Does Obama want to be president anymore?

[badger]

The way he acted in the first debate - not prepapred, not really showing a lot of heart, etc. led NP to ask that question.

His first term has not seemed to be a lot of fun. Maybe he pictured it differently --- Michelle and he could go visit elementary schools, his daughters would get to find Easter eggs on the White House lawn, he could invite championship pro sports teams in, and do a bit of world peace and legislation on the side.

In fact, his first term seems like the absolute opposite of fun --- he had the BP oil spill, a sh!tty economy, Obamacare, being called a socialist Muslim repeatedly, you name it.

Does Obama just want out of the Oval Office and retire early back in Chicago? Is he just running to appease the Democratic Party and those that believed in his hope and change of four years ago?

Thoughts?

[Breadburner]

He hasn't changed...He can't talk with out a teleprompter telling him what to say.....Lame duck puppet....

[jk the sooner fan]

he's as concerned about his "legacy" as any other president - his ego is no different

so to answer your question - yes, he does

[Curly Bill]

We joke about it, but I think him not having his friend the teleprompter hurt him more than you'd think it should affect a supposedly educated man. That and how do you defend what he's done over the past 4 years?

[salth2o]

He said it himself...

CRAMdUNo2Cg

[Skysooner]

We joke about it, but I think him not having his friend the teleprompter hurt him more than you'd think it should affect a supposedly educated man. That and how do you defend what he's done over the past 4 years?

There is such a fine line on "debates" like this. I hesitate to even call it a debate when the "facts" are basically manufactured. This is a beauty pageant. It isn't about substance. It is about appearing to have substance and knowledge of your facts. Romney basically repeated the same talking points over and over in slightly different ways. Obama just looked tired. Romney "won" if that really means anything. I don't think it will have much of an effect on the election. Once we went over the financial cliff with the rest of the world in 2008, there was very little any President could have done. There are things that could have done much differently certainly, and I think Obama doesn't really communicate his message that well even though he is a gifted speaker. I'm more interested to see what the foreign policy debate looks like although I'm sure it will be more of the same (talking points without much substance on both sides).

[BigTip]

and I think Obama doesn't really communicate his message that well even though he is a gifted speech reader
Fix it for you.

[Curly Bill]

I said before the debate they don't mean much, and anyone who was basing their vote off of them is too stupid to vote in the first place. That being said: I like that Obammy came out looking bad after the 1st one!

[Curly Bill]

Yep, I laughed when I saw that Obammy is a gifted speaker thing too. He can use a teleprompter well is what he can do.

[MamaMia]

Maybe he's torn between not wanting to lose and longing to be a former president. We may not know until his next book comes out. :)

[rock on sooner]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

[Curly Bill]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

Does anyone care? Does it remotely matter? A professional community organizer should be good at turning out peeps. I'd rather elect a guy who looks like he can run a country.

[badger]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?
Did thousands of teachers call in sick to be there? :mad:

Seriously, I was thoroughly disgusted when I heard that about my home state teachers during that whole collective bargaining crap.

[cleller]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.



Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

A couple questions:

1. Are you sure there wasn't a teleprompter?
2. Did the rally have anything to do with cheese?

[Breadburner]

He's been fast-tracked and coddled his whole life.....What else would you expect......

[hawaii 5-0]

I've seen nothing of his goals for the next 4 years if reelected.

5-0

[Skysooner]

Fix it for you.

Speaker, speech reader. It is all the same thing in the era of television. Reagan was a great speaker and speech reader too.

[5thYearSooner]

“the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President (Barack) Obama to be a one-term president.” -Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

If Obama wins again and the pubs decide to continue their strategy, then God save America.

Note: Personally I'm disgusted about this passive aggressive strategy

[rock on sooner]

A couple questions:

1. Are you sure there wasn't a teleprompter?
2. Did the rally have anything to do with cheese?

1. Yup
2. EVERYTHING in WI has to do with cheese, the Packers and beer,
not necessarily in that order!:biggrin:

[Skysooner]

I've seen nothing of his goals for the next 4 years if reelected.

5-0

I haven't either, but I would hope it would be a long-term deficit reduction plan that is bilateral. This can consist of many things, of course.

[sappstuf]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

It doesn't mean much or at least it doesn't mean much good for Obama. Obama was supposed to have Wisconsin wrapped up after winning it by almost 14% in 2008.

The fact that he is there says the state is still up for grabs.

