MyDD :: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses Obama

All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses Obama

by Big Tent Democrat, Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:38:45 PM EST

Nelson, a popular moderate in largely Republican Nebraska, said Obama has "the greatest potential to ending the bitterness and poisonous atmosphere in Washington." Nelson said Obama's victory speech in Iowa was an effort to reach out to Democrats, independents and "enlightened Republicans," and that Obama epitomizes what Nelson has tried to do in Washington. Obama is the "prototype of what we need today," Nelson said.

Again, the national implications for me are not positive for Obama, they are negative. I am glad that Ben Nelson is a Democrat and coming from Nebraska, I doubt we could get someone better, but Nelson's views are NOT what I want for the Democratic Party. Remember, Ben Nelson endorsed Joe Lieberman as an INDEPENDENT in the Connecticut Senate race in 2006.

Ben Nelson's desires for the Dem Party are diametrically opposed to my own. But Obama's seem in sync with Nelson's. That is very troubling.

Tags: Election 2008, Barack Obama, Ben Nelson (all tags)

Permalink :: 65 Comments :: Post a Comment

Is Ben Nelson right about Obama? (none / 0)

I surely hope not.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:39:55 PM EST

You are TROUBLED by Obama's (2.00 / 2)

appeal across the spectrum?

NO, NO, NO, SAVE US FROM CANDIDATES THAT HAVE A WIDE APPEAL!@!!! It's TERRIBLE - Obama appeals to MANY TYPES OF PEOPLE!!! How awful!!!

Are you really serious about that?

by dataguy on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:48:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Absolutely (2.00 / 1)

I am troubled. There are people who should NOT agree with you if you STAND FOR SOMETHNG. That Ben Nelson believes Obama will be a President the way he is a Senator troubles me greatly. Do you not understand that?

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:54:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wasn't Nelson (2.00 / 1)

a proponent of the bipartisan crap that yields horrendous judges. This is what Obama stands for.

by sinclair on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:30:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is Ben Nelson right about Obama? (none / 0)

not very much of a diary. this is more of an extended comment. needs more analysis.

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:01:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Only if you do not know Ben Nelson (2.00 / 2)

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:02:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is Barbara Lee right about Obama? (2.00 / 1)

There is already a diary about this. It isn't just Sen. Nelson who wants to end the bitterness and poisonous atmosphere in Washington. It's everyone in Washington who wants to see us start accomplishing things and are fed up with a non-working majority. When your endorsements stretch from Sen. Nelson to Rep. Barbara Lee there's some hope we can get things done.

by Piuma on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:44:11 PM EST

No (none / 0)

There is NOT a diary about this. There is an Obama adulation piece.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:49:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is Barbara Lee right about Obama? (none / 0)

Hillary has endorsements stretching from Lynn Woolsey to Evan Bayh, if you want to go that route. John Edwards has endorsements from all over the political spectrum.

The relevant question is WHY a given person lends their endorsement. Your argument is sort of ironic in light of the title of this diary.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Heh (none / 0)

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:06:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (2.00 / 1)

Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson, Tom Daschle... the bipartisanship schtick and blurring the difference between the parties is essential to their personal survival (or was, in Daschle's case).

But that kind of message from our Presidential candidate will not move the progressive agenda forward one iota. We need a candidate who is not afraid to say what the Democratic Party stands for and that, in many cases, it is the complete opposite of what the Republican Party stands for.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:44:43 PM EST

Yep (none / 0)

Hence my diary. Which was NOT already done, despite the protests of the Obama idolators.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:51:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yep (none / 0)

So it's impossible to support Obama without being an idolator?

by MNPundit on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:57:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No (none / 0)

I support him myself. Did you feel alluded to?

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:06:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

There is already a diary about this.

by Namtrix on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:45:56 PM EST

No (none / 0)

Ther is not. There is an Obama adulation piece.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:50:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No (none / 0)

The diary was specifically about this endorsement. Why couldn't you have made your views on this known there? If you didn't like the current discussion, you could have easily changed it.

by Namtrix on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:55:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Because (none / 0)

the diary was nonsensical and I was not going to buy into the narrative it was creating. This is not daily kos by the way, where diaries are being push off the list in rapid fashion. Here's my question, have you been complaing about repeat diaries before? Because the Obama repeaters are pretty common.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:58:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No (2.00 / 1)

This is rich, considering that we were treated to at LEAST 10 repetetive DIEBOLD diaries from Obama posters so far. Every single one of them contained info or updates that would have easily found a home in the ORIGINAL diary titled "DIEBOLD VOTER FRAUD."

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:08:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Of course (none / 0)

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Someone tell me how (none / 0)

I shake my head when I hear this nonsense like, "ending the bitterness and poisonous atmosphere in Washington."

How?

What has he done in this first 3 1/2 years in office to prove it?

Will the Republicans just fold if Obama is elected? Boehner, Norquist, Blunt, Limbaugh, Heritage, CLub for Growthy, McConnell, etc., they all going to go away? Surrender to Obama? Of course not.

They will fight him harder than ever and hope to gain the White House back in 4 years. It might be easy for them to do.

If Obama is elected he could face the same type of blowback that Reid and Pelosi are facing now over the war. Republicans won't let them end it, but Americans are saying "you promised you'd end it."

Obama could end up being dumped for not delivering his great change. All the Republicans will have to do is dump on him for 4 years.

by dpANDREWS on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:51:42 PM EST

Ben Nelson's strategy (2.00 / 2)

has been to capitulate. Is that what Obama is promising.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:56:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (2.00 / 1)

Obama is NOT A PROGRESSIVE. He is close to the center. Of course Nelson, Johnson et al would endorse the guy. They don't want to have to fight for a truly universal health care system, are hoping that with Obama we'll get a watered-down "nice effort," which then will be further GOP-ized to make it a truly bipartisan effort all Senators can be reasonably happy with. In the end we get NOTHING. Blech.

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 01:54:53 PM EST

Ben Nelson (none / 0)

agrees with you it seems.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:01:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (2.00 / 1)

Actually what is Obama? Sometimes I'm not sure. He doesn't have much of a voting record to go on. His IL record is pretty far left but he's also caved a number of times when the going gets tough. He's not selling progressive ideas just gauzy things like "hope" with his rhetoric. He's failed to define himself unfortunately so he'll can be easily defined by the opposition.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:33:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

a year ago Obama was my second choice (2.00 / 1)

Now I barely prefer him to Clinton, and that is primarily because I think there is a chance he would include Edwards in his cabinet (whereas Clinton would never appoint Edwards to any position).

I have no confidence that Obama would govern as a progressive. On the contrary, I think he will try to rise above the parties and propose a "unity" agenda that does nothing to advance the progressive cause.

Despite all my reservations about Hillary Clinton, at least she understands that the Republican opposition is not going to melt away through the sheer force of her personality.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:02:06 PM EST

I support Obama (none / 0)

on the grounds that he will get over this BS.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:23:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I support Obama (2.00 / 1)

"I support Obama on the grounds that he will get over this BS."

You're living in a dream world BTD. You of all people should see the handwriting on the wall and I think you do, but you are in denial for some reason. I think you are hoping BO will wake up. No pun intended. But that will not happen. I doubt a lot of what you say now BTD. You have been wrong before; remember NH.

by lonnette33 on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 04:08:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Let me give you my take, as well as the take of several people I talked to last night when I heard this news.

Ben Nelson endorsed Barack Obama because he doesn't want Democrats in Nebraska to lose. Which we absolutely will with Hillary Clinton at the top of the ticket.

The heart of Nelson's endorsement lies in this phrase:

"Barack Obama will be the strongest candidate in the heartland, because he puts solutions and consensus fist and he inspires great crossover appeal among Republicans and independents."

When are you all going to understand that Obama's talking about Republican and independent voters, not Republican politicians?

Barack Obama can do for progressives what Ronald Reagan did for conservatives.

Further Reading

by Dave Sund on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:05:16 PM EST

An electability argument? (none / 0)

So Ben Nelson calling Obama moderate and saying he will be a President in the manner that Nelson is a Senator was all a lie? And your comparison of Obama to Reagan is facile. Are you at all familiar with they way Reagan campaigned and governed? He has no similarity to Obama's unity schtick.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:12:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama is too much like Reagan (2.00 / 1)

yet not enough like Reagan. His campaign style is similar, but the content of his message is quite different. Reagan turned his supporters against liberalism and the Democratic Party. Obama avoids sending an ideological message to his supporters beyond, let's all get along somewhere in the middle.

So Obama is running a campaign based on optimistic feelings and a lack of specifics about what he would do. But unlike Reagan, he is not also trying to build his own party.

John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

by desmoinesdem on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (none / 0)

I think you completely misunderstand the intent of the statement. (Which is not surprising, though somehow ironic, given your name).

Show me where Ben Nelson calls Barack Obama a moderate. Show me where Ben Nelson says they agree ideologically on all issues.

Here's the problem with your argument. Some people saw the last 8 years of divisive and destructive Karl Rove politics and said "we can do better than this." And then others saw it and said "we can do it better than them."

Sadly, most in the progressive blogosphere would rather have a bloody fight than a clean win.

Further Reading

by Dave Sund on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:22:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh the Tent reference (none / 0)

You know you need some new material. I ewant a Big Tent of course, just do not want Ben Nelson dictating what the Dem positoin will be on issues. You are from Nebraska, how would you characterize him? Do you REALLY believe that Nelson believes Obama will fight for a progressive agenda and STILL endorse him? What you call a "clean win" is a won for the Nelson point of voiew. I oppose the Nelson point of view. It is a clean win for him and his views. That is what this means. As for Obama being called a moderate, no, all Nelson said was Obama would be a President likehe was a Senator. What do YOU think he meant by that? Honestly, there is no discussing this with some of you.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:28:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (none / 0)

Try as you might, there is no way you can reconcile the statements "Obama's ability to bridge the partisan divide" and "Furtering the progressive agenda." Those two are anathema to each other. If the former is what you want, just state so. There is nothing wrong with that viewpoint. Just don't ALSO sell the notion that bridging the partisan divide would FURTHER the progressive cause. It would obviously harm it in certain ways, as bridging the divide would automatically mean a watering down of liberal/progressive proposals with a compromise found somewhere in the middle.

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:33:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (none / 0)

Fear is a Republican tactic. They're better at it than us. When you hear Obama talk about "partisanship" he's not talking about the two parties, but the culture that says the other side is the enemy. It started in 1994. And, yeah, the Republicans are responsible for it. But that doesn't mean we should continue it.

Fighting fire with fire is a terrible strategy. That's why firefighters use water.

Further Reading

by Dave Sund on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:44:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this all you can say? (none / 0)

Pathetic comment.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:50:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (none / 0)

Winning the Presidency does not give us the option to "continue" it or to "stop" it. We controlled the Presidency from 1994 to 2000 and it didn't stop the Republicans from employing scorched-earth partisanship.

Unless you believe the Republicans are going to wake up one day and change their entire strategy, our only options are to oppose the Republican partisanship or to surrender to it.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:54:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what Steve said (none / 0)

To stop it we must do what Ben NELSON does, capitulate. I know why he does it. But Nebraska is not the rest of the country.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:57:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (2.00 / 1)

In the 2006 midterms, moderate Republicans were the biggest losers. There were SOME conservative casualties, but overall, more moderate Republicans were shown the door. That has left the GOP in Congress more conservative as a whole, and more convinced that moderate values are a sure loser (they can point to the 2006 midterms from proof,) that the only way to regain the upperhand as a party is to embrace conservative values more strongly than ever. You are ok with building a bridge to a more conservative, more partisan GOP, more determined to undermine our every move, then we have seen before? That seems counterproductive, quite honestly.

We have a historic opportunity to make gains and see the Democratic party thrive by putting OUR stamp and OUR policies on this thing. Then the American people will decide for perhaps a generation whether they believe that the GOPs trickle-down ideas are the way to go, or ours, whether their ideas on SS or education or health care are the way to go, or ours. If we water everything down (in the name of fighting fire with water) we are validating the GOP's ideas and are opening a huge barndoor for them to storm through at the first sighting of an economic downturn or an international crisis. Right now we have the chance to regain the upper hand for many years. I don't want to see that squandered with this bridge to nowhere, or if it goes anywhere at all, this one-way-benefit-the-GOP bridge.

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:23:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: An electability argument? (none / 0)

they can point to the 2006 midterms from proof

should have been

they can point to the 2006 midterms for proof

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:24:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

didn't you say up above (none / 0)

that if Hillary gets the nomination we will lose down ticket races? Isn't that a fear tactic?

Of course you are wrong on that point. Women will come out to support Clinton and they will vote democratic on down ticket races. Clinton is the BEST thing that could happen to the fifty state strategy.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 08:21:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: didn't you say up above (none / 0)

Not based on the people she surrounds herself with. Terry Macauliffe and company hate the 50 state strategy.

I believe Hillary Clinton will win if nominated. I don't believe she'll be of any help to Democrats in states like mine. We won't lose the House, and we won't lose the Senate, but we can expect her White House to run in much the same way that Bill's White House ran. In other words, the flyover states don't mean anything, resources go to "battleground" states, and the President has no coattails for Congressional Democrats.

Further Reading

by Dave Sund on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 05:20:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (2.00 / 2)

Ben Nelson obviously has the ability to attract lots of crossover votes from Republicans and Independents, or he wouldn't keep winning.

Most of us accept that he's a conservative Dem and he does what he has to do to win in Nebraska. None of us expect him to be the standard-carrier for the progressive cause.

But we don't want a President who wins crossover votes via the same model that Ben Nelson uses in Nebraska. Nelson blurs the differences between the two parties, he talks about bipartisanship as though both parties are on the same team together solving problems (when we all know they aren't), he casts any number of conservative votes to shore up his moderate credentials.

I don't know if you're old enough to remember Reagan, Dave. He built a big majority, but he didn't do it by being nonpartisan and blurring the differences between the parties. Not a day went by that he didn't talk about how the Republican Party offers better solutions and the Democratic Party is what stands in the way. I sure wish Obama would do more of that, but he really doesn't.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You must be gainst a big tent . ... (none / 0)

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:30:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you do realize ... (none / 0)

... it's the Democratic primary right now. Railing against the Republicans is not a winning strategy. Don't worry when the competition against the repugs start Obama will be very effective. He is the Movement candidate the Reagan was, bringing moderates back to our side.

by JoeCoaster on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:29:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you do realize ... (2.00 / 1)

Of course criticizing the Republicans is a winning strategy in a Democratic primary. You're telling me he's going to stress unity and bipartisanship in a primary, only to become more partisan in the general election?

Where is your evidence that Obama is capable of running this sort of partisan campaign? Whatever would make you think that he is waiting to appeal to the Democratic base until the general election?

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:51:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Heh (2.00 / 1)

What a boob. sorry but these Obama folks are just so stooopid.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 04:12:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you do realize ... (none / 0)

So Hillary is going to beat Obama by pounding on the republicans? That's not anyone's stratagy so far. I guess they are stupid too.

by JoeCoaster on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 07:22:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you do realize ... (2.00 / 1)

Apparently you haven't been paying any attention to Hillary's actual campaign.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 07:56:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you do realize ... (2.00 / 1)

she HAS been running against the republicans. Do you forget all the hysteria because she was running a GE type campaign, in THIS primary against the republicans and everyone said she was so wrong to do that as if she already had the nomination?

Yes Clinton will pound the republicans she has been.

ABO... Anybody but Obama. I LIKE the democratic party.

by MollieBradford on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 08:16:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

I really don't get th point of this diary .

Yeah Ben Nelson endorsed Obama . And ?

Am I missing something.

If Obama can appeal to Ben Nelson in Nebraska I would think that is a testament to his broad based appeal .

IF the worry is that Nelson is a centrist and he is endorsing Obama because he thinks he would govern that way , I don't think it makes sense to crucify obama for that.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:07:07 PM EST

I do not get the point of your comment (none / 0)

It is precisely that Nelson could think that that is attributable to Obama's political style. I will not reproduce the multitude of pieces I have written on the subject because what is the point? This is a subject long debated and for you to act and if you are unfamiliar with the arguments ast this late date, then what's the use?

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:14:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I do not get the point of your comment (none / 0)

I am familiar with the arguments which I think does have some merit , but I just don't think an endorsement from a politician helps further or explain the argument.

He might be endorsing obama for several unrelated reasons he is spewing out in his endorsement release which fits into the narrative Obama's campaign has been pushing.

He was endorsed by Barbara Lee , so anyone can make the opposite case.

My point is an endorsement doesn't look like a realistic basis of furthering such an argument.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:20:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Make the opposite case then (none / 0)

I think Nelson's endorsement is troubling.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:29:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Lori, the problem is that we are being sold in the announcement piece that Nelson made the Obama endorsement to 'bridge the partisan divide' (an original quote.) That basically, to some of us, means that Nelson believes that Obama will be, just as Nelson is, more of a centrist, who will work to split the difference with the GOP and also agree with the GOP on a lot of things, to show that party means little, even though the initial designation in front of the name was D. Some of us feel that that is exactly NOT what the Democratic party, and especially the Progressive movement, needs at this point. Obama as the partisan-divide bridge builder would have to be a nightmare to all progressives, and even moderates, as the GOP in Congress has shed itself for the most part of their reasonable moderates, is more fiercely partisan/conservative than ever. Building a bridge to THAT group? I am dismayed at the prospect of looking at a true CENTRIST in the White House who in addition also has the tendency/inclinatin to "bridge the partisan divide," thereby likely moving the country further to the right than it currently is. I also am not looking forward to the prospect that we as Democrats see continued chiding from our own president for "being too partisan" and told to "get over it," with Republicans held harmfree, and, worse, getting a sympathetic and in certain cases agreeable ear for their own agenda.

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:26:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Wow , it seems a lot of bloggers would have been up in arms against someone like Mark Warner then.

He would have been my ideal candidate , so maybe we are looking at this from two different perspectives.

I have never been against Obama on ideological grounds because ideological I don't think a case can be made that he is not a progressive , he might not be a strong ideologue like Clinton is , but he has a progressive record nonetheless.

But it seems quite a few bloggers are challenging his progressive credentials. I think that is making a mistake of falling for his rhetoric which is just a strategy crafted out to win the presidency instead of looking at his record which is progressive.

I have never understood the criticism of Obama for being able to attract inde's and republicans . In an ideal world that would be a plus not a minus.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:41:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Interestingly enough (none / 0)

A lot of them now irrationally are fervent supporters of Obama. go figure.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:52:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Lori, an honest look at Obama's record reveals a rather unimpressive record (from a progressive's point of view.)

Obama ranks 43rd for the 07/08 Senate session:

http://progressivepunch.yvod.com/members .jsp?search=selectScore&chamber=Sena te&scoreSort=current_congress

He ranks 44th lifetime for his votes "when the chips are down."

http://progressivepunch.yvod.com/members .jsp?search=selectScore&chamber=Sena te&scoreSort=current_close

You can find the entirety of his voting record when you click further in and review all votes. I think that if you look into this a bit further, you will see a rather non-progressive record, which is shown in Obama's low ranking on the progressive richter scale. Rhetoric does not a progressive make, and in this case Obama's rhetoric is not really progressive, anyway. Somehow we are being told that Obama's concilliatory or bridge-building rhetoric still comes with progressive policies, but Obama's progressive scores are just not there to make that case.

You also have his record when it comes to him co-sponsoring or writing bills. A look at the entirety of that gives Obama a ranking as a "rank and file Democrat":

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.x pd?id=400629

whereas, for comparison purposes, Hillary Clinton is ranked as a "radical Democrat," to the far left of Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.x pd?id=300022

I would say the definition of a "rank-and-file Democrat" is more of a centrist/moderate designation, whereas a "radical Democrat" would have to be the more progressive designation.

I realize that many people believe that Hillary Clinton would just continue Bill Clinton's policies, but a look at the voting record and bill co-sponsorship record shows that she is much more progressive. In many ways, Obama would be much more likely to be Bill Clinton-redux, policy-wise, as he is more of a centrist/moderate. I think we are at a time and place where more progressivism is needed, and because of her more progressive bonafides, voting-records-wise and also bill-co-sponsoring-wise, Hillary Clinton fits that bill, moreso than Barack Obama.

by georgep on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:07:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Don't bother georgep. Please go over to taylormarsh.com and look at some of the comments made by lori. Opposite from what she says here. I asked her once before if she blogs under lori over there and she never answered me, which led me to believe that she does. Her comments are quite troubling.

by lonnette33 on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 04:16:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

Here's my concern Re: republicans.

I don't see it as much of a plus because right now they see Obama as "the enemy of my enemy" or more as a tool to defeating Hillary rather than some one they will vote for. The Republicans have been sending out emails about how he's a muslim and a member of a radical separatist black church so in the end he is just a means to the end nothing more for them.

I can see the independent argument as somewhat valid though.

No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!

by Ga6thDem on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree (none / 0)

It says it all. the rest of your comment says a lot too.

by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 02:36:37 PM EST

Re: All Things To All People: Ben Nelson Endorses (none / 0)

You're right, the fact the Ned Lemont and Ben Nelson actively support Obama Kinda says it all. Obama is starting a national movement in the Democratic direction...join the ride.

by JoeCoaster on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 03:38:06 PM EST

The Hillary-bots don't need additional voters (none / 0)

They have 25 %. They need no more.

by dataguy on Sat Jan 12, 2008 at 08:36:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.