Weekend open thread
Bottomless vales and boundless floods,
And chasms, and caves, and Titan woods,
With forms that no man can discover
For the tears that drip all over;
Mountains toppling evermore
Into seas without a shore;
Seas that restlessly aspire,
Surging, unto skies of fire;
Lakes that endlessly outspread
Their lone waters- lone and dead,-
Their still waters- still and chilly
With the snows of the lolling lily.
What do you dream of this weekend?
October 13, 2012 - 12:45 AM
With two bad debate performances, the Obama/Biden campaign is now in serious trouble! That coupled with the Benghazi coverup, has set the stage for a Romney/Ryan victory in November.
Romney has taken the lead in many national polls and the latest battleground polls show a Romney surge is taking place in the critical swing states.
“[A] University of Colorado model, which has correctly predicted the winner of every presidential election since 1980, has Mr. Romney taking all nine swing states plus New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Maine. If this plays out, Republicans will more than run the table. It’s starting to look like Mr. Obama is behind the eight ball.”
Read more: EDITORIAL: Obama behind the eight ball – Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/12/obama-behind-the-eight-ball/#ixzz29BUUnVut
The Benghazi fowl up has traction and I predict a clear victory for Romney with at least a five point margin!
#1, Actually, JohnR, Ryan got beat like a gong. There are an equal number of polls showing Obama predicted to win. for example:
http://www.electionprojection.com/2012elections/president12.php
I predict that Americans will not be fooled and vote to go backward to the failed policies of the GOP/NFR, they will choose FORWARD motion and reelect Obama/Biden.
An editorial from the Washington Times? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Only a blind partisan would claim Ryan held his own against a withering assault by the vice-president. Advantage-Democrats.
#2 – “I predict that Americans will not be fooled and vote to go backward to the failed policies of the GOP/NFR, they will choose FORWARD motion and reelect Obama/Biden.”
Could be, E. They got fooled four years ago and I don’t think any of them got any smarter since then.
I know I am dreaming indeed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSQJ2ULuhb8
Join me?
You could be right Michael, we will have to look at the final percentages to know.
In 2008:
Barack Obama
67,066,915
52.7%
John McCain
58,421,377
45.9%
The latest RealClearPolitics average of national polls has Romney 47.3% to Obama 46% and Romney is gaining momentum.
TV debates are all about perception and nothing about substance. Biden’s rude behavior turned off women and independents and Obama was sleepwalking!
The Benghazi fowl up is exploding and Obama is being dragged down by the perception of a coverup from the WH when the truth was known within hours of the terrorist attack.
Obama peaked too early! Mighty Mo is now with Romney/Ryan!
#4, “could be”… but wasn’t the case. Americans voted for who they thought could better guide the nation, and the Electoral College followed their lead, casting 365 votes to McCain’s 173. The EC will be tighter this year, for sure, but in the end Americans will again vote Obama. Doesn’t have anything to do with “how smart” Americans are; if it did, we would all vote for someone other than one of the two major party candidates. It has to do with who we believe will better represent our core values, and more to the point, these days, we vote against The Other Guy. kinda sad, but that’s were we are.
#8 “It has to do with who we believe will better represent our core values…”
That was not what the ’08 election was all about!
That election came down to two things:
1. The electorate was ready for a change.
2. Affirmative action. If Obama had been white, Hillary Clinton would be president. The electorate was caught up with the historic event of electing the first black president.
This time, reason #1 above is in play, reason #2 is not.
The electorate is center-right, Obama is far left. He does not represent our core values, if he did he would be ahead in the polls by a significant margin.
This November the election will turn on:
1. The electorate is ready for a change.
2. It’s the economy stupid!
Obama loses, Romney wins!
The Romney campaign is all smoke and mirrors, Biden was right to laugh. We should all be laughing, corporate media is being true to it’s masters by lending credence to this farce. Perhaps John R. would be so kind as to give us this weeks Mega Millions numbers while he is busy predicting the future.
