Richard Codey, 4 time governor of New Jersey than no one’s ever heard of
New Jersey has a reputation for being special. In the summer, we go to the shore instead of the beach. We aren’t allowed to pump our own gas. And almost none of the nice restaurants in the area have liquor licenses because the mafia owns the few licenses the state issues. We do have restaurants with liquor licenses that go through a sequence of “new owners” before they’re burned down, but that’s a story for another post.
We also have a history of Governor problems in the decade Brook likes to call “The Naughties”. Our problems were exacerbated by the fact that up until 2009, the state of New Jersey didn’t have a Lieutenant Governor position. How ironic that in a state chock full of excessive administration, we wouldn’t have a lieutenant governor during the decade when one would have come in handy. Go figure.
Let me back up a second and say that although New Jersey is considered to be solidly blue in presidential matters, that’s a bit of a misleading statistic. Our Congressional representation in the House is 50/50. We also have no female congressional reps and haven’t for several decades. The local Democratic org says that’s because none ever apply, to which I answer that there don’t appear to be any lower level female politicians who are mentored and why is that? But I digress. New Jersey also votes for Republican governors and while Democrats are lucky if they last through a single term, Republican governors are usually two termers. Tom Kean and Christie Whitman come immediately to mind. Our story begins with Christie Whitman when a Democratic legislator named Richard Codey served the first of his several terms as governor of New Jersey.
When Whitman became head of the EPA under George Bush the lesser, she left a void in Drumthwacket (that’s the gov’s mansion right outside of Princeton).
Drumthhhhhhhhwacket, Chez Governor in Princeton
Since there was no lieutenant governor, the time left in her term until the election of a new governor was filled by the president of the state senate. In 2001, the person in that position changed three times and each senate president took a turn being governor. Richard Codey served his first 3 day term as governor just before Jim McGreevey, the newly elected governor, was sworn in. We all know what happened to Jim McGreevey. When he stepped down, Richard Codey, then president of the state senate, became governor once again for about half a year until the next governor could be elected. That new governor happened to be Jon Corzine. But during the transfer of power when Corzine went from Senator to Governor, there was some weird little protocol where the state was in danger of not having an acting governor for a few hours (Oh No!), so Codey was asked to fill in until Corzine was free to take over.
Corzine had a thing for taking risks even back then. Early in his term, he decided that he didn’t need to wear a seat belt as his SUV raced up the highway from Atlantic City because he was special. What former Wall Street banker isn’t? What could possibly happen?
Corzine’s State Trooper driven SUV crashes while speeding on the way back from Atlantic City.
Well, the SUV speeding at 91 mph could be involved in a serious accident where the governor was tossed around in the vehicle like dirty laundry and broke his femur. The fracture, and other injuries, were very serious and the governor was hospitalized and incapacitated. Richard Codey once again stepped up to fill the vacancy while Corzine temporarily suspended his powers for about 3 weeks.
So, if you’ve been counting, that makes Richard Codey the governor of NJ *four* times. After the last time, the state got serious about the Lieutenant Governor position and in 2009 we elected our first.
But back to Codey. He turned out to be not bad as a governor. He’s a true blue Democrat that leans liberal and has a passion for championing the mentally ill. His one major accomplishment during his brief stint as governor was making sure that insurance companies cover treatment for mental illness and postpartum depression. He also made sure stem cell research wouldn’t face any obstacles in New Jersey. It appears that everyone played nicely when Codey was in office, although he wasn’t in long enough to make any significant policy changes. Even stranger was that even though he got good approval ratings, nobody really knew who he was. His tenure was just one of those special things that happen here. When his last crack at being governor ended, he went back to the senate. All hunky dory and people forgot about him. Until 2009.
