Welcome to the WRR/X Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Welcome to the WRR/X Forum

A place to share your passion for the WR250R/X!
 
HomeHome  Latest imagesLatest images  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
WR250R/X Forum

 

 Can Obama win with the just left base?

Go down 
5 posters
AuthorMessage
rydnseek

rydnseek



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyThu Sep 29, 2011 9:18 am

It looks like Obama is abandoning (for now) any appeal to moderates & is targeting his left wing base.. trying to rally his troops. The last few campaign rallies seem to be aimed at them. He chided the black congressional caucus, promised the dream act (again) to latinos, & all but guaranteed lots of govt. contracts for the unions.

But will unions, latinos, & the black vote be enough? Will his alienation of middle america & anti-wealth rhetoric bite him in the butt?

He also needs the youth vote.. a big bloc that he courted in '08, but he seems to be neglecting somewhat, now.

It seems to me that the only group he has come through with govt. goodies has been the unions. Blacks are not better off under Obama.. unemployment is much worse in the black community. Welfare & food stamps have skyrocketed, if you want to call that courting the black vote. Latinos have not gotten anything but empty promises.. no amnesty.. no dream act. He had the opportunity with a full dem congress, but spent it all on obamacare.

So will his base come out in droves & vote for him? I don't think so. The minorities are wising up to the left's constant race baiting. Blacks, Latinos, & other ethnic groups are not just rubber stamping whomever the democratic bosses tell them to vote for. You can fool people for a while with racial manipulation, but they are not stupid & will see through it eventually. Herman Cain, Allen West, & Marco Rubio are evidence that fiscal conservatism & constitutional america strikes a chord in everyone, regardless of race.

How about the 'womens' vote? The democrats have trumpeted themselves as the party of women, but where are the women democrats on the rise? Hilary? She seems to be content fixing sandwiches for Barry. Is Debbie Wasserman-Schultz the new face of democratic women? She will appeal to a handful of liberal academians or npr news anchors, but will not speak for the majority of american women of any race. The repubs, on the other hand, have women coming out of the woodwork, running for president, congress, senate, & dog catcher. They seem to have a better message that resonates with American women. No, it seems that democratic sexism is over, too. Women won't just blindly vote for whomever liberal men tell them to vote for, just because they are women.

If the democratic party doesn't abandon it's far left socialist agenda, i'm afraid they will lose by a landslide in the next election. A little financial responsibility would go a long way. ..less class warfare & economic divisiveness would help, too.

Obama ran as a moderate in '08. Will he be able to win over any moderates or conservatives in the next election?
Back to top Go down
motokid
Moderator
motokid



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyThu Sep 29, 2011 10:42 am

No candidate from either party can win with "just their base".

The swing voters are the ones who decide the winner in the end.


IMHO


_________________
2008 WR250X
Gearing: 13t - 48t
Power Commander 5 / PC-V
Airbox Door Removed - Flapper glued - AIS removed
FmF Q4
Bridgestone Battlax BT-003rs
Back to top Go down
motokid
Moderator
motokid



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyThu Sep 29, 2011 10:46 am

Once again - you should stop listening to far-right news/media and talking-heads.

Obama is pretty stinking moderate. He's pissing off many on the left. Almost as many as he's pissed off on the right.

Obama has "caved" into much of what the reps have wanted and asked for. He's compromised a lot.
Something that doesn't sit well with many on the far left.

Obama really hasn't done much that's different than what GWB did. There's plenty of similarities.

_________________
2008 WR250X
Gearing: 13t - 48t
Power Commander 5 / PC-V
Airbox Door Removed - Flapper glued - AIS removed
FmF Q4
Bridgestone Battlax BT-003rs
Back to top Go down
motokid
Moderator
motokid



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyThu Sep 29, 2011 10:55 am

Please tell me you're not using Palin and Bachmann as examples of the conservative openness to females.....please.

_________________
2008 WR250X
Gearing: 13t - 48t
Power Commander 5 / PC-V
Airbox Door Removed - Flapper glued - AIS removed
FmF Q4
Bridgestone Battlax BT-003rs
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 3:38 am

motokid wrote:
Once again - you should stop listening to far-right news/media and talking-heads.
Sayeth the man who gets his talking points from the radical left wing fear mongers in the country - and for whom, anything to the right of Marx is "far right".

I keep reading about how bad all these 'far right" news media and commentators are. But never specific examples of what they disagree with. Just the hate, and the fear mongering.

Which brings up an interesting thought: it is interesting how those who spew fear and hatred of the "far right" i.e. anybody not as left wing as Marx or Obama, practically never reference the Constitution. Or the Founders, or their intent. Not all that relevant, I suppose.

Quote :
Obama is pretty stinking moderate.
??? I wonder how far to the far, far, far left you have to be to see our Marxist president as somehow or other being in the center, a "moderate".

Quote :
Please tell me you're not using Palin and Bachmann as examples of the conservative openness to females.....please.
Damn... don't you just gotta HATE a conservative woman. Moreso if she's openly religious. And even moreso if she's also a) successful, and b) can get elected to office and command a significant degree of popularity.

What's up next? Do we call Herman Cain an Uncle Tom because he's a Republican? It's a mindset like homophobia, really.

Or perhaps Obama a "moderate" - while he hangs with unapologetic terrorists, anti-Semites, and shreds the Constitution, even while musing about going it alone without Congress?

