One of the most appealing things about being a liberal is that, in general, one is allowed to think for oneself. Unfortunately, such flexibility ends up being not so wonderful when it comes to electoral politics in our warped, money-driven system. Actual liberals, who could be counted on two hands in the congress, are always in danger of being swamped under a tsunami of money (see Grayson, Alan), and “centrist” Democrats (see Obama, Barack) tend to offer little or no reason for anyone to vote for them.
Just the fact that the 2012 elections are going to be close is a depressing illustration of this. Though Mitt Romney is a colorless plutocrat disliked by nearly everyone, including Republicans, and offers nothing but a more extreme version of the program of the Worst President in American History, he still might plausibly win. Though his party is busily driving away women, public servants, gays, environmentalists, civil libertarians, blacks, Latinos, the poor, the middle class, union members, etc., Obama and the Democrats have done little or nothing to woo these groups, and certainly isn’t promising them much of anything in a second term.
Although Dick Cheney just told a Wyoming audience that Obama has been an “unmitigated disaster” for America, and he would know about those, it seems obvious that his spanking new heart wasn’t in it. If Obama actually had been a disaster for everything Cheney holds dear, he would win in a walk. Obama is vulnerable precisely because Dick Cheney is still running around loose, looting people for their organs, rather than siting in a jail cell.
The fact is that the hypothetical and imaginary Obama Republicans are feverishly running against would have been a much more successful President. Every time Obama “defends” himself by helpfully pointing out that he has, say, increased gun rights, lowered taxes, cut government spending or what have you, another liberal decides not to bother voting.
Republicans, on the other hand, suffer no such malaise among their base, despite the unpopularity and proven failure of their agenda. Their voters are committed (or, ought to be), to their warped ideas, which if anything have gotten even crazier since 2008. Worse, Obama has legitimized many of their nonsensical notions while discrediting liberal ones, most notably involving the economy, not just by failing to offer any real alternatives, but by failing to even make the case for them.
The economy remains stalled because Obama adopted the demented mantra that attacking the deficit would somehow help boost job growth. His signature accomplishment, Obamacare, is unpopular and may be struck down because it wasn’t a “government takeover.” Deficits remain high because Obama repeatedly wimped out on the Bush tax cuts. Mistrust in government remains high because Obama failed to prosecute the banksters. The list of unforced errors, all involving capitulating to Republicans, that led to his current predicament is as lengthy as it infuriating.
Conservatives, as a rule, are gullible nitwits who will happily make voting decisions against all available evidence; liberals, not so much. As proud members of the reality-based community, we tend to vote based on, well, what actually happened. Karl Rove recognized this inherent advantage; I’m not sure Obama has.




77 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Hag!
We are doomed unless we can ban private money from elections completely and go entirely to public funding.
Also, conservatives come in three basic flavors. The first is your basic greedy sociopath. The second is your terrified pants wetter, who can be scared into almost anything. The third group are the haters )the racists, the misogynists, the homophobes) who will vote for anyone who supports their hate and promises to screw the people they hate.
And he still believes it in, and Obama is still searching for his “grand bargain”.
Obama is vulnerable precisely because Dick Cheney is still running around loose, looting people for their organs, rather than sitting in a jail cell.
Aloha, Hag…! That truly encapsulates the complete injustice of the Obummer Administration…!
You’re right. Groups #1 and #3 actually vote with eyes wide open, and generally get just what they want.
When he first (out of many times) compared the federal budget to the family budget, I wanted to punch him in the nose. When he started talking about “looking forward, not back,” I just hit the bottle and gave up.
Thanks, CH. Righteous rant, and I agree with Dr. Dick’s 3 “flavors” of conservatism.
Well I’m cynical & skeptical enough to think Obama’s a ringer, a Manchurian candidate, bought off, paid off, whatever… to parade out and speechify every so often bc it works with a certain subset of authoritarian liberals – or at least trad-Dem voters – who get their rocks off on American exceptionalism, and that’s quite good enough for them, thanks very much. I speak from experience of some friends, who will literally stick their fingers in their ears if I so much as whisper a complaint about Obama.
So I’m not so sure that there’s much difference between some liberals and a lot of conservatives. Authoritarians who don’t want to think, to do any homework, and who want to be told fairy tales (remember Ray-Gun’s shining city on the hill… barf) by Big Daddy and then get all misty-eyed about how great Team USA USA USA really really IS.
I don’t get it, but it’s why we are seeing this Kabuki Show called the “General Election” whereby we have Rmoney v Dmoney, and there’s not a whole hella lotta diff between the two.
BAH!
Yeah, and I doubt those banksters would be whining as much if they were in orange jumpsuits, too. From the department of unforced errors….
