L.K.Eder
unbannable non-troll
thanatos must be a left wing plant.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Obama failed miserably to lead, to accomplish, to provide direction, to see the bigger picture and address it. So are those who supported and/or voted for him delusional that he somehow was good in his job? Or that as bad as it was the first four years, he has somehow learned how to do it right now?
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Partisan ideology makes people talk themselves into some crazy stuff.
But the fact is, to reelect Obama with the state the economy was/is in was so blindly partisan that some of us despair that we will ever regain common sense and a rational perspective in this country.
I can get this point. I was surprised all election season that the polling data was showing Obama carrying states like Wisconsin. I think the OP"s point, is that it takes real intelligence to see an uncomfortable truth and accept it as the truth. It's the height of lunacy to see an uncomfortable truth and deny it.
It was fairly clear that despite the state of the economy, the deficit, the debt, and the unemployment rate that Obama was going to win. I don't for the life of me know how that works but that happened.
Ok, that's a small lie. I do know how he won. It's the same way Bush won in 2004 and Clinton in 1996. The opposing party just decided to screw up a shot because they were scared of the incumbent. I'm just surprised the GOP actively blew the election.
I don't think the GOP blew it actually. I just think that with the help of the media, the Democrats were successful in demonizing Romney enough to lessen the enthusiasm for him. And when you have 50% or more of the people receiving some kind of government handout or benefit, it is too easy to protect that, however small, at the expense of doing what we intectually know is the right thing. Romney was honest that some of that had to go if we were to rein in runaway spending, get more people working, and move toward a balanced budget again. And that scared those who thought they might have to give up something personally. And enraged the hard core partisans who look to government to accommodate partisan interests.
I can get this point. I was surprised all election season that the polling data was showing Obama carrying states like Wisconsin. I think the OP"s point, is that it takes real intelligence to see an uncomfortable truth and accept it as the truth. It's the height of lunacy to see an uncomfortable truth and deny it.
It was fairly clear that despite the state of the economy, the deficit, the debt, and the unemployment rate that Obama was going to win. I don't for the life of me know how that works but that happened.
Ok, that's a small lie. I do know how he won. It's the same way Bush won in 2004 and Clinton in 1996. The opposing party just decided to screw up a shot because they were scared of the incumbent. I'm just surprised the GOP actively blew the election.
I don't think the GOP blew it actually. I just think that with the help of the media, the Democrats were successful in demonizing Romney enough to lessen the enthusiasm for him. And when you have 50% or more of the people receiving some kind of government handout or benefit, it is too easy to protect that, however small, at the expense of doing what we intectually know is the right thing. Romney was honest that some of that had to go if we were to rein in runaway spending, get more people working, and move toward a balanced budget again. And that scared those who thought they might have to give up something personally. And enraged the hard core partisans who look to government to accommodate partisan interests.
Unsubstantiated talking points. Handouts is not the correct term. The media was not proven to have favored Obama in its coverage.
Romney's plan was to cut the max tax rate to 20% and kill cap gains taxes. You cannot say he was prepared to do what was needed to balancing the budget. Sorry.
Romney and honest are nor words that go well together.
But you sure do have a nice, calm way of expressing these inaccuracies. Very pleasant.
Obama failed miserably to lead, to accomplish, to provide direction, to see the bigger picture and address it. So are those who supported and/or voted for him delusional that he somehow was good in his job? Or that as bad as it was the first four years, he has somehow learned how to do it right now?
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Obama failed miserably to lead, to accomplish, to provide direction, to see the bigger picture and address it. So are those who supported and/or voted for him delusional that he somehow was good in his job? Or that as bad as it was the first four years, he has somehow learned how to do it right now?
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Please support those opinions.
You contradict yourself in that last sentence. Why would a strong candidate have his work cut out for him in a battle against such a piss-poor leader with a soft economy? Why?
Hey boxer dog. Fuk you.
What about the year we are in and the country we are in.
Are you so fuking stupid that you don't know the year and the country? You got any evidence that todays unions are communist. If not, shut the fuk up.
What a fuking asshole you are. No ifs ands or buts about it.
So we should ignore the history of the communist organization and still ignore the socialist organizations that still support it cause you say it doesn't mater? I am sorry but some of us like using our brain.
thanatos, how do you have a real conversation with someone who believe that if you are pro union you are a communist? Weird belief system. You got any proof of that opinion. Or does it just "feel" good to say?
I am sorry but why would you think I am wrong? The whole union structure is based on a communist structure.
That's equivocation. Are you a chimp because you've got the same basic structure?
