This is how the Democrats back Obama

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obama-bus-tour-20110817,0,5073945.story

Reporting from Davenport, Iowa— After pledging to send a job-creation package to Congress next month and daring Republicans to block it, President Obama offered few specifics Tuesday about the form the plan might take as he stuck to a broad outline of how to improve the economy.

On the second day of Obama's three-day bus tour of the upper Midwest, the president worked off the blueprint he had used the day before, offering proposals such as extending a payroll tax cut, spending money to repair roads and bridges, and ratifying pending trade agreements.

And he continued to hammer away at Republicans in Congress, suggesting they stand in the way of economic growth, even as some Democrats expressed discomfort with what they saw as a potentially divisive stance.

"We could do even more if Congress is willing to get in the game," Obama said to a gathering of small-business owners, community leaders and rural development experts at a small college in Peosta, Iowa.

"There are bipartisan ideas — common-sense ideas — that have traditionally been supported by Democrats and Republicans that will put more money in your pockets, that will put our people to work, that will allow us to deal with the legacy of debt that hangs over our economy," he said.

Republicans pushed back by escalating their criticism of Obama's trip, calling it nothing more than a glorified campaign swing at taxpayer expense.

"This week taxpayers made a donation to the Obama reelection campaign. No matter what the president says, his Midwest bus tour is nothing but a campaign trip," said Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee. "He's talking about campaigning against Congress and doling out talking points, not policy plans."

Congressional Democrats and former administration officials gave a mixed review of Obama's declaration. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) welcomed the president's feistier tone.

"I heard more of that approach yesterday than I've heard in a while, and I think it's very important," she said in an interview. "He needs to say now, 'I've tried it your way, and now we have to create an aggressive approach to creating jobs.' "

But one Senate Democrat, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the White House, was troubled by the president's gambit.

Voters are tired of the partisan back-and-forth and it would be a mistake for Obama to present Congress with a large-scale, high-stakes jobs bill and challenge them to pass it, the senator said. A more sensible approach would be for Obama to roll out a series of smaller proposals, the senator said, adding that the public "has very little patience for anything that looks like you're beating up on the other side."
Jared Bernstein, a former economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, said it was futile for Obama to try to accommodate Republicans determined to block the White House agenda. "If the president frames his jobs agenda based on what Republicans will accept, I don't think he's going to end up with much," he said. "He has to prescribe what he and his team believes the country needs and fight for it."

White House spokesman Jay Carney wouldn't comment on the shape or the scope of the plan or say whether it would take the form of legislation.

But Carney reiterated the president's threat that if Congress failed to act, Obama would not hesitate to leverage that failure politically.

"If they don't do it," Carney said, "he will take his arguments to the American people."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Republicans were waiting to act on pending trade deals with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, but he complained that the White House hadn't sent them to Capitol Hill.

Carney said the administration was working with Senate leaders on an agreement for submitting the treaties for ratification.

Obama didn't spend his entire day in Iowa talking economic policy. He stopped at a high school in Maquoketa and visited a volleyball practice, bought ice cream cones for his aides in DeWitt and shopped at an antique store in LeClaire.

The president will wrap up his tour Wednesday with two town hall events in Illinois before he returns to Washington.



As I've said repeatedly when people compare Obama to Bush unfavorably, Bush had his entire party behind him while Obama is constantly herding cats in getting Democratic consensus while the opposition is more united than ever. Obama isn't your enemy, Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson are.
 
Like his policies or not your statement is correct

Today's Democrats are an inclusive party while the Republican tend to be a single minded

Dems have a range of things they focus on
Rep Have only a few issues so its easier to push and get in line
 
Like his policies or not your statement is correct

Today's Democrats are an inclusive party while the Republican tend to be a single minded

Dems have a range of things they focus on
Rep Have only a few issues so its easier to push and get in line

u said it right there. if dudes ever really read up on past dems in the house they would bug out. it's like old school dems would be like 'FUK YOU! GET THESE NUTZ AND PASS THIS BILL MUTHA FUKA'! and most of the time the progressive bills got passed cause they were sheit that would help the lives of millions of everyday working people. gop members that tried to stand in the way of the sheit would get called out.

most dems today are 2 beatch made. sheit, todays gop is more like the old school dems then these beatch azz dems we got running around here today
 
So you pull one anonymous quote as evidence of the entire Democratic electorate?