#9, wow, really? “If Obama had been white, Hillary Clinton would be president” That statement is so rift with deep-seated institutionalized racism that it’s sociologically disturbing. The fact that you apparently believe it enough to reprint it is indicative of the serious problems that face our nation.
The electorate is ready for change, just not the kind Romney is offering. Therefore, the only real “choice” is Obama. If Romney wins (which he won’t) it will be middle class Americans who lose and the elite aristocracy that wins. History shows that when you stratify wealth as Romney wants to continue to do, a nation winds up with brutal, destructive revolution (France, Russia…) We are better than that.
The Obama administration’s cover up of the Benghazi terrorist attack on the anniversary of 9/11 and the murder of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans comes down to this:
When asked by a reporter about the administration’s initial, and since retracted, explanation linking the violence to protests over an anti-Muslim video circulating on the Internet, one unnamed intelligence official said, “That is a question that you would have to ask others. That was not our conclusion.”
In Thursday’s debate Biden contradicted the testimony before Congress on the previous day by State Department officials and blamed “the intelligence community” for not informing the White House of the US Libyan Embassy’s concern about the increased al-Qaeda linked terrorist threat and requests for more security and the falsehood that this had been a “spontaneous” attack.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443749204578052602951971998.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
True to form, the Obama administration has a habit of blaming others! Are we to conclude that there was no communication between State and the White House during and immediately following the attack?
Now that the Obama/Biden campaign has blamed the State Department for the Benghazi foul up, look for more “whistle-blower” career intelligence officials to come forward to set the record straight.
Benghazi-gate is not going away!
Here is what obama supporters do.
“A Wisconsin school bus driver has been fired after reportedly telling a 12-year-old boy he should have been aborted because his family supports Mitt Romney”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/11/wisconsin-school-bus-driv_n_1958877.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012
#11 – “That statement is so rift with deep-seated institutionalized racism that it’s sociologically disturbing.”
I disagree…it’s not a racist comment at all. Many people voted for Obama because of his race. The honest ones even admit it.
11, 14 – A white male candidate with Obama’s qualifications and experience (or more precisely, lack of either) would have never made it to the primary in ’08…much less to the general election.
Anyone who thinks a white male Obama would have beaten Hillary Clinton, truly has their head in the sand, IMO.
If that statement makes me a “racist” in the eyes of libs, then so be it. The race card has been played so much since Obama came on the political scene, it really can’t be taken seriously anymore. Especially when applied with the reasoning exhibited here.
Obama’s race played a significant part in his victory. That is a fact, not racism.
Do you have any evidence that “Many people voted for Obama because of his race”? You have said it often, but you have never proved it. That alone makes the statements, his and yours, racist at the core.
If that was the case, why the hell would Obama lose this time? Those same people will not vote for him because of his race this time? That is not even credible.
There is in fact, some research to show that racial animus cost Obama votes in 2008 and might cause his loss this time. Many people are happy to mention his race among their reasons they don’t like or support him. It is in the epithets, protest posters, comments and stupid things like “If Obama had been white, Hillary Clinton would be president”.
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~sstephen/papers/RacialAnimusAndVotingSethStephensDavidowitz.pdf
“”We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out.”
Karl Rove
John R. and the Republicans, still creating reality.
#14, that is not what he said. Go back and read his post. And, be careful what “logic” you might try to employ. If you want to claim people voted for him because of his race, then it must also be true that people voted against him because of his race…which indeed makes them racist.
#16 – Why does someone saying people voted for Obama because he’s black make it a racist statement, Sandi?
It’s true and you know it…people DID vote for him because of his race. That’s not a racist comment at all…it’s reality.
I know you don’t like to see facts that go against your beliefs, but spend some time on Google…you’ll see I’m right.
And people have already said they will vote for him again…because he’s black.
So tell me…who’s the racist?
When Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., Chairman of the Black Congressional Caucus, was asked about record high unemployment in the black community, he replied:
“If [former President] Bill Clinton had been in the White House and had failed to address this problem, we probably would be marching on the White House…”
Meaning a black president gets a pass. The same sentiment goes for many white liberals as well!