[Skysooner]

Does anyone care? Does it remotely matter? A professional community organizer should be good at turning out peeps. I'd rather elect a guy who looks like he can run a country.

The key is looks like. Reagan was a leader. Romney spins at every little bit of wind. I just don't know if I trust him. If he will govern from right center, I would be happy to have him as President. If he gets bulldozed by the hardcore right wing (meaning focusing on the social issues that shouldn't even be part of the political debate this year) and doesn't focus on what is important in this country (getting our financial house in order) then he would prove to be a huge disappointment.

[cleller]

1. Yup
2. EVERYTHING in WI has to do with cheese, the Packers and beer,
not necessarily in that order!:biggrin:

Aha! And is the government still in the cheese business?

[XingTheRubicon]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

In the middle of the day on a Thursday, most of Romney's supporters are at work.

[rock on sooner]

It doesn't mean much or at least it doesn't mean much good for Obama. Obama was supposed to have Wisconsin wrapped up after winning it by almost 14% in 2008.

The fact that he is there says the state is still up for grabs.

The last poll I saw for WI (but Badger said don't believe ANY poll in WI)
that Obama was up 8 points, remember, it is Ryan's home state, just like
Michigan, Mass, and California are places where Romney has homes or has
had homes, so, it stands to reason for Obama to not let up.

I asked in my post if Romney has had any rally that had 30000 people, still
no answer. I'm only guessing, but by this time next week, the "lost" debate
will not be a focus. So far, Romney is still staying centrist, still flip flopping
on nearly every issue out there, so looks like same oh, same oh....

[rock on sooner]

Aha! And is the government still in the cheese business?

Don't know, but probably...

[rock on sooner]

In the middle of the day on a Thursday, most of Romney's supporters are at work.

Could well be the case, but I'm guessing that Romney can't pull in 30000
to a rally ANY time, day, night, weekend...

[XingTheRubicon]

congrats on your rally

[TheHumanAlphabet]

You just wait until he campaigns in Utah!

But of course he won't. I bet he gets 99% of the vote in that state.

[cleller]

congrats on your rally

Bet the place smelled like a Grateful Dead show.

[rock on sooner]

congrats on your rally

Thank you.

[rock on sooner]

You just wait until he campaigns in Utah!

But of course he won't. I bet he gets 99% of the vote in that state.

THA, I think you're low...closer to 99.9%.

[rock on sooner]

Bet the place smelled like a Grateful Dead show.
Nah, closer to cheese curds, brats and beer!

[badger]

EVERYTHING in WI has to do with cheese, the Packers and beer,
not necessarily in that order
It is true. If you are running for any office, mention the Packers early and often. Your campaign literature should have you and your family in Packer garb. You should have TV spots with Lambeau Field in the background. Additional helpings of cheese and beer are not necessary (especially if you've had DUI issues in the past), but usually don't hurt.

I only wish I was kidding. Even Hillary Clinton, during 1992 campaign stop, claimed to be a Packers fan. SHE IS FROM CHICAGO! liarliarliarliarliarliar


The last poll I saw for WI (but Badger said don't believe ANY poll in WI)
This is still true, but I am surprised people thinks Wisconsin matters so much. 10 electoral votes, right? That's half as many as Ohio, half as many as Pennsylvania, almost a third of Florida, almost half of Michigan... small peanuts, Wisconsin is. I can say that, I'm from there. Leave the cheeseheads and their Packer airwaves alone. Most would probably prefer it that way. More time for hunting and fishing. And Packers.

[okie52]

The key is looks like. Reagan was a leader. Romney spins at every little bit of wind. I just don't know if I trust him. If he will govern from right center, I would be happy to have him as President. If he gets bulldozed by the hardcore right wing (meaning focusing on the social issues that shouldn't even be part of the political debate this year) and doesn't focus on what is important in this country (getting our financial house in order) then he would prove to be a huge disappointment.

It's pretty obvious from the debate that Obama plans to continue his assault on oil and gas. Actually I don't think Romney hit Obama hard enough on his wretched energy policies like cap and trade, failing to mention that 2/3 of our trade deficit is due to oil imports, or even the 4 billion in "subsidies" for oil and gas (which Obama reiterated it was time to end them). Romney at least corrected him to make it $2.8 billion but he should have stated how how most industries like GM are getting the same write offs.