US President Barack Obama said Monday it was "tempting" to think of going it alone without Congress after weeks of trying to forge an elusive debt deal with his Republican foes.

"Believe me, right now dealing with Congress... the idea of doings things on my own is very tempting. Not just on immigration reforms," he said, during a meeting with Hispanic-origin rights activists.


Yes, our "moderate" Marxist President is tempted to simply assume the power of the purse for himself from Congress. Who needs that stupid old division of powers and Congress in 2011, anyways. They contemplated making Washington a king - why not King Barry? After all, if you can win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing, and then starting another war without congressional approval "because the UN gave me the authority", is being the first King of the USA really so out of reach?

I really wish he'd give in to his temptation. That impeachment trial would move along rather swiftly, I would imagine.
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 5:03 am

rydnseek wrote:
It looks like Obama is abandoning (for now) any appeal to moderates & is targeting his left wing base.. trying to rally his troops. The last few campaign rallies seem to be aimed at them. He chided the black congressional caucus, promised the dream act (again) to latinos, & all but guaranteed lots of govt. contracts for the unions.
Pretty much. For somebody who's apparently The Smartest Guy In The Room, he's really not much more than a one trick poney. When things aren't going his way, he falls back on his Saul Alinsky/community organizer schtick. Class warfare, race baiting, and It's The Other Guy's Fault, Not Mine.

It won't be enough to carry him, especially as people decide more and more that this IS his economy, not somebody else's. The election is the Republicans' to lose. With enough RINO screwing around, they certainly can snatch disaster from the very verge of victory.

Quote :
He also needs the youth vote.. a big bloc that he courted in '08, but he seems to be neglecting somewhat, now.
They will be staying away in droves, as they often do. The starry eyed idealists who bought a bag of promises and found it it was nothing but a sack of BS just got their first lesson in real life. Obama got them to grind his axe once; it isn't going to happen again barring some very major event. The mainstream media will continue to pimp themselves out for Obama - if only because they mostly despise Republicans - but the youth don't trust the media much either.

The essential difference in the Religion of Obama is it is based on hope. Not optimism. There is a significant difference. Hope is the blind faith that things will ultimately, somehow or other, turn out for the better - like when you buy a lottery ticket. You hope you'll win, but you don't see a path forward to get to that goal. Optimism is the belief that things will get better, and the existence of a set of facts to lead you to believe what you wish to achieve is within your grasp. Obama came to power and rules on hope and (broken) promises. He does nothing to inspire optimism.

Quote :
It seems to me that the only group he has come through with govt. goodies has been the unions.
Yes. Like all those waivers for those Cadillac health plans of theirs, for example - waivers that he has no power to give.

Quote :
Blacks are not better off under Obama.. unemployment is much worse in the black community. Welfare & food stamps have skyrocketed, if you want to call that courting the black vote.
And interestingly enough, his popularity with Blacks has remained fairly constant while it has dropped with whites, Hispanics, and other minority groups. Sidebar question: if we had a white president, a black opposition, the economy was in the tank, and whites as a group did not drop their support of the white guy in the face of all of that, with little movement to support the black guy... would whites be considered to be motivated in their preference by racism?

Quote :
Latinos have not gotten anything but empty promises.. no amnesty.. no dream act.
Ah... not entirely true: amnesty by the back door, remember? Obama announced he has instructed immigration to stop deporting anyone that doesn't have a significant criminal record. And while he argued that Arizona's law that simply enforces existing immigration laws is ultra vires because it amounts to setting immigration policy, he doesn't use that same argument to put an end to the states and cities that have declared themselves to be sanctuary states and cities.

Sidebar question: When the President takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution (and by extension, all the laws legally passed under that Constitution), does he violate his oath of office when he then makes a deliberate and calculated decision to order federal government agencies to NOT enforce laws passed by Congress? Like... immigration law, for example?

Quote :
Blacks, Latinos, & other ethnic groups are not just rubber stamping whomever the democratic bosses tell them to vote for.
Well, popularity polling suggests he has lost very little ground with Blacks. Be curious to see how much of that would change if Cain were to take the Republican nomination. I suspect a few Republicans will be musing about that when it comes to vote for who will be the Republican presidential candidate.

Quote :
You can fool people for a while with racial manipulation, but they are not stupid & will see through it eventually.
I fear I believe the American public is far more gullible to the words of the mass media and a slick Teleprompter aided confidence man than you think. Consider the disasters the previous porkulus packages have been, and yet Obama has no problem finding support for Porkulus v2.01.

Quote :
Herman Cain, Allen West, & Marco Rubio are evidence that fiscal conservatism & constitutional america strikes a chord in everyone, regardless of race.
Rubio is another one to look forward to in future Presidential races. Worth watching.

Quote :
The democrats have trumpeted themselves as the party of women, but where are the women democrats on the rise? Hilary? She seems to be content fixing sandwiches for Barry.
Billary has done reasonably well, considering the shit sandwich Barry gave her to carry to the rest of the world. It was relatively easy while he was a rock star; now it's pretty hard work now that people have got a look at what is behind the Wizard of Oz's curtain. I think she took the State job to enhance her street cred and pad her personal resume for a later presidential run. For the immediate future, I think she wants to bail out of the Obama Administration as soon as she can do so gracefully. She doesn't want to be anywhere near the train wreck this is going to be at it's eventual conclusion.

