Obama's liberal base 'disengaged'

Obama's liberal base 'disengaged'

www.usatoday.com

Is President Obama losing his base?

Liberal and progressive organizations that helped propel him to the White House are turning on him now, little more than a year after he took office. Their collective discontent, on issues from health care to nuclear energy to the handling of terrorism suspects, could mean bad news for Democrats during this fall's congressional elections.

Polls show that liberals and blacks still approve of the job Obama's doing. That approval, however, doesn't necessarily mean they will make the effort to vote, and many of the activists and groups that worked to get people to the polls in 2008 say they're not inclined right now to help Democrats in the fall.

(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 3/11/2010 by iMacFanatic]

Okay here is one for you Obama haters and it is being posted by a staunch liberal who voted for Obama even though he wasn't my first choice.

Has or rather is Obama losing his base? From my prospective he is. I am becoming increasingly discouraged with his administration...most notably his aloofness from the legislative process as shown in this ongoing health care reform fiasco...and his embracing of many of junior's most odious policies.

He has flubbed just about everything from closing Gitmo to trying the detainees here to what seems to be utter inaction regarding the Israeli/Palestinian peace process to aforementioned health care reform debate...which he should have been leading the charge from day one instead of leaving it up to the jellyfish in congress.

I am really disappointed but not surprised. At the same time I am not about to vote GOP as the party stands today. They have nothing...no candidates worth voting for and no solutions other than no.

I find their policy of no to everything Obama and their inability to negotiate anything in good faith foul and counterproductive.

So like it or not...I will probably vote for Obama again unless a viable dark horse comes out of nowhere to challenge him...

Hell I would vote for Hillary if she opposes him either in the primary or as a 3rd party candidate.

www.usatoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 3/11/2010 by iMacFanatic]

In the 08 primaries I voted not so much for Obama as against Hillary because I felt another hand off of power to a Clinton (or to another Bush for that matter) would be detrimental to the health of our democracy...we should not have power so concentrated in the hands of one or two families...that was one of the things that killed the Roman republic...and I still feel that way...

but I have to say that I am impressed with her performance as Secretary of State and I think that it goes a long way in improving her stature.

The concentration of power thing still disturbs me.

Obama has shown he is spineless...his quest for bipartisan support endlessly shows he simply is out of touch.

Tennis is only a game when both sides play...he keeps standing on the court waiting for someone to wack a ball back at him...he is pretty dumb for a smart guy.

It can be turned around if he continues his latest efforts to start bulling things, but he most likely wont.

I suspect the Dems will take a walloping in November...but this might not be a bad thing. Clintons best years was when things were balanced out,

Originally posted by iMacFanatic
In the 08 primaries I voted not so much for Obama as against Hillary because I felt another hand off of power to a Clinton (or to another Bush for that matter) would be detrimental to the health of our democracy

...I let the numbers speak for itself. budget surplus and insanely strong economy...sure do miss those days.

reply to post by iMacFanatic


I'm getting pretty frustrated with Obama as well. He is being way to soft and is still trying to work with republicans who obviously have no desire to work with him. He needs to just cut them off these next two years and push his policies...that's why we voted for him...right?

If things continue like this...we will always be controlled by the right wing because they do something left wingers don't do...and that is stick together. Dems had a super majority and decided to fight among themselves instead of solve problems. If Republicans had that same super majority...you can be sure they would of all stuck together to pass their policies. Heck...they passed their policies under bush without a super-majority...even without a majority the last 2 years of his presidency.

I don't agree with right wing policies...but I will admit they have the left wing beat when it comes to propaganda, controling issues, and sticking together. The Dems just all seem to be looking out for themselves...and not caring about the country as a whole. Very dissapointing.


Having said all that...I'm with you that I would never vote GOP because of my disagreement on their policies. Obama needs to toughen up and start cracking heads.

reply to post by SaturnFX

Well this has been the Democratic downfall since Reagan...they keep thinking despite all evidence to the contrary that if they make the effort to go half way the GOP will follow suit...that if they move to the center right it will make their policies more acceptable to conservatives...if they try to run a clean election the GOP will too.

Obama proves that the Democrats still don't get it...while they are playing chess the GOP plays hardball.

reply to post by OutKast Searcher

Sadly I am beginning to agree with you. I too want to see the parties work together but its obvious its not going to happen so long as one side (and it doesn't matter which side) insists on being obstructionist.

this crap is going to tear this nation apart yet.

reply to post by iMacFanatic

I find their policy of no to everything Obama and their inability to negotiate anything in good faith foul and counterproductive.

Many congressional Republicans has offered to work with the Obama administration yet for months there was no response from the White House, not one call.

Carl Rove knew and watched Obama as a Senator. Rove's comments illustrate how Obama would come to a bipartisan meeting and make comments about coming together and working and making progress. But of all the Senators, Obama was the least likely to work with the opposition, to compromise and find common ground.

Ie., Obama was the least qualified for the job he now holds!

Hindsight!

The political "show" is all about "showmanship" at which President Obama excels.

More than most, he should have anticipated the obstacles that would be thrust in his way.

The people of this nation, simply 'consumed' the product 'as packaged'. Many realize now that it isn't about Obama and "Yes we can." That is just a nice cover on a book with the same words in it as before.

There is a reason the constitution seems to coddle dissenters and opponents of status quo.

The republo-cratic party IS the status quo.

I don't think it's accurate to say he is losing his base. I think it is more realistic to assert that 'a' base which supported him seems to be chagrined about expecting too much, and thinking that change meant something other than it really did.

