FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

"Obama's approval rating is soft, but new polls of South Carolina and Florida show him ahead of Gingrich and Romney. Michael Tomasky asks: could the GOP be headed for disaster?"

Barack Obama may be elected for a second term as President of the United States. (photo: Getty)
Barack Obama may be elected for a second term as President of the United States. (photo: Getty)



FOCUS: Obama Headed for Landslide?

By Michael Tomasky, The Daily Beast

13 December 11

 

Obama's approval rating is soft, but new polls of South Carolina and Florida show him ahead of Gingrich and Romney. Michael Tomasky asks: could the GOP be headed for disaster?

ow can Barack Obama, as this new NBC/Marist poll has it, be beating Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in South Carolina, of all places? The leads are narrow-it's just 45-42 over Romney and 46-42 over Gingrich. But still, this is South Carolina, the home state of a senator (Lindsey Graham) who, just this past Sunday on Meet the Press, was talking nullification of federal laws in the shameful style that is his state's benighted tradition. Is it conceivable that 10 months and three weeks from now, Obama could actually win the state? If it happens, we will know that the Republicans are headed off the cliff. And that is precisely where we should all hope they go.

Everyone wants sanity and civility restored to our politics. Some moderate Democrats and a smattering of Republicans have this fantasy that a centrist third party will do it. Nonsense. As I've written before, all a centrist third party will accomplish is ensure the election of the right-wing candidate. The only thing that might bring back sanity and civility is the destruction of the current GOP. If Republicans wake up next Nov. 7 to see that their extremist-obstructionist posture of the last four years has only reelected a president who started the year below 50 percent (as he will) and whom they should have been able to beat, then they might finally return to earth.

Nothing would say that the American people thought Republicans had vacated our planet like losing South Carolina. Everything was going gangbusters for the GOP there recently, even more than usual. The last remaining Democratic federal-level officials were all wiped out, except for James Clyburn, the congressman who represents the one majority-black district. The Democrats' last Senate candidate was a laughingstock. And the Palmetto State had this hot new governor, Nikki Haley: right wing; a Sikh, of all improbable things (by birth-she's a fervent Christian now); a heavyweight endorsee of Sarah Palin; and a rising star.

Now? Well, the Democrats aren't going to take over state politics anytime soon. But Haley's star is very much on the wane. Her approval rating in the state, 36 percent, is 8 points lower than Obama's. A state agency of her administration-get this-voted to grant Savannah, Ga., the right to deepen its port channels, thereby potentially putting the port of Savannah in a position to take business away in the future from the port of Charleston. Haley's appointees to the board voted with Georgia.

There are various allegations flying about. But on the central question of why the appointees of a governor of South Carolina would side with Georgia's interests and against their own state's, one South Carolina politics website, linked to above, has this to say: “According to our sources, moneyed Georgia interests with connections to the Port of Savannah threw a big fundraiser for Haley in Atlanta last month. Also, our sources say that the chairman of the Georgia Ports Authority-a major GOP donor who will select speakers for next year's Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida-has been negotiating with Haley and her political consultant to land the governor a coveted prime time speaking gig at the event.”

Ten months and three weeks is a long, long time. But today's poll suggests that a wipeout is not unimaginable-by a president whose anemic approval rating is just 44 percent!

Haley is sinking like a stone. Meanwhile, South Carolina Republicans surely know deep down that Gingrich is unelectable, and they find Romney unpalatable. The state's black voters, about 30 percent of the total, have no such reservations about the Democratic candidate. And his 45 or 46 percent in the new poll suggests he's getting some white support, too-more than he got in 2008, arguably, when he won just under 45 percent of the vote against John McCain.

OK. Realistically, South Carolina is a reach. But nobody cares about South Carolina, really-it is assumed to be in the red column just as Massachusetts is assumed to be in the blue. But now let's look at the Florida numbers from the NBC/Marist poll. There Obama is beating both Romney and Gingrich by outside the margin of error. He leads Romney 48-41 and Gingrich 51-39.

>Again, all politics is local. Republican Rick Scott is the least popular governor in the United States-right now at 26 percent and still sinking. Scott and Haley are prime examples of governors who were supposed to show a new and better way, with politics forged in the cauldron of Tea Party fervor about an absence of accountability, and so on. But these politicians have turned out to be just like all the old ones, except less competent. And if Obama holds Florida, he can afford to lose-take note of this list-Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, and either Michigan or Pennsylvania, and still rack up a winning 270 electoral votes. (Here, go click the states yourself.) But of course, if he's winning Florida, he's likely not losing any of those other states, with the exception of Indiana. Indeed, if he's winning Florida by around double digits, he's winning Missouri, Arizona, and maybe Georgia (yes, even-I'd say especially-against Gingrich).

Ten months and three weeks is a long, long time. But today's poll suggests that a wipeout of such proportions is not unimaginable. By a president whose anemic approval rating is just 44 percent! But I am not here to say the GOP had better grow up fast. Quite the contrary. If this tantrum lasts through the election, and if 2012 is for the Republicans what 1984 was for the Democrats, then finally our polity stands a chance of functioning again. The Tea Party will be dead and buried. Grover Norquist's vise lock on the GOP will loosen. Someone will start a centrist Republican Leadership Council, just as people started the centrist DLC back in 1985. A certain number of elected Republicans will understand that being the Party of No didn't get them much of anywhere. So this poll should not be a wake-up call for Republican voters. Hit the snooze button, folks, and keep fuming away.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+97 # Klanders 2011-12-13 12:48
Ten months is a long time, but it never hurts to think positively. Fortunately, the GOP continues to hold on to their absolute commitment to taking care of the wealthy, Corporations, and other members of the 1% at the expense and to the detriment of the 99%.
 
 
-40 # Martintfre 2011-12-13 15:44
Republicans helping the wealthy - so we are to pretend that the democratically controlled house, democratically controlled senate (With then Senator Obama's vote) were hostile to big banking bail outs????

And Later did President Obama stop any of that nonsense - not a bit - he dove into the pool and added to the mess.

I see a massive gap between reality and political BS based upon convenient falsehood.
 
 
+41 # feloneouscat 2011-12-13 17:00
According to a CBS News Poll conducted in July, "Just 34 percent of Americans surveyed by the Pew Research Center correctly said that TARP was enacted by the Bush administration. Almost half -- 47 percent -- think Mr. Obama started the bank bailout, according to the survey, conducted July 1-5. There was no partisan divide on the issue."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20013452-503544.html

Oops. Guess where you fall?
 
 
+28 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 18:51
It's a little misleading. TARP occurred under Bush but the Democrats favored it. Obama supported it. Once in office he has extended it. BOTH parties sold America down the river in exchange for the contributions of Wall Street. Blaming both parties and the last five administrations would not be wrong. This is not about Democrats and Republicans and never has been. It's about who owns the country and doesn't plan to give it up.
 
 
+44 # feloneouscat 2011-12-13 20:26
Actually, it is incorrect to say BOTH parties sold America down the river.

TARP had to occur because it was the failure of the REPUBLICAN'S who held all three branches for SIX YEARS to govern properly. Recall after Enron Bush made that impassioned speech about how this will never happen again? His policies GUARANTEED something worse.

This is about those with money who don't give a damn about who gets hurt. This is about people in power. But beware about spreading the blame - just because someone takes some steps to fix something DOESN'T mean they are responsible for the problem. And it wasn't Republicans who fixed it - it was Democrats.

If people think TARP sold them down the river they don't understand what happened PRIOR to TARP.
 
 
+4 # Martintfre 2011-12-14 16:09
BOTH PArties - the partisan defense of Democrats requires ignoring their grubby mitts have been helping to grease the skids (dem majority in house and senate passed the bail outs before bush could sign it) and push us down the hill just as much as the republicans.

It is a fool who thinks if one side is wrong the other must be right - quite often they are both wrong.
 
 
+9 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 17:40
"It is a fool who thinks if one side is wrong the other must be right - quite often they are both wrong."

The funny thing is that I've never heard you blame repugs for ANYTHING. You can see on this very thread that I'm perfectly willing to blame my side for a few things. Are you willing to do the same for the party you obviously belong to?
 
 
-7 # Michael_K 2011-12-14 23:10
Quoting Billy Bob:
"It is a fool who thinks if one side is wrong the other must be right - quite often they are both wrong."

The funny thing is that I've never heard you blame repugs for ANYTHING. You can see on this very thread that I'm perfectly willing to blame my side for a few things. Are you willing to do the same for the party you obviously belong to?



You know, listening to Americans argue over the relative merits of Dumbocrats over Rethuglicans or vice-versa is remarkably similar to listening to demented weirdoe arguing about chocolate versus vanilla flavoured shit.... STOP EATING SHIT! IT'S BAD FOR YOU!
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 21:40
Right now, the choices we have are bad tasting shit and worse tasting shit.

By the way, I've decided that I'm all for liberals voting for a 3rd party if they can find a candidate they like, somewhere. However, I'm very tired of liberals not voting. I've never known a conservative who stayed home on election day. If the choice was between hitler and mussolini they'd vote.

Yes, the lesser of two evils is still evil..... LESS evil.

Voting for something better than shit would be nice, for a "change". Judging from your comment, may I assume you didn't realize that's all we Americans have available right now?
 
 
+12 # epcraig 2011-12-13 20:35
We are well over the brink. We have proved the economy cannot expand, There are limits and we are well past them. That we have yet to crash only means we pay no attention to either failure nor those who have failed.
 
 
-1 # Martintfre 2011-12-14 16:04
Read what I actually wrote not what you think I wrote.

