The New York Times delivered an iceberg size wake up call to Mr. Obama and the President’s stunningly inept re-election team. The most recent Times/CBS poll shows Mr. Romney slightly ahead of Mr. Obama nationally, 47 to 46 percent. Those results are worse than the same poll found weeks ago, before the campaign team began hammering on Mitt Romney’s business dealings, his tax avoidance and lack of character.
What the poll is telling us is not just that Mr. Obama is losing, but the American people are coming to the conclusion he does not deserve reelection, regardless of the deeply flawed character of his opponent. It suggests the election is a referendum on Mr. Obama’s stewardship of the economy, no matter how much the re-election team wants to frame it as a choice between their guy and his obviously unworthy opponent. This is what accountability looks like.
Perhaps more telling to the incumbent and his policies, the poll found respondents believe by a 49% to 41% margin that Mr. Romney would do a better job in managing the economy. You would be hard pressed to find any responsible economists not working for Team GOP who actually believe, or could credibly explain how, Mr. Romney’s policies would improve matters. Those policies would do little more than shift more wealth towards the top, hold the middle class stagnant or worse, harm the poor, and dramatically cut public services to the detriment of everyone but the wealthiest Americans. So when a poll tells you Americans think Mr. Obama would do worse in managing the economy, it may seem illogical, but it’s a huge thumbs down on what they expect from an Obama second term.
I’ve always thought Mr. Obama’s team thinks he won in 2008 because of their brilliance and not because the country was overwhelmingly ready to dump George Bush and his legacy and wanted to feel good while doing it with their guy. So how to explain this to the all the Presidents’ men?
First, your guy is a fine campaigner, who in ordinary times would be a shoo-in against the other side’s truly offensive caricature. But these are extraordinarily bad times, with millions of people suffering and more millions losing hope. They simply don’t understand why they’re not being helped when they know both parties leaped to bail out the scoundrels that caused the housing bubble, tanked the financial system and are still looting consumers with little accountability. If your guy isn’t doing — and seen every day to be doing — everything he can to tell the American people how to right the economic ship, there’s no reason for voters to give him another term.
Second, the advantage of an incumbent President is not to be a campaigner but to be President. Anyone can campaign. Any decent campaigner can poke fun at his inept rival. But while it’s fair game for the campaign to go after Mitt’s character, his taxes, his business looting history, etc, the voters expect the President first to lead and run the country. They expect a leader who has a plan that makes sense and that the American people understand. And if that plan isn’t being implemented or passed because it’s obstructed by the most irresponsible and destructive GOP-led Congress in our lifetimes, then the President has to say that flat out and take that case to the people.
And it’s not just “Congress” that has to be held accountable; it’s a specific part of Congress. It’s the opposition party plus everyone in your party (and in your own White House and Treasury etc) who have contributed to the false frames that make their obstructionism possible.
A responsible media, along with voters, should demand this President put the nation’s problems and solutions out front. I don’t know whether doing that will save this President, but it will still be good for the country. There are lots of things that need to be said, and the public may only be able to absorb a few, given the blizzard of distortions and lies bombarding us. But here’s a possible list of things just on the economy that any President should be telling the American people now. Aside from possibly helping the campaign, they have the added advantage of being true and getting our discourse focused on what matters: [cont'd]
- The nation’s economy needs a major boost. The US economy has stalled, and there’s little hope we’ll see much if any improvement in employment this year. We gave it a half-size boost in 2009, and that helped for a while, but as some warned back then — and I should have listened — that wasn’t enough. My mistake. But the solution isn’t to do less, repeating the same mistake. We’re going to have to do more, and we need to do it now, not next year (and we shouldn’t be waiting for Europe’s problems to make it worse here, as they easily could).
- The states need help, and only the federal government can help them. The radical spending cuts states have been imposing on public services, laying off hundreds of thousands of teachers, police/firemen and other public services are a major drag on the economy. Drastically cutting public services may help balance state budgets, but it makes the overall economy worse. It reduces economic growth and increases unemployment, not just for the teachers and firemen directly laid off but also for those whose local businesses shrink when thousands of workers lose their jobs. We need to reverse that destructive drag on the economy, and only the federal government can do that. Not using federal government resources to help states in need is not just dumb economics; it’s unpatriotic. That’s one reason why we have a federal government.
- This is the best time in a century to rebuild the country; it’s financially irresponsible and unfair to our workers not to seize this opportunity. We have trillions of dollars in needed infrastructure repairs, replacement and ungrading that are going neglected. That’s hurting the economy now and it will hurt us in the future. We’re cheating our own kids and their future by not making these investments now. Yet we’ve never had lower costs for paying to get this work done, and we have millions of able-bodied Americans willing to do the work. It’s crazy not to do this. Let’s put Americans back to work doing the jobs Americans needs to have done.
- The Republican Party has become the enemy of everyone who needs a job but can’t get one, and that’s hurting business. The Republican Party has been taken over by extremists with radical, unAmerican views. They’ve blocked every effort in Congress to boost the economy and create jobs. (latest example) And while making the economy worse and preventing millions from getting jobs, the Republican Party and their corporate allies have worked to strip away the safety net programs we have had since FDR to help those who are down mainly because the economy is down. No decent country behaves this way. No moral or religious people can defend this. No decent citizen should tolerate these cruel policies. We need to get rid of this destructive element in this Congress and send a clear message that such views have no place in American politics.
- We have to fix the stupid deficit deal we passed in 2011. Back in 2011, the Republican Party was holding the national debt extension and a government shutdown hostage to force agreement to radically and irresponsibly slash government spending, regardless of its effect on the economy and vital public services. It was a shameful business, and I regret going along with it. Now even the Republicans regret half of that deal, and the American people would soon regret the other half; the whole deal was a mistake. It’s obvious to everyone, including independent observers, that imposing draconion automatic budget cuts would do serious damage to the economy. As defense contractors keep reminding us, if you cut government defense spending, you cause unemployment to rise. That argument applies to any government spending during a down economy, as state budget cuts have shown. We need to repeal that stupid legislation and start over on a long-run budget deal that addresses the real needs of the country. But this time we should do this without the blackmail and without the nonsensical claims that America faces some catastrophic debt crisis. We do not. We are a wealthy country behaving as though we’re impoverished with no options. That’s crazy. I was wrong to accept the debt framing, and I intend to call out the scaremongers on all sides that have been misleading the country.
