- This topic has 191 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 29, 2012 at 10:53 PM #736928January 29, 2012 at 11:09 PM #736929
markmax33
Guest[quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]
I’d like to hear Huntsman’s platform. He never mentioned it anywhere during this election. I’m not sure how you can support a guy who really hasn’t established a platform. Do you like him because he talks smoothly and looks respectable? We’ve been tricked by that many times before![/quote]
Just because you never made the effort to find it, doesn’t mean he didn’t have one. He did.[/quote]
Show me one youtube clip from a debate where he offered any sort of plan that actually meant anything. I was listening.
January 30, 2012 at 4:01 AM #736931Anonymous
GuestPlease disregard the post from briansd1. He is so far in the tank for Obama it’s not even worth debating.
How’s that “Hope and change” thing working for you, briansd1?
January 30, 2012 at 5:10 AM #736933Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][…] how on earth is a 2nd Obama term going to be better?[/quote]
Better than what?
It will be better than any Republican alternative because the Republican alternatives are terrible.
It will be better than his first term because he won’t be constrained politics and the mass-ignorance of the FOX news viewing audience (see Brutus’ post for an example.) Almost every decision he made during his first term had to be tempered with “how will FOX news exploit this and twist it into an absurd argument about patriotism?”
His second term will be better than the first because he won’t have to worry about a third.
It’s better because it’s the best available option in 2012 – that’s all that matters in the real world.
January 30, 2012 at 9:32 AM #736937Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][…] how on earth is a 2nd Obama term going to be better?[/quote]
Better than what?
It will be better than any Republican alternative because the Republican alternatives are terrible.
It will be better than his first term because he won’t be constrained politics and the mass-ignorance of the FOX news viewing audience (see Brutus’ post for an example.) Almost every decision he made during his first term had to be tempered with “how will FOX news exploit this and twist it into an absurd argument about patriotism?”
His second term will be better than the first because he won’t have to worry about a third.
It’s better because it’s the best available option in 2012 – that’s all that matters in the real world.[/quote]
Pri: Take a deep breath, Bubba. I wasn’t casting aspersions and I agree that there isn’t a real GOP alternative (see my previous posts to SK). However, given that Obama has been fighting uphill and also given that he’s squandered immense political capital, I believe that he’ll face even more intransigence and obstructionism than his first.
January 30, 2012 at 9:58 AM #736938Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I believe that he’ll face even more intransigence and obstructionism than his first.[/quote]
From whom?
Congress?
There are congressional elections in 2012 and again in 2014. Even FOX News cannot obscure the fact that congress has done nothing for the past four years except obstruct (look at their approval ratings.)
They’ve played the same card way too many times.
Obama will have nothing to lose in his second term, those who would obstruct him have much to lose. That’s the difference.
January 30, 2012 at 10:49 AM #736943Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]I believe that he’ll face even more intransigence and obstructionism than his first.[/quote]
From whom?
Congress?
There are congressional elections in 2012 and again in 2014. Even FOX News cannot obscure the fact that congress has done nothing for the past four years except obstruct (look at their approval ratings.)
They’ve played the same card way too many times.
Obama will have nothing to lose in his second term, those who would obstruct him have much to lose. That’s the difference.[/quote]
Pri: Dude, I hope you’re right and I mean that sincerely. Along with my fervent hope that the GOP finally pulls it’s head out of it’s ass and nominates someone like Huntsman, I also hope for a return to moderacy on their part.
Hence my hope that Obama does win re-election, because it will force a sea-change on the GOP (which is to your point above) and thus help break up the present logjam in DC.
January 30, 2012 at 10:52 AM #736945ParticipantBrian: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard article on China and the true state of their economy: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100014380/china%E2%80%99s-very-mysterious-data/
Thought you’d find this interesting, especially in light of your remarks about China creating a self-sustaining consumer-driven economy. According to Evans-Pritchard, there is little to no chance of this happening and he explains why.
January 30, 2012 at 11:31 AM #736952briansd1
Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Brian: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard article on China and the true state of their economy: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100014380/china%E2%80%99s-very-mysterious-data/
Thought you’d find this interesting, especially in light of your remarks about China creating a self-sustaining consumer-driven economy. According to Evans-Pritchard, there is little to no chance of this happening and he explains why.[/quote]
Thanks for the article.
Which proves my point that we, as country, can borrow at low interst rates to spur the economy. Sure, we have to pay back the money later. But, right now, there’s no reason to needlessly force hardship and deprivation onto people, as the right wing wants to do.
January 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM #736960Guest[quote=Brutus]
How’s that “Hope and change” thing working for you, briansd1?[/quote]Sounds like a Sarah Palin line. But it’s working well, thank you.
I see a lot of anger and venom on the right. But I’m not seeing a good case being made for a Republican candidate for President.
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] how on earth is a 2nd Obama term going to be better?
[/quote]pri_dk made a good case to why.
Allan you disparage Obama then you say that you wish he wins. Obama will win.
What about that “demography is destiny” thing? What is the Republican base? I don’t think that non-college educate Whites of the Red States can elect Republican presidents on their own.