To wit::
"so we are to pretend that the democratically controlled house, democratically controlled senate (With then Senator Obama's vote) were hostile to big banking bail outs????

And Later did President Obama stop any of that nonsense"
 
 
-3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:30
What you said is right on, Martinfre. BO is no better than the other side. He worships money and the big contributers and what;s worse is he lied about the promises and human rights "rhetoric" he ran on. Obama is an "empty suit" (ie), he lacks character! I will not vote for the lesser of two evils. What's worse is it's impossible with these political candidates where the actual continuum on evil lies.
 
 
+52 # feloneouscat 2011-12-13 17:13
All which has little to do with the fact that Obama is more likely than not going to win by a landslide - all because Republicans don't understand how to govern.

Whether you agree with him or not, whether you agree with Democrats or not, the one thing, the truly one thing they have proven is that they can govern (not great, but they can).

The one thing Republicans have proved is that they can bring the country to brink of economic collapse.
 
 
-7 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:33
OBAMA has brought the country to your "brink of economic collapse". Are you unaware of this??? He is the worst POTUS we've ever voted in. He has to GO!
 
 
-19 # wantrealdemocracy 2011-12-13 18:17
Oh, give me a break! You think the Democrats give a hoot about the 99%? Our only chance of any way out of the disaster we are in is to vote out everyone in Congress. You want something for the 99% you sure better not vote for members of the 1%. Our federal elected officials are all millionaires. You think they care about you? Vote them all out. We need a clean sweep and a new Congress.
 
 
+16 # Virginia 2011-12-13 12:54
Why would the Republican elites want to run a viable candidate when Obama is doing their bidding just fine? He won't dump Geithner and he's surrounded by Goldman Sachs advisors running the financial circus. Obama is the ring master and as a Democrat it's easy to blame the economy they crashed on the incumbent. Then they'll run some superstar in 4 years and hold the office for another 8.

The problem is that unless we run viable, untainted, unbeholden to Wall Street Congressional candidates it won't matter who wins. Without a reason voters won't bother - and many may miss the date anyway because they have no TV or radio in their tents.
 
 
+36 # LessSaid 2011-12-13 14:21
Quoting Virginia:
Why would the Republican elites want to run a viable candidate when Obama is doing their bidding just fine? He won't dump Geithner and he's surrounded by Goldman Sachs advisors running the financial circus. Obama is the ring master and as a Democrat it's easy to blame the economy they crashed on the incumbent. Then they'll run some superstar in 4 years and hold the office for another 8.

The problem is that unless we run viable, untainted, unbeholden to Wall Street Congressional candidates it won't matter who wins. Without a reason voters won't bother - and many may miss the date anyway because they have no TV or radio in their tents.


Whereas I agree with you for the most part. But, the question becomes do you want Newt Gingrich as your president. Also, we need to set our sights on getting the Teapublicans out of the House and Senate.
 
 
-13 # RLF 2011-12-13 16:22
NO! I WANT THE GOD DAMN DEMOCRATS TO RUN A GOD DAMN LIBERAL. I won't be voting for any of these fakes ever again!
 
 
+13 # rtrues54 2011-12-13 16:53
Quoting RLF:
NO! I WANT THE GOD DAMN DEMOCRATS TO RUN A GOD DAMN LIBERAL. I won't be voting for any of these fakes ever again!


AMEN!!!! A LIBERAL needs to challenge Obama for the DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION...AS AP!!!!!!!!!!
 
 
-2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:35
YOU SAID IT!
 
 
+12 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 21:55
I agree. However, the Democrats don't run a candidate. A candidate runs. Do you know of one who actually plans to? Me neither.
 
 
-34 # RLF 2011-12-13 16:26
Might ass well have Newt...the economy is going to suck for the next five years and he will just make it worse. Then we can run a liberal..not one of these Demopublicans.
 
 
+37 # Risa de Angel 2011-12-13 18:47
Well then, RLF, you'll be glad to know that there's a new third party, the "Justice Party", and its candidate is Rocky Anderson. Expect them to receive million$ from overjoyed Republicans just as big Republican bucks to Nader/Greens helped bring us the national catastrophe that was BushCheneyRepub lican rule 2000-2008. Bad not only for Obama but for all the TRUE progressives in the Democratic Party who are running or being challenged in 2012.

If Anderson/Justic e Party get enough support to siphon substantial resources away from Obama, get ready for a permanent majority of ultraconservati ves in the Supreme Court.... you know, our judicial branch of govt that has more power now than Congress and is so politicized and corporate-owned that we got the Scalia /Thomas /Roberts /Kennedy edict (Citizens United) giving corporations more rights and MUCH more power than we the people have. More than one Supreme will be retiring within 4 years.

I can't help wondering if the Republican Party is actually behind Anderson's candidacy.

With Republicans' biggest attack on democracy now underway -- via their ALEC-backed bills designed to suppress Democratic votes in most states -- this is no time for frustrated progressives to weaken Obama and progressive candidates and office holders any more than Republican obstructionists , corporate-owned media, and Koch-funded dirty tricks by Rove and their superPACS already have.
 
 
+18 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 21:52
Absolutely BEAUTIFUL reply.
 
 
+13 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:01
GOD BLESS YOU RISA. PLEASE KEEP REPEATING THIS MESSAGE.
All the frustrated, angry, IMPATIENT progressives can destry our country for many years.

For this romantic notion that in 4 or 8 years,.... after the country is fed up with the republicans,... .. we will come in on our white horses .....is TOTAL CRAP !!

Because if the republicans win next year, we will not have a chance IN AGES, IF EVER. With 2 new reactionary supremes, the Supreme Court will basically run the country with the corporations. And NO REGULAR CITIZENS have a chance.

Who is going to go against the Supreme Court???? They are the highest court in the land.......And we saw what they did with citizens United??

They WILDLY OVER REACHED. AND WHO COULD- OR DID STOP THEM??? Congress sure was not able to.

WAKE UP PROGRESSIVES AND REALIZE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR.
The Supremes and corporations will make it a total police state, and clamp down REALLY HARD ON DISSENTERS. Forget free speach.
NOW GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER, AND HELP GOOD CANDIDATES LIKE ELIZABETH AND GREYSON, AND LET'S SEE IF WE CAN FIND MORE LIKE THEM.
 
 
+23 # Texas Aggie 2011-12-13 18:49
After Newt, do you really think that the PTB will allow the hoi polloi to vote in elections? By then the reactionaries will have removed voting rights from every group that tends to vote Democratic. Think photo ID on steroids. And the police will have the power to decide whether you vote and military, if your selection meets their approval.
 
 
+24 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 21:52
Assuming you still have the right to vote in 4 years.
 
 
+52 # readerz 2011-12-13 14:24
In many states with new photo ID requirements, many people won't be able to vote anyway. Many progressives will vote grudgingly. However, most people realize that the alternative is disaster; I know that I'm going to vote for Pres. Obama.

However, I strongly agree that we need the House and Senate to be progressive, especially that magic 60 seats in the Senate needed for confirmations and to get bills to the floor. Support Sherrod Brown in Ohio and Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts.

Without progressive super-majority, there is no possibility of a progressive Cabinet (if Pres. Obama decides to listen to progressives this time).
 
 
-13 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 15:11
There's nothing 'magical' about 60 votes. That's a bit of fakery designed to justify doing nothing. The Democrats had a landslide in 2008 and Obama refused to use it. And his cabinet appointments were uniformly terrible. Why would you think he'd suddenly become a progressive or back away from Wall Street and the major corporations if he wins a 2nd term? "If Obama decides to listen to progressives this time"? Are you kidding?
 
 
+22 # Suavane 2011-12-13 16:55
Dear RR,

Have you ever heard the phrase: "Blue Dog Democrates"?

It was they who worked in concert with the "Tea Party" Republicans to defeat many of the initiatives to get our economy moving in the right direction.

As a result, your statement:"Ther e's nothing 'magical' about 60 votes. That's a bit of fakery designed to justify doing nothing." is just that......Fakery!

By the way, some 50% of the "Blue Dogs" were voted out of office in the 2010 election. But, now the House is controlled by the Republicans.

I hope you'll be very unhappy with the 2012 election results!!
 
 
+22 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 19:01
Suavane, have I heard the phrase 'Blue Dog Democrats'? Yup, and what's your point? I've got fifty years in politics, some of it on the national level. A majority party always has various recalcitrant members...that' s what leaders are for. When LBJ was majority leader, the Senators knew when they had to get into line on important issues. Obama simply did not lead. He did not assert his authority. Harry Reid is a joke. The party allowed people like Lieberman, who endorsed McCain, to push it around on committee assignments and so forth. The party I used to work for and with would've kicked his ass out the window. This is not a parlor game. The 60-vote argument is a fake. Most of the great changes in American legislative history did not have 60 votes. They needed a majority. Filibusters run their course and then the majority can pass what needs to be passed.
No, I don't expect to like the 2012 results regardless, because the system is corrupted. The only thing that will help is to run them out of town, most of the GOP and half of the fake Democrats. Both parties are doing the bidding of the wealthiest, of the bankers and insurance companies, of Wall Street and the arms industry and the oil companies. The rest of us will continue to come last until we make it clear to these people that we will no longer support liars and hypocrites, regardless of party.
 
 
+9 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:24
R R You mentioned JBJ as opposed to Obama in regards to leadership....T hat ia grossly unfair, because LBJ had been in congress for many years. He had a lot of dirt on most of the guys,.. Since I am a lady I can't say what I really mean...But he had NO QUALMS about hitting them where it REALLY hurts.

