|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 3, 2008 13:56:37 GMT -5
Lol. You're grasping for some explanation for why your guy lost. Face it, Obama is an intelligent man, a prolific orator, and offers change from the policies of George W. Bush. THAT is why he was elected.
Painting the voters as stupid is stupid in itself. I could bring up the "swiftboating" of John Kerry in 2004 and claim the same thing as the reason Bush won.
Obama won. There's nothing you can do to change it. So take your medicine and move on with us to the 21st century.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 3, 2008 14:22:22 GMT -5
I'm not grasping for any explanations. Barack was elected, in part, for the reasons you mention. He also was elected based on a complete lack of knowledge about his background and the complete trashing of his opponents, all courtesy of a media that was in the tank for him.
Interesting that you bring up the "swiftboating" of John Kerry. I notice that for all the protestations there is not one iota of legal action that Francois has taken to "clear his name" in the intervening years. If someone cost me the presidency of the United States with a lie, I'd be pissed and suing. Francois, who has plenty of resource with which he can sue, is silent. Now I don't expect you to make anything of that in your rose colored world, but to reasonable people it has the appearance that there might have been some measure of truth to it all.
Of course, your selective memory also fails to recall the "swiftboating" of Bush in the same election cycle by Dan Rather, and others. Sure the documents were forgeries, but why should that stand in the way of a good story.... at least in Mr. Rather's world. But since the victim was an eeeeee-vil Republican, that's apparently okay on Planet Saunterelle.
In fact, a strong case could be made that Bush has been getting unfairly treated in the press, swiftboated if you will, across a variety of issues from the 2000 election itself forward. No Child Left Behind comes to mind. Medicare Part D is the single largest entitlement program in history to date, Bush signed that. Bush signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to help rein in corporate accounting practices, yet is roundly blamed for the abuses (during the Clinton years) that led to Sarbanes and Oxley writing the law that Bush signed. Just last night I heard a Democrat pundit harp again about the debacle in Florida eight years ago and declare that Bush caused it, neglecting to correctly recall that it was Gore who brought the legal actions that the Bush people ultimately had to respond to. Hell, even Fannie and Freddy are Bush's fault, exclusively, according to you and people who think like you.
Where I come from that is called "spreading the lie".
In the past two cycles, where Bush won, the press was no less in the tank for Gore or Kerry than they were this time for Barry. The difference is exactly what you allude to. This time they actually had a candidate with charisma and 8 years of hyping lies about what Bush had and had not done. It worked for them. Barry was elected and now we will all live in a utopian, socialist workers paradise with our free bubble up and rainbow stew served to us daily by a benevolent government.
And in so far as there being nothing anyone can do to change Obama's win... there is still that small matter of his citizenship which will be reviewed by the Supreme Court starting on Friday. While I don't really expect them to upset the applecart, if the court orders Barack to put up or shut up on his birth records, you all might be celebrating President Biden's inaguration next January 20.
|
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Dec 3, 2008 14:29:05 GMT -5
No-one wants the election reversed.
We want to watch the man-child fail big-time!
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Dec 3, 2008 14:31:34 GMT -5
Obama is an intelligent man that is your subjective opinion and i'll let you have that althought i can post dozens of video clips to the contrary. yep, he's great with a teleprompter. can't argue with you there. no doubt about it. the same will be the case for defeating obama in 2012 or whoever his hopeful successor might be in 2016. it's not hard to beat an incumbent. all you have to do is tell people how bad off they are and say that you are 'different.' no, these voters clearly painted themselves stupid with the skill of picasso. i don't see the relevance of swiftboating here. but if you must trot out that out tired argument, be my guest. you will lose .... again. yep. and don't forget that...... you asked for it! also, i wonder why it is that since obama won there was no pissing and moaning about stolen elections and rigged voting machines, etc., etc., etc.  if mccain had won i GUARANTEE you that democrats would be filing law suits across the nation claiming voter fraud and " disenfranchisement." |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 3, 2008 14:36:21 GMT -5
saunterelle, I can tell by the tone of your post that you did not even look at the site, because you obviously missed this point, "In general, the voters did universally worse on questions where the negative information was about their candidate."
Saying a person is ignorant is not calling them stupid. Stupid implies A: slow of mind, obtuse, B: given to unitelligent decisions or acts or acting in an unintelligent or careless manner, or C: lacking in intelligence or reason, brutish. Ignorance implies the state or fact of being ignorant: lack of knowledge, education or awareness.
The synonyms for ignorance are obliviousness, unawareness, unfamiliarity.
The sysnonyms for stupid are brainless, dense, doltish, dopey, dorky [slang], dull, dumb, fatuous, half-witted, mindless, oafish, obtuse, senseless, simple, slow, thick, thickheaded, unintelligent, vacuous, weak-minded, witless. The word ignorance is not even considered a related word, so you are way off the mark. In fact, you are engaged in hyperbole or extreme exageration.
