With five months until Election Day, Barack Obama faces a grim new reality: Republicans now believe Mitt Romney can win, and Democrats believe Obama can lose… – Mark Halperin
IT’S IRONIC, which you’ll understand in a moment, but it was almost a year ago that Mark Halperin called Pres. Obama a “d*@!” on “Morning Joe.” I disagree with Halperin most of the time and he is a total Washington insider with a mind that only thinks in conventional wisdom fits and starts, but as the week ends I’ve got to give him this one. So, to honor the columnist who let slip the gaffe of all gaffes and got suspended for the rude disrespect, we’ll now use his remark and name it after him so I don’t have to use weird characters. It’s a family joint for the most part around here.
I’m a liberal, so I’ll never root for Mitt Romney, but the general hideousness of this week earned special notice for Pres. Obama.
Stiffing unions in Wisconsin was a d*@! Halperin move.
Pres. Obama proved this week to be an expert at Halperin moves through the Wisconsin recall drama.
It takes a real Halperin for a Democratic president to choose to let labor flop around in a state, not even sending cash, deciding to employ only your thumbs, and let them get beat up and fail miserably, especially after all organized labor has done for the Democratic Party, including Barack Obama, through money and GOTV.
Politicians are rarely loyal, but Pres. Obama showed a new low on that scale this week.
“I’m very sorry about what happened,” Clinton said in an interview to air on CNN’s “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer.” “I thought something had to be done on the ‘fiscal cliff’ before the election. Apparently nothing has to be done until the first of the year.” – Clinton: ‘I’m very sorry’
It’s Obama who should be apologizing for his general disinterest in Democratic Party interests.
I still don’t think it will cost Obama the pain he’s earned, because people are mostly bluster about their disappointments and disgust, so when push comes to shove in the voting booth the zombie voter drone kicks in and they just can’t help but come home. However, Pres. Obama having to pay a price for his disloyalty to principle could prove to be the only thing that saves the Democratic Party from further embarrassment and irrelevancy, while providing a real political service by letting Republicans and Mitt Romney make a spectacle out of their incompetence.
If Barack Obama’s loss would wake up the Democratic establishment, which is doubtful, and shake the dead left, something that is possible, from their stupor it would be worth it for the country in the long term.
Of course, as you know, I’m ambivalent about either political party, both of whom are less than America deserves; I’m sitting out this election on the presidential score, which has set me free from both sides. The right’s crazy and the left is so zombie-fied people are still squealing like chicken little about Republican evil to try to convince people to vote Democratic. The Supreme Court canard is also being used, but that just proves those making that argument are comfortable enough financially they don’t need to worry that the middle class is being carved out from the very people who are supposed to be its champion.
When you have Barnie Frank and Ed Rendell castigating labor for making a stand in Wisconsin for working men and women you know the Democratic Party has rotted from the inside.
People need to start thinking seriously about what they’re voting for, not just against, and whether who they’re voting for is actually doing the job for them. You owe something to the country long term, not some political party or politician Halperin who only thinks about himself, handing out goodies to get your vote then selling out larger principles when he’s elected. Your vote doesn’t belong to whatever party you prefer and in fact you don’t need a political party. What’s required is finding someone who is a hero for the middle class and working people who won’t stab labor in the back, and I say that as someone who thinks labor has screwed up as badly as the activists on the left by letting Pres. Obama get away with what he has so far.
For my money, the Stupak Amendment was the first Halperin move by Obama, but bailing on labor in Wisconsin because you weren’t able to figure a way to be involved and spin a win or a loss was political cowardice of the first order for a Democrat, a party who owes labor a hell of a lot.
And just so we’re clear, Republicans are doing ghastly things across the country in their war on women, but Pres. Obama, former Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Bart Stupak kicked off the war on women and there should be no splitting hairs on that one.
The President deserves to lose in November.
But the outcome in November is up to you.
I’ve come to the conclusion that it doesn’t much matter this year who’s elected. Whether it’s Obama or Romney, entitlements will be on the table for tinkering, the Pentagon and homeland security toys and tactics will remain the sweet spot of budgetary largess, while the middle class continues to get screwed by everyone in both parties, because the right is crazy and the left is too lazy to hold Pres. Obama accountable.
“The President deserves to lose in November.” Really? Tell that to the thousands of people out there with a chronic illness that are only alive today because of the healthcare coverage they are getting under Obamacare. Tell that to the hundreds of American soldiers who have not been killed in Iraq because that war is now over. Tell that to the relatives of Bin Laden’s victims. The next gay person you come across? Ask them if they think President deserves to lose in November and replaced with a gay who says he wants to add an amendment to the US Constitution barring marriage equality. Taylor your opinions are driven by the personal and that is just sad, especially coming from someone who claims to be liberal.
Well, well, well, it appears there are still some people who drink the Obama Kool Aid and defend him no matter how many times he betrays the Democratic Party, America’s working people, and labor.
I just love these drive-by comments! Instead of throwing out insults how about actually pointing to something I said in my last post that isn’t factually correct?