After a little "SESSION" with LBJ, they were usually ready to play ball....The way he wanted !!!
 
 
+9 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:12
Simple Richard. He is not running again. He doesn't have to toe a line, And if he stands strong, he will have ALL THE PROGRESSIVES WITH HIM.

And THIS time I hope he will use the "rollerdex" when important laws are up for votes, e-mail all the names, CLICK, and tell them to call end mail their representatises to vote for the bill.
If we all STAND TOGETHER FOR A CHANGE it can be an immutable force.
OK comrades. TO THE BARRICADES !!!
 
 
-2 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 23:41
Sherrod Brown voted for a number of acts that are completely unacceptable to any freedom-loving people including the Food Modernization Act... Let's face it, he's an Obamination type of DINO
 
 
0 # Michael_K 2011-12-21 23:40
For the reality deniers who give my statement a "thumbs down", I plan to make an appointment with Mr Brown during the recess, in order to have him explain to me how his vote for the "Defense" bill doesn't constitute an egregious breach of his Oath of Office... I'll report back here for more thumbs down! LOL
 
 
+30 # Ralph Averill 2011-12-13 16:37
It's all about Congress in 2012!! I see that some of the posters see that. Send your money, donate your time, to the Democratic Congressional candidates/incu mbents in your state/district.
Obama will probably be re-elected, but it won't matter if he is still stuck with a Republican majority in the House.
It's all about Congress in 2012!!
 
 
+12 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:25
RIGHT ON Ralph
 
 
+22 # Wyntergreen 2011-12-13 12:55
From your mouth to God's ear.
 
 
+26 # bugbuster 2011-12-13 12:58
It does seem at this point that the best thing that could happen to the GOP at this time is to have their heads handed to them. The current crop of Republican pols seems hell bent on mutilating the party and burying the remains. The GOP needs to clean house. There are still some real public servants toiling away there. Orrin Hatch, for example. No, I don't agree with most of his views, but he deserves respect. That's what we need in the GOP now--more politicians who deserve respect.
 
 
+59 # photojack53 2011-12-13 14:44
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back and I'm surprised that you would mention Orrin Hatch if you don't agree with MOST of his views! They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies. THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
-6 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:24
Susan Collins is palatable (to a certaiin extent).
 
 
+9 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:35
Yes she is Tod, but she and Olympia are both scared of being "primaried" by Norquist, so they are voting AGAINST what they would REALLY like to VOTE FOR.

The reasonable republicans are being scared out of doing the right thing.
And sadly they don't say: I don't care if I loose my seat, I am voting FOR THIS BILL BECAUSE THAT IS THE RIGHT THING.

It is more important for them to stay in the house or senate, than doing what is right for the PEOPLE and the COUNTRY
 
 
+6 # X Dane 2011-12-14 16:31
By the way, the democrats are not willing
to risk their cushy jobs either.
We will HAVE to make them understand that unless they do the CORRECT thing, we will see to it that they will need to look for another job too....soon
 
 
+4 # Hey There 2011-12-15 00:24
Check Susan Collins involvement in S353 and HR2309 where she claims that 3000 federal workers over 65 who have been injured at work should NO LONGER receive compensation based on their pay at the time of their injury but should be put on retirement pay which would reduce their income by 25%. 2000 of these injured workers over 65 were former postal employees and COMPENSATION is covered by the USPS,not by taxes. HR2309 would allow the POST OFFICE to establish and administer it's own heath insurance and worker's compensation programs.This would remove the postal employees from the option of being in a much larger pool of federally insured employees which predictably would increase the cost of health insurance with less benefits. Worker's Compensation would no longer be administered by a separate government agency(OWCP) but by the USPS,the very agency where postal employees are injured.
The aim of the bill is also to allow closure of smaller post offices, some where the local population is dependent upon the service,home delivery replaced "where possible" by block boxes.
In short Susan Collins is on the march to decrease pay and benefits for postal workers and USPS service to the public.
Congress passed a law in 2006 mandating that the USPS fund retirement health benefits 75 years ahead in 10 years.
But,rather than rescinding a law inherently unfair her solution is to cut workers' income and public service.
 
 
+32 # bugbuster 2011-12-13 13:02
I think that real support for the GOP in the south is a mile wide and an inch deep.
 
 
+68 # Regina 2011-12-13 13:09
We can't crow as long as the rabid-right devises ways to keep people who they think might vote for Obama out of the voting booth. Some of this article is more hallucination than hope. We can't let down our guard and let up in our challenges to insane demands like picture-i.d. and birth certificates for everyone, plus marriage certificates for women whose names were changed, plus a total no for college students whose residence can't count.
 
 
+25 # ruttaro 2011-12-13 13:58
Nor can we just sit back and think the Limbaugh Lites are so foolish as to just let things happen...unless the Euro goes down. Then it doesn't matter because the US will go with it and so will Obama and reasonableness. Then it doesn't matter who runs on the right. However, assuming all things being equal, looking at the current field of the simpleminded nitwit Republican candidates may be the wrong place to focus. There is too much money at stake for the Repugnants to let self-destructio n take place. I think the establishment and moneyed interests in the Republican party will look to Jeb and saddle up the the Bush horse for a run. He appeals to both the worst ignoramuses in the party and the moneyed Norquists. They have the organization in place. He will be seen as the savior because of American's short memory. And Wall Street/corporat ists will hedge their bets by supporting Obama, too, like they have in the past. All in all, we, the people, lose only not as bad with the Democrats. We need a constitutional amendment that makes all public elections publicly funded. Then we will see the real differences.
 
 
+13 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:42
Yep ruttaro, that's why we HAVE to support Bernie Sanders, because as you said. WE really MUST GET MONEY OUT OF ELECTIONS.
 
 
+6 # ruttaro 2011-12-14 12:35
x dane, I love Bernie and the few other rare, sane and strident voices in Congress that stand with the people. But as much as I agree with the purpose of Sander'a amendment, it doesn't address the core, the rotten corrupting core of the problem. Stripping personhood from corporations won't stop the lobbyists from making campaign contributions. Essentially, this is what is meant by money as free speech and Citizens United simply broadened the idea exponentially. So many of the initiatives taken by good, thoughtful, decent people that aim to restore representative government are missing the bulls eye. I have written to my Senators and representative telling them with no equivocation, that I my vote is no longer cheap. Unless they introduce, support, co-sponsor, argue and fight tirelessly for a constitutional amendment that makes all elections to federal offices publicly funded they will not get my vote. That is my pledge and I intend to stick to it no matter what. And I really like my two Senators and Congressperson. But if they do not follow up, I will write my own name in when I vote. If we could all take the same pledge and, hard as it might be, stick to it, change would really come to America. We cannot depend on those who depend on moneyed interests for their campaigns. We need to do this ourselves. I see it as a new march of freedom: for us and for our representative democracy.
 
 
0 # X Dane 2011-12-20 01:14
I agree with you, ruttaro, and I am so frustrated for if we do, as you suggest, and write our name on the ballot, instead of the canditate's, the republicans will win, for there is no way they will do the same.
I am afraid we will be worse off. I don't know HOW we can get the money out out of elections and politics altogether.
 
 
+18 # readerz 2011-12-13 14:27
It costs a lot of money if your state did not put your mother's name on your birth registration certificate; you have to pay $50 for a New Jersey registration, for example. And it takes months; twice as long as the states say it will to get the official certificate after this money has been paid. So it will take a HUGE fund-raising effort to help people get their ID, and it will have to be done long before the election.
 
 
+26 # jon 2011-12-13 15:09
Exactly right, Regina.

Be prepared for flagrant election "irregularities ". This game plan might explain why the Republicans are running such unapologetic fascists.

Steal the election, do away with the rest of the Bill of Rights, and they have accomplished their corporate master's ultimate goal: No More Democracy.
 
 
-22 # RLF 2011-12-13 16:24
Screw Obama...He is a REPUBLICAN if you haven't noticed. To not vote republican...yo u mean don't vote for Obama...then I'm right there!
 
 
-1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:40
RLF: Strong, rational comment. Do not pay attention to the minus's. You see what others are too blindsighted to be aware of.
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-26 20:28
Quoting RLF:
Screw Obama...He is a REPUBLICAN if you haven't noticed. To not vote republican...you mean don't vote for Obama...then I'm right there!


Sadly, you are 100% correct, and far too many here just refuse to see it!
 
 
+50 # ganymede 2011-12-13 13:11
Barring any unforeseen events such as a military coup or extremely high tech voting machine hacking by the Republicans, it's becoming clearer that the Republicans are going to go down to a complete wipe-out. We will have four years of one party rule which might be a good thing, while the Republicans rebuild their party. The rightwing and their backers have brought this on themselves and while the Democrats have been almost as bad, they are and will continue to respond to a public that is beginning to see through the years of bad rightwing propaganda, warmongering and manipulation of our financial system. In four years time we will clean up Wall Street, institute a sensible national health care program, continue to slow down the warmongering, start dealing with global warming, take the money out of politics and reform the Washington/Wall Street kleptocracy and more. This is all possible if we pull together as a nation. Also, demographics are working against any chance of a Republican resurgence.
 