In 2009, Jon Corzine was facing reelection against Republican Chris Christie. Let’s remember here that New Jersey doesn’t have a problem with Republican governors. Christie was not as moderate as Kean and Whitman but Corzine would have had a better chance of winning if he hadn’t been so meh as a governor. During the economic catastrophe that followed the housing bubble, he should have stepped up and presented some policies that would have helped municipalities and cash strapped property tax payers. But he didn’t. He represented the bonus class. He was a former Goldman-Sachs guy and I think that he thought he could ride to reelection on the coat tails of Barack Obama.
Part way through the election campaign, it looked like Corzine wasn’t going to have the cake walk he was anticipating. He was having trouble attracting interest and couldn’t fill his rally venues. The race was starting to tighten up. This is where it gets interesting. Richard Codey says it happened like this:
Codey said he got a call from the White House a week after Vice President Joe Biden appeared at Corzine’s poorly attended primary night kickoff rally in West Orange in June. “They wanted to talk about what’s going on with the governor’s race,” he said. “They would call me every week, every two weeks.”
By July, Codey said there was growing concern from the president’s advisers as Corzine’s polls declined even as he poured money into anti-Christie ads. It grew worse after 44 arrests on July 23 in a corruption and money-laundering case.
Corzine privately mused to the White House he was having second thoughts about continuing his campaign, Codey said.
“He was, mentally, as low as you can get,” Codey said of Corzine, even before July 23. “Then this … hit. It was understandable he was having a moment where he was saying ‘to hell with this.’”
Codey said White House political director Patrick Gaspard called him and expressed “great concern about the governor’s race, (Corzine’s) lack of support amongst Democrats and whether or not he would be able to overcome it. He never criticized Jon personally. But he said he was meeting with Obama and ‘the president wants to know if you might run if, in fact, Mr. Corzine got out.’ Can he tell the president ‘Yes.’”
Codey said Gaspard detailed an internal poll that showed Newark Mayor Cory Booker and Rep. Frank Pallone about the same as Corzine, but Codey leading Christie by double digits.
“I told Gaspard I was going to be seeing Mr. Corzine in Trenton. I told him I felt duty-bound in terms of being a gentleman to tell Corzine. I sat with Corzine. I told him what I knew. I said ‘as a friend, I just wanted you to know.’ I said ‘bottom line is you’re the decision-maker. You want out, just do me a favor let me know as soon as possible. If you’re going to stay in there, I’m with you.’”
“I did not hear back from the White House.”
I guess the Democratic party leadership was concerned that losing New Jersey to a Republican would look bad. (And it did, Oh, how it did) And even though Corzine went out of his way to make sure to deliver all of New Jersey’s delegation to Obama during the 2008 convention in Denver, from a primary that Obama LOST by 10 points to Hillary Clinton, I might add, Obama and Biden didn’t feel any sense of loyalty to this guy who carried their water and sold out the rest of the state for them. So they approached Richard Codey and tried to work out a deal where they would pressure Corzine to step aside in the campaign and Codey would become the nominee.
Oh no they di-int. Oh yes they did.
Corzine didn’t quit but that hardly matters, does it? It was the thought that counts. And the thought was that Corzine was in danger of losing the governorship of New Jersey and the Democrats were concerned enough to want to make a switch of candidates at the top of the ticket of an incumbent governor with a solid, well liked Democrat former temporary governor whose approval rating was higher than Corzine’s.
So, ladies and gentlemen, if someone tells you that it’s not possible to change candidates before or during the Convention, and that the world would end if we merely *entertained* the idea of changes at the top of the ticket, remember that it was Obama himself who proposed the very same thing to the Democrats of New Jersey in 2009 when Corzine was in danger of failing. Indeed, he did fail and Christie the Republican is now governor. All that stuff about how an incumbent is sacred and the primary voters have spoken (because they had a gun to their heads and didn’t have a choice) and the world will end, yada-yada-yada, all that is bullshit. The Democrats are a private party. They can (and have) change the rules any time they want. We have seen by 2008’s example that the delegates can be forced to vote for who ever the party wants, voters be damned. And if they want to switch candidates, it can be done. Franklin Roosevelt switched out his VPs, Lyndon Johnson stepped out of the race when he knew he couldn’t win a second term and, by golly, if Democrats don’t think Obama can win in 2012, they can make him “spend more time with his family”.
