Re: Primarying Obama In 2012 (I'm Not There Yet) BUT...

[WillyT]

What would be the deal breakers for you???

I don't see any such candidate that could do it... YET. And I'm sure the party power brokers wouldn't allow it... IOW they do all they can to squelch any such move... so I really don't see it happening.

That said... The two deal breakers for me would be:

1) Extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

I know he's said he wouldn't raise taxes on anybody making over $250,000 a year, but that's a "per couple" average as far as I know, so what he's really saying is he wouldn't raise taxes, or would extend the Bush tax cuts for anybody making under $125,000 per year.

If he does... game over for me.

2) The Catfood Commission recommends, and the Obama Administration agrees, that Social Security and Medicare need to be cut.

Either of those two things happen, and I'm supporting a primary challenge, going Green, or getting a pedicure.

Anybody else???

:shrug:

[davidinalameda]

1. how about going for broke

and getting a mani-pedi

anyway, I think he needs to be primaried

[noamnety]

2. There's an advantage to having a primary even if we know Obama will win it.

That's the only way to have a real critique from the left of what's happened during the Obama years. Without that, the WH talking points will be unchallenged except from the perspective of the rightwingers.

For that reason alone, I would support a primary challenge even if I didn't intend to personally vote for the challenger, or if I didn't expect the challenger to win. Sometimes there is value in the debate itself.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[NJmaverick]

22. Fantasy always looks better than reality

so the "would have done" has it made

[socialist_n_TN]

79. THANK YOU! "Sometimes there is value in the debate

itself." Speaking as just ONE leftist, that's what I've been saying all along. I don't want a "pony", I want my ideas to be considered and not barred from the table. If the majority doesn't go along with them, fine, but at least CONSIDER them.

[Ignis]

88. That's a great point. Thinking back to the Gore/Bradley primary...

...I'll admit I was lukewarm on Gore until I saw his performance in the primary. While I still preferred Bradley's stance on a few issues, I found myself warming to Gore when he was forced to more clearly elucidate his positions--and was given a chance to show where his positions differed from those of Clinton.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Afghanistan was the deal breaker for me in '08. Still is.

[MineralMan]

9. So, whom do you support?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. I'll be voting for the most progressive, anti-war, candidate on the ballot.

Even if I have to write one in.

[MineralMan]

18. So, you flat out won't vote for President Obama in 2012?

If so, then you're irrelevant to the election.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. I don't vote for war or those who make them.

It's a habit I got into in '68 when I voted for McCarthy. Ask LBJ how "irrelevant" that was.

[NJmaverick]

23. Did you vote for Bill Clinton?

[Robb]

53. Heh.

Clinton has the distinction of having ordered the first overt military action in Afghanistan by this country. He sent a dozen cruise missiles into Khost, disabling what would eventually become the Haqqanis, if I'm not mistaken, and disrupting two terror plots in the process. Kicked the can for a few years, sure, but in the meantime probably saved some lives. Albright signed off on it.

And, of course, Big Dog was accused of trying to distract people from Monica. :eyes:

[noamnety]

29. Relax.

It's flamebaiting to try to goad someone into breaking DU rules.

[MineralMan]

34. I'm not trying to goad anyone into anything. I'm just asking a

question. Whether someone breaks a DU rule is not up to me to decide. I am not a moderator. I asked a simple question.

I do not take instructions about what and how to post from other DUers. But thanks for your concern.

[noamnety]

43. That's a funny response

"I do not take instructions about what and how to post from other DUers."

only because I thought your post was coming across as demanding that someone else post at your command.

[Raineyb]

75. Then perhaps you should refrain from doing the same if you can't take advice.

Since you do seem to rather like telling others how THEY should post.

[IndianaGreen]

30. I believe the 2012 primary season has not been cancelled

We are still a democracy, no?

[johnnie]

48. And you'll get the same thing we have now

Welcome to politics.

[Ignis]

85. "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?"

