Do Democrats Deserve Re-Election in 2012?

[Shalrirorchia]

The Democrats still control the White House and the Senate....yet in Washington since the 2010 elections, it seems like it's the Republicans in general and the Tea Party in particular that is in charge. This fight over the debt ceiling is just one more example of the trend; the Democrats supported a balanced approach mixing tax increases and spending cuts, whereas the Republicans demanded nothing but spending cuts. We are now negotiating a deal apparently with them that contains nothing but spending cuts....never mind that the majority of the public, when polled, consistently indicates desire for a balanced approach with tax increases and spending cuts. The only group that consistently opposes that approach en masse is the Tea Party. Perhaps a quarter of the country is dictating terms to the other 75%.

Personally, as a moderate Democrat, I've had it. I'm sick of spineless, cowardly Democrats who won't put up a fight on Democratic principles. What on earth did we elect you people for? To play golf with John Boehner? I'm sick of seeing the Tea Party and the Republicans take fundamentally flawed (even ludicrous) positions that we do not call them on "for the sake of bipartisanship". So I'm thinking of trying something new. Since voting for Democrats only results in me getting Republican policies, I'm thinking about not voting for the Democrats in 2012, and not sending money to help their campaigns. That would be new....I've not missed an election since I became old enough to vote. As I see it, a massive Democratic defeat in 2012 wouldn't be a bad thing. It would bring Tea Party and Republican politicians to power in all branches of government; their policies are quite frankly idiotic, and they'll immediately screw the country into the ground (and hopefully rightfully get blamed for it). At the same time, a lot of Democrats would lose their seats in Congress....perhaps the Democrats who retake those seats in 2014 or 2016 would be made of sterner stuff, politically-speaking. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a stand on principle from time to time. That is, after all, the strategy that the Tea Party has taken....and it seems to be working quite well for them.

[Ashmoria]

they deserve to take the entire house and every senate seat that is up for grabs.

[New Octopucta]

No, they don't deserve re-election, but they deserve it more than the Republicans.

[Siorafrica]

The Democrats don't deserve reelection but electing the Republicans would be slightly worse.

[The free thinking few]

they deserve to take the entire house and every senate seat that is up for grabs.

i wouldnt go that far but they certainly deserve a majority. Id rather not allow either party the ability to start a situation like this ever again.

[SaintB]

Despite their flaws I'd prefer them to the TP... they terrify me.

[The free thinking few]

Despite their flaws I'd prefer them to the TP... they terrify me.

someone holding a gun to your head tends to do that.

[Franco-Lowlands]

I think they deserve it more than the republicans.

[Ashmoria]

they deserve to take the entire house and every senate seat that is up for grabs.

i wouldnt go that far but they certainly deserve a majority. Id rather not allow either party the ability to start a situation like this ever again.

the dems have no reason to be idiots.

the repubs need to suffer massive losses so that they might have the time to think it through and realize why they are no longer successful.

its not like this is the first time they have gone off the rails.

[Shalrirorchia]

they deserve to take the entire house and every senate seat that is up for grabs.

Why? They've gotten rolled in every discussion they've held with the Republicans since the end of last year. Hell, the current debt ceiling crisis exists in part because the Republicans managed to cajole President Obama into extending the Bush tax cuts at the end of 2010. Specifically, the Republicans threatened to scotch extensions to unemployment insurance unless they got their way. Everybody knew that an extension of the Bush tax cuts was going to make the debt worse, and yet Obama did it anyway. He could have been more partisan and called the Republicans on holding up unemployment in order to safeguard tax cuts for millionaires (and he probably should have). But he didn't. Now here we are, getting trashed by the Republicans for a deficit that they themselves helped to engineer.

Without spending cuts AND tax hikes, we're not going to balance the budget, this issue WILL crop up again, and the Republicans WILL use it again.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

Of course not. All of them ought to be replaced by Allen West and Paul Ryan clones.

[Simon Cowell of the RR]

Who cares about 'deserve'? What The People want are results, and solutions (or whatever Fox tell them). And honestly, a government dominated by libertarians and tea partiers frightens me.

[The free thinking few]

i wouldnt go that far but they certainly deserve a majority. Id rather not allow either party the ability to start a situation like this ever again.

the dems have no reason to be idiots.

the repubs need to suffer massive losses so that they might have the time to think it through and realize why they are no longer successful.

its not like this is the first time they have gone off the rails.

the republicans didnt have much of a reason to do this either. If you give someone a trump card, and expect them not to use it, then your nuts.

