win. but then listen for a second.

I suspect most of y'all know where I'm coming from, but for those who don't: Hi. I am a lifelong Democrat, a wild-eyed liberal by current standards, a Nader voter of 1996 and 2000 vintage, and not given to apology for my views.

I want Barack Obama to win. I want it with every iota of my being, and I believe that he will, easily. This is not to be construed as advice to quit working for the campaign - keep up the pressure! - but I do believe in this campaign and this candidate. I think we're going to pull it off, and pull it off handily, no matter the media and the dirty tricks at the polls.

Then will come the hard part.

Forget that Obama will inherit a post-Iraq, post-bailout deficit of horrifying proportions. I mean the necessity that the new President listen to those that brung him. That's you and me, friends.

That's not to say that I don't get that support for gay marriage is political suicide in a general election. I do. I get it. That's not to say that I don't get that opposition to No Child Left Behind might leave one open to criticism. I get it. Four years ago, I got some flack for supporting a centrist like Howard Dean. I supported him because he got what I was talking about, too.

I support Barack Obama knowing full well that he is not likely to ignite some liberal renaissance. An Obama administration, in the absence of pressure from the left, will be glued to the center. But I want that administration to listen to those whose human needs outrank the needs of Wall Street. I want that administration to listen to those whose schools are struggling, to those whose jobs have been outsourced, to those who might one day face the end of their lives without their partners by their sides.

Fulfill that end of the deal, and I'll fulfill my end to keep agitating.

I am 46 and by the end of my lifetime I would like to see the following.

A national holiday for voting with paper ballots hand counted at the precinct.

Full rights for Gays including marriage.

A resurrection of unions including a Workers Bill of Rights.

NAFTA, CAFTA, and any other blatantly unfair trade deals dissolved. All trade deals need a labor cost equalization tariff.(Thom Hartman's idea.)

Tax structure returned to Clinton levels

Gramm-Leach-Bliley rescinded.

Feel free to add.

I support these efforts....

:toast:

Carter and Clinton both took on big issues (Energy and Gays in the military, respectively) immediately and both went down in flames. The first steps must be baby steps to get to the point where big legislation can get through without major in-party opposition as Carter and Clinton faced.

there are a lot of things I want to see get done, but the Carter and Clinton attempts right out of the box hurt them a lot for a long time. I think the trick is going to be log rolling a few easy things first getting people onboard to work together and compromising on the easy stuff, first. The that cooperation becomes habitual if not instinctive.

The old saying "Rome wasn't built in a day" isn;t really the right way to look at it in the sense that the better analogy would be "The Coliseum wasn;t built before the roads were laid out."

In all honesty, I expect the progress on a lot of things will be more analog than digital, so I don't have a good answer to "how long." But I can assure you we will be traveling down the right road starting Jan 20th,which is a damn site better than going the wrong way on the wrong road as we have for the past 8 years.

I understand what you're saying about not going too hard out of the box. On the other hand, I don't want to wind up in the final months of an eight-year Obama admin with barely a dent made in the damage we've seen the last eight years.

week to settle: Habeas Corpus returned to the Constitution, Gitmo & other secret prisons closed (prisoners switched to visible system where necessary), audits begun to recoup money misspent, etc.

:eyes:

I've known Uly here for 7 years--you don't have a fucking clue.

:loveya:

I just set off Bloo because I teach. ;-)

He that shall see this day and live t'old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours (and fellow old DUers),
And say "To-morrow is Saint Crispian":
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars
And say "These wounds I had on Crispin's day."

:hi: :loveya:

We've wounds to last a lifetime, don't we?

I still want to read that Merton with you.

That Merton's still sitting on my shelf, about 1/3 read. :7

:)

...

"This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered -
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day."

(Henry V, William Shakespeare)


This reminds me of the '60s "battles" that way.