- We’re going to have to rein in our largest banks, because too many in that industry have been looting the country. I inherited an economy that was sinking into depression and a financial sector that was collapsing, threating the entire economy. We had to do something, but I made a mistake in believing that we could rescue the essential parts of the banking industry without dramatically changing the incentives that drive that industry to undermine the economy and cheat the public. We’re going to have to do more to rein in this industry, like changing executive pay and incentives and restricting the casino mentality that still drives the largest banks. We’re going to have to fully fund the regulatory staffs and those at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau who’s job it is to police the fraudulent policies still prevalent in this industry. By the way, the Republicans in Congress, and too many in my own party, have become dependent on industry donations. They want to weaken regulations and let the financial industry loot the country at will. That’s another reason why America can’t afford to let those elements control Congress.
- I’m going to have to clean my own house, because not all my advisers are on board with what needs to be done. I intend to bring in new people who fully understand what needs to be done to get the economy moving and put people back to work. We need people in regulatory positions who fully understand the threat the financial and mega corporate sectors still pose to the stability and fairness of the American economy. And by the way, we’re going to have to reform the Federal Reserve, because it’s not doing its job at any level. More to come . . .
And that’s just on the economy.
To be sure, the President already proposed (last Fall) a Jobs Act, aid to states to rehire public teachers, firemen etc, a bit more stimulus, some more tax breaks for those patriotic job-creating small businesses and so on. I read dday every day. But that’s not what Mr. Obama is running on. Instead, he’s running against Mitt Romney’s character, and he’s left doing his job and solving the country’s problems out of the campaign. So the message to American voters is that Mitt Romney would be awful, but Mr. Obama is not telling the country how he’s going to address the nation’s problems. And that deficient message is losing.




130 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Last time I called the WH, back in 2009, the intern answering the comments line laughed at me.
I think they all are laughing at us. Their concerns are not about us. In fact, the situation of how the Trans Pacific Partnership(TPP) is being done in closed door atmosphere tells me everything I need to know about our elected officials.
On C Span, one Senator, not realizing his mic was on, told another: “I feel we must do anything we can to keep China happy with us. The USA trade deficit needs to be chipped away, in any way it can be chipped away.”
I interpret that remark, combined with the notion of the TPP, to mean that we lower middle-incomed people might soon possess the “glorious opportunity” to work off our debts in a Chinese-controlled warehouse, coming to our neighborhoods soon.
No one has been home at the White House since Barack Obama was elected president. He’s been out campaigning every since he was elected, I think he just likes flying around on Air Force 1.
Thank you, Scarecrow, for telling it like it is.
I doubt that President Obama will hear you … as HE’S busy, just now, looking for all those people who lost their homes to criminal fraud perpetrated by his best friends and advisers, that he might enlist their help to re-elect him, which is, apparently, his ONLY concern …
The people of this nation need to engage in a conversation about what we must do … to survive … as the “traditional” political class, which includes the media, has demonstrated, again and again, that THEY are not interested in that conversation, so, Scarecrow, we shall have to have that conversation without them … or we can all just sit back, and hope … that our “betters” will, finally give a damn. “I read the news today … oh boy …”
I wonder how much longer it will take for the people to realize that our “seats” will become sore and fall off, long before our “betters” even begin to give a damn about anything but themselves, their precious money, their perverted power, and their damned bull-shit “election”?
DW
Unfortunately, we know what Obama’s economic plan will consist of (assuming he’s reelected): offshoring more jobs with the TPP and establishing a national version of the “Georgia Works” indentured servitude program. If we’re looking for a solution, we shouldn’t look to a corporate-owned politician who’s going to let us down every time–who has PROVEN that he will let us down every time, with a smug grin and a wink. Appealing to Barack Obama is an exercise in futility.
Honestly, what do people have to lose by voting third party? I ask that question often, but haven’t yet received a valid response. (“But…but…Republicans!” doesn’t cut the mustard.)
He can’t and won’t back up from his agenda and I doubt that if he had the audacity to spew forth a 99-percenter agenda that anyone would believe he was serious about it. If hevwins it will only be because of minorities and gays. A strong base, but very tenuous to his political survival if he can’t beat his way out the paper bag he lowered onto his head 4 years ago.
Outstanding. Thanks.
Congress may have their problems, but let’s take a look at something else.
It was reported by Politico that WH Jobs Council had not met for 6 months. When asked about this by a reporter, Jay Carney, WH horn, said, Obama couldn’t do it because he has “a lot on his plate.”
Doesn’t have an hour or two for his own Jobs Council.
But, he did have an entire day to fly out to George Clooney’s place for a big high class fundraiser. And, was able to spend some quality time there.
He did have some hours to fly to NY to spend a few hours with Ann Wintour and Sara Jessica Parker at another high roller fundraiser.
“A lot on his plate?”
If you ever wanted to get a gauge of the priority put on jobs, that sums it up rather well.
When the guy at the top has this attitude, what do you expect of the people below?
Good one Scarecrow. The President has to get out in front of this. He has to fully differentiate himself,from the idiot class that is intent on destroying the country. Bipartisanship is bullshit when they are looking to destroy you.
Actually it is on Obama as he over-promised on the weak stimulus, which was called out at the time on FDL amongst other places. It is also on Obama for then thinking the most important thing for the country was paying back the healthcare corporate lobbyists by nationalizing Romneycare, which Obama at the time called said Obamacare was his jobs plan. It’s on Obama for all his lies and him seeking to reward his corporate healthcare friends rather than aiding 99%ers. Obama and the Democrats have controlled Congress for the majority of time that Obama has been in office and he’s been leading them to the corporate fatcats.
The jobs council never produced much worth considering, because of its membership. No one should want to empower that group unless it were reconstituted.
“He has to fully differentiate himself,from the idiot class that is intent on destroying the country”
Yeah, instead Obama is part of the smart class that is intent on destroying the country.
I will be voting 3rd party, because there is almost nothing left to lose. Romney’s Supreme Court nominees might be worse, but maybe the Dems in the Senate will find some gonads, or maybe they will be VERY SIMILAR to Elena Kagan, so who cares? Romney will keep warmongering, but so will Obama. Obama has already gone insane on the security state and upped the ante on violations of the Constitution and civil liberties. Transparency? Don’t make me laugh. Prosecuting whistleblowers? Please. Programs for the poor? Obama can barely mention the middle class more than once every 6 months.