Quote :
Is Debbie Wasserman-Schultz the new face of democratic women?
Well, she's a hater and race-baiting liar that the "moderates" will continue to love.

She loves to spew drivel about conservative women like Palin, Bachmann, etc - that will give some of them the warm fuzzies. She'll continue to fear monger about how Republicans want to bring back the days of Jim Crow laws (aside from the stupidity of the remark, forgetting that Jim Crow laws were passed by Democrats). Her typifying of Americans who support the Tea Party philosophy as "tyrants" with swastikas and in blackface will endear her to another set of haters.

Oddly enough, those who drool all over themselves waiting for an opportunity to unload on Palin and Bckmann have not a single comment to make about Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Hard to criticize someone who shares your belief system, I imagine.

Quote :
If the democratic party doesn't abandon it's far left socialist agenda, i'm afraid they will lose by a landslide in the next election.
They won't - not while they're controlled by university and union elitists who promise to deliver votes while standing there with their hand out for porkulus money. Their essential problem is they can have a hate-mongering waste of skin like Jimmy Hoffa promising to make war on Republicans (amusingly enough, without the criticism Palin got for simple ads) - but he doesn't control the way his union members vote when they enter those polling booths.

Frankly, they need to get wiped out to purge their bilges and generate their own version of the TEA Party to regenerate Democrat traditional values. They have their own version of RINOs, and Marxism never was a tenant of classic Democrat values.

Quote :
A little financial responsibility would go a long way. ..less class warfare & economic divisiveness would help, too.
That won't happen until Barry's turfed and amateur hour in the White House is over. Class warfare, Saul Alinsky, and spending other peoples' money is all that man knows.

Quote :
Obama ran as a moderate in '08.
No. He ran on hope with empty promises attached. And against a weak RINO like McCain, no less.

You can't be promising to "fundamentally change America" and be seen as a moderate. Except by someone even further to the left than you are.
Back to top Go down
twday

twday



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 9:28 am

Jäger wrote:
motokid wrote:
Once again - you should stop listening to far-right news/media and talking-heads.
Sayeth the man who gets his talking points from the radical left wing fear mongers in the country - and for whom, anything to the right of Marx is "far right".

Dude, you take crazy wingnut to new levels of crazy. Do you ever stop talking to the mirror? You should get out of the cabin, find some human friends to replace the bears and hermits, and read a book. Please, don't pretend to understand the Constitution until you read it.
Back to top Go down
twday

twday



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 9:32 am

rydnseek wrote:
It looks like Obama is abandoning (for now) any appeal to moderates & is targeting his left wing base.. trying to rally his troops. The last few campaign rallies seem to be aimed at them. He chided the black congressional caucus, promised the dream act (again) to latinos, & all but guaranteed lots of govt. contracts for the unions.

First, you need to meet and talk to some moderates. Middle of the road is not the far right shoulder, even if there is some unmaintained dirt to ride in that area. Even my retired Air Force father-in-law is cheering the kids on Wall Street and telling his retirement home friends to write their Texas congresscritters. It is possible that the wingnut parade has overstepped the bounds of appearing reasonable even to traditional conservatives. All that bawling about "socialism" and "class warfare' while pigging out at the public trough and hacking away at the middle class may have some blowback.
Back to top Go down
rydnseek

rydnseek



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 10:40 am

motokid wrote:
Once again - you should stop listening to far-right news/media and talking-heads.

Obama is pretty stinking moderate. He's pissing off many on the left. Almost as many as he's pissed off on the right.

Obama has "caved" into much of what the reps have wanted and asked for. He's compromised a lot.
Something that doesn't sit well with many on the far left.

Obama really hasn't done much that's different than what GWB did. There's plenty of similarities.

First, i can listen to whomever i want. None of your business. Second, i have a wide range of info i receive.. personal education, philosophy, & knowledge is a bit of a hobby for me. I don't tell you who you listen to, or who i think you listen to. I don't really care. Why are you constantly trying to diminish my comments by linking them to those you despise?

Obama is not a moderate. Only far left wing nuts claim that. (been watching Bill Maher a lot? Does that invalidate your point?) He has at times had to settle for a more moderate outcome.. but that was not his choice. But i do agree that the far left seems to have lost some enthusiasm for Obama.. which is why he is back courting them with the class warfare & partisan rhetoric.

motokid wrote:
Please tell me you're not using Palin and Bachmann as examples of the conservative openness to females.....please.

? Obviously they are conservative women who have ascended into the public arena. You don't like them. I get it. But the left gets Debbie & Nancy. You would consider them to be great examples of women in politics, i suppose. My point is that more conservative women are rising in the national discussion than from the left. They seem to represent 'the women's vote', whatever that is, better than the self appointed left claiming to speak for all women.

I've always thought the left was very presumptuous, claiming to speak for all blacks, women, gays, hispanics, etc. The proper view is to see people as thinking individuals who can make up their own minds, rather than stupid pawns for the elite to manipulate. But that presumptuous arrogance will be the left's downfall. Peer pressure doesn't work as well as you get older & wiser.

twday wrote:
rydnseek wrote:
It looks like Obama is abandoning (for now) any appeal to moderates & is targeting his left wing base.. trying to rally his troops. The last few campaign rallies seem to be aimed at them. He chided the black congressional caucus, promised the dream act (again) to latinos, & all but guaranteed lots of govt. contracts for the unions.

