I find it dubious, but if there's anything to the claims that there are throngs of liberal Paulites

[whatchamacallit]

it says a lot about the job the president has done.

[maximusveritas]

1. You're right. There's nothing to the claims

and that says a lot about the job the president has done.

[gateley]

3. ...

[pnwmom]

2. No, it says a lot about the lack of real information

that those Paulites are responding to.

[whatchamacallit]

5. So which is it?

Are the actual instances of liberal Paul support way overblown, or did the prez drop the ball so badly that it's driving people to a maniac?

[pnwmom]

7. Those people's ignorance is driving them to a maniac.

Either that, or the ability of Paul to appeal to them on a couple of issues -- military spending, and the power of corporations -- while they ignore everything else.

Obama didn't drop the ball. He has been forced to play with a team that doesn't have enough players, against a team that has been constantly cheating. And most of the referees got chosen by the other side.

[whatchamacallit]

10. Well that's the convenient rationale

but his cabinet appointments, rhetoric, and policies paint another picture.

[FarLeftFist]

12. Huh? Obama is the most Progressive president we've had in a LOOOONG time.

[whatchamacallit]

18. Lol! Being regarded as the most progressive out of Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II

aint saying much.

[FarLeftFist]

19. Right,

Admit that you dislike him because, so far in 3yrs, he hasn’t completely eclipsed the accomplishments and remedied the shortcomings of the three most Progressive Presidents of this century. It was “an absolute miracle” that Obama achieved as much legislatively as he did during his first two years, according to James Thurber, the director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. Obama has “adapted, preserved in trying circumstances and seen tremendous legislative successes,” Thurber told Open Secrets Blog, “These have been huge changes compared to usual.”

[whatchamacallit]

23. He's prowar, pro corporate, and moving as swiftly as possible to remove hard won civil liberties

No one forced him into these positions.

[FarLeftFist]

25. You may want to study the other 3 progressive presidents first.

Whatever you may personally think of Obama, within the national political debate Obama stands for preserving social safety nets, maintaining consumer protections against industry greed, regulating pollution and advancing civil rights. Since Republicans oppose all of these policies, they will spend the next year trying to brainwash voters into thinking that they should fear Obama’s “Socialist” or “Marxist demagoguery” rhetoric.

Edit: Btw, being anti-capitalist ISN'T a Liberal viewpoint. And D's have started more wars than the R's throughout history.

[whatchamacallit]

28. Read better

I said pro corporate, not capitalist.

[hootinholler]

35. Can we wait until we've had 3 presidents in this century before making those claims?

Personally I wouldn't character his legislative success as tremendous, although I will say the ball has moved in the right direction.

My major criticism is that he has not fought. He did not stand up for us from the beginning. I think if he had then he would have had greater legislative success. I think if he had gotten up on the pulpit we would have maintained a D majority in the house in 2010 and we would be holding a 62 or 63 majority in the senate.

[FarLeftFist]

36. It's tremendous given the rabid opposition and obstructionism he faces. That's just reality.

[whatchamacallit]

39. We need to separate the comprimises the administration has been forced into by the opposition

from the paths the administration has freely chosen. Much of the shit we find ourselves in is not the result of obstructionism.

[FarLeftFist]

44. Please elaborate.

[hootinholler]

41. But that is no excuse for the pre-compromises made

Starting negotiations halfway to the opponent's position only works when the opponent wants to strike a deal reasonably.

The losses from obstructionism should be wholly owned by the R's, but much was given away before the obstructionism came into play.

[FarLeftFist]

43. Really, not that much? Not much else to start with being the House is controlled by the R's.

What was given away before obstructionism came into play?

[hootinholler]

45. Well the earliest one I'm aware of was the deal with PHARMA

You can't really claim that was because of obstructionism, can you?

It's not like I keep a list, but I'm sure there are others as well.

[FarLeftFist]

46. Which deal was that? Are you referring to the HC bill?

[hootinholler]

48. The first of many give aways during the health care bill

But, this was before any legislation was even in committee IIRC.

[FarLeftFist]

50. Could you elaborate further? What was the giveaway?

[hootinholler]

53. Estimated at around $75 billion in a secret meeting.

Here is a pretty good explanation.

But really, I found that with a search on Obama PHARMA meeting.

Edit to point out that during this period Ds held both chambers, but I will agree they were somewhat ineffective majorities.