 
+27 # MEBrowning 2011-12-13 14:01
I don't consider voting machine hacking an unforeseen event. It's been part of the Republican Machine's agenda since 2000, if not before. We need to be exceptionally vigilant in 2012 because tie and again, Republicans have proved that they will stop at nothing to win, win, win. They don't care if they lie, cheat, steal, slander or wreak violence on innocent Americans. They don't care about anything except winning. Polls said John Kerry was the clear winner in 2004. If we sit back and relax, Obama could easily run the risk of losing. Plus, there are plenty of disaffected Democrats that are disappointed at Obama's first-term record and may well still vote for a third-party candidate that will unseat the incumbent (remember Ralph Nader in 2000?). And many young people may not vote at all. Call me cynical, but every presidential election since 1972 has shaped my view.
 
 
+26 # maddave 2011-12-13 15:40
Quote MEBrowning; Call me cynical, but every presidential election since 1972 has shaped my view. Unquote

Hardly! You are spot on, my friend!

Upon reading the basic article, my first inclination was to say "Shhhhhh!" This situation has been developing for a couple of years now, and the circumstances cannot have been missed by knowledgable Republi-can'ts. There is no - and will be no - time for such crowing until well after the polls close next November.

The specter of electronic voting fraud by GOP supporters is real and chicanery such as disenfranchisin g large numbers of minority voters and "discouraging others is a always a probability.

Let's not be distracted by counting un-hatched chickens while the real work of electing Obama remains to be done.
 
 
-10 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 16:24
"...the real work of electing Obama remains to be done." Excuse my asking but didn't we already do that once? And what for? So he could extend the Bush tax cuts and attack Libya? So he could push Monsanto's chemical crops and preventive detention?
Sorry, but I don't plan on being suckered twice by this guy.
 
 
-9 # Okieangels 2011-12-13 17:54
Me either. I'm voting for someone with integrity this time around. I live in a red state anyway, so it's making a statement and not throwing away a vote.
 
 
+11 # rabbitty 2011-12-13 19:13
Quoting Okieangels:
Me either. I'm voting for someone with integrity this time around. I live in a red state anyway, so it's making a statement and not throwing away a vote.


Have you seen any republican who has integrity?
If you have, it, well it's just not possible. they are all way worse than Obama.
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:47
Rabbitty: You have made a "rabid" and foolish proclamation with your illogical generalization. This is coming from a Democrat. Your black and white reasoning makes no sense and promotes the kind of MO bipartisan government now in office.
 
 
0 # Michael_K 2011-12-26 20:31
Let me know when someone with integrity runs, and I'll join you in voting for them
 
 
+13 # MemoFromTurner 2011-12-13 18:27
Yes, Obama has been a big disappointment on numerous counts. But you sound like a Naderite circa 2000 (forget Florida, consider carefully how Nader supporters in New Hampshire enabled a Bush victory in that horrid general election). You may not like Obama, you may feel ethically, morally and politically superior to him and his supporters, and you may say what Naderites did in 2000 -- there's no difference between Republican and Democratic candidates... and how did that play out? At least consider the appointment of federal judges, individuals who will interpret the law over the course of lifetime appointments. Into whose hands you you want to place that transformative power? Newt Gingrich's? Mitt Romney's? Whatever sap that the Koch Bros. and Karl Rove move to the forefront? Sorry, I'll stick with Obama, flaws and all, and keep the pressure on him to move leftward. Considering the alternative(s), at least an Obama presidency offers a flicker of -- dare I say -- hope. Remember what Bush said immediately after his 2004 (ill-gotten) victory -- "I earned some political capital, and now I intend to spend it." And so he did, to the detriment of all Americans. Why not give the incumbent Obama some of that political capital? It's entirely possible, even probable, that he would be less centrist in a second term. Please don't waste or withhold your vote, or dissuade anyone else to do likewise, there's far too much at stake.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:43
Richard, you have made a very insightful intelligent, pragmatic comment. too bad so many posters are unaware of the truth
 
 
+13 # rabbitty 2011-12-13 19:11
That's true, but I have no idea how to fight back! They are lying scum of the earth without any shame. I hope someone can figure out how to keep close tabs on the election. maybe if we went back to paper and got rid of the computerized votes?
 
 
+6 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:57
Apply for absentee ballots.
 
 
+33 # readerz 2011-12-13 14:29
But they are already hacking the vote with the photo ID requirement. Lots of elderly, and even middle-age people won't be able to vote, or won't be able to afford the more detailed official birth registration certificate. "Get Out The Vote" will have to start NOW.
 
 
+34 # Hugh Manatee 2011-12-13 14:36
Quoting ganymede:
Barring any unforeseen events such as a military coup or extremely high tech voting machine hacking by the Republicans, it's becoming clearer that the Republicans are going to go down to a complete wipe-out.


I'm not so sure about that. It is not unforseen that the GOP is moving full speed with state voter ID laws to deprive approx. 5 million student, elderly and minority voters of their right to vote, ie. anyone who is likely to vote Democratic. It's disgusting, shameless, amoral, anti-Democracy and (so-far) legal. They don't care who they screw so long as they win. The Republicans can no longer be allowed to hold this country hostage and let the rich suck it dry.
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2011-12-14 03:50
That's a tall order ganymede, but I aggree, that we should go for it, and we MUST LET GONGRESS KNOW, That if they are not with us, WE WILL work very hard to get them out of office.
 
 
+39 # mjc 2011-12-13 13:12
Given any one of the possible candidates in the top three of the Republican list, it is very hard to imagine any outcome except Obama winning. And it doesn't have to be in a landslide. For me it will be much like 2008, neither candidate at the top of the ballot, either Party, really would have my support but the Republicans...G od help us all if they succeed.
 
 
-26 # Martintfre 2011-12-13 13:15
That gubberment bail out money for the banksters and their media hacks must be paying off.
 
 
+49 # samothrellim 2011-12-13 13:21
An Obama win would be just the beginning of the battle. No sitting back and waiting for him to do the right thing this time!
 
 
+16 # readerz 2011-12-13 14:32
Could I give this post ten "like"s?

He is going to have to hear us loud and clear and constantly; no assuming that he will pay attention to the platform he runs on. Line up to lobby in Washington every day; if the corporations can do it, so can we!
 
 
+8 # X Dane 2011-12-14 04:20
That is right readerz. The protests when people surrounded the White House to protest the Keystone Pipe line, worked Obama reacted and pushed it out til after the election.

Did you read Robert Redford's article here?? He explained very clearly why that pipeline is wrong for us.
The CANADIANS said that only abouT a few HUNDRED JOBS WOULD BE CREATED....and VERY few are permanent. The work is highly specialized so most WORKERS WOULD BE "IMPORTED" ? All the hollering about THOUSANDS OF JOBS id BUNK.
 
 
+24 # Regina 2011-12-13 14:43
We can hope that in a second term, with no further terms possible, Obama will drop his pie-in-the-sky efforts for bipartisanship and kick the obstreperous obstructionists in their Congressional seats.
 
 
0 # warrior woman 2011-12-13 15:40
I'm a died in the wool lib but I expect that he will go even further to the right, he is such an extreme disappointment to me w/ his cronyism to corporations, etal. Will he get my vote? I just don't know yet because as I see it, he's no different than Bush except he's hastened some of the neocon policies: war in how many more countries??, genetically modified foods getting blown wide open, taking away habeas corpus, gitmo, civil rights being quashed, additional money to the banks on top of TARP and...... much more where that came from.
 
 
+8 # rabbitty 2011-12-13 19:18
Have you noticed that the republicans have opposed and obstructed every thing he has tried to do??
He is better than any one of the repug nuts who are running.
A lost vote for Obama is more likely to help a fascist than anything else.
 
 
+53 # Barbara K 2011-12-13 13:22
The Greedy Old Pigs should have figured out that the people are not going to vote for people who are destroying the country and the people. We are not as stupid as they are counting on. We far outnumber the idiots who do support them. Hope Obama does win by a landslide and that we take the House and Senate too so we can actually make some progress and recover from what the Teapublicans have been doing to us.

NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN !!
 
 
+20 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 14:23
NEVER VOTE BLUE DOG EITHER !!
 
 
+11 # maddave 2011-12-13 15:44
Quoting Billy Bob:
NEVER VOTE BLUE DOG EITHER !!


There's a difference?
 
 
+10 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 21:40
One of them has the capital "R" next to their name when they appear on talk shows using repug talking points.

The other one does the same thing, but uses a capital "D".

See the difference?
 
 
-2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 14:57
Maddave: You said what needs to be said on this post in three little words! Good for you! There sis no longer a difference between blue and red or whose more enamored with big money lobbyists and contributers than human rights and human beings. The Obama Apologists and "True Believers" that actually believe that all Democrats are more righteous than all Republicans are pathetic!
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2011-12-16 23:08
There's a HUGE difference between red and TRUE blue. There's no difference between red an blue dog, however.
 
 
+18 # readerz 2011-12-13 14:38
Outnumber doesn't mean very much though in the Electoral College.
Numbers: a state with about 5 million voters gets about 10 or 11 Electoral College votes.

The smallest seven states, added together, have about 5 million voters, but they get a total of 21 Electoral College votes. And that's just the smallest seven. Most of the smallest (population, not square miles) states are right-wing. So it is already harder for any Democrat to win going into any Presidential race.

Senate numbers for these same seven states are worse:
A state with about 5 million would get 2 Senators.
These seven states get 14 Senators, and that skews the 60 vote requirement for appointments for Cabinet, judges, and to bring votes to the floor if there is a filibuster or other opposition.

So if the Democrats really win by a landslide for President, Senate, and House; then we must remind them again and again that it is their duty to act on our behalf and pass strong and decent laws.
 
 
+5 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 15:18
So if the Democrats really win by a landslide for President, Senate, and House; then we must remind them again and again that it is their duty to act on our behalf and pass strong and decent laws.