First, you need to meet and talk to some moderates. Middle of the road is not the far right shoulder, even if there is some unmaintained dirt to ride in that area. Even my retired Air Force father-in-law is cheering the kids on Wall Street and telling his retirement home friends to write their Texas congresscritters. It is possible that the wingnut parade has overstepped the bounds of appearing reasonable even to traditional conservatives. All that bawling about "socialism" and "class warfare' while pigging out at the public trough and hacking away at the middle class may have some blowback.

What is a 'moderate?' I've met plenty of people who claim that label.. they mostly seem like they're trying to have it both ways.. please everyone.. & they also seem more smug & superior.. like they have the 'real' balance of wisdom & insight. Most 'moderates' i have known are simply leftists who have not come out of the closet.. they are not secure in their thinking & try to hide behind a veil of ambiguity.

..not sure of your second point.. are you pointing out hypocrisy in the congress as they complain about Obama's class warfare & socialism? All the while they are profiting from their cushy govt jobs? Are you implying that people will see the right's hypocrisy & run back to Obama & the left? Which hypocrisy do the people prefer? Right or left?

Out of this mess the tea party was born. These are people tired of the hypocrisy from both sides, the corruption, & the wasteful govt. spending. The last election was a wake up call to politicians from either party.

The left just does not seem to get it. They want to constantly stir the bourgeois vs proletariat pot & reminisce about their glory days of 1917. What do they find so appealing about marxism? It does not work. The basic assumptions are flawed. But still they persist..doggedly determined to transform the country into a marxist utopia.

The democratic party needs a 'tea party' type revival of it's own. I don't think it will survive letting the far left dictate policy.
Back to top Go down
rydnseek

rydnseek



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 11:00 am

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703382904575059293624940362.html

Interesting bit about the tea party..

Here's a short quote:

There were promises of transparency and of a new kind of collaborative politics where establishment figures listened to ordinary Americans. We were going to see net spending cuts, tax cuts for nearly all Americans, an end to earmarks, legislation posted online for the public to review before it is signed into law, and a line-by-line review of the federal budget to remove wasteful programs.

These weren't the tea-party platforms I heard discussed in Nashville last weekend. They were the campaign promises of Barack Obama in 2008.


This is what most voting americans want.. Obama masqueraded as a champion of these values, but it was an illusion.
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 12:05 pm

twday wrote:
Dude, you take crazy wingnut to new levels of crazy. Do you ever stop talking to the mirror?
Ah, our resident whackjob reappears! Are you still blogging that the right wing inspired Laughner to shoot Gifford and the others - months after it was determined that simply was not true and nothing but malicious slander?

But then, dealing in the truth never really is something socialists like you like to deal with, is it?

Quote :
You should get out of the cabin, find some human friends to replace the bears and hermits, and read a book.
Most of my friends wear a uniform and have been on the two way rifle range more than once. Some of them have died to insure that raving Marxist hate mongers like you can maintain the right to spew whatever drivel comes to their fevered minds.

And if you want to talk about books, feel free to open a discussion on just about anything Locke wrote. Or the Federalist Papers. I would love to discuss those with you - particularly given your far left bent. I kind of suspect your reading tastes trend more towards The Communist Manifesto, however.

Quote :
Please, don't pretend to understand the Constitution until you read it.
Feel free to open a discussion of the Constitution anytime you wish. Before you do, I suggest you put the crack pipe aside and go get your meds checked, because you're going to have to be a lot more rational and coherent than you are now if you want to debate the Constitution with me. Especially when it and the constitutional documents surrounding it reject pretty much every thing you stand for.
Back to top Go down
rydnseek

rydnseek



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyFri Sep 30, 2011 12:09 pm

Jäger wrote:


Quote :
Blacks are not better off under Obama.. unemployment is much worse in the black community. Welfare & food stamps have skyrocketed, if you want to call that courting the black vote.
And interestingly enough, his popularity with Blacks has remained fairly constant while it has dropped with whites, Hispanics, and other minority groups. Sidebar question: if we had a white president, a black opposition, the economy was in the tank, and whites as a group did not drop their support of the white guy in the face of all of that, with little movement to support the black guy... would whites be considered to be motivated in their preference by racism?

Another interesting note is the left's view of Cain. ..Allen, too, and of course any other black conservative. I've heard him called a 'racist' by a pundit on cnn. Another black commentator labeled him an 'oreo'.. black on the outside, white on the inside. Are these not racist statements? Are they not making bigoted statements about his color because he is in another philosophical camp?

I'd take Cain any day. He's got constitutional values, & is a straight shooter, completely different than Obama.

Jäger wrote:

Sidebar question: When the President takes an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution (and by extension, all the laws legally passed under that Constitution), does he violate his oath of office when he then makes a deliberate and calculated decision to order federal government agencies to NOT enforce laws passed by Congress? Like... immigration law, for example?

Yes. I don't know how the press, the congress, the military, or other american institutions can stand idly by while Obama tries to make himself king.

Quote :
Blacks, Latinos, & other ethnic groups are not just rubber stamping whomever the democratic bosses tell them to vote for.
Jäger wrote:
Well, popularity polling suggests he has lost very little ground with Blacks. Be curious to see how much of that would change if Cain were to take the Republican nomination. I suspect a few Republicans will be musing about that when it comes to vote for who will be the Republican presidential candidate.