He spent too much time at the University of Chicago.
I don’t buy the ringer bit. He is just a standard issue, corporate friendly DLCer, like Clinton, which is pretty much what we have had for the last 20 years.
I’ve thought that all along, and it’s why I’ve hypothesized repeatedly here and elsewhere that the righties don’t even care about 2012. They’ve gained more by losing than they ever could have by winning.
Oh, they would be wining even louder, but nobody would have to hear them.
I think the wingers care, but the monied elites, except for the Koch-Coors-Walton-Scaiffe lunatics, don’t much care. That is why I said what I did in my first comment. We only get to choose from among the candidates that they pre-approve. To some extent that has always been true, but as the cost of campaigns has grown, their influence gets ever stronger. Now that they have their duly anointed Supreme Court, their influence is unbounded.
It’s that Dimon character that I would especially like to take an iron skillet to, like in “Eating Raoul.”
I agree. I hated that simplistic, incorrect comparison.
What Obama and his True Believers forget or overlook is that the more he tries to be a centrist Republican and embrace the Right’s agenda, they more they hate him.
He and they just cannot accept that they’re just not that into him.
I have a very long list of folks I would like to turn into sausage and feed to the swine.
Funny you should say that.
It’s certainly apparent that the biggest plutocrats care, primarily because they can afford to. When you’ve got 20 billion, what’s a million or two here and there, if it makes you feel like the big boss, and protects your unearned fortune for thirteen generations? All or those people need to have their heads examined….. How much money does one person need? Or, more importantly, how much should everyone else suffer so you can sock away the 21st billion? It crosses the line between greed and sadism, and not in the sexy way.
All of it.
Meanwhile, it makes those who ought to like him recoil in disgust and embarrassment. Smooth move.
This is more what I had in mind.
And when they’ve got it all, they’ll get metal detectors to make sure they haven’t missed any.
Scrooge McDuck, eatcher heart out.
You missed one flavor of conservative, the perpetual victim. This is where most of the Faux News over 65 crowd live. They are convinced that the poor, disabled or displaced are encouraged and assisted by the Liberal government to take what they are not entitled to by stealing it directly from them.
These people may possibly get lumped in with the greedy sociopaths but they are different. They aren’t into stealing themselves.
They are at the top of the list in category 1.
Not everyone at the top is that insanely greedy (Warren Buffet for instance), but none of them is going to actively work against their own interests. It really is a division between the bread and circuses elites (provide the plebes enough to keep them quiet) and the iron fist autocrats (fuck the plebes!).
Those folks are in category 2.
Good movie, the only time I have been entertained by anything even remotely related to Madonna.
Caucasians and Christians are persecuted minorities in this country thanks to liberals, doncha know?
Sadly, even the bread and circuses set seems to be a dying breed. I doubt the Kochs could spell noblesse oblige, let alone feel it.
That is what they keep telling me, but the one group nobody will vote for is unbelievers.
Still plenty of circuses–we call it “reality TV”–but not much bread to be had.
Obama never listened to the words of Truman, ” If you want to live like a Republican then you’ve got to vote like a Democrat. ” Or,… Oh well, it doesn’t matter what Truman or Roosevelt or McGovern or any of those people said because Obama is a moderate Republican. Like Sen. Brooke from Massachusetts he’s content to be the ” Black Moderate ” and to be remembered as the conciliator par excellence. We may have many rivers to cross but our President isn’t a bridge builder or any thing close to that. He’s a political phony in the wrong party. He should of run, like his hero Lincoln, as a Republican from the get go. But he wouldn’t of gotten elected dogcatcher in Chicago on the ” R ” ticket so we get this Democratic poseur-in-chief. As someone who campaigned for George McGovern in 1972 against the biggest jerk in politics at the time; Obama remains me of that lying hypocrite Nixon more and more. I will not vote for this man. And, increasingly, I think George McGovern was the last real military hero and true statesman the Democratic Party has produced. The rest have all been DLCers or moderate Republicans, take your pick, if you can tell the difference. Democrats seem destined to pick boring technocrats or flawed philanderers lately. And it’s either their platform and policy goals or their candidates that are out of sync. I truly believe it’s the latter and Obama continues the trend. What a bust!
You are sadly correct. There are far too few who realize that there is a limit to their excesses. I have been watching the transformation as those who lived through the Great Depression and saw how close we were to a revolution that would have cost them everything (including their heads) died off.
Subscription to the outrageous lie of religion is the price of admission in US politics, part of the reason I don’t think this ship can be righted.
Seems that the plutocrats have to be reminded every fifty years or so that they can’t have everything no matter how much they think they deserve it. Some people are just too greedy to be bothered learning from history.
