Skip to main content

View Diary: Let's take back the Democratic Party from the Clinton-Obama machine! (173 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Revisionist history (9+ / 0-)

    You leave out the part where Obama ran on a left-wing, anti-war message in 2008. Remember the whole "wine track" vs "beer track" meme when it came to Obama and Clinton? More than a few conservative commentators compared him to McGovern at the time. And he won by a significant margin against a fairly popular, centrist war hero (centrist by current Republican standards anyway).

    There's no doubt Obama ran to the left of Kerry, who couldn't even clearly articulate his opposition to the Iraq War.

    •  "I don't oppose all wars, (6+ / 0-)

      I oppose dumb wars." -- Barack Obama.

      He ran on opposition to the Iraq war and also more of a focus on Al Qaeda, including a specific pledge that he would engage in air strikes within Pakistan or other countries if he had actionable intelligence, or as we now call it, <>

      At no point was Barack Obama ever part of the Ron Paul left.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 06:02:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  If Ron Paul is a leftist. . . (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sebastianguy99

        does that term have any meaning at all?

        When the United States becomes a low wage country, only bobbleheads shall go forth from American soil.

        by amyzex on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 12:49:22 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Has there ever been a candidate who opposed (0+ / 0-)

        "all wars?" That seems like a rather radical position:)

        Of course Obama was never a hardcore isolationist like Ron Paul, but he co-opted some of the same anti-war sentiment and used it to build a winning coalition.

        And for those who believe a leftist candidate can't win, I'd point out that there was more than enough "leftist baggage" against Obama to potentially doom his candidacy. Whatever political flaws McGovern, Dukakis or Kerry may have had, there was no foreign sounding name, childhood in Indonesia, or associations with Bill Ayers and a radical African American preacher who suggested America had it coming on 9/11 to deal with.

        For those who have over-learned the lessons of the Reagan/Bush years, it would be easy to assume such a candidate could never be elected. Instead, voters mostly shrugged these off as distractions and elected Obama anyway based on other issues.

    •  Same old shit from the 3rd way. (7+ / 0-)

      If they're pegging Dukakis as "losing b/c he's too liberal" rational discourse pretty much ends there.

      We're talking about a guy who ran away from the liberal label up till October 31, and then caved and said, OK yeah all right, I guess I'm a liberal. That doesn't sound much like a liberal to me; it sounds like somebody completely out of his depth who stupidly collaborated in demonizing liberal politics right up to the point when it became completely clear that doing so was going to lose him the race. Because if Americans disrespect one thing more than any other, it's weakness and a refusal to stand up for your own convictions.

      If Dukakis had wanted to condemn liberal politics to a 40-year journey in the wilderness, he couldn't have done a better job. Couldn't have done a better job if he had planned it that way.

      Now, despite the fact that Dean is not as liberal as people think, and I think of him more as a progressive than a liberal, this is a much better example of a liberal politician than Dukakis:

      Ou sont les neigedens d'antan?

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 08:13:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site