Obama and Corzine have a lot in common. It’s not like Christie is well loved by New Jerseyans or that we actually wanted a Republican this time around.
Chris Christie during the first leg of his helicopter-limo-walk triathlon.
The problem was we didn’t want Corzine anymore. Voters were well aware of all of Christies liabilities and Corzine’s campaign flogged us with the fear whip and tons of advertising to make Christie look bad. In the end, it didn’t matter. It wasn’t about Christie. It was about Corzine’s performance. Voters judged him fairly, so, he lost. I might add that Independent Chris Daggett, who I voted for, took almost 6% of the vote, almost all of it from Corzine’s hide. New Jerseyans wanted to send a message to the Democrats but it remains unclear whether the Democrats actually got it.
But if any Democrat tells you you’re crazy to even suggest that Obama step aside for a better Democrat in 2012, and starts terrorizing you about Supreme Court justices and women losing access to birth control and dogs and cats living together, ask them why the Democrats didn’t think a candidate switch was so crazy in New Jersey in 2009. Obama is not having a cakewalk this year. And in spite of the media blitz against Mitt, Obama and Mitt are still tied in the polls. People may not like Mitt personally, but they really don’t like Obama’s performance. He has let regular people out to hang by themselves for four long years. The Democrats are fooling themselves if they think that’s not going to hurt in November. And it’s not like the Democrats don’t have a back up who would be a lot more popular than any politician on the current scene.
Time to call Obama into the office and tell him management would like to make a change. We’re in the doldrums, the dog days and the base is depressed. Change up the ticket, bring in a relief pitcher see what happens. I’d be very surprised if management hasn’t already entertained such a possibility behind closed doors. In the event of an Obama loss in November, they might be in political oblivion for a very long time. If the Democrats are sincerely concerned about all the horrible things they fear will happen if Mitt wins, then they owe voters a REAL choice.
Otherwise, the country might just end up with a Chris Christie type Republican in the White House in 2013 and it will be very hard to take Democrats seriously if they lose without ever considering changing their lineup.
Filed under: General | Tagged: Barack Obama, Chris Christie, Convention, Democrats, Joe Biden, Jon Corzine, lieutenant governor, New Jersey, Republicans, Richard Codey, top of the ticket switch |
The Confluence 
Well, RD, that suggestion is too sane, sensible and (gasp) democratic.
The poobahs and their minions are appalled at you for even thinking such mutinous ideas.
I just saw an HBO documentary, “Hard Times on Long Island”. It chronicled the lives of several former middle class couples who, now, are jobless, facing foreclosure and having to shop at the community food “pantry.”
As one man said, “I lived the American Dream and, now, it’s over.
There is no more American Dream.”
Then, he looked into the camera and asked “what politician cares about us? Who’s going to help us?”
Well, he and we know the answer–no one.
My husband and I had the “talk” last night. I said, yes, I know that he could be fired any day and at 62, his career would be over. We discussed reverse mortgages, cashing out the 401K, Social Security and AARP. We’d be alright for a couple of years, then, who knows.
I have never seen an election where the standard bearers are so similar, lackluster and uninspiring. Both are corporate/Wall Streeet lackeys.
It’s inelegant but I do ask how do you choose between Shit Sandwich A and Shit Sandwich B?
Does it come down to condiments-mustard or mayo with that sandwich?
I don’t really care because it’s still shit.
To be more specific, it’s a choice between a donkey shit sandwich and an elephant shit sandwich.
As for the American Dream, it’s like the late George Carlin said: it’s called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it. 👿
Dear Monster, I agree with everything you say and I remember you from Hullabaloo as a voice of reason.
You’re my brother.