It is actually the Mammon worship that makes me cynical.
Guillotines have a highly salutary effect.
Which is why the plutocrats were overthrown in the 1980s, no wait…
I said “or so…”
All part of the same shit pile, which is why our currency reads “this is your god,” or something like that.
It may as well.
They are rather past due on a refresher course in humility.
Remind me, how did the last “true statesman of the Democratic Party” do?
The plutocrats have been working diligently since the 1930s to put the FDR genie back in the bottle. As I type this they’re reaching for the cork…
My theory about sellout Democrats is pretty much in line with yours. Clinton and Obama ran for office, incidentally at first but later deliberately, to secure futures for themselves, not people like themselves. True liberals who attained any success have seldom come from such humble roots; nor cared particularly about how power would advance their own station in life. Once you’ve finally made it into the boat, you don’t rock it.
Time for me to toddle off. Young minds must be corrupted tomorrow. Take care all.
Nighters. Suppose I will mosey too. Thanks to cocktailhag for filling Teddy’s shoes. Wishing a splendid evening to all.
Once you’ve finally made it into the boat, you don’t rock it.
Therein lies the rub…! 8-(
Pleasant dreams, rf and Dr. D…!
Voting in the US is a fiction, a myth. The influence of the television, corporate personhood and their campaign dollars, and the 2000 election demonstrate this. Perhaps this is why both the Rep and the Dem parties are “busily driving away women, public servants, gays, environmentalists, civil libertarians, blacks, Latinos, the poor, the middle class, union members, etc.,” which is to say the majority of the citizenry. How can this be done? Maybe because it doesn’t matter. How can this be done in a representative democracy and still have it function as such? Maybe it can’t and it doesn’t.
Barring authoritarian followers (who do seem much more prevalent on the right than on the left), if every time folks vote they get shit on a shingle, why do they keep doing it as if expecting some other result? If liberal Dems live in the “reality based community,” why do they keep voting for candidates that deliver the same results as Reps? Obama’s victory in 2008 suggests to me that conservatives don’t have a monopoly on gullibility.
Do our political options in the US amount to simply allowing every sheep to “vote” for a shepherd?
Oh, drat, did I just miss ratfood? I wanted to ask if he read the Times piece that has a prominent role for a rescued cockatoo. I doubt it ’cause it’s in real estate or lifestyles or something. But the cockatoo’s hard life before rescue made me think of Bob.
“The economy remains stalled because Obama adopted the demented mantra that attacking the deficit would somehow help boost job growth.”
Perhaps the economy remains stalled because it has been unsustainably constructed on the premise of perpetual growth and the extra extraction of profit and it is simply running down? Why assume Obama or the men behind the curtain even know which levers to pull? If these folks are so knowing and capable, how did we end up here? Just because these greedy death-suckers know how to consume does not mean they know how to create.
Well, I still vote, albeit glumly, because of what happens to the courts when an actual Republican gets in. (That, and we have vote-by-mail in Oregon, so it’s absurdly easy…) But it does seem like it pretty much makes no difference, at least since Clinton, and probably before.
I have no answer, I guess.
Nate Silver, who writes the excellent FiveThirtyEight Blog for the NYT, did an analysis of Obama’s ideology in response to charges that he was a moderate Republican. Silver’s analysis concluded:
I find it is helpful to ignore what the owning class and their political representatives (e.g. Obama) say and instead pay attention to what they do and the consequences of those actions. It is the actions that matter.
Leaving aside the unsustainability of perpetual growth, at least as we currently understand it, Keynesian economics still does work. The problem is that for the plutocrats, recessions are the best thing since sliced bread. They get to cut wages, fire people, get rid of regulations, and whatever else they can think of to boost profits. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and all.
Good times make the servants uppity, a condition which can never be tolerated.
Well, in the 90′s, Republicans were as cuckoo as they are now, almost. Silver’s comparison would be more valid if he compared today’s Democrats with say, Richard Nixon or Dwight Eisenhower. Methinks he’s either a teenager making an honest mistake, or he’s an aspiring Villager, skewing his sample.
I don’t have much of an answer either except the suggestion to ignore them, stop participating in their games, stop following their rules, stop looking to them as leaders, stop consuming their products, stop giving them money to gamble with. They need our submissive participation in order to keep their horror show on the road. One thing we can do is say no. But this is VERY hard to do, not least because of the terrible imbalance of wealth and power that has accrued upward without a concomitant level of responsibility. That and they have used those resources to instill The Fear in the bulk of the citizenry–good god, we are a scared-shitless people (folks, here’s the secret to getting shed of any fear and punishment based control system: Stop being afraid).
