when the GOP takes the gloves off in these debates all obama has to do and sit back as they self destruct.

wgh raider;808733 wrote:when the GOP takes the gloves off in these debates all obama has to do and sit back as they self destruct.

That's what McCain thought in 2008. It has been proven to be false.

Zactly ^^.

Pretending like Obama has already won or lost his reelection is pure silliness.

fish82;808612 wrote: He's a classic narcissist though...it only takes a couple chapters of any Psych 101 textbook to see that.

Anyone know of a politician in today's environment that isn't?

I Wear Pants;808577 wrote:Second, this is another one of those situations where I think it's a bad way to say something and you guys take it as a damning conviction that he is an egomaniacle narcissist that thinks he's a messiah.

First, Obama definitely fits the ego-maniacal narcissist mold...but in all fairness most politicians do. However, BHO takes it to a whole new level.

Second, "you guys"? Tell me there isn't anyone else in your sphere of influence (work, place of worship, health club, neighborhood, whatever) who doesn't have similar views about Obama.

dtdtim;808790 wrote:Anyone know of a politician in today's environment that isn't?

You're mistaking ego for narcissism. They're two different things.

How angry are you people going to be when Obama is reelected?

2kool4skool;808934 wrote:How angry are you people going to be when Obama is reelected?

Angry? I don't sense anger in most of these posts. Intensity and passion, yes...anger, not so much.

And if Obama wins re-election, it won't be anger most of us will feel. It will be extreme sadness for our country. Obama has done a lot of damage in 4 years. Most of would prefer he not get four more. However, if the House remains in GOP hands and perhaps the Senate follows, it will help limit some of that damage.

2kool4skool;808934 wrote:How angry are you people going to be when Obama is reelected?

I wouldn't be angry at all as long as it's the will of the people. I didn't vote for him last time and I am in disagreement with a lot of his decisions but it was the people's will that put him there and it's telling of what the people wanted at that time.

2kool4skool;808934 wrote:How angry are you people going to be when Obama is reelected?

I dunno...how angry will you people be when Michelle Bachmann is elected?

Writerbuckeye;808946 wrote:Intensity and passion.

What is it specifically that you're passionate about, and how is posting here accomplishing it?

Writerbuckeye;808946 wrote:anger, not so much.

The nicknames, one-liners, calling someone a "POS" because you disagree with them, are very indicative of anger. It's something a kindergartener does when they're not getting their way.

fish82;808956 wrote:I dunno...how angry will you people be when Michelle Bachmann is elected?

I don't really care who wins, though Bachmann would likely produce a pretty hilarious reaction from the left, similar to the right when Obama is reelected. Unfortunately, only one of those scenarios has a chance in hell of happening.

But if you're confident, please name the amount you would like to bet on Bachmann being elected.

2kool4skool;808934 wrote:How angry are you people going to be when Obama is reelected?

Please answer this question. Who the fuck will vote for Obama?

* The poor who are poorer now than ever
* Blacks who are the highest unemployed (voting race never ends good)
* Small business owner (Even the Black National Chamber Commerce’s is against Obama and they voted for color)
* Present home owner (property value dropping)... those who have been foreclosed... (The new poor)
* Wealthy (have to be a crazy mofo)
* Insurance, financial investment, banking or medical field individuals ( Why would they)
* Oil and Gas and Coal States (not likely)
* The Unemployed……..11% by 2012
* Those that have closed their business
* Newly graduated High or College grads (who can’t find a job or pay off their loans)..
* Illegal’s can’t vote
* Jewish population (Obama agenda for Israel does not support this)
* Military Personal (didn’t happen last time and thing are worse now)
* ACORN is gone and Oprah off the air... (so goes that support

With Obama track record of failure …. What is there … “Union Members without guns”

2kool4skool;808966 wrote:What is it specifically that you're passionate about, and how is posting here accomplishing it?



The nicknames, one-liners, calling someone a "POS" because you disagree with them, are very indicative of anger. It's something a kindergartener does when they're not getting their way.



I don't really care who wins, though Bachmann would likely produce a pretty hilarious reaction from the left, similar to the right when Obama is reelected. Unfortunately, only one of those scenarios has a chance in hell of happening.

But if you're confident, please name the amount you would like to bet on Bachmann being elected.

I'm passionate about the topic of politics; it's exciting, fun and yes, it can be aggravating at times. Posting is an OUTLET for that passion, not unlike having a discussion with friends. You really don't get that? I mean, why is Facebook and other social networking sites so popular.

As for the nicknames, etc., it would depend on the nickname, now wouldn't it? I'd say if I call him the messiah, it's more out of derision than anger. If I say Obummer, it's more likely a satirical play on his name and effect of his policies; not anger. I haven't seen too many people call him a POS, so I'm not sure where that's coming from. Perhaps you're misreading anger in too many places because you don't like the way we're discussing him? Just a guess...

