or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Those Crazy Obama Supporters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Those Crazy Obama Supporters

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 

I've decided to start a thread because according to some, those who did not support the reelection of President Obama are divorced from reality. Also if anyone suggests that Obama supporters have racist motives in their voting, expect something in return for their vote, or have a belief that President Obama won't work in a bipartisan and outreaching manner, they are just again, divorced from reality.

 

Sadly there are many examples that show those suggestions about Obama supports are completely and entirely true and this is where said examples can go.

 

First we have Jesse Jackson, who has a laundry list of demands that he said ought to be met since the votes turned out. He even notes they have the power, and by power he means the vote and what do they need to get for having that power, access to the real power. Money, transportation, resources, jobs, all that needs to come to his supporters because they have the "real power" aka the vote.

 

This DailyKos diarist notes that the presidency is a "de facto dictatorship" and wants Obama to grab and use his power. He wants bankers locked up. He wants debt defaulted on, pardon me "forgiven."  He declares that a dictator can take this divided nation and "make it so" and by that I guess he means end opposition in some yet to be explained manner that does involve a lot of troops coming home and patrolling here.

 

Want to know what the ten poorest American cities have in common? Obama supporters for one!

"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 #2 of 11

What legal authority does Obama have to cancel debt? How is that fair to those of us that didn't get some over-sized loan for an over-sized house?

 

I guess dictatorship is good so long as it's a democrat.

post #3 of 11
Thread Starter 

Missouri Audits!

 

Schweich pointed to recent reports of benefits being accessed from casinos, gentlemen’s clubs and locations around the world. He says the assistance programs are not intended to finance recipients’ entertainment or to pay for their vacations.


Edited by trumptman - 11/12/12 at 6:30pm

"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 #4 of 11

NO, TRUMPY.

 

You have got it so, so, so, infuriatingly wrong.

 

There is no-one on this board who is saying that supporting Romney means you are divorced from reality.

 

There is no-one on this board who is saying if you didn't support Obama you are divorced from reality.

 

Objectively, you could make the case for a CEO of a VC to be the 'CEO' of the US because he has relevant experience in global capital and a firm nerve in a board-level negotiation (or international summit).

 

They are saying, I am saying, that many supporters of the GOP would not be able to make a comparable comment about Obama because they are divorced from reality and think he is a socialist / communist / Muslim / Kenyan / dictator / class-warrior.

 

Many supporters of the GOP didn't think Obama would win, again because they are divorced from reality. The polls were skewed (they weren't — SDW I think is totally lost here); how could anyone in the US not share their perspective on the appalling, terrible, criminal, constitution-killing, vote-buying violent activist Obama?

 

The GOP has (had) senatorial candidates who believe that if a woman is forcibly raped then the body rejects the pregnancy. Because they are divorced from reality.

 

The GOP has plenty of people in it who disbelieve evolution or anthropogenic climate change, because they are capable of substituting their faith in a position for the mountains of evidence in their favour.

 

NOT "supporting Romney."

post #5 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harald II View Post

NO, TRUMPY.

 

You have got it so, so, so, infuriatingly wrong.

 

There is no-one on this board who is saying that supporting Romney means you are divorced from reality.

 

There is no-one on this board who is saying if you didn't support Obama you are divorced from reality.

 

Objectively, you could make the case for a CEO of a VC to be the 'CEO' of the US because he has relevant experience in global capital and a firm nerve in a board-level negotiation (or international summit).

 

OK.

 

 

 

 

They are saying, I am saying, that many supporters of the GOP would not be able to make a comparable comment about Obama because they are divorced from reality and think he is a socialist / communist / Muslim / Kenyan / dictator / class-warrior.

 

There are some who think those things or versions of them.  I, for one, think he is a quasi-socialist, so to speak.  He's not a communist, though one of his mentors was a card carrying member of the party.  He was, in fact, a Muslim at one point--though I highly doubt he is now.  He allowed himself to be labeled "Kenyan born" for many years, though the evidence seems sufficient to prove he was born here.  He's not a dictator, but he has expanded the powers of the office in many areas, and expanded the federal government, thereby limiting freedom.  He is most certainly a class warrior.  Simply listen to his rhetoric.  He's always been a class and even race warrior in a sense.  

