Obama alternatives

since alot of people here dont like Obama anymore becasue he didint do everything they wanted My question is ,Who else.

Who would you like to see in Obamas place,that could actually win the general election.
remember you need to win electoral votes.. a true far left candidate would have no chance.
so whats worse.. Obama where you get some of what you want or a GOP winner who not only gives you nothing you want but repeals some of what Obama accomplished.

Whats your choice.

:popcorn:

he barely got health care through and that was with a democratic congress.
what can he get through a GOP congress.

...why not Medicare for All? Let's see the bastards try to repeal that!

He should be hitting Republicans daily on their assaults on the American workers but instead he would rather pal around with Republicans and take their positions on most issues.

when you don't attach a capital "D" next to it. Just hold press conferences once a week explaining the war the elites have raised on the poorer classes...He obviously doesn't feel that way. Basically, if he repeated Bernie Sanders-esque speeches once a week, he would be immensely popular.

is that they would have to be pretty progressive, and I don't think American is going to elect someone that far to the left, mostly because of Faux news. The best we can hope for is someone slight to the left and Obama is still my choice personally.

Shit, as long as a Democratic President is going to be called a socialist, we might as well put a REAL socialist in the WH.

But, in keeping with your desire for playing it safe, let's put Feingold or Dean on the ballot.

Sure, that's totally going to happen.

If that's the case, why not go ahead and give them a real socialist?

The nation would be better for it.

going to vote for a real socialist? OK.

they label socialist, but not another? Or they'll vote for neither, in which case, we haven't lost their votes by putting forth the real thing, have we?

The people who voted for Obama knew that was hysterical right wing spew.

Might as well put someone on the ballot someone worth voting for.

majority of Americans supported a real health care bill that at least included a PO.

A vast majority of Americans opposed Bailouts for failed, corrupt Wall St. Banks.

A vast majority of people do NOT want any cuts in benefits or SS.

A vast majority of Americans wanted the Bush tax cuts to go.

A majority of Americans no longer support our wasteful, criminal foreign adventures.

Iow, when people are polled on the issues, they are pretty liberal across party lines.

The excuse for a HC bill never got a single Republican vote so that wiped away the claim that 'consessions' had to be made for the purpose of 'getting the votes'.

Despite the people's opinions on all of the above issues, the people were IGNORED.

In fact when Congress actually did listen to the people on the Bailouts and voted against them, the same administration that we are told 'cannot get the votes' refused to accept Congress' decision and forced another vote, after members of Congress were threatened by Paulson et al.

And that was another vote that got no Republican votes.

If a real progressive candidate who supported what the people support were to run for office, and we had fair elections, that person would win.

But the system we live under will not allow such a person to even get close to being elected.

To win the presidency now in this country a candidate must show how willing they are to protect the interests of the ruling class.

And it is because of THAT, NOT because a progressive candidate can't win, that we will not get what the majority of americans want, until we start fighting for it.

Greatest number of electoral votes either of them would get would be about 12.

Obama swept into the Oval Office on a great tsunami of "hope and change" that meant whatever each voting block wanted it to. He mastered the packaging.

The day the Democratic Party stops dismissing it's best and gets behind them with the same energy and intensity they do the destructive neoliberals they've been promoting for the last couple of decades, we'll see a decent nominee, a decent president, and some good things happen for the people in this country.

We weren't sure what we were getting with Obama. There was a little history. With Feingold or Dean we would know exactly who we were electing and what they stood for in terms of character and politics. They each have solid character and real Democratic politics. I could get solidly behind either one of them and I don't think there would be any disappointments like the ones we've had with Obama.

Do you have a crystal ball? I believe a lot of people said that about Barack Obama winning the nomination and the presidency.

We supported Eugene McCarthy with great vigor. And Dukakis. And Carter. And Mondale. And Clinton. And Obama.

Some won, and some didn't. It is absolutely amazing to me that a large fraction of self-proclaimed progressives at DU suddenly have decided that Clinton was a sell out and Obama should run as a Republican. All I can say is that those making those claims have very little in common with me.

:shrug:

That's indisputable.

and I also don't claim to have much in common with you.

I'm over here on the left. From my perspective, a neoliberal Democrat is worse, in some ways, than a psycho republican. At least when the R is in office the Ds PRETEND some opposition to bad policy.