The Republican base is riled-up and pissed at Obama — irrationally, I would say, but pissed notheless. I don’t think the Republicans can build a national platform on anger alone.
January 30, 2012 at 12:58 PM #736971Participant[quote=briansd1]
pri_dk made a good case to why.Allan you disparage Obama then you say that you wish he wins. Obama will win.
[/quote]
Brian: Legitimate criticism is NOT disparagement. My criticisms of Obama have been fact-based and similar in tone and tenor to the more center-left posters on this board, like SK, afx or Gandalf. As a matter of fact, you’ve even pointed out where Obama has blown some golden opportunities. Does that count as disparagement?
As to demography being destiny, there is no clearcut case for a massive shift in either direction, no matter what James Carville would have you believe. Obama’s victory in 2008 was not a landslide and I strongly doubt that 2012 will be either, in spite of an exceptionally weak Republican field.
February 1, 2012 at 3:46 AM #737126
CoronitaParticipant[quote=markmax33]
[quote=flu]
[quote=markmax33]
Seeing as he has only campaigned in 3 states so far and the media doesn’t talk about him and outright lies about him, 15% nationally is pretty good and it’s all grassroots. Remember 4 years ago was 0% so by the end of this election he should easily be a solid 25% or greater.It’s really a two man race right now anyway. Romney and Paul are the only 2 with that are on all of the ballots, only two with organization in every state, only two with money. Gingrich and Santorum won’t be around much longer.[/quote]
Wrong again. Paul is a non-compute in these states.[/quote]
FLU,
Your comments are a non-compute as usual. The GOP has promoted a different candidate per week. There are 564 delegates that Paul and Romney only have a shot at since they are the only ones on the ballot.[/quote]Hey, mm33, just checking in if you woke up yet….How did Paul do in Florida? 🙂
February 1, 2012 at 12:26 PM #737150Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] Brian: Legitimate criticism is NOT disparagement. My criticisms of Obama have been fact-based and similar in tone and tenor to the more center-left posters on this board, like SK, afx or Gandalf.
[/quote]I believe that SK said that he’s to the south and self of Gandhi. But despite his political leanings, he chooses to be rational and pragmatic and look at the political lay of the land the way it actually is.
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
As a matter of fact, you’ve even pointed out where Obama has blown some golden opportunities. Does that count as disparagement?
[/quote]I believe that Obama blew some opportunities because he had had the mandate and popular support. You said that he overeached and never had popular support.
Folks on the right say that Obama is a socialist demagogue and the like. In reality, as SK pointed out, Obama is very centrist president who very much wants to work within the establishment to change it.
What does that say about the Republican party? They are moving further and further to the right and away from the mainstream.
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
As to demography being destiny, there is no clearcut case for a massive shift in either direction, no matter what James Carville would have you believe. Obama’s victory in 2008 was not a landslide and I strongly doubt that 2012 will be either, in spite of an exceptionally weak Republican field.[/quote]Time will tell. Unless the Republicans can issues important to Hispanic voters, they will not win presidential elections.
Unlike you, Allan, I believe that an Obama win will invigorate the right wing of the right, and cause the Republican party to turn more religious and reactionary.
I know that I’ll be given flak for bringing up the race issue. But it’s clear the me that the Republican base* can’t stand a Black “Golden Boy” who can do no wrong, is too smart for his own good, and rose to power at a young age.
* by base here, I’m referring to non-college educated, middle-middle to lower-middle and lower class White Republicans.
February 1, 2012 at 12:32 PM #737153Participant[quote=briansd1]
I believe that Obama blew some opportunities because he had had the mandate and popular support. You said that he overeached and never had popular support.What does that say about the Republican party? They are moving further and further to the right and away from the mainstream.
Time will tell. Unless the Republicans can issues important to Hispanic voters, they will not win presidential elections.
Unlike you, Allan, I believe that an Obama win will invigorate the right wing of the right, and cause the Republican party to turn more religious and reactionary.[/quote]
Brian: And yet none of what you believe is supported by facts, polling or data.
An excellent source is William Galston at The New Republic. As I’m sure you’re aware, Brian, TNR is hardly right-wing in style or content and Galston does an excellent job of deconstructing the numbers and setting forth his case as to what the upcoming election might bring.
Obama’s 2008 victory was too narrow to truly claim that he ever had a clearcut “mandate”. He ran against a weak GOP challenger and in an environment where the populace was clearly ready for a change after eight years of Dubya. The Dem drubbing in the 2010 mid-terms shows that his mandate, such as it was, wasn’t clearcut and that voter anger and frustration manifested itself in a swing back to the GOP and away from the Dems. This was NOT a mandate, either, simply the voters choosing to move in a different direction, after the Dems failed to move the needle.
Further debunking your point as to mandate: Obama and Co. are choosing NOT to run on signal legislation, like Obamacare, nor are they running on things like the auto bailouts. Why? Because polling consistently shows low voter approval numbers there.
So, if you want to argue using facts and data, let’s have at it. Otherwise, it’s simply more of the same leftist posturing.
February 1, 2012 at 12:55 PM #737155GuestArguments about whether a president has a “mandate” are a waste of time.
Only one person goes to the White House in January. There’s nothing subjective about it.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.