We’re both quite cynical but always hopeful.
Great piece, RD. Sometimes I wonder if the Democratic Party leadership even gives a damn about being in power. From 2009-2011, they seemed to hate the idea they had overpowering majorities in both houses of Congress. They would prefer to sink on the SS Neoliberal rather than change the ship. The Corzine analogy is very appropriate ( Geez, Obama, Corzine…..with Democrats like these who needs Republicans ?). So many Democratic politicians prefer to take care of themselves first…as long as their own nest is feathered, who cares if the party burns to the ground?
Most importantly, voters and party officials need to start taking risks. You’re right, if we curl up and assume BHO is inviolable as the nominee, we force ourselves into two really bad choices. In business, if you make a bad decision, you don’t double down on it. You cut your losses. It’s time for 2008 Obama voters to recognize that their candidate is an abject failure and change course.
Greg, I don’t believe in labels. Neoliberal is meaningless in a period of economic crisis like we have today. Either a politician does the right thing or he doesn’t. Likewise, it doesn’t matter if the politician is wealthy or comes from a lifetime of privilege. During national emergencies, both FDR and Winston Churchill rose to the occasion.
When people say that character matters what they really mean is they become instruments through which the national will is channeled and they do this without expecting fame, wins or rewards. They do it because it has to be done. That kind of character should transcend labels like neoliberal.
This is the idea that is lost on some of our Democratic activists today.
Neoliberal is not just a label of convenience. It is a truth-in-labeling label which accurately names people who believe in forced Free Trade, carefully engineered bankruptcy of government so as to force Yeltsin-era-style privatization, etc. Perhaps if one renamed “neo-liberals” as “Chicago Friedmanites”, the meaning-content of “neoliberal” would become more clear? “Yeltsinization” is the sum-total of the content of every “neoliberal’s” character. “Neoliberal” describes a world view and any “neoliberal” in power can be counted on to use their position of power to drive their ideologically-set vision of
the sort of political economy their victims are to be forced to live in.
Nope. Not going there. Whenever I see that term, I get the impression that all the things Democrats hate have been affixed to it like engrams. Then, anyone who steps out if line even by a nanometer gets nailed with that label regardless of anything else they might have done good in their lives or their actual voting records. By your definition, the Clintons are neoliberals and they are put in the same box as Obama. Politics is a lot more complicated than that and voting records would show that both Clintons are more traditional Democrats with liberal records on supreme court appointments, taxes, privacy, equality etc.
This term is like a big black brick that gets tossed at too many Democrats while other Democrats get let off easy in spite of their records or lack of political gifts.
So, I’m not using it. After awhile, certain words lose their original meaning or don’t fit the context of the times. We can’t know how a person will govern based on a label. We can only look at what they say and do.
You are so smart.
Um, no I’m not, obviously.
but the point about the hooty, snooty University of Chicago asterisk is BRAVO! dead on. The Apology Tourist can’t digest American Exceptionalism, yet taking big endowments from manipulators like Annenberg and Soros who pitch Socialism the way Wal*Mart middle management bars the door to employee-shareholders is a platform for squandering graft in a barely concealed “Special School” for the short bus boogeymen.
To SWPAnnA actually . . .
What socialism did Annenberg and/or Soros ever pitch specifically?
And what is/was specifically socialist about whatever specifically specific socialism that Annenberg and/or Soros are said to have specifically pitched? Factually and specifically?
I wish they would listen to you, Riverdaughter.
They won’t. If President Obama decided he did not want another term, then it might happen. But I do not consider that likely and I am just trying to hang on until 2016.
djmm
I’m sure I am not the only person who has considered it. I’m just the only person I know who is nuts enough to say it out loud.
I know there are a lot of Democrats, all loyal, good people, who are disheartened by this election year and know that with either candidate, we ordinary people are going to lose.