Without any opposition, even token opposition, neoliberal policy rides a wave forward much faster, and much more comprehensively, than it did when the Ds mounted even weak opposition.

it would be a GOP landslide. Feingold couldnt even win in wisconsin,how do you think he would do on a national scale..

personally I would like to keep the GOP out of the oval office,not hand it to them on a silver platter

And I don't give a damn how that is achieved.

and thanks to him we now have two or three new Republican Senators.

isn't hiding out with the 14 or walking the picket lines in Wisconsin doesn't mean he doesn't stand with labor.

And don't give me the "WELL HE SAID THIS YOU SEE FOUR YEARS AGO". First, it was four years ago, and second--he's the President and can't abandon his job with the world going to hell in a handbasket.

Obama is a neoliberal and is no friend to labor.

I've known that since before he decided to run for president.

His meet up with Jeb Bush to push education deforms while real Democrats are walking picket lines underscores that point.

I'm entirely dissatisfied with Republican Lite.
If he rolls for big business we already have a Republican regardless of his party membership.
I'll never cast a Fascist vote nor will I stay home on election day.
But we've been too long without actual Democratic behavior in the White House.
And its clear we'll get none from Obama.

Let's see. Carter was challenged by Kennedy in the priamry. He won the nomination and lost in November to Ronald Reagan.

In 1968 Lyndon Johnson was challenged by Eugne McCarthy. Johnson withdrew from the race. Nixon elected that year.

1992 George Bush I challegned by Pat Buchannan. You know the rest.

Recent history has shown incombants challenged don't get re-elected.

I disagree Obama's Republican lite but it sounds like you'd rather have a full fledged Republican in the White House.

After 8 years of GW I say no thanks.

"we already have a Republican regardless of his party membership."

No not really.

remember you need to win electoral votes.. a true far left candidate would have no chance.

I disagree with that. We haven't had a "true far left candidate" since FDR, and he won four times. If the candidate can put together a coherent message that resonates with people, he'll win.

I haven't seen any

russ feingold.. about as progressive a candidate you will find,couldnt even keep his own seat.. How would a true left candidate win in the electoral college????
The only way a true left candidate wins is if the GOP is stupid enough to nominate palin or bachman.. and they arent that dumb..

25% when Roosevelt was elected.If we were to ever see 25% unemployment again, I'd be afraid in this climate we wouldn't veer to the left.

if it were measured by the same standards and definitions in Roosevelt's day. For one thing, back then they counted *all* the people out of work as unemployed, not only the ones who hadn't yet given up looking for work. Big. Fucking. Difference.

was 'far left'.

we need to restock the farm team so we can have a viable candidate in 2016 or 2020. That said, the solution is to look down ticket and start cutting some of this illiberal deadwood down. Want a diverse vibrant Democratic Party? It's time to start pushing non-centrists at the bottom and middle. No more GOP defectors in key races either. Centrists where we must, no centrists allowed where we can go big lib.

Wither the monolith. Let the sunshine in.

true left. red state legislatures have gone completely off the deep end (I'm in AZ, I think I can speak with some authority on this!)

...because he didn't do ANYTHING I wanted...

end the wars...

healthcare for all...

end Bush tax cuts....

procecute war criminals....



Right now, Dennis Kucinich looks like the best candidate.

Because he did so well in 2008, right?

...what's the point of electing a fake Republican?

a difference between democrats and republicans, regardless of what some on DU choose to believe.

troops by demanding draconian cuts to every social program the US has ever had when they're not calling for cutting whole government programs completely.They want abortion made illegal,they want to invade Iran,they want religious organizations to take over the work of government programs,they want gays to disappear from public life,they want a right wing activist Supreme Court,they want an end to all collective bargaining, they want zero corporate legislation,they want Planned Parenthood to be declared a terrorist organization,I could go on,but if you truly can't see a difference between the two, I doubt it's worth my time.To even suggest the democrats and republicans have the same ideology when it comes to government is silly beyond reason.Asinine.

with any of that shit. This place goes further down the rabbit hole every day.

Great video here compiling Kucinich's responses in a 2008 debate: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x560200

He totally kicks a**; and if more people saw him like this in the light of events SINCE 2008, I believe they'd vote for him.