 

 

 


 

Many supporters of the GOP didn't think Obama would win, again because they are divorced from reality. The polls were skewed (they weren't — SDW I think is totally lost here); how could anyone in the US not share their perspective on the appalling, terrible, criminal, constitution-killing, vote-buying violent activist Obama?

 

 

They were skewed, Hands.  No one believed Obama would get the kind of black and latino turnout he did..not even the pollsters using D+11 samples.  What are you arguing...that somehow they had a crystal ball?  I told you...I believed the polls were inaccurate because I thought turnout would resemble 2004 or 2010.  It did not.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:
The GOP has (had) senatorial candidates who believe that if a woman is forcibly raped then the body rejects the pregnancy. Because they are divorced from reality.

 

I agree we need to get rid of these people.  They are not always the horrible people they are portrayed to be, but they are horrible candidates in the least.  

 

 

 

Quote:
The GOP has plenty of people in it who disbelieve evolution or anthropogenic climate change, because they are capable of substituting their faith in a position for the mountains of evidence in their favour.

 

Most people believe in evolution, at least to an extent.  That said, there are holds in evolutionary theory.  As for AGW, that is far from proven.  Saying that skeptics of it are divorced from reality is typical of your side of the aisle.  It's Al Gore-ification of science, and it's as bad as those who only watch one news source.  And that's it Hands...you accuse others of being divorced from reality and living in a bubble, when on the issue of AGW (and I'd argue, taxing and spending), you yourself clearly are in one.   

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 #6 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harald II View Post

NO, TRUMPY.

 

You have got it so, so, so, infuriatingly wrong.

 

The GOP has (had) senatorial candidates who believe that if a woman is forcibly raped then the body rejects the pregnancy. Because they are divorced from reality.

 

See Harald, here's where you've got it wrong. When the GOP has candidates like you mention, they don't get elected. When the Democrats run, say the son of a civil rights activist who is under investigation for fraud related to campaign funds, who has checked into "rehab" to deal with the claim that he only spent said funds because he is bipolar AND when the only form of campaigning he can do is a single robo-call to his constituents, you know what Democrats do?

 

They don't tell him to get out of the race. They don't tell him he is nuts. They don't withdraw fundraising cash or party support from him.

 

The reelect him.

 

Every party can have some nut jobs file to run for a race. The difference is the Democrats elect and keep reelecting them. That is what you call divorced from reality. Just like how they reelected a president who has borrowed more than $5 trillion dollars, has a record four consecutive trillion dollar plus budgets, has put more people on disability than have found jobs and they just pull the level for him again.

 

Republicans aren't divorced from reality because they didn't want to believe that people living like that would go back to the hot stove, touch it again and burn themselves. They are in reality because who would be crazy enough to go for round two of that?

 

Really you guys are celebrating people being wrong on a poll predicting that they would stop engaging in harmful behavior to themselves.

 

Obama is the first modern president to be reelected with a reduced majority. He shed almost 8 million supporters. That is reality.

"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 #7 of 11

SDW:

 

You've just demonstrated you don't understand what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. Holes in the theory of evolution. No shit.

 

You've demonstrated the mountains of evidence for anthropogenic climate change (just cut out the 'AGW' shit, it makes Noam Chomsky cry) aren't enough to trump faith, proving the fact I'm trying to make. I'm not going to try and convince you because there is nothing that would convince you; maybe the GOP changing its position would work. This isn't a controversial subject apart from on the lunatic fringe. Sorry. In the same way the polls weren't skewed. Delusion.

 

You've horrified me with your comments about those candidates. Pretty disgusting.

 

The polls weren't skewed. The result was exactly as predicted by anyone using aggregated data. The fact you're able to still persist in this, despite the black-and-white evidence is a pretty impressive piece of self-delusion.

post #8 of 11

Did freedom win?

 

 

Quote:
Sadly, President Obama's swooning fans don't want to tame politicians. They don't even seem to think much about freedom. We attended Obama's victory party in Chicago (we go so you don't have to) and asked his supporters what Obama's reelection means for freedom. People reacted as if they didn't understand the question.
 
"Freedom?" one asked.
 
"Um, yes, I have no idea," said another.
 
It's not on their radar, and that's upsetting. Some wouldn't know freedom if they fell over it. To many, "freedom" means getting the government to force women's employers to pay for birth control.
 
Sorry, that's not freedom. That's force.
 
Obama's supporters seem to think it's enough to put this extraordinary man in office. After that, he will take care of everything. Spare us the details.
 