ALL presidents have to deal with people in their own party who don't necessarily march in lockstep with your policy preferences. The difference is that some presidents LEAD, and make those people eventually fall in line. Obama has led from the back. That is his fundamental problem.
 
So you pull one anonymous quote as evidence of the entire Democratic electorate?
ALL presidents have to deal with people in their own party who don't necessarily march in lockstep with your policy preferences. The difference is that some presidents LEAD, and make those people eventually fall in line. Obama has led from the back. That is his fundamental problem.

No, I've been saying this and supporting it with links for months on end, this is just the latest example.

All Presidents do not deal with the same situation as Obama is dealing with. Bush never, ever, dealt with unified Democratic opposition but had near unanimous Republican support. It's the exact opposite for Obama. Clinton was successful despite the similar problems because he went to the Right on some issues. Reagan and Bush dealt with Democrats who were much more willing to work with them, such as Tip O'Neill, than Obama has in Boehner.
This call for him to "lead" seems only to come from people who have nothing to lose or political enemies. The Stimulus was his idea. He was the guy who pushed health insurance reform and campaigned on closing Gitmo but in each case, when he turned around, many of his troops had vanished and he was by himself.

Are you "attacking the messenger"? My article shows explicitly shows the division of the Democrats and the unity of the Republicans.
 
So you pull one anonymous quote as evidence of the entire Democratic electorate?

ALL presidents have to deal with people in their own party who don't necessarily march in lockstep with your policy preferences. The difference is that some presidents LEAD, and make those people eventually fall in line. Obama has led from the back. That is his fundamental problem.

Can you give an examples of such great leadership from a democratic president?
 
No, I've been saying this and supporting it with links for months on end, this is just the latest example.

All Presidents do not deal with the same situation as Obama is dealing with. Bush never, ever, dealt with unified Democratic opposition but had near unanimous Republican support. It's the exact opposite for Obama. Clinton was successful despite the similar problems because he went to the Right on some issues. Reagan and Bush dealt with Democrats who were much more willing to work with them, such as Tip O'Neill, than Obama has in Boehner.
This call for him to "lead" seems only to come from people who have nothing to lose or political enemies. The Stimulus was his idea. He was the guy who pushed health insurance reform and campaigned on closing Gitmo but in each case, when he turned around, many of his troops had vanished and he was by himself.

Are you "attacking the messenger"? My article shows explicitly shows the division of the Democrats and the unity of the Republicans.

It's kinda like watching a team that constantly plays prevent defense.
 
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obama-bus-tour-20110817,0,5073945.story

Reporting from Davenport, Iowa— After pledging to send a job-creation package to Congress next month and daring Republicans to block it, President Obama offered few specifics Tuesday about the form the plan might take as he stuck to a broad outline of how to improve the economy.

On the second day of Obama's three-day bus tour of the upper Midwest, the president worked off the blueprint he had used the day before, offering proposals such as extending a payroll tax cut, spending money to repair roads and bridges, and ratifying pending trade agreements.

And he continued to hammer away at Republicans in Congress, suggesting they stand in the way of economic growth, even as some Democrats expressed discomfort with what they saw as a potentially divisive stance.

"We could do even more if Congress is willing to get in the game," Obama said to a gathering of small-business owners, community leaders and rural development experts at a small college in Peosta, Iowa.

"There are bipartisan ideas — common-sense ideas — that have traditionally been supported by Democrats and Republicans that will put more money in your pockets, that will put our people to work, that will allow us to deal with the legacy of debt that hangs over our economy," he said.