He’s doing exactly what he believes in and wants to do, and nothing will be changing if he is re-elected. Maybe something will change in the Dems or a third party will rise if Romney hands him his ass.
Obama’s presidency has largely been a continuation of the Bush policies. In fact with regard to civil liberties, he’s gone even futher stripping away the priciples of the Magna Carta, prosecuting whistle blowers, escalating the war on terror, giving the banksters legal immunity, giving us a health care bill designed by the Heritage foundation in response to Hillary care, failure to stem the foreclosures,not having a plan to put Americans back to work, signing a two year extention of the Bush tax cuts etc.etc. His reversal of campaign promises and sucking up to the financial elite has virtually opened the door for a Romney presidency.
Someone already answered that thing about the jobs council. As I recall the question was what would meeting do when the Rs will not pass,anything. But i agree,that,presents an opportunity. He could use it to throw some real shit their way. I heard him today and he may be starting to lay it in their laps. All the things Scarecrow said above should be in play. If,he can’t make the connection, he will lose. Actually, if he took them on maybe they both would scrap this bs deficit cutting nonsense.
I am not ready to buy into that ” intent on destroying the country.”
This is how it looks: when the auto makers were in trouble, Washington saved them. When the banks were in trouble, Washington saved them. When Wall Street was in trouble, Washington saved them.
The people are in trouble and who cares?
They controlled congress for two years and a lot of that was with the help of Blue Dogs and people like Bayh, Lamdriu , Bachus and Lieberman. Try to pass something that goes through the finance committee when Bachus doesn’t like it. It won’t even come out of committee.
Last time I called the WH, back in 2009, the intern answering the comments line laughed at me.
I intend to have the last laugh in November, when I vote for a third party. Obama finds himself in a Hell of his own making.
If he wants to win, he may have to start over again and hope people look past his obvious reversals.
Maybe something will change in the Dems or a third party will rise if Romney hands him his ass.
The chance of the Dems changing are about the same as those of the Cubs winning the 2012 World Series. Which leaves a third party as the only remaining option.
He is in a hell largely of his own doing. But do you really want to lose all your benefits?
In fairness, President Obama did have a lot on his plate at Clooney’s fundraiser. Wolfgang Puck cooked it, and it was yummy — but TOP SECRET!
http://www.tmz.com/2012/05/08/wolfgang-puck-food-george-clooney-barack-obama-fundraiser/
“Our sources say Wolfgang and company have signed a confidentiality agreement and have been told in no uncertain terms to treat the event as top secret.
“We’re told there will be a special menu — not the standard Wolfgang catering — and, as one source put it, “The food is going to be a lot better than the Oscars” — Wolfgang caters the Governor’s Ball that follows the academy awards.”
A third party is not going to happen. Shit I don’t think Jill Stein has enough money to make it to the election.
Personally my reason for not supporting Obama is because he’s been even more abuses and nasty as far as my civil liberties go than even W. Bush was. And Bush was *very* nasty.
Think it’s not a big deal? Well, I voted straight Democratic tickets from 2004 until 2008. And I sat home in 2010. At least if Romney were president the phony liberals, hypocrites that they are, will line up to condemn him whenever *he* urinates on the Constitution like it’s a piece of garbage.
Good luck with that.
You can still get good odds on betting websites that Romney will win the election. It was surprising to me when I looked it up today, but Obama is actually the favorite (at this time) on those sites.
Matthew 7:15-16
Obama has done what he intended to do. What he says is irrelevant. People know what’s happening in their lives. They don’t have time or resources to closely parse the origins and actors and inside baseball scenarios. He seems to them likable enough, but that’s not enough for their circumstances. They need a president who makes a beneficial difference to them and Obama hasn’t done.
I’m not sure that the poll you cite actually supports your analysis. It is after all just one poll subject to the usual sampling error. But your analysis is exactly on target. Obama cannot coast to victory in November. And he must do more than campaign speeches; after all, he is the President–unless he is going to try to make people think Romney is the incumbent.
And even if he squeaks it out at the end after procrastinating until October (remember Kerry’s disastrous vacation?), the down-ticket races will suffer greatly. And that could do greater harm than a Romney presidency by entrenching more Republicans legislatures and governors.
Too close to call. They are both assholes, maybe one more or less. You pick ‘em.
I’d love to see the Cubs win the WS. Good for baseball.
But do you really want to lose all your benefits?
You mean if Romney wins, he might put cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid on the table? Or refuse to prosecute the banksters and ignore the foreclosure crisis? How dare he steal ideas from Barack Obama!
or
some of us are saying, even though the mutt torturer will not “manage” the economy better then obama, the dems will fight corporate agenda more aggressively then they will under the zero so less damage will be done
That is one distinctly lousy outcome. Imagine a republican government the day after. Say goodbye to SSMM and whatever is left of civil society. So we need Obama to give it a go even if he loses. We can’t afford another disaster like last,election.
BUWAHAHAH
A third party is not about winning, bluedot, that being quite unrealistic … it is about expanding the conversation that the legacy parties (all “one” of “them” ) and the media, which is now a part of the political class, DO NOT want the people to engage.
Until the people can perceive that there ARE other options, sane, rational, and human options, and far better possibilities … then the people will remain in powerless disarray and continue to be victimized by “divide … and conquer”.
DW
His cuts from one Paul Ryan cut those programs to nearly nothing. Want a voucher for Medicare? Want to give SS to Wall Street ? Want another Scalia on the supreme court? Want unemployment t go up?
me likey that one
barack is the trojan sheep in benedict clothing with antithesis in prophetization!
Funny, as this campaign rolled along, I found myself pulled into the personality cult of O. I really had to make myself stop. It was like a crack addiction. I wanted so badly to believe. And I am one cynical human. That and the notion of a crazy ass Mormon in the White House drives me around the bend. If I step back and try to be dispassionate, I know I will vote dem or only vote down ticket dem. As the election nears, I will make up my mind. Beware the smile and wink of O. It is a distraction. He is like the boyfriend who will promise to respect you (and millions of others) in the morning.
That kind of,thing should have started years ago at,the local level.
we already have a third party, the t (for turd) party, we also have a 4th party (independent, once liberal now corporate)
we now need a 5th party
‘Democrats have controlled Congress for the majority of time that Obama has been in office’
Try reading.
The republicans won the house in 2010, and the senate was lost when Teddy Kennedy and Bobby Byrd died, less than 6 months into the term. The bluedogs have voted with the republicans in both houses.