Those two groups that pretend to be different parties need to go!

They are the same, only the scripts change to keep the soap opera interesting.

[edit on 11-3-2010 by Maxmars]

Is his base really the liberals? I know a lot of Reagan Republicans like myself voted for Obama due to the Republicans parties excessive rightward shift and corporatism. I would argue that his base is middle America.

A lot of us never expected him to be liberal, but we did expect to see some restrained progressiveness. Which was badly needed after the severe stagnation over the last decade.

reply to post by plumranch

There is no one qualified to do that job.

Generals only manage the military but have no experience outside of the military since to get to general requires a life career...
CEO's only manage businesses and despite rhetoric to the contrary government is nothing like business....
Senators and Congresspeople manage nothing...and even in their previous lives they don't have the experience to be president...
Governors probably come the closest but the size of the stage is far larger and more complex.
Retired actors can only act like they are governing...
Crazy retired business people who run...drop out and start back up aren't qualified either.
Neither are aristocrats or plebeians...

whats left?

Small town mayors who quit half way through their one term as governor?

The key problem with our system is that the candidates themselves put themselves forward as candidate as opposed to the best possible choices being chosen.

The older I get the more I am favor of a Parliamentary system.

[edit on 3/11/2010 by iMacFanatic]

reply to post by iMacFanatic



Obama is a fraud, he has done nothing worthwhile to mention, and he will be worse the Bush and Carter, his countless spending and failure to reign in public debt, his inabilty to make a decision and stick with it, will be his down fall... A far left Loon or a Far right Loon is not what this country needs we need a center president we need Ron Paul.

reply to post by Kaploink

I knew he was no liberal but rather a mildly left center moderate and said so repeatedly but no one...especially no one on the right believed me.

As he stands at this moment in time I would call him a right center moderate.

He is and has never been a threat to the status quo...that is why he was allowed to win the primaries and why he won the election.

government has become a parasite. It takes from the productive, and gives to the unproductive. Even if we object to measuring life through money, we have to recognize that rewarding the good means that they have an incentive to outperform others. It's that incentive that is the foundation of evolution and natural selection as well as any healthy society.

I'll spare you the comparisons to Communism and instead make a comparison to 1776 and 1968. In 1776, bureaucrats from England were taking money from the productive colonies and using it to prop up their failing empire. In 1968, fat dumb guys in suits were in such a mania to profit from the post-war boom that they forgot their souls.

And now in 2010, the same pattern is repeated. We thought humanism was an antidote to soullessness just like we thought revolution was an antidote to bad leadership. Once we slayed the dragon, we thought we could blow off the problem for the interim. But now we see that the dragon regenerates, because wherever we stop paying attention, parasitism grows.

When the left was rebelling against a calcified culture of materialism, they at least had some degree of accuracy -- even if their methods were bad. Now that what the left created has become just as calcified, the right has taken over and adopted their methods. In the middle, the citizens who have been ignoring politics in order to have careers and raise families have started to notice, and they're siding with the Right.

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
we need a center president we need Ron Paul.

What tha...Ron Paul is socially centerist, but his fiscal and governmental stance is so far right that it fell off the side completely and kept going...


not that thats a bad thing mind you...hell, it really might be what this country needs overall. fiscally I am independent, socially I am very liberal in most areas...RP I have some philosophical disagreements with, but thats all they are..I do not see him as a demon or shill and though not "my guy", he wouldn't scare me if he was POTUS...if his stuff worked, great...if it didn't, then thats what reelections are for...but no need to restock the bomb shelter if he was elected.

Good. The less things Obama pass, the better for the whole nation.

Even without his agenda going throught, he still manages to increase deficits to UNSEEN LEVELS.

What a puppet!

Since he's already a fail puppet, unless TPTB do something really big to rally for Obama like they did with Bush, we gonna have a new puppet in charge in 2012.

And OP, you're a joke. You're the minority here in loving one or the other party, most here have understood that BOTH PARTIES are scum and need to be kicked out of power.

You are part of the problem, continuing this fail system by participating in it.

And the most ironic thing in all this is you live in Virginia... HAHAHAHA, back in 1776, you would have been shot for being a King George supporter.

[edit on 11-3-2010 by Vitchilo]

reply to post by concernedcitizan

Government is not a parasite it is a function of society...the debates that take place in government reflect those taking place in society and all governments redistribute wealth one way or the other.

be that as it may your post has nothing to do with Obama and whether his base is becoming disengaged with him or not.

reply to post by iMacFanatic


Obama's a sell-out, who could guess?! He was a false Jesus from the very start, functioning as the divine leader that'd overcome race problems, stop the war in Iraq, and solve the economic crisis. Only fools would buy into this. Like most politicians, Obama's all talk. It sounds good and that is why people vote for him. Now when he's shifting position in critical issues because of pressure from lobby groups, his voters freak out. Guess what, you've been duped from day one, and Obama's going to continue serving the interests of the groups who made it financially possible for him to grow into the political Messiahs he is today.

I think both parties are losing their base. But, generally speaking, Americans are lazy when it comes to politics. So rather than seeing folks on both sides jumping ship on a long-term basis, I expect them to flock back to the same two parties when it comes time for election 2012.

The "tea party" and the new "coffee party" are nothing more than groups of people publicly venting...but it will fade as they realize that nobody is listening STILL. They will get tired, give up hope and just go back to voting for what they perceive as being the lesser of the two evils.

It's sad, but I fear that it's true.