How about this? I am not enthusiastic, neither is anyone I know, yet I am going to vote, and so is everyone I know.

And we all know what the alternative is. Strange how nobody seems to talk about this, they get caught up in their own feelings about dreams about what politics should be, but never has been, and never will be.

Wonder what Rahm Emmanuel says about this?
"Fuck enthusiasm?"
"Fuck our base?"
"Fuck liberals?"

Compared to other countries, America always has a low voter turnout.

Perhaps this is because we don't really pay much attention to politics and politicians.

Evidence includes the average citizen's inability to name the President, either Senator, or their congressman.

I hate to say this, and its not a pleasant thought at all, but the Republican base is far mare representative of the American public than the Democrat's base. Sad but true.

"I'm tempted to think the most radicalized Republican Party in generations would alone be enough to bring Democrats out to the polls in droves."

Democrats use fear of Republicans as the number one GOTV tool, eschewing "deliver on our promises," and "dance with those what brought you."

Speaking for myself, I am trying to be motivated by this very issue but it's just not effective. There's probably a limit to how often Democrats can go back to that well, especially as they move rightward.

I gotta be honest, with you. I think Adam's a bit of an idiot.

So, is he really continuing to sell the "if only Obama had been more Liberal" line? Right.

This from the guy who didn't bother to read (or understand Eugene Robinson's column) from this morning.

I think you've said it before. If the Employment numbers were still high, but heading downward, would we be having this conversation?

Are you really trying to tell me that the Public Option (as much as I loved it), was the singular driving force that brought people to the polls in 2008, and now are going to keep them away?

Do my fellow Liberals really think that Congressional Elections are some kind of video game, where you "reward" President Obama with Senate and House members as "points", and take them away when he doesn't do exactly what you want?

Who exactly is going to get hurt here if the GOP should take over the House and Senate? Only then will these nimrods get motivated?

We can't say we weren't warned. Or can we?

I'm a high-information political junkie. I'm 62 years old. I've lived through Nixon, fer crissakes. I know what bastards these people can be. But NEVER have I lived through a situation where the Democrats are so utterly demoralized. Part of this is the devolution of the MSM and the rise of the right-wing scream machine. And another part is the personality of Barack Obama. It would actually help if Obama got a blowjob from an intern (with a corresponding reaction from the right). That would mobilize the left. Sadly, we've got a cold dog for a leader. I want to love the guy. But he doesn't return phone calls.

It certainly couldn't hurt if Obama would go out and campaign.

There is one other factor. Democrats have basically been acting like losers for the past 6 months or so. Every major Democrat has admited the party will lose seats in November. The White House is making plans for how to deal with a Republican controlled congress. It's becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The various congressional election committees and the national party are supposedly flush with cash. And yet I hardly see any of that money being used. Where are the adds talking up insurance reform or the success of the auto bailout (which saved my job)?

Democrats are basically slouching into November. Perceptually the average person just doesn't get all that gung-ho for people who act like they are going to lose and lose big. It turns them off. It says 'don't bother' to most of their allies. Why vote a party that says 'we're lossers, please vote for us'?

I think the mistake made here and in other places where current events are a life-force is the assumption that everyone cares about the twists and turns of political life. Our obsession with it is not shared by most people. Daily analysis is like evaluating a marathon after the first fifty yds.
In about a month most people will give some thought to the election and vote like they usually do.
The unhappy Progressives and the wacko Teabaggers will be trumped what Mort Saul used to call "Right wing social democrats."

The key difference is that the Democratic leaders from Obama on down are showing zero leadership, nor are they attempting to capitalize on Republican scariness, except in a small sporadic way. Obama's brief foray into Social Security seems to have been shut off by Mark Halperin's column about Republicans somehow not "trusting" Democrats. So even if Democrats are concerned about Republicans, the Democrats are giving them no reason to get out and vote.

Also, Obama does not have a populist bone in his body. When we need bold action, instead we get his signature coolness and aloofness.

