Ethnicity is telling as well:

80 percent of whites

39 percent of blacks

100 percent of hispanics

So much for Hispanics as a new Democrat majority.

I see there is a shortage of clowns. Come 2015, many Democrats representatives and senators will be unemployed. Transitioning to clowns will be a natural for them.  

.

So those Obama voters "regret" having voted for him, but, under the same circumstances, (i.e. with Romney as his GOP opponent), would vote for him again 71% to 10%.

What kind of "regret" is THAT?  If I "regret" doing something, would I not be disinclined to repeat the act and take on even more "regret".   .  

Haha...spin it any way you like Contendah....If the election were held today based upon his performance, Romney would win, and that is with what your ilk describes as a "poor candidate"...This administration will be regarded as one of the worst in history.  Glad I can say I did not vote to put him in office.

In by elections, if the president is out of favor with the electorate, his party suffers.  Hope Pelosi likes being minority leader and that Reid will get use to it.

Obama was always too far to the right to suite me, but throught the modern era, every single time a "Conservative" has been in power and attempted to impose their "trickle down economic theory" upon us, it has caused either a recession, or a depression, so , no, I don't think our country could have stood another term of W Bush in the 08 election, or the pampas "give the rich even more than Bush did" Romney.
In my voting lifetime, I have only regretted 2 votes for president, and it took a few years of looking back at what the real cost of his policies had done, and those votes were for Reagan.

But seeweed, you are an admitted semi-socialist, and most of the ones supporting Obama are not that far to the left. I do however agree that there are as many of his supporters who are upset with his wishy-washiness as there are who are upset with his leftist tendencies.  Of course like my granddaddy used to say, you can't please everyone.

For me, his hallmark problem is his healthcare debacle.  I am seeing a whole different side to this than most, because I am on the inside and seeing how these issues are going to affect us.  Years from now the damages will still be adding up here.

What I am is a "Democratic Socialist". What he did that disgusted me most, is back in his first term, when the Bush tax cuts were set to expire, he gave in to Boehner (or Boner as I like to think of him) , and signed an extension. We had something that was working for our country, Bush screwed it up (along with a host of other things), and Obama had a one time chance to get us back on track , and backed down. My take is , if you are going to be a Liberal, BE A LILBERAL ! A lot of us think that being Liberal is a good thing, and our country has always prospered far better under Liberal policies. I think he learned from that experience and grew a set, as he has caved on some issues, but has refused to cave on the main ones.

I know you have an issue with ACA, and I don't think it is all that great myself, as I would have much preferred a single payer plan , which is something I changed my mind on several years ago, but it is better than nothing. I think (maybe I'm by myself on this) that Obama caved on insurance reform, and tried to play nice with the Congressional Republicans who had no interest in doing anything for the country so as to make Obama's admin a failure (they stated that - I didn't make it up). He chose their own program , what became the ACA, and they wouldn't even support their own program. I think he should have gone for the goal, Medicare for all, but caved .

These are some of the reasons I said he was too far to the right for me.

AS to the ACA; I believe it will change and morph over time into a workable program, but still , I kinda have a moral thing that I don't think insurance companies (or anybody for that matter) should make billions of dollars gambling on the health of people . As far as I can tell , and if I am wrong please enlighten me. health insurance companies bring no value add to the situation.

A doctor, like yourself, brings value to the equation, so do nurses, and even the people who empty bed pans and mop the floors, but there is no value add to a middle man who takes your money and gambles you won't get sick.

T, I can't let you out of sight for long. This soliloquy of yours selling yourself as the all Seeing Eye as to the ACA convinces no one but your fellow tbaggers. Your bottom line is exponentially greater due to the ACA and you are fooling no one.

Why don't all of the Socialists in America MOVE?  That would solve EVERYONES' problems.

why don't the 'teabaggers' start their own country? why stay, you hate everything about america.

Because our country reached it's zenith under the democratic socialism of our greatest president FOR. We grew and prospered until Reagan started dismantling the New Deal

You can forget that .... I don't care what the figures say (NOW) because come election day the Democratic National Party will pull out and run the very same dusty sterotypical ads about how Republicans want to starve babies, old people, throw granny off the cliff in her wheelchair and how they want to send all Mexicans back across the border and people will BLINDLY buy into it just like the last time and Hillary will be elected no matter who is running against her.  

