CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 06, 2012 05:03 AM UTC

Vote "Uncommitted" at caucus to support Progressive values

  • 28 Comments
  • by: DKOColo

Many Democrats are disappointed with the Obama administration’s failure to consistently defend Americans against the destructionist tactics of the extreme right-wing over the last three years. While we acknowledge the many gains that have taken place in spite of the most obstructionist Congress in history, we still have a long way to go. While we strongly support the re-election of the President, we will not allow the issues most important to most Americans to be relegated to the back of the of the Democratic Party bus.

Too often we’ve seen the administration’s leadership falter, beginning with the first moments of the President’s term, when he named an anti-progressive chief of staff to lead his agenda. We shed no tears that Rahm Emanuel has gone, but too many of those strong-arm and financially motivated issues continue to linger.

Still open is Guantanamo Bay, a tribute to torture and policies that have even caused the indictment of the prior President and Vice-President in some countries while no meaningful investigation and action on our own soil has been ordered. American troops are still dying in Afghanistan.

The attack on working families and their children continues. Across the country, local jurisdictions and states have publicly rejected the Secure Communities (SCOMM) program and have told the federal government that they do not want SCOMM to destroy their communities, break families apart, and encourage discriminatory police practices such as racial profiling. The Bush Administration’s No Child Left Behind law and its push toward the privatization of public education exacerbated under programs such as Race to the Top, continues punish families, rather than addressing the socioeconomic root causes of struggling schools and the need to better fund education. We can’t continue these actions and still say we include everyone in the tent.

There are still far too many involved in the Administration related to the financial collapse preceding the election of the President, and we hope that Tim Geitner makes good on his plans to no longer serve as Secretary of the Treasury in a second Obama term. We hope some of the other economic advisors are asked to join him. Eric Holder has done little to inspire confidence in investigating the banking collapse that his former law firm blessed when they gave the OK to a banking-run system that has wrecked home ownership records throughout the country. More prosecutions took place during the Savings and Loan Crisis of the 1980s and 1990s than have taken place at the Justice Department for obvious criminal acts that almost created a new Great Depression.

Hardly a sound was whispered when Treasury and Justice failed to take Standard and Poor’s to task for their favorable treatment of poor-quality mortgage backed securities, while at the same time allowing S&P to hold the country’s debt rating seemingly for ransom in the palm of their hand. Not good enough.

The banking industry has taken far too much from the 99%, which was so well demonstrated through the Occupy Wall Street and related movements, and have given back virtually nothing. The historical “housing settlement” that offers a pittance to those improperly foreclosed upon still does virtually nothing to provide fair treatment to our citizens negatively impacted when that industry stuffed itself with profits. While finally appointing a director to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the President refused to act decisively and sooner with the spine behind the backbone of the CFPB, Elizabeth Warren. We wish her well and success in her effort to become a member of the US Senate as a person with true progressive values.

We have thus far turned our back on landowners and citizens who receive water from underground resources, and failed to put an honest effort into stopping the expansion of fracking, and other failures that are within the control of the administration in the EPA have been left without attention. Further, the administration has shown a keen lack of judgment in the protection of our food supply by appointing Monsanto executives to the FDA.

The campaign arm of the Obama Administration, “Organizing for America” must look to recalibrate its purpose from one hoping to create an army of lemmings, to one tasked with moving towards a constitutional amendment to abolish the effects of Citizens United and work to remove money from politics, not further entrench it through a self-sustaining system that instead circumvents the Democratic Party altogether.

These are just a few issues that cause us to pause.

We encourage Democrats attending the Colorado caucuses on March 6 to register their disappointment with the administration by casting a vote for “uncommitted,” by listing their issues, and by bringing them forth to county assemblies. We urge them to follow through at county assemblies and work to become uncommitted delegates to the national convention.

Make no mistake: we support the re-election of Barack Obama as President of the United States. We also support election of more true progressives, which we believe really are the core of the American public.

We still believe that the Democratic Party is a place for democratically-supported dissent and airing of grievances, and we expect the titular head of the party to listen to the voices of its most dedicated activists.

Andrea Mérida and Dennis Obduskey

Co-chairs, Progressive Democrats of Colorado

Tweet
Share

Comments

28 thoughts on “Vote “Uncommitted” at caucus to support Progressive values”

  1. that the Party’s elites and Obama will hear.

    They may still ignore the base, but they will feel the result of that foolishness in 2014 and 2016.  Those elections will be disasters if the party elites continue to ignore us.