As one who is astonished at all that has been accomplished, imperfect as the various pieces of legislation have been (as legislation always is), my tolerance for people complaining they didn't get their precise wish delivered by a magic pony is at an end. Any Democrat, any liberal, any progressive who thinks that their issues will be better served by "showing those spineless Dems by not voting and depressing the Dem vote" are simply absurd. Nothing in the world that a progressive wants to see happen is made more likely by having the republicans retake Congress.

At this point, person-to-person 'vote, damnit" GOTV is essential. Also, person-to-person "stop the bullshit" talks like John Cole just had at the barbers are also essential: http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/09/03/fox-nation/.

You can't beat something with nothing, even if it's an insane something.

Personally I'm not planning on voting, but if I do, it'll probably be for the Republican. We can't keep going like this, and if it takes impeachment hearings to get that message across to the Democrats, well, then that's what it takes.

I'm with Walt. Why should I fight when Obama won't? I'm sure the conservadems are telling him to stay out of sight so they can trash him behind his back hoping that is the path to victory. Sorry, Barry, but you are going to have to decide whether you are going to undo Rahm's "Blue Dog" project or lose the House. Pelosi deserves better than this limp noodle crap.

Republicans have been pissed off since Obama was elected and now, after stewing for two years, they get to do something about it. If Republicans retake Congress, Democrats will feel the same way in 2012. Anger is the best motivator (how mad were we at Bush?) and may be the only one in our current political climate.

I think he's right. It's not that people don't want to reward or punish Obama, necessarily, by voting or staying home. I think the problem is that people recognize that he's not up for election, it's a congressional election. Who's inspired by their representative? Or their Senator? Harry Reid is the majority leader of the senate, and he's within single digits of a deranged lunatic. You don't get enthusiastic without leadership, and frankly, congressional Dems haven't had leadership since Teddy Kennedy passed away. As an Ohioan, I'm pretty motivated by Sherrod Brown. By Lee Fisher is, well, Lee Fisher. He's not out there, putting out a strong message. Strickland's been a bit of a waffler for a while, and he's alienating some of his strongest supporters. Sorry, but you don't blame teachers for a bad educational system in a state where the State Supreme court still says that the method of funding the schools is unconstitutional.

On top of all of that, there's no sense that the Democratic Congressional Caucus cares about their base. It's not that they don't pander to the base, it's that they actively ignore it. Everyone here knows the litany of complaints of the left, and they're not wrong. It's not just public option (which was already a betrayal of single payer hopes). It's not just Rahm Emanuel. It's not just judicial nominees. It's not just the inability of the democratic caucus to get anything to a vote in the Senate (or even for every cloture vote to be exactly on party lines). It's not just the Blue Dogs. It's not just that Joe Lieberman held his committee chairs and seniority. It all of this and more. A thousand little slaps in the face ultimately adds up to the cumulative message that we should just stay home, and the hell with them.

Maybe we are suffering from some form of PTSD. In this case the Liberal Voters felt disillusioned by the actions of government. But how possible is it to satisfy people like me, a liberal? The liberal block is basically young, with little experience with setbacks, or ideologically pure, unspoiled, belief systems.

Everyone goes through the process discovering that your beliefs do not match reality...at least once.

Maybe Obama is too realistic. Such a position might be great for diplomats or behind-the-scenes leaders, it doesn't work with the public at large.

Instead I believe that Obama is working for eventual re-election in 2012. I think this is the singular goal, because everything he has accomplished in the last two years could easily be reversed if he does not win re-election.

In addition, I think his most important goal is appointing Supreme Court justices. He might get one more before 2010, but any openings might get delayed until after the election. Republicans play hard. Only if Obama wins a second term can he focus on the judiciary. The judiciary will uphold or strike down his legislation.

There is always the possibility that democrats will vote out of civic duty is not 'enthusiasm'.

well, we can hope.

