What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Heh heh heh, you know, the point of a fake scandal is that it brings down your opponents #'s, not that it brings yours down. Once again we see Obama holding steady with the American people while the Republican brand is circling the bowl.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...17f-11e2-bfdb-3886a561c1ff_story.html?hpid=z2

Best of all, this poll is from ABC, the conservatives new media darling so it can't be questioned!!!
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

And the further point is, after the 60's and the Dems heroic leadership on civil rights, all the racists found a home in....you guessed, the GOP! Do me a favor and review Jesse Helms greatest hits and get back to us.

Also, I'm not sure what your obsession is with sexual relations between consenting parties, but you do realize not being able to tell the difference between consensual and non consensual contact (Studds vs Foley) will get you a listing on a sex offender registry, right Opie?
So racists in the south abandoned the democrats in the 60s and haven't gone back that suddenly makes conservative ideas bad, got it.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Excellent article by Charlie Cook, not exactly a partisan Democrat...

Republicans’ Hatred of Obama Blinds Them to Public Disinterest in Scandals
Republicans are so focused on their bitter battles against Obama, they can’t see how little impact the “scandals” have had on public opinion.
Tweet By Charlie Cook

Updated: May 21, 2013 | 7:55 a.m.
May 20, 2013 | 6:00 p.m.


Red-faced Republicans, circling and preparing to pounce on a second-term Democratic president they loathe, do not respect, and certainly do not fear. Sound familiar? Perhaps reminiscent of Bill Clinton’s second term, after the Monica Lewinsky story broke? During that time, Republicans became so consumed by their hatred of Clinton and their conviction that this event would bring him down that they convinced themselves the rest of the country was just as outraged by his behavior as they were. By the way, what was Clinton’s lowest Gallup job-approval rating in his second term, throughout the travails of investigations and impeachment? It was 53 percent. The conservative echo machine had worked itself into such a frenzy, the GOP didn’t realize that the outrage was largely confined to the ranks of those who never voted for Clinton anyway.

These days, the country is even more polarized, and the conservative echo chamber is louder than ever before. Many conservatives made it all the way to Election Day last November unaware that their White House nominee was falling short. How could Mitt Romney possibly lose when everyone they knew was voting for him? Except that he did lose, and it wasn’t even a very close race. Five other post-World War II presidential elections had closer outcomes.

The simple fact is that although the Republican sharks are circling, at least so far, there isn’t a trace of blood in the water. A new CNN/ORC survey of 923 Americans this past Friday and Saturday, May 17-18, pegged Obama’s job-approval rating at 53 percent, up a statistically insignificant 2 points since their last poll, April 5-7, which was taken before the Benghazi, IRS, and AP-wiretap stories came to dominate the news and congressional hearing rooms. His disapproval rating was down 2 points since that last survey.

In Gallup’s tracking poll, Obama’s average job-approval rating so far this year is 50 percent. For this past week, May 13-19, his average was 49 percent, the same as the week before. The most recent three-day moving average, through Sunday, May 19, was also 49 percent. Over the past two weeks, even as these three stories/scandals have dominated the news, they have had precisely zero effect on the president’s job-approval numbers. His ratings are still bouncing around in the same narrow range they have been for weeks.

Maybe that will change. Maybe these allegations will start getting traction with voters. But it might just be that Americans are more focused on an economy that is gradually coming out of the longest and deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression. Most economists say the current quarter will show a slowdown in economic growth from the first quarter’s 2.5 percent pace, but they expect the economy to be stronger in the second half of this year. People may be encouraged by housing prices rising and the stock market setting record highs—and their retirement accounts may actually be looking better. The University of Michigan’s widely watched Consumer Sentiment Index is at the highest level since 2007, before the recession. The Conference Board’s more volatile Consumer Confidence Index is also generally moving up, although it isn’t at the record level of the Michigan index. The National Federation of Independent Business’s Index of Small Business Optimism, which took a deep plunge after the election, increased last month and is on an upward trend since the beginning of the year. Maybe the people and businesses polled have written off Washington as a political cesspool, and so these stories don’t affect them much. Perhaps they see this town as a place that can’t seem to get anything right.

One wonders how long Republicans are going to bark up this tree, perhaps the wrong tree, while they ignore their own party’s problems, which were shown to be profound in the most recent elections. Clearly none of these recent issues has had a real impact on voters yet. Republicans seem to be betting everything on them, just as they did in 1998—about which even Newt Gingrich (who was House speaker that year) commented recently to NPR, “I think we overreached in ’98.”

Republicans and conservatives who are so consumed by these “scandals” should ask themselves why, despite wall-to-wall media attention and the constant focus inside the Beltway—some are even talking about grounds for impeachment—Obama’s job-approval needle hasn’t moved. The CNN/ORC poll suggests that people are aware of and watching the news, but they aren’t reacting, at least not yet. Clearly Republicans hope the public will begin to respond. But at what point do they decide that maybe voters might be more interested in other issues or worries than about politicians on one side pointing fingers and throwing allegations at those on the other side? At what point might the GOP conclude that it is just digging the hole a little deeper?