    The party elites may not be able to hold the Democratic Coalition together if they don’t soon start doing what the base wants..

    1. Then watch as we Democrats descend into the same quagmire that the Republicans are in. Extremes who can’t and don’t care about governing, against the moderates who can and will do both.

      Your words, “If the party elites continue to ignore us” is claptrap straight out of the Tea Party handbook.

      In a contest of mine-is-bigger-than-yours, nobody gets laid.

      Grow up, and win the election.

    1. The brakes were slammed on the moment he placed Emanuel in power, and the car was sent into a spin.

      When it emerged, we ended up with far too much focus on supporting the financial industries and far too little focus on accountability for torture.

      It will probably come as a suprise how many people screamed when early updated drafts of the preliminary 2012 platform failed to list issues around 9/11 and Bush Administration issues.  

      Here’s a little quote from Huffington Post on 9/7/10 and just before the 2010 elections:

      “Rahm is unfit to represent Democrats in office,” Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Adam Green said. “He’s a cancer on the Democratic Party. Democrats’ current 2010 situation is due to a weak Rahm Emanuel mentality that says water down real reform at the urging of Republicans and corporations, thus making Democratic reform less popular with voters than the real deal would have been. If Democrats had passed the overwhelmingly-popular public option and broken up the big banks when they had the chance, they’d be cruising for a landslide victory right now.”

      Nope, it’s too bad that he started off on the wrong foot, and has yet to regain the balance we all hoped.  Hopefully the change we all can believe in will happen in a second term, but with strong “encouragement” from the Progressive Community who helped sweep him to office in 2008.

      I don’t think anyone is confused that he’s “too progressive.”

        2. OFA is following closely D and K’s remarks avidly… though how sending a message through uncommitted delegates will work when actual public fights over the party platform haven’t moved policy an inch. Meh.

          I’m pretty disillusioned with Obama, but unless there was enough steam to front an actual primary challenge then this is just too easy to ignore or worse it’s fodder for bash-the-hippie style moderate credential burnishing.

  3. …Fuck that?

    If you want a more progressive domestic policy, try sending Barack Obama a Congress capable of voting on anything besides naming post offices and condemning women and other minorities.

    1. Osama bin Laden happy!

      Still, do you want to be the level of support for anyone other than Obama is a lot lower than the level of support for anyone other than Romney? Republicans really seem to dislike that guy. He’s got a problem getting anyone excited about him, and lots of voters seem to really, really want someone else at the top of the ticket.  

    2. but I’m pretty content with the way this President governs, the way he keeps trying to explain to the public his efforts to engage with recalcitrant Republicans who have endorsed a goal of getting rid of him as higher than trying to repair the economy.

      Bin Laden is dead.

      GM lives

    3. He’s the Mitt RMoney of the left, . . . I mean, except for the multiple challengers thing . . . and the support of more than 26.3% of his party . . . fracking dumbass!

    1. Andrea is not alone here, nor is she in strict alliance with John.

      I’m PDC Co-Chair with her, and with regard to Progressive Issues, we are on them page most of the time.

      When I attended the JJ Dinner, I was one of (well, maybe one) who took time to go out and speak with those from Occupy who were protesting.  To my surprise, out of the people I was talking to and after unwrapping his scarf to protect himself from the cold, it was John H Kennedy.

      We, also, agree on many issues and have swapped barbs and messages in the past.  That day we also even discussed how there are similarities with Occupy and Tea Party concerns.

      I recently attended a meeting at the State Capitol regarding foreclosure legilation arranged by a Democrat, and was pleased and suprised that there were also Republicans there with the same concerns.

      We all have common ground and might I suggest that rather than trying to place people inside of a box, you think of the number of alliances you can make from the commonalities of concerns we all have and work to make things better for everyone.

      Dennis

  8. Your fantasy of taking control of future conventions (and therefore a President’s policymaking?) by voting uncommitted at the caucus comes crashing down with this reality: You vote for “uncommitted”, you don’t advance to the conventions. Period.

    It’s the rules. Each candidate — and “uncommitted” is considered a candidate — must be supported by at least 15% of the caucus voters in order for “uncomitted’s” delegate to go to the county convention. No way is an “uncommitted” nomination going to attract 15% of caucus goers. Even if it does it means no more than “undecided” or “ha, ha, I’ve got a secret”.

    And the President may have political smarts, but a silly “uncommitted” vote will never reach his ears. Voting for “uncommitted” at your caucus, like “undervoting” in an election, is merely crying out in a vacuum.

    That said, DKO and John, be my guest. Piss into the wind.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

173 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!