Republicans pushed back by escalating their criticism of Obama's trip, calling it nothing more than a glorified campaign swing at taxpayer expense.

"This week taxpayers made a donation to the Obama reelection campaign. No matter what the president says, his Midwest bus tour is nothing but a campaign trip," said Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee. "He's talking about campaigning against Congress and doling out talking points, not policy plans."

Congressional Democrats and former administration officials gave a mixed review of Obama's declaration. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) welcomed the president's feistier tone.

"I heard more of that approach yesterday than I've heard in a while, and I think it's very important," she said in an interview. "He needs to say now, 'I've tried it your way, and now we have to create an aggressive approach to creating jobs.' "

But one Senate Democrat, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the White House, was troubled by the president's gambit.

Voters are tired of the partisan back-and-forth and it would be a mistake for Obama to present Congress with a large-scale, high-stakes jobs bill and challenge them to pass it, the senator said. A more sensible approach would be for Obama to roll out a series of smaller proposals, the senator said, adding that the public "has very little patience for anything that looks like you're beating up on the other side."
Jared Bernstein, a former economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, said it was futile for Obama to try to accommodate Republicans determined to block the White House agenda. "If the president frames his jobs agenda based on what Republicans will accept, I don't think he's going to end up with much," he said. "He has to prescribe what he and his team believes the country needs and fight for it."

White House spokesman Jay Carney wouldn't comment on the shape or the scope of the plan or say whether it would take the form of legislation.

But Carney reiterated the president's threat that if Congress failed to act, Obama would not hesitate to leverage that failure politically.

"If they don't do it," Carney said, "he will take his arguments to the American people."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Republicans were waiting to act on pending trade deals with Colombia, Panama and South Korea, but he complained that the White House hadn't sent them to Capitol Hill.

Carney said the administration was working with Senate leaders on an agreement for submitting the treaties for ratification.

Obama didn't spend his entire day in Iowa talking economic policy. He stopped at a high school in Maquoketa and visited a volleyball practice, bought ice cream cones for his aides in DeWitt and shopped at an antique store in LeClaire.

The president will wrap up his tour Wednesday with two town hall events in Illinois before he returns to Washington.



As I've said repeatedly when people compare Obama to Bush unfavorably, Bush had his entire party behind him while Obama is constantly herding cats in getting Democratic consensus while the opposition is more united than ever. Obama isn't your enemy, Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson are.



Regardless of those facts Obushma has something that Bush didn't have: PUBLIC CONSENSUS for JOB CREATION!

If Obushma FOUGHT in the area of public opinion and called folks out by name thus challenging them in the media, I promise you everybody would fall in line like dominos!!!


Those who are resistant to job creation on the magnitude needed to make a dent in unemployment, should have to answer to why they are against jobs for the unemployed in their districts. MAKE them have to answer to the voters.


Look at how John Kasich in Ohio had an epiphany as soon as he saw the public outrage towards his anti-union bill!
 
Last edited:
Regardless of those facts Obushma has something that Bush didn't have: PUBLIC CONSENSUS for JOBS CREATION!

If Obushma FOUGHT in the area of public opinion and called folks out by name and challenge them in the media, I promise you everybody would fall in line like dominos!!!


Those who are resistant to job creation on the magnitude needed to make a dent in unemployment, should have to answer to why they are against jobs for the unemployed in their districts. MAKE them have to answer to the voters.


Look at how John Kasich in Ohio had an epiphany as soon as he saw the public outrage towards his anti-union bill!

you talk a lot but don't seem to listen.

The GOP has consistently said they don't care about polls and what the American people think they want.

The GOP has said they were sent to Washington to lead and they will do what is right for the people.

When Romney was asked a few days ago did he come to listen he said no he came to speak.

Public consensus means nothing to the GOP . They listen to the heritage foundation.

You are under the mistaken belief that the people will make the GOP act when in fact they can't do anything until the next election in 2012

The GOP is confident that by then the economy will be so fucked up that the people will forget that they didn't listen and just blame Obama.

