Did the left have the same disdain toward Jimmy Carter as they do for Obama?

I don't remember, I was alive but was 8 and scared because my father said RayGun was dangerous and hated blacks.

Thx in advance for your input

P.S. K, I took the word "far" out of the post title....

n/t

RIP Teddy. Carter would be considered the far left by most of the party today.

Hey I don't know, I was a kid!

Alas

Obama "centrism" of today.

Count me "Far Left."

And that's where McCain's "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" ditty began --

wasn't it --

Very average people were just gun-ho for bombing Iran!! Just Nuts!!

And because Carter wouldn't do it -- they hated him!



Imagine there were a few other reasons behind the RW interest in invading Iran

other than the hostages!!

and they never didn't reconsile for quite some time after the 1980 race.

...and got RayGun?!

I'm doubling my support of Obama now

They really are our equivalent of the Tea Party, in that they would rather let the world burn than not have things 100% their way.

Something just aint right

By "cheated," I refer to their treasonous dealings with the Ayatollah Khomeini's regime: The October Surprise

Otherwise, it would have been a Carter victory.

Oh, that's right. To many modern Democrats, that is far left.

I am old enough to remember whan that was not an extinct species. And I voted for him in 1980. I figured the Raygun would win the election and that Carter would win my state, so I felt free to vote my conscience. Turns out I was right.

It was my very first election to vote, and it was for the "I" not the "D"!

No, I suspect no one rationally expected things 100% their way.

But we're more than a little disappointed with things 2% of our way. Greedy bastards, aren't we?

...let the crazies in while working on congress as an alternative to having an asshole like Perry running things

n/t

I understand that the Republicans will drive us over the cliff slightly faster than the current Democrats. Still doesn't make me excited about the cliff.

"Some people prefer imaginary ideological purity over ever actually accomplishing anything..."

In other words, some people vote with the courage of their convictions while others vote based on political expediency. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

and had horrid relations with Congress (despite it being his party). He got a lot done but probably would have gotten more had he been more open to them.

...massaged every message he gave the dumb ass'd conservatives.

I would've doubled my support of Carter knowing RayGun was coming...

and most dems came home to Carter in 80 but there was some reason for the primary in 80. Kennedy was, rather uncharacteristicly, a poor campaigner who had little to no vision or he might have won that primary.

so that obama becomes indistinguishable from ray-gun

The very idea that we hold people responsible for the politicians they vote AGAINST, but NOT for the ones they vote FOR...

...indicates how irredeemably STUPID our political system has gotten, mostly due to BIPARTISAN finagling by both parties to hold their duopoly.


Excuse me, but haven't you folks ever heard of reductio ad absurdum?

But there was a very powerful RW push for Obama to attack Iran --

And many Americans -- even some liberals -- seemed to have gotten pulled

up in that issue -- lots of signs in my town for "bombing Iran" -- !!


Overall the Carter administration is still a mystery in many ways -- from

who and what Carter really was -- to what the hell was really going on?


One of the primary players in the October Surprise was Gates --

And that bit of Treason was of course the final undoing of Carter --

Hostages can become a very emotional issue -- that's why the RW pushed it --

btw, every night on Ted Koppel's NIGHTLINE, expressly created for that purpose!!

he did a lot of it (banking, energy, airlines, trucking) and his biggest legislative victory was the Superfund. He really did very little in signed legislation. He was no chickenhawk warmonger of course. A good man all around but Obama's progressive cred is 50x more impressive.

I among them. How did that work out for us? It gave us the Republicans we know today. I don't like watching history repeat itself. The war in Viet Nam wouldn't have lasted any longer under Johnson than it did with Nixon and the war on poverty would have continued. The war against the environment wouldn't be what it is today. There are many ways we would have been better off. I heard it about Al Gore. Both parties are the same---doesn't mater which one you vote for. As one whose been around since Roosevelt I can tell you it makes a big difference.

was either nearly as productive or very slightly more productive than Obama's two years were. I saw the stats somewhere and will try to find it again, but it was actually quite shocking just how much Carter really got done.

still - nothing much of progressive consequence passed. Especially in 1977-78.