... which Dem and which Repub you are talking about.

But he didn't compromise his principles.
:sarcasm:

and lose 49 states..
how could Obama get healthcare for all. or get rid of the bush tax cuts.. he cant just do it on his own.. he barely got watered down health care through the congress how could he hope to get apublic option through..

the far left needs to deal with the reality that we are not a far left nation.. If anything we are center-right.. Thats a reality the far left needs to accept..
wishing it wasnt true doesnt change things..
a far left candidate wouldnt win..

You dont sound like you're from around these parts.

Your saying tht the Democratic party should abandon its roots and become a right wing party?

Good luck with that.

and i would rather have a dem who is liberal 50% of teh time than a repuke who is lib 0% of the time

Um, hate to inform you but the core beliefs of Democrats do not drift with the prevailing winds.

People who advocate for their own beliefs to flip polar opposite never believed in anything to begin with.

Do tell us which republican policies should the Democrats start running with, given all of the success the Bush administration had with it all.

between right wing and not far left.. some people call anyone night as far left as them right wingers. and its bullshit.


nominating someone like a feingold or a kucinich is a far left move. the country is not that far to the left for them to be elected.
clinton was a centrist democrat. but still a dem.. and his views are more in line with the rest of the country.

Liberalism is just to the left of center on the US political scale. 'Far left' as you call it is communism and anarchism. You are saying Kucinich is a communist or an anarchist?

You make absolutely no sense whatsoever. If you remove the left from the Democratic party there is nothing left. Sounds like you are in the wrong party buddy.

He'd get demolished if he was the national nominee.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

:rofl:

Is that we vote to elect people, the gopers vote to for policy. Look what happened after 2008, we voted in record numbers for a mandate and what we got was the individuals we voted for. Now, after 2010, the R's have the right wing ideology that they voted for. Meanwhile, they were able to control the message from Jan 21, 2009 to Nov 11, 2010. Why can't we maintain control of the message?

and you will NEVER get a logical or feasible answer.

The folks endlessly complaining about the President are not your "get out and do it" kind of folks. They have no alternatives except some apparently mystical third party that will solve all of the world's problems but never, EVER has to deal with things like Republicans, Blue Dogs, an American electorate that significantly self-identifies as conservative etc. This "super party/super politician" will swoop in and save the day, but only after the current Democratic party has been completely destroyed and the earth salted in its wake (or so the legend goes).

Tolkien couldn't have come up with some better shit after not sleeping for a week and eating nothing but magic mushrooms.

:yourock:

and they both won.

and didn't fight

not much of a role model

Kerry authorized Bush's illegal, immoral, unjustified war. Not much there either.

I think either of them would not make the same mistakes twice, and they both would still make great leaders. I have great respect for Al Gore in particular. Whether they would be willing to go through a presidential campaign again is a different question. It isn't much fun.

:hide:

Al Gore or John Kerry would have been. But don't let that stop your speculation.

Speculation using facts or past performance is one thing; fantasy is another.

and Al Gore was VP for 8 years- they do have public records which can be compared to Obamas on some level.

the other side that we have a centrist and not a radical leftist. With Obama we get the far leftist baggage and none of the benefits.

Maybe too many people wanted to see that in him.

You're using Fox News to bolster your argument?

If we are going to put forth centrist policies, why not do so with the centrist image that someone like Evan Bayh has. Obama doesn't do a good job of projecting centristness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47MKGOPP4Zo&feature=relmfu

Maybe his 2012 campaign slogan should be "I was wrong".

Four recommends when I clicked on it. There's now only one.

Fair enough if they disagree but they should stop posting because it puts the topic to the top of the page.

Even if it takes a few cycles for the pressure to be responded to with action.

Yeah, it sucks that he kisses up to the GOP so much

Yeah, it sucks that they don't give him any breaks because of that

Yeah, it sucks that he can't even get his most modest reforms passed by this wall of lunatics (that is the house)

But your alternative under the 'R' banner undoubtedly will be worse

And yeah, it sucks that although the 3rd party choice might appeal to us, its a surefire way of getting the 'R' guy elected.

