Tweet
I tweeted that I would vote for anyone, including Sarah Palin, for President before Barack Obama in 2012. The responses ranged from crazy to obvious insults to GOP troll pretending to be a Democrat. I expected as much. As a lifelong unapologetic Liberal Democrat, I’m very secure with my politics and philosophy, and I don’t really give a crap. Sure I lost a few followers but there are always more. I wouldn’t be surprised if this blog didn’t receive similar responses. FYI, Palin doesn’t mean Sarah Palin literally, but she is included, it means any Republican, Libertarian, Democrat, breathing human, or candidate. Palin just expresses the level of disgust I have with Obama, and she enrages Obama-Democrats.
I thought I would provide some context, but I doubt it really matters. Like GWB, Palin is evil beyond all others, and just the mention of her name creates a emotional response in Democrats. As long as Democrats react emotionally, we will accept anything other than Palin, Bush, or Reagan. We elect DLC Democrats that undermine our values, and we elect inexperienced black Democrats that have no core values. Democrats are so desperate for victory that we think we are winning with Blue Dog Democrats. We think we are winning with DLC Democrats, and we think we are winning with Barack Obama.
My reasons are simple, I trust the opponent (Republican, Tea Bag, Nazi) in front of me with whom I totally disagree more than the supporter (“Liberal”, “Progressive”, or “Democrat”) behind me with a knife out ready to stab me in the back for his or her political career. I can fight Palin, Romney, or Huckabee. I know Palin is the dumbest woman on the planet but I also know the “Democrats” will oppose her reflexively. I know my team, the Democrats, will fight her to the bitter end. With Barack Obama, Democrats will compromise everything they ever stood for to support his capitulations. Example, Could you imagine Sen. Joe Biden supporting a tax cut for the rich that raises taxes of the working poor? Yet, Vice President Biden slithered up to the Capital this week with deal in hand, and “every” Democratic senator is ready to roll over for Obama’s weak pitiful tax compromise. Case closed.
I’d rather elect a Mitt Romney and let him disappoint Republicans by compromising his principles and pass Health Care Reform like he did in Massachusetts. They got more from Mitt than we got from Obama. And I know it’s Massachusetts. Mitt, like all sleazy politicians, will compromise any principle to get elected, and he will sell-out any supporter to get re-elected. That’s Liberals best chance at real Progressive policy, not Obama selling-out Social Security and Medicare in an useless attempt to move to the principle-less Center. We have gotten Obama’s best, and it wasn’t nearly good enough. All Obama has left is investigations, compromises, disappointments, and capitulations. Progressives’ best option is to nominate any other Democrat and start fresh.
I know this was a waste of time. The title “Democrats for Palin” lost most before they read the first line. Don’t worry, that’s exactly what Obama is depending on while he sells-out the Democratic Party for re-election. Until Democrats support and elect a Progressive willing to lose for his beliefs, we will keep electing these smooth talking worthless fakes that believe in nothing or worse – Bipartisanship and Compromise.
40 Comments
Thank you.
I actually agree with you, as one of my own diary posts amply illustrates. See http://my.firedoglake.com/ohiogringo/2010/12/09/better-a-republican-in-2012-than-obama/.
However, your title is even more provocative than mine. Sounds like you’re itching for a fight with Obama cheerleaders. I could be wrong. That’s the problem with this medium. No body language, no tone of voice, just words on a page.
I agree with you.
Obama has been able to continue every Bush policy and in some cases, go further than Bush, in part, because of the support of all the people buying into the knee-jerk “better than Palin” mythology. Even his signature “accomplishments”, such as HCR, are essentially Republican policies.
In fairness to the frightened lesser-evilists, I must also mention that other class of enablers, the tribalists, those who think it’s OK for Obama to act like Bush simply because he claims to be a Democrat.
As you said, we’d be better off with someone like Palin because Dems of all stripes would reflexively oppose her. I don’t think she’d be near as effective as Obama at implementing authoritarian and corporatist policies.