[The House of Petain]

Of course not. All of them ought to be replaced by Allen West and Paul Ryan clones.

Talk about Attack of the Clones

That said, they probably deserve it slightly more than the Republicans do. At least the Tea Party ones.

[Magniamitas]

I would propose (And I'm center right) that liberals start a far left revolution to battle the tea party which I was a member of until realized that they were hypocrites who scream for personal freedom and then their candidates pledge to fight against personal freedom.

So yes a Super progressive movement to fight the tea party and center right democrats would be incredibly entertaining to watch.

[Ashmoria]

they deserve to take the entire house and every senate seat that is up for grabs.

Why? They've gotten rolled in every discussion they've held with the Republicans since the end of last year. Hell, the current debt ceiling crisis exists in part because the Republicans managed to cajole President Obama into extending the Bush tax cuts at the end of 2010. Specifically, the Republicans threatened to scotch extensions to unemployment insurance unless they got their way. Everybody knew that an extension of the Bush tax cuts was going to make the debt worse, and yet Obama did it anyway. He could have been more partisan and called the Republicans on holding up unemployment in order to safeguard tax cuts for millionaires (and he probably should have). But he didn't. Now here we are, getting trashed by the Republicans for a deficit that they themselves helped to engineer.

Without spending cuts AND tax hikes, we're not going to balanced the budget, this issue WILL crop up again, and the Republicans WILL use it again.

yeah

you are a little off base.

you must not have noticed that the republicans had just enough power in '10 to obstruct anything they wanted to obstruct.

so the president got TONS of concessions from the republicans for the price of the short term extension of the bush tax cuts that the president didnt want to get rid of at the time anyway. its not WISE to raise taxes in a bad economy, eh? you cant fix the deficit until you fix the economy, eh?

the republicans will use anything they can to fuck us all on the theory that it will make it less likely for the president to be re-elected. there isnt any way to stop that.

[SaintB]

Despite their flaws I'd prefer them to the TP... they terrify me.

someone holding a gun to your head tends to do that.

I've had a gun held to my head; it scared me less than the Tea Party and their fiscal/social agenda

[New Octopucta]

the republicans didnt have much of a reason to do this either. If you give someone a trump card, and expect them not to use it, then your nuts.

Using a trump card? That must be why Donald has so much support. Amirite?

[Shalrirorchia]

Why? They've gotten rolled in every discussion they've held with the Republicans since the end of last year. Hell, the current debt ceiling crisis exists in part because the Republicans managed to cajole President Obama into extending the Bush tax cuts at the end of 2010. Specifically, the Republicans threatened to scotch extensions to unemployment insurance unless they got their way. Everybody knew that an extension of the Bush tax cuts was going to make the debt worse, and yet Obama did it anyway. He could have been more partisan and called the Republicans on holding up unemployment in order to safeguard tax cuts for millionaires (and he probably should have). But he didn't. Now here we are, getting trashed by the Republicans for a deficit that they themselves helped to engineer.

Without spending cuts AND tax hikes, we're not going to balanced the budget, this issue WILL crop up again, and the Republicans WILL use it again.

yeah

you are a little off base.

you must not have noticed that the republicans had just enough power in '10 to obstruct anything they wanted to obstruct.

so the president got TONS of concessions from the republicans for the price of the short term extension of the bush tax cuts that the president didnt want to get rid of at the time anyway. its not WISE to raise taxes in a bad economy, eh? you cant fix the deficit until you fix the economy, eh?

the republicans will use anything they can to fuck us all on the theory that it will make it less likely for the president to be re-elected. there isnt any way to stop that.

No. I'm not talking about short term concessions. I am talking about grand political strategy.....and I could see back in December 2010 that renewing the Bush tax cuts was going to be a dreadful error. I knew that we would hit the debt ceiling this year at that rate, and I knew that the Republicans would use it against us. They never seem to have a problem with being hypocritical in order to gain political advantage. The only thing I did not anticipate was how far the Republicans would be willing to take it. But if I, with no political training or experience, could foresee this issue, how come Obama and the Democrats could not?

[The free thinking few]

someone holding a gun to your head tends to do that.

I've had a gun held to my head; it scared me less than the Tea Party and their fiscal/social agenda

or them forcefully trying to shove it down our throats.

