Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The New (and On Notice) Obama Thread

1373840424346

Posts

  • KrieghundKrieghund Registered User regular
    V1m wrote: »
    Krieghund wrote: »
    Shit, today's 40 year olds still play fucking games!

    Sup, I'm 42.

    Yo, I'm 40, lol. Though I think we may be some of the upper edge here. But I am in the middle of new Wolfenstein, so yeah, old gamer.

  • KasynKasyn Registered User regular
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    Chanus
  • Mild ConfusionMild Confusion Smash All Things Registered User regular
    There's an older Wolfenstein?

    steam_sig.png

    Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
    Spoit
  • Mild ConfusionMild Confusion Smash All Things Registered User regular
    :wink:

    steam_sig.png

    Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
  • CantidoCantido Registered User regular
    Obama is unpopular? He is with a dying demographic. ..

    3DS Friendcode 5413-1311-3767
    Gnome-InterruptusKing Riptor
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    Except Obama isn't that unpopular. She's playing into a media myth(Obama's on the ropes and losing popularity quickly!) that polling does not back up. He's really not that unpopular for a 2nd term president. Keep in mind about this time in Bush's 2nd term he was up to his eyeballs in Katrina and his own party had totally turned on him.

    SpoitHarry DresdenKid Presentable
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    That's not it, it's the whole package. With her it's only optics and being safe, and safe to her is always on the right side of politics. You think Obama's a centrist? Wait until she gets into office. Then there's her failure with campaigning and a being an old school politician. Obama changed the game, I fear she'll go back to her standard tactics without adapting to the new environment - and repeating past mistakes. She's the greatest politically when the spotlight isn't on her, that's why she became a star being the Secretary of State. In the spotlight she's a flame that attracts both the right and the left wings against her.


    Distancing herself from Obama is the wrong move. He's doing badly from the right wing, since he doesn't care about appeasing them. That was a fool's errand he was never going to succeed in doing, their hate for Obama and the Democrats make them voters he'd never be able to win over. It took him too long to figure that out. She's meant to be trying to attract voters from Democrats, not Republicans.

    Harry Dresden on
    joshofalltradesGnome-InterruptusStolls
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The issue is more distancing herself from the part of his Presidency that she was most directly responsible and was why she lost to him to begin with is maybe not the smartest political choice.

    Basically it seems like she's listening to Mark Penn again, which is not good.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    Gnome-InterruptusStollsshrykeKid Presentable
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    That's not it, it's the whole package. With her it's only optics and being safe, and safe to her is always on the right side of politics. You think Obama's a centrist? Wait until she gets into office. Then there's her failure with campaigning and a being an old school politician. Obama changed the game, I fear she'll go back to her standard tactics without adapting to the new environment - and repeating past mistakes. She's the greatest politically when the spotlight isn't on her, that's why she became a star being the Secretary of State. In the spotlight she's a flame that attracts both the right and the left wings against her.


    Distancing herself from Obama is the wrong move. He's doing badly from the right wing, since he doesn't care about appeasing them. That was a fool's errand he was never going to succeed in doing, their hate for Obama and the Democrats make them voters he'd never be able to win over. It took him too long to figure that out. She's meant to be trying to attract voters from Democrats, not Republicans.

    And the Right's hate for her is nearly as deep as their loathing of Obama. Beating up on Obama isn't going to win anyone from that side over either.

    Harry DresdenRchanenGnome-InterruptusStollszagdrobKid Presentable
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades 地獄のようにかわいい あなたは嫉妬深いかRegistered User regular
    edited August 2014
    I agree (with HD). I really wish the left wing had another Obama waiting in the wings. I don't mean a clone, I mean someone charismatic who isn't of the Bush/Clinton dynasties. Hillary has the name recognition, I just wish she would play things a bit more to the changing demographics. Every outgoing President has declining ratings; that isn't what you judge the worth of the person on. You judge them on what good or harm they did for the country.

    Obama has exposed a lot of right-wing ugliness through sheer force of diplomacy, and we needed it. America needed a wake-up call in right wing politics. Unfortunately, only the left got the memo. Actually, I do think some of the right got the message, but they aren't the right anymore.