Add to that a guarantee that McCain and Romney will somehow be thrust into the race yet again bolstered by polls stating that they have become the new number one choice among Republicans when in actuality it will be crossovers voting in primaries tainting the Republican pot with votes for McCain & Romney, whichever is more viable at the time, along with a very Liberal, Democratic leaning media running countless numbers of stories stereotyping any potential actual conservative candidate that may happen to get their name on the ballot.

Come Election day people will once again, in masse, vote for the Democratic candidate either to elect the first woman or because they somehow identify with the Democratic National Party or buy into the concerted media effort to paint Republican candidates in a very negative light all the while ignoring stories that might somehow be detrimental toward Democratic candidates (such as Hillary) like Benghazi and what happened under Hillary's leadership and command.  

Face it results, overly negative performance, or disastrous outcomes, will not longer hurt the party in power for the combination of media bias and DNC Stereotyping of all Republicans using the century old catch phrases and warnings will once again result in a Democratic Executive office.

The ONLY hope Conservatives have is if enough people that are actually effected by this disastrous healthcare system actually remember who saddled them with it and are responsible for it and vote based upon that and send enough Represenatives and Senators packing that the Republicans achieve veto proof majorities in both houses so that they can be a barrier against a run a way executive branch.  But then just as with now NO Party would want to be responsible for the impeachment of the "FIRST" Black president or the "FIRST" Woman President or the "FIRST" Mexican-American President.    

In short it's a brave new world.

  Remember, we need to pass this bill to see what is in it.  And no FDR was not the greatest leader of this country.

_______________________________________

Do you remember stagflation and unemployment before Reagan?  Guess not! As the last man standing in the late forties and fifties, the US prospered.  Not because of any democratic socialism. 

Actually since FDR borrowed economic ideas from interwar Italy, the correct term to use is fascist:

The centerpiece of the New Deal of President Franklin Roosevelt was the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) of 1933, which was “similar to experiments being carried out by the fascist dictator Benito Mussolini in Italy and by the ****s in Adolf Hitler's Germany,” according to John A. Garraty, ^[2] of the Society of American Historians.^[3] NIRA established the National Recovery Administration (NRA), “the New Deal’s attempt to bring to America the substance of Mussolini’s corporativism.”^[4] As one NRA study concluded, “The Fascist principles are very similar to those which have been evolving in America and so are of particular interest at this time.”^[5]

Just as Mussolini “organized each trade or industrial group or professional group into a state supervised trade association” that “operated under state supervision and could plan production, quality, prices, distribution, labor standards, etc.,”^[6] the NRA “forced virtually all American industry, manufacturing, and retail business into cartels possessing the power to set prices and wages, and to ^[7] dictate the levels of production.”

U.S. Ambassador to Italy Breckinridge Long wrote to Roosevelt’s economic advisor Rexford Tugwell, “Your mind runs along these lines [corporativism]… It may have some bearing on the code work under N.R.A.”^[8] Tugwell, the “most prominent of the Brain Trusters and the man often considered the chief ideologist^[9] of the ‘first New Deal’ (roughly, 1933–34),” said, “I find Italy doing many of the things which seem to me necessary…. Mussolini certainly has the same people opposed to him as FDR has. But he has the press controlled so that they cannot scream lies at him daily.”^[10]

As head of the NRA and thus “FDR’s leading bureaucrat,”^[11] the President appointed^[12] General Hugh Johnson, who was granted “almost unlimited powers over industry.” ^[13] According to economist Thayer Watkins (who teaches economic history^[14] at California’s San José State University), Johnson was “an admirer of Mussolini’s National Corporatist system^[15] in Italy and he drew upon the Italian experience in formulating the New Deal.” Walker F. Todd, research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, agrees that Johnson “did admire greatly what Mussolini appeared to have done,” and identifies the NRA as a “thoroughly corporativist” ^[16] idea.

