Obama '08?

@maporsche,

Nothing wrong with continuing to question the president and congress in what they conspire to do when it comes to spending taxpayer monies, but they'll end up doing what they want to do no matter what the citizens say or want.

The biggest weakness in our government is that we can elect them into office, but once they stamp their feet in Washington, it becomes somewhat permanent. We have found the enemy, and .....

0 Replies

Good afternoon. We have talked about the polling firm Rasmussen and their "perceived" conservative bias. I found it more than a bit eerie today when Scott Rasmussen sort of talked about that (the CAPS were my addition attempting to clarify):
"When comparing data from different firms, it is important to keep in mind that polls of LIKELY VOTERS and polls of ALL ADULTS will typically and consistently yield different results. In the case of President Obama, polls by all firms measuring ALL ADULTS typically show significantly higher approval ratings than polls of LIKELY VOTERS. Polls of REGISTERED VOTERS typically fall in the middle."

2 Replies

@realjohnboy,

rjb, Good points because we all know that even registered voters do not vote on every election. Last month's California propositions were voted by only 25% of the electorate - one the worst on record.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Which means that opponents of Prop 8 polled about 12% and they are strongly politicised and presumably all voted. Which means 82% didn't vote Prop 8 down.

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

realjohnboy wrote:

Good afternoon. We have talked about the polling firm Rasmussen and their "perceived" conservative bias. I found it more than a bit eerie today when Scott Rasmussen sort of talked about that (the CAPS were my addition attempting to clarify):
"When comparing data from different firms, it is important to keep in mind that polls of LIKELY VOTERS and polls of ALL ADULTS will typically and consistently yield different results. In the case of President Obama, polls by all firms measuring ALL ADULTS typically show significantly higher approval ratings than polls of LIKELY VOTERS. Polls of REGISTERED VOTERS typically fall in the middle."

My translation, rjb, conservative people are more politically engaged, more likely to be registered, and more likely to vote, and they are very likely much more politically informed.

1 Reply

@okie,

I think you may be correct, but please remember that the election of 2008 was more like a benediction from millions of a "rock star". Many who voted for the President knew very little about his policies and his stances. They were just impressed by this tall charsimatic rock star.

3 Replies

@sangiusto,

sangiusto wrote:

They were just impressed by this tall charismatic rock star.

Come to find out he is neither... bummer.

0 Replies

@sangiusto,

Welcome Sangiusto. Make sure your bullet proofing is in place and wade right on in.

I believe you are right that millions who voted for the charismatic 'rock star' didn't have a clue what he was all about. But in fairness, few Presidential candidates have been 'vetted' as well as Barack Obama was vetted during the campaign, mostly because he was running against a very formidable, well known, and controversial figure from his own party for so much of the campaign. So there are more than a few here who did believe that they knew what he was all about and voted for him anyway. Some remain true disciples who grovel at his feet, worship him, and essentially defend his every word or nuance or quickly forgive him as 'not being as bad as anybody else'. Others remain hopeful that he has what it takes to bring order out of the chaos.

I do wonder though, how many of the informed voters who voted for Barack Obama would do so again if they had it to do over knowing what they know now?

Or would we be discussing President Clinton?

Political cartoonist Michael Ramiriz, for instance, was quite supportive of Obama in the beginning. Here is his latest cartoon:

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mrz060509dAPR20090605031427.jpg

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Gasp! A new leader not meeting everyone's historically high expectations? I'm shocked.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Some remain true disciples who grovel at his feet, worship him, and essentially defend his every word or nuance or quickly forgive him as 'not being as bad as anybody else'.

Religious language. You never fail to use it.

1 Reply

@old europe,

Well, in the face of such religious-like devotion, its hard not to do:

In France. . .

Quote:

. . . .When dining out Saturday night at a no-star bistro, La Fontaine de Mars, the presidential party was served water, Coke and table wine to accompany foie gras, lamb and steak with shallots, and paid for meals "like any client," said owner Jacques Boudon. "It's just what they wanted."