As one who is astonished at all that has been accomplished, imperfect as the various pieces of legislation have been (as legislation always is), my tolerance for people complaining they didn't get their precise wish delivered by a magic pony is at an end. Any Democrat, any liberal, any progressive who thinks that their issues will be better served by "showing those spineless Dems by not voting and depressing the Dem vote" are simply absurd.

It think it's a little more complex. It's not a matter of showing the spineless Dems by not voting. I think it's just that its hard to get enthusiastic about a bunch of non-entities who seem fundamentally incapable of defending our interests and priorities. That lack of enthusiasm is killing the Dems because it means that the base won't evangelize on their behalf. I'll go vote for Lee Fisher, but I sure as hell can't work up the sort of enthusiasm needed to be bothered to volunteer for him, and I'm not going to write a check for something I don't believe in. That's what's killing the Dems.

I'm one of the unmotivated Dems you talk about and have been terribly disappointed in Sen. McCaskill and in Robin Carnahan. I have sent e-mails to both asking why I should get out to vote if they seem so unwilling to fight for such things as a stronger health care bill or eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the rich? But the alternative, for me, is too awful to imagine. So I will vote. The question becomes how many apathetic Dems are like me and see reason enough to vote against the GOP threat, and how many really think they will be teaching the Dems a lesson by not voting. We shall see.

The "base" of the Democratic party is not liberals. It is low-income voters, women, and minorities, with a Venn diagram of those three groups showing the real base.
Low-income voters are less likely to vote. So are minority voters (women, no, not as a group). Now ask yourself. Why should they? What indication have the Dems given they are fighting for those folks? Little or none.
People do not, rightly or wrongly, and in my opinion mostly rightly, consider the opposition when they vote. The people in power get a yea or nay. When the Republicans control Congress next year, voters will remember they hate them, too.

"even going so far as to drive Republican moderates out of the party altogether", No! They won't leave the Republican party, they will be there.
The Dems have no Gonads, plus they are a lot more honest, You can't be honest in America and win elections. You have to lie, lie lie!Too late to change the electorates mind, the Dems will get killed in November. I am very depressed with the current state of affairs. Maybe like a drug addict we have to hit rock bottom.The republicans will take us there.

The 2008 electorate included a ton of people who liked Obama for being Obama, wanted to work for him, got fired up about him, voted for him and other Democrats... and they don't feel that way about "Democrats" in the abstract. They're Obama voters. And Obama isn't running.

There's not a lot of reason to think that the way to get them fired up is to be "more liberal." Liberals like me always want that, because we're liberals. Being "more liberal," though, means losing a lot of votes, as the cohort of conservative Dems will refuse to play nicely. Which means a lot more press about Democrats in disarray, a lot more coverage of Obama proposing things that don't get enacted, and a lot MORE of a sense of failure.

I don't know why so many self-avowed liberals refuse to see that showing that you stick up for liberals might make liberals very happy -- because we kind of _like_ the idea of going down swinging for a cause we believe in -- but might breed media coverage that's all about _losing_. Because liberal policy _will not win votes in Congress_. It will lose them.

Jack.B.Nimble? That's how I feel..and for the rest instead of complaining about 'what have they done for me LATELY?' how about what has the GOP EVER done for the middle class? So you're pissed off, demoralized, etc. etc...do you HONESTLY think the GOP is gonna do jacks#$t for you if you DON'T turn out? I don't and nobody I know does so WE are all voting...

I can tell you why this particular part of the Dem base is saying "meh" -- the Democrats in Congress and the White House have continued the practice begun by Clinton of working for the votes of Republicans and so-called independents while taking the Democratic Party base completely for granted.

Apparently someone needs to let the Democratic "leaders" know that they don't need Republican voters -- there Democrats outnumber Republicans by a wide margin.

There are only so many elections I am willing to go the extra mile for a party which operates on the theory that I will vote for its candidates because the other party is insane.