Face it, in the 2008 election there was a whole lot of liberals and independents that placed electing America’s first black president above experience and qualifications.
#18 – I have no doubt that people voted against Obama because of his race and will do so again. And yes, that’s racist.
And I agree with his comment about Obama being where he is because he’s black. People wanting a black president voted for him because he’s black.
You think that’s a racist comment, and to be honest with you, I really don’t care.
#19, claiming the only reason he won is because he is Black is an inherently racist attitude. Of course some people voted for him because he’s Black, just as some voted against him because he’s Black (which is racist). That’s not the issue. To insinuate he would have lost if he had been Caucasian is racist.
Now, the irony: not too long ago, the GOP/NFR talking heads tried to claim he isn’t actually Black. Now, they say only because he’s Black did he win. You just can’t have it both ways.
#18 “#14, that is not what he said. Go back and read his post. And, be careful what “logic” you might try to employ. If you want to claim people voted for him because of his race, then it must also be true that people voted against him because of his race…which indeed makes them racist.”
Let’s examine your “logic”. Does the former (voting for) make “them” racist?
I detect the odor of double-standard. The former is progressive & enlightened, the latter racist. Same people, same candidate.
Perhaps the manifest factor is his 4 year record.
Heading into Tuesday’s debate, the advantage is with Romney.
Obama, even with a masterful performance, cannot cement a win. Romney can. Break even helps Romney.
I don’t see how Obama can score a decisive debate victory. Same issues, same record, same men. Plus the Libya fiasco. In addition to these realities, Romney is too smart to be sand-bagged by Obama.
This is one of the problems with the society. The rampant blind partisanship causes people to refuse to accept reality. Yet again, the politically sensitive leap to the accusations of racism when faced with a reality that is unpleasant to them. Not voting for Obama for no reason other than his race is demonstrative of racism on the part of the voter. Similarly, voting for Obama simply because of his race is also demonstrative of racism on the part of the voter.
Now to argue that there are not people who voted in a certain way because of race is to simply stick one’s head in the sand and deny reality. So yes, I am saying that some black people did vote for Obama because he is black. However, recognizing that people do this and stating the same is not a racist statement.
“I don’t see how Obama can score a decisive debate victory.”,/em>
Watch and learn. The only time Obama loses is when he wants to.
#22 – “To insinuate he would have lost if he had been Caucasian is racist.”
No, it’s not…and I feel sorry for you to have to throw the race card.
I’m not insinuating anything…it’s called an opinion.
If Obama had been white, he would have been just another candidate running against Hillary. Compared to her, his lack of experience would have killed him. But because he’s black, that made him special to some voters and they voted for him because of it.
WFIR has a promo that features a woman saying she’s a minority and therefor ALWAYS votes for the minority candidate.
Tell me again how I’M the racist…
Maybe some of YOU need to read and comprehend better, not me. I did not, and have never said no one voted for Obama because of his race. But where is the evidence that “Many people voted for Obama because of his race”?
Even saying people voted for him to “make history”, is also not remotely proof of racism. It was not “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race” nor was it “racial prejudice or discrimination“. You “might” stretch to call it wrong to want to “make history” and by that sense, will the first woman to be elected be “sexist”?
IMO, to say “many” people voted for Obama “because of his race” is to admit you believe his race should have been a hindrance for him, not a plus. How is that not at least as racist as claiming they were?
And why would the deliberately conservative WFIR have such a promo in the first place? To play to the racists who see her voting for people of her race as racist. Are you racist if you ALWAYS vote for the white person? What about women who say they ALWAYS vote for a woman? IDC what you think you are saying, it comes across as racist to say “Many people voted for Obama because of his race” or “If Obama had been white, Hillary Clinton would be president”.
Art, are you actually saying Obama wanted to tank that first debate as badly as he did?
#27, dude, if you can’t see it, then there’s no point in trying to explain it to you because you don’t want to understand it. The sociology is there, but you are blind to it. I could tell you again how the statement you made is racist (never said YOU were a racist), but you are incapable of understanding it. So, good evening.
