it's not just going to magically appear, you know.

with such candidates, and stop settling for what we think will win, in place of what we think is right.

has a supportive majority in Congress.

Remember the Jobs Plan he wanted to pass last summer, the Fair Pay Act, and how he wanted to implement the Buffet Rule?

The past few years have badly shown this, as the political losses piled up. Its not inspiring to most people to see politicians try to be in the mushy middle, rather, it is inspiring to take bold stands and policies, people can respect that, they respect strength and boldness, even if they are non-political types. Its long past time for progressive policies to be pushed, straight from the presidency.

Voting is simply not enough anymore.

This is just the latest version of Gore=Bush. I really wish the "true progressives" would just finally go, and if we have to rebuild the Democratic party after that, then sobeit. Between the intransigence from the wild eyed left, and the nutjob teabaggers, it's a wonder we can get approval for trash removal. Everything has to be a fight. Compromise is a dirty word.

We've had ample opportunity to nominate the type of candidate you speak of, and time and time again, we've rejected them. Just ask Dennis Kucinich. What you call "the mushy middle" is where most of us are. For better or for worse, reasonable people see the other options as extreme, and count me among them.

it is never a compromise because I really do prefer the least harmful politician. Because of this conviction, I never vote for republicans and always vote for their strongest opponent, because their strongest opponent is always less harmful.

People seem to think that they will eventually get something ideal out of government. I am not convinced on this notion. Therefore in short, I would have happily voted for a ham sandwich, if said sandwich had a serious chance of beating Bush*, a potted palm, whatever.

Something sitting behind the Oval office desk inanimate and unresponsive would have been better than Bush*, because it would not have been working to do harm.

In the primaries, I vote as far left as the available candidates will allow. In the general, I try to pick the folks who will do the least damage when given the keys to this place, because one of them will get the keys. This is always true, one of them will win, and the winner actually gets the keys to the largest nuclear arsenal on Earth. I like to think about that on my way into the polls, which is why I always vote in the general against the republican.

I vote against republicans in every single race, every single time, without fail, because I don't want to encourage that sort of thinking. Win or lose it is still a valuable personal form of protest.

I assume you would vote for Cuomo?

If people who want change sit back and accept our fate, as dictated by others.

I share your commitment to voting for Obama, and your dissatisfaction with him, and your hope for more genuine progressive alternatives in the future.

Refusing to vote for centrist Dems in the general election is not, however, a good way to get better candidates. Politicians go hunting where the ducks are. If there's a comparatively tiny cadre on the left that won't vote for a centrist, and a much larger group of swing voters who are themselves centrist and are undecided, then Democratic politicians will largely write off the left and try to appeal to the centrists.

The key point that seldom gets enough attention in these discussions is primaries. The days of the smoke-filled room are gone. Candidates aren't picked solely or even primarily by party bosses. If you don't want a prospective Blue Dog as our nominee for an open Congressional seat in your area, or you don't want Andrew Cuomo on our ticket in 2016 (and I certainly don't), then you have the opportunity to do something about it.

Of course, that's not a perfect remedy. My State Senator, nominally a Democrat, is fairly conservative, and has even made noises about possibly endorsing Christie for re-election next year. Nevertheless, he's very well-entrenched, high name recognition, popular, energetic about constituent services, etc. There's essentially no chance of ousting him in the primary. You just have to be smart about picking targets of opportunity, with open seats being the most obvious.

I don't want to put words in your mouth -- but some people who make statements similar to yours mean that, if the Democratic nominee isn't thoroughly to their liking, they won't vote for him or her, in order to teach the party a lesson. That's totally mistaken.

start a DU group called something like "Progressive Prez 2016".

For all the disappointment with Obama I hear voiced here on DU over the last 3+ years, I keep expecting to see such a group.

Still has not happened.

That makes me feel better, less disillusioned.

The US Congress and President's office have, IMHO, become way beyond the control of the common person. A recent thread here asked whether DUers would you support getting a tax increase if it meant a tax increase across the board. The NOs were usually supported by an explanation like, no, not until they stop spending money on _______ (eg wars, etc.). No one I know feels adequately represented at the federal level, at least not by the corporate spokesperson.

I feel like I can make more of a difference at the local, even state, level. I feel like grouping together with like-minded citizens can actually change something in a meaningful way.

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I feel like by building a strong foundation from the bottom up, maybe eventually it won't be so purple in the future.

(I also think that the rhetoric in politics has become so poisonous that only the teflon candidates well supported by corporate backers want to run at the national level. The idealists no longer need apply. But that's a different discussion. )

they act at the local level (and they have well managed messaging)...

was about filibuster abuse, I would lend you a hint of credibility.

As it stands, you have none with me. Your anger is entirely misplaced.

thanks for the chuckles

I would ever again vote for the proverbial "lesser of two evils." Of course I didn't think that's what I was doing at the time; I was actually very hopeful for about the first week or so after the election. Then Obama started announcing his Cabinet appointments...

NOT doing it again. Sorry, demwing and everyone...I am just not doing it again.