Obama vs. Activists

[PyramidHead]

 

[Politesse]

View attachment 24895

What else would one want? I hate monarchy, figureheads are fine if we must have anything at all.

 

[PyramidHead]

View attachment 24895

What else would one want? I hate monarchy, figureheads are fine if we must have anything at all.

lol. We are fucking doomed as a species.

 

[Politesse]

View attachment 24895

What else would one want? I hate monarchy, figureheads are fine if we must have anything at all.

lol. We are fucking doomed as a species.

You're not wrong.

 

[PyramidHead]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead. Obama has transformed from the progressive champion of the 2008 campaign to a bankrolled servant of Wall Street, who he failed to hold accountable for the economic collapse in any meaningful way because he stocked his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and Citigroup executives. The hideous irony is that he now believes the mess we're in is due to his administration being too radical, which is objectively false but what he probably thinks.

 

[Politesse]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead. Obama has transformed from the progressive champion of the 2008 campaign to a bankrolled servant of Wall Street, who he failed to hold accountable for the economic collapse in any meaningful way because he stocked his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and Citigroup executives. The hideous irony is that he now believes the mess we're in is due to his administration being too radical, which is objectively false but what he probably thinks.

It's not what I desire, it's just what always happens.

 

[PyramidHead]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead. Obama has transformed from the progressive champion of the 2008 campaign to a bankrolled servant of Wall Street, who he failed to hold accountable for the economic collapse in any meaningful way because he stocked his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and Citigroup executives. The hideous irony is that he now believes the mess we're in is due to his administration being too radical, which is objectively false but what he probably thinks.

It's not what I desire, it's just what always happens.

I wonder why! It's too bad we, the voting population, have absolutely no power to change the fact that our elected leaders tend to be empty suits beholden to rich donors.

Instilling political nihilism such as the kind you are displaying here is part of a calculated strategy by the beneficiaries of our unequal and corrupt system. Obama's personal wealth has increased by an order of magnitude since running for President, and now he sides with the centrists who spend their whole careers telling us what we're not allowed to fight for. You don't have to carry their water for them by assuming it's impossible to challenge the status quo.

 

[Politesse]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead. Obama has transformed from the progressive champion of the 2008 campaign to a bankrolled servant of Wall Street, who he failed to hold accountable for the economic collapse in any meaningful way because he stocked his cabinet with Goldman Sachs and Citigroup executives. The hideous irony is that he now believes the mess we're in is due to his administration being too radical, which is objectively false but what he probably thinks.

It's not what I desire, it's just what always happens.

I wonder why! It's too bad we, the voting population, have absolutely no power to change the fact that our elected leaders tend to be empty suits beholden to rich donors.

Instilling political nihilism such as the kind you are displaying here is part of a calculated strategy by the beneficiaries of our unequal and corrupt system. Obama's personal wealth has increased by an order of magnitude since running for President, and now he sides with the centrists who spend their whole careers telling us what we're not allowed to fight for. You don't have to carry their water for them by assuming it's impossible to challenge the status quo.

I am not a political nihilist. I just don't like kings. I am and have always been a committed democrat - not Democrat - and firmly believe that democracy cannot function if people are sitting around waiting for the "right" daddy figure to lead them. Or, conversely, applying all of their energy to getting the "wrong" one out, to the exclusion of paying any attention to who is actually running the country, and how they are exercising their power.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

About his slamming “the activist wing of our party,” that sort of running away from the party's base only helps the Republicans. The Republican Party doesn't run away from its base.

And look where that has led it and the USA. Mr Obama was elected POTUS twice. It is quite possible he actually knows what he is talking about here.

Yes, but he lost the House, the Senate, several state governors, and a LOT of state legislators - some 1000 elected positions to the Republicans.

...after getting the ACA through Congress.

The Democrats got the House back last year, but not the Senate, and the most that the Democrats can reasonably expect for the Senate in 2020 is a simple majority, not a filibuster-proof supermajority.

Let us also not forget that his would-be successor, Hillary Clinton, lost to Donald Trump in 2016.

And had Sanders run there is certainly no guarantees he'd have seen victory.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

View attachment 24895

The world is definitely much easier to condemn if one is overly simplistic in their judgment.

 

[laughing dog]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead.

Actually, that sentence is evidence you are wrong. Politics is the art of compromise, not "Gimme what I want now".

 

[J842P]

I have no idea how you managed to get that out of my post...

The message is that "stooges" get elected. As long as there a significant portion of the electorate who are not kneejerk partisans, centrists win. The real question is whether Trump's election is an aberration or the new normal.

New? He's like the second coming of Jackson, Americans love race-pandering "Washington outsiders" and always have.

Yeah, Trumpism is nothing new. It is simply the modern version of the Know-Nothing party (the Native American Party), just not so much anti-Catholic as much as anti-Mexican. Although, I bet there is a huge amount of anti-Catholic sentiment and the current nativists.

