or Connect
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 21

post #801 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Faith.

 

See, there you go again.  Just like the fools who conflate the scientific and vernacular definitions of the word "theory"--here, too, you conflate the religious and secular definitions of the word "faith".

 

There you go again trying to define word to mean what you want them to mean in order to pretend that you have some sort of moral and or intellectual high ground. This would be laughable if it weren't so sad.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I do not have religious faith--the kind I deride--in any of the above mentioned topics because my beliefs are firmly grounded in reality, supported by evidence.  The faith you think I have would be better described as confidence in the validity of said theories based upon the overwhelming supporting evidence.

 

I never specifically said "religious" faith (though the faith you had in many things certainly has a religious fervor to it). And it is nice of you to simply assert and expect us to accept unquestioningly that your beliefs are "firmly grounded in reality" when the sum total of your posts here provides evidence to the contrary on many things.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Furthermore, I don't have faith (vernacular or otherwise) that there is no god.  I am not a gnostic atheist.  I am an agnostic atheist in that I do not believe in a deity nor do I believe such a thing is knowable. Furthermore, I am an igtheist--there's no point even discussing a god without first adequately defining one in a falsifiable manner.

 

What you fail to realize is that this is a position of faith. It is no less so because of your denial of it being a position of faith.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

So, again, you are firmly, soundly, overwhelmingly fucking wrong about everything you said there.

 

If that makes you feel better.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #802 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's narrow minded to not allow delusions and wishful thinking to govern my life?  The only naive one here is the person here is the one who believes in a Santa Claus for grownups.  He knows when you are sleeping.  He knows when you're awake.  He knows when you've been bad or good, but you just have to say "I believe in you, Jesus" and all that bad shit you continually do will be forgiven.  Shit, your version kinda ruins the song.  

 

It's narrow minded to not even consider the possibility of a supreme being, nor of anything you cannot experience through scientific evidence or your own senses.   And remember, we're not just talking about Christianity here, BR.  We're talking about ALL faith in ANY supreme being/force, etc.  Yeah, I think it's naive and narrow minded to not even be open to the possibility.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's cute how you think that well established science amounts to fairy tales while you bend your knee to an all powerful invisible father who sacrificed himself to himself (but not really because he magically resurrected himself three days later) so he could forgive you (because what fun would it have been to simply NOT put the tree of knowledge in the garden?  why did there need to be such a tree?) because although he is allegedly omnibenevolent, he still will torture you for eternity if this perfect being who requires nothing doesn't receive your love.  

 

Yes, I'm the one who believes in fairy tales.  You just believe in a 3 headed zombie who killed himself to unlock his own capacity to forgive only those who worship him.  Yeah.  Grow up

 

Yet, as MJ says, you consistently deny facts and express faith in that which is not only unproven, but demonstrably false.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Faith.

 

35ke38.jpg

 

See, there you go again.  Just like the fools who conflate the scientific and vernacular definitions of the word "theory"--here, too, you conflate the religious and secular definitions of the word "faith".  I do not have religious faith--the kind I deride--in any of the above mentioned topics because my beliefs are firmly grounded in reality, supported by evidence.  The faith you think I have would be better described as confidence in the validity of said theories based upon the overwhelming supporting evidence.

 

Furthermore, I don't have faith (vernacular or otherwise) that there is no god.  I am not a gnostic atheist.  I am an agnostic atheist in that I do not believe in a deity nor do I believe such a thing is knowable.  Furthermore, I am an igtheist--there's no point even discussing a god without first adequately defining one in a falsifiable manner.  So, again, you are firmly, soundly, overwhelmingly fucking wrong about everything you said there.

 

 

If that bolded part was true, you wouldn't be mocking others who come to a different conclusion.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

 

So you are claiming economics and also outcomes from government actions are the same as hard science and the basis of your proof for this is the fact that you are a agnostic atheist.

 

Talk about not knowing word definitions.......

 

If you want falsifiability, stop personally attacking people because people and who they are have determination on a hard science. Gravity doesn't stop working because someone is Mormon, or because they are Catholic or anything like that. Instead of operating on a higher ground that you claim science would give you debase it, yourself and the discussion here by continually attacking others when personal attacks prove nothing scientific. Much like how people say they'd believe in God if not for the Christians, in your case it is the agnostic atheist who is turning people off to his claims.

 

That said economics and sociology are in no form or fashion hard science.

 

 

BR believes in plenty of things that haven't been proven to exist, such as his mythical "social contract."  He believes that higher taxes and government spending helps the economy, when, in fact, just the opposite has been shown to be true.  He has faith.  He has dogma.  He just don't doesn't know it. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #803 of 886

I must say, and I'm not sure why I didn't get this before, is that the Appearances of Jesus after his Death can be viewed simply as Reincarnation For Monotheists. Because, if somebody is born again, but you didn't quite recognise them as first, that means that they died but came back in a slightly different form... aka Reincarnation, which as we know, predates 0 BC by several millennia. So Resurrection is actually a kind of tweaked Reincarnation, in this case a temporal state pre-Ascension. Just food for thought.

 

 

1. Jesus is not easily recognised

John portrays Mary as initially not recognising Jesus, even though she had known him well for a long time.

 

2. The Bible literally states Jesus was in a different form

Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country...

 

3. Jesus has become a supernatural being

Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him, and he disappeared from their sight.

 

4. Again, Jesus seems to have become post-human

Thomas the Apostle, a disciple of Jesus who doubted Jesus' resurrection and demanded to feel Jesus' wounds before being convinced, then became convinced.

 

So, it is a tweaked-reincarnation, afterlife story if taken literally, not actually a "way to cheat Death itself". I wonder if most people understand the Resurrection in this way.

 

Then of course, the symbolic nature of the above 1-4 is obvious, that is, basically, we can become better people if we try to, and, after death, we encounter a post-human state.

 


Edited by nvidia2008 - 5/30/12 at 6:50am
post #804 of 886

Back on topic:  Obama says he knows more about Judaism than any other President.  

 

 

Wow...and I thought Clinton was a narcissist.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #805 of 886

It's not faith to take the default position of nonbelief.  You assert there is a higher power.  Show me the evidence that's credible, and maybe I might believe it.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  

 

It doesn't take faith to not believe in a deity just as it doesn't take faith to not believe in a purple invisible chimera hovering three feet to the left of me breathing invisible fire that does not interact with matter.  There is no credible evidence for either.  I therefore lack a belief for both.  I don't need to acknowledge the possibility of your mystical assertions being true any more than you need to acknowledge the possibility of that invisible purple chimera--not until evidence is actually presented.  And SDW, prepare to be irked, but THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #806 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's not faith to take the default position of nonbelief.  You assert there is a higher power.  Show me the evidence that's credible, and maybe I might believe it.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  

 

It doesn't take faith to not believe in a deity just as it doesn't take faith to not believe in a purple invisible chimera hovering three feet to the left of me breathing invisible fire that does not interact with matter.  There is no credible evidence for either.  I therefore lack a belief for both.  I don't need to acknowledge the possibility of your mystical assertions being true any more than you need to acknowledge the possibility of that invisible purple chimera--not until evidence is actually presented.  And SDW, prepare to be irked, but THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU.

 

Whatever helps you feel better about what you believe to be true.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #807 of 886

It's not about what I believe to be true.  It's a lack of belief in what you believe to be true.  There's a very important difference there.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #808 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's not about what I believe to be true.  It's a lack of belief in what you believe to be true.  There's a very important difference there.

 

It's actually cute the semantic gymnastics you're willing to go through to cling to in order to avoid admitting that your what you think (believe) about unseen things is not a position of faith or belief. It's also fascinating how you feel you must define your position in terms of my beliefs rather than in relation to the thing we're alluding to (God and His existence or not.) And what's even more fascinating is you strident anger toward people who believe different things than you do. If I had to guess, I'd say that you have a hard time knowing who you are independent of the beliefs of others and, in particular, those for whom you harbor so much anger and disdain.


Edited by MJ1970 - 5/30/12 at 1:53pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #809 of 886

There's no semantic gymnastics.  Not agreeing that something is true is not the same thing as asserting that it is false.  You have not met the burden of proof to cause me to believe your deity exists.  The self-contradictory nature of your deity has led me to believe that your idea of a deity actually is false.  The idea of a deity at all...well...I can't disprove it, but that's not up to me to do so.  Until evidence is presented, I will lack a belief in a deity, but not actively disbelieve in one.  

 

Nuance apparently is hard for you.

 

Here's a good video that will help you understand.

 

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #810 of 886

Oh look everyone, true to confirmation bias, BR found a cute video that agrees with him. lol.gif

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #811 of 886

The burden of proof is on you.  Deal with it like a grownup.  Can't prove your claim that a god exists?  Change your view.  You have no right to expect me to take your claim seriously.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #812 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

The burden of proof is on you.

 

Except that I'm not trying to prove anything to you or anyone else on this matter.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Can't prove your claim that a god exists?  Change your view.

 

Again I'm slapped in the face by the irony of this kind of statement coming from you. lol.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You have no right to expect me to take your claim seriously.

 

What makes you think I do?! lol.gif I don't really care what you believe (or don't). I also don't even begrudge you your beliefs and opinions.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #813 of 886

You call atheism a faith-based position.  In doing so, you have made some assertions and you're going to need to support them.  The burden of proof is not on the atheist to disprove a god--it is on the theist to prove it.  It is unreasonable to expect every supernatural assertion to be given credence without evidence.  I lack a belief in the supernatural.  That requires no faith whatsoever.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #814 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You call atheism a faith-based position.  In doing so, you have made some assertions and you're going to need to support them.  The burden of proof is not on the atheist to disprove a god--it is on the theist to prove it.  It is unreasonable to expect every supernatural assertion to be given credence without evidence.

 

Yes I did. I don't need to. The theist need not prove anything. I'm not expecting you to give it any credence.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I lack a belief in the supernatural.  That requires no faith whatsoever.

 

Whatever makes you feel good.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #815 of 886

As the theist making the claim for the existence of a deity, you own the burden of proof.  I have no reason to believe in your deity without evidence.  Dismissing your claim--which you won't even attempt to support--requires no faith.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #816 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

As the theist making the claim for the existence of a deity, you own the burden of proof.  I have no reason to believe in your deity without evidence.  Dismissing your claim--which you won't even attempt to support--requires no faith.

 

Again, you seem to be completely obtuse to the fact that no one is trying to prove anything to you. And seem to keep demanding that someone try to. Why is this I wonder. I suppose it might be because you're insecure about your own beliefs. Whatever. It matters not at all to me.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #817 of 886
Projecting much? You lie about the nature of atheism and then attack the person defending himself from your misrepresentation. Either support your theistic assertion or stop spreading lies about the nature of atheism.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #818 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Projecting much?

 

Not at all. You?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You lie about the nature of atheism and then attack the person defending himself from your misrepresentation.

 

I have neither lied, as you claim, nor attacked you, as you claim.

 

Having a different interpretation of something is not the same as lying. Explaining (and arguing for) that interpretation to you is not the same as attacking you.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Either support your theistic assertion or stop spreading lies about the nature of atheism.

 

I'm not spreading any lies at all. Perhaps you ought to stop making demands of others, especially when you're unwilling to live up to your own standards.


Edited by MJ1970 - 5/30/12 at 4:56pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #819 of 886

You say that atheism requires faith.  Support that position or go home.  However, in supporting that position, you have to support it not against the strawman of atheism that you construct, but what atheism actually is.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #820 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You say that atheism requires faith.  Support that position or go home.

 

I'm sorry to tell that I have no obligation to submit to your orders. That said I have tried to explain and support that position, but you've rejected those explanations. I suppose we're at an impasse. This is, of course, completely unsurprising.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #821 of 886

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.  If the overwhelming majority of humans collected stamps, then those who don't may be given some sort of title.  However, that title still does not make not collecting stamps a hobby.

 

I am stuck with this label because the world is still gripped by superstition.  No amount of attempts to shift the burden of proof will strengthen your position.  At the end of the day, the default is nonbelief.  It takes no faith to lack belief.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #822 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.

 

I never claimed atheism was a "religion".

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I am stuck with this label...

 

Sorry that you feel "stuck with a label." I view it more as a description of your belief about the existence of God. That's all I see it as.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

...because the world is still gripped by superstition.

 

Thanks for sharing your characterization and opinion about the beliefs you do not hold.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

No amount of attempts to shift the burden of proof will strengthen your position.

 

I could say the same to you actually. I have not attempted to "shift the burden of proof" onto you. I have not asked you to prove the God does not exist.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

At the end of the day, the default is nonbelief.  It takes no faith to lack belief.

 

Thanks for telling us your opinion on this metaphysical/philosophical subject.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #823 of 886

It's always word games with you when you have no leg to stand on.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #824 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's always word games with you when you have no leg to stand on.  

 

Pray tell what "word games" do you claim I'm playing? Is this your only response? You have nothing within the realm of reason to say in response to my post?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #825 of 886

You, frankly, don't exist within the realm of reason.  Have a nice day.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #826 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You, frankly, don't exist within the realm of reason.  Have a nice day.

 

So, no then. Got it.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #827 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It's not faith to take the default position of nonbelief.  You assert there is a higher power.  Show me the evidence that's credible, and maybe I might believe it.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  

 

It doesn't take faith to not believe in a deity just as it doesn't take faith to not believe in a purple invisible chimera hovering three feet to the left of me breathing invisible fire that does not interact with matter.  There is no credible evidence for either.  I therefore lack a belief for both.  I don't need to acknowledge the possibility of your mystical assertions being true any more than you need to acknowledge the possibility of that invisible purple chimera--not until evidence is actually presented.  And SDW, prepare to be irked, but THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON YOU.

 

But your default position isn't "non-belief" on everything...it's really only on the topic of faith.  Secondly, you again are screaming for "proof of assertions."  What you fail to understand is what MJ states perfectly below:  We (and it really is "we" here, it seems) are not actually asserting anything.  We are telling you we believe differently.  No one is trying to convince you in this area.  On the contrary, you are the one making the argument that people of faith are idiots for believing in that which is unseen.    

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Except that I'm not trying to prove anything to you or anyone else on this matter.

 

 

 

Again I'm slapped in the face by the irony of this kind of statement coming from you. lol.gif

 

 

 

What makes you think I do?! lol.gif I don't really care what you believe (or don't). I also don't even begrudge you your beliefs and opinions.

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #828 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

As the theist making the claim for the existence of a deity, you own the burden of proof.  I have no reason to believe in your deity without evidence.  Dismissing your claim--which you won't even attempt to support--requires no faith.

 

This is true. I don't know about the others here, but for me, my faith is what I believe, and what I don't have to prove. I don't go to atheists and say, "prove to me there is no god". 

 

My concern is with organised religion where people are told something, which is not faith, just propaganda, if you haven't taken the time to see if you actually truly believe it, let alone ~what exactly~ you believe in.

 

This is the crux of most problems in the world, actually. We are now as humanity smart enough to go to Mars and have all human knowledge in the palm of our hand. But we still don't know if there is a God, what happens when we die, or if Jesus will or will not return tomorrow evening. We know how malnourished babies die, but who the hell knows why babies are even born in parts of Africa that are completely prehistoric in living conditions. Cockroaches have better living conditions.

 

This causes massive amount of confusion, anxiety and self-inflicted suffering. We're kinda almost there but still only children of the universe. Thinking we haven't come a long way, as well as thinking we're all that, causes such anxiety.

post #829 of 886

Closer to the actual thread topic, Obama really is uniting the country: Democrats appear to be switching parties in droves.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #830 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Closer to the actual thread topic, Obama really is uniting the country: Democrats appear to be switching parties in droves.

 

Obstructionists!

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 #831 of 886

Seriously? Nobody wants to touch the Walker win tonight?

 

I don't know that it changes the Federal dynamic in and of itself, but Obama clearly bailed on the most important political union fights in decades.

 

His union backers probably have no choice but to help him, but they will be extremely grumpy about it.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #832 of 886

I am afraid that Obama is in real trouble with this creep winning in Wisconsin today. I hope the unions back up Obama 100% in this election.
 

post #833 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Seriously? Nobody wants to touch the Walker win tonight?

 

I don't know that it changes the Federal dynamic in and of itself, but Obama clearly bailed on the most important political union fights in decades.

 

His union backers probably have no choice but to help him, but they will be extremely grumpy about it.

 

I didn't have a chance earlier.  I think that it shows a few things, most notably the decrease in power of labor unions.  I also think it shows that: 

 

  • People don't necessarily think a recall is justified over policy differences
  • People like when politicians do what they say
  • There will be a serious enthusiasm gap for Obama in November
  • Wisconsin might well be in play for November. 

 

The real question is whether Wisconsin is a microcosm of the national political mood.  To a certain extent, I think it is.  Wisconsin is a moderate state, with both rural conservative voters, suburban moderates/swing voters and urban liberal voters (see: Madison).    I consider it slightly to the left of my state (PA).  The fact that Walker won by a 7 point margin despite a massive union mobilization speaks volumes.  What we're seeing right now nationally is:  

 

  • Obama holding a lead but losing some ground in blue states
  • Obama even or marginally ahead in many swing states, but losing ground amongst core voting blocks.  In others, like Florida, he's behind.  
  • Obama losing ground rapidly in red states he won last time (North Carolina, Virginia, etc).  
  • Obama getting clobbered in traditionally red states.  

 

 

The reason is that I just don't think people buy what the man is selling.  The economy stinks and we're spending over a trillion dollars more than we take in.  Those are the facts.  At a certain point, people don't care whose fault you say it is, or what your excuses are, or that things could be worse.  They hold you responsible.  And that's what seems to be happening.  

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I am afraid that Obama is in real trouble with this creep winning in Wisconsin today. I hope the unions back up Obama 100% in this election.
 

 

The creep?  Tell me, why is he a creep?  He limited collective bargaining rights for public sector unions because they were bankrupting the state.  Did you know, for example, that until last year Wisconsin teachers did not contribute to their pensions or medical care?  As a teacher in a union myself, that's nuts.  I contribute a mandatory 8.5% to my pension.  I contribute to my medical insurance.  Walker proposed public employees (other than police and fireman) cannot bargain for wages and benefits, only working conditions, etc.  He proposed they pay not 10%...not 8.5%...but 5.8% of their pensions.  He proposed they pay not 20% of their medical benefits (the average for private sector workers), but 12.8%.  So go ahead...tell me how this makes him a creep.

 

Secondly:  The unions will support Obama.  But they are not going to be very happy about his lackluster support of the recall.  A Twitter endorsement?  How would you feel?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #834 of 886

The Republicans have the same sob story over and over blaming Obama on almost everything he did.They have no concrete plan to really fix the economy and now Romney wants to purpose let the Bush tax cuts hang in there for the rich and forgot about the middle class and poor.I never heard them once introducing any type of infrastructure program to start jobs rolling once again.Only if it is for the benefits and brings money in their pockets.Obama has faults but at least he is trying.
 

post #835 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

The Republicans have the same sob story over and over blaming Obama on almost everything he did.They have no concrete plan to really fix the economy and now Romney wants to purpose let the Bush tax cuts hang in there for the rich and forgot about the middle class and poor.I never heard them once introducing any type of infrastructure program to start jobs rolling once again.Only if it is for the benefits and brings money in their pockets.Obama has faults but at least he is trying.
 

 

1.  Obama has been wrong on almost everything he's done.  We've seen the proof.  

 

2.  Obama has no concrete plan...for anything, apparently. 

 

3.  Bill Clinton, as well as former Obama economist Larry Summers both say that we should extend the Bush tax cuts.  And no, not just for the rich.  You just made that up.

 

4.  Infrastructure programs do not "start jobs rolling again."  We've seen the proof of that, too.  A growing economy starts jobs rolling again.  

 

5.  Obama has tried and failed, and is now proposing more of the same.  Where is OBAMA'S plan?  Isn't he the President?  Oh, I forgot...he's not interested in actually governing.  

 

 

What you cannot understand, marv, is that Presidents get reelected by making a compelling case for their reelection.  In other words, they review their successes and then tell people what they want to do next.  The ones that don't do this well lose.  Bush 43 did it, and won despite growing anti-war sentiment.  He made his case.  Some disagreed, but they at least knew what his case was.  Clinton did it after having taken credit for a rebounding economy.  Bush 41 lost in part because he presented no vision of what he wanted to accomplish in his second term.  Reagan presented a clear vision and ran on his past accomplishments.  Jimmy Carter lost because he had a terrible record (like Obama) and didn't present a positive vision.  

 

Obama has not made any case for his reelection whatsoever.  His healthcare law is deeply unpopular and about to be struck down by the court.  The economy sucks.  The deficit has not been cut in half as he promised, but exploded by 200%.   The only accomplishment he can really point to is killing bin Laden, a hand that he clearly overplayed with the public.  Of course, there is always the "it would have been worse without me" argument, but no one really listens to that.  Face it...the man is toast. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #836 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I am afraid that Obama is in real trouble with this creep winning in Wisconsin today. I hope the unions back up Obama 100% in this election.
 

 

 

Yea Obama has been so great for the Unions I'm sure they are ready to spend their money on an election for him that he has a good chance of losing.

post #837 of 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

The Republicans have the same sob story over and over blaming Obama on almost everything he did.They have no concrete plan to really fix the economy and now Romney wants to purpose let the Bush tax cuts hang in there for the rich and forgot about the middle class and poor.I never heard them once introducing any type of infrastructure program to start jobs rolling once again.Only if it is for the benefits and brings money in their pockets.Obama has faults but at least he is trying.
 

 

Plans like what? Wasting trillions on bogus stimulus that was little more than a government funded payout to his supporters? Plans like creating more regulations and then claiming the compliance is job creation? Plans like shutting down coal plants and driving up the cost of electricity? Plans like shutting down drilling and then claiming past efforts to increase drilling as his own success. Or maybe killing a pipeline from our friends oil fields to our country to move oil that will be produced and burned anyway.

 

No plan sounds fucking great to me!

post #838 of 886

Obama:  Private sector doing "fine."  Public sector jobs are the problem.  

 

 

Here's my favorite part...edited for brevity's sake:  

 

 

 

Quote:
And so, you know, if Republicans want to be helpful..... what they should be thinking about is how do we help state and local governments.......they're promoting are basically the kinds of policies that would add weakness to the -- to the economy, would result in further layoffs, would not provide relief in the housing market, and would result, I think most economists estimate, in lower growth and fewer jobs, not more.

 

 

 

 

lol.gif  This friggin' guy.  He's way past angry now. He's just out there making crap up.  One has to wonder if he actually believes that the public sector is the problem and that "most economists" estimate what he claims.  Is he really that delusional, or is he just a bald faced liar?  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #839 of 886

Just like Romney a liar also.
 

post #840 of 886

I do not think he will lose the election. He has good backing from Bill Clinton who people still favor as being a great president when he was in office.

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.