I don’t care about another fight with Obama-Bots, been there, bought the T-shirt. Just trying to provide some context, and hopefully educate the hopeless. I read your post, I’m glad I’m not alone. Obama has to be defeated in 2012 because I don’t think Democrats can recover, at least not in a generation.
To me voting for any dem is asking for “The Death Of A Thousand Cuts”.
Palin is in Haiti learning how our government should be run. I don’t think Amerika will really change untill we actually hit bottom and Sarah is the best choice to reach that goal.
I’m still thinking defecting to the Greens might be the best move.
Hey OhioGringo, at least this diarist didn’t get the dreaded “FDL disclaimer.” ;-)
Thanks for a thoughtful diary.
The one element I would add [that I include when I'm having arguments on this topic with "friends"] is that at least under Bush [or Reagan] there was ORGANIZED OPPOSITION.
To me one of the worst things about Obama is that because of his role as [purported] “Head of the Party,” no Democrats will oppose him, point out his flaws, etc. It’s taken two long years of continuous outrageous actions by him to reach the relatively pitiful opposition that’s being voiced now. And note how many “Democrats” — both elected and “supporters” — are still hiding in the weeds, afraid criticism would “weaken the President.”
That’s why Jane and Glenn Greenwald have been so important over this period: they have focused on the issues and not on the “cult of personality” that Obama relishes and relies on to keep him safe from oversight.
Great essay. We seem to have agreed that a Republican is better than Obama at least since Bill Egnor diaried the opposite several days ago.
Great title!
As for voting (“I would vote for anyone, including Sarah Palin, for President before Barack Obama in 2012.”), you can always write in “Ralph Nader”.
(If anyone wants to know why Nader, please watch the documentary DVD “An Unreasonable Man”.)
I hate to concur. But I do this time. I like the phrase – the opponent in front of your with sword drawn instead of the “Friend” behind you with knife ready to stab the back.
Obama has effectively neutered the popular Democratic opposition. We are disorganized, paralyzed from within.
When a woman is attacked by a total stranger, she has the will to fight, kick, scream, yell, and even HURT the other party.
When its her husband that does the assault, she tends to endure it with silence, shame, and confusion that this person she loves just hurt her. There is no reflex to fight, kick, scream, yell, or even HURT the assailant.
So too with the Democrats of America. We have been politically beaten, raped, and subjugated by our beloved leader. What to do? Where to go? Code Pink went silent as the war escalated. Unions went down with two black eyes and a boot up their ass. Latino families got midnight raids and torn families, already without a voice, but now without a champion. And the peace activists? FBI roundups. The equivalent of being told by your spouse “turn on me and you die bitch”
That is how we have been treated by Obama. No holds barred in my language. Would we have tolerated HALF this shit from Bush? Would a stranger have gotten a chance to keep biting at the apple, night after night, day after day, with emotional abuse (Fucking Retards, Professional Left, etc) each time, with physical abuse (FBI roundups, deportations) and humiliation (Suck this Union bitch, Hey LGBT community, yeah you over there – I will help you… NOT!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!).
Yeah Obama. Keep it up. 2012 will be a massive divorce. The Democatic voter is the abused spouse, and you’re the abuser. We have food pantry lines unlike anything since the Great Depression, with almost 20% of America on food stamps, with blatant war crimes (and the coverup of those crimes) being done now in orders of magnitude beyond what was done before. Social Securty on the brink, taxes on the POOREST being INCREASED while the RICHEST are being DECREASED!!! (REGRESSIVE TAXATION has NEVER been seen in America before. NEVER. Only under Obama is this possible). We have literally been held hostage by our own spouse. Time to file the papers baby. I don’t care who it is. WHoever it is, my fellow Americans will remember to stand up and RESIST! Right now, I’m shocked and awed over the deafening vacuum of silence that has swept this nation.
I’ve been thinking the same thing. Now, I went and caved by voting for Patty Murray last month. I couldn’t stand the thought of Dino as my senator.
It is going to be real hard to vote for someone like Sarah Palin. Really, really, really hard. I truly can’t stand her. It might be easier to not vote in that race, which in Washington State may be the same thing as voting for her, because it will be close.
I agree. Why are Democrats afraid to weaken the President when he’s pushing them off a cliff?
This all makes me long for the days of Robert Byrd. He was the only congresscritter who constantly reminded everyone that the Congress is an equal branch of government.
Easy solution: Write in Ralph Nader.
Not voting for Obama (or any other Dem) doesn’t mean you have to vote for Palin (or any other Repub).
Vote third party or write-in and know that you are voting your conscience.
I think the general feeling here is that if someone like Palin got elected, it wouldn’t be any worse than what we have now and possibly, for the reasons stated, not as bad as what we have now.
I was thinking about this very topic earlier today, and how it makes a weird sort of sense. Obama’s policies are warmed over GOP policies, so why not have an actual Republican in the White House passing GOP policies? Why have a “Democrat” do it? Is Palin really worse than Obama? What would she do differently? Really?
I understand your dilemma. Rosi was really repulsive. Again, if the GOP had nominated sane candidates in Washington, Delaware, and Nevada, they would have taken the Senate.
Obama is an unprincipled liar and tyrant. Vote him out in 2012.
Another troubling aspect of Obama is that all these horrible policies he’s pushing now get labeled as “Democratic” or, even worse, “progressive.” So the Democratic and progressive “brands” are tarnished for years to come. Who wants to be associated with the crap Obama’s pushing?
There’s no one standing up and saying, a la Lloyd Benson, “Mr. President, I am a Progressive, and Progressives are my friends, and you, sir, are no Progressive!!”
“I know this was a waste of time. The title “Democrats for Palin” lost most before they read the first line.”
Oh not for me. I’ve been saying much the same thing for at least 2 years now and, in a sense, since 94, the last time health care slipped beneath the waves.
Your point that Dems seem to rally in opposition to the R’s when the R’s are in charge is true. And, even if a Palin or Huckabee were to be elected and enact dreadful legislation well, what’s the big difference? You can drive over the cliff at 65 w/ the D’s or 75 with the R’s. Either way your still flying over the cliff to your doom.
I wrote all this once before and Tbogg called it “Rapture for Retards!” Ha ha I kind of liked that. I wonder what he thinks about his precious Democratic Party nowadays. I’m tired of this endless slow death with the rotting one party system. I say let’s bring this damn thing to a head.
Democrats for Palin would give the Republican insiders (Karl Rove et al) complete heartburn.
It would a a pleasure to watch the Rs form their own circular firing squad (if indeed they could form a circle).
Obama cannot form a circle, his and the DLC’s best is a triangular firing squad.
FWIW — I scraped my Obama bumper stickers off today.
One of my major end of year projects is to make some new bumper stickers. Here are some candidates:
PALIN/2012
(much smaller font – The world is going to end anyway)
PALIN/BECK – 2012
(Don’t think, just vote)
$ARAH PALIN/2012
(The Snowbilly Grifter Queen knows what’s best for America)
Anybody have any other nominations for a good Palin bumper sticker?
Question: Should I vote for the Democrats or the Republicans?
Answer: No.
And with Obama we got a DLC Bluedog. What a joke on us. I would vote for Palin before Obama. At least then the democrats would stand up to her republican platform. I find Obama far scarier.
First, let me thank all those that responded. All of you give me hope. Democrats must remove Obama, we must vote for the Republican, Palin et al, in numbers loud enough to register our disgust. Otherwise, the idiot media will just say the Independents rejected Obama, partisanship, etc. Democrats, Progressives, and Liberals must be responsible for kicking this sorry fake core-less ass out of office or we’ll just encourage more DLC Democratic behavior.
Six more years of Republicans minimum. Ugh. What semblance of a country will be left?
Palin is Obama’s only hope in retaining his presidency.
Increasingly, there are people standing up (in effect) and saying that. But your point is a good one, and it also raises the question whether we might actually be better off if some of the worst Democrats in Congress were replaced by Republicans. At least Republicans wouldn’t give the Democratic Party, or its perceived (if not actual) liberal/progressive ideology, a bad name.
To be concrete: I’ve voted for Dianne Feinstein in several elections here in California, despite misgivings, just to prevent a Republican from being elected. Never again. I’ll vote third-party if I still live in California in 2012 and she runs again; or, I might even vote Republican in that race. She’s a “Blue Hagfish” (my term for Democrats who oppose filibuster reform); she has endorsed the “report” of the Catfood Commission; she has called for Julian Assange to be tried under the Espionage Act of 1917 (she currently chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee); and she has a terrible record on civil liberties, worse than many conservative Republicans. With friends like this, who needs enemies?
But, better yet, primary them all. If these slimeballs can be defeated in the primaries, then we won’t face such evil dilemmas.
Voting 3rd party has the same effect as not voting at all. It says you’re unhappy with both major parties. Voting Republican says you’re unhappy with the Democratic party.
I responded to your proposed Green strategy on another post:
http://my.firedoglake.com/themalcontent/2010/12/11/a-line-too-bright-to-ignore/
You might find the response interesting!
Voting third-party has a much better effect than not voting at all, even when the third-party candidate has no realistic chance of winning. Not voting at all is the absolute worst possible choice. Better to flip a coin to decide who to vote for!
Voting third-party says “I’m unhappy with both major parties, I’m mad as hell, I’m highly motivated, and I give more thought to politics than most of the population.”
Not voting says “Either I don’t care, or I’m too discouraged to fight, or both.” And it says nothing else!
OBAMA IN 2012-KEEP A REPUBLICAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE
Elections in LA are often on Saturday. For example, Bobby Jindal was elected Governor on 10/20/07, a Saturday. Sometimes not voting means “I thought the election was Saturday.”
Not voting can also mean, for example, “I am a convicted felon and my voting rights have not been restored”, “I can’t read,” or I am mentally incompetent.”
Not voting and voting for 3rd party both don’t change “votes for 1st place candidate – votes for 2nd place candidate.”
I meant, of course, not voting when you have a choice. I wasn’t referring to people who aren’t allowed to vote, or are misinformed as to when the election is being held.
Those are not the only statistics that matter. Recorded turnout is critically important in predicting future turnout, and predictions of turnout carry enormous weight in the decisions made by political power players. In particular, low turnout has a strong negative effect on the estimated chances of progressive candidates.
Your original statement was:
That is one of the most dangerous myths I’ve seen (regrettably, from more than one person) on Firedoglake. I’ve even seen some posts that go further than anything you’ve said – one of them assumed that staying home sends some kind of constructive message. It doesn’t – period. On the other hand, voting third-party can send such a message under some circumstances.
138,000 voted 3rd party for Prez in FL in 2000. 1 or 2 million registered but did not vote. The difference between these 2 groups was what?
The difference? An unconstitutional supreme court interference in a national election that installed an unqualified idiot in the White House.
Nowhere in the Constitution is the Supreme Court given ANY role in elections in this country, 14th and 15th Amendment notwithstanding. The court intruded to ensure that a Bush would get in and secrets from the Reagan/Bush presidency, which were due to be declassified in 2001, would remain secret until someone could get access to them and sanitize them. Had that not happened, a few inconvenient things written by John Roberts might just have been available for review to prevent him from being appointed to the court and Citizens United would not be putrifying our electoral process.
When you vote third [or fourth or fifth] party, your vote is at least OUT THERE. Parties #1 & 2 can see that there are other votes that they could, at least theoretically, capture, if they modified their message in the right direction.
There’s no way of counting the “stayed at home” vote, other than post-election surveys.
Why do you think Nader voters [and I'm NOT one] aroused such ire in FL, but the “I stayed home” contingent did not?
Also, as in Scott Brown’s election, most Dems and almost ALL the MSM got the message wrong. They didn’t look at how many people stayed home. If the votes from those who were repulsed by Coakley, couldn’t vote for Brown, and just stayed home had instead been in the column of the third party candidate, it would have been easier for Dems to see what they’d lost by their lousy candidate.
As much hope as the response to this post gives me, these fools continuing the Left-Right War don’t realize they are fighting the Left-Left pretend battle while their corporate masters drain their bank accounts, careers, and futures. “Democrats” heal thou self.
These are the tweets I received because of this post:
jamieharbor James Mitchell
MT @maple_apple_bee: You are a nutcase! Where did this come from? //@BHO_007: @chucktodd “Democrats for Palin” http://fdl.me/fcypuR |Drunk
maple_apple_bee LM
@BHO_007 If Sarah Palin is the Queen of it, You are by far the Prince of Fake Outrage. OMG ….. get out of here!
maple_apple_bee LM
You are a nutcase! Where did this come from? //@BHO_007: @chucktodd “Democrats for Palin” http://fdl.me/fcypuR #p2
maple_apple_bee LM
:O! //@i_GreyKing: Exactly!!! RT @JeffersonObama: @i_GreyKing That @BHO_007 is a racist. He’s a faux Liberal redneck that should be exposed.
i_GreyKing The Shady One
Exactly!!! RT @JeffersonObama: @i_GreyKing That @BHO_007 is a racist. He’s a faux Liberal redneck that should be exposed.
JeffersonObama C Gauvin
@i_GreyKing That @BHO_007 is a racist. He’s a faux Liberal redneck that should be exposed.
i_GreyKing The Shady One
RT @JeffersonObama: Capitulation Wing of our Democratic Party. @firedoglake @janehamsher @BHO_007 «— this one is a racist!
JeffersonObama C Gauvin
Capitulation Wing of our Democratic Party. @firedoglake @janehamsher @BHO_007
good one!
I have begun to really think that people vote Democrat or Republican as much based on what mommy and daddy did growing up. They inherit a “party” and then go with it out of familial loyalty. They buy name brands at the supermarket because of some fuzzy feeling generated on tv commercials, or because they grew up with the brand. People grew up with the LBJ or JFK or even FDR brand of Democratic Party, so they just keep voting Democrat. They don’t stop to think for one second with their brains. They don’t know that the Democrats no longer exist in substance. They never knew what being a Democrat was in the first place. As long as the Democrats are in power, they think the world is great and all is well. When Republicans are in power, we are happy to have those mindless fools’ unqualified voices added to ours when we oppose what the Republicans do. But we mistakenly believe that those people who rally against Republicans are doing so on the basis of principle or ideals or even some rational basis or thought-process.
They are not. They are rallying against Republicans because that is how they were raised. That is what their social circle does. That is what they were taught to do. And likewise, they were equally taught to eat Apple Pie, support all wars started by Democrats, and never question the Democrat in power. Support the Party. That is true patriotism.
That’s it. They have no more clue. No more ability to see what we are ranting about here. And by “they” I mean the majority of luke-warm Democrat voters, and even many of the die-hard Democrats. They love Democrats.
Obama’s two years and their applause for it has now proven this to me. There is no way all those liberal, civil-rights defending, idealistic progressives I shared campaign time with in 2008 really knew a damn thing about what they were supporting. They still support OBama, and they still tell me – “Hey, at least the Democrats are in power. Don’t rock the boat or we’ll have Republicans in power.” They are that stupid. They really don’t know, and can’t tell, the difference and don’t realize that we already DO have a Republican in power.
These people don’t know that there is no such thing as “Republican” or “Democrat.” It is all Corporatist now. There is no two-party system. They can’t see that. They won’t see it. Ever. Never.
And that is why the Banksters want to keep a Democrat in office. They can’t get away with even half this shit if they tried to push it with a Republican in power. The Best combination is a REpublican House, a divided SEnate, and a Democratic white house. That is the secret sauce of Corporate Fascism in America. It worked so well under Clinton for 6 years. The inverse – A GOP white house with a Democratic majority in Congress from 2006 to 2008 was so ineffective for them that they will never let it happen again.
And they will make sure to support Republican “Democrats” who run in Democratic primaries. Blue Dogs will be favored. Always now.
Until America becomes Parliamentary, with at least 4 or 5 viable parties, and a Legislature that requires coalitions (as in Germany) then we are stuck with a one-party Corporatist regime.
Amen!