Your demagoguery is informed by your ignorance and hapless Obama-mania.
The Supreme Court will have more to say about the Affordability Care Act than any Republican in Congress.
If Obama had taken the advice of the American people & movement progressives, Medicare for all would have been instituted, or a public option, and the people would have actually understood it.
I’m on record re: bin Laden, so you just sound silly on that one.
You obviously don’t even know what it takes to get a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Sheesh, you guys make this easy.
Anyone blindly following Pres. Obama and his reelection efforts is the one whose liberalism, aka progressivism, should be challenged. You’re a Blue Dog backing a conservative Democrat; nothing wrong with that, but at least be honest about it.
An unintentionally hilarious caller to the Mark Thompson show the other day ranted on and on about how if the Republicans spent a “ZILLION” dollars they could not convince him to vote for any Republicans in November. Here’s his punchline- “only weak minded people, easily led and uninformed, will vote for Republicans! I’m voting straight Democrat this November!”
So….only “weak minded” people vote Republican, but this guy is proud that he’s going to vote a straight ticket of people who happen to be running as Democrats, and principles be damned. Hey, was it you, Solo?
Ok, here’s one- what “healthcare coverage” are they getting “under Obama?” All Obamacare does is make the health insurance companies offer to sell people a product. It does nothing to make that insurance AFFORDABLE, which was the driving problem in health care delivery in the first place.
Thousands of people will die this year because they can’t afford health insurance. Tell me why any of them should vote for Obama in November.
Now, SENATOR Obama- the guy who was open to the public option- THERE was a guy who might have been worth voting for.
Taylor, I think you are right on all points here. The cowardice of Obama and the Democrats in DC was sickening and disgraceful on the recall—-more so than their usual disgraceful conduct. Most importantly I think you’re conclusion that it really doesn’t make much difference if the Democrats win or lose is the key point. If we get the same results how can anyone argue that it matters? When the Democrats M.O. is to sell out on the most important issues the moment they are elected and hand the government over to rule or ruin Republicans how is it that voting for whoever is the Democrat running is going to be better for the commoners out here in America? Even on the issue of the Supreme Court the argument is a joke when you consider the corporate friendly nominees of Obama and how his failure to nominate even one liberal has moved the court even further to the right. I do not see how anyone who opposes Republican policies can vote for Obama in November.
Excellent column! I hope more people come around to this thinking so we can begin to reclaim the nation.
it is short term, present, now thinking that allows the D’s to betray the base. as ‘the alternative’ is far worse. all the while, our leaders become ‘the alternative’.
for my money, not ending ‘the humongous banks’ is obamas greatest failure. there is no real reform in the financial system. it’s a ticking Bomb. it will destroy our once great economic system, capitalism and threaten democracy itself.
I think the presidential race is less important, especially given the contestants, than the House, Senate and statewide races. I intend to focus on more local issues and let others foam at the mouth over the race for the White House.
I agree totally. The real possibility of affecting the outcome is in the local and statewide races–I am not convinced that any of the people in the federal system care about anything outside of DC.
Here we agree. There are a few progressive candidates out there, and they deserve support. What state and local governments can do right now is somewhat limited by the state of the economy, but electing people who are willing to do what they can is at least a step in the right direction.
By the way, Taylor, love your new definition of “Halperin.”
heh-heh…
second that.
Same here. When I first read about this incident, the old saying about the pot and the kettle sprang to mind…
.
Dude’s gonna lose so big. Dems stand for nada except the 1%. Kos & others will keep saying fight the good fight, yada-yada, instead of building a new world. Great Secret is that every individual can do this… Trying my damnedest, anyway. No one to lobby against except my own upbringing.
There’s no evidence “dude’s gonna lose so big,” none at all.
In fact, today there are polls in battleground states revealing the Bain attacks are starting to work.
Salon.com
Yahoo!
I agree, President Obama is still in great shape to win this years election, but it will be a close one I am sure on that. I am sure President Obama will not take all the states he did in 2008. I am not happy about either candidate. Labor and Unions are being pushed off the cliff and the sad part is its the DNC as well as The President that are helping in pushing Labor and Unions off the cliff. The Democratic party is no more the LBJ party and the Republican party is no longer the party of Lincolin, heck its not even the party of Reagan now. The Presidents would no be welcomed in these parties no more. I do think President Obama has a very good chance of winning in November, but as far as the Senate and Congress, thats a whole other matter. President Obama will be more focused on his own re-election and the DEM candidates will more than likely have to fend for themselves. While the Tea Party and Cross-Roads as well as a whole bunch of conserative organizations will throw there full support toward their candidates.
I think there’s actually a case to be made that a more progressive total result would come with Romney and Democratic control (or even divided control) of congress.
Obama embraces the idea of a grand bargain and he lusts after it mightily. To achieve it, he has shown that he is and continues to be the Democrat willing to go after Social Security. (The horrendous payroll tax cuts which undermine the basic political calculus* of funding Social Security is a prong in this attack.)