Obama's first two years are a New Deal compared to Carter's.

for benefit of the wealthy -- !!

Per Wm. Greider's report on this in his 1992 book "Who Will Tell the People?" --

This is well before Reagan -- !!

with Carter. I was one of those somewhat discontented with him in those days.

The difference is that Carter campaigned as very-slightly-left-of-center (back when the term "center" meant something) and his Repub opponent, Gerry Ford, was just right-of-center, not off in the "here there be dragons" territory. Carter did not campaign promising transformation. Carter focused on honesty and a pull-back from the imperial presidency of Nixon. That much he delivered and many of his problems were not of his own making. Though his inexplicable decision to let that hated crawling shit the Shah into the US for medical treatment made the hostage seizure a lead-pipe certainty, and it was that more than anything else that doomed him to be a one-term president.

Obama on the other hand campaigned implicitly and explicitly as a transformative agent and time and again stressed progressive (or at least very progressive sounding) principles in his biggest speeches. His utter cave on all economic issues and most foreign policy issues is inexplicable in any terms other than that he simply doesn't find those policies objectionable.

Obama gulled us. Carter did not.

...congress.

Jimmy Carter did NOT have a crazy congress!!!

It's like baggers got into congress and everyone on the left ignored them

...the ones who seem to hate him aren't in the middle no doubt or left leaning...am I wrong?

You would do well to remember that "hate" isn't just a game and there are a lot of people who really do hate Obama and want him dead, and none of them are part of what you foolishly refer to as "the far left."

You've forgotten or maybe never knew the real enemies. Lucky you.

...who want to throw the baby out with the bath water and let the crazies in at the same time are to the point of sounding irrational to me especially when there's a congress we can gather to push Obama towards policies that are more progressive.

Hate in this case is the irrational response of 'screw Obama' vs get the congress...

...shut down a Freeper on RayGun, spending and WWII...shut the thread down fast cause they couldn't deal with the facts...

They never cared much for him in the first place because he was from Georgia.. It was a raw wound.. And the saddest thing I have ever seen is Jimmy Carter trying to shake Teddy's hand at the convention.

Both good men.. but once people get into their corners it is hell to pull them out.

Edit.. I am talking about the supporters

that the Democratically held Congress hated him. I did not hear the grumbling from the people I was around. In fact our Democratic Rep had to explain to the Demo club why the Congress was so hard on Carter. Carter was elected as anti-Washington is what he said and he did not get much cooperation from the Dems in Congress for that. Also - I believe the part that was not stated is that he was an outsider. The establishment wanted one of their own which is why Kennedy jumped in. That was the death knell for Carter - he looked weak.

The media also attacked and ridiculed Carter constantly.

it was very much T. Kennedy.. and people were just mad as hell. He was definitely an outsider.. when you look back at it, you can see all the things that were going on. But that is the value of hind sight.. No one thought for a second..not a second that Reagan was going to get elected. They were in this little cocoon of delusion..that no one in their right mind would vote for a 2nd rate actor .. and just blew it off basically.

I heard the same meme then that I have heard from time to time .. let the republicans have it and the "real" Democrats will get back in power.

People were still mad about Johnson.. and forgot what a warrior Kennedy was..

It was a peculiar time..

...they sacrafised him.


Hmmm, history is repeating itself but not with the congress this time...

Both ran to the left of President Carter. Carter's approval ratings were 28%. President Carter was viewed by many as an ineffective President. The economy was in shambles and the failure to rescue the hostages was a disaster for his Presidency.

Of course there was no internet, cable was in its infancy (the 1984 Cable Act created cable TV as we know it, freeing it from a lot of restrictions), and no place to tap into politics 24/7, so it is difficult to compare then to now. I was in my late 20's and got my news from TV, Newspapers, and radio, and lived under the poverty line as Petty Officer in the U.S. Navy who worked a second job at McDonalds when I was not deployed. I voted for Ted Kennedy in the primary and President Carter in the General.

