignoring impressive, hard evidence of his character and ability.

Since most of Obama's legislation was enacted in Illinois, most of the evidence is found there -- and it has been largely ignored by the media in a kind of Washington snobbery that assumes state legislatures are not to be taken seriously. (Another factor is reporters' fascination with the horse race at the expense of substance that they assume is boring, a fascination that despite being ridiculed for years continues to dominate political journalism.)

I am a rarity among Washington journalists in that I have served in a state legislature. I know from my time in the West Virginia legislature that the challenges faced by reform-minded state representatives are no less, if indeed not more, formidable than those encountered in Congress. For me, at least, trying to deal with those challenges involved as much drama as any election. And the "heart and soul" bill, the one for which a legislator gives everything he or she has to get passed, has long told me more than anything else about a person's character and ability.

Consider a bill into which Obama clearly put his heart and soul. The problem he wanted to address was that too many confessions, rather than being voluntary, were coerced -- by beating the daylights out of the accused.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The police proved to be Obama's toughest opponent. Legislators tend to quail when cops say things like, "This means we won't be able to protect your children." The police tried to limit the videotaping to confessions, but Obama, knowing that the beatings were most likely to occur during questioning, fought -- successfully -- to keep interrogations included in the required videotaping.

By showing officers that he shared many of their concerns, even going so far as to help pass other legislation they wanted, he was able to quiet the fears of many.

Obama proved persuasive enough that the bill passed both houses of the legislature, the Senate by an incredible 35 to 0. Then he talked Blagojevich into signing the bill, making Illinois the first state to require such videotaping.

Obama didn't stop there. He played a major role in passing many other bills, including the state's first earned-income tax credit to help the working poor and the first ethics and campaign finance law in 25 years (a law a Post story said made Illinois "one of the best in the nation on campaign finance disclosure"). Obama's commitment to ethics continued in the U.S. Senate, where he co-authored the new lobbying reform law that, among its hard-to-sell provisions, requires lawmakers to disclose the names of lobbyists who "bundle" contributions for them.

Taken together, these accomplishments demonstrate that Obama has what Dillard, the Republican state senator, calls a "unique" ability "to deal with extremely complex issues, to reach across the aisle and to deal with diverse people." In other words, Obama's campaign claim that he can persuade us to rise above what divides us is not just rhetoric.

[sandnsea]

34. He's already passed excellent bills with Republicans

usaspending.gov with Coburn. Non-proliferation with Lugar. He did the same thing with death penalty reform in Illinois. Maybe you need to spend some time figuring out what he actually does, instead of concocting a bunch of pre-conceived ideas that have no basis in reality.

[Droopy]

44. Ok, sandnsea. Let's work with the Republicans on the war

Look what that got us. Let's work with Republicans on the Patriot Act. Been trying to take that one back ever since.

The reality is that Republicans have gotten us into the current mess we are in with some Democrats coming along for the ride. I don't think it's too unreal.

[TwilightGardener]

49. We have Republicans that want to end the war, and have voted with us that way--

even cosponsored our legislation. We have Republicans that want to end torture, close Gitmo, restore Habeas Corpus, enact SCHIP, enact global warming legislation--we just don't have enough of them to give us a winning or veto-proof margin. The solution is NOT to dismiss them, it's to get MORE of that R support for our agenda. You don't do that by being combative or marginalizing or demonizing them, you do it by listening, addressing their concerns, and convincing them and the public that your legislation is in the Rs' best interest politically. It's the art of politics--Obama has proven to be skilled at getting Republicans to come to US. Don't dismiss that as weakness--that is a strength.

[sandnsea]

51. He didn't say to do that though

He works with Republicans who agree with things HE wants to get done, not the other way around. That's the point. He will be completely the opposite of the Clintons triangulation we've dealt with for fifteen years. He also said that in his book, specifically, that "Others pursue a more "centrist" approach, figuring that so long as they split the difference with the conservative leadership, they must be acting reasonably -- and failing to notice that with each passing year they are giving up more and more ground."

He wants to make another transformation, where the majority supports an agenda of progress and change again.

[Recursion]

40. That might have been my girlfriend

She's canvassing OH right now. I'm very proud of her.

[Droopy]

45. Nah, it was a dude

But I do appreciate your girlfriend sticking up for what she believes in. I'd be proud of her, too.

[LWolf]

52. I understand your position.

Mine is much the same, although I don't think I'll ever be casting a vote for Obama.

I DO give a fuck, but I don't see much hope of a positive outcome. For me, the most positive outcome at this point would be a brokered convention, with neither of them ending up on the ticket. If I were in Ohio, I'd be tempted to vote for HRC, in an effort to keep either of them from locking it up.

I don't think it's going to matter by the time my primary rolls around on May 20th. I'll probably vote for Gravel, if he's on the ballot.

[Arkana]

57. Working with them is not the same as allowing them to walk all over you.

Remember, after all--the President wields the veto pen, and you need a sizable amount of Congress to overcome that.

Unless we get like a 70-30 majority we will NEED to work with them, no matter how reprehensible you think they may be.

[axordil]

59. Working with the GOP: numbers

There are probably 4-5 GOP Senators who would be more inclined to vote differently on a whole range of issues if there weren't a sitting president from their own party with a veto pen handy waiting for legislation. You don't have to work with ALL of the GOP, only ENOUGH.

On the larger issue--50% + 1 got us where we are now, which is nowhere. People who disagree with us aren't all evil, stupid or insane, and more to the point, they aren't going to disappear if we win this cycle. We didn't when they won, did we? So we can either fight blindly and reflexively for the indefinite future--or we can figure out a way of reframing the issues so that we can accomplish something with some of them.