AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread. - Page 3

post #81 of 886
11/21/11 at 4:18pm
Thread Starter 
Obama should step aside.

Quote:
Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president's political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.

Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.

Hope and change is going to be burning down anything that stands in the way of reelection no matter the harm to the nation.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #82 of 886
11/21/11 at 4:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Obama should step aside.



Hope and change is going to be burn down anything that stands in the way of reelection no matter the harm to the nation.

And as long as there's a democrat in the Whitehouse the republicans are going to continue to say " No " no matter what harm it does to the nation.

From the same article :
Quote:
Consequently, he has to make the case that the Republicans, who have garnered even lower ratings in the polls for their unwillingness to compromise and settle for gridlock, represent a more risky and dangerous choice than the current administration—an argument he's clearly begun to articulate.

Quote:
is going to be burn down

Now what would SDW make of this sentence?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #83 of 886
11/22/11 at 4:38am
Thread Starter 
Not that BR will see this and not that he would avoid being hypocritical and condemn it but it seems President Obama knows Republicans will come around to his views and things will work out because of his RELIGIOUS FAITH.

BTW, Obama stammers so much he makes Rick Perry seem smooth at debates. Second, I like how he notes both he and Al Sharpton are both 1%'ers. I look forward to the Occupy protests following them both around soon and also look forward to them chipping in whatever additional taxes they think ought to be paid whether it is the law or not.

They should give as their faith moves them to give toward the government. Those tax rates can be considered minimums. If their religious faith moves them on deficit reduction, they can just give more!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #84 of 886
11/22/11 at 8:48am
Thread Starter 
So in addition to be a faith-based person, Obama apparently has more and more people revealing his large list of flaws. With a proper media, these would have easily gotten out there before he was elected. Now they will start to creep out in hopes he might bail before the second term.

Jon Meacham declares Obama is in the wrong business because he doesn't like people.

Quote:
JON MEACHAM: It's a little worse than normal. Because even though he was there, my sense is he doesn't particularly like people and politicians who don't like people are kinda in the wrong business."

HAROLD FORD, JR.:Kinda.

MEACHAM: Kinda. I really believe this. So, Reagan wanted to perform for people. So you could bring him in, and he, it would be a small audience. George H.W. Bush: all of his life was one long reunion mixer. Bill Clinton, uh, loved people. So I think this is a personality distinction.


Even Chris Matthews has become critical. The thrill up his leg is gone.

Quote:
Matthews is also upset that Obama is running a "virtual presidency," through endless impersonal emails, rather than building and exploiting the interpersonal relationships that are vital for effective governance. On that score, he laments: "I hear stories (from members of Congress) that you will not believe. Not a single phone call since the last election."

Congress doesn't do what he wants, including those in his own party, but...but...but... he sent them an email!

David Limbaugh is smart though and hits at the real source of the Obama anger, the same sort of anger that has every liberal on these forums refusing to even address the substance of this thread.

Quote:
There is a disconnect at work here with Matthews' anger at Obama for doing precisely what liberals do. Obama shoved through a radically liberal agenda -- the kind that should earn him permanent gratitude from a liberal such as Matthews, and it has led to economic catastrophe. Matthews, at least in part, is furious at Obama, perhaps subconsciously, for proving that Matthews' lifelong ideology is an epic fail.

Yes, Obama shoved through liberal policies and they have proven an epic fail.

Obama can act as he wants and need not worry about accountability. Liberal media sources will keep sanitizing his actions, ignoring his gaffes and they will keep rationalizing away his lack of leadership.

Quote:
Apparently it isn't even worthy of mention that Obama's actions in Libya violated the War Powers Resolution, the president's own professed standards for what he can do without Congressional permission, and the legal advice provided to him by the Office of Legal Counsel.

Quote:
Perhaps most egregiously, Chait doesn't even allude to Obama's practice of putting American citizens on a secret kill list without any due process, or even consistent, transparent standards.

The best part is here.

Quote:
Why is all this ignored?

Telling the story of Obama's first term without including any of it is a shocking failure of liberalism. It's akin to conservatism's unforgivable myopia and apologia during the Bush Administration. Are liberals really more discontented with Obama's failure to reverse the Bush tax cuts than the citizen death warrants he is signing? Is his ham-handed handling of the debt-ceiling really more worthy of mention than the illegal war he waged? Is his willingness to sign deficit reduction that cuts entitlement spending more objectionable than the fact that he outsourced drone strikes to a CIA that often didn't even know the names of the people it was killing?

These are the priorities of a perverted liberalism.

It's also ignored and shows the same perverted reasoning when a bunch of 'occupiers' show up everywhere but the Obama White House.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #85 of 886
11/22/11 at 11:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


BTW, Obama stammers so much he makes Rick Perry seem smooth at debates.

He does, doesn't he?