[Wilgrove]

I would rather have Democrats than Republicans & Teabaggers. Hel, I would be in favor of voting the Republicans and Teabaggers into the history book as an obsolete party and let a left of center to leftist party take their place.

[Distruzio]

They deserve prison cells, right next to the Republicans.

[Alien Space Bats]

The Democrats still control the White House and the Senate....yet in Washington since the 2010 elections, it seems like it's the Republicans in general and the Tea Party in particular that is in charge. This fight over the debt ceiling is just one more example of the trend; the Democrats supported a balanced approach mixing tax increases and spending cuts, whereas the Republicans demanded nothing but spending cuts. We are now negotiating a deal apparently with them that contains nothing but spending cuts....never mind that the majority of the public, when polled, consistently indicates desire for a balanced approach with tax increases and spending cuts. The only group that consistently opposes that approach en masse is the Tea Party. Perhaps a quarter of the country is dictating terms to the other 75%.

Personally, as a moderate Democrat, I've had it. I'm sick of spineless, cowardly Democrats who won't put up a fight on Democratic principles. What on earth did we elect you people for? To play golf with John Boehner? I'm sick of seeing the Tea Party and the Republicans take fundamentally flawed (even ludicrous) positions that we do not call them on "for the sake of bipartisanship". So I'm thinking of trying something new. Since voting for Democrats only results in me getting Republican policies, I'm thinking about not voting for the Democrats in 2012, and not sending money to help their campaigns. That would be new....I've not missed an election since I became old enough to vote. As I see it, a massive Democratic defeat in 2012 wouldn't be a bad thing. It would bring Tea Party and Republican politicians to power in all branches of government; their policies are quite frankly idiotic, and they'll immediately screw the country into the ground (and hopefully rightfully get blamed for it). At the same time, a lot of Democrats would lose their seats in Congress....perhaps the Democrats who retake those seats in 2014 or 2016 would be made of sterner stuff, politically-speaking. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a stand on principle from time to time. That is, after all, the strategy that the Tea Party has taken....and it seems to be working quite well for them.

Do you know what staying home or voting Green in protest got liberals in 2000?

It got them George Walker Bush.

Which means that it got them the tax cuts that have produced - and will continue to drive - the worst budget deficits in American history. It got them Guantanamo Bay, extraordinary rendition, the Iraq War, and Abu Ghraib, with all of the contempt those things have heaped on our heaped on our heads from the international community. It got them a Justice Department that ignored increasing violence by the far right against abortion providers, culminating in the assassination of Dr. George Tiller. And - perhaps worst of all - it got them Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, which in turn gave us Citizens United (among other rulings).

Now, let me ask you: Do you think that refusing to vote Democratic out of anger and frustration was a productive tactic for the left, one that advanced liberalism in America?

And let me ask you this follow up: If you are happy that George Walker Bush got elected President, and if you think his election advanced liberalism in America, how does the prospect of electing Rick Perry or Michelle Bachman President grab you?

I think you've asked yourself the wrong question.

I don't think the question is: "Do Democrats deserve re-election in 2012?" I think the question you should ask yourself is: "Is it imperative that Republicans be soundly defeated in 2012?"

Given your obvious political bent, Shalrirorchia, if you ask that question, then the answer should be crystal clear.

Even if you don't like it.

[New Chalcedon]

The Democrats still control the White House and the Senate....yet in Washington since the 2010 elections, it seems like it's the Republicans in general and the Tea Party in particular that is in charge. This fight over the debt ceiling is just one more example of the trend; the Democrats supported a balanced approach mixing tax increases and spending cuts, whereas the Republicans demanded nothing but spending cuts. We are now negotiating a deal apparently with them that contains nothing but spending cuts....never mind that the majority of the public, when polled, consistently indicates desire for a balanced approach with tax increases and spending cuts. The only group that consistently opposes that approach en masse is the Tea Party. Perhaps a quarter of the country is dictating terms to the other 75%.