The republicans have filibustered everything since then.
That said, the president squandered a lot, and in my estimation threw gas on the fire for the dems to lose the house.
I am furious at Obama. But I cannot give up to the Kocks and Rommey to run this world.
by his actions we can see the kochsuckers have their man in office already, everything else is kabuki
Sounds like Romney to me. Maybe one of the Pauls
I believe that, too. It is so hard to trust and vote for someone who gives definition to the term dick-i-tude.
Yes, but we are here now, and ‘understanding’ is much further along.
Consider the last presidential election and compare it to this one.
MANY more people are speaking against “more of the same”.
This is not an overnight affair … and it will be, a very close thing, the wresting of power and control from the PATHOLOGY.
Bluntly, it will demand of us, blood, sweat, and tears …
I have been watching “the conversation” for almost fifty years.
And we are making progress, the only way possible, one step, one mind at a time.
There is no other way.
DW
Obama could still save himself if he had the spine for it. He could take on the big banks, fire Geithner, stop punishing people for using MJ, etc. There are so many things he could do without the consent of Congress but I doubt that he’s that smart.
or
he could make believe that’s what he’s going to do and then pull one of his famous;
“errr,,,nevermind”
off to bed, c all on another thread
I think he would have to actually have to do those things because so many of us just don’t believe any more.
It isn’t in his nature to change. Plus, it is clear he made promises to the MOTU early on and is intent on keeping them. In other words, he is an asshole.
.
.
Is that a drone I hear over my house?
Obysmal’s failure to really sit down and concentrate on the economy, jobs, foreclosures, etc., for an extended period of time and enunciate the fact that he’s serious about this stuff and truly understands that ordinary people are suffering wholesale, is a tragic indictment of his complete lack of empathy.
“No drama Obama” is a soulless, uncomprehending technocrat, caring only for self-aggrandizement.
Excellent, Scarecrow.
I do believe that Obama is succumbing to his own toxic prescription: “Look forward.” He’s so accustomed to dispensing that old let-bygones-be-bygones opiate as a remedy for all of our epoch’s biggest crimes that he honestly believes it shouldn’t matter what HE has done…or hasn’t done. Only his promises of a better future should matter, and only a churlish peon would bring up the nasty subject of accountability.
A humiliating defeat in November couldn’t happen to a nicer asshole. But I never underestimate an incumbent president — or the perfidy at every layer of money that controls our elections.
As I am sitting here I hear Obama saying some things that scarecrow suggested while attacking Romney. Needs to keep it up.
Registered and voted as a Democrat my entire life, but have now unregistered. I keep waiting for the Democrats to start “wooing” me as an unaffiliated voter. Instead, I keep getting fundraising crap from them. They are fortunate that I have quit sending it back duck-taped to a brick.
Actually, it msy come to him one day that is the only way to pull this out.
The ‘bots will find every excuse and lie to maintain more of, this. Let’s see if their sales pitch resonates with the public. We know how well the Bain distraction is working!
The triumph of pusillanimous fabulism.
DW
By the way scarecrow, virtually everything you listed was true 3.5 years ago when bo was sworn in.
Those weren’t his priorities and they still aren’t. He’s just gotten get to enough weak-minded voters, win the election, and get back to golfing and date nights around the world with the wife.
“Obama could still save himself if he had the spine for it. He could take on the big banks, fire Geithner, stop punishing people for using MJ, etc. There are so many things he could do without the consent of Congress but I doubt that he’s that smart.”
I don’t doubt that he lied about all of this. And anyone who is still calling him an expert on the Constitution needs psychiatric care. Also, he is every bit as willing to destroy SSMM as Romney. He keeps offering it up, but the Republicans are too stoopid to say “yes.”
What a great phrase!
Well, I keep a direct line open.
I love the proactive diary. But, see, TBogg is absolutely sure Obama will win, because his psychic friend Nate Silver said so. So there’s no question of Obama doing anything on your wish list.
“…the american people are coming to the conclusion he does not deserve re-election…”
That can certainly change, but as of now, that’s pretty much the bottom line for this election.
And, I don’t think there IS a lot he can do without the consent of congress, etc.
Sure you are not writing his stuff now? It may be too late or no one will believe him anyway.
He could back off of the weed issue for one. O will probably lose Colorado due to his idiot/cruel plan to bust the dispensaries.
All of this reminds me that Laura Clawson at DKos writes Republicans block Bring Jobs Home Act, protecting companies that outsource jobs while Obama negotiates the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Talk about cognitive dissonance. Campaign mode is insanity and cuts across nearly everyone’s best interests. The handful that benefit are predators.
The Black Agenda Report writes “This notion of elections=politics is pervasive across the American racial landscape.” Across America, period. Elections are not a cause, they’re a result.
Actually I suspect he is just rooting for him. I don’t think him or any of the folks there are declaring a victory. But they are pro Obama, which is ok.
At any rate, Obama’s attempt to market Obama is bound to be far more effective than the Cherry-Pick Mitt Romney Movement:
http://voicesonthesquare.com/features/2012/07/13/cherry-pick-mitt-romney-movement
http://my.firedoglake.com/cassiodorus/2012/07/17/the-cherry-pick-mitt-romney-movement-marches-onward/
I suggest you take your own advice. Obamacare wasn’t passed in 2009 – let alone in the first six months of 2009 – nor was it passed by a single Republican.
Glen Ford’s piece, ‘The Concept of “Black” Elections’, at “Black Agenda Reports”, is most excellent, liberalarts.
I wonder how many, here, have taken the time to read it?
Always appreciate your comments, btw.
DW
Lets see if this is right. T Bogg is pro Obama, you are anti Obama. Ok so far. I am anti republican of all stripes or most all. The last thing I want is to wake one Wednesday morning to find out this country is now run by those assholes and backed by the Koch brothers and headed to a 7 to 2 supreme court. I don’t think I am full throated Obama but …. But cherry pick you say? o shit yeah, if it helps.
With Bush we got about a third of a 1929 collapse. Clearly, it wasn’t enough. We need pretty close to the whole hog, for some FDR-style salvage to happen. I think we’ll get that faster with Romney, plus, it will be on the GOP’s bar tab.