Obama is no smooth talker at all.

Some people refer to Obama as a great orator. Obama is totally lost without his $8,000 teleprompters and he couldn't talk his way out of a brown paper bag. He is extremely gaffe prone, though many ignorant people would never know that, because much of the mainstream media ignores and censors those moments.

Bush was an intellectual compared to Obama and Obama's speeches have been measured to be on a lower grammatical level than Bush's speeches. Somebody has to be an ignorant liberal to be impressed by Obama, because he is not that smart at all. And where are his school records? I believe that there are good reasons as to why they are being so closely guarded and hidden.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 886
11/22/11 at 11:21am
And it compounds the irony when he prefaces nearly everything he stammers with "let me be clear".

That would be nice, Mr. President.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #87 of 886
11/22/11 at 11:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And it compounds the irony when he prefaces nearly everything he stammers with "let me be clear".

That would be nice, Mr. President.

Yes, he does have a rather limited vocabulary, often repeating the same tired lines over and over again.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 886
11/22/11 at 1:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Some people refer to Obama as a great orator. Obama is totally lost without his $8,000 teleprompters...

I so want to rip into the whole can of worms, but I'll simply ask this - can you name just one active politician, democrat or republican, that has never had a speech writer or used a teleprompter? Seriously, can you name even one?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Bush was an intellectual compared to Obama and Obama's speeches have been measured to be on a lower grammatical level than Bush's speeches. Somebody has to be an ignorant liberal to be impressed by Obama, because he is not that smart at all. And where are his school records? I believe that there are good reasons as to why they are being so closely guarded and hidden.

Oh yes, the famous "Fool me, can't get fooled again" speech was simply poetry on the likes of Shakespeare. xD Dude, get over yourself. Every politician has a facade, a 'public' persona that doesn't match the actual person that they are, nor can they ever live up to the expectations we place upon them. We know that George W. Bush and Barack Obama graduated from Harvard. What does that have to do with their ability to lead the country?
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
Video editor, tech enthusiast, developer.

http://www.yuusharo.com
http://www.studioyuu.com
Reply
post #89 of 886
11/22/11 at 5:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by yuusharo View Post

I so want to rip into the whole can of worms, but I'll simply ask this - can you name just one active politician, democrat or republican, that has never had a speech writer or used a teleprompter? Seriously, can you name even one?

Obama has taken teleprompter usage to a whole new art form. It's not just about using it occasionally like other people do, he seems to rely on it for everything, including short speaking engagements where he's only speaking for a mere few minutes. How pathetic.

And when the teleprompter malfunctions, Obama is completely lost, repeating lines that he has already spoken and basically making a fool of himself. Obama has taken teleprompter dependance to a whole new level, unlike anybody else before him.

That's why I mock Obama, especially when the liberals like to proclaim that he's so smart or intelligent. Well, I am smarter than him for starters, and so are many other people. Obama doesn't impress me, but then again I'm not a liberal.

Almost every time the president delivers a speech or makes remarks, no matter how mundane or brief, he reads from a teleprompter. (Two of them, actually — twin glass panes that rise on narrow sticks at eye level, one to his left and the other to his right, projecting an electronic visual of the scrolling text of his prepared remarks.)

President George W. Bush used teleprompters, but usually only for important speeches, said Ari Fleischer, a former White House press secretary. “Ordinarily, when he would just go hit the hustings, he’d use notecards, little 5-by-8 cards,” Fleischer said. “That was his standard style.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...L_story_1.html
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 886
11/22/11 at 5:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

NBC News engages in deliberate and indisputable bias. They've made a conscious decision to be "the alternative to Fox News." So, the poll is nonsense. But I offered to put that aside.



That's not atypical. Same goes for the Democrats. Of course, if I showed you that Obama has lost support among Democrats, you'd probably dismiss it.



That was quite a weaselly way to state that. They are dissatisfied with Congress in general, not "the Republican Congress."



Some do, some don't. Romney--who as of now is all but certain to win the nomination--hasn't gone after people. Neither has Newt Gingrich.



Apparently crazy is now defined as "won the most electoral votes despite Al Gore trying to steal the election."



Larry Sabato's site shows absolutely nothing conclusive at present. There are 111 toss up votes. Obama's map should look far better at this point.

Your other link shows Mitt Romney beating Obama 51 to 47. Good job proving my point.



I know we fight about this every cycle and that we've had our battles, but I really don't see how you come to that conclusion. The numbers for Obama are really, really bad.
  • No President except for Reagan has been been re-elected with 7+% unemployment. And Reagan was the beneficiary of a rapidly improving economy at the time.
  • Obama's approval rating is around 40% in most polls. It even dips to 39% at times. Presidents don't win re-election unless they are close to 50%.
  • Obama's support amongst core voting blocks has dipped, including blacks, hispanics, younger voters and indepenents.
  • Most polls show Obama even with or losing to a generic Republic candidate.