Romney did at least mention the 90 billion in green energy and solyndra, but he could have done a lot more.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

It is probably a requirement in Wisconsin that any candidate have a DWI or a run in with the law about something sexual... I kid but not really. I mean we all know they likes their beer and liquor up there, but Wisconsin is the greatest Peyton Place I have ever seen...

[rock on sooner]

It is true. If you are running for any office, mention the Packers early and often. Your campaign literature should have you and your family in Packer garb. You should have TV spots with Lambeau Field in the background. Additional helpings of cheese and beer are not necessary (especially if you've had DUI issues in the past), but usually don't hurt.

I only wish I was kidding. Even Hillary Clinton, during 1992 campaign stop, claimed to be a Packers fan. SHE IS FROM CHICAGO! liarliarliarliarliarliar


This is still true, but I am surprised people thinks Wisconsin matters so much. 10 electoral votes, right? That's half as many as Ohio, half as many as Pennsylvania, almost a third of Florida, almost half of Michigan... small peanuts, Wisconsin is. I can say that, I'm from there. Leave the cheeseheads and their Packer airwaves alone. Most would probably prefer it that way. More time for hunting and fishing. And Packers.

The super pacs have pulled out of Michigan and Pennsylvania, pretty much
handing Obama those two. Ohio and Florida are still tooth and nail fights
and as for WI's 10 votes, we here in Iowa have only six,,Biden was here
yesterday, Ryan two days ago, Romney is coming next week and I'm sure
Obama won't be far behind. I get up at 5:30 most mornings and turn on
tv...it is NON-STOP negative campaign ads from both sides. I'm a political
junkie of sorts and I'll be happy as can be when it is Nov 7!

[LiveLaughLove]

“the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President (Barack) Obama to be a one-term president.” -Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

If Obama wins again and the pubs decide to continue their strategy, then God save America.

Note: Personally I'm disgusted about this passive aggressive strategy

Nice dem talking point, just not true. Never was. Not in context at least.


The Facts
McConnell made his remarks in an interview that appeared in the National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010 — nearly two years after Obama was elected president. The interview took place on the eve the of the midterm elections. The interview is relatively short, so we will print it in its entirety, with key portions highlighted.

NJ: You’ve been studying the history of presidents who lost part or all of Congress in their first term. Why?

McConnell: In the last 100 years, three presidents suffered big defeats in Congress in their first term and then won reelection: Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and the most recent example, Bill Clinton. I read a lot of history anyway, but I am trying to apply those lessons to current situations in hopes of not making the same mistakes.

NJ: What have you learned?

McConnell: After 1994, the public had the impression we Republicans overpromised and underdelivered. We suffered from some degree of hubris and acted as if the president was irrelevant and we would roll over him. By the summer of 1995, he was already on the way to being reelected, and we were hanging on for our lives.

NJ: What does this mean now?

McConnell: We need to be honest with the public. This election is about them, not us. And we need to treat this election as the first step in retaking the government. We need to say to everyone on Election Day, “Those of you who helped make this a good day, you need to go out and help us finish the job.”

NJ: What’s the job?

McConnell: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.

NJ: Does that mean endless, or at least frequent, confrontation with the president?

McConnell: If President Obama does a Clintonian backflip, if he’s willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues, it’s not inappropriate for us to do business with him.

NJ: What are the big issues?

McConnell: It is possible the president’s advisers will tell him he has to do something to get right with the public on his levels of spending and [on] lowering the national debt. If he were to heed that advice, he would, I imagine, find more support among our conference than he would among some in the Senate in his own party. I don’t want the president to fail; I want him to change. So, we’ll see. The next move is going to be up to him.

NJ: What will you seek from the president on the tax issue?

McConnell: At the very least, I believe we should extend all of the Bush tax cuts. And I prefer to describe this as keeping current tax policy. It’s been on the books for 10 years. Now, how long that [extension] is, is something we can discuss. It was clear his position was not [favored] among all Senate Democrats. They had their own divisions. I don’t think those divisions are going to be any less in November and December.

When seen in full context, McConnell’s quote is not really as shocking as the snippet that is frequently repeated by Democrats.

Generally, Democrats suggest that McConnell believed that no problem is bigger than getting rid of Obama, but it is clear that he is speaking in a political context — that the goals of Republicans could not be achieved unless Obama is defeated in his race for reelection. A case in point: the health care law could not be overturned unless Obama is defeated.