The left media has mostly been amused by Cain. If he becomes a real force, they will unleash their full fury against him, like they did with Palin & Bachmann. Will their lies & hypocrisy be exposed or admitted? Will the tea party be apologized to for the 'racist' tag? No, but the left media is becoming more & more blatantly left, & their credibility (& ratings) suffer for it.

Quote :
You can fool people for a while with racial manipulation, but they are not stupid & will see through it eventually.
Jäger wrote:
I fear I believe the American public is far more gullible to the words of the mass media and a slick Teleprompter aided confidence man than you think. Consider the disasters the previous porkulus packages have been, and yet Obama has no problem finding support for Porkulus v2.01.

You are probably right. I am a starry eyed idealist thinking that people are not stupid & will see clearly through the BS.

Quote :
If the democratic party doesn't abandon it's far left socialist agenda, i'm afraid they will lose by a landslide in the next election.
Jäger wrote:
They won't - not while they're controlled by university and union elitists who promise to deliver votes while standing there with their hand out for porkulus money. Their essential problem is they can have a hate-mongering waste of skin like Jimmy Hoffa promising to make war on Republicans (amusingly enough, without the criticism Palin got for simple ads) - but he doesn't control the way his union members vote when they enter those polling booths.
Frankly, they need to get wiped out to purge their bilges and generate their own version of the TEA Party to regenerate Democrat traditional values. They have their own version of RINOs, and Marxism never was a tenant of classic Democrat values.

I'm sure they will win in their regions. I don't know why the extreme left seem to congregate on the coasts. San Francisco will still elect hard core leftists.. Massachusetts will elect Barney Frank. Your analysis seems to be accurate. I also agree that the dems need a reformation. Many old time democrats are not happy with the direction of the party, but stay with them out of loyalty. That won't last.

Quote :
Obama ran as a moderate in '08.
Jäger wrote:
No. He ran on hope with empty promises attached. And against a weak RINO like McCain, no less.

I did not say he *was* a moderate.. he just masqueraded as a moderate. But his true colors are evident, now, & he is standing tall & proud as a progressive liberal.
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptySat Oct 01, 2011 1:21 am

rydnseek wrote:
Another interesting note is the left's view of Cain. ..Allen, too, and of course any other black conservative. I've heard him called a 'racist' by a pundit on cnn. Another black commentator labeled him an 'oreo'.. black on the outside, white on the inside. Are these not racist statements? Are they not making bigoted statements about his color because he is in another philosophical camp?
There is a rule written down - somewheres - that you can't be a racist and nothing you say can be racist as long as you're left wing, socialist, and/or a statist. Only conservatives can be called "bigoted twats" and similar verbal trash (and the fact that the accusation is baseless doesn't matter either). The whacked out socialists, statists, and "progressives" are off limits where questions of racism are concerned.

Quote :
I'd take Cain any day. He's got constitutional values, & is a straight shooter, completely different than Obama.
Yep, he has his warts as well, but at least he isn't all BS and no substance.

And maybe more importantly, he's demonstrated that he actually understands finances and economics, and how not to run entities into bankrupcy. Subject matter that Obama can't get his head wrapped around.

Quote :
Yes. I don't know how the press, the congress, the military, or other american institutions can stand idly by while Obama tries to make himself king.
The military can't act (or more accurately, refuse to act) until he actually confiscates powers that are exclusively excluded from his office.

Congress is in the same situation - except they have the added problem that numerous Democrats have spoken out saying Obama SHOULD assume powers he is explicitely barred from exercising. Not to mention the Democrats suggesting we should just suspend elections for a few years while Obama "fixes" the country.

That leaves the press. And they've pretty much pimped themselves out to Obama from day one i.e. "Every time I hear him speak, I feel a thrill run up my leg". The same press freaking out because Palin had a bullseye on districts they wanted to take, but nary a word about Obama telling Hispanics to "attack their enemies", Hoffa promising to make war on Republicans and destroy them, etc. If Republicans and conservative candidates in particular acted and talked like these Democrats and their supporters do, the media would have to be printing extra editions, just so they'd have enough room for all of their columns expressing outrage.

Quote :
The left media has mostly been amused by Cain. If he becomes a real force, they will unleash their full fury against him, like they did with Palin & Bachmann. Will their lies & hypocrisy be exposed or admitted? Will the tea party be apologized to for the 'racist' tag? No, but the left media is becoming more & more blatantly left, & their credibility (& ratings) suffer for it.
No, they won't. The haters out there - the ones who call Cain an Uncle Tom, the ones who will call Bachmann a "bigoted twat" while ignoring the racism, race baiting, and hate mongering of their socialist brethern - aren't going to change their reading and viewing habits. Where else would they get their lines, for one thing? Unless the RINO Republicans screw it up and give Obama an escape route to a second term, expect it to get only worse as the next election approaches. Conservatives scare the hell out of the media and academic socialist elites, and they react accordingly.