This article appears in the May 21, 2013, edition of National Journal Daily as Blind Rage.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Obama's term is shaping up to be just like that of Clinton and the antithesis of Bush. We'll see, but perhaps amazingly so. When Clinton started the economy was weak. Stock market performance while he was in office was outstanding. He was harrased from the right for scandals which really didn't have impact on him in the average person's eye's. His popularity remained just fine. The current view of Clinton (as with Reagan) was good and has been getting better in recent years. Based on the current direction of the economy, it appears Obama is headed for a somewhat better than average legacy.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Charlie Cook's and idiot. Everyone knows that Republicans are never wrong about America.
 
Obama's term is shaping up to be just like that of Clinton and the antithesis of Bush. We'll see, but perhaps amazingly so. When Clinton started the economy was weak. Stock market performance while he was in office was outstanding. He was harrased from the right for scandals which really didn't have impact on him in the average person's eye's. His popularity remained just fine. The current view of Clinton (as with Reagan) was good and has been getting better in recent years. Based on the current direction of the economy, it appears Obama is headed for a somewhat better than average legacy.

I'd rank Obama behind Clinton but that's not a bad thing as I'm not sure I'll ever see a President as good as Clinton again. Problem with Reagan is his economic policies in hindsight are proving to be a disaster kinda like how nobody regards Alan Greenspan as a genius anymore.

Much like Clinton and as you say, how he manages the economy, as in the trade off between growth and deficit reduction is key to his legacy. People always want to assume Presidents have nothing to do with the economy. In fact that's not entirely true as the budget choices they make do indeed affect the economy beyond the usual boom and bust cycles.

Beyond that though, if he bags health care, financial reform, offing OBL, and immigration reform that's a pretty good record. Get us closer to energy independence and maybe he does reach Clinton's level of competence.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Beyond that though, if he bags health care, financial reform, offing OBL, and immigration reform that's a pretty good record. Get us closer to energy independence and maybe he does reach Clinton's level of competence.

Not as long as U5 unemployment remains above 7%.
 
And the further point is, after the 60's and the Dems heroic leadership on civil rights, all the racists found a home in....you guessed, the GOP! Do me a favor and review Jesse Helms greatest hits and get back to us.

Also, I'm not sure what your obsession is with sexual relations between consenting parties, but you do realize not being able to tell the difference between consensual and non consensual contact (Studds vs Foley) will get you a listing on a sex offender registry, right Opie?

Senator Byrd comes to mind. Mr KKK himself
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Obama's term is shaping up to be just like that of Clinton and the antithesis of Bush. We'll see, but perhaps amazingly so. When Clinton started the economy was weak. Stock market performance while he was in office was outstanding. He was harrased from the right for scandals which really didn't have impact on him in the average person's eye's. His popularity remained just fine. The current view of Clinton (as with Reagan) was good and has been getting better in recent years. Based on the current direction of the economy, it appears Obama is headed for a somewhat better than average legacy.

You know what's funny? I remember them saying the exact same thing about GWB when the same thing was happening under him.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Forgetting who is who...a president's approval rating could remain static despite "issues" if the people who support him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they aren't doing a good job and/or those who didn't vote for him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they are doing a good job.

So, a static approval rating could suggest that we are so polarized it doesn't matter what they do. I see the occasional "I used to be a red" or "I used to be a blue" posts but I mostly discount those as people liars.

If a candidate went out and stopped the OK tornadoes, their opponent and that party would still condemn the candidate and find some fault in how they didn't stop yesterday's tornado or once voted to increase parking meter fines. And their approval rating wouldn't change.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Forgetting who is who...a president's approval rating could remain static despite "issues" if the people who support him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they aren't doing a good job and/or those who didn't vote for him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they are doing a good job.

So, a static approval rating could suggest that we are so polarized it doesn't matter what they do. I see the occasional "I used to be a red" or "I used to be a blue" posts but I mostly discount those as people liars.

If a candidate went out and stopped the OK tornadoes, their opponent and that party would still condemn the candidate and find some fault in how they didn't stop yesterday's tornado or once voted to increase parking meter fines. And their approval rating wouldn't change.

And given how much the media has either shouted down dissent, or in GWB's case raised holy heck as if it were the end of the world to the point that it's the only thing people can think about, I believe you have hit the nail on the head. Just remember that, in order to win American Revolution II, you must be able to withstand three BILLION armor piercing rounds.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Gosh, what a surprise.


WASHINGTON — An Oklahoma senator who opposed federal aid for Hurricane Sandy victims suggested Tuesday that he would support such aid for victims of the Oklahoma tornado because the two situations are “totally different.”

Of course they are. One impacted an area half a continent away with a high concentration of liberals, and one impacts his own backyard with a high concentration of conservatives. I'm sure that is simply a coincidence. Maybe Senator Inhofe's constituents ought to pull themselves up by those famous bootstraps and bail themselves out.

It should be noted that the Republican Congressman who represents Moore, OK supported the emergency relief for the northeast, saying "There's clearly a federal responsibility to act. We have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible."

To be clear, as a liberal (and a human being), I think the people of Oklahoma should get whatever assistance they need. I just think it's a little...ironic...that members of Congress who opposed federal relief for the northeast suddenly want it for their own people...
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Forgetting who is who...a president's approval rating could remain static despite "issues" if the people who support him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they aren't doing a good job and/or those who didn't vote for him/her are blind to any issues that suggest they are doing a good job.

So, a static approval rating could suggest that we are so polarized it doesn't matter what they do.

Dunno. Approval is not often moved by those on either side...that is solid Dems will approve and solid GOPers will disapprove regardless of scandals. Remember that middle America is 'between the 40 yard lines' or not hard core supporters or haters...and middle America drives approval ratings. And remember approval does change as we have seen very low ratings in the last 5 years.

Not as long as U5 unemployment remains above 7%.

Disagree. If businesses/markets continue on their tear and the deficit gets under control, his legacy will be solid. The financial crisis destroyed alot of jobs and BO was not to blame for it. Since then, job creation has not been so poor as to dismantle the great turnaround in the balance of the economy. Notice that nobody calls it 'the great recession' anymore.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Gosh, what a surprise.




Of course they are. One impacted an area half a continent away with a high concentration of liberals, and one impacts his own backyard with a high concentration of conservatives. I'm sure that is simply a coincidence. Maybe Senator Inhofe's constituents ought to pull themselves up by those famous bootstraps and bail themselves out.

It should be noted that the Republican Congressman who represents Moore, OK supported the emergency relief for the northeast, saying "There's clearly a federal responsibility to act. We have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible."

To be clear, as a liberal (and a human being), I think the people of Oklahoma should get whatever assistance they need. I just think it's a little...ironic...that members of Congress who opposed federal relief for the northeast suddenly want it for their own people...

Some of us see it the other way around. We didn't get much assistance for the Great Ice Storm of '98, nor did the area get much of any assistance from Irene a couple years ago, and that has left me slightly vindictive.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Gosh, what a surprise.




Of course they are. One impacted an area half a continent away with a high concentration of liberals, and one impacts his own backyard with a high concentration of conservatives. I'm sure that is simply a coincidence. Maybe Senator Inhofe's constituents ought to pull themselves up by those famous bootstraps and bail themselves out.

It should be noted that the Republican Congressman who represents Moore, OK supported the emergency relief for the northeast, saying "There's clearly a federal responsibility to act. We have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible."

To be clear, as a liberal (and a human being), I think the people of Oklahoma should get whatever assistance they need. I just think it's a little...ironic...that members of Congress who opposed federal relief for the northeast suddenly want it for their own people...

I'm shocked.
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

This is what happens when you elect ideological nutballs. Gubmint interference is only a problem when its someone else getting government dollars. When its you its always 100% legit. It goes to show what I always say, which is conservatism has no practical application in the real world. How many of these poor bahstids in OK who just got their lives torn apart will refuse any and all govt aide? I'm thinking...maybe...None of them. What's the good in subscribing to a rigid ideology if you refuse to follow it when it applies to yourself? (see Sanford, Mark).
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

This is what happens when you elect ideological nutballs. Gubmint interference is only a problem when its someone else getting government dollars. When its you its always 100% legit. It goes to show what I always say, which is conservatism has no practical application in the real world. How many of these poor bahstids in OK who just got their lives torn apart will refuse any and all govt aide? I'm thinking...maybe...None of them. What's the good in subscribing to a rigid ideology if you refuse to follow it when it applies to yourself? (see Sanford, Mark).

And you don't think the other side doesn't do it as well? Take the left-wing blinders off for about 30 seconds and look from the bird's eye view. I'll even share some of the popcorn. ;)
 
Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

This is what happens when you elect ideological nutballs. Gubmint interference is only a problem when its someone else getting government dollars. When its you its always 100% legit. It goes to show what I always say, which is conservatism has no practical application in the real world. How many of these poor bahstids in OK who just got their lives torn apart will refuse any and all govt aide? I'm thinking...maybe...None of them. What's the good in subscribing to a rigid ideology if you refuse to follow it when it applies to yourself? (see Sanford, Mark).
And if everyone had the same attitude as the oklahoma senator, we wouldn't hand out money like it was free for every event because there would be more not effected by the event than effected by the event. I understand your sentiment but it doesn't change the fact that we continue to spend money we don't have and many people agree on that point. The problem until the end of time will be that "my handout" is ok but yours is bad, which is why none of them should exist in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top