As a Massachusetts voter, I was thoroughly ashamed of the piss poor effort the Democratic party made in the special election that gave us Scott Brown.

And that of course followed the piss poor efforts of the White House and Congressional Democrats with respect to health care reform, energy policy, unions and -- a big one -- investigation and prosecution of the Bush administration for torture and war crimes.

I am sure not going to vote for the GOP, but it is very hard to get motivated to vote for the Dems. The idea that things would be worse if the GOP retakes Congress is NOT the way to engender enthusiasm. I will vote in November but only because I always vote and consider it a duty. What I won't do is give money to the Dems or make phone calls or try and defend their cowardly and timid leadership. The fact is that if "none of the above" were on the ballot, the Dems might come in third.

I have less than zero enthusiasm for the current Democratic Party. I will vote for them. But am I really supposed to answer the phone when they call me at dinnertime every night asking for money? There's your enthusiasm gap. I'm supposed to give money to get out....what message, exactly? "We're not insane like the Tea Party, and we only serve the super-rich half as much as the other guys do, and although we don't do a damn thing about global warming, at least we believe science has some merit?"

Folks, quit peeing your pants and reread Hornblower's post. Wasn't it the Big Dog who pointed out that elections are won in the last 3 weeks of the campaign? Call my attitude "pie in the sky," but I'm going to wait a little while longer before I commit seppuku over the November elections.

Where is David Plouffe?

All we need to do is vote.

Sometimes it's a matter of just getting to the polls to approximate Tom Jensen's picture of 2008. I'm swayed by Gene Robinson's cri de coeur in this morning's WaPo. If we need every political action to be accompanied by a party with favors and ice cream and cake and presents to take home, then we really are being silly. Obama gave a great party in 2008. Now he needs to get some support to pay the rent. For 18 months he's been mugged and spat on and dissed. We owe him.

So duck the phone calls and neighborhood campaigning if necessary. No need to plaster a great fake smile on your face. Just bloody well get out there and vote!

For extra motivation,if needed, read "Washington Rules."

The GOP has abandoned the middle and painted themselves into a corner of extremism and racism. They have only one tune on their iPod.

The situation has been made clear - what is needed now is making the case to the people, and communicating that everything we hope for with Obama depends on turning out to vote for candidates who are not Obama.

How long does it take for an idea to jump from the well-informed voter to the less-informed voter? Sometimes only a couple of days.

Of course, if Democratic activists spend the next 8 weeks mourning the public option, instead of spreading the message, then it might not happen.

Steve, bring out the banhammer and institute a policy of not printing comments that are aimed at lessening Democratic enthusiasm. Just until the election. Make the Naderite parasites start their own site and do their own reporting. Why should you build an audience so that they can try to demoralize it?

I'm at the point where I'm hoping Obama catches bin Laden.

In previous recessions Democrats were fighting for measures to create jobs. They are fighting for us this year.

"...so other examples -- Robert Gibbs' comments about the "professional left," the defeat of the public option, annoyance with Rahm Emanuel in general, frustration on judicial nominees, the administration's disappointing record on civil liberties in the context of national security -- likely come to mind to explain progressive disillusionment."

Add to that pile-on Obama refusing to give a complete debunking of the Republican machine's war propaganda in his speech this week. And ironically he even appeared to sweep the Republican Iraq mess behind him -- and behind all of us; in essence letting off the Republicans for an illegal, immoral and financially disasterous war; in addition, he plans to stay in Iraq past 2012 with 50,000 troops -- that was actually what Bush was planning. Also, add to the pile-on doubling down in Afghanistan where the chances of an effective outcome understood in terms of a practical success are near zero before next summer.

When one understands that these wars were central to what helped stoke Obama's turnout 3 years ago, where the public could see an electoral Obama-Bush polarization in clear foreign policy terms ... all that is near gone now.

I think what the public/dems see now is a tepid president, contrasted with an Obama of 3 years ago.

So, "Are you fired up"?