He was depressing as a leader.

And on another note. Following is a quote from Carter in a 2010 interview:

"And I think another lesson I learned is, I should have paid more attention to the organization of the Democratic Party. I was not only the leader of our nation, but I was also the leader of the Democratic Party. And I think I failed in that respect to keep the party united."

Obama are you listening?

My father loved Ted Kennedy, and even supported Reagan until PATCO.

going full tilt ever since.. (Reagan)

that hid his extremist views. Tip O'Neil called him Hoover with a smile.

My father loved cowboys and westerns, and Reagan fit the mold. Also, my father hated Southerners. As an African American male that was to be expected.

My father turned on Reagan when he fired PATCO, and I marched with him with the unions protesting that firing. It was one of the biggest marches on Washington.

serious...

...the high 70s and 80s with liberal democracts

and this is part of the problem. Most Americans, it's not you, it is the country, cannot use terms correctly... because we really do not know what terms mean.

For the record, the US does not have an organized far left... for that matter, it does not have an organized left either. It hasn't for over forty years as a matter of fact.

If you chose to use the term those who are not happy with DC policies, you'd have a point. Alas this is not just "left."

I would also love to hear what you think a liberal democrat is... because the definition has shifted... and it is not what it meant fifty years ago, let alone one hundred and fifty years ago.

1. Obama has poll numbers in the gazillions from democrats, so he doesn't need the left.
2. If the left stays home, its their fault Obama didn't win.

Aporia?

DU sure has changed. :eyes:

...RayGun was more sane than Perry or Bachman

He is not weak. He is not overwhelmed. He is not a liberal being blocked by a recalcitrant Congress.

He is a Third Way Democrat, pushing for what he believes in: policy goals for the economy and the wars that are essentially the same as those of the Republicans.

It is important to name the real problem here, so that the infiltration of the Democratic Party by the Third Way can be addressed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1660734&mesg_id=1661130

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1540315

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1757952

...to go against Obama and let the crazies further in cause Obama isn't a way I want him.

Do I think an overly progressive congress push Obama left? YES

...and no meaningful retort.

Come on, let us reason together.

There Is NO "Far Left" at DU.


Unrec.


Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
The "FireBaggers" WILL!!

You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is either an example of the widespread lack of knowledge about what constitutes "the left" or something else.

Are you on probation?

....towards Obama does akin back to the days were a crazy ass was voted into office because "not good enough" was taking the seat.

Reagan's much-talked-about landslide was the work of Reagan Democrats. Those people are not today's liberals-- they're today's "moderates".

http://www.openleft.com/diary/3263/

This is just one example. Obama mentions Reagan several times in his books, too.

...I don't see a quote on it either.

I don't dislike Obama to the point of making things up about him.

Your entire premise is that people like me - people you refer to as "the far left" - are the enemies of Obama and you're trying to prevent Reagan from being elected or something. So I'm pointing out that Obama, in fact, is far more of an admirer of Reagan than I or anybody on the left will ever be.

Maybe "the far left" isn't really the problem.

Your entire premise is that people like me - people you refer to as "the far left" - are the enemies of Obama and you're trying to prevent Reagan from being elected or something. So I'm pointing out that Obama, in fact, is far more of an admirer of Reagan than I or anybody on the left will ever be.

Maybe "the far left" isn't really the problem.

...Rush says. The LIV republicans seem crazy to the point of ignoring reality...


When one says moderte I can't imagine them talking about GOPers say it has to be dems no?

Again, the people who were called Reagan Democrats are today's Democratic "moderates", ie conservative Democrats.

...conservative democrats or those who'll admit it.

Conservatism has gone the way of the crazy, not too many people willing to admit they're anything like them

...effects then you're damn right then.

I'm not reality adverse, I do see a crazy congress and they're assholes...

...want but because it's foolish to repeat the bad parts of history

Not liberals-- not the people you're trying to blame. Reagan won the support of the people who are today called "moderate Democrats".

