Stop Me Before I Vote Again

i agree
i prefer a dump ohbummer movement to a third party if one has to choose a struggle path

of course we don't we can do both
and both at once
prolly sends a fuller message
to the party coree's pros

with a dump ohbummer in '12 movement afoot
they realize they could lose
more then just seats in congress that cycle
they could lose control
of the pwog moiety of their electoral base

recall the henry challenge to harry
was not a dump harry movement
it like ralph's runs
really didn't rip
at the imbricated party entrails
like the dump johnson dump the hump moves of '68

the dump carter led to the
gibberish of the ted spread

more ripping ..potentially
the jackson '84 challenge
which threatened not just the pwog but the black base too
perversely it led to the DLC
but it also
might ...might ...have led to more
if jesse had
decided to challenge the party
with an independent run say just before
the convention in '88
alas he chose to fold himself in ...
not go out

as a dump clinton move
the nader run in '96 was not
even as disruptive as henry in '48

and clinton didn't even shift rhetoric
like harry did to blunt
the indi pwog challenge

lot's to swirl thru here
but maximum rip requires an inside challenge

so who ???

feingold looks spent
jesse looks tears of the clown bathetic
some one minor rubber ducky
like dear dennis or some black or hispanic house pwog strikes me as useless

irony the best dumper would be some cat just like ......obama circa 06

or a jack ass
off the reservation governor like dean was

or ...and i ain't kiddin' dick trumka

i agree with this line
(at the link)....as far as it goes..

"I’ve been told for two years a mere 59 Democrats in the Senate are powerless due to the filibuster; by this same logic, we have nothing to fear from Republican gains because they will never be able to get anything through a Democratic filibuster, and even if they do, Obama can veto it ... "

review the last 6 clinton years
the danger then as now ...
what the dem core
wants to let thru

"Talk of how a segment of Republican candidates favors privatizing Social Security or eliminating Medicare...in all honesty there is zero possibility that either move would come about.. with ...(gop) control
of the House"and senate
the corporate center aisle will simply have
a broader ...aisle to run thru

It's a pretty good post. The comments are good too, and the idea is fundamentally sound from any angle but the Democratic partisan's. I wanted to stick to the most basic gist of it, though. For this, the broad strokes are the best and it would be easy to get derailed on the fine points—as one of the commenters tried do.

It's not a reasonable proposition, though. The Democrats don't actually take orders from their "base." They don't fear them.

The Republicans, at least, treat seriously with their Talibornagain contingent, because that faction [i]can[/i] make some electoral hay for the GOP.

The liberals/progressives don't have a analogous cache within the Democratic Party.

So, there's no actual "dumping" Obama.

If electoral shenanigans are your thing - wouldn't it make more sense to get as many Republicans elected, as possible?

The Republicans have the same basic policies as the Dems, but they go about it rather nakedly - and seem to prefer openly ophidian leaders, such as Boehner, Gingrich and Bush, who wear roughly on the skin of voters, after even minimal contact.

Respect,

Jack

Jack, of course you're right. The Dems don't take orders from their base. If and when push comes to shove, only a small portion of the movement would want to follow through. Some of those who did so would want someone as bad or worse than the dethroned Obama. If, by some miracle, the movement found someone worth voting for, who would be that rarest bird, a good president, one who also had the rudiments of a good support organization in place, there's little chance such a candidate would win (cf Nader). She/he wouldn't be able to govern once in office anyway. At its best, it's merely disruptive.

The existing political system handles disruptions through repression and, less often, a little bit of co-opting. The habit of disruption is hard to cultivate and harder still to sustain. The pressure of trying can drive people nuts, literally. The meliorism from the co-opting is temporary and gets hollowed out quickly. So, jumping ahead to the conclusion, on it's face, a movement to dump Obama is a waste of time. The realistic downsides are such that one could make the case that advocacy for it is immoral.

But I still think it's a good idea.

