Along with the historic victory of Barack Obama winning the U.S. presidency in 2008, the Democrats got control of the House and Senate. The Democrats had a mandate. But they blew it.

Rather than take advantage of the mandate, Obama used his art of compromise (or surrender) a lot in his first term. (In his second term, he sometimes displayed more of a backbone.) But virtually every proposal Obama made, it was shot down by the Republicans, i.e., the Party of No. Obama and the Democrats still tried to overly compromise.

Along with Obama's accomplishments, overly compromising is a character flaw that most Democrats have done for years. It was, e.g., displayed when most Democrats voted for the Iraq War. Or the willingness to allow increasing deregulation which was a prime factor in causing the wild speculation (of which both the Democrats and the Republicans participated in) of the banks and Wall Street, which in turn lead to the 2008 Great Recession. Or, going along with cuts in Social Security and other social programs.

My criticism of the Democrats as a tag-a-long party is mild compared to other sources:

"Democrat Party Candidates Have Turned into Spineless Jellyfish" blares a headline from an article published in  Motley News (11/03/2014). It condemns Democrats-"these sniveling, spineless jellyfish"-for disassociating themselves from Obama because of his falling approval ratings at that time. Meanwhile, "the Republican Party is now a group of very loud whiners and criers...the party's constant 'drip, drip' of hate speech and vitriol wears people down, including the Democratic candidates."

The same is evident in an article published in the Daily Kos (6/20/2009) - The title asks, "Why Are Most Elected Democrats, Still, Spineless Cowards?" "...the Democrats are still spineless wimps and are literally afraid to stand up to the hostile Republicans." When it was obvious that members of the Bush Jr. cabinet committed crimes, most Democrats did nothing: "They are very afraid to investigate Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Rove, et.al, despite the fact that these slimebags need to be investigated."

"Why is My Party So Spineless?" asserts the title of an article published in the Huffington Post (3/18/2010) by Andy Ostroy. "I'm not gonna pull any punches here, the Democrats have become a bunch of spineless pussies. Sadly, this is the way it's always been..." "Democrats now own the White House, 60 Senate seats and have an 81 seat lead in the House. Yet the party seems so utterly neutered and unable to accomplish anything unless it waters down every measure to the point of being worthless." Ostroy is referring to the Democrats having a mandate, which I mentioned earlier.

Considering how the Democrats are described above, it would possibly be fruitless to ask the following questions (but I will anyway): Can the Democrats now become the Party of No since the Republicans will control the White House, Senate and House? Can they develop a political spine to challenge what will be horrid proposals from the GOP?

There are a few Democrats who have the spine to do this like Barbara Lee, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Yes, there are a few. But somehow, someway, the progressive wing has to take the reins of leadership from the corporatist/neoliberal wing of the Democratic Party. It is a matter of continuos struggle.

But if not, the Democratic Party will continue to be merely loyal opposition to the Republican Party.