But being disheartened is no excuse for not talking about the possibility of replacement. Now, that we have seen that the idea is not foreign to the party, not even the president himself, we have an obligation to talk about it, consider it, debate the pros and cons and propose alternative candidates.
Silence on the matter does not serve the party or the voters. It merely fixes a disaster in place.
Talk is cheap. It cost you nothing. Even if you have good reasons to oppose the idea, to sit on it is inexcusable when the train is bearing down on you and options are getting to be fewer as time goes by.
So be proud and say it loud… this post should be re-posted everywhere. What’s the risk? They’ll kick you out of the Party or stop being nice to you? Me thinks “The Amateur” tipped off as to why that meeting was held in Chapauqua and “It’s About The Middle Class, Stupid” Carville is hawking is the rationale.
Huh? What are you talking about? Meetings in chap aqua?
misspelled it: Chappaqua – where Edward Klein claims the Clinton loyalists met to urge her to run.
In the aftermath of 2010 the Dem hierarchy rearranged the deck chairs and tried to sail on. Those pols on machine support have forgotten how to stick their neck out for Liberal principles. As long as they get re-elected it’s all good. Nancy Pelosi comes to mind, she should have apologized and stepped aside for a Minority Leader willing to poke their finger in republican eye.
It’s a nice fantasy but it ain’t gonna happen. But let’s assume it did and Obama decided (or was convinced) to step aside.
Hillary would not be the nominee.
The voters would have no say in it, the party poobahs would decide who the nominee is. They are the same people who wouldn’t let Hillary be the nominee last time.
You forget that up until Obama bought them off last time, Hillary had many super delegate commitments. It’s not like she doesn’t have potential supporters, some of whom are up for re-election themselves. And Bill has been campaigning for the ones who were loyal to her until the end. Those candidates have been winning their primaries against former Obots.
I don’t think any of us really knows what is going on behind closed doors but there have to be a lot of Democrats who are unhappy at the way things have turned out. A good indication of the level of discontent in the party can be measured by the number of Hillary articles in the media. Whenever Obama’s favorability rating drops, out come the profiles about Hillary and how she is completely boxed in my Obama’s droogs. I’m not sure that actually works in his favor because if she can’t do her job because of his reporting strategy, that hurts the US and doesn’t make use of his strongest asset.
Just watch. The New York Times frontpage is a bellwether. She’s still too popular and they get nervous. There’s a reason for that.
I read your 2008 post, ” we were PUMAs once. ” That post helps me understand your point of view.
I feel like I was asleep for that entire election season.
None of the blogs ( or Big Medias) which I read at the time said anything about any of this. It is too bad that Monster from the Id wasn’t able to tell the Hullabaloo readership about the The Confluence blog several months before DemCon 2008.
Now it is fair to say that if I had been reading DailyKos from before 2008 that there is every chance I would have been reading Riverdaughter and followed her work on her own blog when established. But since DailyKos was physicall ugly and user hostile. . . with that vile diarrheal orangey-brown color and the difficulty of finding my way around in it . . . I recoiled in esthetic revulsion after a few minutes spent on it one day, and never tried it again.
(How I even found my way to it by accident to begin with is an interesting story. There was an interesting blog about alternative food and alternative food issues called Heretic Fig which I don’t think is on the web anymore at all. One day the Heretic FigKeeper ran an article by a small scale rancher about the Animal Rfid Conspiracy and I clicked the master link to it and found my way to one of the DKos Diaries. That was the first I ever heard/read about Spychips for Animals.)
If the Dparty is going to swap out Prez nominees, it will have to do so by DemCon 2012. If there are Ds who would like a D party victory for whatever the reason, catastrophically crashing poll numbers for Obama could give them ammunition and a tire iron to swing into the mouths of those Ds who support Obama regardless. What could crash poll numbers that badly among the majority of Americans who consider politics to be an unpleasant task like cleaning out the crawlspace or attic?