Just trying to blend in with the other reactions to your statement. :D

[cliffordu]

4. YAWN.

:hurts:

[WillyT]

6. Well At Least It's Nice To Know You're A Supporter

:evilgrin:

[cliffordu]

7. That's me, athletic supporter to the stars.

[MineralMan]

5. Very boring. It is still 2010. And already you're talking about

primarying the President. No, thank you, very much.

And, if you're wondering whether I support the President I worked so hard to get elected, why, yes, I am. At least let him get through half of his term before you write him off, OK?

[WillyT]

19. I Was Posting This Because The Subject Had Already Been Breached...

by another poster who had already decided.

I posted this to see, for those of us still hanging on, what it would take to change one's mind.

This is still a political discussion board, is it not?

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

26. I don't know any more, really. I'm not thinking about

2012 right now. There is an election this year, which may make a huge difference in what happens over the next two years. I'm pretty much focused entirely on that election.

Sometime in late 2011, I'll turn my attention to 2012. For now, we have a President. We have a Congress. I'm hoping to help give this President a Congress that will help him, not obstruct him.

It's way too early to start discussing 2012, in my humble opinion. There is much to do before November. I'll be doing that, thanks.

[WillyT]

33. Fair Enough...

Like I said... this is SUPPOSED to be a political discussion board... DEMOCRAT.

We are supposed to be allowed to to discuss potential future scenarios.

Apparently... there are many here who are afraid of the potential of destructive disharmony.

When I was a youngee here... I was lectured multiple times that what is said here, does not shake out that much in the real world.

Came to know that the lecturers were correct.

:shrug:

[WillyT]

27. And BTW - You Didn't Say Whether There Was A Deal Breaker For You...

or if you were going to support him NO MATTER WHAT???

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

32. I did not say, because I'm not thinking about 2012 at all right now.

There is a crucial election in November. All of my energies are going there. I do not deal with Presidential elections during the off-year congressional elections. Right now, I'm trying to get Michele Bachmann dumped. That's my main goal. We also have a very crowded primary for Governor of Minnesota and my state senate district has multiple DFL candidates going into the primary.

As I said, in 2011, I'll start looking at 2012, but mainly on the state level.

[WillyT]

38. Well... If You Can Get Michelle Bachman Dumped In 2010...

I will be owing you major league butt kissings in 2011 and 2012!!!

:woohoo:

:rofl:

:evilgrin:

Please, please, please...

:hi:

[socialist_n_TN]

80. It's NOT too early to consider a primary challenge

It's a BIG undertaking to primary a sitting President. You NEED two years to even THINK about putting something like that together.

[Odin2005]

10. Obama is already dead to me.

[MineralMan]

11. How nice.

This thread is deteriorating more rapidly than any I've yet seen.

[Odin2005]

14. And I was one of Obama's earliest and most vocal supporters back in 2007-2008.

I have reasons to feel betrayed and backstabbed.

[MineralMan]

16. I'm not entirely happy with the state of progress. I'm also

not surprised, given the obstructionism. It is still less than halfway through President Obama's first term. Even before the term started, the trashing of this President began here. I'm sorry to see you join in that. Very sorry.

[Odin2005]

25. When one's cabinet is filled with Wall Street cronies "obstructionism" is not an excuse.

By choosing fuckwits like Rahm, Geitner, and Summers he sided with the Enemy and stabbed his Progressive supporters in the back! I worked my ass of for him during the campaign expecting something like Howard Dean, only to get Clinton 2.0. :grr:

[dionysus]

52. .

:nopity:

[SeattleGirl]

12. Jumping the gun, aren't you?

Or is the truth, in fact, that you just flat out don't like him and will waste no opportunity to say so in your various ways.

[MineralMan]

13. I think some folks are testing the waters by giving the finger

to DU's rules.

[Hekate]

15. There you have it.

:hurts:

[depakid]

20. Has nothing to do with DU's rules

Fact of the matter is that- like it or not, the administration has managed to alienate many key democratic constituencies and so talk of potential primary opponents is to be expected, and I would say, in a Democracy- encouraged.

[MineralMan]

24. Halfway through the man's first term? Really?

Sorry, but I can't support that in any way. Feh!