You answered so quickly you clearly did not read the links I provided. If you are honestly interested in what is happening here, I suggest you read them. He is *not* a liberal. If you hold traditional liberal Democratic values like protecting the social safety net, progressive taxation, and restraint in war, he is NOT going to stand for what you believe in.

He will defend the military industrial complex, and he will cut Social Security and Medicare benefits. That is why Leon Panetta has already come out publicly to pit these things against each other, and that is why we have a Super Congress meeting later this year.

He is pushing to do these things, because his brand of Third Way Democrat is backed by the very same banking and corporate interests that have controlled the Republican party for years.

People need to wake up and pay attention what he is actually doing and fighting for. He is not a traditional Democrat.

...would any democrat want to vote for a union busting asshole like raygun?

Thx

And you're doing this while defending a Democratic president who proudly cites Reagan as a personal hero/great influence? Sorry, but I think you understand the Reagan Democrat mindset more than I do.

...saying RayGun was his hero?

...and the (literally) flaming fiasco of the Desert One rescue mission.

But no! Carter lost because of Ted Kennedy. :crazy:

just a kid. My father, a die-hard Dem, liked him but thought he was weak. He would never have criticized any President in public, though...Dem or Republican. He thought of it as anti-American and disrespectful. He would discuss policy, but no name-calling, etc.

You lose all credibility. No need to read any further then that.

...or the middle left to me.

and no, I don't mean British Petroleum.

I only carried my SDS card through 1974 however, and then the drugs kicked in. So when I say I don't recall, I'm hopin' you believe me. ;)

but hey! presto, I'm now supposed to believe that I'm a member of the "far left", a demographic which I've been told is irrelevant to Obama's re-election. Surprisingly, this supposedly insignificant fringe is being relentlessly lectured about how they should have the President's back. So, I'm not just on the "far left", I'm on the "far left Moebius strip"--a place where my support doesn't matter, yet I must give it to the Party's nominal leader. :crazy:

on a few noisy inconsequential web sites as widespread disdain for a President or even thoughtful discourse on an issue. A visit to any of these websites, either left or right, reveals the same talking points repeated over and over hundreds of times. If it's posted to Kos, RawStory or Huffpo it ends up on all the rest. If it's posted on Redstate, Malkin or Newsbusters it spreads to the rest.

300 + million people in the country are just not that influenced by a couple of thousand self aggrandizing, self appointed, trying to out outrage each other, keyboard commandos.

Disdain for Carter? His popularity diminished because of the conditions in the country at the time, whether he had anything to do with them or not. He fell from favor and was voted out in the only poll that matters.

But this line was pure poetry:

300 + million people in the country are just not that influenced by a couple of thousand self aggrandizing, self appointed, trying to out outrage each other, keyboard commandos.

My only quibble is that the numbers are probably no where near "a couple of thousand." More like a couple of incredibly, painfully loud hundred who realize their numbers in real life are miniscule so they're trying to make up for that by screaming the loudest (and often the most ignorantly) on the Internet.

Unrec.

ability to converse. The fact is our president was given a huge majority, more than could be expected, and only got through part of what the majority of voters wanted. He faced horrible obstacles W gave him, and his desire to try and be bipartisan hurt him. He's trying, but he needs those who strongly support him to admit there's been horrible gaffes but that he's the best chance we have at saving this country based on the political climate with him being the sitting office holder. A 3rd party candidacy will just harm his re-election chances, as I don't see a 1% chance of him losing a primary race. So, Dems can be ticked off at him and show it, but it's safe to say they'll mostly vote for him over a loon like Romney/Perry. Let people vent about him, times are tough. It's not that nasty on DU, it's anger over policy choices, and people have the right to be very frustrated.


http://www.cafepress.com/barackobama12

...the opposition abuses policy rules like the GOP has.

My issue with the "far left" is they continually ignore this and heap blame open Obama as if the US congress is full of the saner sorts of this country.

The GOOP tried, and were successful, in making a joke of his presidency. I always thought of him as a good and decent man. The hostage crisis, promoted by Reagen, was the cause of his loss for re-election.

he is to Carter.