Moreover, McConnell goes on to say that he does “not want the president to fail” and cooperation was possible “if he’s willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues.” McConnell in fact cited an extension of the Bush tax cuts — and Obama did strike such a deal shortly after the midterm elections.

Here’s how McConnell explained his remarks in a speech after the election, when Republicans had taken over the House of Representatives and made huge gains in the Senate:

“Let’s start with the big picture. Over the past week, some have said it was indelicate of me to suggest that our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office. But the fact is, if our primary legislative goals are to repeal and replace the health spending bill; to end the bailouts; cut spending; and shrink the size and scope of government, the only way to do all these things it is to put someone in the White House who won’t veto any of these things. We can hope the President will start listening to the electorate after Tuesday’s election. But we can’t plan on it. And it would be foolish to expect that Republicans will be able to completely reverse the damage Democrats have done as long as a Democrat holds the veto pen.”


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/when-did-mcconnell-say-he-wanted-to-make-obama-a-one-term-president/2012/09/24/79fd5cd8-0696-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

The Washington Post Fact Checker.

This has been a big distorted lie for a while now. The media knows the context but they are more than happy to allow Obama and his surrogates to continue to perpetrate it without calling them out on the lack of context.

I don't like McConnell but he isn't guilty of stonewalling Obama or purposefully trying to hurt him. He is guilty of standing for what he believes is in the best interests of the country. It just so happens that is diametrically opposed to Obama. It is just as honest to say Obama is trying to make a Republican led Congress a one term thing, and is stonewalling the Republicans from getting what they want.

I remember how Obama negotiates. "I won, you lost." Yeah that's working with Congress, huh.

[LiveLaughLove]

The last poll I saw for WI (but Badger said don't believe ANY poll in WI)
that Obama was up 8 points, remember, it is Ryan's home state, just like
Michigan, Mass, and California are places where Romney has homes or has
had homes, so, it stands to reason for Obama to not let up.

I asked in my post if Romney has had any rally that had 30000 people, still
no answer. I'm only guessing, but by this time next week, the "lost" debate
will not be a focus. So far, Romney is still staying centrist, still flip flopping
on nearly every issue out there, so looks like same oh, same oh....

No offense, but I don't believe that 30k number. Their campaign just a few days ago claimed a number that was impossible in the building they were in, and it was only about 2/3rds full. I can't recall where it was, but I definitely recall that exaggeration.

Plus, when he was having anemic numbers, didn't his campaign say they were purposefully keeping his numbers down to make them more intimate affairs? Didn't they move from an outdoor stadium to an indoor one at their convention? Oh yeah, the 10% chance of rain, I believe was the "reason" for that.

So which is it? Are we going for big numbers, or intimate affairs?

By Obama math (which he used to say his healthcare would only cost $90billion, not the actual $2.7trillion), I would say the crowd was actually about 10k in Wisconson. Bet I'm much closer to accurate than the 30k.

[rock on sooner]

No offense, but I don't believe that 30k number. Their campaign just a few days ago claimed a number that was impossible in the building they were in, and it was only about 2/3rds full. I can't recall where it was, but I definitely recall that exaggeration.

Plus, when he was having anemic numbers, didn't his campaign say they were purposefully keeping his numbers down to make them more intimate affairs? Didn't they move from an outdoor stadium to an indoor one at their convention? Oh yeah, the 10% chance of rain, I believe was the "reason" for that.

So which is it? Are we going for big numbers, or intimate affairs?

By Obama math (which he used to say his healthcare would only cost $90billion, not the actual $2.7trillion), I would say the crowd was actually about 10k in Wisconson. Bet I'm much closer to accurate than the 30k.

LLL, I wasn't there to count them...somebody prolly counted 60000 legs and
then divided by two. It is arithmetic, after all. You could be right, I

[Soonerjeepman]

Could well be the case, but I'm guessing that Romney can't pull in 30000
to a rally ANY time, day, night, weekend...

we don't need to rally, we'll just vote. I would bet the house some of those were bused in from inner cities, don't have jobs, are on welfare....of course they rally...they don't want the free ride cut.

[Soonerjeepman]

Nice dem talking point, just not true. Never was. Not in context at least.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/when-did-mcconnell-say-he-wanted-to-make-obama-a-one-term-president/2012/09/24/79fd5cd8-0696-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html

He is guilty of standing for what he believes is in the best interests of the country.

didn't obama say that in HIS closing arguments...that sometimes HE had to stand up for what HE thought was right ..and say NO to the bipartisan work? Guess that is only good for the dems...

