I see that I have misunderstood your position.

You are NOT claiming that the majority of Americans voted against the Democrats JUST because of the economy.

You are, in fact, saying that of all the reasons that the majority of Americans voted against Democrats, the top reason was the economy.

I can agree with that. :D

Michale.....

88

Actually, let me rephrase this slightly.

Here's Obama's MO. Take healthcare.
- Starts w/ position around single payer. Realizes that there will probably have to be compromise.
- Proposes public option as a compromise to counter opposition w/o taking a stand on single payer.
- Proposes current mandated version as a further compromise w/o taking a stand on public option.

He wins the fight on legislation. But what has happened is that it doesn't appear as if he's compromised with Republicans. For the most part, they still never supported his plan.

What I'm suggesting is how negotiation should work. Take the stand on single payer.

If Republicans are willing to compromise, then work towards a compromise. But they have to commit and agree to support the bill. Otherwise, call them out for what they're doing.

All of the backroom legislative wrangling has occurred w/o Republicans ever having to appear to have compromised. So they appear as standing for what they believe in. They also get the compromise they want. And, they've forced the Democrats to own it entirely so they can beat them up in the next election. A pretty good deal for Republicans.

I want to see both parties work together w/o calling each other names. But the way to do this is to stand on your principle, and then compromise. Not compromise w/o any public negotiation.

The Obama administration is going to have a chance pretty soon to see if they've learned this lesson.

http://views.washingtonpost.com/leadership/post_leadership/2010/12/gop-lame-duck-blockade-taxes.html?hpid=topnews

Haven't fully digested yet, but it seems similar to the government shutdown attempted by the GOP in 1994.

Know your BATNA, Obama! :)
-David

You're funny, Michale. I like how recently any evidence which contradicts your foregone conclusion is "cherry picked".

Look at any of the exit polls. As I've mentioned before, the scientific way to find out why people voted the way they did is to ask them

Here's another one ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/02/exit-polls-independent-voters-gop/

Fox puts a bit of a tilt on it as they are wont to do, but it's still relatively consistent with the other exit polls. But look at any of them.

You latch onto a poll here and a poll there to support your belief and you ignore any other evidence that would refute your world view.

Ignoring evidence? What is your method for finding out why people voted the way they do? How are exit polls not evidence?

I know this comes out as insulting and I really tried to think of a better way to say it, but that's how I see it.

Yes, it is insulting. Please, I thought we were beyond the name calling.

Now, flash forward to 2010 and the Democrats have received a much worse shellacking and now, all of the sudden, it's "Oh, the American haven't rejected the Democratic Party. They just didn't like how the Party handled one single issue.."

Huh? I have no idea where you're getting this from unless that issue is the economy.

I think they lost because voters are angry about the economy and they took it out on the party in power. Basically, the same thing that happened in 2008, but in reverse.

This is what the exit polls indicate. Take the headline: "The economy overshadows everything." There's other reasons as well, but this seems to be the main one.

And here's a great quote:
"But underscoring a broad dissatisfaction with politicians, just over half voiced negative views of both the Democratic and Republican parties."

Because us NPAs and Independents are not going to be fooled a second time by platitudes of HOPE and CHANGE.. We're not going to be lulled with pretty words and petty partisanship.

Nope. This time it was "freedom" and tricorn hats and Tea.

This is my complaint about marketing. Both sides do it until they get into office. Tell the people one thing during the election, then its business as usual in office.

It happened to the religious right all through the 90s and 00s. Now it will happen with the Tea Party. Observe people like John Boehner who are already ignoring the Tea Party.

Yes, the Democrats have to win over Independents and NPAs in order to win. Here, I agree with you. Both sides do.

I just believe the way to do this is to stand up for your principles. If Obama had done this rather than compromise, compromise, compromise, the elections may have been different. I still think Republicans would have made gains, but I don't think they would have won by as much.

Being a Blue Dog did not help Obama or any of the other Blue Dogs.

Cheers
David

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJSnozJ4LVg

This is exactly what I am talking about..

Michale

86

How do you explain all the losses among the Blue Dogs then?

That's easy. Because the Independents and NPAs of the country seem them as Democrats first and foremost.

Another riddle. The progressive agenda polls well among people when you just ask people about issues.

For example.....????

What would that particular "progressive agenda" be??

If you focus on just issues, people tend to agree w/ much of the progressive agenda. Hmmm. Could this be the reason that so many conservative pundits/politicians spend so much time on everything but the issues?