If Obama gets in again, no big margins in congress; and no political clout in the form of expectations and support from the voters, for him to fight the good fight. He’s going to be hamstrung from the gitgo, basically, just like he is now. For progressives, this governmental drift to the right is the death of a thousand cuts. Another 4 years of it and the word “liberal” or “progressive” will be utterly and finally stricken from the political vocabulary of anyone running for preznint.
That’s a good point, Mary. Will he do it? Sure doesn’t look like it from here.
The problem is, we don’t know what the man really thinks. Except, that he’s a political coward of the first order.
He seems to have no convictions, except maybe, some that are “evolving” in direct proportion to how much shit he’s catching from other democrats…which is why sticking with him and ignoring what he’s done and not done, while endlessly pissing and moaning about Romney, etc., is playing right into the hands of the republicans.
As someone said: “The most risk-averse president since James Buchanan.”
In principle, third parties are indeed about winning. Eugene Debs was not about “expanding the conversation”. Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose party was definitely not about “expanding the conversation.” George W. Wallace’s Independent Party was not about “expanding the conversation”. Even the Tea Party was out to win and drill their institutions deep into state and county government. It was the Ralph Nader supporters who would vote for Ralph and never build an institutional party that started this “expanding the conversation” bullshit because it was “just too hard to get on the ballot in every state”.
You work to win, and someone tries to co-opt you, which expands the conversation. You work to expand the conversation, you are easily ignored and occasionally become a spoiler that sends the conversation in exactly the opposite direction. I am encouraged that Jill Stein and folks have been working hard to get on the ballot in every state. Now they have to work equally hard to win in all the states. And draft candidates for down-ticket offices now or for 2014 to deepen their territorial hold.
Third party candidates gain clout when they can win an entire state. For example, in spite of Nixon’s Southern Strategy, George Wallace won four states in 1968. Neither Eugene McCarthy in 1976, nor John Anderson in 1980, nor Ron Paul in 1988 expanded the conversation or altered the direction of policy.
My take is Obama will be delighted, privately, with a Republican majority. His MO is to take positions slightly to their left and force them to scramble ever further right–which is where he wants go and is pleased as all get out to let them lead. So he can pose as “the only adult in the room,” the Versailles Hall of Mirrors.
The final bill was passed by reconciliation on March 25, 2010 by a vote of 210 to 207 in the house and 56 to 43 in the senate. I think there was one republican there somewhere (maybe back at the end of 2009)
Nate Silver is not psychic, but his statistical model for analyzing polling results is the best out there. And he states up front the margin of error in the data.
The failure of his model is that it cannot include strong third party showing. If Jill Stein can get some state-by-state polling that registers the Green Party’s strength in this election, that information if significant would affect the outcome in ways that Silver’s model does not forecast.
Did you catch my actual argument? Or did you just create a straw man and slap my name on it?
Why is it that people imagine that running anti-Romney propaganda is going to sway anyone who might otherwise vote for Romney? From the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/us/politics/poll-shows-economic-fears-undercutting-obama-support.html?_r=2&hp
I can’t claim to have much of an attitude toward Obama himself, actually. He seems to me to be a creature of the system, and perhaps a particularly friendly one. See, I don’t see any reason to cherry-pick Barack Obama, much as I don’t see any reason to cherry-pick Mitt Romney.
What’s scary in this regard are Obama’s sycophantic supporters, who can’t seem to recognize that if they want to support Obama, then Obama has to be good enough to be worth supporting. They can’t seem to understand that cherry-picking Mitt Romney for the actual ills created by the wealthy neoliberal, capitalist elites in our too-late capitalist society is not going to substitute for having something worth supporting. Nor is the descent into election-year mudslinging going to make them credible.
I’m also beginning to recognize the descent into election-year rhetoric as a substitute for sanity. People say all sorts of crap so their candidate can get elected, and we’re supposed not only to believe it but we’re supposed to believe that this rhetoric is important? Forget it. It is all Kabuki theater from here to November. If you want to appear sane, talk real social solutions. Occupy had and has more credibility than OFA for this reason.
Once again, this “Obama is really a progressive” meme needs to be examined. How do you know he’s being hamstrung, and that the outcomes of his policy decisions aren’t really just the ones he wanted from the beginning? Oooh, the Republicans are against him. How do you know this isn’t just for show?
Do you have any insight to whether and who she has on her staff and what money she has? I see on her web site she is trying for matching funds and to get on the ballot in most states but not much else there. She has good ideas but this may just be an exercise in futility.
Very interesting. I liked it.
we know as a fact he is not progressive, we know as a fact he dealt away the public option before discussion even began, we know as a fact he dealt away drug competition and buying power behind our backs, we know as a fact he gave telecom immunity before he even found out what crimes were committed, who was robbed, who did the robbing, what national security was breached or the harm done
we know as a fact every single economic policy has been the failed top down or
trickle down” redistribution of middle class asset scheme
we know as a fact he is the wolf dressed as sheep
Third parties, do have a history, just as you relate, TD, but they also have affected policy by expanding the conversation … most third party efforts in this nation are quite forgotten, save those which, like the Bull Moose Party, “make it” into the history books as cautionary tales of foolish conceit, and narcissistic delusion …
Those third parties affiliated with labor or socialist endeavors to change the equation, which many did indeed do, are as lost to collective memory now as the importance of the Homestead Massacre is to the majority of those who live nearby to the place where it occurred.
Winning is not “taking it all”, as it is now, too often, perceived to be, rather it is, and must be, best understood as a means, necessary and inevitable, to changing the perception of the possible and the actual meaning of justice.
Consider the words, “bread, and roses too …”.
You and I know its meaning as well as when and where it was used. That most people who live in the USA do not, does not diminish its significance nor its living “application” to the plight which all of us, who are not part of the Pathology, collectively face, today.
Always a pleasure to encounter your analysis and astute grasp of essential strategy, TD.
DW
Hmm well I still got you firmly in the anti corner. But that’s ok. I mostly don’t care for the republicans and those people who say we’ve given all you people need to know and go off horsee dancing.
Eugene Debs, the labor movement and even communism were very powerful. Do you think JIll Stein falls in that category?
Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon, as well as other writers at BAR, are among some of the very best advocates for rational change and thoughtful perspective to be found these days … Richard Wolfe, whom Southern Dragon often links to is another. Chris Hedges is yet another.
There are many coherent voices today … and one hopes that there are more ears, every day, willing to hear, marymccurnin.
As well, it is, always, a pleasure (and a delight)to encounter you and your thoughts on these threads.