I mean damn when the leadership says the number 1 agenda is to make Obama fail that should tell you somehting.

It's not jobs
Its not the economy
Its not taxes

Its to make Obama fail.
 
:eek::eek::eek: Exactly what I've been waiting to read. That was his campaign style and it manifested in his presidency.

can't see what you are looking at.

the example was of congress

the analogy was directed and congress

and you miss that to put it on Obama.

Obama wasn't playing from behind until he got elected and found out his team didn't block.
 
Regardless of those facts Obushma has something that Bush didn't have: PUBLIC CONSENSUS for JOBS CREATION!

If Obushma FOUGHT in the area of public opinion and called folks out by name and challenge them in the media, I promise you everybody would fall in line like dominos!!!


Those who are resistant to job creation on the magnitude needed to make a dent in unemployment, should have to answer to why they are against jobs for the unemployed in their districts. MAKE them have to answer to the voters.


I do think Obama under-utilizes the power of his office domestically and underestimates his own personal popularity (different than job approval ratings). During the health insurance reform fight, he should have went to Connecticut, a strong Democratic state, and put hard pressure on Lieberman to conform. During his last bus tour he should have skipped Minnesota and Illnois, he's going to win those states and went to Ohio, with an unpopular Republican governor and the home state of John Boenher, and Virginia, a "swing state" he won in 2008 and will need in 2012 and is home to Eric Cantor. He also should have swung through Wisconsin. I get why he kept at a distance during the protests and the recall (the same way he stayed out of Egypt, let the locals decide their fate) but now he should go to keep the national spotlight on the state and to keep motivated those that want to recall Walker.

Look at how John Kasich in Ohio had an epiphany as soon as he saw the public outrage towards his anti-union bill!

Yep. Bitch got real cooperative after the Wisconsin recalls and the petition for the recall for his law had three times the required number.

can't see what you are looking at.

the example was of congress

the analogy was directed and congress

and you miss that to put it on Obama.

Obama wasn't playing from behind until he got elected and found out his team didn't block.

I like that one too. I don't think they're mutually exclusive. Obama's made some tactical and messaging mistakes but the people who are supposed to have his back suck balls, particularly Harry Reid in the Senate.
 
I do think Obama under-utilizes the power of his office domestically and underestimates his own personal popularity (different than job approval ratings). During the health insurance reform fight, he should have went to Connecticut, a strong Democratic state, and put hard pressure on Lieberman to conform. During his last bus tour he should have skipped Minnesota and Illnois, he's going to win those states and went to Ohio, with an unpopular Republican governor and the home state of John Boenher, and Virginia, a "swing state" he won in 2008 and will need in 2012 and is home to Eric Cantor. He also should have swung through Wisconsin. I get why he kept at a distance during the protests and the recall (the same way he stayed out of Egypt, let the locals decide their fate) but now he should go to keep the national spotlight on the state and to keep motivated those that want to recall Walker.



Yep. Bitch got real cooperative after the Wisconsin recalls and the petition for the recall for his law had three times the required number.



I like that one too. I don't think they're mutually exclusive. Obama's made some tactical and messaging mistakes but the people who are supposed to have his back suck balls, particularly Harry Reid in the Senate.


I agree that his message and achievements are understated.

I think the strategy of not coming off as an angry black man was given to much importance.

I think people would actually understand anger at least the appearance of anger.

I think those in charge of getting his message the proper spotlight including Obama himself could be better.

I think knowing he needs two terms to get what he wants done has taken some aggressiveness away.

Obama is not without blame but he also is totally the blame as some would like to believe.

I also think he has been doing a lot better at showing the GOP to be obstinate. Hopefully the people who complain the loudest run and elect the right type of congressmen and senators to get some things done.
 
Can you give an examples of such great leadership from a democratic president?

Clinton got his budget plan passed which increased taxes even though many of the democrats KNEW that it would cost them their re-election. That tax increase was a big reason that the gop won so big in 1994.
 
