Political Hotsheet
November 10, 2009 2:48 PM

Liberal Base "Worried" About Obama Agenda

(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)
Jane Hamsher, the founder of liberal blog FireDogLake.com, said in an interview Tuesday that the liberal base is "worried" about the Obama administration and may "stay home" in the 2010 midterm elections.

Hamsher compared the current situation to the 1994 elections, when, she said, the Democratic base (including union members) was demoralized and disengaged following the passage of The North American Free Trade Agreement. Republicans took control of both the House and Senate in that contest.

She argued that the Obama administration is paying little attention to its base even as the opposition gins up support among the Republican base with events like the Tea Party protests.

"If you're suppressing your base, and the other side is revving up theirs, and midterm elections are all about turning out the base, I sort of question what their strategy is here," she said.

Hamsher has signed on to a financial boycott of the Democratic National Committee, Organizing for America (the DNC-run operation to mobilize Obama supporters) and the Obama campaign. The boycott was organized by Americablog's John Aravosis and Joe Sudbay over what they see as President Obama and his party's failure to keep its commitments to the gay and lesbian community.

"LGBT Americans, our families, and our friends kept our promise at the ballot box, we now expect President Obama to keep his in the White House," they wrote. In addition to Hamsher, cosponsors include the liberal blog Daily Kos, writer and editor Dan Savage and radio host Michelangelo Signorile.

The boycott will be lifted, Aravosis and Sudbay write, when legislation is signed enacting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell and repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. During the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama pledged action on all these issues but has not pressed them since entering office.

"We respect the right of anyone to express their views and always are willing to listen," a DNC official told Hotsheet in response to the boycott. "And, we recognize that there is much more to do. We do, however, take pride in the historic accomplishments which we have been able to achieve with the help of the community just nine months into the president's term and are we going to continue to work for greater equality and justice for all Americans."

Accomplishments cited by the official included signing into law an extension of hate crimes protections for LGBT citizens, extending benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees, hiring record numbers of LGBT Americans, and extending the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act.

That's not enough for some on the left, however – and LGBT issues are not the only ones generating anger. Separate from the Americablog effort, another boycott is being organized by Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos. He is calling on his readers not to donate to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee because it is supporting candidates who voted against the health care reform bill. "Instead, give to those elected officials who best reflect your values," he writes.

In addition to signing onto the Americablog boycott, Hamsher pushed her readers to unsubscribe to the Organizing for America mailing list, which is believed to include 12 - 13 million names. Liberals have been unhappy with OFA for not doing more on progressive causes like the gay marriage referendum in Maine.

"They don't want to go out on issues that would make supporters of that list happy," said Hamsher. "They're triangulating against that list."

The DNC official counters that the president remains popular with liberals (and "across the political spectrum") and notes that Democrats have won all five special elections this year – evidence, the official suggested, that the base is not demoralized.
Tags:
Jane Hamsher ,
glbt ,
gay ,
Democratic National Committee ,
Obama
Topics:
Gay Issues
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 55 Comments
by wheresclair November 11, 2009 3:38 PM EST
People need to understand that when they elect a candidate, it is a long term investment. The newly elected official has to work within the framework of what he or she can legally do unilaterally or in concert with peers and the order and timing of what they try to accomplish depends hugely on those peers, the current national climate, and the vocal support of their base. When the base gets impatient and questions their candidate's commitment to their cause, the opposition jumps in and becomes empowered. For example, in the case of Barack Obama and the issue of "Gay Rights," there is no question that he is committed to equal rights for Gays and Lesbians. The question is HOW to make it happen. Obama is very intelligent and understands politics and timing very well. He knows he has to have several strong and widely popular political successes before he can insert something like Gay Rights on to the public stage. Give him the time and the support to get into that position of advantage. Quit nit-picking and whining. You voted for him, trust him. If you splinter the party now, the opposition WILL make large gains in 2010 and then your cause will be lost ? possibly for decades. You CAN oppose Obama like a 12 year old not getting their way, or you can see the big picture that you are falling right into the hands of the opposition that's just waiting for opportunities to split the party. If the party splits, they win every time! If they win, it will be the fault of those too immature to give him some time. Another example is this abortion issue. If liberals bail or threaten to bail on the health bill, it's gone...possibly forever. Instead, they need to get in there and just make sure the language stays the same so neither side gains the advantage. Grow up people; don't throw it all away on ?principle,? because the alternative is soooo much worse. If you fail to support the Democratic Party or fail to vote ?on principle? you?ll see what it?ll get you?it will get you the opposite of what you want! Don't fall into the opposition's hands! Yeah, you?ll be sending the world a message all right?you?ll be looking pretty dumb to have defeated yourselves!
Reply to this comment
by jdblue82 November 11, 2009 10:01 PM EST
Clair our cause is just as lost if Obama fails to act. He's demonstrated via inaction on several issues that LGBT equality is not on the top of his list. My civil rights, while they might not be a priority to him, are a priority to me.