[rock on sooner]

LLL, I wasn't there to count them...somebody prolly counted 60000 legs and
then divided by two. It is arithmetic, after all. You could be right, I

Don't know what happened there...I was going to say that I spoke about
what I heard reported.

To your post about McConnell's one term statement, I would only point
out that, according to the transcript, his was a complete single sentence,
unlike your side's "you didn't build that", where the right pulled those four
words out of a complete four or five sentence paragraph. Granted that
this is parsing at its most obnoxious, but no apology for it, because that
is what it has come down to. While I'm at it, the weather forecast called
for a 40% chance of inclement weather, not 10%, as you stated. And, I doubt
that the Dems would have had 65000 in the stadium, but it would have been
a big number. Oh, and you say 10k in WI, has Romney ever had THAT?:biggrin:

[Blue]

No fun? This guy has thrown more parties and played more Golf than any other president I can remember.

[OU_Sooners75]

If he didn't want to be President any longer, he could have told his party that he wasn't seeking a second term.

[cleller]

It is probably a requirement in Wisconsin that any candidate have a DWI or a run in with the law about something sexual... I kid but not really. I mean we all know they likes their beer and liquor up there, but Wisconsin is the greatest Peyton Place I have ever seen...

I know two people from Wisconsin. Both are very nice, but at times you'd just like them to stop talking.

[BigTip]

In the middle of the day on a Thursday, most of Romney's supporters are at work.

And.......BOOM!

Exactly.

lol

[badger]

I know two people from Wisconsin. Both are very nice, but at times you'd just like them to stop talking.

I'm one of them, aren't I. ;)

Or are you revising that list to three now :mad:

[Skysooner]

No fun? This guy has thrown more parties and played more Golf than any other president I can remember.

Compared to the ultra-vacation days Bush took?

[KABOOKIE]

Obama got his *** whooped in the debates and the next day he is off spouting that Mitt is two faced and it was all LIIIIIIIEEEEEEEES. Yeah. Typical loser reply.

[Blue]

Compared to the ultra-vacation days Bush took?


The question was about Obama, not Bush, Sparky.

[Skysooner]

Compared to the ultra-vacation days Bush took?


The question was about Obama, not Bush, Sparky.

You said any other President you could remember. If you can't remember Bush you should get checked for dementia.

[Blue]

Let me rephrase that. The question was about Obama not having fun. I say how can he not? Turning the White House in to party central, playing golf every weekend(which I have no problem with), and Michelle jetsetting around the world.

[FaninAma]

I don't know if it means much but in Wisconsin yesterday, in front of
30000 people, Obama, without a teleprompter, pounded home the
message about two Romney's, the one running around the country
spouting off and the "fake" one on stage with him Wednesday. His
strategy Wednesday night, if he had one, still has me puzzled.

Has Romney ever had a rally with 30000 people?

Yeah, and I heard Landry Jones is a great QB when the big spot light isn't shining on him.

Obama got his a$$ smoked on national television in front of 50 million potential voters.

[Skysooner]

Let me rephrase that. The question was about Obama not having fun. I say how can he not? Turning the White House in to party central, playing golf every weekend(which I have no problem with), and Michelle jetsetting around the world.

I stand corrected. In that light he should have had fun. I think the premise of the thread is wrong. Of course he wants to be President. If it was a financial issue he can make as much money speaking as he would 4 years from now. This is a very tough job, and if he wanted to be out of it he would be.

[Mazeppa]

Of course he wants to be President.

He wants the Title of President but does not want to be President.

[Skysooner]

He wants the Title of President but does not want to be President.

What does he have to gain? I think he honestly wants to help the country not that he has gone about it in the right way.

[Mazeppa]

What does he have to gain? I think he honestly wants to help the country not that he has gone about it in the right way.

I don't think he wants to help the country I think he wants to help himself.

[SCOUT]

What does he have to gain? I think he honestly wants to help the country not that he has gone about it in the right way.

He has explicitly stated that he wants to fundamentally change the country. Why would you disagree with his stated objective?

[Skysooner]

He has explicitly stated that he wants to fundamentally change the country. Why would you disagree with his stated objective?
Another straw man. He can't "fundamentally change the country" without Congress. I disagree with Mazeppa's post. He doesn't have anything to gain personally doing this one more time.