Belly35;808984 wrote:* Illegal’s can’t vote

Well they can if they live in Chicago, Los Angeles, or Phoenix.

Belly35;808984 wrote:* Jewish population (Obama agenda for Israel does not support this)

Don't count on it. Jewish Americans are notorious for voting for Democrats even when liberals like Obama are clearly anti-Israeli. I've never understood it.

Belly35;808984 wrote:* Military Personal (didn’t happen last time and thing are worse now)

Naw....they'll vote for him now. After all the Nobel Peace Prize winning BHO has expanded their job opportunities.

Belly35;808984 wrote:* ACORN is gone and Oprah off the air... (so goes that support)

Naw...there's still the Obama-loving leftist "mainstream" media.

Belly35;808984 wrote:With Obama track record of failure …. What is there … “Union Members without guns”

But they still have clubs and fists.

Writerbuckeye;808994 wrote:I haven't seen too many people call him a POS, so I'm not sure where that's coming from.

My thoughts too but liberals are rarely opposed to creating false reality to drive home a point.

believer;808997 wrote:Well they can if they live in Chicago, Los Angeles, or Phoenix.



Don't count on it. Jewish Americans are notorious for voting for Democrats even when liberals like Obama are clearly anti-Israeli. I've never understood it.



Naw....they'll vote for him now. After all the Nobel Peace Prize winning BHO has expanded their job opportunities.



Naw...there's still the Obama-loving leftist "mainstream" media.



But they still have clubs and fists.

Think NRA members.........

Belly35;809003 wrote:Think NRA members.........

When it comes to votes, Unions > NRA

2kool4skool;808966 wrote: I don't really care who wins, though Bachmann would likely produce a pretty hilarious reaction from the left, similar to the right when Obama is reelected. Unfortunately, only one of those scenarios has a chance in hell of happening.

But if you're confident, please name the amount you would like to bet on Bachmann being elected.

One million dollars. :rolleyes:
FYI...four years ago people said the same thing about the chances of a black dude winning the Chair. You seem pretty confident that BamBam is a shoo-in, though. Did you have a number in mind?

Kudos though on bringing forth the "pragmatic pseudo-intellectual" schtick...this place is sorely lacking in that.

Writerbuckeye;808994 wrote:not unlike having a discussion with friends. You really don't get that? I mean, why is Facebook and other social networking sites so popular.

I could understand that if the point was to learn, open ones self up to new perspectives, challenge their existing opinions, etc. But that's not what this is. No one's ever changed their mind arguing on the ohiochatter political forum. It seemingly serves as nothing more than a place where people come to validate and reaffirm their existing beliefs.

Running is fun, but not if it's just constantly running into a brick wall over and over.

Perhaps you're misreading anger in too many places because you don't like the way we're discussing him? Just a guess...

I honestly couldn't care less. It just so happens the anti-Obama people provide more unintentional lulz than the pro crowd at this given time.

I haven't seen too many people call him a POS, so I'm not sure where that's coming from.

believer;809002 wrote:My thoughts too but liberals are rarely opposed to creating false reality to drive home a point.

Oh good, more generalizations. But anyway, here was where I got that from.

BGFalcons82;804417 wrote:the current P.O.S. in the White House.

It's really weird how people(on both sides) treat politics as nothing more than a team sport. If I actually thought which side was in power effected my life THAT much, I'd be really depressed by the entire attitude. But mostly, it's just funny.

fish82;809130 wrote:Did you have a number in mind?

I will give you 2-1 odds, at $500 that Bachmann wins the Presidency in 2012.

fish82;808901 wrote:You're mistaking ego for narcissism. They're two different things.

They're interchangeable in electoral politics, IMO. Republicans and Democrats are not separate in this issue. It is a politician thing, not a party thing, and a huge reason why Americans can't win no matter which party is in control now-a-days.

fish82;808956 wrote:I dunno...how angry will you people be when Michelle Bachmann is elected?

I originally thought she was crazy and, to a degree, still do. But her debate performance was excellent and I think she's going to make the primary season very, very interesting to watch. There's a lot to like about her personality-wise but I don't think she is the answer for the GOP to winning the election. Even if 100% of Republicans voted for her she's going to need independent votes and I don't think she'll get them.

Belly35;808984 wrote:Please answer this question. Who the **** will vote for Obama?

* The poor who are poorer now than ever
* Blacks who are the highest unemployed (voting race never ends good)
* Small business owner (Even the Black National Chamber Commerce’s is against Obama and they voted for color)
* Present home owner (property value dropping)... those who have been foreclosed... (The new poor)
* Wealthy (have to be a crazy mofo)
* Insurance, financial investment, banking or medical field individuals ( Why would they)
* Oil and Gas and Coal States (not likely)
* The Unemployed……..11% by 2012
* Those that have closed their business
* Newly graduated High or College grads (who can’t find a job or pay off their loans)..
* Illegal’s can’t vote
* Jewish population (Obama agenda for Israel does not support this)
* Military Personal (didn’t happen last time and thing are worse now)
* ACORN is gone and Oprah off the air... (so goes that support

With Obama track record of failure …. What is there … “Union Members without guns”

1. Please tell us the last time someone that is not the Democratic candidate carried more than 15% of the African-American vote. I'll wait. That is not going to change when the sitting president is black and, no offense, it's idiotic to think that this election will be any different. Some things don't change regardless of how bad things are.
2. This election isn't going to be a landslide for either party. But I hope the GOP doesn't take your attitude. Votes aren't simply going to fly into the ballot box for Republicans if they just assume that all of these groups are going to vote for their candidate(s) because of Obama's failures. See the results of the 2004 Election. That thought process doesn't work for either party.

"Votes aren't simply going to fly into the ballot box for Republicans if they just assume that all of these groups are going to vote for their candidate(s) because of Obama's failures. See the results of the 2004 Election. That thought process doesn't work for either party. "

A very fair point. '04 was weird as the DEMS put up the worst ticket possible, a throwaway Senator with a history of being a doof (confirmed by his actions since the election) and the worst VP of all time (how Palin gets all the media attention, yet Edwards not only cheated on his cancer-stricken wife but had a kid with his mistress yet the media largely ignored it is beyond me, but I'll let that go for another thread), but in a two party system it is one person against the other. Obama would lose against a made up candidate, but that doesn't exist. The GOP has to put up a viable threat. I think it has to be Romney, Bachmann did herself a huge favor with her showing at the debate (and made the sexist "liberals" eat crow), but that doesn't necessarily mean she is capable threatening the Obama administration. To your point Obama has such a large following with certain groups that beating him will require excellent political skills, I'm not sure Bachmann or Romney have that.

Or maybe the U.S. will be in such sad shape in '12 people that are disenchanted with Obama simply won't show up. That's the worst case scenario, I don't think the country can handle much more tribulations.

Edwards was/is a douche for sure. Though he was at least articulate.

And of late Bachmann has been looking much less crazy than when I initially evaluated her. Hopefully that keeps up.

believer;808900 wrote:First, Obama definitely fits the ego-maniacal narcissist mold...but in all fairness most politicians do. However, BHO takes it to a whole new level.

Second, "you guys"? Tell me there isn't anyone else in your sphere of influence (work, place of worship, health club, neighborhood, whatever) who doesn't have similar views about Obama.

I kind of think one has to be an egomaniac to actually want to be POTUS.

And by "you guys" I was referring to the more conservative posters on here (read: almost everyone) and conservatives in general. The people who think the things I said and are constantly getting boners about any story that makes Obama look bad are generally quite conservative and usually older. If they aren't older they're Farmy/Rednecks. Not using those terms as a synonym there by the way. I do have a circle of friends at Ashland who are quite conservative and in the political science field but they tend to be a little bit more cerebral about their distaste for Obama than most that I hear. Which is why I don't feel the need to get as defensive with them because they realize that their differences are usually like those of Adams and Jefferson. That is to say that they realize that while they feel their positions are correct they accept that one isn't necessarily stupid/mmoral/etc to differ in opinion.

I Wear Pants;809443 wrote:I do have a circle of friends at Ashland who are quite conservative and in the political science field but they tend to be a little bit more cerebral about their distaste for Obama than most that I hear. Which is why I don't feel the need to get as defensive with them because they realize that their differences are usually like those of Adams and Jefferson. That is to say that they realize that while they feel their positions are correct they accept that one isn't necessarily stupid/mmoral/etc to differ in opinion.

I believe it is fair to say that MOST conservatives on this forum are pretty much in the same boat. Some of us can use some hyperbole from time to time in response to some off-the-wall or inane comments we see from some lefties.

believer;809511 wrote:I believe it is fair to say that MOST conservatives on this forum are pretty much in the same boat. Some of us can use some hyperbole from time to time in response to some off-the-wall or inane comments we see from some lefties.

It isn't just fair, it is reality. Many people want the U.S. to succeed, even if vicariously it is through Obama. Sadly that hasn't happened. We have an election coming up next year. Obama (IMO) has not earned our vote and many people could do a better job. There isn't anything defensive about it, Obama wasn't qualified. Heck, I would bet everything I own that I got a higher LSAT than he did - he was simply unqualified to be POTUS. His administration has led to nothing else but more spending, more deficits, and no hope and negative change (pun intended).