"Then, no worries if he's not re-elected..."

Comments

[Puget Sound Blathers]

President Obama is more pragmatist than wild eyed progressive.
In the first two years, when President Obama had veto proof majorities in the House and Senate he didn't take advantage of it to put in a overwhelming Progressive Agenda. Ask a reasonable Progressive about Obama-care and they'll likely tell you that it didn't go far enough.

Pres Obama at worst -or best- is a centrist and having him balanced by the right only reenforces that tendency on his part. I don't even think he is an idealogue. Just a pragmatic type who seeks consensus.

Look at his foreign policy. He said all he needed to run the tables -aka dupe the Progressives- in the 2008 primaries but once in he became Bush-lite.

He likes the trappings of power and wealth. It is where he is most comfortable. He wants his time in Martha's Vinyard. He likes his time on the golf course. I don't begrudge him that.

Contrasting that, Bush (W) spent his vacation time on his ranch because that was where he was comfortable.

It's put the Progressives in a tough spot. They'll no doubt fold their tent and go PINO cause that's what they tend to do. Pres Obama and David Axelrod have put the PRogressives in a spot between a rock and a hard place. The only thing that they can do is stay home but that just means more Repubs in Congress. So the Progressives need the moderate Pres Obama as a tepid check on the right. Sucks to be a Prgressive.
So get out the vote, PINOs. You got doorbells to ring and phone calls to make. LMAO

[joanie]

The stay-at-home point: Most progressives know that whether or not we vote for Obama again, we will vote for a Democratic Congress. You see black and white where I see shades of gray. It's always like that with you guys.

And it wasn't progressives that brought the tea party candidates to power in Congress. People will say it was because progressives didn't vote. Well, can't have it both ways. We seem to be damned if we do and damned if we don't. Are we a force that matters are aren't we? I've read that it was independents who brought Obama the White House. What are they going to do?

Instead of all your blaming of progressives, why not a broader analysis?

[joanie]

As for our little comic above, it would take more than just the tea party to elect her. What would Republicans do?

Of course, she's not going to be the candidate. If it were Perry, would you vote for him?

[Puget Sound Blathers]

First off, you proved my point Joanie PINO.
Second, you are one of the most black-white thinkers around this blog.

And you'll be voting again for McDermott for Congress and voting for Pres Obama. Lock-step. If you were a true Progressive you would be looking beyond and reaching out to elect Progressive Candidates.

Oh yeah, don't forget to hike the rent on your MIL unit. (Doesn't sound very 'Progressive')

Actually, I am glad you'll be voting for Pres Obama for the reasons listed above. He's a moderate/pragmatic type and he'll have a Republican Congress as a counterbalance.

[joanie]

Well, another post in which you say nothing. It's a pattern.

Where did I say I would be voting for Obama? I don't care of people get mad when I call you an idiot. You are an idiot.

[KS blathers for the halibut]

I'd say that Obama doesn't deserve to be voted for by a number of progressives, just as Bush-43 did not deserve to be voted for by a number of Repubicans.

I prefer divided government up until 2008, but after the Dems couldn't help themselves and overreached drove us up to the edge of the financial cliff - I only have a tepid desire for divided government after 2012, but realize that the pendulum will swing back to divided government after the next midterm.

Maybe the Dems will get the screaming message about cutting back on spending and handouts - but as long as there are progressive moonbats out there pushing for a rebirth of the feudal system, it won't happen without a protracted fight...