“they voted for him because of it.
They voted for him because he wasn’t Bush.
#30 – No, E…I’M not the one who can’t see it. Being a Lib, YOU want to see racism where it doesn’t exist. Any comment concerning Obama is automatically racist in your world…and that’s a pathetic way to live.
“Incapable of understanding it”? Now you sound like Sandi.
“Art, are you actually saying Obama wanted to tank that first debate as badly as he did?”
I don’t think he tanked, Chuck. If shouting your lies over the top of your opponent (after having just flip-flopped on every major position you’ve campaigned on) constitutes a “win” then we’re down the rabbit-hole. I don’t pretend to know what Obama is thinking, but I’d be willing to bet Romney is in for a rough ride come Tuesday. We’ll see.
#28 – “IMO, to say “many” people voted for Obama “because of his race” is to admit you believe his race should have been a hindrance for him, not a plus.”
I’m not admitting anything, Sandi, merely voicing an opinion.
Any yes, Obama’s race was a plus for him. Like I said, had he been white, with the record he had, he wouldn’t have stood a chance against Hillary.
Well once again Sandi, the logic behind your opinion is a non-sequitur. Just because someone recognizes that some people voted for Obama because of race doesn’t mean the person recognizing that reality thinks his race should have been held against him. That is an illogical leap intended to malign the person making the statement without actually refuting the statement.
You see the race/gender effect time and again in lower level campaigns. This (2008 and 2012) is just the first time it has been demonstrated at the presidential level. If you don’t think it’s true, why were people so ready to accept that McCain was courting the female vote by picking a female VP. Why did everyone think Romney should have picked Rubio to help him with Hispanics? The simple fact of reality is, there is a strong trend toward voting along one’s own ethnic and gender lines. Rather than demanding proof of some non-existent study proving that, why don’t you provide some proof that things like race and gender don’t affect voter behavior.
And again, recognizing that these effects exist, does not make you a racist. It makes you a realist.
If all of that was true, Hillary would have been the Democratic nominee. She too would have “made history”, hell twice, both as the first woman president and the first first lady to then become President. It simply holds no water.
” If shouting your lies over the top of your opponent (after having just flip-flopped on every major position you’ve campaigned on) constitutes a “win” then we’re down the rabbit-hole.”
Art, are you talking about the presidential debate or the VP debate? I ask because Romney/Obama I was characterized by remarkably polite behavior from both candidates. If you are talking about one person shouting over another, you must be talking about Biden.
If he didn’t tank it, then what was your earlier post about Obama only losing when he wants to lose? Was that just bravado? ‘Cause if you think Obama won that first one, we really are down the rabbit hole.
E William, you think the electorate will elect not to go back to the failed policies of the GOP and instead choose to stay with the failed policies of Obama. Is that right?
Obama is not doing well among white registered voters of both genders.
White registered voters make up 39% of the electorate, the largest single segment of voters. No presidential candidate in a two way race has ever won with less than 40% of the white vote.
A Gallup poll of registered voters in May found Romney leads Obama among white voters of both genders. Among white men, Romney leads by 27 points, 59% to 32%. Among white women, he leads by nine points, 50% to 41%.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/154568/Tight-Race-Obama-Romney-Core-Support-Groups.aspx
Even if in ’12 Obama were to increase his black and Hispanic voter turnout over that of ’08, he will still lose unless he improves his current white voter support.
Chuck, you are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
Here’s a little something for you and John R. to chew on. See you Tuesday.
“IMO, to say “many” people voted for Obama “because of his race” is to admit you believe his race should have been a hindrance for him, not a plus. How is that not at least as racist as claiming they were?”
This is ridiculous. In no way is it admitting such a thing.
His race should not be a hindrance. Conversely, it should not give him an unfair advantage, either. In 2008, that’s exactly what happened. People excused his lack of experience in order to elect the first black president. Affirmative action, in action at the highest level possible.
37 – True, history would have been made either way. But to liberals, “first black POTUS” was more important and historically significant than “first female POTUS”. Result: four long hard years of Obama.