Since trying to scare people into voting — "Just think of how awful it will be if we don't vote D!" — isn't exactly a way to create excitement, here's a thought:

If Democrats want to fire up their base and get some votes, then maybe they need to stop shitting on that base at every opportunity, and begin treating those who support them with respect instead of contempt.

It really is that simple. Seriously. It is.

Time and again thousands of people work their fucking asses off to get Dems elected ... only to turn around see Dems throw them under the bus, run over them a few times, and then spit on them for good measure.

Kinda hard to like people who show more disdain for those who support and vote for them, than they do for those who would rather see them all rounded up and shot.

The kooky Teapublicans are enthusiastic, but then again they always are. They have a capacity for self delusion only exceeded by that of the early Christians.

From my readings of the population here in Az. The regular Republicans are not enthralled. Knowing how my late mom voted, she voted Republican until the last few years of her life when she felt the Party was too radical and too sleazy for her taste. (she did vote for McCain, but only because she knew him.

And if you look at the late few years of Az Governor races the more moderate candidate has always won, 1990 being an exception because of the run off. ditto, CD8 last year.

Assuming Dems turn out normally and the regular repubs are either dead or disenchanted and my mom would never have voted for Angle, Miller, or Paul this could bode well for the Democrats this fall.

Finally,

Boycott the Wall Street Journal...it's pretty much been succeeded by Bloomberg anyways.

DINO's have many good choices, startingb with BHO. However, TEA-partiers outnumber DINO's. The Dem base has very few good choices. It's beginning to look like the best result is Repub contol of both House and Senate, rejection of BHO and other Blue Dog Dems--- and a 2012 election with no incumbent running for Prez on any ticket.

Malcolm Johnson rips on other liberals for not being enthusiastic:

"Who exactly is going to get hurt here if the GOP should take over the House and Senate? Only then will these nimrods get motivated?""

This reminds me of the saying:
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

Malcolm, don't rule out that you may be a complete idiot.

The Dems are going to get killed because the economy sucks and they have done too little to try and improve it. And Obama sucks because he refuses to tell the catfood commission that social security is off the table. The only reason anyone can offer to vote for Dems is that they are not as bad as the GOP. Good luck with that.

I wish columnists who talk about the base would list the real concerns of the real base. Not the internet folks or vocal minority on TV. The real base is concerned about the economy and the economy only, not remarks made by Gibbs or Rahm, nor do they care(right now and as passionately) about civil liberties.

In today's Charlotte NC Observer - quote

Koch brothers recipe for a tea party:
Fear and greed poured into a pot full of gullible Americans who drink it up, fooled into thinking they are acting in their own self interest.

I too wonder where the rosy glow of October 2008 has gone. It turns out we are not, after all, the people we've been waiting for. It was just a clever campaign slogan.

But so what? I've been disappointed before. I remember when the voters elected two actual felons to the highest offices in the land. And the country survived.

All I can do is my small part. So on election day, I will put on my shoes and go out and vote for Democrats. As a party, Democrats are a mixed bag and a very imperfect lot. It's tempting to say, "A plague on both your houses!" But I hope I know better. The choice is starker than ever: trying, often timidly and halfheartedly but still trying, to solve today's problems; or returning to the paradise of the McKinley administration.

to me the amazing sight is watching the democrats refuse to flog the gop across the back every single time some teajadist running for [or in] office speaks into an open mike...obama and the congressional leaders are still acting like they can appeal to the republicans' "better angels."
news flash! angels don't exist....

it's probably too late to think that the democrats might govern in the way the voters who voted for them wanted them to do...

Of course, "Meh!!"

You can only catch your steady in bed with someone else a certain number of times before you give up on them, especially if it is someone totally different from you. So the Cheney/Bush experience didn't teach people that the Repugs are bad news, and it didn't teach the Blue Dogs that right wing dogma is nonsense. Maybe they need another round of it and then it may take.

