jump to last post 1-9 of 9 discussions (41 posts)

Should a progressive challenge Obama in 2012?

  1. TeaPartyCrasher profile image63
    TeaPartyCrasherposted 6 years ago

    In light of the decision to let the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy continue, and the criticism from Obama of those progressives opposed to letting them continue, perhaps Obama needs a reminder of who got him where he is.

    I think a challenge in 2012 from the likes of Russ Feingold, Alan Grayson, or some other progressive firebrand is in order?

    What about the rest of you?

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ron Paul 2012

      1. EPman profile image61
        EPmanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        this

      2. Harry Santos profile image67
        Harry Santosposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Ron Paul is truly the only hope!

    2. Reality Bytes profile image92
      Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      Oh Absolutely, they should run as a third party candidate.

      Woohoo, did someone say Ross Perot?

    3. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      If you want to ensure a victory for Sarah Palin, sure.

      1. Reality Bytes profile image92
        Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Or possibly Gov. Chris Christie?

        1. livelonger profile image88
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, maybe.

          Fortunately, though, the disgruntled far-left will not be strong enough to mount a challenge to Obama, and Obama will win reelection fairly handily.

          1. profile image61
            C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I think he definitely helped himself out with this tax cut comprimise. Only the far left is really angry enough to mount a challenge. However their numbers are small. That issue will be settled in the Primaries. Once he wins the nod, there is no way the far left will vote for anyone other than the DNC candidate.

          2. Reality Bytes profile image92
            Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            If he continues to compromise, I think you might be correct.

    4. profile image55
      RonPaulLiberalposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      A primary challenge of Obama will do nothing good. A progressive raid of the GOP is a much better idea: http://progressivesforronpaul.blogspot.com/

  2. profile image61
    C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago

    Two words: Al Franken.

    The perfect candidate to lead the progressive charge.

    1. Reality Bytes profile image92
      Reality Bytesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, Yeah Al Franken "That's the ticket"

      http://wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/franken_diaper.jpg

      lol

      1. profile image61
        C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Exactly, I mean if you were so impressed with one harvard man, why not another?

  3. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Nah. One schizo party at a time. It's the GOP's turn in 2012.

  4. lovemychris profile image82
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    The progressives and Ron Paul share a few issues in common, but the philosophy's as a whole are miles apart.

    And I'm telling you---something about Ron Paul is off. He's still a Republican, you know.
    He speaks at pro-life rallies......How is that "for freedom"?

    It's not.

    1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
      BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, life, and the freedom to enjoy it.....sounds like a real schmuck to me....

      1. lovemychris profile image82
        lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, not exactly...
        Apparently, my womb is property of the State.

        1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
          BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          And the law on the books that says this is located where?

          1. dingdondingdon profile image60
            dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            If you ban a woman from exercising choice over her own body you are saying her body does not belong to her.

            1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
              BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              But there is no such ban, so your point would be.....?

              1. Jim Hunter profile image61
                Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Isn't it strange how they complain about the oppression thats NOT taking place and ignore the real threat to their freedom?

                1. lovemychris profile image82
                  lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh it's real.
                  Your guys are making sure of it...little by little, just as they are dismantling our gvt--little by little.

                  Perhaps it's because you are not a woman, that you don't understand, so I won't bother to explain it to you...after all, erections are so important, tax dollars are paying for them!!--So you have NO idea how I feel, since you BAN funding a procedure for me. Now you are working on banning the procedure alltogether. You don't fool anyone with your games.

                  It's nothing new, really. The founding fathers thought of me as property, and could legally beat me.
                  It's not a stretch that you now want to control my sexuality, as if YOU were my daddy.

                  Daddy state.

                  1. BillyDRitchie profile image60
                    BillyDRitchieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    LMC, I couldn't care less about your sexuality.  Don't flatter yourself.

                    And as of today, abortion is still legal.  So I'm left wondering 9again) what your gripe is...

                  2. Jim Hunter profile image61
                    Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    "since you BAN funding a procedure for me."

                    I haven't banned anything, I'm all for your right to abort any baby you feel you are saddled with.

                    Hell, if you want a lobotomy I'll pay for that myself.

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      it's against freedom if you consider the fetus not alive.

      it's pro-freedom if you consider the fetus a separate life.

      Thus, this IS a tricky subject for libertarians.

      Calling Ron Paul a Republican is about as apt as calling Obama a hippie.

  5. dingdondingdon profile image60
    dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago

    I would love to see Hillary run, but I don't think she will.

  6. lovemychris profile image82
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    I'm with Obama...all the way.

    But go for it progressives! The more voices, the better.
    As long as it's not a RW operative playing the game of being a progressive.

    No faces that don't have a proven record. RW'ers will do ANYTHING to win, as you know.

  7. dutchman1951 profile image60
    dutchman1951posted 6 years ago

    It may be a moot point..!

    with the Republicans split between and Tea and Center, Obama may just, by a Republican split, walk right back in!

  8. Doug Hughes profile image59
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    I think the progressives should run a candidate if only to spotlight that President Obama is a moderate. Americans like progressive ideas - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance, Head Start, etc. The idea of progressive taxation, that the rich SHOULD pay more... polls well. Despite the fact that most Americans favor liberal ideas,  a lot of those folks think they are moderate/conservative.

    It makes no sense, but progressive presidential candidates do poorly. George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis ring a bell? Bill Clinton was a moderate and did OK. President Obama is a moderate and he's doing alright. The republicans won't field a moderate candidate who will preserve the progressive ideals of this country. Obama will defend the programs republicans want to destroy. Since a fire-breathing liberal makes Obama more electable, I like it.

  9. lovemychris profile image82
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Did you know Ryan got SS benefits when his dad died? Is he a mooch?
    Is Bachmann a mooch for taking a farm-subsidy?
    Boehner in gvt for 20 years?
    All these people who "hate" the gvt, still taking the 174K and all the bennies.....

    What has happened to Integrity?

    1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      damn right he got benefits -he paid for the service so he's entitled to it.

      1. Mighty Mom profile image90
        Mighty Momposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Gee, I was under the distinct impression that Mr. Ryan did not approve of government entitlement programs.
        Well, good thing he already got his SS benefits.
        As if he gets his way he -- and everybody else his age and youngers -- won't be getting no more.

        1. Evan G Rogers profile image78
          Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          He can be against it all he wants.

          He's been paying for the service - against his will - for his whole life. The government owes him what was promised.

          It's called "a contract".

 
working