Add to this the following factors:
  • There is a huge enthusiasm gap between Republicans and Democrats
  • The overall economy is still very bad and is unlikely to improve significantly by election day.
  • Issue polling wrt Obama is bad, particularly on the economy and healthcare.

The Republicans are now famous for saying " No " and are looked on even more unfavorably than Obama so keep drinking the Kool Aid!

Good job Romney!
Quote:
Romney's first TV ad hits Obama (and is out of context)

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...out-of-context


Quote:
CNN Poll: Partisan divides explain super committee failure

Quote:
The survey indicates that two-thirds of the public supports increasing taxes on higher-income Americans and businesses, with just 32% opposed to such a move by the super committee. That's a slight increase since early August, when the panel of six Democrats and six Republicans was created. And by a 60% to 39% margin, Americans back major cuts in spending in domestic government programs, basically unchanged from late summer.

The Republicans won't like that! You can see the mood of the country and it's not really in line with what the GOP's been trying to sell. If anything the average voter out there thinks Obama hasn't been hard enough when dealing with the GOP.

Quote:
President Obama back to even with generic Republican opponent, Gallup poll shows



Quote:
With the caveat that polling at 43 percent is never good for an incumbent president, this trend line from Gallup is welcome news for Barack Obama:


President Obama now essentially ties, 43% to 42%, a "generic" Republican candidate when U.S. registered voters are asked whom they are more likely to vote for in the presidential election next year. This marks a change from October and September, when the Republican candidate was ahead...
Continue Reading


Independents are split, giving 38% support to each candidate ... The evenness of independents' preferences marks a significant change from September and October, when independents favored the Republican candidate by a significant margin.

Obama trailed a generic Republican opponent by as much as 8 points earlier this fall, and there was a moment there where it looked like the floor could really drop out from under him. That could still happen, of course, and it's not like Obama's in robust political condition now. But the Gallup poll is another data point suggesting that the president has helped himself, at least modestly, with his recent push for a jobs bill and his more confrontational stance toward Congress.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68067.html
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #91 of 886
11/23/11 at 8:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

The Republicans are now famous for saying " No " and are looked on even more unfavorably than Obama so keep drinking the Kool Aid!

Good job Romney!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news...out-of-context






The Republicans won't like that! You can see the mood of the country and it's not really in line with what the GOP's been trying to sell. If anything the average voter out there thinks Obama hasn't been hard enough when dealing with the GOP.







http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68067.html

You're taking that one poll number and claiming it represents "the mood of the country?" LOL! Tell us, jimmac, what is "the mood of the country?"

Oh, and by the way: You're kidding me with the Romney ad, right? OMG! One statement that is out of context! Meanwhile, Michelle Bachman is being called a slut trash can bitch on national TV. But that's OK. Got it.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #92 of 886
11/23/11 at 9:02am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You're taking that one poll number and claiming it represents "the mood of the country?" LOL! Tell us, jimmac, what is "the mood of the country?"

Oh, and by the way: You're kidding me with the Romney ad, right? OMG! One statement that is out of context! Meanwhile, Michelle Bachman is being called a slut trash can bitch on national TV. But that's OK. Got it.

I wonder which part of his "cycle" we are in now. We're we supposed to be Democratic controlled for a generation?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #93 of 886
11/23/11 at 9:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I wonder which part of his "cycle" we are in now. We're we supposed to be Democratic controlled for a generation?

Isn't it obvious trumpt? We're in the Spin Cycle.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #94 of 886
11/25/11 at 10:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You're taking that one poll number and claiming it represents "the mood of the country?" LOL! Tell us, jimmac, what is "the mood of the country?"

Oh, and by the way: You're kidding me with the Romney ad, right? OMG! One statement that is out of context! Meanwhile, Michelle Bachman is being called a slut trash can bitch on national TV. But that's OK. Got it.

What's the mood of the country? They're fed up with government not doing their job. In a about a month we'll be in the same pickle that we were in in August. Why is government not doing their job? Primarily it's the Republicans refusing to do anything but say " No " ( they are after all the party of " No " and that's why they aquired the name ). So in essence they're mad at Obama for not being harder on the Republicans but they're even more upset with the Republicans for dragging their feet and placing winning the next election over serving the people. What they apparently don't get is that those same people are the voters. This is relfected in the polls as Obama may be down but not at much as congress and spedifically the Republican side.

So dream on SDW.

And by the way trumpy and SDW that's the part of the cycle we're in now. Disgust with their policticians and especially Republicans.

So how do you think this will affect the next election?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #95 of 886
11/26/11 at 5:04am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What's the mood of the country? They're fed up with government not doing their job.

No what they are fed up with is the government trying to do every job since they are about 500% more inefficient at it and people can't afford the waste and graft.