And if the US goes third world, so be it. It's not as if we're doing that much good for the world as it is. Think Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan, Columbia, Honduras, and numerous other totalitarian governments that we're supporting. Maybe a serious crisis will concentrate some minds and we can get back to the innovative, productive, scientifically oriented society we once were.

wow, this is a gloomy thread... maybe it's my youthful optimism, but I agree with Dr Fog.

Sure the republicans/baggers base is worked-up with outrage, but the more worked-up they've got the more insane their arguments and statements have become and the more people they've alienated. Manufactured issues have a limited shelf-life (e.g., 'ground zero' mosque) and most people are hardly paying any attention at this point anyways.

i know politicking isn't exactly the dems strong suite but maybe, just maybe, we're seeing some 'muhammad ali' strategy from Obama/dems. As the repubs have fomented they've provided plenty of ammunition for the dems to capitalize on and repulsed a lot of 'thinking' republicans in the process. Dems have just been protecting themselves up to this point (which doesn't exactly make for an exciting fight), but I think we're going to see a lot more uppercuts start flying in the next two months. One can hope...

@wvng.........At this point, person-to-person 'vote, damnit" GOTV is essential. Also, person-to-person "stop the bullshit" talks like John Cole just had at the barbers are also essential: http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/09/03/fox-nation/.

Hear! Hear! I am with you. I have never heard so much whining and complaining.

Obama is the best president in years and in the end, will be better than Clinton. Dems suck it up and get your act in gear. You sound like kids who didn't get every present on your XMAS wish list.

The blogs are full of self-proclaimed liberals who profess to be demoralized. But is that what drives the "enthusiasm gap"? I _highly_ doubt it. There aren't enough liberals, sad to say, to make the disillusioned percentage of an already small percentage show up as a poll deficit. It is _much more likely_ IMHO that people who were psyched about Obama in '08 but aren't all that keyed in to non-Obama Democratic politics are not that happy with how things are going. Basically, it's a regression to the mean: people got excited about sending a message to Republicans in '06; they got really excited about Obama in '08; and they're not so excited anymore. I don't think it has much at all to do with noisily discontented liberals who want to see things be more liberal. That's who congregates on the blogs, though, giving us all a skewed view of the reasons for voters to behave as they keep being reported to be.

"Who's inspired by their representative? Or their Senator? You don't get enthusiastic without leadership, and frankly, congressional Dems haven't had leadership since Teddy Kennedy passed away. As an Ohioan, I'm pretty motivated by Sherrod Brown."

Sherrod Brown is awesome. So is my senator Jeff Merkley. Freshman from Oregon, you may have seen him on Maddow or Schultz. Wyden is OK, too (and should be re-elected). But Merkley is all over it, a true populist. But he's just too nice to go into a rant ala Weiner or Grayson. My former senator, Patty Murray, is good too (hoping she is re-elected). It seems like only those who yell or are insane get the attention, sometimes that's good, but not always, especially when the media treats it all as tabloid stuff instead of sorting out the truth from lies.

I wish everyone who watches Fox would watch Maddow. (Might be fun to see their heads explode when faced with the truth.)

Anyhow... maybe the polls showing the Rs to be up will encourage them to speak their minds even more freely, showing them to be void of reality and batshit insane even more than they already have... which will turn off the Indy's. But mostly it's got the be the Dem leadership that goes for the R jugular. Starting with Obama, who has started doing this but needs to get into high gear. More of the car in the ditch, that the Rs don't care about anyone but the rich/those in power, etc.

I'm visiting DC week after next and hear that the Dems will be voting on the jobs bill. I'm hoping to be in the gallery when that happens. Too bad I can't take rotten tomatoes to throw at McConnell, Cornyn, et al. Maybe one for "good ol'" Ben Nelson, too.

I'm at the point where I'm hoping Obama catches bin Laden.
Posted by: doubtful

I lack the imagination to figure out how, but am sure the Republicans/Fox would think it a bad thing if Obama catches/kills Osama. Maybe weak on terrorism because he wasn't tortured.
I do hope we get the opportunity to see how they spin it.