A tremendously-accomplashed moderate, from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

Like the ones he ran on in '08? "Hope and Change- We Mean It This Time." Great slogan.

good stuff.

and stirs up a hornet's nest that gets enough stirring WITHOUT this question.

the replacement of some of these fake ass Democrats who do their damndest to fight against everything the Dems want and who are really working for their rich corporate buddies and not for the people.

Why did we have to fight so hard to get ANY healthcare bill because many were telling the TEABAGGERS no to worry that they were not going to help the President in any way.

Stands for a lot of the stuff we lefties want.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:eyes:

primary because I do not see any contenders out there who are convinced they can win in the general. We have a lot of good progressives who would make great leaders but I do not see them winning. Obama still has high favorability and as long as that lasts he will be our candidate. What I want to see in 2012 is a real push to get more progressives into congress. That will mean identifying states where a progressive can be expected to win if given half a chance. I hate to say it but once again I will bite the bullet and vote for our side even though I do not have a lot of faith that Obama is still on our side. Having said that - if he is reelected he is free to push the programs we want because he will not face another election. 2nd term presidents have often done those things they could not do in the 1st because they would never get reelected.

At the moment the rethugs are digging themselves into a bunch of different holes that they will have to explain to the people of the US. If we can just keep this is the minds of voters we can win with Obama. As I see it our real problems are the money business is going to through to the rethugs and not making it clear to the people just what kind of mess we are in. This is not just a little recession that is going to go away as soon as the people regain their confidence. This is a fight for our lives and sooner or later if Obama really wants to win he is going to have to start telling us the truth. And yes, we may very well panic if he does but it is the only way.

have a drink

sometimes they let us play with them for awhile ...

No he hasn't turned DC upside down but we all got to see that Wall Street can hold DC hostage even AFTER they get bailed out by DC.

I like Matt Damon and respect his opinion but he is smart enough to know that Obama had to right the ship, bail out the Water, and get it back on path. HOW he did that- yes I have some problems with that but for the most part he has done well.

I think that people here on DU are falling for the rightwing media spin. This is understandable because that is pretty much the only media you can find. IT ISN'T WORKING YET when actually it is but just what 6 years ago when the Iraq adventure publicly went tits-up we were drown with SETTLE DOWN! THIS WILL TAKE SOME TIME. Am I the only one who sees that the egg timer suddenly got moved up to RIGHT NOW!!! ?

The media didn't extend tax cuts for the wealthy. The media didn't tell us to ignore prosecuting torture, that it was time to "move forward". The media isn't trying to push charter schools.

Now all we get is corperate democrats. No progressives any more.

They are doing it to Obama, and also doing it when it comes to other Democrats that are disliked here.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Anyone who really sees the Obama problem at that level isn't going to figure out

much else!!

We need to DRAFT Sen. Bernie Sanders -- and we need a very strong anti-war candidate

for VP -- someone like Tom Hayden, perhaps?

Anyone who can run on a Dem ticket --

We also need to STOP permitting Koch Bros/DLC candidates to self-select and deny who

they really are --

do you think a sanders/hayden candidacy would win???
realistically?

i doubt more than a 2 or 3

:rofl:

I'd rather have an honest enemy in a republican than a false friend in a neoliberal democrat who pretends to be on our side. All the neoliberals do is shift the party further and further to the Right and I'm sick to damn death of it.

Your opinion is right in your OP: "a true far left candidate would have no chance"

I think this Wisconsin thing has all the corporate shills, Dem and Repub, a little nervous. And it's starting to show through. We won't submit to the corporate masters forever.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I sincerely doubt it will or can be Obama, so it will be someone else. I couldn't care less at this point.

On principal alone Obama must face opposition.
He is an employee and must face the consequences of his employers. If citizens lives no better... People have the right to make another choice. At this point, I'd give Hillary a shot.

exactly the reason why the democratic party shoots itself in the foot.

It's views and repressions explores here are what Republicans thrive on.

I am trying to figure out whether this is a ploy or a deliberate action by
few.

Chris Larson, Dave Hansen, Fred Risser, Jim Holperin, Joe Erpenbach, Julie Lassa, Kathleen Vinehout, Lena Taylor, Mark Miller, missing senators, Robert Jaunch, Robert Wirch, Scott Walker, Spencer Coggs, Tim Carpenter, Timothy Cullen,

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

nt