“The only time Obama loses is when he wants to”
So Obama WANTED to lose to Romney in the first debate? Just when I thought I had heard all the ridiculous excuses for his disastrous debate performance…this one definitely takes the cake.
A narcissist like Obama never wants to lose. There were reports that he actually believed he won the debate. But even his cohorts in the media couldn’t cover for him this time.
Well Art, here’s a little snack for you as well.
Like me, you are also not entitled to your own facts. The idea that “every learned voter” supports Obama is just a flat out lie that libs hope they can sell to a broad enough segment of society so as to discourage voter turnout. BTW, your link isn’t really indicative of much. Show me something that shows early voting has been an accurate historical predictor of the ultimate outcome of the general election. Yes we will see Tuesday. Any word yet? Are they gonna let Obama use the teleprompter this time?
As a side note, I got yet another polling call tonight. Called me by name and asked if I was likely to vote for Obama. I decided to tell this guy the truth and told him no. He stuttered and stammered for literally 4 or 5 seconds before asking if anything he said was likely to change my mind. When I said no, he hung up. Now aside from the fact that his speechlessness was hilarious, what the hell kind of “legitimate” poll calls respondents with the idea that it is the pollsters job to change your mind? Talk about skewed results. If this one was indicative of all the polls showing favorable results for Obama, then you guys must be more worried than I thought.
“People excused his lack of experience in order to elect the first black president. “
Sorry, Other Rick, but that’s a crock. Do you have any hard facts to back up your assertion, or is this just your opinion?
45 – it’s an observation. An accurate one, I might add.
Give me some “hard facts” of Obama’s prior leadership and executive experience that uniquely qualified him for the most important leadership and executive position in the world.
Your posts only prove how much you don’t know about liberals. Why don’t you concentrate on your own party and candidate’s weakness? Romney is a pitiful excuse for a leader and there is no good reason to replace Obama with Romney. That remains your problem, and it will remain your problem. Yes, the failed TP/R policies that caused the recession will not be what gets us out of it. America knows this.
Why is it that the same people who “voted for Obama because he was black”, will not do so again? It “makes history” again, too. No, it holds no water. It is as ridiculous as the idea that lowering taxes will fix the economy. There is no reason to vote for Romney. None.
Do you have some “hard facts” that prior leadership and executive experience uniquely qualify anyone for the most important leadership and executive position in the world? I know that is always the right wing line, but where is this manual that proves it? Being a business person or even a governor, is world’s away from what the Presidency is. You know this.
This is just exactly like the argument the right wing uses when their candidate has had military experience on any level. It is suddenly a paramount qualification. Of course, it is NOT a paramount qualification if it is a Democrat with military experience on any level.
BULL!
47…”Yes, the failed TP/R policies that caused the recession will not be what gets us out of it. America knows this.”
This is really a tired lie and doesn’t fly anymore. The liberals were in charge of all spending from 2007 on. Nancy Pelosi had to approve every dollar spent. Other than Obama’s qualifications to be President, blaming George Bush for the recession is one of the biggest lies ever fed to the American people.
#47 – “Why is it that the same people who “voted for Obama because he was black”, will not do so again?”
I’m sure many people who voted for him because he’s black will do so again.
Hopefully, though, many will see that his “hope and change” hype was just that.
Face it, Sandi, Jesus Christ himself could be running against Obama and you’d find fault with him in order to support Obama.
48 – I did not ask for qualifications for “anyone”. I want to know what specific experience Obama had that made him head and shoulders above anyone else for the Dem nomination in 2008. What uniquely separated him from the pack, and made him more qualified than Hillary.
I know what really pushed him over the top…the very thing that you and other libs are so determined to deny.
You cannot have it both ways, either they voted for him only because he was black or they voted for him because he campaigned on “Hope and Change” which is a whole other issue. So why would those you claim only voted for him because he was black need to “see” that his “hope and change” was just “hype”. Still not holding water.
Face it, you just cannot prove your claim so you keep digging.