Personally, as a moderate Democrat, I've had it. I'm sick of spineless, cowardly Democrats who won't put up a fight on Democratic principles. What on earth did we elect you people for? To play golf with John Boehner? I'm sick of seeing the Tea Party and the Republicans take fundamentally flawed (even ludicrous) positions that we do not call them on "for the sake of bipartisanship". So I'm thinking of trying something new. Since voting for Democrats only results in me getting Republican policies, I'm thinking about not voting for the Democrats in 2012, and not sending money to help their campaigns. That would be new....I've not missed an election since I became old enough to vote. As I see it, a massive Democratic defeat in 2012 wouldn't be a bad thing. It would bring Tea Party and Republican politicians to power in all branches of government; their policies are quite frankly idiotic, and they'll immediately screw the country into the ground (and hopefully rightfully get blamed for it). At the same time, a lot of Democrats would lose their seats in Congress....perhaps the Democrats who retake those seats in 2014 or 2016 would be made of sterner stuff, politically-speaking. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a stand on principle from time to time. That is, after all, the strategy that the Tea Party has taken....and it seems to be working quite well for them.

Then I have the following suggestions:

(1) Primary - or support the primarying of - the "spineless" democrats, while donating to the ones who are standing up & being counted. One excellent example - until last year - was Russ Feingold. Another is Al Franken, Barbar Mikulski, Nancy Pelosi, etc. etc.

(2) Work to unseat as many Republicans as possible. I don't know about you, but from a Democrat's perspective, having a Democrat who only votes the way you want 55-60% of the time is one hell of a lot better than having a Republican who votes that way 10-20% of the time.

Also, don't forget: President Bachmann could do an awful lot in four years to irretrievably screw the country up.

[New Chalcedon]

The Democrats still control the White House and the Senate....yet in Washington since the 2010 elections, it seems like it's the Republicans in general and the Tea Party in particular that is in charge. This fight over the debt ceiling is just one more example of the trend; the Democrats supported a balanced approach mixing tax increases and spending cuts, whereas the Republicans demanded nothing but spending cuts. We are now negotiating a deal apparently with them that contains nothing but spending cuts....never mind that the majority of the public, when polled, consistently indicates desire for a balanced approach with tax increases and spending cuts. The only group that consistently opposes that approach en masse is the Tea Party. Perhaps a quarter of the country is dictating terms to the other 75%.

Personally, as a moderate Democrat, I've had it. I'm sick of spineless, cowardly Democrats who won't put up a fight on Democratic principles. What on earth did we elect you people for? To play golf with John Boehner? I'm sick of seeing the Tea Party and the Republicans take fundamentally flawed (even ludicrous) positions that we do not call them on "for the sake of bipartisanship". So I'm thinking of trying something new. Since voting for Democrats only results in me getting Republican policies, I'm thinking about not voting for the Democrats in 2012, and not sending money to help their campaigns. That would be new....I've not missed an election since I became old enough to vote. As I see it, a massive Democratic defeat in 2012 wouldn't be a bad thing. It would bring Tea Party and Republican politicians to power in all branches of government; their policies are quite frankly idiotic, and they'll immediately screw the country into the ground (and hopefully rightfully get blamed for it). At the same time, a lot of Democrats would lose their seats in Congress....perhaps the Democrats who retake those seats in 2014 or 2016 would be made of sterner stuff, politically-speaking. Perhaps they'd be willing to take a stand on principle from time to time. That is, after all, the strategy that the Tea Party has taken....and it seems to be working quite well for them.

Do you know what staying home or voting Green in protest got liberals in 2000?

It got them George Walker Bush.

Which means that it got them the tax cuts that have produced - and will continue to drive - the worst budget deficits in American history. It got them Guantanamo Bay, extraordinary rendition, the Iraq War, and Abu Ghraib, with all of the contempt those things have heaped on our heaped on our heads from the international community. It got them a Justice Department that ignored increasing violence by the far right against abortion providers, culminating in the assassination of Dr. George Tiller. And - perhaps worst of all - it got them Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, which in turn gave us Citizens United (among other rulings).

Now, let me ask you: Do you think that refusing to vote Democratic out of anger and frustration was a productive tactic for the left, one that advanced liberalism in America?

And let me ask you this follow up: If you are happy that George Walker Bush got elected President, and if you think his election advanced liberalism in America, how does the prospect of electing Rick Perry or Michelle Bachman President grab you?

I think you've asked yourself the wrong question.

I don't think the question is: "Do Democrats deserve re-election in 2012?" I think the question you should ask yourself is: "Is it imperative that Republicans be soundly defeated in 2012?"

Given your obvious political bent, Shalrirorchia, if you ask that question, then the answer should be crystal clear.

Even if you don't like it.

^^ Also, this. There are times and places for protest votes - a Presidential election isn't one of them.