Dems in Congress will follow Obama right over the cliff. Pelosi is out repeatedly telegraphing the path ahead under Obama, and that path is to embrace austerity, cut Social Security and go into negotiations on tax cuts that begins with a million dollars as the Democrat’s opening position? Know what happens to even that million dollar baseline after “negotiating” and “compromising” with Republicans?
Obama’s presence in the White House enables all of this. Obama’s presence neuters much of the potential Democratic/liberal/progressive opposition. This must be by design, because no one who makes it to the White House is that politcally incompetent. Far from being weak or a poor negotiator, the president is quite strong and negotiates with great skill. Problem is he isn’t negotiating for us, he’s actively negotiating against us. And he’s getting results, as in late 80′s to early 90′s Republican style economic and taxation policy results. Plus Social Security.
I’d never advise anyone to vote for Mitt Romney. But I would advise them to consider finding a candidate to vote for that actually believes in what they believe in. Because returning Obama to the White House won’t result in a path they want to follow unless that path veers even more to the right.
*From Luther Gulick’s Memorandum on Conference with FDR Concerning Social Security Taxation, Summer, 1941:
Just realized that my entire comment was summed up in a single sentence of Taylor Marsh’s post: “People need to start thinking seriously about what they’re voting for, not just against, and whether who they’re voting for is actually doing the job for them.”
There a lot of food for thought there. I’ll be quoting that sentence or some slightly paraphrased version of it widely.
Romberry–Well said. Thank you!
In the sixth grade I had a teacher who was a little ahead of her time. In 1965, women did not generally speak and espouse like she did. She was an example of a teacher one remembers decades later. One day we had this “olympics” kind of thing and there was a footrace around the school. One kid was 30 feet or so from the finish line, and seeing that he wasn’t going to win, veered of the sidewalk and started lamenting his loss.
The teacher made him finish anyway, and gave us all a lecture about not qutting. She said not winning was irrelevant; trying to the very end was. For years now I’ve seen Democrats in the House, Senate, and White House veer off the sidewalk and throw themselves on the grass, crying that the race couldn’t be won anyway.
Worse, I’ve seen Democrats CLAIMING they’re for “the people” while at the same time having their snouts firmly shoved into the corporate trough. Yes, as some commentors have noted, state and local elections have a huge impact also. But….with ALEC and the like even those elections are being corraled via a national agenda.
Never have used a provisional ballot. This year, though, I’ll take a stab at “voting for the man, not the party.” After all, my future, and that of my children, has been on the chopping block for decades now. My short list so far may seem pointless, but so is another vote for Barack Obama.
Elizabeth Warren
Bernie Sanders
Harry S. Truman
Alfred E. Newman (oh wait, that’s Obama showing up after all)
Taylor-You are on a roll, Lady! Another spot-on analysis that is sparking the typical knee-jerk responses from Obama-land.
mrpister-Terrific post. And of course, I just couldn’t resist posting this in response to your final short list:
http://www.mikefrancesa.com/wordpress/?p=981
I will give Obama props for getting Bin Laden and ending the War in Iraq. As far as health care goes, I am neutral. While I realize it helps many, it was such a hot mess in its final form with the mandate that it is now in the Supreme Court’s hands.
I also appreciate his finally voicing his public support for gay marriage. But I am sure his team did a thorough analysis and found this one of those issues they could use to prop up their base, because they are never going to get support from the other side anyway. It is a good thing, but as far as I am concerned, a little late to the table. One only wonders if he had demonstrated leadership on this issue much sooner, if perhaps we wouldn’t have something like 32-states with some type of anti-gay legislation enacted. My point is, what tangible results are there from his voicing his support now? There are still 30 plus states that don’t allow it, and in the state of Washington, even though a law was passed to legalize gay marriage, the other side got enough signatures to block enacting the law and now they are fighting the whole battle all over again at the “petition against” versus “petition for” level. So the president supports it. Big deal because it is business as usual at the state level, so he really as done nothing concrete that makes it possible at a national level to stop the attacks by the right-wing gay-haters.
But everything else? Just a few I will mention that leave me cold on him. He has been more than willing to serve up Social Security on the chopping block for a long time, which is near an dear to my heart at this point in my life. Also, IMHO, his support of women has been lukewarm. Really, he could have been a much stronger proponent for women issues. My impression is that he throws us a bone once in a while and hopes that will keep us happy enough to vote for him. I didn’t last time and at this point in the game, I don’t plan to vote for him in November either.
Ladywalker: Made the mistake of drinking something when I clicked on the link you provided. Took me a while to clean off the screen. Never knew someone had already compared Mr. Obama to Mr. Newman. Kinda fits, though….”What, me worry (about anybody else?”
Oh, nothing’s ever good enough, is it? Hey, the man was evolving! That usually takes generations. What’s a generation, twenty, thirty years? He did it in three! That’s like, seventeen years ahead of schedule.
Love the link, BTW.