"Obama is a classic example of this cult of the presidency," said David Boaz of the Cato Institute. "But the idea that any politician can just fix the problems in society—that there's some magic there—that doesn't start with Obama. It goes a long way back."
 
Leader-worship is unbecoming a free people. But are we a free people today? I mean psychologically. Years of government impositions change people. At Obama's celebration, people didn't mention freedom, but they sure mentioned handouts, like taxpayer-financed higher education. It's as if their attitude is: What can government give me? They don't realize that "free stuff" only seems free because the real cost is hidden.

 

 

 

Quote:
My hope for now: gridlock. People say they like bipartisanship, but bipartisanship usually means politicians conspire to take more of our money and freedom. Bipartisanship gave us the Department of Homeland Security, TSA, PATRIOT Act, Import-Export Bank, war on drug users, ethanol subsides, TARP, No Child Left Behind, foreign wars and an ever-rising debt. When Democrats and Republicans come together, they put us deeper in debt.
 
Let's have some gridlock!

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 #9 of 11

Crazy? Maybe. Ignorant? Possibly? Deceptive? Possibly.

 

Here DENNIS VAN ROEKEL, National Education Association says:

 

 

Quote:

Well, I brought the message that, number one, it's important that we let the Bush tax cuts disappear for the wealthiest 2 percent.

 

As we're looking for a $1.2 trillion solution, $829 billion takes us a long way there.

 

But Mr. Van Roekel has mixed some numbers up.

 

  • The current average annual deficit is around $1.2T. This is the solution we can presume Mr. Van Roekel is speaking of.
  • Problem is that the $829B Mr. Van Roekel is speaking of is the estimated amount of tax revenue that would come from raising taxes on those earning more than $250,000/year...over TEN years...or about $83B per year or about 7% of the annual deficit. BTW, that estimate assumes not much of a slow down in economic growth or activity. It could be lower in reality given the CBO's bias toward "static scoring" or "static analysis."

 

Whether this is deliberate or from ignorance we don't know.

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 #10 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Did freedom win?

 

 

Quote:
Sadly, President Obama's swooning fans don't want to tame politicians. They don't even seem to think much about freedom. We attended Obama's victory party in Chicago (we go so you don't have to) and asked his supporters what Obama's reelection means for freedom. People reacted as if they didn't understand the question.
 
"Freedom?" one asked.
 
"Um, yes, I have no idea," said another.
 
It's not on their radar, and that's upsetting. Some wouldn't know freedom if they fell over it. To many, "freedom" means getting the government to force women's employers to pay for birth control.
 
Sorry, that's not freedom. That's force.
 
Obama's supporters seem to think it's enough to put this extraordinary man in office. After that, he will take care of everything. Spare us the details.
 
"Obama is a classic example of this cult of the presidency," said David Boaz of the Cato Institute. "But the idea that any politician can just fix the problems in society—that there's some magic there—that doesn't start with Obama. It goes a long way back."
 
Leader-worship is unbecoming a free people. But are we a free people today? I mean psychologically. Years of government impositions change people. At Obama's celebration, people didn't mention freedom, but they sure mentioned handouts, like taxpayer-financed higher education. It's as if their attitude is: What can government give me? They don't realize that "free stuff" only seems free because the real cost is hidden.

 

 

 

Quote:
My hope for now: gridlock. People say they like bipartisanship, but bipartisanship usually means politicians conspire to take more of our money and freedom. Bipartisanship gave us the Department of Homeland Security, TSA, PATRIOT Act, Import-Export Bank, war on drug users, ethanol subsides, TARP, No Child Left Behind, foreign wars and an ever-rising debt. When Democrats and Republicans come together, they put us deeper in debt.
 
Let's have some gridlock!

And where do you think the gridlock comes from? The Republicans won't accept anything but " Yes " to what ever they want. That's stupid. Obama has tried to compromise. They just want it all their way or nothing. That is starting to be noticed now by the voters and if I were a Republican congressman and wanted to keep my job I'd start doing what the people want not just what the far right wants.1wink.gif

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 #11 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

And where do you think the gridlock comes from? The Republicans won't accept anything but " Yes " to what ever they want. That's stupid. Obama has tried to compromise. They just want it all their way or nothing.

 

That may well be. I don't care what the method for gridlock is, as long as we get 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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Those Crazy Obama Supporters