Quote :
I did not say he *was* a moderate.. he just masqueraded as a moderate. But his true colors are evident, now, & he is standing tall & proud as a progressive liberal.
I see what you're getting at. But he didn't even masquerade as a moderate. The politically correct media, statists, and socialists would tell anyone who would listen that he was a "moderate". But you didn't have to look far to hear the "redistribute the wealth" message, the promises to "fundamentally change America", hear the race baiting and class warfare. The fact he hung out with unrepentent terrorists who attacked the country he wanted to lead. He's a Marxist Alinskyite all the way through, and he couldn't change his spots to become a moderate even for an election. Even for his primary against Billary. He caught a break because the media barely mentioned those issues, much less questioned on them. But you still didn't have to look far to see that he was anything but a "moderate".
Back to top Go down
mucker

mucker



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptySat Oct 01, 2011 1:37 am

Since we have energetic posters...and I am not american.
Could someone please mention a moderate, left, candidates' name. So I can brief myself.
I would hope a right leaning individual would chime in, so I could get a center on where they are coming from.
Unless moderate is not an option...there has got to be someone...?
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptySun Oct 02, 2011 2:53 am

mucker wrote:
Could someone please mention a moderate, left, candidates' name. So I can brief myself.
I would hope a right leaning individual would chime in, so I could get a center on where they are coming from.
Unless moderate is not an option...there has got to be someone...?
The Democrats show no interest in primary'ing Obama. Assuming it stays that way, Obama will be running against whoever the GOP chooses.

Which means there will be NO moderate, left candidate in the election. Unless your tastes run to Alinskyism, statism, and socialism, of course - then you can try to claim Obama is "moderate" when your frame of reference is that far to the left.
Back to top Go down
rydnseek

rydnseek



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptySun Oct 02, 2011 9:55 am

I don't really understand what a moderate is, anyway. I know many people like to take that label for themselves.. it sounds so much better than conservative or liberal.. or racist or socialist.. or whatever. But what is a 'moderate' political position? Is it someone for the death penalty & abortion? Is it someone who wants military involvement in all countries, but cut back on welfare? Perhaps someone who wants a powerful centralized govt, but a balanced budget?

I've always been entertained by the irony in the positions that the ideologues take, & the many inconsistencies. That can be another thread.

Forget labels. State your position. Everyone else will label you, then. :)
Back to top Go down
mucker

mucker



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptySun Oct 02, 2011 10:01 pm

rydnseek wrote:
I don't really understand what a moderate is, anyway. I know many people like to take that label for themselves.. it sounds so much better than conservative or liberal.. or racist or socialist.. or whatever. But what is a 'moderate' political position? Is it someone for the death penalty & abortion? Is it someone who wants military involvement in all countries, but cut back on welfare? Perhaps someone who wants a powerful centralized govt, but a balanced budget?

I've always been entertained by the irony in the positions that the ideologues take, & the many inconsistencies. That can be another thread.

Forget labels. State your position. Everyone else will label you, then. :)

I guess, what I meant to ask was...
...work with me , if you will...
Could some right leaning individuals, in the U.S.A., please mention a Democrat representative(s) , that has workable view points. Or common ground, if you will?
Or does the majority of the right, refute everything left in policy?
Some names of "moderates" , however, would go a long way in defining the right, for me?
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyMon Oct 03, 2011 9:32 am

mucker wrote:
Could some right leaning individuals, in the U.S.A., please mention a Democrat representative(s) , that has workable view points. Or common ground, if you will?
Or does the majority of the right, refute everything left in policy?
Why don't we start out with you articulating some of those policies that you identify with belonging to the left to give us some place to start from?

Right now, Obama can't even get his "pass this bill now" budget in front of the Democratically controlled Senate for a vote because Harry Reid can't line up enough Democrats willing to vote for it. And not because Obama's latest porkulus package wasn't far enough to the left. So if that isn't safely defined as leftist policies, what is?

The idea that Obama would have been great if he hadn't had the Republican millstone around his neck (ignoring the first two years he owned the Senate and House, of course) is rapidly losing traction, even among some of the elites. It showed in the midterm election results. Obama is not a "moderate" and never was. And the essential problem is that "hope and change" is not a viable policy to embark upon. And it wouldn't be if the right had been running that scam without any underlying policies either. Some more on that, along with centerism and moderation:

‘The way I think about it,” Barack Obama told a TV station in Orlando, “is, you know, this is a great, great country that had gotten a little soft.”

He has a point. This is a great, great country that got so soft that 53 percent of electors voted for a ludicrously unqualified chief executive who would be regarded as a joke candidate in any serious nation. One should not begrudge a man who seizes his opportunity. But one should certainly hold in contempt those who allow him to seize it on the basis of such flaccid generalities as “hope” and “change”: That’s more than “a little” soft. “He’s probably the smartest guy ever to become president,” declared presidential historian Michael Beschloss the day after the 2008 election. But you don’t have to be that smart to put one over on all the smart guys. “I’m a sap, a specific kind of sap. I’m an Obama Sap,” admits David Brooks, the softest touch at the New York Times. Tina Brown, editor of Newsweek, now says of the president: “He wasn’t ready, it turns out, really.”

If you’re a tenured columnist at the New York Times, you can just about afford the consequences of your sappiness. But out there among the hundreds of thousands of your readers who didn’t know you were a sap until you told them three years later, soft choices have hard consequences. If you’re one of Obama’s core constituencies, the ones who looked so photogenic at all the hopey-changey rallies, things are really hard: “Young Becoming ‘Lost Generation’ Amid Recession” (CBS News). Tough luck, rubes. You got a bumper sticker; he got to make things worse.

