To those “fed up with President Obama” and think he’ll win without your vote in 2012…

Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2011, 3:13 pm by GottaLaff
Google GmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInStumbleUponRedditFarkDiggTumblrBlogger PostDeliciousFriendFeedNewsVineGoogle BookmarksGoogle ReaderMultiplyPosterousEmailBookmark/FavoritesWordPressShare

It’s early in the election season, and polls are nothing but snapshots, and often not very accurate ones, but… I’m posting one anyway, to make a point.

Many people I’ve encountered in various venues are so bitterly disappointed in President Obama that they have stomped their foot and sworn they will vote for down ticket Democratic candidates only, but hey, the president doesn’t need their vote so they’ll stick by their principles and let the rest of America do their thing. After all, they keep telling me, he’ll win a second term no matter what they do anyway.

Not necessarily.

I started to address the anger from the left in a previous post titled If you’re mad at President Obama, this one’s for you.

As for making a point by withholding an Obama vote, now there are numbers to illustrate why voting against the GOP– while not ideal– is mandatory. Via Taegan:

A new Gallup survey of registered voters finds that they are more likely to vote for the “Republican Party’s candidate for president” than for President Obama in the 2012 election, 47% to 39%. Preferences had been fairly evenly divided this year in this test of Obama’s re-election prospects.

A vote against President Obama (whether it’s a vote for someone else or simply not checking any box) is: 

  • A vote for even more legislation that would crush our civil liberties.
  • It’s a vote for seeing a President Bachmann or President Romney on your Tee Vee Box regularly, and knowing they call the shots. Yes, a President Bachmann would be in charge. Think about that.
  • It’s a vote for persecuting– and prosecuting– gay Americans.
  • It’s a vote for rolling back what’s left of our environmental laws.
  • It’s a vote for eliminating the few remaining freedoms relating to reproductive health that have survived the War on Women.
  • It’s a vote for teaching Christianity in our soon-to-be-extinct public schools.
  • It’s a vote for altering history to conform with personal bias.
  • It’s a vote for encouraging bigotry and racism.
  • It’s a vote for an even more conservative/corporate Supreme Court.
  • It’s a vote for people who want to crush unions, crush your independence, crush your voice, crush your privacy, crush you, by making your life a living hell.

Try reversing all of that once it sets like cement.

Since BushCo put their grimy, sleazy, illegal, stupid little stamp on this country, we find ourselves barely able to eke out reversals of their appalling policies. Hell, we can’t even introduce legislation that begins to do that, let alone pass any, even with a Democrat (albeit not a liberal) in the White House and a Democratic majority in the Senate.

So give your time and/or money to congressional candidates, and to local ones, and rally around those who you truly believe in, with gusto. Make change happen, get behind a real movement, find a way to use your anguish and anger constructively.  Go from feeling powerless to powerful by being pro-active. A Progressive Congress is an effective way to achieve our truly small-d-democratic goals.

And then hold your nose (if you are one of the seething Dems out there) and vote for a Democrat who could actually win the presidency, because unfortunately, a vote against him will contribute to a President Perry or President Pawlenty.

And that is truly terrifying.

Making a statement via a protest vote (or non-vote) is one thing. Unfortunately, reality is quite another.

Google GmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInStumbleUponRedditFarkDiggTumblrBlogger PostDeliciousFriendFeedNewsVineGoogle BookmarksGoogle ReaderMultiplyPosterousEmailBookmark/FavoritesWordPressShare
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Photographs on The Political Carnival:
Please read our policy on images from non-TPC sources in the sidebar to your right.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

  • Mike

    Let me clarify.  I’m willing to risk Republican victories.  The only things politicians understand are $$$$ (which we can’t compete in), and votes.  If you say you’re going to vote for the guy, he’s moves on to the next constituency, you have no leverage.  If he seriously believes he’s losing votes, he’ll change.  You have to risk losing it to have it.  If not, you’re just another left-winger not to be considered seriously. 