Yet this President, nine months into his term, has failed to push for the repeal of DADT, the passage of employment and housing non-discrimination law, and has missed yet another opportunity (Maine) to speak out against discriminatory ballot propositions.

Other than hate crimes legislation, which has taken the Democrats over a decade to pass, there has been no significant support of LGBT Americans by the political party that claims to best represent them. Well, we've given and given, and gotten nothing in return. Why on Earth should we funnel money into the DNC or a pathetic excuse for "fierce" advocacy from the White House, President Obama's OFA? It's not like the Republicans did any worse for us over the last decade. Maybe another few years of them in Congress and the DNC will start keeping its promises.
by bacaangel November 11, 2009 9:52 AM EST
That is what the GOP want -- a divided base! Democrats must not be "hoodwinked and fooled" into an abortion fight that does not really exist! We should be smarter than that... We must keep our "eye" on the Prize -- Goal of healthcare for all Americans and lower premiums for those who are already insured. Democrats have a chance to lead by actually doing something good for Americans -- like health care, which is tied to the deficit and the bankrupting of businesses and families. We must keep our "eye" on the Prize and not be labeled with the title of another "do nothing Congress"!

GOP politicians and operatives continue to dishonestly and deceptively say that they cannot support a public option, they claim that they want to keep costs down for the American people! Really? This they claim all the while knowing that a public option/competition is the only way to really control cost and to bring about true reform thereby putting a definite Halt to the ?out of control? medical costs and premiums crippling people and businesses today, making it harder and harder for average Americans and young people to realize and take advantage of the slowly, slipping away American Dream. One could ask themselves, If you happen to lose your job today or tomorrow in these unstable economic times and at a time when we currently do not have healthcare reform for all, who would pay you or your familiy's health care costs, that is, if you are lucky enough to be able to see a doctor without insurance? This American Dream, now being called Socialism by the GOP has slowly been slipping away, and is in the last throes of dying, if we do not forge a new path onwards toward inclusion and cooperation for all. This dream of America will die to be replaced with just another third world country -- only to go by the wayside and into the history books as another failed experiment.
Reply to this comment
by wdh3007 November 10, 2009 11:59 PM EST
Now even the liberals and democratic voters who once suppported the change are just now starting to see how poorly organized, misrepresented, unqualified and out of touch this administration really is. I hope every single millitary person and civilian votes in 2010 because today if an election was held even old man Mcain would win!
Reply to this comment
by tonyatq November 11, 2009 2:25 AM EST
Get real McCain will never will even today.
by askagain November 10, 2009 10:37 PM EST
The liberal base needs to understand that President Obama must be president for all Americans. This sometimes means compromising. Otherwise, little or nothing is apt to get accomplished. Further, every President needs the support of independent voters who are results oriented rather than dedicated to a political party. The independent voters swing back and forth depending on what they like or dislike. These are political realities.
Reply to this comment
by CD_R2 November 10, 2009 10:34 PM EST
Obama is a fraud and a failure. Lots of people have known this for a while now. Glad to see the Democrats have figured it out too.
Reply to this comment
by environmental_wacko November 10, 2009 11:41 PM EST
You're projecting.
by kevjustice November 10, 2009 10:04 PM EST
Obama is currently doing what is politically smart. Also, if a public option is dropped it may be a good move for the Dems. This is because if premiums continue to go up the Dems can say " I told you so, you should have had a public option". Otherwise, if there is a public option that passes they can also claim victory(or even a bill that passes without a public option). In short, they win either way.
Reply to this comment
by bubbadubba November 10, 2009 9:57 PM EST
Never heard of her or her stupid blog.
Who cares?
Reply to this comment
by sonofsummarex November 10, 2009 9:32 PM EST
I hope they continue to be concerned.

By not allowing himself to be dragged into their ultra left wing causes, Obama has been able to stay on the side of the people and govern effectively. I would rather have this, than homosexual marriages, drug legalization, more abortions and a failed president.
Reply to this comment
by jumkey November 10, 2009 10:46 PM EST
What, the last failed President wasn't enough for you?
by tonyatq November 11, 2009 2:28 AM EST
You are right! The president must be a president for all. I don' t necessary agree with everything he does but I am willing to compromise.
by FauxNews November 10, 2009 9:29 PM EST
Now that Obama has deployed 40,000 more troops to the Middle East, the liberals will no longer have to "worry" about Obama, they can down right "know" he doesn't represent them.
Reply to this comment
by bluedenmant November 10, 2009 11:44 PM EST
got your crystal ball out again, I see...
by brian1920 November 10, 2009 9:10 PM EST
The typical argument for ObamaCare is that it will offer better medical care for everyone and cost less to do it, but occasionally a supporter lets the mask slip and reveals the real political motivation. So let's give credit to John Cassidy, part of the left-wing stable at the New Yorker, who wrote last week on its Web site that "it's important to be clear about what the reform amounts to."

Mr. Cassidy is more honest than the politicians whose dishonesty he supports. "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind."

Why are they doing it? Because, according to Mr. Cassidy, ObamaCare serves the twin goals of "making the United States a more equitable country" and furthering the Democrats' "political calculus." In other words, the purpose is to further redistribute income by putting health care further under government control, and in the process making the middle class more dependent on government. As the party of government, Democrats will benefit over the long run.
Reply to this comment
by rafterman1 November 10, 2009 9:09 PM EST
And what? Don't "show up" in 2010 and give all those seats back to the Republicans? Its an empty threat, don't talk so stupidly. Obama is a moderate, get over it. He's not going to give into the far left agenda. A far left agenda is just as bad as a far right one - look what happened in 2001-2008 with the far right in charge.
Reply to this comment
by tonyatq November 11, 2009 2:44 AM EST
It sounds silly to me. We have to stop this foolishness the GOP will never accept you. That what the GOP want you to do. I may not agree with everything the democrats do but I will never sit a home during an election because I can't get my way. You are acting like a 2 year old.
by vpcharan November 10, 2009 7:42 PM EST
Why should they not be? Instead of staying home, I suggest that the base should organize and field candidates as independents to challenge the democrats who are up for election next year. This includes senator Reid who is nothing but a whimp. Target Lincoln, Bayh, Conrad, Bacus, Nelson of Nebraska and all other BLUE RATS in the democratic caucus. Each of these folks are sold out to Insurance companies and they are unfit to hold public office. Staying home does not help the cause, but only emboldens these corrupt senators.
Reply to this comment
by velma179 November 10, 2009 8:23 PM EST
by vpcharan November 10, 2009 7:42 PM EST

I don't know if your post references mine, but I will reply to yours.

I am not a member of any political party, so of course I have no issue with people switching from one to another...

I do have a HUGE issue with the whole "constant election cycle" thing.

Sure, Lincoln, Bayh, Nelson etc. should be held accountable for being seemingly more (R) than (D) while they retain their seats within the Democrat majority party.

But -- and this is a tough one, they are from districts where primary challenges COULD bring more liberal/left wing Dems on as the candidate ... but would this candidate win? Personally, I don't want to see a Republican majority again for long enough to correct the past mistakes made by that team.

There is value in holding the majority in Congress, even though it is totally frustrating to those of us with expectations that when that majority is called Democrat, we aren't going to have Republican ideology making the laws.

So, I get annoyed at the special interest voters, because it seems those who think like this tend to be the loudest and in that, the driving force towards the "endless election".

We're supposed to be the actual majority (the country is either called center-right or center-left depending on who says it), but it is sometimes very difficult being in the "does anyone hear me" center.

Is it asking too much for those who have been elected -- to take a break from being elected again and ...govern?
by hungry1968-17 November 10, 2009 7:30 PM EST
by markj2 November 10, 2009 7:12 PM EST
HMMM, the athesists push there agenda until we took out school prayer,removed crosses and likeness from Courts, while our youth is going to hell because they have no morals,now the LGBT want to flaunt there agenda and make it legal for them to recognized as Married. No wonder God is going to destroy the Earth and a time of his choosing,just as he did at Sodom & Gamora for their sinful ways. Repent America turn back to God before its to late.







This country has been going to hell under the conservative mantra of "god, god, god, and more god".

The ten commandments were only removed from public buildings, (where they NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN), just a few years ago, and prayer was removed from schools in the 1970's, so please explain how THAT started the degradation of America in the 1950's and 1960's. This should be funny.

Your silly religion is being rejected, because it is so absurd and unbelievable, that today's smart and intelligent young people, aren't dumb enough to be brainwashed with such nonsense.

I mean how many "family values" can be extracted from a book where wives are traded for livestock, daughters are sold into slavery, polygamy is ENCOURAGED, concubines live in houses as easily as we own cats or dogs, and the whole foolish book is nothing but a "how to manual" for slave ownership?

Funny too that you mention your "peaceful and loving god" destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, while neglecting to mention that he killed sinners and innocent alike. I guess murdering the innocent, (including babies and small children), is some of those "family values" that you think our children should be taught?

I bet you set small animals on fire as a child too, didn't you?
Reply to this comment
by markj2 November 10, 2009 7:20 PM EST
Hey maybe we can send all the LGBT's to Iran some other Muslim country and they can push their agenda on them and see what it gets them.
Reply to this comment
by bluedenmant November 10, 2009 11:59 PM EST
I suppose you think that's funny. About a year ago two gay teenagers were shown hanging from streetlamps in Tehran for just being gay. How would you feel if you were first in line for the execution of people who cannot spell or use the correct adjective or verb tense??? Which you cannot. Feels different, doesn't it.
by markj2 November 10, 2009 7:12 PM EST
HMMM, the athesists push there agenda until we took out school prayer,removed crosses and likeness from Courts, while our youth is going to hell because they have no morals,now the LGBT want to flaunt there agenda and make it legal for them to recognized as Married. No wonder God is going to destroy the Earth and a time of his choosing,just as he did at Sodom & Gamora for their sinful ways. Repent America turn back to God before its to late.
Reply to this comment
by Jim1900 November 10, 2009 7:26 PM EST
I don't disagree with your criticism of the atheists, who have their own agenda, which is not mine. But it is not for the government to choose between them and any particular religion. Whether Obama is over the line you will have to decide for yourself, but it is a Constitutional question, not a religious one.
by hungry1968-17 November 10, 2009 7:11 PM EST
by newyorkmom November 10, 2009 5:38 PM EST
LGBT is all about whining and crying until you shove your agenda down everyone's throat ; immorality should not be seen as a platform. The current push comparing LGBT to the descrimination that African Americans experience is ridiculous. Sexual immorality is simply that..it is not social injustice.







Discriminating against someone based on sexual orientation, is the same as race, age, or gender discrimination.

Do you want someone telling you, "Sorry ma'am - men only"?

Or, "Women are physically inferior to men, so they shouldn't be allowed to ________".

You wouldn't have a problem with that?
Reply to this comment
by Kintari November 10, 2009 7:04 PM EST
Obama ran as and got elected as a centrist. I guess the liberals saw him as an empty vessel to put all their Marxist dreams into. He is already governing from the left, pushing government into every corner of American life. It's just that fast enough for them. They should hurry up and get what they can, the democrats are going to lose 30 seats in the house in 2010.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-17 November 10, 2009 7:15 PM EST
Keep living that pipe dream, and see what it gets you in 2010 and 2012.

The liberals can act as PO'd as they want, but what are they going to do when the Palin / Bachman ticket is announced? You think they're going to vote for that nightmare instead of Obama?

Please.......
by velma179 November 10, 2009 7:36 PM EST
I dunno hungry...

I went to the FDL website and read the comments.

They are talking about "creating a third party" or joining the "Socialist" or "Green" parties.

Sure, there are probably not any more people on the far left as the far right (likely less, actually) -- but it is the SAME sort of "LOOK AT ME/MY ISSUE" type of noise that "tea baggers" and the like are yelling.

I understand people wanting their voice heard -- but the fact that this type of "vote blackmail" encourages the 24/7-365-for any given two, four or six years ELECTION cycle... just ticks me off royally.

I do think anyone center to left won't vote for a Republican-or-further-right candidate. But folks staying home and not voting at all is what gets us so many inferior "one note" candidates and reps...

in my opinion.
by Disinfectant November 10, 2009 7:02 PM EST
They are so afraid they wont have their safe little cocoons to protect them from EVERYTHING. Liberals are what happens when mankind hasn't yet figured out how to live in harmony with technology and affluence. They are the direct product of "Turning on and tuning out". Perfect subjects for any tyrant. Ready to be led.
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-17 November 10, 2009 7:07 PM EST
This from a Glenn Beck follower?!?!

ROFLMAO!!!!
by bluedenmant November 11, 2009 12:08 AM EST
Your statement is pretty ironic, considering that conservatives are blatantly afraid of anything 'different' (i.e., want nothing to do with liberals, gays, blacks, non-believers, etc., etc.). Arrogant and childish. We won't even go near stupid. Conservatives are what happens when everyone DOESN'T come out of the cloning machine looking the same and they get upset. What makes you think conservatives have a monopoly on technology and affluence? It wasn't Sen. McCain that used the Internet to his advantage in the 2008 election. I have plenty of affluent friends, left and right. You need to grow up or at least try to sound like an adult with at least a modicum of intellect.
by ewo1977 November 10, 2009 7:01 PM EST
"If you're suppressing your base, and the other side is revving up theirs, and midterm elections are all about turning out the base, I sort of question what their strategy is here," she said.

Perhaps the "Strategy" here is to actually govern. To try and fix some problems rather than campaigning. Bowing down to the base does nothing to actually help solve the problems this country is facing. Problems left to us by an administration bent on bowing down to its base.
Reply to this comment
by velma179 November 10, 2009 7:23 PM EST
Thank you ewo1977...

It irks me no end that the elected officials themselves are always looking to the next election, rather than addressing the BROAD RANGE issues that affect ALL Americans.

Now we also have to hear the special interest "MY-ISSUE-IS-EVERYTHING" folks (far right and far left) pushing the lawmakers to care about ELECTIONS more than GOVERNING!

I am so annoyed at this FDL etc. gang right now -- I doubt I'll be doing MY normal donations to causes they support. That's my protest movement...

The ASPCA is getting my bucks, at least they care about ALL breeds...
by erich_1-2009 November 10, 2009 6:56 PM EST
I think that the escalation of the War in Afghanistan should concern the Left more than these other issues. The Administration has not established a good enough reason to escalate the troops, (the "Mission"), and have even threatened to escalate the conflict to Pakistan. To bring Osama Bin Laden to justice is not a worthy enough reason. He is not bringing the troops home any quicker than the Bush Administration was. Just the other day Senator McCain said that he felt we should bring the troops home, rather than just to a half-hearted effort. This is turning into another Vietnam, President Johnson's nightmare.
Reply to this comment
See all 55 Comments

About Political Hotsheet

Stay up to the minute on the latest news and developments from Washington, from the White House to Congress and everything in-between with the best political reporters from CBS News and CBSNews.com.

E-Mail Political Hotsheet
Follow On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. Kennedy: Bishop Barred Me From Communion

    (310 recent comments)

HOTSHEET ON TWITTER