Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its a rebuke of the Tea Party and the ultra conservatives in GOP. They caused the GOP to lose to the Dems last time and they are not doing well this time. You would have thought it would be a blow out for all the noise they made. They are too much baggage for the GOP.
Last edited by thriftylefty; 10-30-2012 at 01:28 PM..
"Obama's presidency has been an abysmal failure, across the board". Your words.
* An abysmal failure (?)
* Across the board (?)
Now it's fact ala Fox "News". Vague, but so what? Congress nowhere in the picture, no effect on "the presidency".
I read your post. Then you go on about the polls and the debates - fine. My beef is with that first basic assumption.
The bold passages in your quote actually support the assertion that you needed to read my post more closely before describing me as a right-winger unwilling to blame Congress for any of this mess, etc.
"Congress nowhere in the picture." Exactly. Describing Obama's presidency as a failure means only that I believe that Obama has failed drastically at the job of the president. I didn't mention Congress because the question by the OP was about the presidential race specifically. No mention of Congress does not imply no criticism of Congress, but simply means that I'm discussing only the president and the job he has done as president, because that's all that's relevant where the topic of the thread is concerned.
My first statement, the one you say you take issue with, was just a heads up about the perspective from which my thoughts about the closeness of the presidential race come. It was never intended to be a deep analysis of the situation this country faces at present. My impression that this race is a mix of widespread negative feeling about Obama and a willingness to accept Romney as an alternative once many people saw a reason to view him positively is simply that: an impression.
That impression I described in order to answer the question posed by the OP. Any other opinion this has led you to express about me or my views is all an assumption on your part based on . . . what? Your own biases? Must be something like that, because there's nothing in my first post that would support any of your assertions about that post.
It looks like the former governor has a good chance to win the election if you go by the polls. With as much as he has changed positions on various issues I gotta admit this is surprising. I wonder whether the close election is a rebuke of President Obama or a true embracing of Romney?
Rebuke.
If I vote, I'll have to vote for Romney, even though I can't stand the man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thriftylefty
Its a rebuke of the Tea Party and the ultra conservatives in GOP. They caused the GOP to lose to the Dems last time and they are not doing well this time. You would have thought it would be a blow out for all the noise they made. They are too much baggage for the GOP.
I'm almost afraid to ask where you get your information.
It will be a rebuke of Obama if he loses. Any time an incumbent loses it is because people are majorly unhappy, most people don't like to rock the boat when things are going well. Last year I voted for our sitting governor, even though I didn't the election before, because even though I didn't think he was great I felt he was doing a decent job. I won't be voting for Obama, even though I did last election, because I don't like how he has performed the job on almost every faucet. I have said for quite some time I am an ABO voter and the would vote for whoever had the best chance of beating the man. After the first debate I was a lot happier with my option, but no I am not voting for him per se.
Here again, why are you, and other people who think like this, not paying attention to what republicans are doing in Congress? You think they are less important than the President?? You think they own no responsibility for the affairs of this country??
What's your point? Should I have said "congress not in your picture of things"? That's what I was getting at. People with your anti-Obama views conveniently leave out the obstructionist congress.
Apparently you need to read my last post more closely as well. The answer to the question "What's your point" that you ask here is explained in that post. Methinks there just may be a wee bit of bias on your part which is leading you do misread, make assumptions about, or overlook, key points in my posts.
It looks like the former governor has a good chance to win the election if you go by the polls. With as much as he has changed positions on various issues I gotta admit this is surprising. I wonder whether the close election is a rebuke of President Obama or a true embracing of Romney?
It is a rebuke of both. Imagine if Bush had entered 2004 with 7.8% unemployment. 14.7% U6, 2% GDP growth, 1.5 trill annual deficits.. He'd have gotten fewer electoral votes than McCain's 159.
While I'm no fan of Obama, even should MR EEK out 285 or so electoral votes, the closeness this year, plus the 20 year GOP average of 211.4 electoral votes, with a high of 286 should concern the GOP.
The bold passages in your quote actually support the assertion that you needed to read my post more closely before describing me as a right-winger unwilling to blame Congress for any of this mess, etc.
"Congress nowhere in the picture." Exactly. Describing Obama's presidency as a failure means only that I believe that Obama has failed drastically at the job of the president. I didn't mention Congress because the question by the OP was about the presidential race specifically. No mention of Congress does not imply no criticism of Congress, but simply means that I'm discussing only the president and the job he has done as president, because that's all that's relevant where the topic of the thread is concerned.
My first statement, the one you say you take issue with, was just a heads up about the perspective from which my thoughts about the closeness of the presidential race come. It was never intended to be a deep analysis of the situation this country faces at present. My impression that this race is a mix of widespread negative feeling about Obama and a willingness to accept Romney as an alternative once many people saw a reason to view him positively is simply that: an impression.
That impression I described in order to answer the question posed by the OP. Any other opinion this has led you to express about me or my views is all an assumption on your part based on . . . what? Your own biases? Must be something like that, because there's nothing in my first post that would support any of your assertions about that post.
Obama's perceived job performance, "failure" or success, which you based your "perspective" on, is connected to the actions of congress imo. Can they be separated?
Since you based your opinion with Obama's "failure" as its crux, you should specify how he has failed apart from the actions of Congress, because I would like to know. I find it interesting - somewhat.
I also noted that you went on to talk about the polls.
Last edited by detwahDJ; 10-30-2012 at 06:26 PM..
Reason: reword
Here again, why are you, and other people who think like this, not paying attention to what republicans are doing in Congress? You think they are less important than the President?? You think they own no responsibility for the affairs of this country??
The Republicans in Congress didn't have control of either house for the first two years and only one house the last two years. The Republicans in Congress don't give the impression that we owe an apology to the world for our affluence or power. The Republicans in Congress are not going before the UN and babbling about an offensive video. The Republicans in Congress did not make a priority or push for an expensive health care program at a time when jobs should have been the number one priority.
Very rare is the presidency that that doesn't have to work with the opposite party. The fact of the matter is, the only president since Lyndon Johnson that had control of both houses during his entire presidency was Carter. Poor Bush Sr. didn't have control of either house his entire presidency. The rest of them figured out how to work with the other party, Obama should have too. That's called leadership, which is what we elect presidents for.
The Republicans in Congress didn't have control of either house for the first two years and only one house the last two years. The Republicans in Congress don't give the impression that we owe an apology to the world for our affluence or power. The Republicans in Congress are not going before the UN and babbling about an offensive video. The Republicans in Congress did not make a priority or push for an expensive health care program at a time when jobs should have been the number one priority.
Very rare is the presidency that that doesn't have to work with the opposite party. The fact of the matter is, the only president since Lyndon Johnson that had control of both houses during his entire presidency was Carter. Poor Bush Sr. didn't have control of either house his entire presidency. The rest of them figured out how to work with the other party, Obama should have too. That's called leadership, which is what we elect presidents for.
Okay, none of this is true. You have been listening to and digesting Fox Media. They are telling you things you want to hear, and so you believe them out-of-hand. You are totally unaware of Romney's fabrications and republican dirty tricks. The cushy Fox cocoon.
You can go ahead and vote republican, helping to turn us into a corporate oligarchy. Hope you feel good about your complicity after that happens!
Last edited by detwahDJ; 10-30-2012 at 09:06 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