DW
I can agree here. I really doubt he is progressive. It would greatly surprise me given all that he has done, not done. He is conservative. Maybe I will convince myself he is just center right. But that is a relative term when you have people like Bachmann and the Kochs out there.
One hopes, bluedot, as we’ve need of such power and eloquence.
Stein’s acceptance speech was a very fine, if brief, outline of what really matters and what must be pursued.
Check out where her running mate, Cheri Honkala lives … and compare it to the Big Names … there is profound power, and honest eloquence in that “statement” of actual reality … as most of us know it.
DW
Yes, indeed, but is this just an exercise in futility like magical thinking?
Oh, I think some of it is for show, but you aren’t going to convince me that he came into office with a plan to become the poster boy for a failed president…and that’s what he is very much at risk of becoming.
Also, I didn’t say that the republicans did the hamstringing; he did it to himself, but I think it was more from cowardice and political stupidity, than from a full-on conspiracy.
Liberalarts is, I think, right. He will be quite comfortable with losing the Senate, too. To a lot of “stay the course” democrats it would absolve him of any responsibility for accomplishing anything in a possible second term.
But I doubt that he can win if the democrats lose the Senate. Those lost seats will probably be accompanied by the loss of several swing states, and if that happens I think Romney will probably win.
Eugene Debs only got 86,935 votes in 1900, and 913,664 million by the time he ran in 1920. In her nomination acceptance speech, Jill Stein said something kind of interesting,referencing the relationship of her campaign to Occupy, about social movements and political parties having parallel developments, and gave several examples like the anti-slavery movement and the Abolitionist party. I don’t know enough history to judge about that, but I think it’s an interesting idea.
ok. Does that mean Jill gets 87k this year? dont take this the wrong way. I listened to her recording and heard her on Jennifer Granholm. I liked her. I will watch her campaign but 87 thousand is not going to win anything this year.
Obama screwed the American people. Romney will rape them. So much for real choices. Sham “democracy.”
That sounds about right. But I think he was mostly stooopid as opposed to cowardly. (mixed in with his natural bent toward conservatism and bi partisanshop.)
I was just trying to find a point of comparison, with the modest vote for Debs, and the influence of the socialists and the labor movement on the events of the times. I’d be the last person qualified to imagine what kind of votes Stein can get, but she did get 30K signatures in IL to qualify for the ballot. Does that mean the Greens are building a ground game that can be leveraged for campaigning and get out the vote? We’ll have to keep watching.
Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Rham Emmanuel, Eric Holder, Harry Reid, Joe Lieberman, Nancy Pelosi. Nuff said.
Anti what?
No, I consider not.
“Magical thinking” is the “realm” of Obama and those who “believe” …
I suggest reality, the reality of the common human being is where hard realism lives.
That MUST be the foundation of building something, which if “informed” with the knowledge of the creation of actual wealth, which comes about ONLY through the transformation of “resources” into things of actual human value and use … may lead us to discover our own true power, it is “building” and growing”, it is the actual work of creating things and not of hatching clever schemes or of a cunning, calculated destruction, however “innovative” and “lucrative” those things may be propagandized as being.
It is the difference between becoming through effort and compassion, and simple self-serving parasitism dressed up in coat and tails as if noble and meaningful.
Let us imagine, and that is the necessary state of being required of us, that not all and everything is deceit and deception.
Else “they” have already “won”.
DW
I don’t. The Greens, for whom I have little regard, don’t inspire the fear, and loathing, Debs and the communists did, which both gave Debs and the communists power and enraged and threatened the incumbent powers. The threatened power response accounts for the brutality of incumbents’ responses to perceived threats. All of these confrontations are power contests.
Darcy Burner made an important point at the Netroots Nation shindig: people think politics is about policy. It’s not. It’s about power. We’d all do well to remember that because acknowledging the animating energy and consuming appeal of politics will make us much more careful about whom we vote for and how we regard office holders.
All good points.
Which is why expanding the conversation doesn’t do squat but threatening to take power gets a response of co-option or opposition.
Can I just point out that wanting everyone to love you is not bi-partisanship? Obama wants everyone to love him. I think he is a narcissist and feels he deserves that highest regard. It’s his life’s work.
Yep. And endurance is the key.
Aye, and it is the nature of “power” that our time is “about”, liberalarts.
Whether it will be “concentrated” to benefit the few, or “radiated” to liberate the … that all may find both meaning and purpose, that LIFE and not the sociopath’s pursuit of money might come to be seen as the most significant “possibility” afforded humanity on planet Earth.
It is that simple.
What matters most, money or life?
That is what we are called to decide.
How we choose to answer that question, in the collective, will determine our collective fate … will we thrive, or become extinct?
What other questions are more seminal and central to this moment?
This election really decides nothing.
Human beings must decide.
To be or not to be?
Period.
DW
Until there is sufficient understanding, any move will be too soon and defeated.
The conversation is fundamental, for without it, few will dare to join any move for substantive change.
Timing, is everything, as you know, TD, yet “preparation” requires a solid, deep and broad, understanding on the part of the people.
Otherwise it is merely another exercise in an “elitist” attempt tp dislodge one tyranny for another.
The people MUST understand “why”.
DW
If I may refer you, again: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/07/links-71912.html Walter Wit Man makes an extended argument that Hedges is a tool. Even if he doesn’t persuade you, I think you’ll find Walter’s argument thought provoking and some of his points on point. The remarks are kind of middle-ish in the Comments.
Off to look, liberalarts.
Thank you.
DW
The cognitive dissonance in this post is that it clings to the belief that Obama and the Democrats are somehow better than the Republicans and that they, and especially Obama, can be persuaded to adopt positions and policies that they have actively worked against for the last 3 1/2 years.
If this post had been addressed to Mitt Romney, everyone would think it was just silly. So how is it any less silly to direct it at Obama who effectively has governed to the right of George Bush, not just embracing Bush’s policies but expanding upon them?
While I know some here have already done this, my question is, and remains, when will this site abandon not just Obama, but the Democrats, all of them? What will it take, how long will it be, how many betrayals have to occur, before FDL is officially done with them? What credibility can this site (not the community) have that 3 1/2 years into Obama and 6 to 8 years with the Democrats it still maintains the fiction that some Democrats are better than others and that if only the right argument is used the Democrats will see and embrace the light? We are years beyond that point. Yet how can this site have any credibility continuing to act as if we are not?
