This kind of thing seems to happen a lot to Obama. I have a hard time believing he'll win re-election with a base that so disappointed. Not unless he gets lucky and Bachman somehow gets nominated.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44389812/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/#.TmMNc2pLNac
QuoteStung by Obama on clean air, environmentalists weigh options
Advocates say they'll resume smog lawsuit against the government
By LESLIE KAUFMAN
updated 47 minutes ago
For environmental groups, it was the final hard slap that brought a long-troubled relationship to the brink.
In late August, the State Department gave a crucial go-ahead on a controversial pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast. Then on Friday, leading into the holiday weekend, the Obama administration announced without warning that it was walking away from stricter ozone pollution standards that it had been promising for three years and instead sticking with Bush-era standards.
John D. Walke, clean air director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an advocacy group based in New York, likened the ozone decision to a "bomb being dropped."
Mr. Walke and representatives of other environmental groups saw the president's actions as brazen political sellouts to business interests and the Republican Party, which regards environmental regulations as job killers and a brick wall to economic recovery.
The question for environmentalists became, what to do next?
"There is shock and chaos here," Mr. Walke said, "so I do not know. I can't answer that question." But he added that his group would resume a smog lawsuit against the government that it had dropped because it had been lulled into believing that this administration would enact tougher regulations without being forced to do so by the courts.
Political analysts watching the Obama administration's pullback from the environmental agenda this past month say that in the current climate there is little chance that environmentalists or their allies will ever side with the Republicans. After all, the Republican-led House of Representatives has been aggressively moving to curtail protections for endangered species and regulations for clean air and water, and most of the Republican presidential candidates have been intensely critical of any government effort to address climate change.
Advertise | AdChoices
Still, they say, the president could face political repercussions in subtler but nevertheless corrosive ways: from losing volunteer enthusiasm to tying up his allies in fights with him instead of with his enemies.
"Energy from part of the base will now be directed at communicating with the White House and not with the public about the administration's record," said Daniel J. Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal research group with close ties to the White House.
And Justin Ruben, executive director of MoveOn.org, a five-million-member online progressive political organization that played a significant role in President Obama's election in 2008, said he was sure that his members would be deflated.
Story: Hundreds arrested protesting oil pipeline
"How are our members in Ohio and Florida who pounded the pavement in 2008 going to make the case for why this election matters?" Mr. Ruben said. "Stuff like this is devastating to the hope and passion that fuels the volunteers that made the president's 2008 campaign so unique and successful."
Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, who does extensive work on public perception and the environment, said the real threat to the president's reputation stemming from the ozone decision went far beyond environmentalists.
"It could play into an emerging narrative in his own party that he is caving too quickly to Republican pressure," Dr. Leiserowitz said. "It is a dangerous narrative in your own base because it cuts down on enthusiasm and it is a narrative that his opponents will pick up on."
In fact, it is a lesson that some environmental groups have already learned, and they are preparing to act accordingly.
"I think that two-plus years into Obama's presidency is more than enough time for him to have established a clear weak record," said Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, which has been battling the president on endangered species.
"The environmental movement needs to keep piling the pressure on and realizing playing nicey-nice won't work," Mr. Suckling said, adding that more public actions and lawsuits are the way to get Mr. Obama's attention.
His is not the only group going this way, but so far it is unclear that protests are being heard.
All last week across the street from the White House, Bill McKibben, a founder of 350.org, a grass-roots organization that advocates limiting carbon emissions, staged demonstrations to protest the Keystone XL pipeline, which would bring the tar sands oil from Canada.
As of Friday, Mr. McKibben said, more than a thousand people had been arrested in the previous days of protest, including Obama campaign staff members from 2008. Yet, he said of the White House, "we heard not one word from them."
One of those former campaign workers who was arrested was Courtney Hight, who was the youth vote director in Florida in 2008. She offered an explicit warning: "If the president decides not to permit the pipeline, he will reignite the enthusiasm many of my friends and I felt in 2008. But if he approves it, it is just human nature that the disappointment will sap the enthusiasm that drove us to work so hard last time."