But don’t worry, it’s not much better at the other end of the spectrum: “Obama’s Wall Street Donors Look Elsewhere” (UPI). Gee, aren’t you the fellows who, when you buy a company, do something called “due diligence”? But you sunk everything into stock in Obamania Inc. on the basis of his “perfectly creased pant leg” or whatever David Brooks was drooling about that day? You handed a multi-trillion-dollar economy to a community organizer and you’re surprised that it led to more taxes, more bureaucracy, more regulation, more barnacles on an already rusting hulk?

Hard statism is usually murmured in soft, soothing, beguiling terms: Regulation is about cleaner air, healthier restaurants, safer children’s toys. Sounds so nice. But federal regulation alone sucks up 10 percent of GDP. That’s to say, Americans take the equivalent of the Canadian economy and toss it down the toilet just in complying with federal paperwork. Obama and the great toxic alphabet soup of federal regulation — EPA, OSHA, SEC, DHSS — want to take that 10 percent and crank it up to 12, 14, 15 percent.

Who could have foreseen that? The most dismal thing about that David Brooks column conceding that “yes, I’m a sap . . . remember, I’m a sap . . . as you know, I’m a sap” was the headline his New York Times editors chose to append to it: “Obama Rejects Obamaism.”

In other words, even in a column remorselessly cataloguing how one of its smartest smart guys had been repeatedly suckered by Obama on jobs, on Medicare, on deficits, on tax reform, etc., the New York Times chose to insist that there is still something called “Obamaism” — prudent, centrist, responsible — that for some perverse reason the man for whom this political philosophy is named insists on betraying, 24/7, week in, month out, spring, summer, autumn, tax season. You can set your clock by Obama’s rejection of “Obamaism.”

That’s because there’s no such thing. There never was. “Obamaism” was the Emperor’s new centrism: To a fool such as your average talk-radio host, His Majesty appears to be a man of minimal accomplishments other than self-promotion marinated in a radical faculty-lounge view of the world and the role of government. But, to a wise man such as your average presidential historian or New York Times columnist, he is the smartest guy ever to become president.

In part, this is a natural extension of an ever more conformist and unrepresentative establishment’s view of where “the center” is. On issues from abortion to climate change, a Times man or Hollywood activist or media professor’s notion of “centrism” is well to the left of where American opinion is. That’s one reason why a supposedly “center-right” nation has wound up regulated into sclerosis, drowning in debt, and embarking on its last decade as the world’s leading economy. But in the case of Obama the chasm between soft, seductive, politico-media “centrism” and hard, grim reality is too big to bridge, and getting wider all the time.

You would think this might prompt some sober reflection from an American mainstream press dying in part because of its dreary ideological conformity. After all, a key reason why 53 percent voted for a man who was not, in Tina Brown’s word, “ready” is that Tina and all her pals assured us he was. Occidental, Columbia, Harvard Law, a little light community organizing, a couple of years timeserving in a state legislature: That’s what America’s elites regard as an impressive resume rather than a bleak indictment of contemporary notions of “accomplishment.” Obama would not have withstood scrutiny in any society with a healthy, skeptical press. Yet, like the high-rolling Wall Street moneybags, they failed to do due diligence.

Three years on, nothing has changed. Obama is proposing to raise taxes because of some cockamamie yarn Warren Buffett has been peddling about his allegedly overtaxed secretary. Yet the court eunuchs of the media persist in taking Buffett seriously as an archetypal exemplar of the “American business community” rather than as an especially well-connected crony. Sometimes, Obama cronyism is merely fiscally wasteful, as in the still-underreported Solyndra “green jobs” scandal. One sympathizes with reporters assigned to the story: It’s hard to get all the public monies and Solyndra-exec White House visit logs lined up in digestible form for the casual reader. But sometimes Obama cronyism is murderous: Eric Holder, a man unfit to be attorney general of the United States, continues to stonewall the “Fast and Furious” investigation into taxpayer-funded government gun-running to Mexican drug cartels. It is alleged that the administration chose to facilitate the sale of American weapons to crime kingpins south of the border in order to support a case for gun control north of the border. Evidence keeps piling up: The other day, a letter emerged from ATF supervisor David Voth authorizing Special Agent John Dodson to buy Draco pistols to sell directly to known criminals. Over 200 Mexicans are believed to have been killed by “Fast and Furious” weapons — that’s to say, they were killed by a U.S.-government program.

Doesn’t the New York Times care about dead Mexicans? Doesn’t Newsweek or CBS News? Isn’t Obamaism with a body count sufficiently eye-catching even for the U.S. press? Or, three years in, are the enablers of Obama still so cynical that they accept it as a necessary price to pay for “change you can believe in”? You can’t make a hope 'n change omelette without breaking a couple hundred Mexican eggs?

Obama says America has “gotten a little soft.” But there’s nothing soft about a dead-parrot economy, a flatline jobs market, regulatory sclerosis, “green jobs” multi-billion-dollar squandering — and a mountain of dead Mexicans. In a soft nation, “centrist” government is hard and cruel. Only the media coverage is soft-focus.
Back to top Go down
Jäger
Admin
Jäger



Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Obama embraces his radical Marxist roots - a fatal move?   Can Obama win with the just left base? EmptyTue Oct 18, 2011 12:56 pm

Who are these protesters that Candidate Obama is embracing, anyways? Is he so strongly tied to his socialist/Marxist roots that he doesn't realize the Occupy Whatever mob and their radical union handlers, wallowing in their own filth, isn't representative of the majority of Americans - over 40% of whom consistently describe themselves as conservatives? A bit of amusement while bleakly watching the RINOs in full charge mode.