In one of his past posts, Colone Lang at Sic Semper Tyrannis suggested that if gas prices were $3.00/gallon or less at election time, Obama will be re-elected. I’m not sure if he suggested a price-threshhold at which a hate-filled populace would turn against Obama.
If there is one, it won’t matter by election day IF the goal is swapping out Obama. When it WILL matter by is if it happens for a solid week or two before and during DemCon 2012. So the question arises, what can 20 million DDs (Disgruntled Democrats) do to drive the price of gas up over $4.00/gallon in the runup to DemCon 2012? They certainly can’t pull any policy levers or make any boardroom decisions.
So what can they do? Anything?
Here is a suggestion. 20 million DDs should spend the month prior to DemCon 2012 doing everything they can to buy, burn, and waste as much gas as possible. They should spend their every off-work day and off-work hour within what is humanly possible driving in circles, driving from one end of their state to the other and back again, etc.
If their cars would not be damaged by being left to run in idle overnigh, every night, night after night after night, they should do that too. The goal is to use up so much gas as to create a genuine actual shortage of gas all over America and drive the price of gas up as high as possible or better yet even create the need for gas lines and gas rationing. That would create the atmosphere of bitter and savage hatred in which Obama’s poll numbers could be burned down like a roll of newspapers soaked in lighter fluid. Pain, torture, and terror.
That’s the only thing I can imagine the Wall Street Shitocratic Party leadership responding to. And I have just offered an idea about how
20 million Disgruntled Democrats can place the Democratic Party under so much torture, terror, and unbearable pain that the Dparty might possibly be tortured, terrorised, and extorted into giving in to the Candidate Transplant which that party is absolutely committed to refusing to do unless the level of pain, torture, and terror can be raised high enough.
And since I don’t have a car myself, I would give some money to a disgruntled democrat who could be TRUSTED to pour that money into the gas tank and out the tailpipe. If such a movement spontaneously and visibly arose, I would donate some money to the cause of creating a desperate gas shortage to create the savage hatred throughout society to burn down Obama’s poll numbers beFORE DemCon 2012.
Gas prices might be one factor but I think only a small one now. What is more problematic for Obama is the number of people who are out of work and are slipping out of the middle class with absolutely no idea how to get back into it. Even some of my former colleagues who were laid off and managed to get new jobs and have relocated are scared silly that they’re going to lose their jobs again. And there are only so many times you can uproot your family or take a cut in pay before life as you know it starts to disintegrate.
I keep getting the idea that the Democrats are relying on the suburbs for votes but the burbs are full of people on the edge and have been for years now. Neither candidate is offering them much to look forward to. High gas prices are just one of the many things they have to worry about. And if you have no job, you don’t need your car nearly as much as you used to.
What I am trying to say is that what Obama is facing is much, much bigger than he is anticipating.
If that is as true as I hope it is, then millions of phone calls and postal service letters from millions of No Bama Never Again Democrats might
be a weaponisable tool in the hands of “Inner Top Level Democrats” who would like a candidate-transplant but are afraid to be seen saying so.
Gas prices are going down but that’s an ominous sign in my opinion. The global economy is slowing. The US economy is at best flatlined and we could tip back into recession. Even people who are working fear losing their jobs and never getting another comparable paying position.
Moreover, the banks are still on dicey ground. The derivative exposures of players like JPM Chase and B of A could send them spiraling back into insolvency. We would then see a renewal of the financial crisis of 2008, this time, our policy options more constrained because of political paralysis, and higher debt and decreasing marginal effectiveness of Fed bank bailouts.
That said, there isn’t much time. We have, what six weeks until the Democratic convention in Charlotte? Can the Party leadership make a change AFTER the convention?
Probably not. Now would be the right time to create momentum. There are a lot of advantages to having a messy, contentious convention.
…with a lot of buzz’d up coverage
I think we also have to accept the likelihood that if we can force a candidate transplant , that Black America will all vote for Romney out of Black Racist Spite. I would say: let them do so. Let them then leave the Democratic Party and form their own Black Race Card Extortion Party, if that is what they want to do.