I actually think the Dems would do well to make Al Franken the voice and face of the party instead of Pelosi and Reid. They need a feisty, quick-witted takedown artist making their case.

And they could use a better case, too. I think the main buzzkill for Democrats is Iraq-Afghanistan. If they'd essentially pulled out of both countries by this summer, they wouldn't have to worry about their base's enthusiasm.

"Personally I'm not planning on voting, but if I do, it'll probably be for the Republican. We can't keep going like this, and if it takes impeachment hearings to get that message across to the Democrats, well, then that's what it takes."

Tell me how this makes any sense at all. Please. Are you twelve?

JMG, @14:52,

Actually, I'm quite pleased with Obama when it comes to the treatment of "female minority". Lilly Ledbetter Act straight out of the gate. Both SCOTUS nominations -- female. And 4 female cabinet Secretaries (that I can think of -- Clinton, Sebelius, Napolitano and Solis. Am I forgetting someone?). Not half bad, to understate. It's nice to have a president who allows that women are sentient beings and who's not threatened by the idea of women in position of power.

It's just that there are so many other areas I care about as much or more, where I'm not happy at all. Beginning with Rahmbo whispering sweet nothings into his oversized ears...

Obama may not be every liberal's dream of a President; but, when you look at the alternatives, there is nothing better. The Republicans are idiots and Americans who vote for them are idiots, too. Which comes to the crux of the problem: the American electorate is way too stupid.

input this URL:
( http://www.fashiongoods.us )
you can find many cheap and fashion stuff
(jor dan s-h-o-e-s)
(NBA NFL NHL MLB j-e-r-s-e-y)
( lv h-a-n-d-b-a-g)
(cha nel w-a-l-l-e-t)
(D&G s-u-n-g-l-a-s-s-e-s)
(ed har dy j-a-c-k-e-t)
(UG G b-o-o-t)

WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

@ JMG: "People do not, rightly or wrongly, and in my opinion mostly rightly, consider the opposition when they vote." They had better. A more horrible mistake could hardly be imagined, especially this year. The opposition is the elephant in the room (;-O) and had better be stopped. Indeed, the specific traits and plans of Democrats this year (maybe for years to come) are secondary. They just are, it's the ways things have become in this bedlam. Checking details of how liberal/progressive etc. is just picking socks by comparison. Vote.

"I'm tempted to think the most radicalized Republican Party in generations would alone be enough to bring Democrats out to the polls in droves."

Yeah, isn't it weird how when you promise people stuff then betray them, lie about, get caught, and respond by pissing all over those same people- they then don;t exactly feel the need to defend your honor.

Has any administration ever gone to such lengths to completely shit on their base as Obama has managed in less than 2 years? I really can't think of any. Everything we cared about (and which he promised) he's since gone back on. Civil rights he's actually worse than bush asserting an intrinsic right of the president to assassinate american citizens with no oversite. Gay rights he's worse than the congressional republican leadership. Latinos have gotten brushed off over and over as have labor. Obamacare was an abomination that completely fucked us in favor of the insurance companies.

So yeah. Fuck Obama, and fuck every dem that helped him run the country as a center right government despite being elected by the left.

Oh and finally fuck all the primary voters who just had to have the eloquent guy with no history who rose meteorically from one of the most corrupt parts of the country. Some of us raised warning flags but you refused to listen. So forgive me if I offer a big helping of STFU to go along with *your* disillusionment. You guys are the ones to blame for wasting a once in a generation opportunity because you just can't say no to someone who talks "purty."

Idiots.

It amazes me that there are still people who can fool themselves into thinking that things would be so much as an iota better if only we had elected Hillary Clinton. Obama's problem is that he has surrounded himself with Hillary's people, has adopted the kind of corporate-based centrism that started under Bill CLinton, and has come to be more like the Clintons than I would have ever imagined, or feared. But stick with your fantasies . . . at least someone will be happy.

