PDA

View Full Version : 45 LIBERAL LEADERS: No more Barry!



LWW
09-19-2011, 03:27 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">President Obama’s smooth path to the Democratic nomination may have gotten rockier Monday, after a group of liberal leaders, including former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, announced plans to challenge the incumbent in primaries next year.

The group said the goal is to offer up a handful of candidates from various fields and areas where the president either has failed to stake out a “progressive” position or where he has “drifted toward the corporatist right.”

“Without debates by challengers inside the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries, the liberal/majoritarian agenda will be muted and ignored,” Mr. Nader said in a news release. “The one-man Democratic primaries will be dull, repetitive, and draining of both voter enthusiasm and real bright lines between the two parties that excite voters.”

In search of candidates, Mr. Nader and the others sent out a letter, endorsed by 45 “distinguished leaders,”to elected officials, civic leaders, academics and members of the progressive community who specialize among other things in labor, poverty, military and foreign policy. The list, they said, also includes progressive Democrats who have held national and state office and have fought for progressive reforms. </div></div>

OH DEAR! (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/19/liberals-vow-challenge-obama-democratic-primaries/)

Soflasnapper
09-19-2011, 04:52 PM
That's not what the article says, nor what the letter says.

Mr. Nader has explained that he has no illusions that Obama will fail to win the nomination. As you may remember, Nader did not run his famous '00 campaign in the Democratic Party, and I do not think he's EVER run in the Democratic primaries.

His further explanation is right there in your cited quote. He wants Obama primaried in his party not to defeat him for the re-nomination of his party, but to push him to progressive positions, and to make the primaries interesting as a side benefit.

Here's where you 'answer' some crap about me always defending Obama, when I'm actually only setting your falsehoods straight.

LWW
09-20-2011, 12:51 AM
Tell me again about how you don't slavishly defend all things Obama.

Soflasnapper
09-20-2011, 10:05 AM
Why don't you post something ACCURATE that is negative about Obama, and see if I object?

Or defend your post headline as accurate, if you think it is (it's not).

All I point out is your errors, or the errors of those you cite in your posting.

Errors not innocently made, btw.

Also btw, Nader is not a liberal. He's far more leftward than plain vanilla liberalism.

Gayle in MD
09-20-2011, 10:25 AM
He cannot post anything that's true.

It is completely against his programming.

He must 'slavishly' attack President Obama, AND all those who support him. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

G.

nAz
09-20-2011, 01:59 PM
Good it will keep him honest.

LWW
09-20-2011, 03:58 PM
Leftists are not liberals.

Soflasnapper
09-21-2011, 05:38 PM
Correct.

And these 45 'liberal leaders,' comprised of many actually leftists instead of liberals, are not calling for no more Barry.

They are calling for SIX candidates to oppose him (which would obviously split the anti-Obama vote), to make the primary more interesting and sharpen a progressive message by pushing Obama to the left.

Not to replace him. That is not their goal, nor have they stated that it is their goal. I provide their stated goals in the preceding paragraph.

LWW
09-22-2011, 03:31 AM
REALLY? (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/08/29/130.poll.pdf)

Odd that over 1 in 4 dem voters want him replaced on the ticket.

Soflasnapper
09-22-2011, 02:03 PM
Really?

Odd that at this same time in the first Clinton administration, 1 in 3 Democrats wanted a different nominee. To be helpful, I will point out that 1 in 3 is more than (a little over) 1 in 4. WAS Clinton primaried? Was Clinton the nominee? Did Clinton win re-election?

Odd as well that you evidently continue to refuse to READ what these Nader+45 are saying, as in, what they actually wrote. Instead you insist they are saying something contrary to what they wrote, and have said.

They are clearly saying it will be better as primary theater, and end in better Obama policy prescriptions, if 6 faux candidates allegedly trying for the nomination, but with no shot (as the anti-Obama vote would be split 6 ways, ensuring its defeat) lively up themselves and push Obama to the center or the left.

LWW
09-22-2011, 03:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you make a claim, you post a link.

Q </div></div>

Soflasnapper
09-22-2011, 07:26 PM
Odd that at this same time in the first Clinton administration, 1 in 3 Democrats wanted a different nominee.

The link to that factoid is your own link, a little down, where the pollster provides a helpful historical comparison.

To be helpful, I will point out that 1 in 3 is more than (a little over) 1 in 4.

1 in 3 is .333. 1 in 4 is .250. .333 &gt; .250. QED (sans link)

WAS Clinton primaried? Was Clinton the nominee? Did Clinton win re-election?

I had forgotten that the mayor of Buffalo joined Lyndon LaRouche in contesting Clinton in the primaries. sez here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_ primaries,_1996) However, those offered token opposition, not a big push by big Democrats, and of course Clinton cruised to re-nomination and re-election.

And here (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Anyone+left%3F+The+search+for+a+Clinton+challenger +in+1996.-a016914424) is a link to a Progressive Magazine article about the interest of the left in searching for a primary opponent for Clinton.

Here is how the WaTimes reported this letter: (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/19/liberals-vow-challenge-obama-democratic-primaries/)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Worried the liberal voice is being drowned out in the presidential campaign, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>progressive leaders said Monday they want to field a slate of candidates against President Obama in the Democratic primaries to make him stake out liberal stances as he seeks re-election.</span>

Ralph Nader warns that without an intraparty challenge the liberal agenda “will be muted and ignored,” the one-man primary will kill voter enthusiasm and voters won’t get a chance to reflect on the real differences that divide the Democratic and Republican parties.

“What we are looking at now is the dullest presidential campaign since Walter Mondale — and that’s saying something, believe me,” Mr. Nader told The Washington Times.

The group’s call has been endorsed by more than 45 other liberal leaders. They want to recruit six candidates who bring expertise ranging from poverty to the military.
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
Mr. Nader said the intent is not to defeat Mr. Obama but to make him focus on issues that might get lost in a purely Obama-versus-GOP discussion.</span> </div></div>