So, what you are saying is that the American people just gave the Democratic Party a shellacking unheard of in the history of this country over just one single issue.

In other words, by your theory, the American voter like everything about the Democratic Party and it's agenda except their handling of one single issue...

And yet, the American voter STILL threw Democrats out of office practically everywhere they were in office on a scale unprecedented in history. Over one single issue...

Is THAT your claim??

I suppose you can speculate about this all you want. But it's not what the exit polls indicate.

You have shown me one cherry picked exit poll from one election..

Yes, maybe in Ohio in that ONE race, the economy was the deciding factor..

But you simply cannot ascribe that one specific issue to the complete and utter shellacking Democrats got at the mid-term. A shellacking never before seen in the history of this country.

It's funny.. :D When the GOP got their shellacking in 2006 and 2008, the Left was all a gaa-gaa about how this country was becoming a Center Left country and that they people had spoken all up and down the board and have condemned and rejected the GOP's agenda and beliefs.

Now, flash forward to 2010 and the Democrats have received a much worse shellacking and now, all of the sudden, it's "Oh, the American haven't rejected the Democratic Party. They just didn't like how the Party handled one single issue.."

Seriously?? :D

It's time to face the reality.. The Democratic Party lost and lost big not over one single issue. They lost because they failed to lead.

It's that simple. I know ya'all hate it when I use that phrase, but it's true.

The Democratic Party failed to lead this country in the manner that this country wants to be lead. Now you can point to one single issue and say THAT'S why, but that's not the reality..

And if the Democratic Party doesn't take away that message from the shellacking they received in the mid-terms, then 2012 will make 2010 look like a picnic by comparison.

They ONLY way that Obama and the Democratic Party can survive in 2012 is by pleasing both the DP base and the Independents and NPAs..

This is an undeniable fact that I am sure you will agree with.

Now, can you explain to me how Obama and the DP can do that?? How can Obama and the Democratic Party please both their base and the Independents and NPAs?

It's a sincere question because I really don't see how it's possible.

What do you think is fundamentally wrong with the progressive "belief structure"?

Because progressives see the world as they want it to be, not as it really is.

Your belief about the mid-term elections is a perfect example. You don't want to see that the mid-terms was a referendum on the Democratic Party so it's not. You latch onto a poll here and a poll there to support your belief and you ignore any other evidence that would refute your world view.

I know this comes out as insulting and I really tried to think of a better way to say it, but that's how I see it.

Progressives are, by and large, not grounded in reality. Now, that worked out very well for progressives in 2008 because the rest of America, myself included, also was not grounded in reality. We dared to believe that a man who had absolutely ZERO leadership experience could actually lead this country.

We Americans in 2008 thought we had a Jack Ryan. Turns out, we voted in a Richard Nixon..

And why is it so important to you that everyone have the same "belief structure" as Republicans? I thought you said you weren't a religious man, my friend. All this talk sounds pretty religious.

Call it a 'belief structure', call it a 'foundation', what ever...

What it all boils down to is that the Independents and NPAs of this country dared to believe the Progressive's message. In 2008, Independents and NPAs said, "OK... You Progressives have convinced us. The GOP royally fracked things up and we're going to give ya'all a shot at it.."

And we did...

And we discovered the true definition of "royally fracked".....

So, now the Independents and NPAs threw Democrats out and replaced them with Republicans...

And Democrats have a large uphill battle ahead of them. Because us NPAs and Independents are not going to be fooled a second time by platitudes of HOPE and CHANGE.. We're not going to be lulled with pretty words and petty partisanship...

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
-Lt Commander Montgomery Scott, STAR TREK, Friday's Child

It's an old saying that was invented in Russia. :D

The NPAs and Independents in this country are going to want to see some tangible results from the Democratic Party.

And, if the DP cannot produce those tangible results, then we will simply vote more Dems out of office, up to and including the Presidency.

This is the reality of the relationship between the American People and the Democratic Party in the next two years..

If you can find any fault in my logic, I would love to see it. :D I mean that in all sincerity..

Michale.....

84

How do you explain all the losses among the Blue Dogs then?

Here's a group that kept trying to be Republican-lite, yet lost more than the progressives. Progressives actually looked good by comparison.

Another riddle. The progressive agenda polls well among people when you just ask people about issues.

If you focus on just issues, people tend to agree w/ much of the progressive agenda. Hmmm. Could this be the reason that so many conservative pundits/politicians spend so much time on everything but the issues?