I do not disagree with those criticisms and concerns, about Hedges, liberalarts, which are likely valid and significant … and note that among those in the “discussion” are some folks whose perspectives I came, some time ago, to respect and appreciate.
Again, I truly appreciate your comments, suggestions, and “hints”, as we separate the chaff from the substance …
DW
Because children rarely give up the belief in benevolent parents who would behave better if they only knew.
It is good to see you Hugh, and I note that many here, do not have the slightest clue as to the actual reason(s) that you no longer regale this site with your List.
DW
I read some Hedges awhile ago, but at my age, I’ve completely lost my tolerance for boredom and Chris is a stemwinder. So, I don’t have a position in the argument. I just thought it was interesting and might have some merit.
I don’t, DW. Tell.
Nay, lad, it is not my place … to do so.
You’ll have to search elsewhere.
And I take Hedges wi’ a grain of salty … for the perspective affect.
DW
Depends upon how you define “accomplishment.” Obama’s accomplishments in the name of the 1% are unparalleled. He’s preserved corporate plutocracy despite some pretty daunting challenges.
That’s one possibility. The other possibility is that Scarecrow, having laid out the conditions by which Obama can redeem his Presidency for progressives, can then later lay out how Obama really doesn’t care. He can then say in late October, “look, this is what Obama had to do to make something of himself, and he did none of that.”
I can’t stand Barry, but honestly the thought of Willard and Ann for the next 8 yrs. is too much to bear.
There are a lot of assumptions in your comment about what I believe, one of which is that when I post, I speak for FDL or it’s owner on political positions. I don’t and have never claimed to. My posts are my own views. Only Jane Hamsher can speak for her.
But to the substance, I’ve been writing critical pieces about Obama since early 2009, at least, and concerned comments before that when I was still at least hopeful the Bush era would end. I gave up that hope years ago. But I don’t have to justify my views to you. You can disagree or criticize me all you want.
As for differences between people and parties, I absolutely believe there are differences, and they matter, and it’s part of our job to sort that out, not just throw up our hands. I believe some are smarter than others, some better or less informed, some more or less honest or corrupt, some who are empathetic while others are indifferent to human suffering. To pretend people do not differ in these and countless other ways is to deny what our own senses and experiences prove to be true. And, moreover, when I read comments here, I also see wide range of views. We are not the same.
You may believe that in things that matter most to you, there are no meaningful differences between anyone in Congress. That’s a different standard, and as a rough guide it may sometimes be mostly true. I just don’t buy it’s true in all things.
A major reason why people have brains, and I do in fact have one, is to be able to discover and recognize such differences, and if possible, to promote some and discredit others. I believe that effort is worth making. Claiming it’s all pointless because every single person is the same seems foolish. Will I be wrong, deceived by some? Sure. So what. I’ll learn.
Finally, you wrongly assume that I believe I write something assuming the WH will read it and accept my views. Nope. If that were true, we would all have ponies. You are mistaken about who I’m writing for and why. I haven’t a clue what effect these posts have, but my guess is not much. But those of us who write here share the view, perhaps naive that by contributing to the discussion, we can collectively move it in a better direction. If we are wrong, then the entire premise of the first amendment, even democracy itself, is up for grabs. If that is where you are, with your constant everyone is the same, and nothing matters, then I have to wonder why you bother to show up. Yet you do,after all these years.
I’ve known and respected your intelligence for years, Hugh, And I acknowledged when you were right and I wrong. I’ve come to believe you don’t really mean all that your comments imply, and that you believe, deep down, that this matters. Your lists tell me that, but I could be wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time.
Nice riff on “If you can’t argue the facts, argue the law. If you can’t argue the law, pound the table.”
Activism without direction doesn’t mean squat. Republicans can be activist too. So what is your point?
The site can not pretend to be an opinion leader if it is and remains so far behind events.
Scarecrow, your post here is the most proactive thing I’ve read about the election so far. Unfortunately that’s not saying a whole lot.
I don’t know this story; please explain. (I’m a fan of Hugh’s List, btw, and quoting it may have helped gotten me banned from dailykos).
Nice deflection to cover the fact that what you do do, is criticize, and what you don’t do, is act.
So what is your point?
Just stop, now.
While I’ve never understood how a site that has been exemplary in analyzing and exposing ‘Veal Pen’ activities would do so little to make such knowledge widely known, the fact is that the FDL community shows little tendency to do so, either.
I’d love to know why this is so. I suspect it’s part of the wider malaise of progressives, who seem incapable of aggressive political organization and action that threatens the political careers of politicians who shaft them – even when they have a recent example of aggressiveness that yielded results, courtesy of the Tea Parties.
There was a diary about 3 weeks ago where reference was made to inferior American child rearing practices (compared to the French). The American citizenry’s failure to organize is baffling to me, but the incessant ranting does suggest that emotional maldevelopment may have something to do with it.
How do children get their way? They whine.
Anyway, as Rumsfeld never said, “You go to politics with the fellow citizens that you have, not the fellow citizens you would like to have.” In this election cycle, it’s too late to Dump Obama.
However, it’s not too late to drive the the public’s view of both the legacy D and R parties into the toilet. Obama vs. Romney is a blessing in this regard – hard to beat for “evil twinness”, IMO.
Well, more correctly, Obama vs. Romeny would be a blessing, if citizens actually exploited it’s hypocritical absurdities to drive home the point that both D and R parties need to be radically reformed, and/or abandoned, in favor of new parties.
Meanwhile, not that you seem to need it, but confirmation of the stupidity of lesser evilist voting has come by way of the accomplished political game theorist Bueno de Mesquita.
This site does harm precisely because it propagates the idea that there are real differences between the two parties. It rejects Republicans but can only be critical of some Democrats some of the time. Yet if we go to the substance, the only differences among the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration or a putative McCain or Romney Administration are atmospheric.
The Democrats showed that even when they had the Presidency and control of both Houses of Congress, they not only would not fight for progressive goals, they would actively fight against them.
In a politician’s whole political career, there are only a handful of votes that define who they really are. The healthcare was such a vote, and every pretend progressive in Congress, bar none, voted for the corporatist model of Obamacare, which was itself largely indistinguishable from Romneycare.
So where are these good Democrats? We all know the dodges of revolving heroes. So where are the good Democrats who have stood up against this most corporatist of neoliberal Presidents, and done so consistently, and not just for their predictable star turns as the hero du jour.