Think about it. "We must remind them..."? Are you joking? They should not require any 'reminding'. Most of these clowns do not care about you any more than the Republicans do. Most 'Democrats' in the Congress are as bought-off as the G.O.P. Personally, I'm no longer voting for anybody I have to "remind."

Several posters here and on other sites always end their comments with "Never vote Republican." That alone doesn't fix anything. The Democrats are taking you for granted. That's why Obama isn't worried about screwing the left –– he figures, were else will they go?

I'm a lifelong Democrat. I've run for office as a Democrat. I've worked for Democrats, including a couple of U.S. Senators. But Obama has lost me. He and the rest of those Wall Street apologists had better realize that they're losing a lot of us.
 
 
+6 # rabbitty 2011-12-13 19:21
do you Really think one of the repug clowns would be better??
Remember, thyey have obstructed and opposed every thing he has tried to accomplish.
 
 
+1 # photojack53 2011-12-14 08:05
Your ranting is erroneous! GO TO POLITIFACT AND LOOK AT THE "OBAMAMETER." HE'S ONLY "BROKEN" 3 OUT OF 16 PROMISES AND HE'S FACED THE INTRANSIGENT "PARTY OF NO" FOR HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION. When you don't vote, you hand a vote to the Repugnicans!
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back! They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies.
THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 16:45
Personally, as a matter of principle and conscience, I'd rather not vote at all than ever again support a cynicallly in-your-face Lying Sack of Shit like O'Bama... And if that means the Rethuglicans win, so be it. It'll only bring the Revolution that much faster. The idea of that pezzolino di merda sitting in the Oval Office chuckling and saying to himself "screw them, where else can they go" is simply not acceptable.
 
 
+57 # jerryball 2011-12-13 13:41
Never underestimate the viciousness of the GOP lie factory. I'm not looking forward to the flurry of lying emails denigrating any human condition that is not related to the greed and need of Republicans.
 
 
+3 # photojack53 2011-12-14 08:02
It's already started! Look at the Karl Rove funded attack ads against Elizabeth Warren. GO TO POLITIFACT AND LOOK AT THE "OBAMAMETER." HE'S ONLY "BROKEN" 3 OUT OF 16 PROMISES AND HE'S FACED THE INTRANSIGENT "PARTY OF NO" FOR HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION.
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back! They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies.
THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 16:46
3 out of 16 promises????? Deep denial isn't pretty to watch!
 
 
+3 # dandevries 2011-12-13 13:46
'tis a consumation devoutly to be wished
 
 
+7 # hwatt 2011-12-13 13:48
We could extend the need for "more politicians who deserve respect" far outside the realm of the GOP. The lack of backbone is widespread amongst the political class in general.
 
 
+11 # Feral Dogz 2011-12-13 13:49
Like a burning car along the interstate, the GOP primary race disaster gets lots of attention but is mostly just a distraction that slows down progress.
 
 
+17 # Vardoz 2011-12-13 14:00
We are voting for Obama and hope that the GOP gets kicked out in the House and Senate. That's the real prize for the GOP.
 
 
-8 # John Gill 2011-12-13 14:07
It shouldn't be surprising in the least. The two-headed snake, the "two" party corporatocracy has all their bases covered. A vote for the Republican candidate is a vote for the corporatocracy. A vote for the Democratic candidate is a vote for the corporatocracy. A vote for the "lesser of two evils" is still an "evil" vote. You have the right to deny this illusion of choice. A third party candidate may not win...THIS TIME...but as long as we keep playing the "two" party game, the game will keep playing us.
 
 
+4 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:28
Please John Gill, don't vote next year! Please! The Dems don't want your vote and either do the Rethugs. Go find some weird third party candiate to support; someone in the 5% range. Don't play the game!
 
 
+1 # epcraig 2011-12-15 11:19
Some of us may not vote for Obama. He does take positions, say pro nuclear power, we cannot vote for, moreso since Fukushima, although some of us did notice Chernoble and Three Mile Island, too. We turn out to be otherwise pretty reliable Democratic voters when those Democrats manage not to alienate their base, even when there is no way we would actually register Democratic.
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 16:47
much as you hate it... the reality is that John Gill is 100% correct, and you're emotionally immature.
 
 
+12 # maddave 2011-12-13 15:58
Maybe you are right, John Gill, but not this time, not this election! There is to much at stake. A strong liberal third party candidate could easily unhorse what looks like a fair chance to gain Presidency, a majority in the House and 60 solid,reliable votes in the Senate . . . and add to that the one, maybe two, supreme court seats that are likely to come vacant before 2016.

This IS NOT the time for upsetting the apple-cart. Let's get Citizens United reversed and our skewed tax system fixed first.

Come 2016, and I'll be your man here in Virginia, but . . .
N O T N O W!!
 
 
+2 # John Gill 2011-12-13 18:43
Maddave, I understand what you are saying and at any time prior to this presidential election I probably would have agreed with you. In fact, I was joking with two of my sons that I have almost perfected my two-headed snake nut job speech, cuz when I read it, it just doesn't sound all that sensible. Maybe it isn't. But I don't think a vote for Obama is an acceptable option. I think, rather, that it is nothing more than the illusion of an option. I have become firmly convinced that there will always be a pretext for towing the line. We will always be able to say, "Oh, but look what's at stake!", and the "two" party corporatocracy will waltz us once again down their path of choice. I am not saying that there is some nefarious cabal of evil wizards out there directing things. Frankly, I think that would be a hell of a lot easier to deal with. But I do believe that innumerable disparate, (though not always disorganized), actions put in play by the rich and powerful move the policies of this government in directions that benefit them, and not the majority of our citizenry, and that the 1% rig the game in such a way as to be certain that the candidates who get the media coverage and the money will be candidates who will play ball. We need to look elsewhere. Easy catch-phrases like, "Never vote Republican," with all due respect to Barbara and others, may have a slightly different taste than this week's tea party slogan, but it's all the same Soma.
 
 
+1 # maddave 2011-12-14 00:15
John Gill, you and voters of your ilk are playing with fire, I am amongst the most disillusioned & disaffected Obama supporters out here, but I sincerely believe that Obama's actions and his positions of late herald a new Obama where taxation and vital social programs are concerned. We can judge better by how he handles the current unemployment benefits and payroll tax issues.

There are times for all things, John Gill, and now is the time for creating jobs, getting our financial house in p order, reforming election financing (reversing Citizen's United), etc, but none of this will happen under a GOP Administration.

Granted, all of these items may not come to pass in a second Obama term, BUT with a solid House & Senate to back him, wonders are possible and - dare i say it? - predictable.
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 16:49
don't you have a conscience? if you did, O'Bama would be no more acceptable that Rick Perry!
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 15:02
John Gill, Spoken like a true scholar and astute observer of what has and is going on in the current political scene.
 
 
-3 # panhead49 2011-12-13 16:06
Mr. Gill I must respectfully disagree - voting for the lesser evil is not merely 'an "evil" vote' - it is a vote for evil that isn't even done properly. Neither party really cares about us, only their re-election/ban k account and at this point in time I may just write in
Howdy Doody for pres. Certainly wouldn't be the first stringed puppet to inhabit the Oval Office.
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 15:06
Note the "scolarly" repies. Panhead 49.
To compromise one's convictions by voting for :the lesser evil" is the greatest "copout" and negation of our free world, human rights democracy and to sanction hypocricy and lies.
 
 
+1 # Michael_K 2011-12-16 16:49
exactly!
 
 
+9 # MemoFromTurner 2011-12-13 19:18
I hear what you're saying, John Gill, but please understand that there still IS a difference between the two major parties. If there weren't, why would right-wing billionaires like the Koch brothers and their ilk dump so much money and effort into fomenting Teabagger hoo-rah and electing strictly right-wing Republican candidates? Certainly they perceive a difference.

A cautionary lesson of the havoc a third-party candidate can generate occurred in New Hampshire in 2000 -- in that state, Bush got 273,559 votes; Gore, 266,348; and Nader received 22,198. If only 7,212 of those Nader voters had gone for Gore, he wins the state, AND the presidency (forget the Florida debacle, just add NH's 4 electoral votes to Gore's 266 = 270 needed to win).

Just a little more than 7,000 votes ushered in the empowerment of neocons; the horrors of 9/11; the invasion of Iraq and grand-scale war profiteering; the deaths of thousands of Americans and untold thousands of Iraqis; a further-right-w ing Supreme Court; hundreds of lifetime right-wing federal judgeships; a nauseating return to an economic disparity not seen since the Gilded Age; an unbridled, deregulated romp for corporations and institutions; an ideological divide in America comparable to the 1850s; and a catalogue of woes and wounds that still haunts us all to this day.

A mere 7,212 votes did all that.
 
 
+27 # Doctoretty 2011-12-13 14:07
Frankly, I can't understand why there isn't more buyer's remorse about the GOP congress that was elected in 2010! They have accomplished NOTHING, caused more divisiveness and should serve as a warning that Republicans will only cause the same disaster as we got under GWB!
 
 
+17 # LessSaid 2011-12-13 14:08
Just how long can you laugh at a group of clowns and not get tired of the same old show. You get a high with the first few routines but if they don't come up with something new and improved the show is over. And now the Teapublicans candidates are seen for buffoons they are.
 
 
+14 # Archie1954 2011-12-13 14:14
The GOP are headed for what they deserve!
 
 
+14 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 14:20
One of two things will happen in the next decade. Either the repug party will become less conservative, or it will continue to dig its heels in until it goes the way of the Whig Party.