For example, why spend time and energy painting Obama as a Muslim unless you know that you're not going to win on issues? Why all the socialist mumbo jumbo? Why not just talk about issues and who wants to do what? Riddle me this.

There are many questions grasshopper.

You don't lose THAT much support up and down the board unless there is something fundamentally wrong with your agenda... Your belief structure.

I suppose you can speculate about this all you want. But it's not what the exit polls indicate.

Just look at the analysis. Exit polls indicate people don't have any great love for either party.

What do you think is fundamentally wrong with the progressive "belief structure"?

I'm not even sure I know what you mean by "belief structure". Do you mean we're communists? Or godless Satanists? Or Presbyterians?

And why is it so important to you that everyone have the same "belief structure" as Republicans? I thought you said you weren't a religious man, my friend. All this talk sounds pretty religious.

-David

Because they ARE Democrats...

You are not the only one who is cornfused.. :D

I don't understand how you can believe that pushing the Democratic Party agenda on the country will endear the Independents and the NPAs of this country to the Democratic Party..

I guess the only thing that makes sense of this is if you believe that the mid-terms was NOT a rejection of the Democratic Party agenda.

But, it clearly was.

Nothing else explains why Democrats lost and lost big both in Federal AND in State elections..

I don't see them hating a "Democratic agenda" the way you seem to.

How else can you explain all the losses suffered by Democrats up and down the board??

State Legislatures??

State Governor??

You don't lose THAT much support up and down the board unless there is something fundamentally wrong with your agenda... Your belief structure..

It's not just a ONE issue loss.... That's the point I am trying to make..

The Democratic Party has failed to lead..

It's really that simple...

Michale.....

83

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-freeze-20101130,0,150704.story

If Obama really wants to impress me, he can forgo his yearly pay. He can tell the American People his wife and kids won't take any more trips. He can announce he will support a complete repeal of CrapCare and replace it with something that WILL actually save money and WILL actually reign in costs..

But Obama can't do that because it will affect his chances of getting re-elected..

It's so simple it's amazing..

Obama can choose to help himself and Democrats.

Or he can choose to help his country.

Wanna lay any quatloos on which Obama will choose? :^/

Michale.....

82

I don't buy this. The one big issue that hurt them in 2010 was healthcare. And I wouldn't say they moved left or right, but moved Washington and corporate. They gave in to what the insurance companies wanted - a mandate.

Being Republican-lite doesn't work for Republicans. So I'm not sure why you think it would work for Dems.

Honestly, wouldn't you respect them more if they stood by their principles? Not agree with them, but respect them.

The American people have rejected the Democratic Party's agenda. No other explanation fits the facts.

The scientific approach to answering this question is to ask the people who voted why they voted the way they did.

Here's some of the results from Ohio.

http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/political/elections_local/why-they-voted-the-way-they-did-in-ohio

In Ohio, people voted the way they did because the economy hasn't improved enough or they don't believe it's improved.

I don't see them hating a "Democratic agenda" the way you seem to.

But blame for the economy was laid on the Democrats, the party in power. Rightly or unrightly so. That seems to be the biggest reason.

It's a shame too because the economy seems like it's starting to come back.

Cheers
David

Fair enough...

If true, do we REALLY want a "leader" like that?? Someone who will do things contrary to the alleged "good of the country", SOLELY to get elected??

Is THAT the kind of leader this country needs right now??

Judging from your subsequent posting, it seems we are in agreement.

Obama is NOT the kind of leader this country needs.

If he really wants to regain the initiative, I think people would like to see him come out with a plan. And the best way to do it is to propose an extremely liberal plan and then come back to the middle.

I completely agree...

But, with CrapCare we have seen what a disaster THAT plan is.

I honestly don't know exactly where Obama is on the political spectrum. Sometimes he is far Left, sometimes he is nearly center, sometimes he is Left off the map...

My guess is it's because he is not a good leader. He follows the political winds and tries to please everyone, but ends up pleasing no one and pissing off everyone...

This is not the leader I voted for. This is not the leader that this country needs.

This is why we need a different leader in 2012..

This isn't true. There's lots of Democrats willing to fight. It just appears that the President is not willing to jump into the fray. Take Nancy Pelosi.

And how did the American people take Pelosi's fight??

More accurately, did the American people as a whole appreciate Pelosi's fight??

No. That's why the American people gave the Democratic Party a "shellacking"....