Quote:
In a about a month we'll be in the same pickle that we were in in August. Why is government not doing their job?

The government's job isn't to borrow and spend money until the currency and the economy implodes.

Quote:
Primarily it's the Republicans refusing to do anything but say " No " ( they are after all the party of " No " and that's why they aquired the name ).

Saying no to the symptoms is part of saying yes to the solution. Simplistic, bumper sticker reasoning can't understand this. Reality demands priorities and choices, not just playing homeless while screaming gimme, gimme, gimme. When you say yes to good health, you say no to eating a certain number of calories a day. When you say yes to good finances, you say no to certain spending habits and patterns. Only idiots believe there are no real choices, priorities and causes and effects and it is just about intentions.
Quote:
So in essence they're mad at Obama for not being harder on the Republicans but they're even more upset with the Republicans for dragging their feet and placing winning the next election over serving the people. What they apparently don't get is that those same people are the voters. This is relfected in the polls as Obama may be down but not at much as congress and spedifically the Republican side.

They are mad they bought a lie and now their lives suck. They can buy more lies and delude themselves and continue to buy more lies. The only way their lives will get better is to stop buying the lie. A better marketed, messaged or whatever else lie won't solve the problem.
Quote:
So dream on SDW.

And by the way trumpy and SDW that's the part of the cycle we're in now. Disgust with their policticians and especially Republicans.

So how do you think this will affect the next election?

No, the polls and results are pretty grim for anyone not getting their news from "lean forward" MSNBC. The result for the next election is going to be retention of the Republican House, likely gain of the Senate and while no one can be certain of the presidency, past precedent leans toward Obama clearly being a one termer. This is why Democratic pollsters and Democratic groups are trying to convince Obama not to run again. He's a giant boat anchor that is going to drag down the party next election. He is damaged good and he is going to take the whole party with him.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #96 of 886
11/26/11 at 9:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

What's the mood of the country? They're fed up with government not doing their job. In a about a month we'll be in the same pickle that we were in in August. Why is government not doing their job? Primarily it's the Republicans refusing to do anything but say " No " ( they are after all the party of " No " and that's why they aquired the name ). So in essence they're mad at Obama for not being harder on the Republicans but they're even more upset with the Republicans for dragging their feet and placing winning the next election over serving the people. What they apparently don't get is that those same people are the voters. This is relfected in the polls as Obama may be down but not at much as congress and spedifically the Republican side.

So dream on SDW.

And by the way trumpy and SDW that's the part of the cycle we're in now. Disgust with their policticians and especially Republicans.

So how do you think this will affect the next election?

As usual, you are projecting your own opinions onto others. It's like the script of another Inception movie.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #97 of 886
11/26/11 at 12:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The government's job isn't to borrow and spend money until the currency and the economy implodes.

We can keep on spending (and we must) as long as we stop borrowing. Can you name the last administration that stopped borrowing? And the one before that? I bet you won't do so honestly.
Reply
Reply
post #98 of 886
11/26/11 at 12:53pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

We can keep on spending (and we must) as long as we stop borrowing. Can you name the last administration that stopped borrowing? And the one before that? I bet you won't do so honestly.

What is the "I bet you won't answer something honestly" routine across multiple threads. Are you in second grade today?

President's don't borrow or spend. The sign the laws and in many ways the buck stops with them since they are the leader of our federal government. The last leader to sign a budget that balanced was Bush. The federal budget did not go back into deficit until FY2002. We can argue about whether it should have or not but considering the stock bubble and the 9/11 attacks, I don't think it too terrible. Before that was obviously Clinton but he didn't achieve it until late in his term and was driven to it by the Republicans who shut down the government to win that balanced budget.

Realize that the largest deficit run under Bush while at war, with a Republican Congress and the current tax cuts was $350 billion. Do you know what we would give to have that be the case now? It would require huge cuts by Obama standards. Obama is running deficits of almost a trillion a year.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #99 of 886
11/28/11 at 7:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

What is the "I bet you won't answer something honestly" routine across multiple threads. Are you in second grade today?

President's don't borrow or spend. The sign the laws and in many ways the buck stops with them since they are the leader of our federal government. The last leader to sign a budget that balanced was Bush. The federal budget did not go back into deficit until FY2002. We can argue about whether it should have or not but considering the stock bubble and the 9/11 attacks, I don't think it too terrible. Before that was obviously Clinton but he didn't achieve it until late in his term and was driven to it by the Republicans who shut down the government to win that balanced budget.

Realize that the largest deficit run under Bush while at war, with a Republican Congress and the current tax cuts was $350 billion. Do you know what we would give to have that be the case now? It would require huge cuts by Obama standards. Obama is running deficits of almost a trillion a year.

