Throughout the campaign, we've heard many people tell us how fundamentally conservative the country is and that Obama is doing precisely the right thing by capitulating to the right wing.
This msnbc.com headline — "McCain takes 5-point lead over Obama" — shows that Obama has been too conservative with his conservatism.
Trashing the 1st and 4th Amendments wasn't enough. Softpedalling on the Iraq exit wasn't enough.
Now, I know that some think Obama would be better served by standing up for the Democratic/liberal/progressive brand, but recall how close to winning Gore and Kerry got by keeping their powder relatively dry in their campaigns. Do we want to endanger the opportunity to come so deliciously close to winning this year?
It is absolutely vital that John McCain be defeated (unless, as Lambert observes, it doesn't matter... because post-partisanship rulez), so what else can Obama do to assure victory in November? Suggestions are not just welcomed, the future of the nation and of Earth itself hangs in the balance.
Ask not what Obama can do for you, ask what Obama can do for the Radical Right!
NOTE:
That was one of several recent policy shifts for Obama, as he positions himself for the general election battle. But Zogby said the changes could be taking a toll on Obama's support, particularly among Democrats and self-described liberals.
"That hairline difference between nuance and what appears to be flip-flopping is hurting him with liberal voters," Zogby said
Legalizing Bush's lawlessness and granting himself (potentially) the same extra-Constitutional powers is a hairline difference. Disparaging and marginalizing countless progressive constituencies throughout the campaign is a hairline difference. Good to know.
- vastleft's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
Iran is old hat, let's annex Canada!
In a few years it's gonna be a tropical paradise.
------------------------------------------------
“When someone engages in divisive behavior, any resulting division is their responsibility” - Melissa McEwan
Time for Michael Moore to do "Canadian Bacon II"!
.
BTW, unilaterally declaring war while he's...
... the presumptive nominee would make him the kind of manly warrior that MoDo and the rest of Village despair of not finding from the Democratic Party.
Since he's accepted the Village's advice that the public wants post-partisanship instead of a stern rejection of Bush's failed policies (and the people who enabled them), it seems only right he should trust them here, too.
How many more election losses
do democrats have to suffer before the elites realize that capitulating to the right doesn't work?
It's not capitulation - they are on the same side
Unfortunately, it's not our side.
------------------------------------------------
“When someone engages in divisive behavior, any resulting division is their responsibility” - Melissa McEwan
Well, he's not doing a good enough job of taking their side
He's got to come up with something more to earn his rightwing bona fides! What more can he do?
Eviscerate an abortion doc on TV, perhaps?
Sounds like a contest...
... but you might have the winning entry right there already, VL.
I know! How about letting some huge corporation's executives off the hook for a whole bunch of felonies? Oh, wait....
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
Wouldn't it be enough after 8 years of GOP malfeasance
To urge Democrats to compromise with them?
No, not nearly enough, is it? Sorry. We've got to find a better way to help him be more like a Republican, otherwise the Republicans will win.
How about pre-emptive pardons for the whole crew?
Since they were all sincere patriots who only acted with the best interests of the country in mind.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
Give them medals, too
After all, many of them were veterans of the bickering partisanship of the 1990s and the ensuing food fight, poor blighters.
It's the economy stupid!
Regardless of what all the pundits say, this election is NOT about foreign policy. On the margins, maybe some folks will not vote for Obama if he gets more hawkish on Iran/Iraq/etc. (just as on the margins, some folks would not have voted for Hillary because of her AUMF vote), but this is a really really really small number.
If you're against staying in Iraq, you're voting Democratic this year. If you're for staying in Iraq, you're voting Republican. Simple enough? The whiny ass titty babies (which, sadly, describes Atrios and Kos now) can cry all they want, but whether or not a few of them stay home or not because of slight differences in proposed Iran policies or torture or whatever DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER.
The true swing vote is on the economy, and this is where Obama's inexperience (vis-a-vis Hillary in particular) is a real problem. Yes, most folks understand that the Bush policies were awful for our economy, and so that favors the Democrats. At the same time, most folks have also swallowed the line (force fed over the past 3 decades by the media and the VRWC
) that tax increases are always bad for the economy.
The only President that most folks can remember who raised taxes and improved the economy was Bill Clinton. That is why Hillary would be such a potent candidate today: on economic issues, she wins the debate without even having to utter a word. She is presumed to have that experience, based on her role in the Bill Clinton White House (again, the WATBs can cry all they want about how Hillary wasn't the President, etc. etc., it doesn't matter, because perception is king in elections, and Americans perceive Hillary to have been an integral part of the Clinton White House, for good and for bad).
Obama meanwhile seems tone deaf on the economy. His instincts (and top advisors) are center-right/free market, at a time when people (rightly or wrongly) want more government intervention and less free trade. The claim that his tax increases will hurt the economy is also pretty devastating, unless he embraces the Clinton presidency, which seems unlikely.
If Obama weren't a tool of the Beltway, he'd be taking someone perceived as a great economic stalwart, ideally with populist appeal: a Warner or a Sebelius or a Schweitzer, or even (thinking outside the box) a Volcker type.
Instead, we're stuck looking at inside-the-Beltway schmucks, because they have that perceived foreign policy gravitas that isn't going to win any additional votes for Obama.
Obama is running "economy" ads
But so far they'reat the local level, while the national level is still hopey-changey.
Which is swell, since that will help him win, but without any mandate for change...
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
Given a choice between a Republican and a DINO Republican
GOP & independent voters always choose the Republican.
It's called "brand loyalty"
------------------------------------------------
“When someone engages in divisive behavior, any resulting division is their responsibility” - Melissa McEwan
They actually were victims
Actually VL, the Republicans were victims of the Democrats outrageous, bickering partisanship. They deserve compensation for their suffering as well as medals. I don't know if that will be enough, but it is worth a try. Maybe if Obama promises to rename airports, aircraft carriers, cities, etc. in their name, maybe that will work?
Why not rename Washington D.C., Bush D.C.? It would go nicely with "Georgetown", yes? Or Obama could propose to name it Bushville, District of Cheney.
-----------------------------
Around these parts we call cucumber slices circle bites
They Don't Need Obama for Their Pardons
They are already on order from the current chief executive.
I think what Obama needs to do is torture a puppy, you can't get more Republican than that.
Who cares about them danged dead-ender ...
... LIBRULS??!! They only have 60 to 80% of Americans with em on the issues.
Gotta git them evanJELLicles!
Gotta git them war capitulists!
THAT's what we NEED!
If the Repugs Get Medals, Does That Mean...
...Former President Clinton, partisan bickerer-in-chief, gets sent to Guantanamo for his involvement in the Great Partisan
War of the 1990's? Because, we sure as hell know that Obama's not really going to shut that place down, right? And we've got to fill it with someone, no?
Sending Bill to prison is a Republican's ultimate wet dream, and Obama would take their votes, for sure, if he promised such a thing. Oh, yeah, and Cheney gets to personally waterboard him.
I'm shocked to hear that proposal, DamonMI!
The vile machine-monster Clintons aren't already in custody?!
Won't the party be destroyed at the convention if they aren't properly Koolaidboarded before and ever after?