Yeah, wouldn't you know, someone who voted for Nader coming on here and complaining and causing a ruckus, just when Obama is skyrocketing in the polls and victory is in site.

OK. Don't apologize for your views, but I still hold the OP responsible for 8 years of Bush and constantly harping on the fact that there was no difference between Gore and Bush -- I hope you will at least concede that Nader was horribly wrong on that one.

Welcome to DU, newbie. :D

uly, he does have a point. Personally, I do hold Nader responsible for the 2000 election. I think it makes it difficult for some on here to take your point seriously. :hi:

If you want to gauge the validity of the point by my voting history, then you be you. Given your defense downthread of centrists, I'd be interested in hearing your view of "Reagan Democrats", though. :hi:

have a place in our party. As I said below, all views should be listened. A successful President Obama will will take a little bit from everyone.

BEAT ou!!!! BEAT ou!!!!! BEAT ou!!!!! BEAT ou!!!!!!

lessen their message?

I didn't say that I agreed with them with the Reagan Dems.I wasn't too happy with them in 1980 and 1984. I am too much of a practical politician to write anyone off. My enemy today might be my friend tomorrow. That is the way politics works. Consequently, even though I felt lots of bitterness toward Nader in 2000, I know that lots of those voters helped us in 2004 and are helping us this year. But I would also challenge you and others to listen to Regan Democrats. They voted against us in 1980 and 1984 but they helped us in 1992 and 1996. I also think they will help us in 2008. The problem with many on DU is that they see politics as always black and white. I see politics as fluid and constantly changing. The coalitions that you construct today may be enemies tomorrow and then coalitions again next week.

When I mentioned your message not being listened to what I meant was that some on DU are not practical enough to view politics the way I do. They see that you were a Nader voter and then tune you out. That is not the way to win elections.

BEAT ou!!!! BEAT ou!!!!! BEAT ou!!!! BEAT ou!!!! BEAT ou!!!!!

LOL! Good luck with that next Saturday. :D

We view politics from different points of view, neither of which is absolutely true in the political arena. Where you see fluid alliances, I see commitments. Maybe that's just another way of stating the fundamental stress in the party for the last thirty or so years.

When the Horns play ou, all else in the world comes to a halt. There is simply nothing as important as beating ou.

Actually, you have probably stated the one absolute truth of politics: nothing is absolutely true in the political arena. :) The thing that I like about our party is that there are lots of different views.

BEAT ou!!!!! BEATou!!!!! BEATou!!!! BEAT ou!!!!! BEAT ou!!!!!

Uly: nearly 28,000 posts, been here since 2001. Well established lefty, not shy or apologetic about it, has been consistent for 7 years.

rvablue: been here since 2008, er, NOW, with 456 posts.

Some of us here at DU still have an issues-driven agenda.

I'm casting a lesser of two evils vote for the Democratic centrist in a few weeks, but that doesn't mean I think electing a centrist is going to put the nation where I'd like to see her.

We've got a lot of work to do to move an Obama administration to the left, and that's what will get my time and energy.

I think those who fear 3rd party voters ought to be courting them, rather than attacking them, myself.

While I voted for Gore in 2000, I've never needed to blame Nader voters. Florida, election fraud, and the supreme court selection were the real culprits, not citizens exercising their right to vote.

Welcome to DU. What do you "come here" for? Issues, or the presidential election? While they are certainly related, they're not the same thing.

Win. Then make it mean something.

to all views. But there are probably just as many Obama supporters who are centrist. If Obama governs from the left, then he will run into the problems President Clinton had in 1993 and 1994.

I don't think he ever intended to do so.

And I'm not asking for Obama to morph into a socialist or piss on our dear party centrists. Not forgetting progressives entirely would be a nice start. We have some pretty good ideas.

you are being pretty reasonable. Democrat Presidents have been successful at taking something from all points of view in our party. The master at this was FDR.

BEAT ou!!! BEAT ou!!!! BEAT ou!!!!

:shrug: