| Name: |
water_watcher
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
How Obama got elected
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 6:32:22 PM
|
If you have a few minutes watch this. Very scary. But so true. I respect anyone that votes, but I would like if the vote they are informed. This is so sad.
http://www.howobamagotelected.com/
URL: How Obama Got elected
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
How Obama got elected
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 7:34:42 PM
|
While that video could have been concocted, I agree that the media played a huge part in Obama's election.
But that beer is spilled and undrinkable now.
Point made, but how do you suggest we change it before the next election?
Nasreddin Hodja
|
| Name: |
NautiMinded
-
|
|
| Subject: |
How Obama got elected
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 9:32:39 PM
|
No, those weren't concocted as there are other interviews much to the same tone out there. I find it embarrassing that people are so malinformed and vote based on the celebrity or skin color or past administrations soley.
I think we should all have to take a simple question and answer test when voting. That test would contain the top 10 issues. Check "yes" if you agree, or "no" if you don't per issue. The most matches/ideals you concur with, in now your candidate of choice. Viola.....that is now your vote. That would alleviate help the mindless ballot casting that happens all too often.
|
| Name: |
Lady
-
|
|
| Subject: |
What next?
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 11:19:15 PM
|
For starters, read this.
URL: http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12599247
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
How Obama got elected
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 11:20:33 PM
|
I guess this would include mindless voting by some Republicans too that vote on a single issue like abortion or continuation of the Iraqi war?
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Please tell me you are kidding
|
|
Date:
|
11/20/2008 11:36:32 PM
|
You say a Republican is mindless because he or she votes on an ISSUE like abortion or the Iraq war.....and compare it to absolutely clueless zombies like those in the video who know NOTHING other than "vote for Obama, he's black and he's cool"?
The cold, hard facts are that Obama was elected because he IS black (or at least half black) and because the media herded the mindless ones like on that video toward him.
If Obama had even half the hard scrutiny that Palin had he would be also-ran instead of pres-elect.
Now back to the real issue. How do we keep the media from deciding our elections in EITHER direction?
Nasreddin Hodja
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Please tell me you are kidding
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 12:04:53 AM
|
I don't agree with your assessment on the reason why Obama was elected. Yes, the media is out of control in the election process, but that isn't why Obama was elected.
And I hardly think that this is a scientific sampling of why so many people voted for Obama, as much as some Republicans would love to believe it. Looks to me like a bit of Republican propaganda.
No doubt some people voted for him because he is African American, but I don't believe that is "the" reason, any more than I believe the article in the Birmingham News that said that nine out of 10 Alabamians voted for McCain because he is white.
And yes, I do believe that there are a large number of Republicans that vote based on a single issue. Some of them even post here. There are almost certainly democrats that vote based on a single issue, like gun control or environmental issues.
And I don't know how you control the media in a country that allows freedom of the press. Or if we should want to. And that's one thing that scares me a bit about conservative Republicans -- they want to control things that don't suit their purpose.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lady Says it all
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 12:12:19 AM
|
The article answers all the questions that any intelligent person might ask. The Rght must be mad at W-W for bringing it up with his video. Of couse, blacks voted for Obama. I really feel sorry for Hodja cause he still doesn't get it!!!!!!!
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Please tell me you are kidding
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 6:55:12 AM
|
"that's one thing that scares me a bit about conservative Republicans -- they want to control things that don't suit their purpose."
Could say EXACTLY the same thing about Democrats - gun control, abortion, wealth redistribution....
Its not about controlling the media, its about having some sort of balance in the media - being fair.
And if you don't think race and the media made the difference, you didn't hear what I heard and see what I saw. Have another sip of that kool-ade. Yes, a lot voted for change, even though they had no clue as to what that change would be - but I would bet my next tax refund that if you did a real analysis, especially in predominantly black areas, you'd find I am right
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Once again.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 8:35:55 AM
|
Race to the forefront. Do you realize the % of Blacks that voted for Obama far surpassed the % of Whites that voted for McCain yet, once again, the Dems scream racism. What a freakin joke! You folks never cease to amaze. And with regards to single issue voters, about 100% of those on Government "handout" progarms probably voted on a single issue...... "Wealth Re-distribution." And Acorn made sure their voices were heard. Pot, meet kettle.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I have no doubt
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 8:45:26 AM
|
that in some predominantly black areas, that they voted for Obama because he is African American. These are the people that thought it would never happen in their lifetime. But, I don't think that is why he won.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Once again.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 8:48:56 AM
|
I'm not screaming racism. I'm not saying that race wasn't a factor, but what I am saying is it is not the reason he won. Everything is a a "factor" for both candidate. No doubt the unpopularity of Bush was a factor in John McCain's loss, but I don't think it is the only reason he lost.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I have no doubt
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 8:54:21 AM
|
Why do you think he won. I do feel a big part was because he was black and got a lot of minorities to vote that normally sit home. They were not voting on issue, they were voting because of his skin color. There were plenty of on the street interviews of Obama supporters and most had no clue of the issues. They would ask questions do you agree on Obama stance on on issue that was really McCains and they would say, yes absolutely.
