At 9/6/12 05:29 PM, TheMason wrote:
2) I think your point about the delegate's degree of motivation (ie: enthusiasm) is filtered through your own ideological lense.
You're the one who said that Democrats only have control over minorities because of fear-mongering and you're saying I'm seeing something through an ideologue lense? Maybe you mean I'm biased? Maybe it's because everyone is.
Obama has major problems with his base. A) For those in his base who know how politics run; he is a poor leader and governor. He could not accomplish much when he enjoyed having his party in control of both houses of congress by a greater margin than any modern president since maybe FDR.
He passed equal pay for women, he bailed out the auto industry, he reformed the credit industry, he reformed wall street etc. etc.
B) While there are conservatives who do not think Romney is conservative (much less conservative enough), there are leftists who do not think Obama is left enough. In the end the base on both sides are going to hold their noses and vote for their party's nominee.
The difference was that going into the election all Democrats were already behind Obama, whereas the Republicans were split. Thus alot of delegates want another candidate but are supporting Romney for the illusion of party solidarity. Thus whereas the DNC is actually done pretty well with people throwing in their support for Obama, the RNC was a complete mess with most of the speakers promoting themselves rather than Romney(just count how many times Chris Christie says something about how he is a good governor) and constant discordination (such as Clint Eastwood).
3) You are dancing around the issue. You have three major political turn-out events where people who hold positions opposite from Obama turned-out in huge numbers. Meanwhile, Obama's acceptance speech has been downsized now three times.
I'm not dancing around anything. What I'm saying is that those people were going to vote Republican even if there wasn't a turn-out event. There isn't as much incentive to protest when you already have control of the White House.
*sigh* Sorry...the US is a center-right country.
Ah but it's not a far-right country. Which is the main problem.
1) The main cause of the recession is a Clinton-era policy decision. Clinton is the president who authorized FANNIE MAE & FREDDIE MAC to buy sub-prime mortgages so that minorities could get home loans (even though trends were going up in regards to this w/o government intervention). Also during this time Obama was on at least one legal team suing CitiBank over this very issue. So I'm so sorry...but the recession is due to more Democratic ideas than traditional Republican ones.
The economy had been stagnating ever since Clinton had left office, Republican policies did roughly nothing and in fact things got progressively worse under them. Hence why they're not very popular. Otherwise if you really want to get technical people blame Bush jr., sr. and Clinton for a whole mix of bad choices, the one that really kicked off the crisis was Bush jr. setting interest rates at 1%. But my point was that the policies are often blamed for it and they have become unpopular, thus Democrats can quite easily exploit that.
2) In '08 I seriously thought about voting for Obama. He seemed smart and level headed enough to triangulate like Clinton did and govern from the center and partner with business. Instead he turned out to be a blind ideologue without a clue as to how to actually govern.
When he was making his healthcare bill he went up to the Republicans and called for a conference to work with them. He accepted their idea's and they still were against it. I don't think Obama is the "blind ideologue" there or in this election.
The reason I wanted to vote for Obama? Bush fatigue. Bush was the worst of both worlds: cut taxes while raising spending. This is the same as his father. Both Bushs come from different schools of thought than Reagan (lumping them in together is a sign of your lack of knowledge). The Bushs take a big government approach to governing...not unlike Obama. In essence, Obama's first term has been like a third Bush term...only with a different flavor on the surface.
I lumped them in together because they both destroyed the balance in the budget, Reagan had a chance to considering he was in a similar position to Clinton, Bush sr. perhaps should be treated more fairly considering he went through a recession and no one really needs to mention Bush jr.
And considering Obama has cut the SSA's withholding tax...it's going to get even worse.
A 2% reduction. Which Congress is now diverting funds to make up for that 2% reduction. So it's roughly changing nothing.
Too bad your graph stops at Bush...
It's not fair because it's not possible to go into a surplus when your revenue is going down. Clinton was able to do it because the country was experiencing the biggest boom in history, Reagan was able to do it because the country had been experiencing the biggest boom up to that point, Obama is not able to do it because he's presiding over one of the biggest recessions in history.
Maybe its also because Democrats since FDR have made economic promises to the minority communities with NO intention of keeping them. We've had Dems in power in the Congress more years than not since FDR. We've also had about 50% of the presidents be Democrats. And yet we have not made any significant strides towards better education and economic conditions in minority areas. Instead Democrats are more concerned with romanticized notions of 'social justice' (and their Union powerbase) so they oppose companies like Walmart coming into their districts and bringing jobs.
Under FDR yah, back then the Southern Conservatives were still part of the Democratic party and they effectively would've bolted the party had he tried anything serious (and they eventually did). Otherwise Truman de-segregated the military and created low-income housing but was unable to do much more. And Kennedy/Johnson? You're insane if you think they didn't do anything, under them the poverty rate dropped from ~20% to ~10% due to job training programs, welfare, medicaid etc. etc. as well as the booming economy. It's stayed at roughly 10% ever since.