African Americans have a choice then: they can support Barack Obama out of loyalty and stand by while his policies destroy the middle class, or get someone like Hillary Clinton, whose policies are much more likely to help them. African Americans know he’s not doing a good job, they feel loyal to him..but survival trumps loyalty.
I’ve always felt that the “African Americans will all take their dishes and go home” argument to be pretty weak and condescending. The condescending part should be obvious but the weakness in the argument is that if someone like Hillary Clinton ran, there’s a good chance that she would attract the support of African American females. That is not to say this is all about identity politics. But if push came to shove, having Hillary at the top of the ticket would give women a good excuse to dump Obama whose performance they don’t like but who feel obligated for whatever reason to support him.
In other words, she gives them cover. I don’t think the Democrats would lose as many African Americans as they seem to think.
It’s a good story though and for people who don’t have time to think it through, it seems logical enough on the surface. But it’s probably not true. That is a hypothesis I would be more than willing to test.
My suspicion is that the African American support for Obama is wide but shallow. I have some friends who are African American and there is some degree of peer pressure to stay behind him but they know he’s been a huge disappointment. I’ll bet if a handful of African American leaders threw their support to Hillary, a lot of them would follow. And make no mistake, only Hillary can pull this off. No one else in the party has the credibility or stature right now.
Yep, only Hillary can pull this off. I think that’s what’s keeping some lefties from embracing the idea. They’re still dealing with residual anti-Clinton koolaid left over from 2008.
If Obama loses in the fall, those are the people who deserve the blame.
That’s what I mean about the party having no survival instinct. They’d rather sink with a dud than take a lifeboat.
The experiment deserves to be run and the risk deserves to be taken.
I’ve always felt that the “African Americans will all take their dishes and go home” argument to be pretty weak and condescending
Doll, I hear you and agree, but 2008’s slogan of “bros before hos” coupled with respected African American leaders labeling the Clintons (!) as racists left such a bitter taste, I’m still flossing!
I know you know. But don’t you wonder how this meme keeps coming up like it’s written in stone? It sure seems like it’s to someone’s benefit to keep it going even if it makes no damn sense.
Idiot me, I was stunned by the sheer tribalism four years ago.
If a woman had been elected President, would I do anything to prop her up in the face of dismal incompetence?
I hope not and don’t think so.
Obama has what-ninety percent- of AA support?
We have so many brave black sisters and many,sadly, under the thumbs of our black brothers.
White brothers aren’t better.
There is also that biblical shit that holds such sway over many people.
I’m despairing.
It all boils down to taking risks to get to a better place. As a former Obama voter, I now see the guy is not equal to the task in front of him. He’s being protected, but you can’t defend against incompetence forever. Facts on the ground catch up to you. African Americans see it. Their own lives continue down a spiral staircase of economic insecurity and it doesn’t matter that the man in the White House shares their skin color; he doesn’t share their values.
There are plenty of others like me. A convention challenge is risky and not likely to work, but we know what’s in store for us if we get four more years of Barack Obama.
…for every aa voter lost, you gain a Republican Woman. Period.
yup, pretty much. I found that out when I was canvassing in the Harrisburg area for Hillary before the primary. There were so many women who told me they couldn’t vote for her in the primary because they were registered Republican but that they would vote for her in the general.
If Hillary had won the nomination, her historic win would have dwarfed Obama’s. And we women know it, don’t we ladies?
But now the Green party which should appeal to many Democrat voters nominated a woman for both President and VP. Jill Stein for President and Cheri Honkala for VP. It is not a choice between Obama and Romney there is a focus for the protest vote.
http://www.gp.org/index.php
There are many focii of a protest vote besides Green Party. There are any number of socialist parties, a conservative party or two, Rocky Anderson with his beginning Justice Party, etc.