[SCOUT]

Another straw man. He can't "fundamentally change the country" without Congress. I disagree with Mazeppa's post. He doesn't have anything to gain personally doing this one more time.

Actually no, that is not a straw man. I have projected no assumptive argument to anyone else.

Obama literally said that he wants to fundamentally change the country. Again, there is no assumption or projection, he said it.

At best you could argue that "fundamentally changing the country" means the same as your usage of "help." If that is the case, then it is a weak straw man at best.

His desire and our governmental procedures are not really relevant.

[Skysooner]

Actually no, that is not a straw man. I have projected no assumptive argument to anyone else.

Obama literally said that he wants to fundamentally change the country. Again, there is no assumption or projection, he said it.

At best you could argue that "fundamentally changing the country" means the same as your usage of "help." If that is the case, then it is a weak straw man at best.

His desire and our governmental procedures are not really relevant.
I would argue that desire and ability to accomplish are completely relevant.

[StoopTroup]

I watched both the Obama and Romney Rallies the next day. Obama's seemed have 3-4 times the number of people there. They all looked like regular Americans. There weren't any chairs lined up in front of the Stage, it was more of a come as you are and listen to what I have to say rally. Ronmey's seemed very organized and had rows of empty folding chairs and a GOP Woman warming up the crowd and telling everyone how important this rally is and trying to pump them up to a frenzy from the coma they seemed to be in.

Obama's looked like a well mannered Hooty and the Blowfish Concert and Romney's looked like a HS Graduation.

[SCOUT]

I would argue that desire and ability to accomplish are completely relevant.

If you finish that sentence, they wouldn't be. They are relevant, in life. They are not relevant when compared to what started this exchange. you said

I think he honestly wants to help the country
I disagree. He WANTS to fundamentally change it.

[Blue]

I watched both the Obama and Romney Rallies the next day. Obama's seemed have 3-4 times the number of people there. They all looked like regular Americans. There weren't any chairs lined up in front of the Stage, it was more of a come as you are and listen to what I have to say rally. Ronmey's seemed very organized and had rows of empty folding chairs and a GOP Woman warming up the crowd and telling everyone how important this rally is and trying to pump them up to a frenzy from the coma they seemed to be in.

Obama's looked like a well mannered Hooty and the Blowfish Concert and Romney's looked like a HS Graduation.
Again, Romney supporters were at WORK (Look into it) and Obama supporters were told there would be cake and free cell phones.

[SCOUT]

I watched both the Obama and Romney Rallies the next day. Obama's seemed have 3-4 times the number of people there. They all looked like regular Americans. There weren't any chairs lined up in front of the Stage, it was more of a come as you are and listen to what I have to say rally. Ronmey's seemed very organized and had rows of empty folding chairs and a GOP Woman warming up the crowd and telling everyone how important this rally is and trying to pump them up to a frenzy from the coma they seemed to be in.

Obama's looked like a well mannered Hooty and the Blowfish Concert and Romney's looked like a HS Graduation.
Do only women go to Hooty and the Blowfish concerts?
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/10/05/do-men-go-to-obama-campaign-events/

[Skysooner]

If you finish that sentence, they wouldn't be. They are relevant, in life. They are not relevant when compared to what started this exchange. you said

I disagree. He WANTS to fundamentally change it.

Fine and he has been unable to in 4 years. That argues against a second term. Bush's policies argue against another R term in the near future. The country is changing demographically, and the Rs haven't changed with it.

[SCOUT]

Fine and he has been unable to in 4 years. That argues against a second term. Bush's policies argue against another R term in the near future. The country is changing demographically, and the Rs haven't changed with it.

The argument is stronger when you consider his comments that he will "have more flexibility after the election." He knows that he has to be moderate to get the extra 4 years. The REAL transformation can take place when he doesn't have to worry about elections.

The Republican party makes me sad. I still have hope that current views will start to filter into the politicians

[LiveLaughLove]

Fine and he has been unable to in 4 years. That argues against a second term. Bush's policies argue against another R term in the near future. The country is changing demographically, and the Rs haven't changed with it.
Translation: The "R"'s need to be more liberal. Let the left move further left and the "R"'s should then move further left, just not Democrat left.

Then things would be fine, huh.

RINO's for everybody! Yeah that's the ticket!

No thanks.

