Still want a primary challenger for Obama?

[toddwv]

Amounts from: http://www.fec.gov/disclosurep/pnational.do

[Skittles]

1. um

that's what it looks like until the candidates are whittled down to ONE Dem and ONE repuke

[Gamow]

4. agree 100%. Still, that is a lot of green more than a year before the election. nt

[Skittles]

5. yes it is but that's where yet again OWS has a HUGE point

[Gamow]

6. Still agree. Lesser of two evils and all of that...

But its not the usual 'lesser'.
If somebody as big-talkin' as Obama, with all of his small online donations, couldn't roll his sleeves up and kick some Wall/K street butt.... who can?

and yea, I know he took WS money in 08, but 200m? or some huge number in small donations.

[Skittles]

7. he never had the will to kick Wall/K ass

[Gamow]

10. that much is obvious now. Heartbreaking. They are Plutocrats, all of them.

[toddwv]

8. No.

That's what it looks like right now. By the time the Republican primaries are over, Obama is on track to have well over $100,000,000 cash on hand pretty easily. That differs from the amount raised because a certain amount is being spent. Currently, Obama has a bit over $61,000,000 on hand with Romney coming in with $14 mil and Perry with $15 mil.

Based on posts on a political forum that I frequent, there is quite a heated debate going on amongst the right-wingers. It's going to get dirty... REAL dirty. Perry is obviously not going to go down easy. It's going to be a Romney, Cain, Perry slugfest. No matter what Romney does, he's going to have to spend money as the other campaigns focus on him. The more people get to know Perry and Cain, the more they look like the corporate ideologues that they are. The right-wingers give lip-service to Paul but we all know that there is NO way that the Republican corporate machine - military-industrial complex included - is going to let Paul anywhere near the White House.

[Motown_Johnny]

17. but the (R)s are spending money fighting each other right now

a primary challenge is doomed to fail and would eat into Obama's funds

[Demeter]

2. Now more than ever

fool me once, shame on you....

[Rex]

3. Why does it cost so much to run for POTUS?

Typical that we would rank a persons ability by how much money they can raise. Those are great skills if you are running a charity. Is that what we are now? America the charity case. So it costs far more then any normal human will ever need in a lifetime to be president of the US. Wow I am really proud that we make sure corporations don't interfere with politics. :sarcasm:

Oh, primary challenger...not really. Next question.

[toddwv]

15. Like it or not, that's the way it is.

We can either play ball or let people like Perry and Cain take over the pitcher's mound.

Should it be changed? Hell yes.
Will it be changed? Probably not.

[JI7]

9. McCotter and Johnson ?

[flamingdem]

11. GO O!

Obama / Biden 2012

go hate on a repuke

[hfojvt]

12. on what planet do you think that is relevant?

it's not one dollar, one vote.

Or it shouldn't be.

[inna]

14. you said it, all. "It shoudn't be".

What is that they say about people deserving their governments?... I forget.

[hfojvt]

25. but the OP itself is a parody of ridiculousness

I want Obama primaried because I am angry about the fact that he does not represent people like me - people in the bottom 80%. The fact that he promised change and delivered more of the same. The OP waves around Obama's big pile of cash like the fact that he's probably unbeatable is supposed to change my mind. It's suddenly okay for Obama to not represent the bottom 80% as long as he has $100 million in campaign funds. I should suddenly start supporting somebody who doesn't represent me because he has $100 million and is probably gonna win the nomination anyway. There's no amount of campaign funds that are gonna make me start cheering for four more years of betrayal and selling out.

[DainBramaged]

26. See below

:yourock: :fistbump: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[LooseWilly]

13. Yes. I want to see Obama try to defend his record within the party...

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that he defeated Hillary in the primary by tacking left... only to then enact policies which seem to be exactly what she'd espoused in the primary?...

If no one has the guts to run against him in a primary, I'll vote for Weiner anyway...

[Scuba]

16. The chart will change the moment the R's pick a candidate. They money on their side...

...both disclosed and anonymous will dwarf what the President can raise. The Koch's could each put in $2 Billion and not even feel it!



The real question is not whether we should primary the President. The question is how we get the President to move left, toward the center or beyond.

Right now I see OWS as our best hope.

[Motown_Johnny]

18. No, the question is how do we keep the man in office so we don't end up with another Shrub

The President simply can't be as far left as we would all like him to be. The political reality in this county right now is that he would not be elected if he were.


We need to keep the most liberal person possible in office for as long as possible, even if that person is a moderate.

Just think what a couple more conservative ideologues on the Supreme Court would do to this country. Right now we are in a 5-4 minority. With any luck that could change before 2016.

[Scuba]

23. Keeping him in office without moving him left is arguably better than having a Republican....

.... but sure doesn't flip the flapjacks.

[City Lights]

19. He who amasses the most money wins!

Go USA! :patriot: We so totally rule. I am blown away by our awesomeness.

:puke:

The United States of America, the best democracy money can buy.

:puke:

[ThomWV]

20. YES! Now more than ever, particularly after is utterly ignorant comments yesterday

His comment that OWS and the Tea Party are essentially the same showed how utterly out of touch with the Nation he is. He is a great campaigner, he can tell a lie about his position and never blink an eye, but as a President where his actions have to outshine his words, the man has been a failure.

[SammyWinstonJack]

30. Obama said that?

:wow: I didn't catch that. :puke:

[JTFrog]

35. No he didn't. n/t

[creon]

21. No

I never did.
I live in the real world and I know possible from impossible.

[Le Taz Hot]

22. Yes

because Democracy really does work if one just allows the system to do what it's supposed to do without interference from the political parties. In a true Democracy, Obama WOULD have a challenger and The Party would be a neutral entity until the primary process (much reform needed on this one) decided who the candidate would be. The primary process was supposed to be a way in which backroom deals were cut and always out of view from the public -- at least that's what they told us. Ironically, the primary process was ACTUALLY established to WEAKEN the voice of the people when choosing a candidate which is EXACLTY what happened. That's no accident. We need to take back our Democracy before it's irretrievably lost.

[LWolf]

24. Yes.

I don't want a primary challenger for Obama because of any Republican challengers.

I want one because I don't want a neo-liberal in the White House.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Autumn]

28. Yes, please, n/t

[L0oniX]

29. No. I like Wallstreet and banker people in the government..

:sarcasm:

[Ganja Ninja]

31. I'd prefer he not run and let the party nominate someone else.

Hold a primary but leave out Obama.

[bowens43]

32. Yes. Absolutely.

suggesting that Obama may have the ability to buy the election doesn't make him more attractive as a candidate.

[JTFrog]

33. Thank the USSC for this bullshit.

Money out of Politics NOW!

[leeroysphitz]

34. Yes. The country needs a liberal in the whitehouse. n/t