Correction: 1.6 trillion a year.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #100 of 886
11/28/11 at 3:36pm
Thread Starter 
Note to voters, if you are white and middle class, you are not needed and President Obama has abandoned you.

Quote:
But preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.

All pretense of trying to win a majority of the white working class has been effectively jettisoned in favor of cementing a center-left coalition made up, on the one hand, of voters who have gotten ahead on the basis of educational attainment professors, artists, designers, editors, human resources managers, lawyers, librarians, social workers, teachers and therapists and a second, substantial constituency of lower-income voters who are disproportionately African-American and Hispanic.

They want what amounts to the Occupy Protesters who are upset over not being hired into these named jobs (human resource manager, director of diversity, etc.) and the poor who will have their votes purchased.

This isn't rich vs. poor. This is productive vs. looters.

Quote:
Will the president hold sufficient support among communities of color, educated whites, Millennials, single women, and seculars and avoid a catastrophic meltdown among white working-class voters?

Fear and dependency is what will be sold for 2012.

If you are white and lower income, there is no need for you. There is no program for you. No one cares if you get into college and if you do, prepare to take the hits in terms of financial aid, scholarships or priority registration. Those have all been used to buy the votes of others. Democratic racism means scaring people into voting for them and you are their boogieman so they can't help you.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #101 of 886
11/29/11 at 4:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Obama should step aside.



Hope and change is going to be burning down anything that stands in the way of reelection no matter the harm to the nation.

There is complete shit running for the Republicans!Everone a liar and a phony to boot. Obama walked into shit in 2008 and is still in it today thanks to the idiot Bush.
Reply
Reply
post #102 of 886
11/29/11 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

As usual, you are projecting your own opinions onto others. It's like the script of another Inception movie.

My opinions? Watch and enjoy!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/...52965#45452965

An example from the transcript :
Quote:
MS. GOODWIN: But I think there's a space now for President Obama. I think the post-partisanship has to go. That is what he came in hoping for, it proved not able to work. But if you look back at Roosevelt, FDR, he first tried to be a bipartisan leader, and then he got so hurt by the rancor of the Republican right, who called him a traitor to the class, that he went right after them, and he wins in a landslide. You know, "The forces of entrenched greed hate me. I welcome their hatred." I don't think that'll work for Obama because he's not a warrior, a happy warrior in that way. But there is a model for him in Teddy Roosevelt. Similar time to our, squeeze middle class, up and down gap between the rich and the poor. And what he does is say, "I like corporations as long as they do well by us. I like union--unions as long as they do well for us. But if they start screwing around with us, I'm going after them." And he called for a square deal, fundamental fairness. And that's where the country's at right now. When Obama first talked about the failure of the supercommittee, when he put out his grand proposal, it was the idea that people want fairness, they want balance. That's what Teddy Roosevelt was all about. Every sentence was balance.

MR. GREGORY: Right. And he wants to take that fairness question...

MS. GOODWIN: I think that's there.

MR. GREGORY: ...to the ballot box next--next year.

MR. BESCHLOSS: He wants to run as the candidate of the 99 percent against the candidate of the 1 percent, be it Romney or Gingrich. That might be pretty effective. I think Doris is absolutely right. I think another part of it is temperament. You know, Barack Obama grew up in Hawaii, and Hawaiian conflicts between politicians are actually quite mild. People like each other even if they disagree a lot.

That and the fact that the GOP signed that stupid thing from Norquist. They in effect said that no matter what they'd say " No " even if it benifited the american people in the long run. And by the way watch the thing on Mr. Norquist. Gregory tore into him about his assertion that raising taxes slows the economy. So how come it worked with Clinton? Of we got the party line from Mr. Norquist.


Here's a couple of samples not connected :


Quote:
MR. GREGORY: Here's the reality in terms of how Americans feel about taxes and, indeed, how Republicans feel about it, which seems to be at odds to where you are. Marist polling out earlier this month indicates 53 percent of Republicans agree, yes, taxes should be raised on higher income Americans as part of a debt deal. I mean, this is also against the backdrop of history of Ronald Reagan raising taxes, a conservative icon.

Quote:
MR. GREGORY: And if a Republican raises taxes after taking the pledge, as president of the United States...

MR. NORQUIST: Mm-hmm.

He uses the Mm-hmm alot!
What an idiot!


Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #103 of 886
11/30/11 at 7:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

My opinions? Watch and enjoy!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/...52965#45452965

An example from the transcript :

That and the fact that the GOP signed that stupid thing from Norquist. They in effect said that no matter what they'd say " No " even if it benifited the american people in the long run. And by the way watch the thing on Mr. Norquist. Gregory tore into him about his assertion that raising taxes slows the economy. So how come it worked with Clinton? Of we got the party line from Mr. Norquist.


Here's a couple of samples not connected :






He uses the Mm-hmm alot!
What an idiot!