I agree that his message and achievements are understated.

I think the strategy of not coming off as an angry black man was given to much importance.

I think people would actually understand anger at least the appearance of anger.

I think those in charge of getting his message the proper spotlight including Obama himself could be better.

I think knowing he needs two terms to get what he wants done has taken some aggressiveness away.

Obama is not without blame but he also is totally the blame as some would like to believe.

I also think he has been doing a lot better at showing the GOP to be obstinate. Hopefully the people who complain the loudest run and elect the right type of congressmen and senators to get some things done.

Agreed on all points.

Clinton got his budget plan passed which increased taxes even though many of the democrats KNEW that it would cost them their re-election. That tax increase was a big reason that the gop won so big in 1994.

That's a pretty good example. That was what Clinton could achieve with a different type of Republican opposition. There was no "Tea Party" then and Mitch McConnell is no Bob Dole. The conservative media wasn't as strong or as omnipresent as it is now. Obama and Clinton had terms under different political circumstances. Obama gave a tax cut with the Stimulus and was still demonized and lost the House.
 
Agreed on all points.



That's a pretty good example. That was what Clinton could achieve with a different type of Republican opposition. There was no "Tea Party" then and Mitch McConnell is no Bob Dole. The conservative media wasn't as strong or as omnipresent as it is now. Obama and Clinton had terms under different political circumstances. Obama gave a tax cut with the Stimulus and was still demonized and lost the House.

You know how many Republican votes Clinton got for his plan?

ZERO.

I keep saying this. STOP JUSTIFYING OR EXCUSING OBAMA'S MISTAKES.

I'm not saying this so that we can pile on him personally. It's never personal. The more we keep excusing and justifying where we feel like Obama has not lived up to our expectations, the more we're telegraphing to the administration that we really don't care and that they can keep doing the same later on.
 
You know how many Republican votes Clinton got for his plan?

ZERO.

I keep saying this. STOP JUSTIFYING OR EXCUSING OBAMA'S MISTAKES.

I'm not saying this so that we can pile on him personally. It's never personal. The more we keep excusing and justifying where we feel like Obama has not lived up to our expectations, the more we're telegraphing to the administration that we really don't care and that they can keep doing the same later on.

I don't see how that change or contradict what I said at all. How many filibusters were threatened during that time, forcing them to have to get 60 votes? Clinton passed his bill 51-50 with Gore having to vote. Where they dealing with Republicans led by Bob Dole, a statesman, Obama has Mitch McConnell, a charlatan.
I don't justify or excuse anything but I do want the entire story to be told so we can see which are Obama's mistakes and which are someone else's and they're dumping it on him.
Another weakness by Obama and Congressional Democrats, especially in the Senate, is believing they're dealing with the old GOP, they're not. If I hear Harry Reid or Max Baucus call them "my friends on the other side" one more fucking time... They're not your fucking friends. They're telling people you're trying to kill their grandmothers, for chrissakes!
 
you talk a lot but don't seem to listen.

The GOP has consistently said they don't care about polls and what the American people think they want.

The GOP has said they were sent to Washington to lead and they will do what is right for the people.

When Romney was asked a few days ago did he come to listen he said no he came to speak.

Public consensus means nothing to the GOP . They listen to the heritage foundation.

You are under the mistaken belief that the people will make the GOP act when in fact they can't do anything until the next election in 2012

The GOP is confident that by then the economy will be so fucked up that the people will forget that they didn't listen and just blame Obama.

I mean damn when the leadership says the number 1 agenda is to make Obama fail that should tell you somehting.

It's not jobs
Its not the economy
Its not taxes

Its to make Obama fail.

*Sigh*
In deference to Upgrade Dave's thread, I will not reply sarcastically, but will say this:

"Reading is fundamental"
You know, like in your avatar? Please re-read what I wrote.
Cheers!
 
Democrats have been a big tent party for a while now. You have liberal, moderat, and conservative Democrats. You have Democrats who've been elected in conservative districts.

