Anyone who actually reads what I post will see that I am a moderate. Just look at my recent thoughts on Obama summarizing his tenure to date. I have always wished Obama well. I have always been fearful that his lack of experience would make for a different reality. Most of my ribbing lately is just my taking pleasure at the complete lack of objectivity this forum displays when it comes to politics.
I said once that I wished GWB well, so I guess I'm a moderate. I think I remember GreatTeacherMacRoss said once that he liked a republican, so I suppose he's a moderate as well.
I would say my definition of a moderate at this point is anyone who will change their opinion when presented with evidence, I know that is not the definition of a moderate but it's so hard to find actual "moderates" that anyone willing to change their opinion is defined as one these days since it has become so rare.
Still A lot of kilarney's arguments deal with things Obama failed to do that would have been progressive. Kilarney is not really saying they shouldn't happen as much as he is saying Obama failed to achieve it. Not necessarily a right wing opinion. Though I do get a kick out of the right wingers critizing the fact Obama couldn't accomplish or didn't try to accomplish something they don't agree with.. shouldn't you be happy? (Obviously they are trying to get you to not like your side or whatnot but still it's always entertaining..)
I would say my definition of a moderate at this point is anyone who will change their opinion when presented with evidence, I know that is not the definition of a moderate but it's so hard to find actual "moderates" that anyone willing to change their opinion is defined as one these days since it has become so rare.
I find myself in that position, but that's less of "I'm a moderate and require evidence to change my opinions" than "I'm an idiot, but I do the best with the information I got" - American politics, not my specialty.
The Democrats need a strong primary challenger for Obama. They won't be able to actually win the nomination, but someone needs to put Obama's feet to the fire and call him on his shit. Mark Warner wouldn't be a bad choice.
Wiener was going to be my big push for 2012, but then... . My dream team is Sanders/Paul, but that's not happening any time soon. I haven't seen any dems that can put up a fight, so I'd actually vote Romney 2012.
The Democrats need a strong primary challenger for Obama. They won't be able to actually win the nomination, but someone needs to put Obama's feet to the fire and call him on his shit. Mark Warner wouldn't be a bad choice.
If you want the Republicans to win the general election, you'd primary Obama. Sitting Presidents that have a strong primary challenger tend not to get reelected.
The Democrats need a strong primary challenger for Obama. They won't be able to actually win the nomination, but someone needs to put Obama's feet to the fire and call him on his shit. Mark Warner wouldn't be a bad choice.
If you want the Republicans to win the general election, you'd primary Obama. Sitting Presidents that have a strong primary challenger tend not to get reelected.
This is exactly why Democrats are weak and can't get shit done. They are afraid of failing, and in doing so they'll never be anything more than mediocre. There is no reward without risk.
I'm asking because I don't know. My last German class was taught by a woman who was a student at the University of Heidelberg during WW II (no joke - this is actually true).
I know need isn't a proper German verb. If you want me to redeem my self, then here "Die Democratisches Leute sind schwach! Wir muessen ein starker Fuehrer haben! Heil Herr Boehner!" I just didn't think that the forum would understand what I was saying if I said that. Why so harsh, chaos?
Not really. I apologize that I couldn't think of another word for "leader" off the top of my head, but I really wasn't thinking Hitler. My thoughts were more along the lines of Chancellor Bismarck leading the Prussian troops to attack Versailles, or the Kaiser instructing the troops to "treat them like the Hun!" as they would be sent off to put down the Boxer Rebellion. Y'know, Second Reich. I know you're trying to rebrand and all, but the Germanic culture has roughly 1000 years of being aggressive, and I love it. I'm going to Germany next Saturday (12 day tour of the southern-est Bundeslaender) and I've been really disappointed by how few war museums there are. This is the country of the 100 Years War, the Franco Prussian War, the 7 Weeks War, and I can barely find a memorial! So, Germany, if you really want to rebrand, take down the 200+ statues of the world's greatest war monger, and then we'll start to talk.
The Democrats need a strong primary challenger for Obama. They won't be able to actually win the nomination, but someone needs to put Obama's feet to the fire and call him on his shit. Mark Warner wouldn't be a bad choice.
Clearly Andrew, the democrats need to run a primary challenge against the first black president alienating a large amount of the strongest most consistent voting block they have. That won't have any repercussions in the general election. Clearly a Rick Perry (Bush III) presidency is around the corner.
Mark Warner's career would be over.
Edit: Plus if you look at his poll numbers with his base, they are historically high. There really is no room for a primary challenger to appear on the left side within the democratic party with any hope of being anything but a issues candidate and not be taken seriously.
ITT: Democrats who care more about maintaining power with a mediocre leader than trying to find a real leader willing to fight for his ideals and actually governing.
Mark Warner's career would be over.
You can't win a battle without casualties. Stop being such a political pussy.
Edit: Plus if you look at his poll numbers with his base, they are historically high. There really is no room for a primary challenger to appear on the left side within the democratic party with any hope of being anything but a issues candidate and not be taken seriously.
Poll numbers with a base don't mean anything. They are his base, they are going to vote for him anyways!
You can't win a battle without casualties. Stop being such a political pussy.
I think there is a difference between being a pussy and political suicide with the byproduct of fucking up your parties ability to get elected for the next 10 years.
I think there is a difference between being a pussy and political suicide with the byproduct of fucking up your parties ability to get elected for the next 10 years.
I think there is a difference between being a pussy and political suicide with the byproduct of fucking up your parties ability to get elected for the next 10 years.
Really? And how do you come to that conclusion?