[hfojvt]

38. I dislike him because in three years

1) he hasn't even tried
2) he continues to advance rightwing talking points

According to Thurber there, Obama is more effective than LBJ, and yet, and yet he could not end the Bush tax cuts - tax cuts which would have expired automatically, but he still could not end them. He promised a making work pay credit during the campaign, but he could not get that for more than two years, and quickly replaced it with payroll tax cuts that favor the rich.

I wonder if Thurber considers that to be one or two of Obama's legislative accomplishments? Wow, he got Republicans to vote for his 'compromise' or that he got Senate Democrats to not fillibuster the damned thing.

[FarLeftFist]

47. Those tax cuts were being held hostage for middle class tax cuts. He really had no choice with

the R's in power.

[aquarius venus]

32. Excuse you?!

I am not necessarily voting for Paul, but I did vote for him in the last primary (IL is a trueblue state and Obama had it in the bag). Oh and in case you're wondering? I voted for Obama in the general...

So those soldiers urinating on corpses in Afghanistan is not enough for you? And this proposed Internets ID is fine and dandy to you? Are you getting ready for your closeup yet, Norma? Ugh. I cannot stand the denial and willful ignorance I am seeing on here! It's all too much!

[FarLeftFist]

34. Ron Paul backed the Afghan war.

[dionysus]

49. the liberal paulites are miniscule in number, they're just loud and annoying.

the end.

[joshcryer]

58. 31% of Pauls votes in NH were "somewhat liberal."

Mostly young white males, likely, imo, misled by pundits like Greenwald who say that Paul's views "desperately need to be heard."

[Zorra]

63. Voting for Ron Paul pretty much means that you're not a liberal.

Anyone that votes for Ron Paul because they are "somewhat liberal" is "somewhat cognitively challenged".

Not really anyway around that.

[joshcryer]

64. Can't disagree with you there, that's what the exit poll said, though.

[SunsetDreams]

4. Actually it says more about them "Oh Look, Pretty Bow"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002155466

[NathanTheGreat]

6. Yes...there are

Obama is leaking supporters fast, he's escalating the Afghanistan war, he's threatening to start raiding medical dispensaries in CA, and the economy is stumbling badly.

Obama needs to read the writing on the wall and remember who put him in office, and stop trying to pander to everyone. It's strategy, because he's assuming Romney is going to be his opponent...but I really think the GOP might pull an end-around on him with Ron Paul.

[pnwmom]

8. Where have you been? Obama's support has been gaining, not falling, over the last several months;

and the economy is still showing signs of being in recovery. Last month's jobs report was much better than expected.

Obama knows who put him in office. But a lot of them stayed home in 2010 -- when Obama wasn't on the ticket -- and allowed the Rethugs to sweep into power.

[NathanTheGreat]

42. Don't trust polls

Trust your ears and eyes

The polls are reflecting the knockdown dragout that is happening across the aisle right now and people on the fence are getting frustrated and returning to support Obama.

I'm not talking about the centrists, I'm talking about the base of the party. I'm talking about those who believe in peace, who believe in the right to privacy, and those who believe that the people's voice should be louder than the corporation.

Obama sure got us whipped up into a frenzy...then essentially continued the Bush policy of spreading more wars.

By pandering to the centrists (who are notoriously fickle and change every day) he has completely alienated everyone who elected him. He got the health care bill passed...but has it helped anyone yet? I'm supposed to trust that in the NEXT 4 years, he'll start acting like the person we were sold in 2008?

He said the feds have no business overruling the voters of California and their doctors...but broke that campaign promise recently.

Ignore peace and privacy at your own peril Barack...because I'm tired of being considered an automatic vote. I've not made a decision, but the Green Party is looking pretty tempting right now.

[FarLeftFist]

51. Uh. he has an 85% approval rating with Liberals.

[pnwmom]

55. My eyes and ears are getting different information than yours. n/t

[snooper2]

11. ROFL

[FarLeftFist]

9. Or it could be the fact that some don't live in reality. Either way...

He still holds an 85% approval rating among Liberal Democrats.

[whatchamacallit]

15. Maybe it has something to do with

Last edited Fri Jan 13, 2012, 07:43 PM - Edit history (1)

the fact that for many liberals, peace, civil liberty, and social/economic justice ARE the issues! They were when Bush was in office, and still are.

[FarLeftFist]

16. Yes, but taking 2 steps forward then 20 steps backwards doesn't equal progress,

And then you also have to believe Paul would be able to even accomplish such things. Remember, Obama wanted to close GITMO or bring detainees to the U.S. for trial and was BLOCKED by a 90-6 VETO-PROOF Senate vote that prohibited all detainee transfers to the U.S. or elsewhere. Time for people to start living in reality and recognize what we CAN get accomplished as forward progress and start putting our energy there. Also, occupy the voting booths.

Edit: What social/economic justice is Paul advocating for?!

[whatchamacallit]

20. For the 10,000th time, nobody on the left is seriously considering Paul

but plenty of us have fucking had it with the authoritarian corporate war wagon! Ron Paul is a topic only because the democratic establishment has decided to preserve the status quo. The plan is to bury these issues with Ron Paul. They thank you for your assistance.

[FarLeftFist]

21. How do you know that "nobody on the left is seriously considering Paul"?

[whatchamacallit]

27. Any rational person and most liberals would regard Paul as a Faustian Bargain at best.

Many are simply thrilled that he's spouting off and making the business as usual crowd uncomfortable.

[FarLeftFist]

29. Like I said, these people AREN'T being rational.

[joshcryer]

56. Tell that to the self-identified liberals and Democrats who voted for Paul in NH.

Yes, they exist.

[karynnj]

13. Anyone saying they are liberal and for Paul misunderstood the word "liberal" for "libertarian"

They are the same on some issues, but total opposites on almost any social justice economic issue. Ron Paul is closer to the John Bircher of the 50s and 60s, than to a liberal.

[DevonRex]

14. It says there are ignorant people out there

who need to be educated about how dangerously vile and bigoted RP is and that he's a states' rights lunatic.

[bigtree]

17. throngs

[Capitalocracy]

22. I'd say there are throngs of potentially liberal Paulites

who have been thoroughly duped and therefore lost a lot of their liberal ideals. A lot of people start out with the freedom and civil liberties and peace bits of Ron Paul's rhetoric (and I don't know how much I even believe him), and then they follow him down the rabbit hole into the land of free market fundamentalism, fear of "big government", gold standard bullshit, and weird conspiracy theories.

And I look at them and think, there but for the grace of reason go I. It must be easy to slip down that rabbit hole.

This is why we need to offer an alternative to Ron Paul.

[whatchamacallit]

33. Ha, the people who have been "duped"

are the liberals who are now supporting immoral, illegal wars, and are happily surrendering their freedoms to the state.

[Capitalocracy]

37. Also duped.

Lots of people duped these days.

[joshcryer]

57. And what liberals are those? Huh?

[quinnox]

24. Ron Paul is very slick and so young people are easily fooled

Ron Paul is always talking about anti-war and bringing the troops home, young people love that.
Ron Paul is always talking about "liberty" and personal freedoms and privacy, young people love that.

Ron Paul doesn't talk so much about his other stuff, like his bizarre economy theories, except for sound bites like "Audit the Fed!" I bet most young people don't even know what the Fed is, but it is a good sounding line so they cheer for that too.

The point is Ron Paul is cagey, and knows what to talk about to reel all the young people in.

[Capitalocracy]

26. I agree with audit the Fed...

but what Ron Paul really means is replace the Fed with a gold standard... which is ridonculous.

[hootinholler]

30. There's not much to them

Oh, wait you said thRongs...

Nevermind.

[JoePhilly]

31. No one will be talking about Ron Paul after February, maybe sooner.

By the end of Feb, Mitt will be the clear nominee. Fox News will be promoting him.

Ron is not going to run as a third party candidate because the GOP establishment would destroy his son ... they are very vindictive.

By March, Ron Paul will be claiming that he moved the discussion forward.

[trumad]

40. No---it's not liberal support..

It's dumb ass support.

[AtomicKitten]

52. I think it says a lot about myopic voters.

[tnvoter]

54. no liberal I know would identify with Ron Paul

he's a wingnut and everyone knows it.

[joshcryer]

59. It says more about single issue privileged voters who won't be affected by the outcome.

ie, mostly white, straight, males. With exceptions, of course. But generally true.

[whatchamacallit]

60. Wow, you've been busy this morning

I just took a look at 'My Posts' and every new response to my posts, across multiple threads, is you...

[joshcryer]

62. All of my responses to you in the past 24 hours were in this thread.

Totaling 4 replies.

Just catching up to a thread I didn't get to participate in. pnwmom had kicked the thread and I saw it.

[spanone]

61. it says a lot about how ignorant the paulites are of who actually fucked this nation up