Great image, by the way.
He is practically a teenager..(I dunno, he may not be as young as he looks), but I do worry about him since he went to the Times…the desire to be a Villager seems to come with that territory.
Howling uppity can’t be tolerated. There is a boss and we are going to show you who it is!
Voting down ticket may be useful. For moi no more lesser of two evils vote now that we know the game is rigged either way. BO is making some populists noises now that the campaigning is on. Like 2008. Fool me once blame you fool me twice blame me. Doing the same thing over that doesn’t work is pretty futile. They got the mike and the podium so they put out the message.
He did those comparisons. You should read the article.
Second all of that well summed up.
Yes, that’s the flip side of the coin. Maybe these folks aren’t incompetent. Maybe they know exactly what they are up to and the current economic situation is part of the plan. In this respect, I’m reminded of folks who lament the failure of the US military to exact a clear victory in the Middle East as evidence of the incompetence of our political leadership. Well, if perpetual war is essential to rationalizing the trillion-dollar-a-year US industry that is war, maybe there’s a reason there is no “mission accomplished” end in sight?
However, I don’t know any of the owning class and they ain’t talking to the likes of me, so I can’t be sure. :)
I did, and thankfully it wasn’t as Village-y as I’d expected, although I did disagree here and there. FDR not very liberal? Really?
I think Silver’s weakness is always trying to turn everything into measurable numbers; sometimes numbers obscure reality, when rhetoric and spirit govern politics, too.
Yes. He really was not. If you don’t believe me, you might ask a Japanese-American.
The wingers care. They think there is an appreciable difference. Watch the price of guns and ammo go up when Obama gets a second term, despite all the evidence of the last four years that nothing will happen regarding gun rights. The panic-driven run on ammunition in 2008 was so significant that stocks dried up and prices boomed, which took a long time to even out (ammunition has a long supply chain). When this self-fulfilling prophesy was created, the wingers felt vindicated in their fears, held on to the same myths that caused them to buy up so much ammo in the first place, and remained oblivious to how their own actions, not Obama’s, created scarcity.
I guess that’s my point; these days, economic liberalism is what matters most. Both parties are war-mongering and anti-civil liberties, so you look at what’s left, i.e., where the money goes. FDR did take on the “economic royalists” with some gusto. And LBJ made probably the last attempt ever to help the poor.
On this one, Nate Silver is full of shit.
you wrote
“Conservatives, as a rule, are gullible nitwits who will happily make voting decisions against all available evidence; liberals, not so much.”
about 90 percent of the posts at this site are contrary to this statement. How can anyone liberal, vote for Obama the republican Trojan Horse.
an important Part of getting out of the mess will be figuring out what everyone can agree on don’t you think?
Sorry, but this needs serious editing to reflect past, present, and future reality …
The problem is that by the time candidates are offered, all the big decisions have been made; we’re left to vote based on the small stuff. Sadly, the move to the right works like a ratchet; electing Democrats halts the movement temporarily, but never changes the overall direction.
My eyes are on who will appoint justices to the Supreme Court. Two, or even one, more Federalist Society type would be a disaster for decades, or even longer, since the next target is voting rights.
True, but as we saw in 2010, liberals righteously staying home seems a bit risky.
cocktailhag, Thanks for the well written essay and civil discussion.
If only there were a third option, someone whom you totally agreed with, someone who was going to be on the ballot on nearly every state in the Union.
What’s that? Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party is running? But that would mean that good policies make good politics. And clearly that’s unpossible. Right?
http://www.jillstein.org/
Last 8 presidents 5 – Republican 3- Democrat.
One direction: increasingly tilt the balance of public spending toward military activity. Increasingly unfetter Corporations to exert ownership rights over American citizens. Widening of the asset gap between producers and owners. Shifting the beneficiaries of government spending from citizens to ledger-book entities. Increasing government secrecy. Increasingly Imperial President.
We switched to Republicans things got worse, we switched to Democrats things got worse, we switched back and forth and things got worse.
THE LESSON: When Democrats or Republicans are in charge things get worse. The Solution is not in Democrats or Republicans, they both have sold the People out.
My solution is to support Jill Stein too, join me, or find your own, but it’s not with the Dempublicans.
Actually, Big Zero’s famous for lurving him some Ronnie Reagan. Otherwise spot on analysis of the man.
If it’s only about winning, and it is to Republicans, then George lost. How he lost? Ask Donald Segretti or the Plumbers of Watergate, don’t ask me. Or ask me how, as Hunter put it so eloquently, the scum also rises? That you would criticize George, with his war heroes’ record, over the scum Nixon and Reagan says a hell of a lot more about your predilections than about my jousting at windmills. If you get my drift.