I find the Green Party and its people to be uniquely self-absorbed and self-righteous to the point of casual evil. They tried their hardest to get Gore defeated in 2000 for whatever sick and twisted motive they might have had. They took Republican funding to run McGaw against Wellstone in Wellstone’s last election. I dimly remember David Emory having alluded to possible Green Party connections to the Underground Fourth Reich in America in at least one broadcast of his.
The Green Party is one sewage lagoon of political poseurism which is uniquely undeserving of votes from NON-immoral people. IMmoral might find the Green Party right up their alley.
Constance, it’s not about having a woman candidate. It’s about having a choice between good, competent government or 4 more years of negligence.
I won’t support Jill Stein. I have to look past the crunchy granola, toxiphobic, overly litigious dogma that is having just as much of a negative effect on this country as grover norquist’s tax pledge.
If you want to win this, you need to find a candidate who is left of center but someone everyone can identify with. Jill Stein is not that person, I don’t care what plumbing or chromosomes she has.
I do care what plumbing the Presidential and VP candidates have because my top issue is political parity for women. Since I am not OK with either Obama or Romney I was planning to vote my local ballot and write in Presidential Barbie. No other candidate inspires my vote so Stein is the perfect focus for many voters who are sick of both parties condescending lip service to women and women’s issues. And the Green party did cost Gore the election in 2000.
I am not sure that the Green Party cost Gore the election all by itself, or even in major part. But they sure tried to cost Gore the election. That was their sole and only purpose for running and I even remember Nader himself bragging about it at the time.
And they also ran McGaw against Wellstone strictly and only to get Wellstone’s Republican opponent elected. That is why they took money from the Republicans they co-conspired with.
I have found Greens to be a uniquely frivolous group of “look at me!”
poseurs when not being uniquely spiteful and malignant in trying specifically to defeat particular Democrats who WERE different than their opponents (Wellstone and Gore come to mind). Slugs of a feather slime together, I suppose.
Well that is all likely true r u reddy, I too find Greens idealistic and naive and I don’t plan to socialize with them only to vote for the woman who represents them. Since she doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning I feel good about voting for her plumbing, hopefully her presence in the Presidential race will condition Corporate Media to the concept of women candidates since I want to see a woman President before I die and I don’t see either the Ds or Rs making any progress in that direction. But Greens are also people who would never vote for Romney and would probably vote for Obama. Add in a bunch of Hillary voters who would never vote for Obama and want to vote for a woman and I think Stein could make an impression in this election. Also I don’t find Greens any dumber than Obots or the extremes of the Republican party.
Also I would expect many Republican donations to Stein. And I would guess she will have whatever help is needed to get her on the ballot and get her publicity. But it really isn’t necessary as anyone can easily write her in.
Y’all make mature sense – then you go and spew that green stuff. For this election, GREEN is code for the stupid Solyndra & Ilk, Regulation Nation lack of reason, bankrupt Coal, job-strangling, Whole Foods inflating insanity. The ECONOMY demands that Green earns its green like everybody else. Nothing personal, but, show me competence. PS: The Green Party can’t even get their candidates on the ballot for Congress! Learn to walk before you start trying to Run the Country.
Ding! Ding! Ding! THANK YOU!
If we want to take back this election, we need to keep it simple and identify the things that bring us together. Green candidates tend to not do that.
Really, good luck with trying to replace Obama at the convention, if you do you will have my vote. However since Democrat Powers That Be effectively told Hillary to sit down and shut up during the 2008 convention I’m not expecting anyone to be able to muscle out Obama.
The idea needs to be widely discussed, both the pros and cons, before someone completely writes it off.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the superdelegates haven’t already thought about it. In any other year, the party nominee would be the strongest candidate the party could field. But that’s not true this year and as long as there is a viable option, there’s going to be discussions.
I would expect the Republicans to go fairly gently on Obama until after the convention. The last thing Republicans want is to run against the stronger candidate.