To realize that one is "pulling out some of the rusty nails from the baseball bat that we are being sodomized with" is realism. There are too many contradictory interests and entrenched positions for any fully rational solution to prevail. This is why centrists are well positioned. They are the only ones that can lure people to work together. Now is a centrist position the best to handle the economy, probably not. However that may be the only position that will get traction. Will this work? Who really knows? As they say in french: "le mieux est l'ennemie du bien" or the better is the enemy of the good.
Problem is the better is all we have. So be it and keep these cheeks closed... rusty nails are painfull

The centrist position couldn't even deliver the supposed centrist vote.

I've noticed that my peers' definitions of good usually fall far short of actually being good, let alone "better" or "perfect" (as I've heard the phrase also used with "perfect" instead of better).

That phrase was among the refrains I received from people who didn't like my preference for Kucinich in the primaries. Problem is, he was among the few politicians running who seemed to be a decent human being with generally reasonable ideas to help our country and stop us from doing so much harm to others. But somehow that made him "better" or "perfect" and unelectable, so therefore I should have settled for someone who was just "good," like Clinton or Obama, to give the Democrats a chance to somehow turn things around. But they're not "good." They're awful.

Relative comparisons are fine in some situations, but objective thresholds have to be set. Sometimes its not "good/better" but "bad/good." And talking yourself into thinking that bad is good is a sure way to run into trouble.

The candidate is either a Village person (as in privatize the gains and socialize the losses) or a People person (as in government of the people, by the people and for the people).

OK I guess my question is
can a people person win if the village is needed to get elected?

The first step would be comprehensive campaign finance and lobbying reform, eliminating private money (legalized bribery) from politics. The second would be trust-busting. The third would be requiring the wealthy to pay their way, i.e., ending "privatize the gains and socialize the losses." Etc.

Folks like Dennis Kucinich and Noam Chomsky have laid it out.

Good start, I would add an educated and critical public and diversified medias...

Then it is already too late.

How bad will it be and for how long? I'd estimate 30% unemployment and 10 years.

Not Can Obama fix it, becuase the answer to that question is no.

They've continually ducked the naked CDS issue. They are also ducking the question of who's going to buy the debt Obama is issuing, and what happens when the Japanese, Chinese, Arabs & Indians want to sell their treasuries?

Obama is retired. Even if he's a one term president, he's the first black president, and never has to work again. His job, getting elected is done, the next 4 years are just one big vacation with fun for him.

The job was running for President. That job is over. The reward is becoming retired as President.

Not everyone is just looking to bust ass until they hit a goal and sit back comfy the minute they can get away with it.

What you're describing is a certain type of *parasite*, someone who only thinks of nest-feathering and retirement - in terms of the moment when, having worked the bare minimum needed to secure their future, they can immediately stop working and never work again - and frames all achievement from that perspective.

I'm not wired like that, my wife isn't wired like that, and the people who I surround myself aren't wired like that. It wouldn't surprise me to hear the bulk of Agonists aren't like that.

I can see *nothing* in the personal or psychological history of Barack Obama that supports this projection, from his relentless overachievement at Harvard to his Presidential campaign. What *I* see is a driven individual, someone who would probably feel a great amount of psychological discomfort or even distress if he let up.

I think you need to worry about him *working himself to death* in the Oval Office - amongst other considerations, he shows every sign to me that he's aware he's got the aspirations of black America riding on his shoulders, and that he has to do far better than place-hold. He has to *excel* as the first black President in order to simply be grudgingly admitted by some to have done an adequate job.

doing poorly given his recent moves on the economy, etc., I doubt the next 4 years are going to be one big vacation for him...

He's going to leave office looking at least 10 years older than he should, probably more. Given the global economic situation and what is likely to transpire as a result, he will probably face one of the most difficult presidencies in history. He's in for a terrible 4 or 8 years.

I'd estimate 30% unemployment

Source

http://agonist.org/20090129/u_s_draft_law_would_ban_most_trading_in_credit_default_swaps

At least someone has a clue.

Naked CDS's essentially allow you to buy ten fire insurance policies on my house. This is not a good thing for me. Business is war, yes, but this just makes it worse.

“The Playboy reader invites a female acquaintance in for a quiet discussion of Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex.” - Hugh Hefner

did you check Norms site to see if your vote counted? I was happy to see there were not too many idiots in Crow Wing County :D (and I wasn't one of them lol!)

How did it cost a billion?

Clearly you need a bailout. Call Jesse Ventura! He can wrestle Geithner to the ground.

“The Playboy reader invites a female acquaintance in for a quiet discussion of Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex.” - Hugh Hefner