An Evil FDL diary is currently top of the Rec List.
FDL's "evil": Drawing attention to problems. 2008 Obama voters -- particularly independent voters and youths -- are staying home now because the change promised never happened, or was inadequate, or was sabotaged from the start. As a 2008 volunteer said:
"We thought there was going to be a huge change in the country, and a lot of people aren’t quite sure that it’s worth putting in the effort this time around if we’re not going to get the promises that were made."
More follows.
Here are the groups that have reason to feel disheartened, disappointed, and disinterested in being what they see as hoodwinked for a second time by sweet promises:
LGBT groups: Candidate Obama famously promised to be a "fierce advocate" on behalf of these groups. While the appointment of John Berry to head the Office of Personnel Management was a welcome move, that has been about the only welcome move in the past two years. The words "fierce advocate" are now uttered in bitter derision by gay activists every time Obama or the people in his administration do something seen as hurting the cause of gay rights -- such as the defense of DOMA.
Human rights groups: In 2009, the Obama administration said it was committed to protecting human rights. But the Obama Justice Department has been working to smother the cause of justice for the victims of our torture chambers and our other possible war crimes.
People Needing Jobs: Instead of a stimulus big enough to do the job back in the spring of last year, we got one that as everyone sees by now was woefully inadequate. When Obama responded to the call for more stimulus, that response was also woefully inadequate. This may be the single biggest issue for independent voters, and the lack of progress on this is the prime reason many will stay home this year.
Unions and labor activists: Where do we start? Screwed on ECFA, screwed on "free trade", then spat upon by the DSCC. And that's off the top of my head.
Consumers: Obama's refusal to do what he could have done at any time over the past few months and appoint Elizabeth Warren to head the agency she virtually invented speaks volumes:
The President gets to nominate someone to a five-year term subject to Senate confirmation. But the CFPB begins at the Treasury Department before transitioning to the Federal Reserve, and in that time, Treasury can appoint an acting director without Senate action needed. It would make sense to align the President’s nominee with the acting director, and everyone should expect that to happen, on the same day if possible. Given the situation with Obama nominees and Senate gridlock, there should be no reason that Warren languishes when the clear rules of the Dodd-Frank law allow for an acting director to be appointed...
[...]
...There would be no greater champion for ordinary consumers at this agency which Warren literally invented in her head. On the politics, it can only help the President with the base, and in fact, a failure to nominate Warren would be quite damaging.
People wanting real health care reform and lower hospital bills: Ha. Ha. Ha.
People expecting a secure retirement: Ha. Ha. Ha.
Of course, the favored excuse has been, even with a 60-seat presence in the Senate, "but but but those mean Republicans won't let us!" That was used, most infamously, to explain why Obama couldn't allow a bill with a public option to live. (The $150 million deal cut with the health industry went unmentioned.) Any attempt to point out that reconciliation -- which needs only 51 votes -- could be used was mocked. Of course, when the Dems dipped below 60 votes in the Senate, suddenly it was admitted that reconciliation could be used after all, by golly.
But so long as Obama feels no heat from people like those that now dominate DKos, he won't have a reason to be the person he was elected to be. And instead of blaming himself or Rahm, he'll do what Rahm did when Rahm's spit-on-the-base triangulation cost the Dems Congress in 1994: Blame it on anyone who criticized him from the left.