    The big issue here is that Hillary is appealing to the right wing that Obama has worked so hard to expose as outmoded, obsolete and obsolescent. They are going the way of the dodo, and it may take the right years before they finish their wandering in the wilderness. The progress is slow, but it's getting there. And it's best for the country; having a majority non-crazy right wing is good!

    Hillary should be embracing Obama's legacy. Her distancing now is evoking Gore in 2000 and that scares the shit out of me.

    joshofalltrades on
    ジェイムズ・ブラウンの好きな色は何ですか?
    青!
    Gnome-InterruptusSpoitStollsTL DRKid Presentable
  • ScooterScooter Registered User regular
    Is there any chance of Biden making a run of it? I'd prefer him over Hillary.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Scooter wrote: »
    Is there any chance of Biden making a run of it? I'd prefer him over Hillary.

    On MSNBC, probably Alex Wagner's show, there were reports that the best campaigners and donors in the party were staying away from him to join Hilary.

    Harry Dresden on
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades 地獄のようにかわいい あなたは嫉妬深いかRegistered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Scooter wrote: »
    Is there any chance of Biden making a run of it? I'd prefer him over Hillary.

    On MSNBC, probably Alex Wagner's show, there were reports that the best campaigners and donors in the party were staying away from him to join Hilary.

    She has the last name Clinton.

    And Biden has the unfortunate tendency to stick his foot in his mouth, as awesome as he actually is.

    I'm really glad Obama chose Biden though, he turned out to be an excellent VP. Especially compared to Cheney.

    joshofalltrades on
    ジェイムズ・ブラウンの好きな色は何ですか?
    青!
    Harry DresdenGnome-Interruptuschrishallett83
  • DiplominatorDiplominator Hardcore Porg Registered User regular
    I basically want someone to tell me that if I like my current president I can keep it.

    Gnome-InterruptusKamarTofystedethSquigieKid PresentableMr RayWraith260emp123
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Scooter wrote: »
    Is there any chance of Biden making a run of it? I'd prefer him over Hillary.

    On MSNBC, probably Alex Wagner's show, there were reports that the best campaigners and donors in the party were staying away from him to join Hilary.

    She has the last name Clinton.

    And Biden has the unfortunate tendency to stick his foot in his mouth, as awesome as he actually is.

    I'm really glad Obama chose Biden though, he turned out to be an excellent VP. Especially compared to Cheney.

    Also her polling numbers are waaaaaaaay better than they were in 2007. Like instead of a 25 point lead, it's closer to 50.

    Anyway, 2016 is not strictly on topic beyond discussion of her criticism of Obama's policy on their own merits.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Warren 2020
    joshofalltrades
  • RonaldoTheGypsyRonaldoTheGypsy Or just "Ron" Registered User regular
    To quote Hank Hill:

    "I miss voting for that man"

  • KasynKasyn Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    Except Obama isn't that unpopular. She's playing into a media myth(Obama's on the ropes and losing popularity quickly!) that polling does not back up. He's really not that unpopular for a 2nd term president. Keep in mind about this time in Bush's 2nd term he was up to his eyeballs in Katrina and his own party had totally turned on him.

    Obama is as unpopular as he has ever been. There's a reason he's not out appearing alongside candidates at campaign events, and has pretty much been relegated to party fundraisers in blue states. There's a reason so many campaigns across the country right now are about the Republicans trying to tie their opponents to Obama. His party hasn't turned on him? Democrats in tough districts are falling all over themselves to draw contrasts when possible. Lundergan Grimes will campaign with Elizabeth Warren in Kentucky but won't be caught dead with Obama. That's telling.

    He's bad news if you're running anywhere outside of an area that's pretty damn blue. The nation as a whole isn't, and that's where Hillary's running for, so...yeah.

    I'm not saying this isn't a continuation of the same spineless abdications that let the Republicans set the terms on everything, but again, it's utterly natural and I don't think is anything that should surprise or disappoint us when it comes to Hillary.

  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades 地獄のようにかわいい あなたは嫉妬深いかRegistered User regular
    In 3 or 4 years though, Obama will be pretty well vindicated by history. Which is another reason why it would be dumb for any Democrat to run from him.

    Every President's popularity declines towards the end of their second term (OK, maybe not every President, but I am lazy and not looking the numbers up now).

    ジェイムズ・ブラウンの好きな色は何ですか?
    青!
    Geth
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    I am sure glad the Republicans have made everyone so tired of Benghazi

    I keep hoping that all they do during her run for the oval office is keep mentioning Benghazi

  • KasynKasyn Registered User regular
    In 3 or 4 years though, Obama will be pretty well vindicated by history. Which is another reason why it would be dumb for any Democrat to run from him.

    Every President's popularity declines towards the end of their second term (OK, maybe not every President, but I am lazy and not looking the numbers up now).

    People don't run campaigns on what they think someone's favorability will be three or four years from now. They run them on what the polling tells them it is when they are running. If Obama bounces back sooner than historically expected (I actually think he'll wind up as a fairly popular ex-POTUS rather than the political leper that is GWB, because once we're out of the shitstorm people will feel bad for how raw a deal he was given) then Hill will be reminding everyone of how friendly they were. Until then, expect the politician with an election ahead of them to behave like a politician with an election ahead of them.

    And we'll grumble about it and hate it because it's shitty in the long run but then vote for her anyways because the alternative is Rand Paul.

    As Charlie Pierce regularly says, this is your democracy America, cherish it.

    Gnome-Interruptus
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades 地獄のようにかわいい あなたは嫉妬深いかRegistered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    In 3 or 4 years though, Obama will be pretty well vindicated by history. Which is another reason why it would be dumb for any Democrat to run from him.

    Every President's popularity declines towards the end of their second term (OK, maybe not every President, but I am lazy and not looking the numbers up now).

    People don't run campaigns on what they think someone's favorability will be three or four years from now. They run them on what the polling tells them it is when they are running. If Obama bounces back sooner than historically expected (I actually think he'll wind up as a fairly popular ex-POTUS rather than the political leper that is GWB, because once we're out of the shitstorm people will feel bad for how raw a deal he was given) then Hill will be reminding everyone of how friendly they were. Until then, expect the politician with an election ahead of them to behave like a politician with an election ahead of them.

    And we'll grumble about it and hate it because it's shitty in the long run but then vote for her anyways because the alternative is Rand Paul.

    As Charlie Pierce regularly says, this is your democracy America, cherish it.

    No; you think long-term and short-term, not the latter exclusively.

    Obama's legacy is not so poisonous that the Democrats need to turn tail and flee from it.

    ジェイムズ・ブラウンの好きな色は何ですか?
    青!
    Gnome-InterruptuslonelyahavaMr Ray
  • KasynKasyn Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    In 3 or 4 years though, Obama will be pretty well vindicated by history. Which is another reason why it would be dumb for any Democrat to run from him.

    Every President's popularity declines towards the end of their second term (OK, maybe not every President, but I am lazy and not looking the numbers up now).

    People don't run campaigns on what they think someone's favorability will be three or four years from now. They run them on what the polling tells them it is when they are running. If Obama bounces back sooner than historically expected (I actually think he'll wind up as a fairly popular ex-POTUS rather than the political leper that is GWB, because once we're out of the shitstorm people will feel bad for how raw a deal he was given) then Hill will be reminding everyone of how friendly they were. Until then, expect the politician with an election ahead of them to behave like a politician with an election ahead of them.

    And we'll grumble about it and hate it because it's shitty in the long run but then vote for her anyways because the alternative is Rand Paul.

    As Charlie Pierce regularly says, this is your democracy America, cherish it.

    No; you think long-term and short-term, not the latter exclusively.

    Obama's legacy is not so poisonous that the Democrats need to turn tail and flee from it.

    You think ahead to the upcoming election. You can't flee someone's legacy, you can only flee them now. The pool of voters she would potentially discourage by campaigning at Obama's expense right now are a lot smaller than what she stands to gain by not being so attached to her toxic former boss and by retaining some credibility in a key area for her.