Easily: Being a pussy is a decision based on fear. Political suicide with the byproduct of fucking up your parties ability to get elected for the next 10 years is a decision based on stupidity. Even smart, brave, well intentioned people can be fearful from time to time. In fact, I think I'd prefer a candidate with a healthy fear and respect for the strengths of his/her opposition. That fear however should never make them blind to the larger consequences. 10 years is far too long a time to leave in your oppositions hands, no matter how well intentioned they may be. I mean really, consider if one party had the chance to give up control of the government on September 11,1991. Sure, they'd get the opportunity to complain about the other parties choices on September 12, 2001 but they'd have no way of knowing it was coming in the first place and imagine all the unintended damage that would have been done between those dates. How many important laws/bills that barely passed or failed would have had completely different outcomes and compositions?
Really? Tell me? How is Mark Warner going to Challenge President Obama in a democratic primary? They are both extremely moderate? What differences could they highlight? What message would a white southern run with that would give him any support in a primary against their own incumbent? What would be accomplished other then possibly draining funds and weakening the party? It's not like the disheartened left liberals would rally around Mark Warner he covers the same base as Obama. To have a effective and meaningful primary challenge you have to be able to peel off a group from your own party which means you have to be more liberal or more moderate.
Really? Tell me? How is Mark Warner going to Challenge President Obama in a democratic primary? They are both extremely moderate? What differences could they highlight? What message would a white southern run with that would give him any support in a primary against their own incumbent? What would be accomplished other then possibly draining funds and weakening the party? It's not like the disheartened left liberals would rally around Mark Warner he covers the same base as Obama. To have a effective and meaningful primary challenge you have to be able to peel off a group from your own party which means you have to be more liberal or more moderate.
First of all, I questioned you on how a primary challenger would cause the Democrats to never win an election in a decade, but ok, I'll let it slide. I can tell by the fact that you "asked" several statements as questions that you are mildly upset. Secondly, it's not about Mark Warner having a chance or actually winning the nomination. Hell, Mark Warner was only an off the cuff suggestion. The key idea is that Barack Obama is not the President he promised he would be during his campaign. Yeah, I know "Surprise, Surprise".
But if you are content with letting him just slide by not even fighting for what he was elected to do, then by all means vote for him again without any reservations. I, on the other hand, don't want to make it that easy for the President. I want a legitimate challenger to call Obama to the carpet on his failed campaign promises and lack of leadership. I want someone to stand up and tell the President that the people who elected him are not happy with the way he has floundered in the office and delivered essentially nothing. It's not about winning or losing, it's about making Obama sweat, pulling out Campaign Obama and making him realize how different he is from President Obama.
Unfortunately though, it probably won't happen. Because the Democratic party is afraid of alienating their base. Afraid that they'll never get elected for ten years. Afraid of the other team winning. Afraid of actually trying to stand for something.
This is why American politics has been the status quo recently. The system doesn't change, politicians play the game of reelection rather than the one of governing.
Comments
Still A lot of kilarney's arguments deal with things Obama failed to do that would have been progressive. Kilarney is not really saying they shouldn't happen as much as he is saying Obama failed to achieve it. Not necessarily a right wing opinion. Though I do get a kick out of the right wingers critizing the fact Obama couldn't accomplish or didn't try to accomplish something they don't agree with.. shouldn't you be happy? (Obviously they are trying to get you to not like your side or whatnot but still it's always entertaining..)
Die Democratisches are schwach! Wir need ein starker Fuehrer! Heil Herr Boehner!
I'm asking because I don't know. My last German class was taught by a woman who was a student at the University of Heidelberg during WW II (no joke - this is actually true).
I know you're trying to rebrand and all, but the Germanic culture has roughly 1000 years of being aggressive, and I love it. I'm going to Germany next Saturday (12 day tour of the southern-est Bundeslaender) and I've been really disappointed by how few war museums there are. This is the country of the 100 Years War, the Franco Prussian War, the 7 Weeks War, and I can barely find a memorial! So, Germany, if you really want to rebrand, take down the 200+ statues of the world's greatest war monger, and then we'll start to talk.
Mark Warner's career would be over.
Edit: Plus if you look at his poll numbers with his base, they are historically high. There really is no room for a primary challenger to appear on the left side within the democratic party with any hope of being anything but a issues candidate and not be taken seriously.
Political suicide with the byproduct of fucking up your parties ability to get elected for the next 10 years is a decision based on stupidity.
Even smart, brave, well intentioned people can be fearful from time to time. In fact, I think I'd prefer a candidate with a healthy fear and respect for the strengths of his/her opposition. That fear however should never make them blind to the larger consequences. 10 years is far too long a time to leave in your oppositions hands, no matter how well intentioned they may be. I mean really, consider if one party had the chance to give up control of the government on September 11,1991. Sure, they'd get the opportunity to complain about the other parties choices on September 12, 2001 but they'd have no way of knowing it was coming in the first place and imagine all the unintended damage that would have been done between those dates. How many important laws/bills that barely passed or failed would have had completely different outcomes and compositions?
But if you are content with letting him just slide by not even fighting for what he was elected to do, then by all means vote for him again without any reservations. I, on the other hand, don't want to make it that easy for the President. I want a legitimate challenger to call Obama to the carpet on his failed campaign promises and lack of leadership. I want someone to stand up and tell the President that the people who elected him are not happy with the way he has floundered in the office and delivered essentially nothing. It's not about winning or losing, it's about making Obama sweat, pulling out Campaign Obama and making him realize how different he is from President Obama.
Unfortunately though, it probably won't happen. Because the Democratic party is afraid of alienating their base. Afraid that they'll never get elected for ten years. Afraid of the other team winning. Afraid of actually trying to stand for something.
This is why American politics has been the status quo recently. The system doesn't change, politicians play the game of reelection rather than the one of governing.
Whatever, fuck it.