The fact that she's willing to act on what she believes in despite the huge anti-Pelosi ad campaign against her makes me proud of her.

You are proud of her because she fought for the Democratic Party agenda.

Yet, the rest of the country has completely rejected that agenda as is evidenced by the Mid-Term elections..

As I have said before. A bump for a GOP here or a bump for a GOP there, you could make the logical argument that, over all, the American People support the DP agenda.

But the complete and utter shellacking that the DP received at the Federal AND the State level makes such an argument completely moot.

The American people have rejected the Democratic Party's agenda. Period.

No other explanation fits the facts..

This being the case, the ONLY way for Obama and the Democrats to survive is to go Right... If they try to go Left, he and the Democratic Party will be crucified in 2012.

Regardless, my original point regarding the Democratic Party's inability to fight as a whole, is this..

"There are only two possibilities, Admiral. They are unwilling to respond; they are unable to respond."
-Captain Spock, STAR TREK II, The Wrath Of Kahn

In other words, the DP is either unable to fight for their agenda or they are unwilling to fight for their agenda...

Either one doesn't bode well for the idea that the Democratic Party is fit to lead.

Michale.....

80

I think that's a great question, Michale.

Now I'm guessing you want to argue that Obama, being smart, has seen the wisdom of the Republican plan :)

I'd agree that Obama isn't stupid. But I don't think he's doing what he believes in.

I think he's doing what he thinks will politically help him. I think he's stalling and trying to look like he's gotten the message from the election.

I don't think he has.

Dear President Obama, We would like someone who will lead. Sincerely, The Electorate.

As you yourself have stated, you'd like a President who is going to lead, damn the torpedoes.

What we're getting is a President who looks weak and afraid to put out his own strategy for fear it might be unpopular or he might not win.

The LA Times has an article that argues Obama is trying to regain the initiative on the economy.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-freeze-20101130,0,150704.story

My question is, do you regain the initiative by putting forth Republican proposals from 2 months ago?

If he really wants to regain the initiative, I think people would like to see him come out with a plan. And the best way to do it is to propose an extremely liberal plan and then come back to the middle.

That is, fight the fight.

Republicans have done the better job of fighting this fight in the public eye.

Best example: No one knows about the Obama tax cuts. Or talks about them.

If he doesn't fight for what he believes in when it comes to taxes, the question people are going to be asking is, what will he fight for?

I mean, that seems to be the common theme in these pages.. Democrats don't fight for what they allegedly believe in.

This isn't true. There's lots of Democrats willing to fight. It just appears that the President is not willing to jump into the fray. Take Nancy Pelosi. The fact that she's willing to act on what she believes in despite the huge anti-Pelosi ad campaign against her makes me proud of her.

Cheers
-David

Michale.....

79

Lemme ask ya something..

Forget all partisanship BS and Left vs Right and all that garbage...

I think we all can agree that Obama and the Democrats ain't stoopid. They know at LEAST as much about the current situation as you and I do... Hopefully, they know more, but we can agree that they at least know as much.

Since we all agree that Obama and the Democrats ain't stoopid, doesn't this beg the question as to WHY the Democrats don't fight??

I mean, that seems to be the common theme in these pages.. Democrats don't fight for what they allegedly believe in.

Doesn't anyone care WHY???

Michale.....

78

I sincerely hope that no matter what their strategy on this that they play it out in public and fight against trickle down theory and high-end tax cuts.

I read a recent article about the Obama tax cuts expiring. Why aren't we hearing any outrage about these tax cuts expiring? 2 reasons:

1. It was a tax cut for 95% of Americans. It didn't include the millionaires. Therefore, it's not going to make the mainstream media. Don't believe me? Try a Google search on "Obama tax cuts" vs "Bush tax cuts"

2. Most people don't even know that Obama cut people's taxes. The amount of disinformation out there is astounding.

Unfortunately, the only way people are going to find out about these type of things is if the administration picks a fight.

And it's a fight I think they could win. But you can't win if you don't fight.

Unfortunately, the administration is not off to a good start. They started negotiations by conceding to Republicans a freeze on federal government pay. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but what are they getting from Republicans in return?

Nada.

Here's how negotiation should work. You ask for something. The other side asks for something. You both give a little and reach a compromise. Here's how it works under Obama. Republicans ask for something. Obama moves to the Republican position without asking for anything in return in the hopes that ... well, I have no idea what he's hoping.

*sigh*

Alas, it's good to be back to the fray!
-David