Johnson was said to carry around with him a copy of Raffaello Viglione’s pro-Mussolini book,^[17] The Corporate State^[18], even presenting a copy to Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins.^[19] In his 1934 retirement speech, he invoked what he called the “shining name” of Mussolini.^[20] According to Jonah Goldberg, Johnson displayed a portrait of ‘’Il Duce’’ in his NRA office and actually “distributed a memo at the Democratic Convention proposing that FDR become a Mussolini-like dictator.”^[21]

http://www.conservapedia.com/National_Recovery_Act

As to people continuing to vote for Democrats, considering the percentage of the "gimme" class in the U.S., it's hard to imagine Dems not doing well.

=======

One of the major indicators of "Fascism" is corporate control of the government.
Do you really think Democratic Socialism promotes that ?

Why should the means of production be community owned? 

One of the major indicators of "Fascism" is corporate control of the government.

The Rich Support McCain, the Super-Rich Support Obama

• By Robert Frank

In Richistan, I wrote about a new political divide emerging among the wealthy. While most Lower Richistani’s ($1 million to $10 million in net worth) were voting Republican, most Middle-and Upper Richistanis (those worth $10 million plus and $100 million plus) were voting Democrat.

Associated Press

Lower Richistanis tended to vote almost exclusively based on taxes. But Upper Richistanis placed a higher priority on longer-term societal issues like health care, the environment and education, which are traditional Democrat issues. Some say Upper Richistanis can afford to minimize taxes, since they have plenty of money even after the government takes its share. Others say the ultra-rich have better tax attorneys so they don’t care as much about tax rates.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/20...-rich-support-obama/

<caption>Top Industries of Obama Bundlers</caption>

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/bundlers.php

The Democratic Party Is Now The Party Of Big Business

By Jeffrey Dorfman

The traditional view of American political parties and their special interest groups is that the Republican Party represents big business and social conservatives while the Democratic Party represents labor unions and the poor. However, evidence suggests that this situation has changed. Labor unions and the poor are still linked with the Democratic Party. Small business is strongly with the Republicans at the moment, thanks to Obamacare, and social conservatives still lean Republican (and certainly not toward the Democrats). However, big business has now aligned itself with the Democratic Party.

Big business is working with the Democrats in favor of immigration reform because they want to expand the labor supply so they can hire people for lower wages. Big business has also received special treatment under the Affordable Care Act and they are happy to have received those favors. Also, big business likes the Obama Administration's practice of picking winners and bestowing subsidies, bailouts, and other forms of corporate welfare because they are the beneficiaries.

http://www.realclearmarkets.co...business_100768.html

In the United States, beginning in 1933, the constellation of government interventions known as the New Deal had features suggestive of the corporate state. The National Industrial Recovery Act created code authorities and codes of practice that governed all aspects of manufacturing and commerce. The National Labor Relations Act made the federal government the final arbiter in labor issues. The Agricultural Adjustment Act introduced central planning to farming. The object was to reduce competition and output in order to keep prices and incomes of particular groups from falling during the Great Depression.

It is a matter of controversy whether President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal was directly influenced by fascist economic policies. Mussolini praised the New Deal as “boldly . . . interventionist in the field of economics,” and Roosevelt complimented Mussolini for his “honest purpose of restoring Italy” and acknowledged that he kept “in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman.” Also, Hugh Johnson, head of the National Recovery Administration, was known to carry a copy of Raffaello Viglione’s pro-Mussolini book, The Corporate State, with him, presented a copy to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins, and, on retirement, paid tribute to the Italian dictator.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html

Let's see here 'weed, some of the "gimme" class are crony capitalists who funnel money to candidates to get special breaks in taxes and contracts. It might be noted that in corporatism that labor unions are considered to be a corporation. So on the face of all the evidence, hail yeah, we are a fascist nation. Add to list of fascist actions, the FCC intends to intrude into newsrooms , even at newspapers which aren't under FCC control.

See http://www.fcc.gov/info-needs-communities#read

________________________________________________

That would surprise Il Duce!  Fascism uses private industries to meet national goals.  You got it bassackwards. 

BTW....... What ever happened to Mussolini?  Oh, yeah.......