This article, "Stung by the President on Air Quality, Environmentalists Weigh Their Options," first appeared in The New York Times.
You know, I like the Obama that the Republicans talk about. That Obama does things. He is constantly raising every ones taxes and increased the debt by a factor of 10. He steals ammunition and creates a shortage, and he's creating a paramilitary force to overthrow the Republic. He's also responsible for the drought out west somehow.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 12:35:23 AM
I have a hard time believing he'll win re-election with a base that so disappointing.
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?!
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 02:12:00 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 12:35:23 AM
I have a hard time believing he'll win re-election with a base that so disappointing.
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?!
Obama's base is disappointing. What's so hard to understand? :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 02:12:00 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 12:35:23 AM
I have a hard time believing he'll win re-election with a base that so disappointing.
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?!
:Embarrass:
Single issue voters are whining, that's what they do. This is not news.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 04, 2011, 04:08:14 AM
Single issue voters are whining, that's what they do. This is not news.
I don't recall Bush's single issue voters bitching nearly as much.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 04:23:38 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 04, 2011, 04:08:14 AM
Single issue voters are whining, that's what they do. This is not news.
I don't recall Bush's single issue voters bitching nearly as much.
The thing is Bush got things done.
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 04:26:27 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 04:23:38 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 04, 2011, 04:08:14 AM
Single issue voters are whining, that's what they do. This is not news.
I don't recall Bush's single issue voters bitching nearly as much.
The thing is Bush got things done.
Well, that's my point. Bush did enough to satisfy his base and he got reelected because of it. Obama's base seems to always be upset. Obama might still win despite that, but it will certainly make things more difficult for him.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 04:23:38 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 04, 2011, 04:08:14 AM
Single issue voters are whining, that's what they do. This is not news.
I don't recall Bush's single issue voters bitching nearly as much.
His single issue voters already had a packed Supreme Court.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 04:28:51 AM
Obama's base seems to always be upset.
Let me paraphrase Yi from his post: Lefties upset? Where the fuck have you been, you fucking moron?
Extremists are always upset by moderate policies. Obama would need those votes a lot more if he faced any credible opposition next year, but he doesn't. The most credible republican candidate is probably Romney, who is running away from his record as fast as he can.
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 04:26:27 AM
The thing is Bush got things done.
The right claps and applauds their leader until they stab him in the back. The left moan, argue and grumble all the time and then vote for the lesser evil. At least that's the British experience.
I think Obama's got things done and his approval rating among Democrats and liberals remains in the 75-85% area that it's been for years despite all of these stories about an unhapy left. My guess is that journos spend more time with lefties who aren't happy and project that more widely.
Having said that I do think the civil liberties left have legitimate grievances, maybe the environmentalists do too :mellow:
What did Bush get done, exactly? Other than an unnecessary war where he confused Iraq with Iran, his only major initiatives he accomplished was No Child Left Behind, and the fucked up Prescription Plan. Homeland Security? A useless mess.
He spent the 2nd term hiding in the family room playing video games because presidenting was hard work.
His only successes were Gitmo, renditions and sending Canadians overseas to get their ball sacks zapped with cattleprods. And that was Cheney's.
Those are pretty impressive successes though. He also did a good job getting his guys on the Supreme Court.
Bombing brown people.
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 02:12:00 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2011, 12:35:23 AM
I have a hard time believing he'll win re-election with a base that so disappointing.
English, motherfucker, do you speak it?!
Clearly, Tim was engaged in negligent neglect.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 04, 2011, 07:59:35 AM
What did Bush get done, exactly? Other than an unnecessary war where he confused Iraq with Iran, his only major initiatives he accomplished was No Child Left Behind, and the fucked up Prescription Plan. Homeland Security? A useless mess.
He spent the 2nd term hiding in the family room playing video games because presidenting was hard work.
His only successes were Gitmo, renditions and sending Canadians overseas to get their ball sacks zapped with cattleprods. And that was Cheney's.
:lol:
Stop being a commie about the Iraq War. Remember: bombing is the American way, baseless imprisonment and torture, the Chinese.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2011, 06:24:54 AM
Quote from: Martinus on September 04, 2011, 04:26:27 AM
The thing is Bush got things done.