    Geth
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Yes, "Vote for my team, because I'll be totally different than it's been!" is totally a great line. She's more tied to Obama at this point than Gore was. Best case she manages to convince some people more to the right to think she isn't Satan while sucking all the air out of the Left Wing that actually provides on the ground volunteers.

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    GethGnome-InterruptusArdolKid Presentable
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Scooter wrote: »
    Is there any chance of Biden making a run of it? I'd prefer him over Hillary.

    Biden will be 74 in 2016. He will be legitimately too old.

    Edit: McCain was 72 in his run and he should have been too old to win the nod but the rest of the field was so bad there was no other option.

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
    chrishallett83
  • chrishallett83chrishallett83 Hi! Registered User regular
    If only Jill Stein could achieve some sort of relevancy and support...

    Tammy Duckworth would be awesome.

  • emnmnmeemnmnme Heard about this on conservative radio:Registered User regular
    I am sure glad the Republicans have made everyone so tired of Benghazi

    I keep hoping that all they do during her run for the oval office is keep mentioning Benghazi

    adytum
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    That's not it, it's the whole package. With her it's only optics and being safe, and safe to her is always on the right side of politics. You think Obama's a centrist? Wait until she gets into office. Then there's her failure with campaigning and a being an old school politician. Obama changed the game, I fear she'll go back to her standard tactics without adapting to the new environment - and repeating past mistakes. She's the greatest politically when the spotlight isn't on her, that's why she became a star being the Secretary of State. In the spotlight she's a flame that attracts both the right and the left wings against her.


    Distancing herself from Obama is the wrong move. He's doing badly from the right wing, since he doesn't care about appeasing them. That was a fool's errand he was never going to succeed in doing, their hate for Obama and the Democrats make them voters he'd never be able to win over. It took him too long to figure that out. She's meant to be trying to attract voters from Democrats, not Republicans.

    Let's not pretend like Hillary is the only person trying to court Republicans by moving away from Democratic positions. The entire fucking party has a ridiculous problem with that. You'd have thought they'd seen the errors of their ways by now but

    Let's just say the Democratic Party is the very definition of insanity

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
    Spoit
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Re: Hillary, blaming a politician for disloyal opportunism in an attempt to position themselves favorably for future elections is like ... something something metaphor for something that is utterly not surprising. She is trying to distance herself from a very unpopular figure and reassert some credentials in an area that should be her strength and therefore will be attacked relentlessly. It's not that surprising or irrational.

    Except Obama isn't that unpopular. She's playing into a media myth(Obama's on the ropes and losing popularity quickly!) that polling does not back up. He's really not that unpopular for a 2nd term president. Keep in mind about this time in Bush's 2nd term he was up to his eyeballs in Katrina and his own party had totally turned on him.

    Obama is as unpopular as he has ever been. There's a reason he's not out appearing alongside candidates at campaign events, and has pretty much been relegated to party fundraisers in blue states. There's a reason so many campaigns across the country right now are about the Republicans trying to tie their opponents to Obama. His party hasn't turned on him? Democrats in tough districts are falling all over themselves to draw contrasts when possible. Lundergan Grimes will campaign with Elizabeth Warren in Kentucky but won't be caught dead with Obama. That's telling.

    He's bad news if you're running anywhere outside of an area that's pretty damn blue. The nation as a whole isn't, and that's where Hillary's running for, so...yeah.

    I'm not saying this isn't a continuation of the same spineless abdications that let the Republicans set the terms on everything, but again, it's utterly natural and I don't think is anything that should surprise or disappoint us when it comes to Hillary.

    H'es unpopular as he's ever been because that's what happens in 2nd terms. Hilary and the Dems are being very short sighted in throwing Obama under the bus

    joshofalltradesGnome-Interruptusshryke
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Kasyn wrote: »
    Kasyn wrote: »
    In 3 or 4 years though, Obama will be pretty well vindicated by history. Which is another reason why it would be dumb for any Democrat to run from him.

    Every President's popularity declines towards the end of their second term (OK, maybe not every President, but I am lazy and not looking the numbers up now).

    People don't run campaigns on what they think someone's favorability will be three or four years from now. They run them on what the polling tells them it is when they are running. If Obama bounces back sooner than historically expected (I actually think he'll wind up as a fairly popular ex-POTUS rather than the political leper that is GWB, because once we're out of the shitstorm people will feel bad for how raw a deal he was given) then Hill will be reminding everyone of how friendly they were. Until then, expect the politician with an election ahead of them to behave like a politician with an election ahead of them.

    And we'll grumble about it and hate it because it's shitty in the long run but then vote for her anyways because the alternative is Rand Paul.

    As Charlie Pierce regularly says, this is your democracy America, cherish it.

    No; you think long-term and short-term, not the latter exclusively.

    Obama's legacy is not so poisonous that the Democrats need to turn tail and flee from it.

    You think ahead to the upcoming election. You can't flee someone's legacy, you can only flee them now. The pool of voters she would potentially discourage by campaigning at Obama's expense right now are a lot smaller than what she stands to gain by not being so attached to her toxic former boss and by retaining some credibility in a key area for her.

    This year sure by 2016 the picture could be completely different. at best Clinton is being extremely premature

  • PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    It still bugs me she stood on a stage with Holy Joe and decried video games. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Obama, but I damn sure that we don't need anybody trying to run even more to the center. Wherever that is now.

    It's standard Clintonism. I lived through eight years of it, and I honestly am not wild about another go.
    Krieghund wrote: »
    V1m wrote: »
    Krieghund wrote: »
    Shit, today's 40 year olds still play fucking games!

    Sup, I'm 42.

    Yo, I'm 40, lol. Though I think we may be some of the upper edge here. But I am in the middle of new Wolfenstein, so yeah, old gamer.

    I'm 39 and a lot of my friends play games. If you do the math, that simply means that the kids who were playing games when Starcraft and Diablo came out are now adults. My college friends all had Playstations and even the ones who had the systems just for sports games usually had a copy of Grand Theft Auto, Halo or some other major franchise.

    You really have to go up to the 50s to find people who grew up when gaming was nonexistent or gamers negatively stereotyped to any major degree. The mainstream media and politicians were a few years behind the curve in the 90s, but even then the anti-gamer hysterias were the result of more people playing games.

    And this type of crap is exactly why I am not excited about a Hillary Clinton run. I got tired of the Clinton's super-transparent "issues" style of politics back in the 90s. The last thing the world needs is another round of V-Chips and Parental Advisory Stickers.

    Phillishere on
    chrishallett83Lovely
  • chrishallett83chrishallett83 Hi! Registered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Let's just say the Democratic Party is the very definition of insanity

    So then what the hell do you call the GOP? Or the Tea Party?

  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    I like Obama and am happy with what he's done for the country (i.e. I approve of his performance), but there's a lot of silliness in this thread:

    re: But Obama is NOT unpopular

    He's more popular than Bush was at this point in his term, but is still ~3.5 points lower than the average approval rating of all second term Presidents since Truman at this point in the term. Though he is certainly not politically toxic, it is not ridiculous to refer to him as "unpopular". Clinton's approval rating was 64% at this point, Obama's is hovering in the low 40's...

    History will vindicate Obama!

    You have no idea what history will do with Obama. Zero, zilch, nada. Furthermore, this EXACT claim was made by the GOP regarding Bush. You may think he's done good things for the country, but you have no idea what ACA will look like in 5-10 years, or the fallout of his foreign policy decisions, or the status of the economy, etc etc. His legacy is completely up in the air.

    Hillary is courting the right!

    Yes, she is, which is ironic given that her actual policy positions are considerably left of Obama's. This kind of political maneuvering is commonplace, however. Democrats aren't crazy, POLITICS are crazy.

    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
    a5ehrenKasynSageinaRage
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    My advice? Change the US political system to Consociationalism (didn't know the word existed before today - the word we use in Switzerland is very different). Allow in other parties. Have a government that isn't a de facto two-party system but one where the different parties, and especially the big ones, must share responsibility in governing. Can't play ball? Nothing happens, but you can't say, "Well, *they're* the ones in power!" I think it would begin to solve so many problems. Same in the UK.

    How to get there? Simple.

    Magic.

    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    Clinton had the advantage of Congress going after him for lying about a blowjob, which most people outside of Congress thought was bullshit. There's nothing more than talk of impeachment yet, so that could change.

  • WyvernWyvern Registered User regular
    Thirith wrote: »
    My advice? Change the US political system to Consociationalism (didn't know the word existed before today - the word we use in Switzerland is very different). Allow in other parties. Have a government that isn't a de facto two-party system but one where the different parties, and especially the big ones, must share responsibility in governing. Can't play ball? Nothing happens, but you can't say, "Well, *they're* the ones in power!" I think it would begin to solve so many problems. Same in the UK.

    How to get there? Simple.

    Magic.
    Clearly this is not politically viable, because that word contains all the letters of "socialism". In order! Don't you know anything about US politics?

    Also, if we tried to throw out the Constitution and start over, we would be Egypt within two months. If we even got that far.

    Switch: SW-2431-2728-9604 || 3DS: 0817-4948-1650
  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Let's just say the Democratic Party is the very definition of insanity

    So then what the hell do you call the GOP? Or the Tea Party?

    Evil

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
    chrishallett83
  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Let's just say the Democratic Party is the very definition of insanity

    So then what the hell do you call the GOP? Or the Tea Party?

    Criminal.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    chrishallett83
  • ArchangleArchangle Registered User regular
    Yeah, a potential presidential candidate saying "You know the current president? I supported the bits you liked and didn't support the bits you didn't like" should not be shocking to anyone. Even if the second part is the bit that gets amplified.

    jmcdonaldMr Ray
  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    Heartlash wrote: »
    I like Obama and am happy with what he's done for the country (i.e. I approve of his performance), but there's a lot of silliness in this thread:

    re: But Obama is NOT unpopular

    He's more popular than Bush was at this point in his term, but is still ~3.5 points lower than the average approval rating of all second term Presidents since Truman at this point in the term. Though he is certainly not politically toxic, it is not ridiculous to refer to him as "unpopular". Clinton's approval rating was 64% at this point, Obama's is hovering in the low 40's...

    I think it's a distinct possibility that the polarization of the electorate has progressed to the point where low 40's is about as bad as it gets (and high 40's about as good) absent very strong circumstances. When Bin Laden's death was announced, Obama got a 9 point approval bump that evaporated over the next two weeks of not killing America's greatest enemies. Just as it's unlikely that we're going to see a huge sweep of a Presidential election (popular vote-wise), I think that the band of movement for a president's overall approval rating has shrunk.
    History will vindicate Obama!

    You have no idea what history will do with Obama. Zero, zilch, nada. Furthermore, this EXACT claim was made by the GOP regarding Bush. You may think he's done good things for the country, but you have no idea what ACA will look like in 5-10 years, or the fallout of his foreign policy decisions, or the status of the economy, etc etc. His legacy is completely up in the air.

    This is not really true. It is, of course, always possible that something catastrophic could happen that would radically shift the way people felt about Obama; he could react exactly the wrong way to something terrible, or we could discover that he's secretly a lizard person, or whatever. But reasonable people can look at the ACA and determine that his popularity will go up once it becomes clear that his main achievement has insured many uninsured and softened the cost curve, things it has already done and will continue to do going forward. No trend will continue indefinitely but so far most of these trends look pretty good. History will probably take the the view that he ended some wars and oversaw a weak economic recovery and also healthcare. That's about it.
    Hillary is courting the right!

    Yes, she is, which is ironic given that her actual policy positions are considerably left of Obama's. This kind of political maneuvering is commonplace, however. Democrats aren't crazy, POLITICS are crazy.

    It may or may not be bad politics to badmouth the sitting president; but at this point, a term and a half into the insanity that has been the response to the Obama presidency, it is definitely frustrating politics to see in action.

    ACsTqqK.jpg
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Democrats turning on Obama to try and score points with the right is insane. You are a democrat, YOU CAN NOT SCORE POINTS WITH THE PARTY THAT HATES YOU!

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    KamarSpoitAistanSurfpossumzagdrobStollsArdolchrishallett83Captain MarcusfrandelgearslipKid PresentableGnome-InterruptusshrykeRchanenlonelyahavaLovelyWraith260emp123
This discussion has been closed.