The Lincoln victory in Arkansas is a victory for obama as well.

Congratulations. A win is a win.

And no I still don't like Obama but a win is a win.

How this is a win for Obama is curious.

Obama is for voter disenfranchisement? I think not.

and proof that DLC Democrats are as crooked as the Republicans.

Still -- Licncoln is Obamas girl.

Her win is his win.

that's a well known fact and Obama only endorsed her because he had to

I would never have known so obvious a thing.

and I don't know why you would come to such a silly conclusion as a Lincoln victory is an Obama victory if you knew that fact. If Lincoln wins in November, which is very unlikely to happen, that can be called an Obama victory.

Yes, Obama has been consistent in supporting incumbents.

"In the 1918 midterm elections, for example, President Woodrow Wilson framed Democratic primaries as a referendum on the merits of his progressive domestic and pro-war agendas. He targeted conservative Southern senators, such as Mississippi’s James Vardaman, who had opposed intervention in World War I, and Georgia’s Thomas Hardwick, whom the president called a “constant and active opponent of my administration.”

Wilson successfully vanquished Vardaman and Hardwick in the primaries. His efforts remain “the only successful party purge by a 20th-century president,” according to historian John Milton Cooper Jr.

Wilson still managed to lose control of Congress in that November’s general election. Turning the midterms into a yes-or-no vote on Wilson’s vision backfired — and his administration never fully recovered.

The biggest political debacle in modern times was when President Franklin D. Roosevelt intervened in a series of 1938 midterm primaries.

FDR considered the 1938 primaries an “act of vengeance against Democrats who had betrayed him” during his 1937 court-packing fight, as Jeff Shesol, author of the new book “Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. the Supreme Court,” said in a recent conversation."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37012.html#ixzz0qKBr8Hqi

Still, that move was a major disaster for him. I don't recall any other President daring to try his luck at that again! I recall VP Agnew blasting a very "liberal" NY Republican, but I don't think that really counts.

I'm referring to arch-conservative Democrats ("Blue Dogs"?). Here's from Wiki:

Determined to overcome the opposition of conservative Democrats in Congress (mostly from the South), Roosevelt involved himself in the 1938 Democratic primaries, actively campaigning for challengers who were more supportive of New Deal reform. His targets denounced Roosevelt for trying to take over the Democratic party and used the argument that they were independent to win reelection. Roosevelt failed badly, managing to defeat only one target, a conservative Democrat from New York City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt#Second_term.2C_1937.E2.80.931941

Compared to Obama, FDR held a lot more high cards in his hand. I too would have liked for Obama to have been a lot more kick-ass, but that's how he presented himself in the campaign, and that's what I (a 'lapsed anarchist"!) voted for two years ago. My confidence in his judgment & timing is still largely intact.

:rofl:

only way a Democrat to win in Arkansas is with a moderate who isn't going to vote with the left's base on 1/2 the issues.