The right claps and applauds their leader until they stab him in the back. The left moan, argue and grumble all the time and then vote for the lesser evil. At least that's the British experience.
I think Obama's got things done and his approval rating among Democrats and liberals remains in the 75-85% area that it's been for years despite all of these stories about an unhapy left. My guess is that journos spend more time with lefties who aren't happy and project that more widely.
Having said that I do think the civil liberties left have legitimate grievances, maybe the environmentalists do too :mellow:
While I don't entirely agree with your post, I do agree that "Environmentalists* upset with President" makes for a story, while "Environmentalists* happy with President" really doesn't.
*substitute name of Democratic base group of your choice here
You know, the problem here is that it doesn't matter if Lefties are upset, as such. This will be spun as Obama caving to Republican pressure, and not a sign that he's an ineffably wise moderate.
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2011, 10:51:27 AM
You know, the problem here is that it doesn't matter if Lefties are upset, as such. This will be spun as Obama caving to Republican pressure, and not a sign that he's an ineffably wise moderate.
And even if he does cave into the Republican pressure he will still be called an "extreme leftist".
Quote from: Faeelin on September 04, 2011, 10:51:27 AM
You know, the problem here is that it doesn't matter if Lefties are upset, as such. This will be spun as Obama caving to Republican pressure, and not a sign that he's an ineffably wise moderate.
By whom?
:huh: Obama isn't effable?
He's no Bubba, that's for sure. :lol:
Quote from: Razgovory on September 04, 2011, 10:59:40 AM
And even if he does cave into the Republican pressure he will still be called an "extreme leftist".
True. But the fact that he's distantly cerebral and academically aloof to the point he makes Jimmy Carter seem like a Barney Bad Ass doesn't help.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 05, 2011, 10:07:40 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 04, 2011, 10:59:40 AM
And even if he does cave into the Republican pressure he will still be called an "extreme leftist".
True. But the fact that he's distantly cerebral and academically aloof to the point he makes Jimmy Carter seem like a Barney Bad Ass doesn't help.
Yeah. Hillary would have been a better choice. I made the mistake of thinking that if we elect Hillary we'll go through the same annoying shit of the 1990's. Turns out, who ever we elect President who doesn't have an "R" behind their name we get the same crazy bullshit. I'm surprised someone hasn't blown up a federal building.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 05, 2011, 10:11:12 PM
Yeah. Hillary would have been a better choice. I made the mistake of thinking that if we elect Hillary we'll go through the same annoying shit of the 1990's. Turns out, who ever we elect President who doesn't have an "R" behind their name we get the same crazy bullshit. I'm surprised someone hasn't blown up a federal building.
If Hillary had won, there never would've been a tea party.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 05, 2011, 10:15:11 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 05, 2011, 10:11:12 PM
Yeah. Hillary would have been a better choice. I made the mistake of thinking that if we elect Hillary we'll go through the same annoying shit of the 1990's. Turns out, who ever we elect President who doesn't have an "R" behind their name we get the same crazy bullshit. I'm surprised someone hasn't blown up a federal building.
If Hillary had won, there never would've been a tea party.
Why? Would she have killed them? The woman has balls. More balls then Obama. Obama, bless his heart actually thinks that you can sit down with people and work things out. It just doesn't work with people who believe that Red Dawn is a documentary.
Wolverines!
Quote from: Razgovory on September 06, 2011, 12:08:02 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 05, 2011, 10:15:11 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 05, 2011, 10:11:12 PM
Yeah. Hillary would have been a better choice. I made the mistake of thinking that if we elect Hillary we'll go through the same annoying shit of the 1990's. Turns out, who ever we elect President who doesn't have an "R" behind their name we get the same crazy bullshit. I'm surprised someone hasn't blown up a federal building.
If Hillary had won, there never would've been a tea party.
Why? Would she have killed them? The woman has balls. More balls then Obama. Obama, bless his heart actually thinks that you can sit down with people and work things out. It just doesn't work with people who believe that Red Dawn is a documentary.
Because Obama is black.