I have never denied that not being a Clinton pushed him over the top. It is the TP/R’s who are pretending she was so formidable and preferable. I have never done so.
Is it truly possible that there are people so uninformed as to claim that what crashed the economy was the “spending from 2007 on”? Seriously? You actually believe that when someone says “the failed TP/R policies that caused the recession” they are mistakenly referring to the “spending from 2007 on”? That is just not even logical.
Did you sleep through the dismantling of the Glass-Steagall prohibitions that allowed the financial industry to create, credit default swaps, and inflate the housing bubble? Did you grow up with mortgage loan sharks on every corner being allowed to loan to anyone drawing breath? Really? The TP/R’s complicit crime in the economic crash was their schemes directly coming out of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act coming to fruition, this act, originated the “too big to fail” institutions and their risky financial shenanigans. The GOP Congress steamrolled Clinton and the race was on. You cannot be that uninformed so obviously you are among those re-writing history and trying to pretend that only the “spending from 2007 on” was the problem. Party over nation is becoming the sad trend.
52 – Who said it was ONLY because he was black??? That was one of the deciding factors (the predominant one, IMO)…but it wasn’t the only reason. Putting words in our mouths in an effort to obfuscate the issue…yep, I’m way too familiar with this tactic.
The reason why Obama will not see the turnout he got in ’08 is simple!
It’s the economy stupid!
The average person does not feel that their lives have improved over the last four years and on many fronts such as average household income, food prices, gasoline, and salary increases, things are worse than four years ago.
Obama ran on fixing the worst economy since the Great Depression. He didn’t deliver.
Obama may change his style and be more animated and more aggressive in the upcoming debates, but he can’t change his record. The only thing Obama has to offer is four more years of the same failed policies. He has offered no new ideas.
The tide has turned and the momentum is with Romney/Ryan!
#52 – I have nothing to prove, Sandi. People voted for Obama because he was black. Many people have come for and said so and also said they will do it again.
I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if it was the reason YOU voted for him. Of course, you’d never admit it even if it were true.
If the average person is dumb enough to believe the President is the one who can “improve their lives” and fix 30+ years of bad decisions, bad legislation and bad Congressional leaders, they deserve Romney to prove them wrong.
I have always maintained that I voted for Obama in the Primary because he was not Clinton. I voted for him in 2008 because he was a better candidate with a better plan than McCain and he remains the better candidate with the better plan in 2012 so that is why I am voting for him again. Not that we have ever had a choice before, but I do not vote based on race or gender. I “have nothing to prove” because I am not the one making the stupid allegations that “Many people voted for Obama because of his race” or “If Obama had been white, Hillary Clinton would be president”.
Nothing bad about you would surprise me either Michael, what has that got to do with you proving what you said?
#58 – “58.If the average person is dumb enough to believe the President is the one who can “improve their lives” and fix 30+ years of bad decisions, bad legislation and bad Congressional leaders, they deserve Romney to prove them wrong.”
Says someone who voted for Obama because of all his hope and change garbage.
Oh, the irony…
It was not “garbage”. Things ARE changing and things ARE getting better. Not ALL things and certainly not fast, but it is a lie to say there has been no change and no improvement.
58 – I seem to recall plenty of people believing that Barack Obama was “the one” four years ago.
He was going to be the answer to all their problems. “I won’t have to worry about my mortgage…I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. Obama’s going to take care of it”.
They were, indeed, proven wrong. As was an Obama supporter that I knew, who was working 3 jobs at that time, was proudly supporting Obama and was absolutely convinced they would not have to work all those jobs once he got into office.
Turns out, this person was partially correct – two of the jobs were eliminated during Obama’s rotten economy.
“You cannot have it both ways, either they voted for him only because he was black or they voted for him because he campaigned on “Hope and Change” which is a whole other issue. So why would those you claim only voted for him because he was black need to “see” that his “hope and change” was just “hype”. Still not holding water.
Face it, you just cannot prove your claim so you keep digging.”
Sandi, why don’t you prove he’s wrong instead of just assuming your right and that it’s up to everyone else to prove otherwise. If your position is so rock solid, proof should be easy to come by, right?
This isn’t 2008. Some will no doubt vote just as they did last time and will do so for the same reasons. However, if you look back at October 14th in 2008, Obama had an advantage of about 7.2 points in the RCP polls. That turned out to be about the same as the final result. Same date this year the race is a virtual dead heat, with RCP showing Romney up 1.3. That’s gotta scare the hell out of the libs.
Now I will grant that a lot can change in the next three weeks. However, there has also been a clear shift in public opinion from ’08. ‘Hope and Change’, race, novelty of a ‘Washington outsider’ – I’m not sure what has changed but it seems clear something has. You guys want to get mileage out of the whole 47% thing, but tell me, how is that different than your own position above in stating:
” If the average person is dumb enough to believe the President is the one who can “improve their lives” and fix 30+ years of bad decisions, bad legislation and bad Congressional leaders, they deserve Romney to prove them wrong.”
Interesting that you now see those who voted for ‘Hope and Change’ in ’08 as dumb for believing the President could improve their lives. I mean that is exactly what Obama promised to do and people bought that snake oil by the gallon. How come that wasn’t “dumb”?
So tell me, why no answer to #36 above? Why is it so hard to accept that blacks may have voted for Obama based on race when it seems to be non-controversial and generally accepted by both parties that candidates are perceived as courting specific demographics by picking a certain running mate?
#61 – “It was not “garbage”.”
I beg to differ. It stunk then and it smells even worse now that we’ve seen how unqualified Obama is for the job.
61..”It was not “garbage”. Things ARE changing and things ARE getting better. Not ALL things and certainly not fast, but it is a lie to say there has been no change and no improvement.”
Any small improvement is due to the effect of the 2010 elections, not Obama.
I did not make the accusation Chuck, it is not up to me to prove it. And frankly I believe the research in the link I provided DID disprove it.
My link offered: “…relative to the attitudes of the most racially tolerant area, racial animus cost Obama between 3 to 5 percentage points of the national popular vote…
…The pro-black effect was limited by African-Americans constituting only 12.6 percent of Americans and overwhelmingly supporting any Democratic candidate.
A variety of evidence suggest that few white voters swung, in the general election, for Obama due to his race.”
I am the ONLY one here who has offered any documentation to prove what I said.
JimW, can you name one small improvement that is due to the effect of the 2010 elections?
Michael, I think we have established that your nose for what “stinks” is decidedly out of whack. NOTHING about Obama’s so called “qualifications” or the lack of them is to blame for the failures of Congress to do their job or for the largest and deepest recession since The Great Depression not to have been “over by now”.
The things that you believe make Romney “qualified” do not account for his lies, flip-flops, or distortions unless that is genuinely the kind of President you desire. If Obama is so damned bad why is Romney turning into a sad parody of himself just to come even? If Obama is so damned bad why is the economy recovering and things changing for the better? NOTHING indicates any need for the lying Romney/Ryan qualifications! You have bought into their “Day 1″ that will rival God and you make fun of Obama supporters who believed him?
What you do not grasp is that we did not believe he could do it alone, we believed, because he believed in us that it could be done. We let him down more than he let us down.
“I’m asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington… I’m asking you to believe in yours.” – Barack Obama“
#66 – “…The pro-black effect was limited by African-Americans constituting only 12.6 percent of Americans and overwhelmingly supporting any Democratic candidate.”
You proved my point in your very own post, Sandi.
Oh, and please show me where I specified it was only white voters who voted for Obama because he’s black.
I’ll say it again…Obama got votes because of his race. You can’t supply one iota of evidence to prove otherwise.
To #67 (Sandi): I can think of a pretty substantial improvement due the effects of the 2010 election. The $447 billion American Jobs Act, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_jobs_act, didn’t get passed.
If it had passed, today’s “debt held by the public” would be nearly $11.8 trillion instead of $11.3 trillion: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np.
No, actually Michael, you are not saying it “again”. You are restating it from “Many…” to “got votes”, because you know you cannot prove what you said is so. And I did not prove your point, I DISPROVED your point. I have never denied that Obama got some votes based on race, no one could. Just as no one can argue McCain didn’t. But the point is mitigated by “…and overwhelmingly supporting any Democratic candidate” as historically minority voters have. What part of that are you still struggling with?
AND, if you did not mean the “white voters”, what has made ANY minority who voted for Obama not apt to do the same this time? Keep digging.
JimW thanks you Brian. Is that the same kind of “pretty substantial improvement” that Romney’s “trust me” tax cuts will be?
Brian’s valiant effort at claiming what did not happen (and his concise admission that the TP/R’s are complicit in our problems) as an “improvement” notwithstanding JimW, you are still up:
Will you name one small improvement that is due to the effect of the 2010 elections?
Ok Boys….I think it’s time you guys backed off of Sandi just a little. Not that she needs anyone assisting her in her opinions but you guys have gotten a little more dilusional than normal.
First off, I don’t believe that I’ve seen or heard anyone say that they voted for Obama just for the pure sake of the color of his skin. That’s not to say that it didnt happen that way…much the same way that there is an element of Caucasian society that will only vote for another Caucasian. If that comes as a surprise to anyone, I’d love to know what rock you’ve been living under since the Civil War.
As for better or worse off than we were as of Jan 21, 2009…I can only answer that on a personal basis. But after looking at my financial condition, the value of my home (relative to when I purchased it) and the over all quality of life that I was enjoying…I have to say that I am personally better off now.
People voted for Obama as an “anyone except a Republican” in 08. The general population was tired of war mongering and the constants state of fear that the then administration kept us in. The fact that the financial meltdown had already begun made it even more appealing to vote for someone other than a republican.
You might take a history lesson and take a look at what happened in 1932 when Hoover was so sounding lay thrashed at the polls. You are right about one thing…it is the Economy then and now.
My problem with Romney is that he doesn’t connect with my background. My father was a blue collar worker who in his last full year of working made slightly more than $25k. Now granted…in 1979, that probably was below the middle quintile. I’m pretty sure George Romney’s pay was a bit higher and consequently, Mitt lived in a bit of a guilded cage as a result. I seriously doubt he knows what it’s like to get up at 4:45 am to milk cows or to sling bails of hey in 100 degree weather or to see a hail storm obliterate a tobacco crop in 5 minutes.
Both parties have a hard time speaking to people of modest means and I’m not sure that they really give a tinkers damn about them; however, I see a little better connection from the democrats than I do from the republicans.
“…blaming George Bush for the recession is one of the biggest lies ever fed to the American people.”
Surely you jest…
#73 – How soon can we expect you to tell Sandi, to back off on her insults to others, Will?
JimW, it is not even in the top 100!
Thanks Will, sometimes I do feel like I am hanging wallpaper over bricks.
BTW Brian and 89Hoo, have you read his book?
http://mikelofgren.net/articles.html
http://mikelofgren.net/
What this nation needs is more people like this and a few less politicians we choose to blindly follow. Even being a “yellow-dog” Democrat, I have to admit I have merely been voting for the lesser of two evils since 1980. That so many cannot see that truth (or maybe they can only not admit it?) should concern us all. I gave up on changing my party and the only people trying to change the Republican party are people making it worse.
I fear for this nation, regardless of the election results. I don’t think the inmates are capable of changing the asylum.
Christina, Christian, Luanne…maybe if the media did more commentaries on
The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted
The Betrayal of the American Dream
It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism
The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track
you could light the fire that needs to burn this house down and allow the nation to heal. You should at least think about it IMO.
Michael…
I’ve read Sandi’s posts on this blog for well over three years now. She is forceful, strong-willed and like me, very opinionated. That being said, Sandi is very capable of giving as good as she gets. I don’t see her doling out the first low blows, but, she’s not afraid to stand toe to toe with you or anyone else who delivers first.
You might be well served to remember this…when you’re pointing a finger at someone else, there are three pointing right back at you. Think about it.