Yes, judging from his policies-- not rhetoric and campaign promises but policy-- Obama is closer to Reagan than he is to Carter.

Yeah, people left and right chuckled at some of his foibles and missteps, like the rabbit attack.

But moderate and left Dems did not have the EARNED disdain that has developed toward Obama.

Firebaggers arise!

...about...why would anyone who can see the crazies in congress want to act like they don't exist if not for hatred of Obama or even Carter back in the day?

...with little choice than a person who is a willing participant.

I don't dislike the guy like that...

maybe middle school would be a better place than the oval office

wheres the leadership!!!!

Thx

you make your case to the public first

obama capitulated to tea party before they were sworn in

obama must have some degenerative disease. his spine keeps getting weaker and weaker

He's NOT asking them to cover his back while he takes on the Tea Party, and he never has. He asks Wall Street to cover his back while he takes on progressives and makes backroom deals with the Tea Party.

If Obama has taken on the military-industrial complex to the point where they form a special lobbying group to fight against him, like they did with Carter, I'd love to hear about it, and I'd love to support Obama in dismantling the thing, starting with "secret government". But from every indication since he's been elected, he's on their side.

"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; Moderation in principle is always a vice." Thomas Paine

...in is what doesn't make any sense.

I'm not hearing lets get a more progressive congress I'm hearing down with Obama...

The focus of the disdain is gob smacking...

Seeing our party act just like the other one does not inspire very much.

...seeing the alternative.

I judged things by that a lot back then. Now I am a recovering Southern Baptist, and I don't judge stuff that way.

Back then we did not have the internet, and we were never really that aware of just how badly we were being screwed.

The only issue I have with him is during the Mariel boat lift and he allowed all the criminals into the country that Castro released from his prisons. I lived in Miami at that time and after that our crime rate shot up.

You know, real Democratic principles...

:eyes:

with the exception of the Superfund of 1980.

and we drove half an hour on mountain roads at night to do it.

it would have been hard for either side to have the over the top response of real disdain or enthusiastic support, as we learned in 1980.

Most would have loved to see Ted Kennedy run but he was blocked by

Chappaquiddick scandal -- which looks more and more like a frame up by the

Nixon adminsitration --

John Dean makes an odd comment on one of the White House tapes about it --

guess I have to go find it --



Carter is still a puzzle not complete -- was he just an idiot o a stoodge --

the Mr. Nice Guy confuses the issue -- but when you look at all Brzezinski and

Gates did hard to think Carter knew nothing about it?

Kennedy ran against him. He gave a valiant challenge, was close to winning, and lost. As a result, Carter looked much weaker than he couldn've and the Democratic base was not united behind him. So that's what we got. I'm seeing a possible repeat next year unless people wake up and finally realize what we're up against.

Being liberal and racist are not mutually exclusive...although I do think a fair amount of posters on this board are trolls who are conservative racists being paid by the Koch bros...but it is possible to be leftist and bigoted.
We blacks always have to be twice as good as whites to prove that we deserve a goddamned job.
And Obama IS by far the most progressive president we have had since LBJ!!!!
OBAMA 2012!!!!

by leaps and bounds than any repug in the past fifty years. But he was not ruthless, and in the terms of the presidency, he was not what we needed at the time. But even then, the assholes on the right had plotted viciously, and stole the 1980 election.

The Iran hostage situation was a major undoing of Carter. But the right had done some secret negotiating (either that, or the Iranians who were in charge of the hostages were repugs themselves) and the plan was to release the hostages when Raygun was inaugurated. That's partially what happened. But like Obama, the repugs worked diligently to make sure Carter was a one term president, even to the cost of American citizens.

Not even this much.
Not even in the same ball park.
Not even in the same league.

"Reagan Democrats."
Raygun was a smooth communicator, honed by years in Hollywood. He controlled the message and the media. And he painted the recession on Carter. Carter was on defense the whole time.

Mondale was just a throw-away candidate. I voted in that election. It's like we just gave up.