1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The most popular politician in America!

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by MisterCreosote, Sep 16, 2011.

  1. I Should Coco

    I Should Coco Well-Known Member

    I hope you're right.

    After Obama's latest cave in to business, on the EPA Clean Air Act rule, the MoveOn.org guy wondered allowed why any environmentalist would vote for Obama in 2012.

    He had a great point.
     
  2. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    If they take this "Most Popular Politician" vote today, Sarah Palin rises to the top on the strength of the black vote.
     
  3. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Andrew Cuomo? :D
     
  4. Brian

    Brian Well-Known Member

    I'm every day convinced more and more that the country is ungovernable as currently constituted. I don't think there is a human being alive who could have an approval rating over 50 percent.

    Any Democrat will be pigeon-holed as a socialist by the right and limp-wristed by the left.

    Any Republican will be pigeon-holed as a fascist by the left and limp-wristed by the right.

    I don't see that changing any time soon. It's depressing, and I don't know what would have to happen for it to change.

    We could re-animate Abe Lincoln, and some political wacko on the left or right would re-assassinate him at a screening of "The Book of Mormon" inside three months.
     
  5. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Yeah. We've had a preview of it in California for the last 8-10 years. We're fucked, but we seem happy and OK with it.
     
  6. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Another terrorist attack, or an actual war in which we were attacked first.

    Sad to say, I know.
     
  7. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I agree. The only time in my life when I was excited about a candidate was with Clinton in 1992 and I was too young and dumb to know any better. I'm not saying that Clinton did a bad job, but just that it's easy to be hopeful and idealistic about a presidential candidate when you don't know any better.

    I think a lot of people felt that way with Obama in 2008 and based on some of the posts here, most have been pretty disappointed.

    In the four presidential elections that I've voted in since 1992, I haven't been even the slightest bit excited about any of the candidates and I really don't see that changing anytime soon.
     
  8. albert77

    albert77 Well-Known Member

    My dad is a die-hard Goldwater conservative, and I vividly remember at Christmas in 2007 talking with him about which Democrat we'd prefer in the '08 election. He was emphatic that he'd much rather face Hillary than Obama, because of the devil-you-know principle.

    I agreed, but from the perspective that she'd be easier for McCain to beat, although given the way things turned out, I believe she'd have won anyway. Even then, I could see Obama running a crusade, rather than a campaign, that would have been hard to stop. And that certainly proved to be the case.

    I also agree that given her background that she'd have been under no illusions about the opposition, but that's Obama's fault. He had plenty of Clintonites in his administration who should have warned him about what to expect, but I don't think he listened. I think he was so convinced of the rightness of his cause and so arrogant that he believed he could win the day by the sheer force of his personality.

    And, yes, Hillary would have taken on the economy before ever attempting health-care reform.
     
  9. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    Unless the GOP nominates someone with a tangible respect for contemporary science (and of the prevailing field, Romney is the only one who fills that bill who has a chance to actually win), they deserve scant respect.
     
  10. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    Because what's the alternative? Voting for Nader again? I just don't get the thinking that because my guy didn't do exactly what I wanted, I'm going to take my ball and go home. Hey, MoveOn guy, you know what people sitting at home got us in 2010? A Tea Party sweep. At least there is possibility of Obama taking your calls. I don't think President Perry is going to worry about your interests, douchebag.

    As for Clinton, I like the allusion made earlier to the backup quarterback. Perhaps she could have worked easier with the Tea Party because sometimes it seemed like she was one of them. Live her answer to whether Obama is a Christian: "As far as I know."

    Also, have others have pointed out, it's not as simple as Obama "caving." The Republican party has made it a point that it will never support anything Obama supports, even if it's stuff the Republicans have supported for years. Plus, as we can see with his jobs bill and we saw with the health bill, Democrats won't unite behind him. They didn't when his approval rating was through the roof, so why would they now?

    Actually, the House ban on earmarks I think does any president no favors when it comes to legislation. It's hard to throw in a little project here or there in exchange for a vote. For a president to get a vote through Congress, he's got to be able to either take away something they want, or give something they want. That's easier to do when you have some members who are eminently flippable. But back to the Republican unity and House majority (and lack of a filibuster-proof Senate majority), Obama can't possibly find something, either way, to move a Republican to his corner. So it has to be something they all want, and all they want is tax cuts.

    It sucks the Bush tax cuts were extended, but in exchange (during the 2010 lame-duck session) Obama got unemployment extension, the new START treaty, new food safety regulations, the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and the 9-11 first responders bill. Heck, he got everything he wanted except the DREAM Act. And for all the kvetching over the lack of a public option, Obama actually got real health reform through Congress, which is something no other president has accomplished, even when he had the majority in his party.

    Back to the MoveOn guy -- you want Obama to be your friend? You want something done? Then quite bitching and spend your ample money on a GOTV effort not only for Obama, but for every Democrat, as left-wing as possible, as you can on every level of government. If you want to send Obama a message, don't stay home, lefties. Show up. Otherwise, the message will be sent for you. And you're not going to like what it says.
     
  11. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I actually thought early on in late 2007 or so that Obama would be easier to beat than Hillary. After seeing the reaction to some of his speeches and the way Hillary's campaign was run, I was clearly proven wrong...

    But other than that, I agree with everything you posted. Hillary would have crushed McCain and would have gone into the job a lot more prepared than Obama was.
     
  12. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    I don't know that she would have gone in prepared, though. What her campaign exposed is she thought the president was her birthright, and she didn't work hard enough and wasn't organized enough to get it together. By the time she took Obama seriously, it was too late. Not a good indicator for how she would anticipate and handle political opposition.

    In fact, I thought the rub on her, versus her husband, was that she was as off-putting as he was charismatic and persuasive.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page