[depakid]

28. Some people will support it- others won't and all will have their reasons

But when you have the two major teacher's unions taking steps to ensure that representatives from the administration don't make appearance or speak at their national meetings, that's evidence aplenty of a problem- and illustrative of the sort of political vacuum that another candidate might step into and fill.

[IndianaGreen]

31. Let's see what happens to Social Security and Medicare

Having the likes of Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson as co-chairs of Cat Food Commission is rather alarming, don't you think?

[MineralMan]

36. I am waiting to see what that Commission reports and what

action is taken on that report. Commissions are a dime a dozen in DC. Generally, they have little effect on legislative action. We shall see what comes from this one. I don't make predictions about such things.

[Yavin4]

90. "the administration has managed to alienate many key democratic constituencies "

Says who? The internet blogging constituency? He's at 80% approval in his party.

I love how you pull fake data out of thin air to support your arguments.

[Ignis]

86. "Whether someone breaks a DU rule is not up to me to decide."

What changed in those 30 minutes? :shrug:

[RainDog]

45. what do you think about Obama voluntarily choosing to restrict women's reproductive rights?

since you want to blame people here for responding to the actions the administration has taken - what's your reaction to his choice to make health care for women more expensive - even unaffordable - and to extend that restriction to states - when there was absolutely no reason to do so, as far as any sort of political pressure from the scarrrry right wing?

I find it's beyond the pale, personally.

I have tried, over and over, to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

Yet he continues to disappoint.

So, as a woman, how do you like his decision to insert religious restrictions on women's health care?

[DCBob]

35. I get the feeling these kind of posts are somehow meant to shock us..

They are shocking... shockingly stupid.

[WillyT]

42. Sorry About Teh Stupid...

Some days it can't be helped.

:shrug:

[RainDog]

47. yeah, it's so stupid to be upset about basic constitutional issues

...even tho it was double plus good to be upset when Bush was in office.

[HughMoran]

37. Unrec and hide

nothing to see here.

[HipChick]

39. +100

[MineralMan]

40. Agreed. I actually forgot to unrecommend the thread.

That has been corrected.

[WillyT]

41. Hey Hugh... Have I Ever Told You...

You... are the wind beneath my wings.

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[HughMoran]

62. Tell me in the other thread of yours I just did the same to

[11 Bravo]

74. A bird fart?

[WillyT]

44. Does ANYBODY Want To Answer The Original Question ???

:shrug:

[NorthCarolina]

46. Both of those things will likely happen

and immediately afterward you will see DU's protected class out in force to post rebuttals challenging the intellect of anyone that dares post disagreement with the Obama administrations actions.

[WillyT]

51. Yep... And Notice Nobody Responded To Those Two Possibiliies...

nor did they come here with a deal-breaker of their own.

Apparently... the support is unconditional, and absolute.

:shrug:

:hi:

[NorthCarolina]

61. You cannot effectively hide what you openly discuss.

The lack of discussion is quite telling actually.

[Raineyb]

77. I find that people who have their heads up the asses of those in power rarely have

a deal-breaker.

:shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

49. ROFL...truly, there is nothing fuinnier than the "Primary Obama" nonsense

It makes me giggle every time.

[RainDog]

54. for me, it's not about "primarying" obama

it's about this question: at what point do you think the political system is so corrupt, the parties so truly fascist and unresponsive to the will of the American people that you recognize that voting is a dog and pony show that is not worth caring about.

giggle all you want.

when people don't think the democratic party offers anything worth voting for, they don't really give a fuck whether you are giggling like an imbecile or not - because they're already decided what you are.

[alcibiades_mystery]

68. Oh Gaaaawd

A single tear trickles down my cheek for your Golden version of the American polity.

Politics is nasty and brutish business, and we carve out what we can given the forces at work. Always been that way, always will. Save the sweet ideology you've been fed on the Constitution for somebody who gives a shit about fairy tales.

I laugh and giggle at nonsense be4cause it is naive and disconnected from reality. Nobody is going to rise as a primary challenger now. Nobody serious. Maybe in dream so-called progressive world, where you keep yourself warm with your blanket of principles and daydreams and 8% of the vote, but that's not serious, and never was. I giggle at nonsense and laughable bullshit, which is all that this primary talk is. And you can well and truly bookmark this thread and see who's serious come 18 months from now.

[RainDog]

69. thank you.

your response makes it that much easier to walk away and tell people like you to go fuck themselves when they ask for my vote.

oh, and just so that you know... this isn't just talk from me. the local candidate has people who keep calling me asking me to pledge to vote in November and I told them I wasn't going to vote for the state dem Senate candidate because he's anti-choice. I cannot vote for this candidate. just cannot do it. I cannot vote for someone who so hates women and sides with the most idiotic and fanatic religious assholes in this nation.

I cannot vote for a candidate who sides with pedophiles over women.

And they want me to vote for the demo house candidate - who voted against the extension of unemployment. I told them I had no interest in voting for a candidate who votes against the wishes of democrats.

they told me the opposition candidate is a tea bagger.

I said, well, it's too bad that the democratic candidate couldn't choose to represent the democrats in the state. If the conservatives want a tea bagger rather than a democrat, I guess the democrat would have been better off voting with the democratic party if he wants votes.

I feel the same way about Obama, now that he has chosen to side with religious extremists to deny women access to health care.

You can all it whatever you want to call it. But some people don't think there's enough difference between the two parties to bother when we see the actions of this administration and our other elected representatives.

It sort of reminds me of Weimar Germany. The Weimar govt was too right wing to work with the democratic socialists and, instead, chose to empower the nazis by their policies and actions. They made it possible for the Nazis to assume power. It wasn't the left that made that possible. It was the government in power.

[alcibiades_mystery]

72. No, the KPD enabled the Nazis to take power by being too purist to

enter into a coalition with the SPD.

And don't worry. I don't ask for votes from people like you. I don't traffic in fantasies with sad dreamers who like to lose.

[RainDog]

82. lol. rewriting history.

the Weimar govt ATTACKED socialists in their homes. you ought to read up on the failure of that govt - that also refused to back down from the hyper-militarism of the empire and re-armed.

but I'm glad you won't ask for votes from "people like me." People like me tell me, all the time, that they're sick of the democrats' caving to the right wing - so you obviously don't care about the votes of lots of folks - and it's no surprise.

the truth is that, throughout history, it was those who refused to compromise with the fascists, with the right wing - with the blue dogs - that have moved society forward. The social democrats won the war - France, Belgium, the Netherlands, (western) Germany and Great Britain attest to this - those nations adopted social democracy and flourished. Those who chose fascism, like Spain, are still coming out from under the thumb of that mess, as is Italy. The communists are now overrun with Greenspan oligarchs and criminals - except Putin put a stop to quite a bit of their looting of those nations.

I don't like to lose - but, yes, it is sad to have a dream and think that a democrat might actually govern like a fucking democrat instead of a corporate shill - and then see the reality.

The losers are the ones who accept this as the best we can do.

[NorthCarolina]

55. You may find it "funny", but I see it as a sad statement on that "Change" the nation sought. eom

[alcibiades_mystery]

67. ROFL!

You're really gonna follow up "primary" nonsense with sad variations of "Not the change I voted for!"

Oh, if you immediately transition into some rant about "Rahm," you'll really have all the silly cliches covered. Good on you. Creative use of meaningless statements! Nicely done.

[katandmoon]

50. The dealbreaker already happened for me. I can't get past the royal "murder at will" proclamation.

[Ignis]

89. Ah, but now we're building in plausible deniability to every Death Drone!

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/07/killer-drones-get-stealthy/

Don't you feel safer knowing we can blow up wedding parties in Afghanistan stealthily?

[BlueIdaho]

56. If you really want to do this it's time to get out of the abstract...

Quick. Who exactly do you expect to run against the President in a primary? We need a name now, because 2010 is more than half over. If you want this to be more than a feel good DU talking point - you need a candidate, with an organization, and plenty of cash, and a desire to run a (likely) ill fated campaign. The months are clicking by, time to get out of the hypothetical and into the real world of Democratic party politics.