It's a major demographic shift that started while ray-gun was still in office 25 years ago and has continued ever since. It's reaching a point of critical mass now and there's no turning back. The borderline psychotic behavior coming from the far right is an angry acknowledgement of that fact.

Personally, I think this was the real reason for the "patriot" Act all along. That's why plans for some version of it were in the works back in the '80s.
 
 
+23 # OrlandoDFree 2011-12-13 14:21
Hit the snooze button? Did you really end your piece like that? I say Wake Up! This is a golden opportunity to organize for the kind of change we need. Obama can't do anything without strong popular movements calling for bold, progressive change. The Democrat's snooze button is why the Republicans were able to take over the house in 2010. Wake up, Democrats. We need to take charge.

Obama told us, back in 2008: You are the ones you've been waiting for.
 
 
+9 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:53
Oh how easily we forget those heady days. Nope, I haven't forgotten nor have I given up hope as some who post here have obviously done. We have to unite to totally dominate. That must be our goal as i see it.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 00:21
He was telling repugs to hit the snooze button so they wouldn't react to the world around them and would be humiliated, which he hopes would turn them into a regular right-wing party, rather than an off the edge of a cliff looney party.

You're right though. We already have a right-wing party. Democrats need to give us another choice.
 
 
+19 # Hank 2011-12-13 14:29
Barbara K, and all others who think Obama is going to win, remember GWB was elected twice!
Get out and help. Donate if you can. Volunteer. Whatever. We need to elect as many Democrats as possible to show the GOP that their extreme tactics won't work.
 
 
+18 # Barbara K 2011-12-13 15:27
Hank, I do volunteer, I did last election and already doing so this election. I hope you are out too. I am somewhat limited, but I do what I can. I signed up a couple of months ago. Our only hope of survival is to get the Rs out of our way.

NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN !!
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 15:09
The R's aren't the only villains out there!
 
 
+17 # Regina 2011-12-13 16:16
No, Dubya wasn't elected; he was put into the presidency twice, once by the shenanigans in Florida, followed by the fiasco in the Supreme Court, and the second time by the shenanigans in Ohio. The Court is in even worse imbalance now. The states are being run by the Republican Governors Association. who now act in lock-step along the party line. We need votes that can outrun the phony voting machines, and voters who can out-smart the unconstitutiona l "laws" limiting their right to vote.
 
 
+12 # Billy Bob 2011-12-13 14:34
By the way, say what you will about repugs, but NOTICE ONE THING:

They KNOW they're gonna lose the next Presidential election.

What's their response?

TO VOTE ANYWAY, AND TO VOTE FOR WHAT THEY REALLY WANT RATHER THAN COMPRIMISE ON THEIR TWISTED "principles".

Psychos who care get stuff done. Nice guy wimps who don't... don't.

Maybe, if we can get a 535 seat (or so) majority in the House and a 100 seat majority in the Senate we can win nearly 1/2 of all future struggles with the repug party. Until then, we need to keep pushing OUR PARTY to actually stand for something.

THAT would be "change I could believe in".
 
 
-14 # stan van houcke 2011-12-13 14:42
i quote:

'Obama Headed for Landslide?'

i am afraid not. when obama was chosen as president using the slogan: 'change we can believe in' at least 43 percent of the american voters did not show up, a mere 1 percent more than showed up during the bush junior re-election. so these people never believed in obama's 'change we can believe in'. it would be a landslide if obama who lied and cheated as a president would be able to motivate the non-voters to vote, but I doubt this will happen. so words as 'landslide' are propagandistic. please don't use it anymore, you not only mislead your readers but also make a fool of yourselves. american people are not so stupid they cannot see through this kind of propaganda. you know friends, propaganda only works as long as people don't realize it is propaganda, the moment they do, they know what it has been all the time, pure lies.
 
 
+1 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:41
Stan, you are a master at propaganda. I salute you!
 
 
+1 # epcraig 2011-12-15 11:30
Judging by the current crop of Republican candidates, Obama is going to win.
The races to watch are in Congress, if the Democrats keep the Senate and regain the House the country could have some chance of getting through the century.
 
 
-7 # RJB 2011-12-13 14:50
We're all headed for disaster. It's either fast track if the GOP wins or the slow burn if the Dems win. Does it even matter that the words of Jill Stein resonate as she announces her candidacy for president under the Green Party banner? Is one-dimensional man even capable of thinking outside the stagnation of the two-party box? Check it out at youtube.com?wat ch?v=obQ51NP4DZ c
 
 
+3 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:43
Yes we are headed for disaster RJB. We most certainly are if anyone listens to you. What are you, a GOP shill?
 
 
-1 # Okieangels 2011-12-13 18:10
Vote Green! They're the only ones who have spoken up against police brutality here in the US. Has Obama??? Hell, no, he hasn't!!!!
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 22:02
Do whatever it takes, BUT VOTE!
 
 
-1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 15:18
Todd, RJB is not a GOP schill. He happens to be a realist about both parties. I would guess he voted for Obama and really believed in his "hope and Change"--"bipar tisan negotiations"-- "human rights activist" whetoric BO spewed to get himself elected. Now, that unemployment and hopelessness is at an all time high and authentic concern for the people is at an all time low since OBAMA took office what he seems to be saying is "Fool me once", it's my fault".
Fool me twice and I become realistic regarding who made a fool of me and why I let it happen.
 
 
-1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2011-12-16 15:20
RJB is no shill. He's a realist!
 
 
+1 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 15:00
What a strange article, referencing the notion that there are Democrats and some Republicans longing for a 'centrist' alternative to the two major parties. What planet are you on? A 'centrist' party would be to the left of the present Democratic Party, which is only slightly less corrupt and phony than the G.O.P. The Obama presidency has been a complete sell-out to the bankers and corporate owners of America, exactly what he ran against. Agriculture is run by Monsanto. Goldman Sachs runs the Treasury. A new war every week. News laws legalizing 'preventive detention' and vitiating the Constitution, adopted by huge majorities of both parties. The ship is sinking. Obama is only a more articulate version of the Bush disaster. We need real alternatives, folks.
 
 
+1 # Sophie 2011-12-13 15:42
I agree--and what has happened to Michael Tomasky?? I used to like his articles. Must be the Daily Beast "centrist," ideology. I cannot understand why so many people refuse to realize who Obama actually is. The Obama administration' s record speaks for itself. Really, how many betrayals will it take?! The cave on the FDA approved Plan-B was the last straw.
It all seems like a set-up--run some idiot Repug like Newt, so Obama will most likely win. I know it is difficult to acknowledge reality--but too many Dems are corporate bought and paid for, including Obama. Wait and see, people.
 
 
+6 # Todd Williams 2011-12-13 15:50
Hold on a second, pilgrim. A new war every week? Man, that must mean we are or have been involved in over 156 wars since Obama won? Wow. Far out, man. Got some good weed there Richard. So the ship is sinking, is it now? Well, well. Where should we go? Costa Rica? Fiji? Antartica? The frigging Moon? So yea, we need alternatives. Right now they are Obama (which you and other phony liberals hate), Newt and Mitt. So what's it gonna be punk (apologies to Clint)?
 
 
-3 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 16:34
"Phony liberals"? No, I don't hate Obama, but I will never vote for him again. And I don't need to prove my credentials. I've worked for Democratic candidates for fifty years, including RFK. I've run for office as a Democrat. The phony is, of course, Obama. He's betrayed virtually every promise he's made and delivered the country into the hands of Goldman Sachs and Monsanto. Those are facts. Okay, 'new war every week' is hyperbole. You must;ve heard of that. But you ignore the other charges and the rest of the argument, and you know why.
 
 
-5 # MemoFromTurner 2011-12-13 19:39
Rudy "9/11, 9/11, 9/11" Guiliani worked for RFK. Michelle "Not All Cultures Are Equal" Bachman worked for Jimmy Carter.

Credentials ain't what they used to be.
 
 
+5 # photojack53 2011-12-14 07:48
Your ranting is erroneous! Have you been getting your "news" from the Fox (Faux) network? GO TO POLITIFACT AND LOOK AT THE "OBAMAMETER." HE'S ONLY "BROKEN" 3 OUT OF 16 PROMISES AND HE'S FACED THE INTRANSIGENT "PARTY OF NO" FOR HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION.
If you don't vote for Obama, you hand a vote to the truly EVIL Republicans!
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back. They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies.
THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
0 # stan van houcke 2011-12-15 09:28
richard, look at the thumb up and down and you notice that the pro-obama propagandists already started working, look who gets positive and negative reactions. remarkable. pro obama propaganda and they will never learn.
 
 
+1 # stan van houcke 2011-12-15 09:21
Quoting Todd Williams:
Stan, you are a master at propaganda. I salute you!

so obama is an alternative. for what exactly? perhaps for some americans, the rich in the first place, but outside the land of the free, home of the brave, for whom is obama an alternative?
 
 
-7 # Martintfre 2011-12-13 15:58
you and your reality.
 
 
+15 # Jane Gilgun 2011-12-13 15:07
I find it hard to believe that the Republicans in charge are so blind to what they are doing. More backbone from the Democrats, please.
 
 
+12 # Regina 2011-12-13 16:19
No, they're not blind. Republicans are dedicated to their fascist conspiracy. They mean it. Democrats need foresight as well as backbone.
 
 
+4 # tclose 2011-12-13 15:10
Most progressives are not so optimistic, but lets hope you are right.
 