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    1. I wasn’t saying that by supporting the Dem we’ll make progress. My
    position is, if you don’t support the Dem, we’ll be way worse off.
    2. Meantime, my position has been to build a movement, and support
    progressive candidates, from the bottom up.
    3. And while all this is happening, I’ve always said to challenge the
    president loudly.

    Our only point of disagreement: Allowing Republicans to get elected. That
    would make it exponentially harder to go forward with everything else we’ve
    both stated.

  • Mike

    Folks, we’ve been down this path before.  He was called Bill Clinton and everyone made the same arguments then … support the Dem and we’ll make progress.  Instead, we got Clinton the DINO,  Bush and now Obama.  Here we are 20 yrs. later with the same problem. Unless, and until, there is a revolution from the left inside the Democratic party, we will continue to get the same ole’ DLC “third way” garbage ($$$$$).  Look at how the tea party, as bogus as it is, has been instrumental in pulling the Republicans to the right.  As long as we keep holding our noses and supporting mediocre leaders, we will continue to get mediocrity. 

    Kansas, I completely agree with your sentiment and much of what you say, particularly about Congressman.  But we should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time pressuring the President too.   Something has to change.  Insanity = doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.  Trust me on this.  If the left REALLY started abandoning Obama in numbers, he would change.  As long as he can count on “they have no where else to go”, he’ll continue to move to the center instead of trying to move the center to him.  We should not be tribal like Republicans.  Democrats should demand POLICIES, not blindly supportive of politicians.

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    Thank you Kansas. There are two of me too, and I struggle with this, but the
    reality is, a Republican president, Congress? Not an option.

  • KansasDem

    I’m a bit simple minded (more so than I used to be) and I understand both sides of this debate :^) Keeping it simple there are two “mes”; the idealogical “me”, and the realistic “me”.

    The idealogical “me” is so damn disgusted with Obama I literally feel like screaming, but the realistic “me” realizes just how screwed up things would be if we’d had a President McCain the past 2 1/2 years.

    At the end of the day what we really need to do is give Obama a more progressive/liberal Senate and House of Reps to deal with in his second term ……………. or maybe get Hillary to present a primary challenge.

    Before moving to Kansas several years ago due to disability, and the need to live closer to my oldest son, I lived my entire life in the panhandle of Nebraska. So I’ve spent my entire life surrounded by idiotic Republican’s that are quite willing to vote against their own best interests.

    The reason for me pointing that out is to mention Ben Nelson. Is he any better at all than a Republican? IMHO not much, but in the final analysis, yes, yes he is. Only slightly, but even a little bit better than the alternative matters when it comes to outcomes.

  • Mike

    I don’t call it political purity, and I have never taken this argument … even when Clinton moved right and Nadar challenged him.  This time it’s different as Obama is even to the right of a hold-your-nose vote for Clinton.  But enough is enough.  I call it standing for something.  My “demands” of Obama haven’t been unreasonable, ever.  I’ve gone along with many sell out issues understanding the greater good argument.  But this breaks it.  My preference would be a primary challenger (if you really want to be practical) that would force Obama to the left.  But that ain’t happenin’, and monied interests have Obama by the throat.  I feel I have no other choice. 

     Just a footnote, I will, personally, greatly benefit from Republican economic policies.  I can easily afford more for medicare.  Despite a six figure income, I haven’t paid ANY federal taxes in four years.   But I’m in a distinct minority from  most Americans.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4OWIAJYPDVWA7TMKF6H52TWCDU DFS

    so then you can pat yourself on the back for your political purity.   And as for bad vs less bad..I don’t know what world you live in, but rational adults make choices to minimize harm all the time.