Who will run against the sitting President in a Democratic primary?

[sharp_stick]

57. But that would take thought

rather than simple flamebaiting on an anonymous message board.

[BlueIdaho]

64. How unfortunate...

Just a waste of electrons.

[femmocrat]

58. I sincerely doubt that he will have a primary opponent.

Someone may come out and rattle about running in order to get some issue addressed in the dem. platform --- but it won't amount to anything more. Trust me.

And if in good conscience, you cannot support Obama for re-election, that is your right as a citizen. :shrug:

[BzaDem]

59. The threshold is 200,000 for an individual, not 250,000. He specifically said 200k/iniv, 250k/couple

Obama might even accept a lower threshold than that (though he probably won't accept a higher one).

As far as the commission, I think that if they report anything, they would have some means-testing for SS/Medicare. They also might recommend raising the retirement age very slightly over a long period of time, such as 2020-2030. (Not saying I would support that, just trying to predict what would happen.) This would likely be in combination with higher benefits for the poorer retirees and/or a rise in the income cap for the SS tax.

However, I don't think it is very likely that they will agree on anything (let alone Republicans and Democrats agreeing to pass what the commission recommends if it recommends anything). The most likely outcome is gridlock.

[Nye Bevan]

60. Obama is a very good president and will definitely be our nominee in 2012

Having said that, however, I am not totally averse to the concept of a primary challenge to spark a healthy intra-party debate, where issues could be thrashed out during the primary season. In the scenario I am envisaging the challenger would end up withdrawing, and throwing their support to Obama, in exchange for Obama showing some movement and/or flexibility on the issues in question.

[RainDog]

71. anyone who sides with religious extremists over women is not a good candidate

which is what Obama has just done.

it seems that that was the final straw for me.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

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

[treestar]

65. It's not going to happen

No one will do it. Even if you want Kucinich or whoever to do it, they wouldn't.

[KansasVoter]

66. I agree on those two items. I would not be happy!!!

[xchrom]

70. here's what the catfood commission won't recommend: taxing the rich and cutting defence

to a budget that brings it in line with SANITY.
and lastly lifting the cap.

that's what they wont recommend and that's really all i've got to say.

the lgbtiq community is thin enough around here.

[Ignis]

87. Man, wouldn't that be a dream come true?

I'd pedal my little bike all the way to DC to give the commission a high-five! :D

[mmonk]

73. A DLC run party will not allow a challenge from the Democratic left.

They would bring the entire weight of the party down on such a candidate. Any challenge from the left for the presidency would come from the outside.

[dmallind]

76. Hey go for it - a challenger would have the following pools to look for votes

19% of Democrats
13% of liberal Democrats
22% of moderate Democrats
31% of conservative Democrats.

That's the current percentage who do not approve of Obama

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

.....but you think a challenge is most likely from the left? Even though his support amongst liberal Dems is by far the highest of all wings of the party?

DU poutrage and reality yet again conflict.

[saltpoint]

78. The drawback to wanting to live in a castle in the air

is that castles have to be built on the ground.

[bvar22]

81. A Primary Challenger from "The Left"...

...would be the smartest thing The Democratic Party could do at this point.

Most of the people on the Left are dissatisfied with Obama because they feel ignored, even ridiculed by the Democratic Party Leadership.
Giving them an opportunity to voice their their issues inside the Democratic Party will do a lot more for the Party than continually telling the Left to STFU.

THAT strategy chased away millions of Leftish voters in 2000,
and WILL do so again in 2012.



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[MadMaddie]

83. There is no deal breaker

I am VOTING for our Democratic candidate in 2012 who will be President Obama.

I would rather gripe about what a Democratic President has done or not done than a Republican who will attempt to turn this country into a religous theocracy and destroy the remnants of the middle class.

That's all!

[VMI Dem]

84. I hit the deal breaker quite some time ago.

He has lost my vote.