 
+1 # Martintfre 2011-12-13 15:57
ANY POLITICIAN WHO VOTED FOR THE BANKSTER BAIL OUTS SHOULD BE EVICTED FROM THEIR OFFICE.

People who see party label before policies are useful idiots that the parties count on and will never ever call their mismanagers to task.
 
 
+8 # feloneouscat 2011-12-13 16:55
Quoting Martintfre:
People who see party label before policies are useful idiots


That label fits the current GOP candidates and the Tea Party quite well - although I would strike out "useful".

The party of "No" didn't get much done. As such, they don't deserve any support nor respect.
 
 
-3 # Martintfre 2011-12-14 16:47
The tea party got started because the Republicans acted like their more admitted socialist counterpart and also pushed for the Bail outs.

Conservatives had no home in either democrat or republican party.

It pleased me greatly to see some of the republicans - like my former US senator Arlen Spector finally swept out of office (one of many poster children for term limits) - the tea party has done much .. we have much more to go.

15 trillion admitted debt is a very bad thing, BOTH parties are responsible.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2011-12-16 10:56
The teabaggers got started because of a huge inflow of cash and a phoney "grass roots" idea started by john ensign. More accurately, it should be called the "John Ensign / Karl Rove Party".
 
 
-1 # colvictoria 2011-12-13 16:39
Ron Paul has got some good ideas about ending all wars and bringing our troops home. Think of the trillions we could be saving and how it can help people here at home. I wish Paul would run as an independent candidate and not as a Republican. On other issues I am not too sure but he seems honest, direct and speaks the truth which many young people find appealing. I thought the same of Obama and voted for him (what a SCAM!) can we trust Ron Paul?
I am frustrated with this 2 party fiasco we have in this country. It appears to be a government for the corporations, for the military industrial complex, the prison complex, the medical mafia, and big agribusiness. Is there any hope that we the people can take back our country?
 
 
+8 # MemoFromTurner 2011-12-13 19:50
Please be very cautious about Ron Paul -- he's not the saint his starstruck, cult-like supporters paint him to be. If you do just a bit of research, you'll find that he's extremely racist, homophobic, anti-choice, and sometimes, he's just not too bright.
 
 
-6 # Martintfre 2011-12-14 16:37
If you actually do your research then you will find your statement false - Doctor Paul is probably smarter then you and I combined.

by the way Racism is necessarily a collectivist notion that ignores individual's values, individual's choices and instead substitutes a collective We or They so They are all like 'Bla bla bla'

Dr Paul's ideas are individualistic - that is why I like them.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 17:51
If your house is ever on fire I want you, as a 'rugged individualist' do deal with it yourself.

If you're ever in a fatal car accident caused by a road that could have been repaired decades ago, I want you to deal with it like the 'rugged individualist' you are.

If you ever take a medication that was secretly swapped with something poisonous to you, but could be produced cheaper in Indonesia, I want you to deal with it. Afterall, we can't have "big government" snooping in the affairs of small businesses like the pharmaceutical industry, right?

If your wife, or one of your children is rapped by a gang, I want you to accept that fact, because afterall, cops are nothing more than government employees, right?

I already assume you hand deliver all of your Christmas cards or overpay to have UPS do it, just to keep it in the hands of private industry, right?

"Individualists" live in caves on worms and crickets and can't leave the safety of their cave, for fear of being shot by the private land owner who probably considers them trespassers.

Build your own roads, schools, and hospitals. Put out your own fires. Build your own house with tools you hand made from trees in your own yard. Grow your own food exclusively.

Do all of these things and more and we can start talking about how much of an "individualist" you are.
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 08:25
Look at my above comment to colvictoria. You can see, I've actually DONE MY research. Have you done yours?
 
 
+6 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 08:24
But:

ending Social Security (what's left of it);
ending Medicare;
ending Medicaid;
ending the public schools (what's left of them);
ending public libraries;
ending national parks;
ending public roads and bridges (what's left of them);
ending inspections on the food we eat (what little we still have);
ending inspections on the medicines we take (what little we still have);
ending the post office (what's left of it);
ending safety inspections on the cars we drive and planes we ride in;
ending the FCC (what's left of it);
ending regulations on the banking industry (what little we still have);
ending public broadcasting (what's left of it);
doing away completely with the public airwaves (what's left of them);
ending environmental regulations that ensure slightly cleaner air, food and water (what little we still have);
and ending the rights of the public to petition the government (e.g. asking it to actually DO things)... (what's left of them);

are NOT "independant" ideas. They are EXTREMELY RIGHT-WING REPUG ones. If you agree with them, you're no "independant" either, no matter how much you try to mask it in "peace" rhetoric.
 
 
-8 # Martintfre 2011-12-15 09:40
Ending FEDERAL involvement in all or any of those things is valid and restoring the Federal government back to the chains of the constitution.

The states HAVE RETAINED the power and can choose or not choose to engage in any or all of these activities - they are where the power rest for that kind of thing.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 21:34
What makes state governments preferable? Most of the states can't even afford to do the few things they are currently doing. Are you willing to allow whether or not your state has safe medicine or a post office that can actually deliver mail to local politics?

Why not just leave the military at the state level as well? Seriously? Why not? Maybe Mississippi can invade Afghanistan and let the other 49 states focus on OUR country, instead.

By the way, I assume you have no problem with California telling the auto industry to switch to 100% electric vehicles, right? California actually tried to curb emissions just slightly and YOU REPUGS went APE, saying the state was over stepping its bounds, and that it was really the FEDERAL government's job to deal with things like that, afterall we can't have 50 different standards. It would be too costly.

A little consistency would be nice. Do you think you can make the "state's rights" argument in a consistent way, that allows states to make bank ATM fees illegal, without the federal government conservatives jumping to the bank's rescue?

I'd be interested in your reply...
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 22:01
By the way, if you think these things are "unconstitution al", you should take it up with the founding fathers. How old do you think public libraries, the post office, public roads, and public schools are?
 
 
+1 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 16:48
In four years time we will clean up Wall Street, institute a sensible national health care program, continue to slow down the warmongering, start dealing with global warming, take the money out of politics and reform the Washington/Wall Street kleptocracy and more. This is all possible if we pull together as a nation.

This is pure fantasyland. Obama HAD a landslide and workable majorities in both houses. He and the party ignored the needs of the people, sucked up to the banks, continued and extended the Bush wiretapping, the Bush wars, and the Bush environmental policies. Stop believing the speeches and look at what these people are doing. We're being hosed. Wake up.
 
 
-1 # ABen 2011-12-14 02:50
RR; are you planning on holding your breath until you get what you want?
 
 
+10 # humanmancalvin 2011-12-13 16:50
Even the Republican voters are turned off with the inane rambling of the right wing contenders. They all say exactly what they believe will grab them the votes, not in the least what they truly believe and it is painfully obvious. Gingrich was run out of Washington by his own party in the 90's and they do not want this serial adulterer back. Williard Romney is the epitome of Fli Flopping. Do I really have to explain the perils of Perry and Bachman never mind 999 Cain?
Please take us to an intelligent place in 2012 President Obama, I am standing solidly behind you. And I will do my part to ensure that you have the majority in both houses so that the party of NO does not bring this great country to ruin as it is currently attempting to do.
 
 
+9 # walt 2011-12-13 17:02
The GOP has clearly distinguished itself as the "Party of the 1%," and the public finally seems to have seen it.

Obama has not pleased many of his supporters as hoped for, but can anyone imagine a Republican win in 2012?

What a terrifying thought!
 
 
+8 # giraffee2012 2011-12-13 17:59
I worry about the FAUX audience. They believe what they are told.

This week FAUX put a graph up where they showed the # of unemployed for each month since 2008 - using bars. e.g. 9% would be longer in the negative than 8%.

Before Bush left there was an 8.6% way to the left. When they posted the Nov. 2011 bar of 8.6% - that bar was not even with the 2008 bar of 8.6%

Current TV has a new show: "The Young Turks". The moderator pointed out this farce by FAUX. Keith Olberman has a daily show and a few new ones of similar ilk are coming soon to Current.

And of this type of madness that worries me about the GOP/TP voter uninformed.

Those who vote GOP are voting against themselves. There have been several specials on Current where police target black/brown people and put them in jail for "nothing" but a marijuana cigarette. Bloomberg on NY, NY is one of those cities.

A showdown will occur this week between the W.H. and Congress: House (surprise) passed the payroll tax bill 236-193 - which includes the OIL pipeline and other crap. Senate will not pass and President Obama will veto it.

Call your Senators and tell them "Do not give in as they did in 2010." Let the people KNOW who caused them starvation.

Newt's tax reform gives top 1% more breaks. (Shades of 9-9-9)
 
 
+5 # angelfish 2011-12-13 18:30
Ah, Sanity and Civility...two qualities sadly lacking in ReTHUGlican Candidates so far. NONE of them has the Intellectual, Moral or Emotional qualities SO necessary in a President. None of them has the knowledge of Foreign affairs, Economics, or even Basic Problem solving that can compare with President Obama's to date! They're ALL good at talking and flapping their jaws but have YET to provide ANY concrete plans to improve our Countries Economy, Infra-structure or provide lasting, meaningful Employment for the Masses or Financial Recovery and well being for our Nation! Finger Pointing, Snide remarks and adhering to their One TRUE Goal of making him a one term President is the ONLY thing they have clung to and unflinchingly brag about as their SOLE purpose for his first term and NOT raising Taxes on the Rich! Sitting on their hands for these three, long years, has shown us they are unable to function as a Legislative Body and need purging! Guess what, Folks...They will ALL go down in the Annals of these, once GREAT, United States of America as the MOST INTELLECTUALLY, EMOTIONALLY, MORALLY BANKRUPT, MOST JADED and UNPRODUCTIVE Congress in Congressional History! Our Founders are surely GLAD to be dead and not having to suffer under the fools that pass for ReTHUGlicans these days. Blue Dog Democrats are counted among them as well! NOT to worry, though. Justice is coming on Election Day 2012! The People, UNITED will NEVER be defeated! Vote Democratic!
 