I see you are a union member which happens to be a communist organization but that means you are not a communist?????? You eat paint chips when you were young?
You need to work on your literacy and get checked for lead poisoning son, I am not a union member. I support their right to exist and function just the same as I support the right of a business owner to exist and function.
You are a dumbass. apparently you need reading comprehension classes.
Obama failed miserably to lead, to accomplish, to provide direction, to see the bigger picture and address it. So are those who supported and/or voted for him delusional that he somehow was good in his job? Or that as bad as it was the first four years, he has somehow learned how to do it right now?
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Please support those opinions.
You contradict yourself in that last sentence. Why would a strong candidate have his work cut out for him in a battle against such a piss-poor leader with a soft economy? Why?
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Please support those opinions.
You contradict yourself in that last sentence. Why would a strong candidate have his work cut out for him in a battle against such a piss-poor leader with a soft economy? Why?
It's hard to unseat an incumbent. Look back at the history of US Presidents, how many have been single term? In the past 100 years I think you're looking at a fairly small club. Ford, who pardoned Nixon. Carter who faced the Perfect Storm politically. George HW Bush who had a viable third party candidate and a rockstar opponent.
As for Obama's leadership, I'd point you to all of the concessions necessary to pass his signature piece of legislation, despite the fact he had a majority in the House and a Filibuster proof Senate Majority. He should have been able, as leader of his party, to get at least an up or down vote without all of the buy offs he had to include.
As far as the military, I'd note the open criticism that's he's taken from the officer corp. I'd especially point out that McChrystal was only asked to step aside after a second offense, the first should have been more than enough.
He's not a very strong leader and I seem to see more insubordination from his own party in Congress than I've seen in a while.
So yes, even a weak incumbent can be very difficult to unseat. Obama is proof of that.
The media was not proven to have favored Obama in its coverage.
Romney and honest are nor words that go well together.
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
I think he largely got re-elected because of the squishy "Personal Likability" factors and the fact the GOP ran Romney. A stronger candidate would have had a real job cut out for him to unseat Obama, but I think could have done it.
Please support those opinions.
You contradict yourself in that last sentence. Why would a strong candidate have his work cut out for him in a battle against such a piss-poor leader with a soft economy? Why?
It's hard to unseat an incumbent. Look back at the history of US Presidents, how many have been single term? In the past 100 years I think you're looking at a fairly small club. Ford, who pardoned Nixon. Carter who faced the Perfect Storm politically. George HW Bush who had a viable third party candidate and a rockstar opponent.
As for Obama's leadership, I'd point you to all of the concessions necessary to pass his signature piece of legislation, despite the fact he had a majority in the House and a Filibuster proof Senate Majority. He should have been able, as leader of his party, to get at least an up or down vote without all of the buy offs he had to include.
As far as the military, I'd note the open criticism that's he's taken from the officer corp. I'd especially point out that McChrystal was only asked to step aside after a second offense, the first should have been more than enough.
He's not a very strong leader and I seem to see more insubordination from his own party in Congress than I've seen in a while.
So yes, even a weak incumbent can be very difficult to unseat. Obama is proof of that.
I don't disagree with this. I think Obama has terrible leadership skills. Arguably the worst of any of the modern Presidents I've seen in my lifetime. He can't keep his own party in line, he can barely keep the military in line, and he can't seem to figure out how to negotiate with his opponents.
.
Nate Silver nails it, pointing out how frustrating it can be to analyze politics:
Nate Silver: Between pundits and partisans, 'a lot of very delusional people' in politics - POLITICO.com
From the interview:
Between the pundits and the partisans, you're dealing with a lot of very delusional people. And sports provides for much more frequent reality checks, he wrote. If you were touting how awesome Notre Dame was, for example, you got very much slapped back into reality last night. In politics, you can go on being delusional for years at a time.
Partisan ideology makes people talk themselves into some crazy stuff.
.
Hey boxer dog. Fuk you.
What about the year we are in and the country we are in.
Are you so fuking stupid that you don't know the year and the country? You got any evidence that todays unions are communist. If not, shut the fuk up.
What a fuking asshole you are. No ifs ands or buts about it.
So we should ignore the history of the communist organization and still ignore the socialist organizations that still support it cause you say it doesn't mater? I am sorry but some of us like using our brain.
No, if you're a union member, you're a union member. That's just the truth. The rest is embellishments you're making up to try to sell your point.
I see you are a union member which happens to be a communist organization but that means you are not a communist?????? You eat paint chips when you were young?
Holy crap.
I have to ask: Is it possible this person is actually a liberal trying to make the Right look as goofy as possible?
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but come ON.