"The Democrats don't actually take orders from their "base." They don't fear them."

true enough
the jackson movement consolidated
the new dixiecrat strategy of the dlc
ironically that back fired in 88
where black dixie voted jackson
union voters "walked" from carter in 80
and of course george McG in 72
but i agree losing a chunk here or there and losing some races
some WHs
some Congresses ....
no KILLER deal any of em
not even WH topples like carters
no of these base messages seem to bend
the party core

" in the long run
where can our unruly fragments go ??"
on the other hand...
there's the relentless pull toward the "middle"

cultivating
the indi voters

a process that in it's up shot
simply seems to produce ....
more indi voters

conjecture
the larger the indi vote
the stronger the corporate grip
on the process
ie
the larger the center aisle party

I shouldn't be so coy about why I think it's a good idea. Testing and probing for weaknesses have some merit. Try, and fail, and try again. It builds knowledge and experience. Organizing against immense odds, with acknowledgment of the odds, usually leaves unruly fragments that can do positive things unrelated to electoral politics. The habit of resistance gets easier over time and forces some social acceptance, however thin it may be. Thugs who get defied and ridiculed never get over it and sometimes make mistakes.

That essay at Corrente is hilarious.

1) Attributing to Wee Glennie ideas that predate Wee Glennie by months, years, perhaps decades. Wee Glennie is a "more, better Democrats" stooge even today. The ideas attributed to Wee Glennie are ideas that I raised myself and got kicked Wee Glennieland (Unclaimed Territory) for raising -- AGAINST Wee Glennie's more, better Democrats position! And to go beyond the personal, I'm not the only clown to have been raising these arguments for many years. Suddenly Wee Glennie gets credit for them, WITHOUT Wee Glennie acknowledging he's been AGAINST them for at least 5 years? WTF? Fuckin' cult of personality. Greenwald as opinion leader, that's some rich fecal stew right there.

2) Jane Hamsher as a candidate? For what? Best fan of Bill Clinton? Oh holy fucking shit, that Corrente is deluded.

3) The continued notion of politics as sports statistics argument... the focus on details of complete irrelevance, as if those details are the thing itself.

At least they're pseudo-thinking. I guess that's a bonus of sorts.

What if Hillary had won the nomination and then the election? It's conceivable she'd now be governing more successfully (through reasonable rapproachment with the Republicans) than Obama, although much closer to the "center" than this blog would like. My sense is that Obama was the last hope of the Left, the one remarkably charismatic guy who could overcome all the hurdles in the way of reaching high office.

Obama is no Morgan Freeman, but he does have remarkable campaigning skills. Not the virtue of a president or national leader, but something else. Video blogger? Dunno.

dd --

I didn't realize Obama wasn't "governing successfully" right now. Seems to me he's giving his money-men exactly what they want, which is quite successful if you ask them, and since they're the ones whose interests are in play under Obama --or under Hillary, or under Newt, or under Mitt, or under Dennis Kucinich even-- then it's under their interests the "success" ought to be judged.

Another arrow goes flying past the target.

oxy snarls away agin glenn G
and corrente too
surprising ???

i fail to grasp the sports stat fanatico bit

i associate that minor vice more
with kosniki then ...what are they ??

left oar pwogs ???

corrent i think
does a yeoman's
job of trying to bridge the pink abyss
between the practical pwog catz
and the left anchorites

of course oxy will never be happy
nor his world brighten
till we all burn in hell
and hey ....he's got a point

dd
i agree ohbummer was that false hope that
trojan rubber
ready to cover
any pwog-left peckerheads
unable to go with "the Hill"

the billary bullion wagon got forced of the road
a dumping of sorts that no ??

and oxy not withstanding
i find that absurdly protracted dumping
provided a certain gratification for me
...as spectator sport

hey i'll admit a dunking of
poor striving wretch hillary
hardly equals the one
that still awaits
mr dog patch hisseff
but it'll have to do for now

frankly i hope ohbummer gets re elected in a land slide
and we job-spools take 4 more years
of nasty unspooling...
we voted for it
so we oughta take it
...the good and hard way

that comes from
the irrseponsible
comfortably out of harms way
hind end of me

that since age 12
has been
forever Mencken

dd, I think Obama would have a very lucrative video blog. I can't stand the things myself, but people do seem to like them. The advertisers drool over the web's eyeballs to dollar ratios, and there's a big demand for fuzzily nice, safely tepid bromides.

Though I'd never vote for her, I also think Clinton would have been a bit better than Obama; better in terms of the "stimulus" delivered and more deft at the real work of soothing banksters, facilitating MNC ascendancy and so forth.

Owen, it's petty enough, but I get real satisfaction from anticipating the snarling, entitled sense of victimhood that would come from the Obama camp over a dumping movement. There's nothing like the bloated complaints of whining courtiers and a sullen, aggrieved king. Then comes the fun of watching them undercut and second-guess each other in the flight to sinecures. The behavior is so disgusting that even the middle management partisans shut up for a bit.

Ox, I have a wonderful, reaffirming picture. It represents the childlike delight of the progressive voter. The pony may have been blown up by the police and the creepiest thing on earth may be squeezing them, but there are still smiles to smiled. Or, not.

"But I still think it's a good idea."

On its own terms, ayup. It won't accomplish its goals. It can't. But, it can spin a few more folks out of the gravity well. Unintended, but excellent consequence, that.

Respect,

Jack

Al, et al, I'm a layman in these matters, but Obama seems too narcissistic for the role he's chosen. A few of us are fortunate enough to experience disproportionate amounts of inappropriate success (at the expense of everybody else). Stochastic distribution of outcomes in life. Also, the electoral process rewards narcissists, so it's hard to tell until it's too late. Again, he'd be at his best trading barbs about policy with Matt Yglesias and Brad Delong in a bloggingheads format. It's a character issue. He might not be a failed president if not for the tragic flaw of his narcissism.

Who are the MNC ascendancy? I thought the big problem were the widely known finance oligarchs. Blankfein, Schwarzman, those guys.

op, it's all spectator sports. Hence the reference to arguing statistics (the "indicia" of the game) instead of actually playing the game and knowing how the game is played because... well, because one has experience playing in the game, rather than commenting on it obliquely. "My team beat your team," etc. Well, that's not the same as "I beat you," is it? And as to Wee Glennie, I'll stifle my comments when he acknowledges his errors, which he hasn't yet as far as I can tell. Glenn Greenwald, the American Idol of politics!

Al, that's a perfect picture -- and I think Alice Miller would have a lot to say (were she still alive and if she cared about American sociopolitical trends) about the childhoods of pwogs, their retreat into fantasy when confronting unwanted reality, their stubborn insistence that the fantasy IS the reality, etc. I often wonder whether pwogs were abused as kids, or whether they developed their retreat-into-fantasy as adults independent of a "good" childhood. Somehow I suspect it's tied to pwogs "parenting" their pwogettes with excess indulgence so as not to stifle "their creativity," if you get me.

dd, I agree with almost all of your assessment of Obama. I could quibble a bit about failed presidencies, but that would be largely semantics. He would indeed be at his best in a pundit show.

Owen might have more to say about the MNC. I consider the finance sector the worst of the worst, with the industrial outsourcers nipping at their heels.

Regarding lay status, I'm wholly without credentials. What qualifications I have consist of being willing to admit and seek to remedy my own ignorance.

Ox, yeah, the authoritarian upbringing does have lasting consequences. The appearance of a smothering regard can conceal endless awfulness.

Arthur Silber's Alice Miller essays were an eye opener for me.

Question: Dump Zerobama for whom? Dennis the Small?

This thing is totalitarian. No Wall Street, no money, no ads, no play.

I'd love to see Zero get dumped, but a) it ain't happening, and b) it wouldn't matter if it did.

SMBIVA.

Jack, that's better phrased than I managed. When I look at the political scene, I see a hopeless situation, with no lasting folkways for coping or achieving a shared clarity. Spinning out of the gravity well, wherever it lands people, must come before any political arrangements.

Miller's work is impressive, and sadly, relatively unknown outside the realm of child psychology. Two books I always recommend to the curious are Drama of the Gifted Child, and Thou Shalt Not Be Aware. Since we all were children once, and since adult personality derives from childhood experience, Miller's work deserves wider exposure (and IMO appreciation) than it seems to have presently.

As one of those dreaded creatures, a Democrat, I see no point in supporting a dump-Obama movement. I certainly don't see why SMBIVA would have any interest in this. Dump him for whom? Hillary? Interchangeable.

Or does SMBIVA hold out the hope that America really, deep, deep, deep down, this progressive nation just waiting to emerge?

Okay, Geoff. Don't support it. The arguments in favor have already been made and if they're not compelling then your course is clear. Why would you even waste your time reading or commenting? It seems off the wall to me.

Dd

all our major corporations are the products
of " finance oligarchs"
so in that sense one is not moving off center
to broaden the scope of the indictment here
to any corporation going across borders
in quest of gain

that we might call them trading companies
misses the point

they play on a global game board
their pieces whether plants or
stores goods or loans
or whatever
are just about everywhere
they are above patriotism
but not above patriotic wars
in fact the poor dears
as electric Al might say
driven on and on
by the diabolical caprice
of their particular
set of ongoing profit streams
yes on and on
never a rest
endlessly driven endlessly ...
by their ever labile
and too often
surprisingly sinisterly fragile
gains

if left un attended
all can be lost to the creditors
in a moment

no wonder they try to rig stuff!!!
and no wonder they often hate each other
like ball players on rival teams

OP, how do MNCs exercise political power for the purpose of preventing real exchange rate adjustments? I can see how GS does it through political donations and participation in the culture of the revolving door, but it's less obvious how it's done by real sector corporations. I understand that the Chinese are pursuing their national interest in purchasing our bonds to push down the Renminbi (as described in today's Krugman). I've always thought that the policy elite (merit babies you call them) were naively in thrall to the doctrine of comparative advantage. Perhaps some sense that we could avoid inflation through cheap imports.

Al, you must think ill of your own post, and the subsequent comments in support of it, to call reading them a waste of time. My apologies for showing interest in the subject, and my apologies again for coming to a different conclusion, and doing so in writing.

I love the Church Lady-styled response by Geoff at 4:08. Sure was SPECIAL!

Al wasn't saying the comments and his post are worthless to everyone. He was saying, Geoff, that based on your prior response, they are worthless to you, which is a lot different than being worthless to everyone. But very cute of you to pretend at a high- road-taking by way of a misread of Al's post!

Ox: I've read the post and the subsequent comments rather carefully. I hardly find them worthless. I just don't agree with them, however intriguing they may be.

"it's less obvious how it's done by real sector corporations. "

is it ???

"Dump him for whom? Hillary? Interchangeable"

you miss the point

fuck up and you get dumped
its tonic no matter if
it produces a clone like Hillary
or a far worse devil bug
like killer McCain or my dear
Sarah of Siberia

http://static.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/alaska-gov-sarah-palin.jpg

Ox, I had to go to the oral surgeon a few weeks ago. He's quite the joker. He explained the procedure and got his instruments ready. "This is like pulling teeth," he said.

"Wait a minute now! What is like pulling teeth."

"Pulling teeth is like pulling teeth, " he was starting to look a little concerned.

"That's a tautology," I responded. "But it's an intriguing one. It's thought provoking. I've considered it carefully, as it happens, in spite of whatever you might think."

"Huh?" He was getting irritated. Clearly I had him on the run.

To cut a long story short, the tooth still hurts like the dickens, but I had my victory. I'm sending him a neener-neener postcard tomorrow, just to make sure he remembers his defeat.

Owen....

>>>fuck up and you get dumped
its tonic no matter if
it produces a clone like Hillary
or a far worse devil bug
like killer McCain or my dear
Sarah of Siberia

Why is this tonic? Why was it tonic when it produced Nixon? Or Reagan?

Does it ever produce someone further to the left?

Why --- from a lefty perspective --- is this tonic?

'it's less obvious how it's done by real sector corporations.'

is it ???"

Yes. How's it done?

Obama is not getting dumped, nice as that sounds. Money calls this dance, and Hillary is not only interchangeable but also shrewd and young and party-disciplinarian enough to know that 2016 is her turn. Nobody else in the Dimbot Dumpster has a prayer of a chance.

Stay Home in 2012!

How's it done ??

same way as with big hi fi

check out the big pharma crowd
or agri biz or big energy
all donate ...no ??

geoff

left right what are these but florishes

we have an ergotic process here that can take on either mask and get top tilted to either side
while remaining at its point of contact with the ground of policy right down the corporate fairway

if we're playing a right dog leg hole
like we did for the 30 years prior to 06
its not going to operate like a left dog leg

i contend we're now playing a left dog leg hole
i'm as likely wrong as right but there you have it

This "dump Obama" thing seems to be attracting some attention. I kinda like it. It's short of what I would wish for, which would be more like "dump the Democrats." But for people who aren't quite at that point yet, it might still be constructive.

For one thing, it's mischievous. If the party starts to find that its base gets tired of management at short intervals, when the promised ponies fail to materialize, then the whole party project of herding and corralling the base becomes more difficult.

For another thing, it's de-cathectic. Party politics largely depends, these days, on a rather shallow emotional personal identification with the candidate. The more people experience falling out of love with the candidate as soon as he gets into office, the less willing they'll be to fall in love next time around. Their hearts will be hardened.

None of this of course will produce a better policy outcome in any short-term way, which is what DP apologists want one to worry about when they ask darkly whether one would rather have Palin. One might well get Palin, and Palin probably wouldn't be much better, if any, than Obama.

We're talking about structures here, structures which are not likely to be altered much by any individual who could conceivably be elected or survive his first three days in office.

I can't speak for any other SMBIVAers, but my own goal here is not to work for better policy outcomes with the existing structures. I long ago gave up on that. My goal is to spread enlightenment about the structures themselves, and in particular, to unmask as well as I can false friends like the Democrats.

How this will ever make things better I don't know, but retaining one's delusions can hardly fail to make things worse.

But, MJS, why compromise in advance here? Dumping Obama is simply not happening. If it does, it will be for Killary or Andrew Cuomo or some other TweedleDem. It is a Kosnickian move.

Why not stand up for SMBIVA, as a protest movement? Why do this system of personalities and TV ads the favor of giving it any more energy?

this thread only proves that a roomful of liberal/progressives, with a few contrarians and centrist lurkers thrown in, would be incapable of governing even themselves, let alone a city of a few thousand. I believe Al once had a good idea, on the Code Pink level, which eventually, under attack, weakened to "anyone who does a bad job should be dumped." This is ridiculous as a serious electoral idea, and for that matter so is the line suggested by OP's meandering among previous intra-party challenges to the leadership. Just dump the fucking party, the entire two party system, the legal fiction that corporations are people, the fiction that elections at any level are anything more than entertainment! Michael Dawson probably said it better than I.

My post concluded with, "I don't think the party is salvageable, but if people want to try, then dumping him is the right move." The post was filled with caveats to begin with. The context I used is sufficiently narrow to preclude any thoughts of compromise or delusions of efficacy, something I subsequently clarified at greater length.

What more do I need to do?!

de-cathectic!? calling Dr. Freud!

Al, I have some clove oil I can spare!

Fr Smith --

None of this of course will produce a better policy outcome in any short-term way, which is what DP apologists want one to worry about when they ask darkly whether one would rather have Palin. One might well get Palin, and Palin probably wouldn't be much better, if any, than Obama.

If any.

Pwogglerumps, though... they'll argue that it's very valuable to have an articulate Black man as POTUS, compared to a comical Hunting Mom populist, if only as an "image of America on the global stage."

Shit, herds of pwoggies voted for Obama just to be rid of the fake-Texan blue-blood who was the family black sheep in a family of very dark-hued sheep. The symbolic victory of the Obamessiah cannot be denied the pwoggie!

Ox, as a Democrat, and proud member of the Creative Class, I think clove oil is poor substitute for the life-affirming mortification of an impacted wisdom tooth. Those who occupy a lofty class perch may disagree, in their elitist way, but I have my pride and that's solace enough.

If it's tearing down the present system and structures that you want, you're almost there. All you need now is the support of the working class and poor --- which you almost entirely lack (something tells me there aren't too many bus drivers and coal miners on your "lefty mailing lists," but give it some time)--- and new, emerging leftist structures, which are almost entirely nonexistent. Other than that, you're all set. Bring on the revolution!

Al, I have it on good authority that Important Medical Laboratories are busy working on a stem cell-related cure for impacted wisdom teeth. The only thing standing between them and your cure is our further enrichment of The Medical Sector. Obama & the Donklecongress have enacted historic reform legislation that will bring your cure one step closer. In the mean time, I suggest regular monthly stipend contributions to the local oral surgeon, who will eventually realize your importance in the community (as represented by your stipend contributions) and find it within himself to take care of that damned tooth.

Let us pray.

"Our dollar,
which art in heaven,
hallowed be thy name.
Thy blingdom come,
thy shills be fun,
with business as the leaven.
Give us this day
our daily debt.
Forgive us our cash purchases
as we forgive those
who seek to barter.
And lead us not into economic freedom,
but deliver us from poverty.
For thine is the interest, the vig, and the juice.
For ever and ever.
Amen."

Geoff, we're exactly as set as genuine liberals who continue to waste their time on the Dimbots.

Big difference, though, is that we recognize exactly how fucked we are. You folks pride yourselves on not doing so.

I haven't written it in a while, so what the hell?

Less typey. More stuff burning.