 
+4 # Richard Raznikov 2011-12-13 19:16
The argument which claims that an election is 'too important' to vote one's conscience is one I've heard for forty years. It's considered a pragmatist's argument: one of two candidates will win and one is worse than the other. Therefore, to limit the damage, vote for the one less awful. I've made that argument myself a couple of times.
But there's a flaw in it. So long as the voters follow this path, neither of the two major parties will have the slightest reason to listen to us. Right now, the Democrats believe that although Obama has truly betrayed every promise he made the specter of one of those GOP idiots will force us to back his re-election because we 'have nowhere else to go.'
Only when the voters in substantial number withhold their support from the phonies, liars, and hypocrites will be get better nominees. Only when we stop being suckers will we deserve anything better. The biggest financial contributor to Obama was Goldman Sachs. Do you seriously think he will act in our interest when it means lost revenue for these people? Why did he extend the Bush billionaires tax cuts? Is that explicable in any way other than the obvious?
I am a long-time Democrat and I am checking out of the whorehouse next year. I am done being hosed by people who don't mean their promises.
 
 
+6 # photojack53 2011-12-13 23:19
Your ranting is erroneous! Have you been getting your "news" from the Fox (Faux) network? GO TO POLITIFACT AND LOOK AT THE "OBAMAMETER." HE'S ONLY "BROKEN" 3 OUT OF 16 PROMISES AND HE'S FACED THE INTRANSIGENT "PARTY OF NO" FOR HIS ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION.
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back! They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies.
THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
+4 # kyzipster 2011-12-14 00:08
You make a good case but I believe it's simply a fact that third party candidates hand the election to one side or the other and I don't believe a Gore presidency would have been nearly as disastrous as the Bush presidency. The housing collapse was inevitable but it would have been a softer fall without the insurmountable debt left by failed Republican governing and I don't believe we would have invaded Iraq with Gore as president.

What we need are four viable parties, two leaning right and two leaning left. That would shake things up nicely.
 
 
-5 # Martintfre 2011-12-14 16:42
Good point Rich - 3 years ago I wasted my vote on McCain for some of the resons you mention - he would not be as bad as Obama.

The fact is McCAin sucked - he supported the bail outs and the wars and .. I wasted my vote not because I did not vote for the guy who won - any one who votes for some one just because they think they can win is a true idiot.

My vote was wasted on McCain because he stood for things I did and do not agree with.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 17:52
Who do you plan to vote for in the comming general election?
 
 
-6 # Martintfre 2011-12-15 09:43
Ron Paul.

Because the message of freedom and liberty is important
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 21:26
I said the general election. Not the repug primary.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 21:59
So long as you're not refering to the freedom and liberty of the electorate VOTING for things he disagrees with. The electorate wants the FREEDOM to KEEP Social Security. He'd deny you that freedom.
 
 
+2 # KittatinyHawk 2011-12-13 20:28
I hope none of them make it. with the trade off of killing specialized areas, and families/farmer s for pipeline I would rather see a rat's a___ win.
 
 
+3 # panhead49 2011-12-13 21:43
breaking news - tax cuts extended in House but attached is the Canadian oil sand pipeline.

I'll repeat, lesser evil = evil not even done well. You can give me all the thumbs down you want - but you'll be getting the single digit salute from DC.
 
 
+9 # photojack53 2011-12-13 23:08
I can't think of a single Repugnican that I could back and I'm surprised that you would mention Orrin Hatch if you don't agree with MOST of his views! They vote as a block at the tyranny of Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and the like. They kowtow to the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Glenn Beck! AND they vote against the bulk of their own constituent's best interests and especially the nation's best health and public safety issues in an unconscionable selling out to their wealthiest donors and big corporate contributors with their anti-environmen tal, pro big business strategies.
THEY HAVE NO CONSCIENCE!
NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN!
 
 
+7 # brianf 2011-12-14 08:09
A simple poll doesn't tell the whole story. The Republicans are much more energized than Democrats, hence much more likely to vote. Obama needs a much bigger lead than a couple of percentage points in order to have a good chance of winning. Many millions are too disappointed in him and probably won't bother to vote, and that's especially true of the most liberal, who were his biggest supporters in 2008. Nobody expects the economy to improve much before the election, and that always hurts the incumbent. On top of all this, big corporations will pour tons of money into ads attacking Obama. If Obama does win, it will be a very narrow victory, I'm afraid.
 
 
0 # activdot 2011-12-14 19:28
Pres. Obama has to win. He's done much that is good, especially The Affordable Care Act, the stimulus (not large enough),ending the Iraq War, getting Osama bin Laden, on first full day froze White House salaries, oversaw the creation of more jobs in 2010 alone than Bush did in 8 years(not enough), saved automobile industry,throug h stimulus saved 300,000 education jobs,made deal with Swiss banks that permits US govt. to gain access to the records of criminals and tax evaders, established more reasonable policies with Cuba, allowing Cuban-Americans to visit their families and send money to support them, and much more. He has not been perfect, but so very much better than any of the Republican candidates. He must be reelected so that fewer Republicans will be in Congress. THe present Republican legislators are a terrible lot. Obama has proposed good legislation; Republicans obstruct. Nasty of them to complicate recent American Jobs Act.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 20:30
I'm replying to you as someone who plans to vote FOR Obama in the next election, afterall, let's be realistic, right?

However, in the vein of "being realistic", don't you think any "gains" or "accomplishment s" Obama can give himself credit for are nothing more than playing the good cop?

Repugs are the bad guys. Obama plays the good guy. However, the things we actually voted for (single-payer, an ACTUAL end to Iraq - including mercenaries, an end to torture) are left "dead on arrival" and "off the table" before any negotiation is even tried. If you ask your boss for a raise and he says you deserve one, but his boss probably won't allow it, what's really going on? Grown-ups know, what's usually happening is that he doesn't want you to have it either. His boss is just a scapegoat.

Obama never wanted single-payer.

He never wanted to close the torture camps.

I know this because he never fought for either thing in good faith. By itself this wouldn't matter. However, he campaigned on promises that he had no intention of keeping.

CONT.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2011-12-14 20:30
CONT.

What do you plan to do about it? You can pretend it's not happening. You can throw your vote away on a third party candidate funded by the repug party. You can stay home and watch tv (WHICH IS INEXCUSABLE), or you can do what I plan to do: vote for the liar, and keep him nervous until the election. Also, make damn sure the Democratic establishment gets the message loud and clear to stop ignoring the base before 2016.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 21:57
You know, I plan to tone down my own rhetoric about "throwing your vote away".

I plan to vote for Obama, because I want to keep repugs out of office. We're all grasping at straws here. If other people vote third party to send the Democrats a message, it might help too.

What I CAN NOT defend is the idea of stay at home on election day. I will walk 10 miles to vote for a can of soup if that's what it takes to keep repugs out of office. Repugs ALL seem to vote. That's why their tiny minority (seriously about 28% of the population) is being disproportionat ely heard.

Liberals are notorious wusses about this. Get registered and vote, damn it. Write in someone if need be. Just don't sit at home. You NEED TO BE HEARD.
 
 
+2 # freierz 2011-12-15 14:55
Two-party politics plays up some relatively minor differences between the two sides, so people yell and scream at each other while both parties drive the country to ruin.

If you believe Bush is a war criminal, who deserved to be impeached or even imprisoned for his acts as president, then voting for Obama is unconscionable. Obama is a war criminal, a financial fraud, and a partisan hack. I refuse to vote for "the lesser of two evils" because that just guarantees each administration will be worse than the one before it.

But my biggest issue with the Obama administration is that it seems to make many Americans complacent. There's a sense that "he's working on it", despite the fact that on most issues, he's basically the third term of Bush.

The only thing right now that gives me hope for the future of my species is that many people among the two most recent major protest movements (the TEA Party and Occupy Wall Street) are starting to realize that there's a lot of common ground between them. There are problems in America that are essentially impossible to make any headway on, because NEITHER party addresses them. We desperately need a true people's movement, focused around COMMON GROUND rather than playing up the differences between people.
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2011-12-16 00:54
You had me until your "common ground" comment. Have you met OWS participants AND teabaggers? There is NO common ground. This isn't going to be solved with compromise. This is sudden death overtime and there will be a winner and a loser. Our side will be the winner, UNLESS we squander our advantage trying to "find common ground" with people who consider us their enemies.
 
 
-4 # cypress72 2011-12-15 19:05
Someone, please tell me why requiring a photo ID is so reprehensible by State Election Officials?? Here in Ohio, you can buy a State issued photo ID for about $7-10, hardly an incrdible amount of money even for someone on unemployment insurance, or welfare. And furthermore why are you walking around without an ID anyway???
 
 
0 # cypress72 2011-12-15 19:13
All this anger directed to the "1%". Remember, many of our elected officials, Democrat and Republican are those very "1%" and have been for years if not their entire lives. Why do they get a pass?? Throw them all out !!!
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2011-12-15 23:28
And who do you think would replace them?
 
 
-1 # Scott479 2011-12-16 18:56
Obama fills me with disgust.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN