For all of you furious with Obama's tax deal, do you want another DEM to run against him in 2012?

[RiverStone]

Poll question: For all of you furious with Obama's tax deal, do you want another DEM to run against him in 2012?

Yea - I'm angry too.

It's very hard to find middle ground when the corporate élite and greedy bastards in the top 1% income bracket demand tax breaks to feed their opulent ways. We all know, in bed with the Republicans.

Yet WTF are ya gonna do? Walk away from the Democratic Party?

Doing that, even if your disgust is justified, puts into jeopardy judicial appointments and legislation that protects civil liberties, the environment, reproductive freedom, immigration rights and so much more.

President Obama may have compromised too much, but there is still local politics in our cities, county, and state.

At this moment, despite the historical odds against it - I'm tempted to rally behind another Dem (in the mold of Howard Dean) to run against all this compromising bullshit.

Yet no matter what, I will not abandon the Democratic party and who ever our nominee is gets my vote in 2012. That includes President Obama. Sorry for the bias in my goofy poll - we all know how scientific they are. :)

And if you are planning on not supporting the DEM nominee or leaving the DEM party, then I call WTF to that - why even be on DU?

QUESTION: Do you want another Dem to run against Obama in 2012 (or what else)?

[drmeow]

1. it depends on what

happens in the next 2 years.

[derby378]

2. I'm wearing a Howard Dean button to the next local Democratic event

As in "Howard Dean for President." If someone doesn't like it, too bad.

[niyad]

3. time to resurrect the national women's party

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. At leaast you'll get

the frat-boy vote.

[Tansy_Gold]

4. I didn't vote in the poll, but I'm going to make a comment

If the historical odds suggest that running a primary challenge to an incumbent up for re-election quashes the hopes of victory, then perhaps we ought to look not at the challenge itself but at the reasons for a challenge. I would venture to guess that popular, aka "successful," incumbents do to prompt primary challenges. Therefore, the cause of their defeat is not in the primary challenge, but in the reasons -- weaknesses, failures, disappointments, mistakes -- that open the door to the challenger(s).

As angry as I am, as disappointed, as disgusted, I am not ready to abandon the Democrats in favor of pukes. I don't think there is anyone on their side who merits anything above my scorn and contempt, so I'm not going to do anything that *I* think will help them. (You may think what I'm doing helps them, and that's your prerogative, but as long as *I* don't think so, I'm gonna follow my own lead on that.)

I do think, however, that there are ways to mount a primary challenge that actually strengthen the incumbent on the issues that matter most to us. Okay, maybe the rhetorical you isn't in the same category of us as I am, but that's okay, too.)

Public opinion polls may show that the incumbent retains substantial strength in the "liberal" base, but I think the more important poll -- the recent November elections -- shows that there needs to be something more than strength in one core constituency. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm way the hell out in far left field, but I think a primary challenge could in fact strengthen the incumbent's position with the broader electorate.

But what do I know?


TG, TT

[RiverStone]

12. Good post

Hi Tansy --- you said:

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm way the hell out in far left field, but I think a primary challenge could in fact strengthen the incumbent's position with the broader electorate.

This is an interesting question and my experience on DU has been people have strong opinions (a good thing) regarding if a primary challenge would help or hurt the party. Like I referenced in the OP, I don't think there are many examples of any individual within the (same) party of an incumbent president beating him. Doing a quick Google search I only found one example in our history of this happening: Pres Franklin Pierce was not renominated in 1856 --- the Democrats opted to nominate James Buchanan. I'm not a political science major, so anybody please correct me if I'm wrong.

That being said, so many of us worked so damn hard to elect Obama (myself included) and who now are so disappointed (myself included) that we vision an in party challenge. There is precedent, but it would be a very tough road!

I should add, my disappointment is only exceeded by extreme revulsion at the prospect of a puke president; Congress going red is bad enough. If Obama's capitulation continues for another 6 months, 2012 could be very challenging for the Dem party and I would foresee a challenge from within.



edit: spelling!

[OKNancy]

5. No I want Obama to run and win

I'm glad DU isn't very representative of Democrats in general... Of course a lot of Democrats have left DU

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OKNancy]

8. Thank goodness for your reply

I'm usually pretty timid despite the number of posts I have. But I hate coming here.

[RiverStone]

14. There is a difference between hating "actions" of an individual and the party in general

Just because some people on DU are very frustrated with some of President Obama's capitulating with conservatives, does not suggest they are rightie trolls or trying to stir the pot in a bad way. Are there trolls??? - of course. I think the DU Mods do a good job (with our help) of weeding those dumbfucks out fast.

On the contrary, what separates DEMS from the wacko right is that we don't march in lockstep. I can be critical of Obama, yet remain very passionate and dedicated to progressive causes. I worked like hell to elect him, I cried in a crowded theater on election night which gave up movies in favor of broadcasting his winning speech 2 years ago, and I am extremely frustrated with a watering down of the very DEM goals that got him elected!

Working to change the message from within to attract and reunite a broad base so we don't get our asses kicked in 2012 is positive. You may not like folks being critical of Obama, but that is exactly what may need to happen to keep him as president for another term.




On edit: added compliment to the mods!

[downeyr]

7. I don't think another democrat or republican

is what's best for the country. We need someone different. That being said, whichever candidate shares my convictions gets my vote. As simple as that. If you go too far into the thought process that you might as well vote for one of the powerful parties, you've already bastardized your vote and compromised your democratic integrity. Democracy isn't about voting to win.

[obxhead]

9. Yes, but in fairness I said that after HCR. nt

[bemildred]

10. The point is that someone will run against him, now. nt

[spin]

11. If the people we elect and send to office fail to to do what they promise ...

we should replace them and keep replacing them until we find someone who will represent us.

If a politician wants to compromise in order to solve problems, he can promise to do just that.

[AndrewP]

15. I'm going to vote for the Democratic candidate in 2012

That's all I promise.

I don't assume that there will be a serious primary challenge.

[Liberalynn]

16. I am not abandoning the Democratic Partry. I will still vote for other Democrats.

I just won't vote for Obama in the primary. I don't get how having a Democratic President in name only who concedes and/or compromises with the Pukes on everything and refuses to stand up for anything that even resembles a liberal value, is any different than having a Republican President?

Sorry if that sounds disloyal or ignorant but to me the result is the same either way you look it. The majority of the American Public gets the shaft and the wealthiest members of society get to keep having their party, drinking their Dom, and eating their cake at our expense.

I will vote for a primary challenger if there is one and I pray to God there is one. Even more so I pray that Obama will do an LBJ and withdraw his re-election bid, so we can choose uncontested a Democrat who doesn't dismiss the party's historic core principles out of hand. Obama can still run if he wants to as an independent or a Republican. He should just IMHO be honest and not run as a Dem.

And even though said Liberal person challenger is not on the horizon right now, I still have hope one will arise.

[RiverStone]

17. Obama's worst day is still better than having a rethug president

So I do see a difference - it's just he has radically underperformed based on our reasonable expectations on election day.

He has time to correct the course, but if today's tax deal is any indication....yikes!

I agree with the rest of your post. Thanks for sharing Liberalynn.

[Skip Intro]

18. I'm not furious with him, and I have no problem with a primary challenge to him either. nt

[customerserviceguy]

19. All I can say is

Bill Clinton is lucky that the Internet was barely a flicker from 1995-1996. He would have surely been primaried.