Leading up to the 2000 election, many were not "enthusiastic" about Al Gore. Some voted for "a more progressive" candidate. Some didn't vote because there's "no difference" between them. Looking back, Al Gore vs. G. W. Bush, don't you wish it had been different. What will you think in 2020 about the "Tea Party take over in 2010". perhaps you should "put a sock in the snark" and get out and vote the non crazy option.

For me, my lack of enthusiasm for Obama to date has a lot more to do with the symbolic issues than anything else. Like many other liberals, I voted for Obama because I wanted to see an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the closing of Guantanamo, and an end to the encroachment on civil liberties that characterized the Bush administration.

On none of these issues has there been any progress. Guantanamo is still open, the war in Afghanistan has actually been expanded by Obama, the end of combat operations in Iraq is a joke (we've still got 50,000 troops there, combat is still occuring, and we're still spending untold billions of dollars there), and the Bush administration encroachments on civil liberties have been wholeheartedly embraced by the Obama administration.

Health-care reform was progress in the right direction even without single-payer (but hamstrung by the fact that many provisions do not come into effect until 2014), but financial reform was a joke thanks to all the Congresional Dems dependent on Wall Street campaign contributions, and the stimulus only a temporary patch.

Ronald Reagan asked the question "are you better off than you were four years ago?". The state of the economy nothwithstanding, the answer for most Democrats is something along the lines of "maybe a little", or "not really".

And that is why there is such an enthusiasm gap.

"Obama's problem is that he has surrounded himself with Hillary's people, has adopted the kind of corporate-based centrism that started under Bill CLinton, and has come to be more like the Clintons than I would have ever imagined, or feared."

Anything to preserve your fantasy of Obama the magnificent, huh?

"Leading up to the 2000 election, many were not "enthusiastic" about Al Gore. Some voted for "a more progressive" candidate. Some didn't vote because there's "no difference" between them. Looking back, Al Gore vs. G. W. Bush, don't you wish it had been different. What will you think in 2020 about the "Tea Party take over in 2010". perhaps you should "put a sock in the snark" and get out and vote the non crazy option."

Or maybe some of us remember that Gore's running mate was Joe "I hate brown people and love rapists" Lieberman. If Gore had picked some non-neocon asshat as a running mate then yeah there may have been a difference between the two. But given the way Lieberman encouraged every excess of the Bush years to say that a gore/lieberman ticket would have been different is stupid and self serving.

Where are the rousing Liberal/progressive speakers to get attention and make news like Palin and others on the right while hammering that the right is full of big lies and failed ideas, and the left has good, sound ideas that will benefit the vast majority of the population, particularly the liberal base. Where are the intelligent, charismatic liberals and why aren't they getting the message out and sounding convinced we have what everyone should want??? (are there no liberals in sales/pr?) At this point Ross Perot and his charts might even help.

Tlaloc, my criticism of Obama can hardly be seen by any sane person as praise, or construed as promoting Obama as "magnificent." Indeed, far from praising Obama, I think he has set himself up for what will be seen as a failed presidency. (Whether less caution would have produced better results in the present circumstances is a matter of speculation, but certainly being so cautious has meant that little has actually been accomplished and even less is being prepared for future action, and his base is discouraged. You might note that all of these things are negative comments.) I will grant that H. C. is probably more of a fighter, but if you are so convinced that she would be doing something different, please let us know what the personnel changes would be for an H. C. administration, and how that would have achieved any different outcome. (Rahm, after all, is her own favorite go-to guy.) At the moment, all the fantasy appears to be your own.

Hello - I must say, I’m impressed with your site. I had no trouble navigating through all the tabs and information was very easy to access. I found what I wanted in no time at all. Pretty awesome. Would appreciate it if you add forums or something, it would be a perfect way for your clients to interact. Great job