What we are pointing out is that the people who voted for Obama, by a large portion, are ignorant of the facts surrounding the candidates. This ignorance is not really a fault of their own, except by being complacent on not seeking the facts, but is the fault of the media who is supposed to report these facts. It is also the fault of our public school system, which has been failing in its duty to teach Political Science properly to our students.
However, if you had read the site you would have also seen this poll, which highlights where the ignorace of Obama voters actually exists, some of which is actually very alarming:
Zogby Poll
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points
97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates
Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions
57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).
And yet.....
Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes
Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!
Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct.
Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey)
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 3, 2008 14:37:13 GMT -5
We want to watch the man-child fail big-time! Maybe you do, but I certainly do not want to see him fail the nation. There is way, way too much at stake. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 3, 2008 14:55:33 GMT -5
We want to watch the man-child fail big-time! Maybe you do, but I certainly do not want to see him fail the nation. There is way, way too much at stake. I agree. I actually like Obama, I am just not sure about his policies. But, as a person he comes across as very affable. |
|
|
|
Post by harpman1 on Dec 3, 2008 15:34:26 GMT -5
Agreed; the nation is in peril.
He will be CIC, and since that cannot be stopped, we might as well enjoy the circus.
Not that one shouldn't stock up on ammo, though.
Just in case.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 3, 2008 16:18:42 GMT -5
[quote author=moondog board=uspolitics thread=579 post=8930 time=1228334133
I agree. I actually like Obama, I am just not sure about his policies. But, as a person he comes across as very affable.[/quote]
Interesting. I have the opposite view of him. He comes off as cold and unwilling to mingle with We the People. If you watched him work a crowd, there was always a bit of a pained look on his face behind the five dollar smile as if he was having to force himself to endjure dealing with the commonality.
I can't see him with a fishing rod in hand. Or even at a cookout with a can of Bud in one hand and a burger, dog, or rib in the other. Pretty much a typical botique liberal in my view. If you are one of the Beautiful or Connected People, yes, he will be willing to talk and rub elbows, but if you are just plain folk, forget about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 3, 2008 17:36:26 GMT -5
saunterelle, I can tell by the tone of your post that you did not even look at the site, because you obviously missed this point, "In general, the voters did universally worse on questions where the negative information was about their candidate." Saying a person is ignorant is not calling them stupid. Stupid implies A: slow of mind, obtuse, B: given to unitelligent decisions or acts or acting in an unintelligent or careless manner, or C: lacking in intelligence or reason, brutish. Ignorance implies the state or fact of being ignorant: lack of knowledge, education or awareness. The synonyms for ignorance are obliviousness, unawareness, unfamiliarity. The sysnonyms for stupid are brainless, dense, doltish, dopey, dorky [slang], dull, dumb, fatuous, half-witted, mindless, oafish, obtuse, senseless, simple, slow, thick, thickheaded, unintelligent, vacuous, weak-minded, witless. The word ignorance is not even considered a related word, so you are way off the mark. In fact, you are engaged in hyperbole or extreme exageration. What we are pointing out is that the people who voted for Obama, by a large portion, are ignorant of the facts surrounding the candidates. This ignorance is not really a fault of their own, except by being complacent on not seeking the facts, but is the fault of the media who is supposed to report these facts. It is also the fault of our public school system, which has been failing in its duty to teach Political Science properly to our students. However, if you had read the site you would have also seen this poll, which highlights where the ignorace of Obama voters actually exists, some of which is actually very alarming: Zogby Poll
512 Obama Voters 11/13/08-11/15/08 MOE +/- 4.4 points97.1% High School Graduate or higher, 55% College Graduates Results to 12 simple Multiple Choice Questions57.4% could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing) 71.8% could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing) 82.6% could NOT correctly say that Barack Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing) 88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing) 56.1% could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing). And yet..... Only 13.7% failed to identify Sarah Palin as the person on which their party spent $150,000 in clothes Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her "house," even though that was Tina Fey who said that!! Only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. Only .5% got all of them correct. (And we "gave" one answer that was technically not Palin, but actually Tina Fey) Did the Zogby "pollsters" ask the same questions of 512 McCain voters? How did they fare? Do you really think 512 voters is a representative sample?? |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 3, 2008 17:47:32 GMT -5
512 was for most state polling in the most recent presidential sweepstakes. Depending on the validity of the sample, it certainly could be for a national poll and I saw some samples that small in the recently concluded cycle. And while I tend to be skeptical of a lot of "polling" in this day and age, Zogby's track record is stellar both in accuracy and in quality of sample.The Zogby organization is one of the most trusted and respected out there today. Besides... just because you disagree with the results doesn't mean they aren't so.  |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 3, 2008 18:36:42 GMT -5
|
|