David Gregory and Doris Kerns Goodwin?
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #104 of 886
11/30/11 at 2:25pm
Thread Starter 
The majority of voters, especially independents think Obama does not deserve to be reelected.

Quote:
6,071 respondents participated in the 2nd November American Pulse conducted 11/21-11/23/2011. The latest results show that most Voters don’t think President Obama deserves reelection. In 2012, it appears Voters will be looking for an honest candidate, one who will take on the biggest issues facing the country: the weak economy, government spending and job creation.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #105 of 886
11/30/11 at 2:40pm
If only those darned Republicans didn't keep standing in the way of "progress", we'd be living in a world filled with lollipops and unicorns provided by the 1%.

Why do Republicans hate utopia?!?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #106 of 886
11/30/11 at 3:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The majority of voters, especially independents think Obama does not deserve to be reelected.

Including me. But I'll vote for him anyway. He'll be re-elected anyway. Because his competition absolutely don't deserve to be elected. Understand how that works?
Reply
Reply
post #107 of 886
11/30/11 at 4:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Including me. But I'll vote for him anyway. He'll be re-elected anyway. Because his competition absolutely don't deserve to be elected. Understand how that works?

No, please explain how if the majority of people believe he ought not be elected and generic and other polls show competitors beating him, and also the Republicans were given the House in 2010 and signs easily point to the same happening with the Senate in 2012, how that leads to an Obama victory?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #108 of 886
11/30/11 at 4:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

If only those darned Republicans didn't keep standing in the way of "progress", we'd be living in a world filled with lollipops and unicorns provided by the 1%.

Why do Republicans hate utopia?!?

If only those darned Liberals and Socialists didn't keep standing in the way of "profit" err... I mean wealth creation, we'd be living in a world of self-regulation, trickle down wonderfulness and other pots of gold at the end of the rainbow that have nothing, oh, nothing at all (trust me), to do with any delusions of Utopia.

Oh, wait, we tried that. What countries are the happiest in the world? Hmm... Maybe we should try THAT!
Reply
Reply
post #109 of 886
11/30/11 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

No, please explain how if the majority of people believe he ought not be elected and generic and other polls show competitors beating him, and also the Republicans were given the House in 2010 and signs easily point to the same happening with the Senate in 2012, how that leads to an Obama victory?

Because all the competition is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. I mean they're so bad now that you guys are considering Gingrich, and there's a push to try to get Palin back in the race!
Reply
Reply
post #110 of 886
11/30/11 at 4:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Because all the competition is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. I mean they're so bad now that you guys are considering Gingrich, and there's a push to try to get Palin back in the race!

Garbage? I think not. The fact that no one candidate has grabbed all the votes doesn't mean much this early. That's like claiming Obama was a garbage candidate because he almost needed a brokered convention to get the nomination with the media pulling full weight for him. Things narrow pretty quickly once the votes start getting cast. This stage of the game still had all sorts of Democrats in the race. The sorting happens quickly after the new year begins.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #111 of 886
12/1/11 at 6:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Because all the competition is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. I mean they're so bad now that you guys are considering Gingrich, and there's a push to try to get Palin back in the race!

Garbage. Right. Let's look at Obama's qualifications compared to some of the candidates:

Obama: Held one actual job (if you can call it that) in his life at Harvard Law School. Never worked in the private sector. Defeated his state senate Democratic primary opponent by having his "sealed" divorce records unsealed (thank you, Mr. Axelrod). Those records showed that the candidate had been accused of pushing his wife around. Then, he defeated his Republican opponent in a similar manner...all with the help of ACORN and other "organizing" groups (read: facilitators of election fraud). Did I mention he was a product of the most corrupt city in the history of the United States? Obama was elected president with no legislative accomplishments, no executive experience and not private sector experience. But damn, he could read that prompter!

Mitt Romney: Son of former Michigan Governor George Romney. JD/MBA in Business Administration from Harvard Law and Harvard Business. CEO of Bain & Company, then Bain Capital. Brought the company out of crisis. Nearly unseated Ted Kennedy for Senate in 1994. Turned around essentially saved the 2002 Winter Olympics. Served as Governor of Mass. Eliminated a $3 billion deficit. Signed healthcare legislation that ensured nearly all residents had coverage. Did this as a Republican in the bluest of all states.

Newt Gingrich: B.A. and Ph.d in History. Elected to House is 1978 after nearly defeating the incumbent in 74 and 76. Inspired Reagan's "are you better off than you were 4 years ago" comment via a memo written in 1980. Endorsed bill to make MLK's b-day a national holiday. Author of the Contract with America. Speaker of the House. Led the effort to balance the budget and pass welfare reform. Credited with leading the charge on capital gains tax cuts in 1997. Author of over 20 books. Widely seen as one of the most intelligent men in the public sphere today.