"And I think they were very happy since they stayed three-quarters of an hour after dining," he said by telephone.

Boudon was over the moon.

The table had been reserved 10 days earlier but he only knew his guests were the Obamas that morning.

"I saw God before me," he said, "because I saw this smile that a million people have seen around the world. I saw her (Michelle) radiant. ... It's idiotic, but it's like that." . . . .
http://news.aol.com/main/politics/article/obama-in-france/515594

Just consider it payback for the many pages on threads devoted to condemning George W. Bush for his religious beliefs whether or not they pertained to anything happening at the time.

0 Replies

Does anybody know where this photo came from? How would you caption it?

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20090606/i/r657478751.jpg?

1 Reply

@sangiusto,

sangiusto wrote:

I think you may be correct, but please remember that the election of 2008 was more like a benediction from millions of a "rock star". Many who voted for the President knew very little about his policies and his stances. They were just impressed by this tall charsimatic rock star.

And isn't it all so wonderful, as the children sing for Obama, we're going to spread happiness,....obama's going to change the world....,....ugh, I think I am going to choke, sangiusto.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

sangiusto wrote:

I think you may be correct, but please remember that the election of 2008 was more like a benediction from millions of a "rock star". Many who voted for the President knew very little about his policies and his stances. They were just impressed by this tall charsimatic rock star.

And isn't it all so wonderful, as the children sing for Obama, we're going to spread happiness,....obama's going to change the world....,....ugh, I think I am going to choke, sangiusto.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54tjbgJmLFg[/youtube]

I wonder if somebody had organized a bunch of kids to sing an anthem about George W. Bush and his 'vision' for America, what the anti-Bush people would have said about that?

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

And do you remember the "We are the world" show at the DNC in Denver?

I don't remember if this was part of the actual show in Denver, or just an internet version, rendition of it, or something. All I remember is I think watching it and feeling cold shivers run down my back.

0 Replies

Wow, this thread has really bottomed out, and is now nothing but a losers' love feast.

People would have been virtually insane to vote for McCain and Palin, whose entire platform amounted to attacks on Obama and his ideas. The former had no program of their own, and gave the impression to any thinking person that they would merely continue the failed Bush policies.

The country is quickly sinking, and Obama has the guts to administer strong medicine. For one thing, he is avoiding the failed FDR policies of letting the major banks sink and being niggardly in public spending. Jobs are disappearing at a high rate, and O's policies are the only chance of stopping this.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Does anybody know where this photo came from? How would you caption it?

"Jealous woman posts picture of good-looking ladies on internet?"

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

This is a caption contest from Fark.

http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4433931

Some disturbing captions, to be sure.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

This is a caption contest from Fark.

http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4433931

Some disturbing captions, to be sure.

Okay, I could think of a lot of silly non offensive captions to put on the photo that would not denigrate either person. I ran across the photo linked on the Drudge reprot and it didn't have a caption--I thought it was funny just because it begged for a caption, and honestly did want to know what the origin was. But the thread you linked is typical of juvenile blogs, whether Left or Right, who think that kind of thing is funny but which people at least like me, and apparently you, find highly offensive and yes even disturbing. I deplore the breakdown in civility in the world these days where so many have no sense of propriety and who direct unkindness or cruelty at others for sport.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

This is a caption contest from Fark.

http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4433931

Some disturbing captions, to be sure.

Okay, I could think of a lot of silly non offensive captions to put on the photo that would not denigrate either person. I ran across the photo linked on the Drudge reprot and it didn't have a caption--I thought it was funny just because it begged for a caption, and honestly did want to know what the origin was. But the thread you linked is typical of juvenile blogs, whether Left or Right, who think that kind of thing is funny but which people at least like me, and apparently you, find highly offensive and yes even disturbing. I deplore the breakdown in civility in the world these days where so many have no sense of propriety and who direct unkindness or cruelty at others for sport.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know