 

[PyramidHead]

Of course I'm not wrong, but you're part of the problem if you think the only realistic options for us are a monarch or a figurehead.

Actually, that sentence is evidence you are wrong. Politics is the art of compromise, not "Gimme what I want now".

Compromise is when you abandon your grassroots coalition entirely, squander two years of government supermajority control by trying to satisfy Mitch McConnell, and drop tens of thousands of bombs on sovereign countries, then berate the next generation of voters for being too lefty on Twitter. It truly is an art.

 

[lpetrich]

(Democrats' losing some 1000 seats during the Obama years... out of a total of 8000 seats...)

And why did these fellow Democrats fail to get re-elected?

Here is what seems like a good reason:

Compromise is when you abandon your grassroots coalition entirely, squander two years of government supermajority control by trying to satisfy Mitch McConnell, and drop tens of thousands of bombs on sovereign countries, then berate the next generation of voters for being too lefty on Twitter. It truly is an art.

 

[lpetrich]

Yeah, Trumpism is nothing new. It is simply the modern version of the Know-Nothing party (the Native American Party), just not so much anti-Catholic as much as anti-Mexican. Although, I bet there is a huge amount of anti-Catholic sentiment and the current nativists.

I think that anti-Catholicism is nowadays a fringe position in the Right. That's because much of the right wing is Catholic and has been for some decades.

 

[J842P]

Yeah, Trumpism is nothing new. It is simply the modern version of the Know-Nothing party (the Native American Party), just not so much anti-Catholic as much as anti-Mexican. Although, I bet there is a huge amount of anti-Catholic sentiment and the current nativists.

I think that anti-Catholicism is nowadays a fringe position in the Right. That's because much of the right wing is Catholic and has been for some decades.

I think there is a very uneasy truce between Evangelical protestants and conservative Catholics in the United States. Essentially, for them, it is the enemy of my enemy (secularism) is my friend.

But privately, I'd be willing to bet many are rabidly anti-Catholic.

 

[Harry Bosch]

(Democrats' losing some 1000 seats during the Obama years... out of a total of 8000 seats...)

And why did these fellow Democrats fail to get re-elected?

Here is what seems like a good reason:

Compromise is when you abandon your grassroots coalition entirely, squander two years of government supermajority control by trying to satisfy Mitch McConnell, and drop tens of thousands of bombs on sovereign countries, then berate the next generation of voters for being too lefty on Twitter. It truly is an art.

Well, I still think that the moderates in the democratic party should find a way to compromise with the left in order to come together and beat Trump. We need to compromise some.

 

[southernhybrid]

(Democrats' losing some 1000 seats during the Obama years... out of a total of 8000 seats...)

Here is what seems like a good reason:

Well, I still think that the moderates in the democratic party should find a way to compromise with the left in order to come together and beat Trump. We need to compromise some.

I agree, but it's mostly the more progressive branch of the Democratic Party that doesn't want to compromise. They seem to forget that the majority of those who won in the midterms, flipped Republican seats. They didn't do that by being extremely progressive. They did it by being reasonable, but their constituents may not support them in 2020 if they go too far left. For some strange reason, some people who live in a very progressive bubble don't seem to understand that they don't own the country, and in fact, many of their views aren't mainstream.

Plus, every president must compromise. They can promise any crazy thing they want but in the end, none of them get most of what they want. In contemporary America, they are fortunately if they can pass one big thing.

 

[Elixir]

(Democrats' losing some 1000 seats during the Obama years... out of a total of 8000 seats...)

Here is what seems like a good reason:

Well, I still think that the moderates in the democratic party should find a way to compromise with the left in order to come together and beat Trump. We need to compromise some.

I agree, but it's mostly the more progressive branch of the Democratic Party that doesn't want to compromise. They seem to forget that the majority of those who won in the midterms, flipped Republican seats. They didn't do that by being extremely progressive. They did it by being reasonable, but their constituents may not support them in 2020 if they go too far left. For some strange reason, some people who live in a very progressive bubble don't seem to understand that they don't own the country, and in fact, many of their views aren't mainstream.

Plus, even president must compromise. They can promise any crazy thing they want but in the end, none of them get most of what they want. In contemporary America, they are fortunately if they can pass one big thing.

Agreed. Progressives seem to feel that it is extremely urgent to shoot the moon at this time, as if the coming election presents some unique opportunity to enact far left legislation. Personally, I don't think that's the case. I urge those who would like to see the government to move leftward, to consider the consequences of trying to shoot the moon without adequate fuel to get all the way there.
Can you say "lost in space"?

 

[ZiprHead]

Compromise, Compromise, Compromise. How come no one ever suggests that Bonespurs or the right compromise?