Michelle Bachman: Law degree from Oral Robert University, Masters in Taxation (LL.M.) from William & Mary School of Law. Worked as tax attorney for the IRS from 1988-1993. Elected to Minnesota State Senate in 2000, defeating a longtime incumbent. Elected to U.S. House in 2006. Consistent in her opposition of overspending and government expansion. Proponent of increased domestic energy production. Opposed financial sector bailout. Served on Permanent Select Committee for Intelligence.



This is not to say these three candidates are flawless...they are certainly not. But even the least qualified (Bachman) is far more qualified than Barack Obama to be President. If we selected Presidents based on their resumes, Obama wouldn't even be called for the screening interview. His would be the one that had his portrait on it and was scented...to "give it a little something extra."
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #112 of 886
12/1/11 at 9:16am
Ron Paul: B.S. in biology and Ph.D in medicine from Duke. Veteran who served as a flight surgeon in the Air Force and Air National Guard. Specialist in obstetrics/gynecology and has delivered more than 4,000 babies. Has served in the U.S. congress 3 different periods totaling 12 two-year terms: first from 1976–77, after he won a special election, then from 1979–85 and finally from 1997 to today. Widely regarded as an expert on the Constitution. Serves on the House Financial Services Committee and the Foreign Affairs Committee. On the Financial Services Committee he serves as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology. Refuses to sign up for the government pension that he would be entitled to in order to avoid receiving government money, saying it would be "hypocritical and immoral." Never votes in favor of legislation unless expressly authorized by the Constitution. Author of several NYT bestsellers. Only candidate proposing real and significant government spending cuts. Only candidate who has a detailed, specific plan to balance the budget by year 3 of his term. Only candidate who wants to end our unsustainable and deadly foreign policy of perpetual war and policing the world. Led the call to audit the Federal Reserve, which other GOP candidates are now echoing. Well versed in Austrian economics, he predicted the housing bubble, the economic collapse, and the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating.

There's much more, but I think it's obvious the man is just as qualified (more so, in my opinion) as any of the other candidates out there. Certainly more than Obama.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #113 of 886
12/1/11 at 9:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Garbage. Right. Let's look at Obama's qualifications compared to some of the candidates:

Obama: Held one actual job (if you can call it that) in his life at Harvard Law School. Never worked in the private sector. Defeated his state senate Democratic primary opponent by having his "sealed" divorce records unsealed (thank you, Mr. Axelrod). Those records showed that the candidate had been accused of pushing his wife around. Then, he defeated his Republican opponent in a similar manner...all with the help of ACORN and other "organizing" groups (read: facilitators of election fraud). Did I mention he was a product of the most corrupt city in the history of the United States? Obama was elected president with no legislative accomplishments, no executive experience and not private sector experience. But damn, he could read that prompter!

Mitt Romney: Son of former Michigan Governor George Romney. JD/MBA in Business Administration from Harvard Law and Harvard Business. CEO of Bain & Company, then Bain Capital. Brought the company out of crisis. Nearly unseated Ted Kennedy for Senate in 1994. Turned around essentially saved the 2002 Winter Olympics. Served as Governor of Mass. Eliminated a $3 billion deficit. Signed healthcare legislation that ensured nearly all residents had coverage. Did this as a Republican in the bluest of all states.

Newt Gingrich: B.A. and Ph.d in History. Elected to House is 1978 after nearly defeating the incumbent in 74 and 76. Inspired Reagan's "are you better off than you were 4 years ago" comment via a memo written in 1980. Endorsed bill to make MLK's b-day a national holiday. Author of the Contract with America. Speaker of the House. Led the effort to balance the budget and pass welfare reform. Credited with leading the charge on capital gains tax cuts in 1997. Author of over 20 books. Widely seen as one of the most intelligent men in the public sphere today.


Michelle Bachman: Law degree from Oral Robert University, Masters in Taxation (LL.M.) from William & Mary School of Law. Worked as tax attorney for the IRS from 1988-1993. Elected to Minnesota State Senate in 2000, defeating a longtime incumbent. Elected to U.S. House in 2006. Consistent in her opposition of overspending and government expansion. Proponent of increased domestic energy production. Opposed financial sector bailout. Served on Permanent Select Committee for Intelligence.



This is not to say these three candidates are flawless...they are certainly not. But even the least qualified (Bachman) is far more qualified than Barack Obama to be President. If we selected Presidents based on their resumes, Obama wouldn't even be called for the screening interview. His would be the one that had his portrait on it and was scented...to "give it a little something extra."

Yep, that's about right with regard to your bias. It's completely asinine that you listed the academic qualifications of every person you mentioned there... except one. Telling.
Reply
Reply
post #114 of 886
12/1/11 at 9:27pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Because all the competition is garbage. Complete and utter garbage. I mean they're so bad now that you guys are considering Gingrich, and there's a push to try to get Palin back in the race!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yep, that's about right with regard to your bias. It's completely asinine that you listed the academic qualifications of every person you mentioned there... except one. Telling.