You are mired in the world of the two legacy parties. You can or will not look beyond them. And much the same can be said about FDL in general. If the site owner fills the site with Democratic voices that is a choice. If this site were truly progressive, then the decision about whether to support Democrats would not be the site owner’s alone. So it seems a bit strange that you would put off the responsibility for that decision on to the site owner but then give a pass to the decision to have posters solidly within the two party framework.
The question is and remains how long can you and this site stick with the Democrats or whatever subset of them on any given day in the face of their now years long record of failures and betrayals of you. Sticking with the Democrats must resemble an awful lot being caught inside the movie Groundhog Day. No matter how it plays out it always ends up the same way.
There are other options, but none as long as you stay with the Democrats.
Hugh, I would not be quite as all encompassing as you in this post, and Scarecrow should know we all love him for what he does, has done, and his sincerity is not to be questioned – but you are right on, and your ‘cut to the chase’ comment here is a breath of fresh air to those of us making our way through the turgid weeds of what passes for analysis – when there is nothing to analyze!
People, people, wake up and turn around – even you DW with your ‘third parties are not about winning’. They are, they are – and those poll numbers tell it if only you will read them. People are sick of do-nothing fat cat philosophy masquerading as government! They are sick of it! And they are gonna go out and invest in one or other of those third parties you all think so little of – they are going to do it! They are already surfing the web those so-called dummies and people with no place to go, and they are already finding the links that go to people who say things that connect with their miserable lives, with a future that isn’t more of the same!
Yes, used to be long, long ago that third parties come along and they put the ideas out there and the main parties latch onto them and on we go – progress. Third stayed third.
This is not that time.
It isn’t going to be believable for Obama or Romney to pick up on a real issue – because no main party, none of the two, has the people’s interests even halfway at heart – and the people know it! This is not your mother’s and father’s election – this is not your grandmother’s and grandfather’s election. These two clowns have no heart, absolutely no heart! They are not believable!
So, I’m with Hugh. The future will be ours, but watch out FDL, I think you are going to be left behind, and that would be such a pity – but we’ll remember your better days as we go where we are most needed. We know you mean well and work hard, and we thank you for this site, these conversations amongst ourselves.
Time’s getting short and there’s lots to do to save this country – neither of those two gyratingly putrid shmucks nor their hangers-on are going to do it! What’s more, we won’t believe them even if they say they are going to do it, not now, not ever – it is too late. The train has left the station; that dog won’t hunt; there’s a new day a-dawning.
Such energy is about to be unleashed this coming fall. It will be such a rejection of the status quo – it is going to blow your minds. This is the way to have an election. No campaign needed – we’ll carry them in on our shoulders if we have to, our Third Party Winners. Just you wait and see!
I know, the wise among you will always say: this is not about elections. But just maybe, this time it is.
If Obama wins, he’ll crawl out of office. If Romney wins, likewise. 2016 will be a watershed election. Altho the major parties may (just) survive to stagger on for a few more years, the decrepitude will be overwhelmingly obvious and even loyalists will be embarrassed to be seen with. By god, Peggy Noonan may turn into an equal opportunity scold.
You continue to assume that FDL is some monolith with one view. It is not. It’s a collection of writers with different views on these issues, and even I do not know where everyone stands. None of them speaks for anyone but themselves. The only position taken for the site, by Jane, is that FDL has not endorsed anyone in this election.
Your statement is incomplete because it is not historical. In the 2000 election, there was a clear difference between the positions of the two presidential candidates. Al Gore, whatever his defects, was NOT a carbon copy of Bush. (Bill Clinton was to the right of Gore but at that time his DNC views were still opposed by a major contingent of the Democrats, to which Gore partially belonged.) That is why I considered, and still believe, the aggressive campaigning of Ralph Nader in swing states such as Florida to have been insidious.
Since November 2000, a series of cataclysmic events have had the effect of wiping out most, or all, of the differences between the parties–the Y2K coup, 9/11, Citizens United, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, the bank bailouts, near-absolute mass media consolidation, etc. Now the best that can be said, as one commenter to a Charles Pierce column put it, is that the Democrats are the slower, not the lesser, of two evils.
In other words, we have witnessed a RECENT national historical disaster, where any type of a functioning party system, and functioning democracy, has largely ceased to exist.
Time is indeed short, juliania.
However, so long as the people are convinced that, as Glen Ford says, “politics” are about “elections” … then the real work of politics, the shared understanding of common plight and the considerations, intent, and energy to DO something to change what is clearly, obviously wrong, must move along at a snail’s pace, unless, pain and privation might goad it along a bit more quickly.
I was not engaged in hyperbole when I said that I have watched (and encouraged, I hope) the “conversation for almost fifty years, neither am I engaged in “inspirational” advice nor wishful thinking …
Until and unless the majority understand not only what is so very wrong with our political economy, not on an intellectual level, but on the hard ground of reality, then they will cling to what those who manipulate thinking AND emotion espouse …
Recently, I heard said that “there is no such thing as reason”, that none of us are capable of behaving always from any such “place”.
Yes, there is reason, even as history is not “dead” and we are not locked into the best and brightest, if brutally unfair, of all possible worlds, as Fukuyama, until he recently changed his mind, would have had it.
Indeed NONE of us are capable of acting always from positions of reason.
Yet we certainly may and must try.
We can also try to behave civilly and act with respect and tolerance toward each other.
Division and mistrust are what the legacy parties seek to enforce, as the “differences” between them amount, as the record clearly now shows, ONLY to degrees of destruction … and even that, the “relative amounts”, as spun by the power brokers, the would-be kingmakers, is designed to deceive.
“Politics” as practiced, in this society now, by the legacy crew, is all and simply about successfully “selling” the lies to a deliberately dumb-downed populace who are told such things as “Real Americans don’t care about candidates’ Afghanistan policy”.
Nonetheless, the “conversation” is gaining insight through the message contained in Southern Dragons daily words, “The truth will set you free but first it will piss you off.”
And the irrefutable truth, for me, that more people “get it” is simply that I am no longer quite so lonely, and often DON’T have to say anything, as several or even many will have already said it.
If you, or anyone else may have an idea of how a third party and its ideas may be heard sufficiently that they might have an actual chance of “winning”, when even a progressive site such as FDL is loath to “officially” cover or include them in the political calculus, then I am all ears and ready enthusiasm … IF the suggestions are reasonable, realistic, and not, themselves, further manipulation of emotion, sensibility, and hope.
DW