I wouldn't say Democrats as a whole don't support Obama. Most do. When you hear about Democrats who don't support some of Obama's policies, it's always the same few names...like someone said earlier, Joe Lieberman (who isn't seeking reelection), Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln (lost reelection in 2010)...

I need to say, Joe Lieberman seemed like he was on something else. He seemed scorned. I can't say that about the others, but Joe seemed very petty.

Obama never really had a super majority when he first came in. Couple that with Republicans who would rather run the country into the ground than compromise, and you have a real mess. With that in mind, Obama's done pretty well.

But now's the time for them to be bold and fight. That goes for Obama and Congressional Democrats. The majority of the country is behind them.
 
Regardless of those facts Obushma has something that Bush didn't have: PUBLIC CONSENSUS for JOB CREATION!

If Obushma FOUGHT in the area of public opinion and called folks out by name thus challenging them in the media, I promise you everybody would fall in line like dominos!!!


Those who are resistant to job creation on the magnitude needed to make a dent in unemployment, should have to answer to why they are against jobs for the unemployed in their districts. MAKE them have to answer to the voters.

Look at how John Kasich in Ohio had an epiphany as soon as he saw the public outrage towards his anti-union bill!


Exibit A:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/19/house-republicans-town-halls_n_930862.html


WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, more than 200 protesters impeded traffic in Washington state as they gathered near the offices of GOP Rep. Dave Reichert, chanting, "We need jobs. Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!" This is the third protest targeting Reichert since the vote on the debt ceiling, Patch reported.
He's not the only House Republican getting an earful from his constituents during the August congressional recess. In town halls from New Hampshire to Minnesota, GOP members have been bombarded with complaints.
In New Mexico last week, a woman angry about Congress’ partisan squabbling over the debt ceiling cursed at Rep. Steve Pearce. In Alabama, several constituents blasted oil subsidies at an event hosted by Rep. Mo Brooks. More than 150 showed up in Pennsylvania to express their frustration to Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick about everything from student loans to Social Security.
Taxes have been a major theme at several town halls. In Illinois, when Rep. Randy Hultgren proposed making the U.S. tax code “flatter, fairer,” his constituents responded by demanding that he support more taxes on the rich.
In New Hampshire, Rep. Frank Guinta -- who serves on the committee on oversight and government reform and the committee on the budget -- faced criticism from hurting voters. "I need desperate help," said John Cochrane, an attendee at Guinta's town hall who has been out of work for more than three years, according to Seacoastonline. "I want to be a good American again. I don't want to be a second-class American."
At an Ohio event for Rep. Steve Chabot, protesters held signs that read "Chabot Shame" and "Hands off my Medicare." Chabot promised the roomful of senior citizens that Medicare changes would affect only those 55 and younger. But one attendee, Teresa Law, told the Cincinnati Enquirer that she was unhappy with his answers. “I want to understand what in the world is going on here. We’re just hearing more rhetoric and we’re sidestepping the issues. It’s maddening,” she said.
Some Republicans sought to lower the temperature by holding virtual town halls or charging members of the public to ask them questions. Rep. Chip Cravaack (Minn.) spoke at an event this week for which a business trade group set an admission price of $10. Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) upped the cost to $15 for his event. Reps. Lou Barletta (Penn.) and Renee Ellmers (N.C.) held $30-per-plate "CEO-to-CEO" events last week. And Rep. Ben Quayle (Ariz.) charged $35 a head for a Q&A session and catered lunch.
This tactic may have helped some Republicans avoid protesters, but others weren't so lucky.
House Speaker John Boehner joined Cravaack and his fellow Minnesotan Rep. Erik Paulsen for a $10,000-a-person golf outing. (Lunch but no golf with the congressmen cost $1,000 a head.) Nearly 200 protesters showed up outside with signs accusing Republicans of protecting corporations over people, and a plane flew overhead with a banner that read, "Where's our piece of the pie? Jobs now."
 
Back
Top