Obama had a great marketing team ... this whole change thing without ever having to really define what change was genius. People got excited and did not even know why ... we are going to get change.
Then all those that believe Obama is going to help me .... they won't have to worry about anything any more. That had to be the take from the rich belief. Very sad.
He is our president, his views are radical, but he is picking more moderate people which is giving the far left where he came from all sorts of head aches.
Obama is dangerous, but hopefully he is realizing what he thought he wanted to do would totally destroy this country if he tried to do it now and is getting more in line with republican fiscal views.
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The Economist.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 9:04:44 AM
|
Wow, now you have lowered yourself to quoting the Ecomist to making your case. Enough said. The Intellectually elite. O may have garnered moe votes from the intellectual sophisticates however, I wonder how many more votes he received from the illiterate masses. Just a question.
|
| Name: |
green,ed
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Once again.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 9:43:33 AM
|
I agree but blacks vote for the democrat anyway(maybe not in such numbers).A black candidate could be president from now on unless the republicans find a lot better candidate than they had this time.And don't get me started on Palin.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I have no doubt
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 9:51:26 AM
|
I think he won because because people felt he would put the country on a different track than the one that everyone is currently unhappy with. Whether he will or whether he won't remains to be seen. He needs some fiscal conservatives to keep him on the right track.
I am beginning to believe that the economy is going to consume his Presidency. I'm doubtful that a lot of the social programs that he claimed he would do are not going to see the light of day because of the economy and the fallout. And I don't think the government is going to be able to come up with enough money to bail out everyone that is going to need bailing out. (and I'm not in favor of government bailouts). The more I read, the more convinced I am that the problems with the economy are much, much worse than the average American realizes, and that anyone that thinks it's going to be over in a year is in for a sad surprise.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The Economist.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 9:54:27 AM
|
Sorry to disappoint you, but a lot of Republicans in Washington, at least the politicals I worked for in Defense, consider "the Economist" mandatory reading. I can't tell you how many meetings I went to with the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy where discussion of a "The Economist" article dominated.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I have no doubt
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 10:11:40 AM
|
I actually agree with that on the economy. I will say that typically when the economy is bad and there is a presidential election with a change in power .... history shows the stock market rallies on the hope of new programs that will stimulate the economy. This is going down in history as the worst post election decline of the stock market on record. Yes I do think it is related to Obama because he never put any clear programs of his "change" on the table and everything he talked about including raising taxes, increasing the capital gains tax, more social spending, anti oil drilling, anti coal, anti neuclear .... all does not sit well with investors. Additionally all are not things that would stimulate the economy.
He needs to go on record and fast, that he is putting this on hold until the economy is back on solid ground. If he did I think you would see the markets turn around and fast.
If anyone does not think a falling stock market does not impact the average person on the street they are grossly mistaken.
|
| Name: |
SPEARFISHER
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Once Again
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 10:19:44 AM
|
The ignorance is flowing. Mr H never said we need to CONTROL the media. I think what he was asking was how do we not let the media control the outcome of the elections.
And BTW it seems like to me the dems are wanting to control the the airwaves more than anyone with the "fairness doctrine". It would not affect "news" programs, but would have a major impact on conservative talk radio shows. The ones they do not like the will just do away with!!
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Once again.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 11:02:42 AM
|
Read my post. I said the black vote AND the media bias won the election for him. Without that combination he would not be pres-elect.
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Lady Says it all
|
|
Date:
|
11/21/2008 2:35:31 PM
|
1. Time will tell. If Obama keeps true to his promises we all will lose.
2. Keep your sympathy. I'll be OK. So will the Republican party.
3. You'd better go get in line or you will miss your handout.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The Economist.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/23/2008 10:17:48 PM
|
I used to have a subscription to the Economist but let it drop. It is filled with too much leftist propaganda as evidenced by the article in question. Have you been to England lately? I don't think I will be taking any advice or political analysis from a country where such a high percentage of their people are better off on the dole than working and if you need heart bypass surgery come back in 6 months and we'll see if we can fit you in. That is one screwed up place where binge drinking is considered a team sport. Great place to visit, but.....
I know how comforting it is to the intellectual elitists to stick their noses up in the air and sniff about people like Rush or Hannity but I frankly would much rather listen to them than Brokaw/Couric/the third guy who I can never rmemeber or imbeciles like Keith Olberman or Chris Mathews. If that is what passes for intellectualism I'll take my rednecks from West Virginia any day. That's what makes liberals so unsuccessful in the media, they are just so tiresome and mean spirited and don't know what entertainment is.
I would caution anyone from drawing any long-term conclusions from the voting demographics of this election given it involved a black man running for President for the first time, a significant economic downturn in the last few months of the election and an unpopular President. Those are mighty stiff headwinds for any candidate to sail against and McCain did just fine. I do find it ironic that the Democrat party, the supposed savior of the working man, is crowing about how they attracted all these intellectuals and how Republicans only attracted stupid rednecks.
Kind of confirms that lie that is the modern Democrat party.....it is actually the party of labor unions, Hollywood/Upper west side leftists, suckle the government teet proponents, abortion on demand fanatics and other disparate groups while the Republican Party is the home for the common man that loves his country, works hard and wants to be able to achieve success, believes in the sanctity of life, lower taxes, less governemnt intervention and actually has an optimistic view of the potential for success (equal opportunity versus the failed concept of equal outcome). I am glad to be part of that minority and unlike the addled masses occupying the "independent" position I have principals and will stick with them.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
The Economist.....
|
|
Date:
|
11/24/2008 10:26:25 PM
|
You are welcome to your opinion, but that is just so much BULL.
The Repubicans are seriously out of touch with the common man. They have let the religious right set their agenda, and they will continue to lose elections until they figure out how to get back to center. People do not want to be told to how to live especially by the religious Right. "On demand" abortions -- that's not what it's about. Most people feel that it is a personal choice, and they know that banning abortion will not stop abortion. Rather, wealthy women will go out of the country to have abortions and poor women will be driven back to back alley abortions. Unwanted children aren't always put up for adoption or happily accepted -- sometimes they become physcially and emotionally abused children.
You may want to listen to Rush and company, and that's fine; but, you need to get some balance and to do that you also need to listen to some of the mainstream journalist and commentators. Then you would know why so many mainstream people found someone like Sarah Palin so scary. Face it, she hurt the ticket.
I get the impression from your post that you want to live in a world that doesn't really exist anymore. It hasn't existed for years. The majority of people feel they were lied to by the Bush Administration and that things are much worse than it has been. They are disgusted by the Democratic Congress too, but they are willing to take a chance. People want change. You can deny it, you can hate it, but that's reality.
|
| Name: |
AUCATZ
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Late to this thread,,,but
|
|
Date:
|
11/25/2008 2:36:21 PM
|
gotta say...
Obviously being 'OUT OF TOUCH' means not voting for the media darling, the newest Hollywood star, or the Harvard grad who has written a couple of 'memoirs' about his hard times growing up biracially, yada yada yada.
Truth is he has made the most of his opportunities, and had a golden road paved for him by opportunists who saw in him a person they could hype to the Presidency. Kudos to them for their brilliant ploy.
Truth is the Republican party relied on an aging veteran with solid war and political experience to carry them through and Hollywood beat him.
Truth is the Republican party has a lot of young folks that will rise to the forefront in the months and years to come that are conservative and have the same values as their forefathers.
Everyone likes a few movies and TV shows, but a steady diet of glamour isn't realistic. The star power of BO will fade, and we will see if there is substance behind the rhetoric.
And, the folks who voted for him based on the mindless mantra of 'change, change, change' will become disenchanted when reality sets in and he can't keep his promises (or what they perceived those promises to be, i.e. 'I'm not gonna have to pay my bills and the gov'ment is gonna give me free gas'!!!). While I never agreed with McCain on everything, at least he was a bit more realistic (and specific, by the way) on what could and could not be done to lead the country.
|
| Name: |
Talullahhound
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And my only point is
|
|
Date:
|
11/25/2008 6:38:44 PM
|
that there is no indication that McCain would have been able to follow through on his promises either.
Time will tell with Obama. He's off to a good start, but we won't know how successful he will be for 2-3 years.
I hope there are young Republicans out there that will take up the mantle of the party. Hopefully they will learn from the mistakes of their elders. It's not that the Republican party is bad; it's just that they've moved too far to the right. It's time for some new blood. I still think that if John McCain was the best they had to offer, then they need to cultivate their younger members.
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Bear Creek Reservoir
Login
|
Home