Polling the Occupy Wall Street Crowd
In interviews, protesters show that they are leftists out of step with most American
voters. Yet Democrats are embracing them anyway.


By DOUGLAS SCHOEN

President Obama and the Democratic leadership are making a critical error in
embracing the Occupy Wall Street movement—and it may cost them the 2012 election.

Last week, senior White House adviser David Plouffe said that "the protests you're
seeing are the same conversations people are having in living rooms and kitchens all
across America. . . . People are frustrated by an economy that does not reward hard
work and responsibility, where Wall Street and Main Street don't seem to play by the
same set of rules." Nancy Pelosi and others have echoed the message.

Yet the Occupy Wall Street movement reflects values that are dangerously out of touch
with the broad mass of the American people—and particularly with swing voters who
are largely independent and have been trending away from the president since the
debate over health-care reform.

The protesters have a distinct ideology and are bound by a deep commitment to
radical left-wing policies.
On Oct. 10 and 11, Arielle Alter Confino, a senior
researcher at my polling firm, interviewed nearly 200 protesters in New York's Zuccotti
Park. Our findings probably represent the first systematic random sample of Occupy
Wall Street opinion.

Our research shows clearly that the movement doesn't represent unemployed America
and is not ideologically diverse. Rather, it comprises an unrepresentative segment of the
electorate that believes in radical redistribution of wealth, civil disobedience and, in
some instances, violence. Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before,
virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and
nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.


The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of
protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment
rate (9.1%).

An overwhelming majority of demonstrators supported Barack Obama in 2008. Now 51%
disapprove of the president while 44% approve, and only 48% say they will vote to
re-elect him in 2012, while at least a quarter won't vote.


Fewer than one in three (32%) call themselves Democrats, while roughly the same
proportion (33%) say they aren't represented by any political party.

What binds a large majority of the protesters together—regardless of age, socioeconomic
status or education—is a deep commitment to left-wing policies: opposition to free-market
capitalism and support for radical redistribution of wealth, intense regulation of the private
sector, and protectionist policies to keep American jobs from going overseas.


Sixty-five percent say that government has a moral responsibility to guarantee all citizens
access to affordable health care, a college education, and a secure retirement—no matter
the cost.
By a large margin (77%-22%), they support raising taxes on the wealthiest
Americans, but 58% oppose raising taxes for everybody, with only 36% in favor. And by a
close margin, protesters are divided on whether the bank bailouts were necessary (49%)
or unnecessary (51%).

Thus Occupy Wall Street is a group of engaged progressives who are disillusioned with the
capitalist system and have a distinct activist orientation. Among the general public, by
contrast, 41% of Americans self-identify as conservative, 36% as moderate, and only 21%
as liberal. That's why the Obama-Pelosi embrace of the movement could prove catastrophic
for their party.

In 1970, aligning too closely with the antiwar movement hurt Democrats in the midterm
election, when many middle-class and working-class Americans ended up supporting hawkish
candidates who condemned student disruptions. While that 1970 election should have been a
sweep against the first-term Nixon administration, it was instead one of only four midterm
elections since 1938 when the president's party didn't lose seats.

With the Democratic Party on the defensive throughout the 1970 campaign, liberal
Democrats were only able to win on Election Day by distancing themselves from the student
protest movement. So Adlai Stevenson III pinned an American flag to his lapel, appointed
Chicago Seven prosecutor Thomas Foran chairman of his Citizen's Committee, and emphasized
"law and order"—a tactic then employed by Ted Kennedy, who denounced the student protesters
as "campus commandos" who must be repudiated, "especially by those who may share their
goals."

Today, having rejected any effort to work with the congressional super committee to craft a
bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction,
President Obama has thrown in with those who support
his desire to tax oil companies and the rich, rather than appeal to independent and self-described
moderate swing voters who want smaller government and lower taxes, not additional stimulus or
interference in the private sector.

Rather than embracing huge new spending programs and tax increases, plus increasingly radical
and potentially violent activists, the Democrats should instead build a bridge to the much more
numerous independents and moderates in the center by opposing bailouts and broad-based tax
increases.

Put simply, Democrats need to say they are with voters in the middle who want cooperation,
conciliation and lower taxes. And they should work particularly hard to contrast their rhetoric with
the extremes advocated by the Occupy Wall Street crowd.

Mr. Schoen, who served as a pollster for President Bill Clinton, is author of "Hopelessly Divided:
The New Crisis in American Politics and What It Means for 2012 and Beyond," forthcoming from
Rowman and Littlefield.

Back to top Go down
Sponsored content





Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty
PostSubject: Re: Can Obama win with the just left base?   Can Obama win with the just left base? Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Can Obama win with the just left base?
Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Guess Who The Next US President Will Be
» G.W. Bush vs. B. Obama
» Now playing at WR250R forum
» Obama (and the media's) Inaugural Speech
» What will Obama's Re-Election Campaign Focus on?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Welcome to the WRR/X Forum :: General :: Off Topic-
Jump to: