[lbo-talk] Why Obama doesn't suck

Marv Gandall marvgand at gmail.com
Wed Nov 10 16:23:28 PST 2010


On 2010-11-10, at 5:06 PM, SA wrote:


> He's doing exactly what his base wants:
>
> ---
>
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/144359/Democrats-Republicans-Differ-Views-Compromise.aspx?utm_source=tagrss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_term=All%20Gallup%20Headlines
>
> Democrats, Republicans Differ in Views of Compromise in D.C.
> Democrats more likely to favor compromise; Republicans, holding firm to beliefs
> by Jeffrey M. Jones
>
> [...]
>
> Is it "more important for political leaders to compromise in order to get things done" or "more important for political leaders to stick to their beliefs even if little gets done"?
>
> Compromise/Stick to beliefs
>
> Democrats: 59/18
> Republicans: 32/41

Other polls have also found the Democrats in favour of apple pie, motherhood, and Sunday night football.

But on the immediate, less otherwordly, issue at hand - Bush tax cuts for the rich - two of three Democrats are opposed to their extension. As are most independents and even a sizeable percentage of Republicans.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016602-503544.html

This would be a good starting point for a liberal bourgeois leadership with gumption, even from the standpoint of its own narrow partisan party interests. The opportunity to seize the initiative and put the Republicans on the defensive on this issue would begin to alter the present political equation and re-open the door to further advance.

But such bourgeois leadership is precisely what is lacking at the top of the Democratic party at this critical juncture - and if the majority of activists are, like Charles and SA, susceptible to its uncompromising attachment to "compromise" - then Obama, and America's millionaires, will most certainly have their way.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list