  • Mike

    If you actually believe in the concept of representative democracy, then what we have is what makes up the countryside.  If voters don’t change, then we continue to drift to the right ….. until …. what?  I’ve watched the drift since Reagan and am sick of it, but apparently American voters are not.    Voters get the government they deserve, and if it’s a theocracy under Bachmann, then so be it.  I for one plan to actually participate in a representative democracy by voting my beliefs and conscience, rather than trying to outguess the political dynamics of bad vs. less bad.   I believe if enough people do that, we’ll have a representative democracy.  Not sure what it will look like, but we’ll have it.  

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    If you read my post, it’s clear I’m not “fooling myself”. I’ve written many
    a critical post of this president, about the very things on your list.

    I think it is you who are fooled into thinking that a Bachmann type in the
    WH would be an acceptable option.

  • Purplecart

    more torture
    more drones than Bush used in 8 years
    more threatening amendments to Patriot Act
    more freedoms for FBI and less for us
    more wars
    more free trade agreements and less jobs for us
    more militaristic society
    more bailouts to come for banks

    all the same lies but done in a quieter way
    in the end the result will be the same
    stop fooling yourself

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4OWIAJYPDVWA7TMKF6H52TWCDU DFS

    and your crash and burn, lets make things real bad so that the “progressive soul” of the nation wakes up…sorry that doesnt sound a logical or sound path to the promise land to me.  Im not willing to pay that price in the short term.  Dont forget about supreme court appointments.  We are dying under 5-4 decisions now.  Wait till Bachmann or Romney gets to shape the court.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=638615031 Alysia Marie Johnson Beaton

    I think the approach is telling Americans what he HAS done, which, by the way, the media has not kept up on because along the way, the Anthony trial and yes, even Charlie Sheen, has been more trendy.

    One of my FAVORITE blog posts about this exactly is Brown Man Thinking Hard’s 100 Accomplishments of Barack Obama: http://simplifythepositive.blogspot.com/2010/03/100-accomplishments-of-president-barack.html

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    What would that accomplish? Just to up the debate? Because splitting the
    vote will result in a GOP president.

    Oh, and neither will run. Sanders already said he wouldn’t, anyway.

  • Flight

    We have to get an independant in the race, or Dem to challange in the primary i.e Sanders, Kucinich or Grayson

  • Mike

    Noooooo …. I got the point.  Hold your nose and vote for the DINO anyway.  That’s not only a moral challenge, I’m making the point that it might not even be good progressive politics.  Enabling DINO’s slows progress, it doesn’t help it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4OWIAJYPDVWA7TMKF6H52TWCDU DFS

    talk about somebody who completely missed the point of the article

  • Mike

    I’m a foot stomper and here’s my logic.  It looks like America has to go into the toilet before voters wake up.  I thought that had happened with Bush and then Obama’s (Change!) election.  But in listening to the Obamabots out there, watching independent voters (aka uninformed voters) and noticing the crazy running rampant on the right, I’m not sure we’ve gone down far enough for a majority to coalesce around the values that created the middle class.  To vote for Obama, if he sells out entitlements, for me will be a calculation of this issue.  Here’s the scorecard, all D’s or F’s:  Afghanistan, Iraq, bank reform, Guantanamo, torture, health care reform sellout, and now pushing for cuts to entitlements for a “grand bargain”.  I refuse to vote for a Republican, which is why Obama may not get mine.

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    I see that, and that kind of debate is a good thing, but a split vote is
    not. And I too am angry at a few things Prez O has done/not done.

  • KansasDem

    All very good points.

    I’m one of the foot-stompers. I quite often feel that Obama’s negotiating skills are lacking greatly. I tend to think he invited the current impasse by caving in several months ago.

    But, while I may threaten to write in Mickey Mouse, I will definitely vote a straight Dem ticket for the rest of my life. I really mean any Dem – blue dog, yellow dog, etc – if for no other reason than to hold out some hope of moving the SCOTUS a bit closer to the left.

    I am however serious about a primary challenge being good for us. It need not be as contentious as Carter/Kennedy but I honestly think it could be great.

    Imagine two Dems arguing about how to actually help the American people while the righjt-wing nut-jobs are talking there standard BS.