Actually what's telling is this "Jersey Shore" reasoning. Are you going to call him a whore next or something?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #115 of 886
12/2/11 at 3:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

He does, doesn't he?

Obama is no smooth talker at all.

Some people refer to Obama as a great orator. Obama is totally lost without his $8,000 teleprompters and he couldn't talk his way out of a brown paper bag. He is extremely gaffe prone, though many ignorant people would never know that, because much of the mainstream media ignores and censors those moments.

Bush was an intellectual compared to Obama and Obama's speeches have been measured to be on a lower grammatical level than Bush's speeches. Somebody has to be an ignorant liberal to be impressed by Obama, because he is not that smart at all. And where are his school records? I believe that there are good reasons as to why they are being so closely guarded and hidden.

I case you can do better!You are talking out of your ass about Bush!
Reply
Reply
post #116 of 886
12/2/11 at 4:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yep, that's about right with regard to your bias. It's completely asinine that you listed the academic qualifications of every person you mentioned there... except one. Telling.

Nice dodge.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #117 of 886
12/3/11 at 5:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

David Gregory and Doris Kerns Goodwin?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/

Notice the VCI chart on this page. The only one that's really close is Reagan. Wasn't he reelected in 1984?

Tonton's right the competition is garbage so better get used to it.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #118 of 886
12/3/11 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Garbage? I think not. The fact that no one candidate has grabbed all the votes doesn't mean much this early. That's like claiming Obama was a garbage candidate because he almost needed a brokered convention to get the nomination with the media pulling full weight for him. Things narrow pretty quickly once the votes start getting cast. This stage of the game still had all sorts of Democrats in the race. The sorting happens quickly after the new year begins.

Trumpy. Nobody wants them besides the GOP!

They eat their own they're so eager to push their lack of a good case on the voter.

Unless something really drastic happens I think it'll be Obama next year.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #119 of 886
12/3/11 at 5:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

No what they are fed up with is the government trying to do every job since they are about 500% more inefficient at it and people can't afford the waste and graft.



The government's job isn't to borrow and spend money until the currency and the economy implodes.



Saying no to the symptoms is part of saying yes to the solution. Simplistic, bumper sticker reasoning can't understand this. Reality demands priorities and choices, not just playing homeless while screaming gimme, gimme, gimme. When you say yes to good health, you say no to eating a certain number of calories a day. When you say yes to good finances, you say no to certain spending habits and patterns. Only idiots believe there are no real choices, priorities and causes and effects and it is just about intentions.


They are mad they bought a lie and now their lives suck. They can buy more lies and delude themselves and continue to buy more lies. The only way their lives will get better is to stop buying the lie. A better marketed, messaged or whatever else lie won't solve the problem.


No, the polls and results are pretty grim for anyone not getting their news from "lean forward" MSNBC. The result for the next election is going to be retention of the Republican House, likely gain of the Senate and while no one can be certain of the presidency, past precedent leans toward Obama clearly being a one termer. This is why Democratic pollsters and Democratic groups are trying to convince Obama not to run again. He's a giant boat anchor that is going to drag down the party next election. He is damaged good and he is going to take the whole party with him.

Quote:
The result for the next election is going to be retention of the Republican House, likely gain of the Senate and while no one can be certain of the presidency

After the " No " circus they've put on already why would they want to reelect them?

Hey after the little celebration you guys put on after the GOP took the house ( like everything was going to improve ) things just don't seem to have gotten better at all. It couldn't be because they don't want to work with the other half of government could it?

Geez!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #120 of 886
12/3/11 at 7:46pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/

Notice the VCI chart on this page. The only one that's really close is Reagan. Wasn't he reelected in 1984?

Tonton's right the competition is garbage so better get used to it.

Perhaps it is time to get the glasses prescription checked Jimmac. Your link just proved my thread premise.

The VCI showed -72 for Carter who was destroyed in 1980. The VCI showed +62 (not negative which is what you must be seeing) for Reagan who was reelected in a landslide. It showed -84 for Bush who was NOT reelected.

Obama is -60 this month and that is recovered a bit from -69 last month.

He is toast.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

After the " No " circus they've put on already why would they want to reelect them?

Hey after the little celebration you guys put on after the GOP took the house ( like everything was going to improve ) things just don't seem to have gotten better at all. It couldn't be because they don't want to work with the other half of government could it?

Geez!

Republicans will be able to show the measures they've attempt to take and the small spending cuts they've fought for and won while only controlling one half of one branch of the Federal government. The reason you are seeing guys like Barney Frank retire is because they've seen the polls and they know they will get wiped out.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Dead Man Walking: The President Obama won't be reelected thread.