[sappstuf]

I watched both the Obama and Romney Rallies the next day. Obama's seemed have 3-4 times the number of people there. They all looked like regular Americans. There weren't any chairs lined up in front of the Stage, it was more of a come as you are and listen to what I have to say rally. Ronmey's seemed very organized and had rows of empty folding chairs and a GOP Woman warming up the crowd and telling everyone how important this rally is and trying to pump them up to a frenzy from the coma they seemed to be in.

Obama's looked like a well mannered Hooty and the Blowfish Concert and Romney's looked like a HS Graduation.

Can you please be specific and let us know what the difference is in the "regular Americans" at Obama's rallies versus the apparent irregular Americans at Romney's. The more specific the better.

TIA.

[Skysooner]

Translation: The "R"'s need to be more liberal. Let the left move further left and the "R"'s should then move further left, just not Democrat left.

Then things would be fine, huh.

RINO's for everybody! Yeah that's the ticket!

No thanks.

No that is an incorrect translation. I am saying that Rs need to appeal to more minorities or they are going to get rolled in coming decades. Conservatism is always going to appeal to a certain part of the population, but the lack of penetration of the latino vote is not a good thing.

The people signing people up to vote were out in my neighborhood in force today. I have had 2 different men come by the house, and they were both Ds (one local and one Obama/Biden). This was surprising as they are in an area where the vast majority of my neighbors are far right wing.

[TitoMorelli]

No that is an incorrect translation. I am saying that Rs need to appeal to more minorities or they are going to get rolled in coming decades. Conservatism is always going to appeal to a certain part of the population, but the lack of penetration of the latino vote is not a good thing.

The people signing people up to vote were out in my neighborhood in force today. I have had 2 different men come by the house, and they were both Ds (one local and one Obama/Biden). This was surprising as they are in an area where the vast majority of my neighbors are far right wing.

How? With Romneyphones?

Perhaps the problem isn't so much with the GOP as with the various mindless plantation-dwellers (blacks being just one of several groups) who cling to the fictitious idea of a Democratic party that actually cares about them beyond their immediate gratification and their votes.

One of these days, European style reality will set in. And the memories of all those used and discarded Obamaphones, along with all the other freebies given along the way, won't be much consolation. I can only hope then that more than a few of those that clung so fiercely and loyally to the Democrat brand will be a little ashamed of how cheaply their allegiance was bought.

[Skysooner]

How? With Romneyphones?

Perhaps the problem isn't so much with the GOP as with the various mindless plantation-dwellers (blacks being just one of several groups) who cling to the fictitious idea of a Democratic party that actually cares about them beyond their immediate gratification and their votes.

One of these days, European style reality will set in. And the memories of all those used and discarded Obamaphones, along with all the other freebies given along the way, won't be much consolation. I can only hope then that more than a few of those that clung so fiercely and loyally to the Democrat brand will be a little ashamed of how cheaply their allegiance was bought.

Appeal to people's hope. There are always going to be people on both sides that mindlessly follow the crowd. As Romney said, you need the 5-10% in the middle that are thoughtful. Right now the parties seem to appeal to people's fears.

[TitoMorelli]

Appeal to people's hope. There are always going to be people on both sides that mindlessly follow the crowd. As Romney said, you need the 5-10% in the middle that are thoughtful. Right now the parties seem to appeal to people's fears.

Good point, Sky.

[LiveLaughLove]

No that is an incorrect translation. I am saying that Rs need to appeal to more minorities or they are going to get rolled in coming decades. Conservatism is always going to appeal to a certain part of the population, but the lack of penetration of the latino vote is not a good thing.

The people signing people up to vote were out in my neighborhood in force today. I have had 2 different men come by the house, and they were both Ds (one local and one Obama/Biden). This was surprising as they are in an area where the vast majority of my neighbors are far right wing.

Not going to happen. Just the reality of it.

1. The media won't let it happen.

2. It's easy to love the child. It's much harder to love the adult.

The dems offer free everything, and instant access to America. The "R"'s have to be the grown ups and say, that isn't what is in the best interests of the country. One of those will always be more popular with the latino voters. One will not.

But the one that will not is the one that is in the best interests of the country. The other one is in the best interests of a party.

We try to appeal to that common good, but it's a hard sell, and harder because we have to fight through the clutter of the media calling us racist's at every turn.

The reality of things is the world is constantly moving left. Because it's easy to love the child.