Nailed It!
- Thread starter Gilligan
- Start date
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
The point is a "stoner, raised by Communists with no business experience" can be President of the United States? Awesome.
To like-minded stoners and Communists who look upon business successes with utter disdain and contempt...probably a true eureka moment.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
I'm just not sure the tweet was a dig at Obama, or the American people for putting a stoner communist in office....twice.
Well...there is that aspect to ponder..
And I know people that still insist America needs more good progressives like the soon gone o to lead the country. Can't fix stupid.
This_person
Well-Known Member
If Obama had completed what he tried to get people to believe he was going to achieve, I would agree. But, he was about hope for a more transparent president, for a post-racial society, for better lives for most people, for change from the divisive rhetoric, for change from the corrupt ways of Washington, DC, for change from a president at war with an ideology, etc. Not only did he fail to achieve these things, he actively worked against these things.
So, if the charge is that We, the People, are easily misled then I would say we are guilty as charged. If the charge is that we got what we asked for, I'd say we are decisively not guilty.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
He did, from day one, EXACTLY what a left-wing politician would do. He never strayed from the model. You never needed to guess. He was never going to break the pattern.
This_person
Well-Known Member
I agree, and I think that's why the OP is accurate. But, I think those that voted for him that otherwise would not have voted for a Democrat, or would otherwise have voted for McCain/Romney, believed his words of Hope and Change and the persona instead of the reality. The reality was fully predictable, but his rhetoric was exactly the opposite. And, people fell for the charisma instead of the reality.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
And there was a BRIEF time in 2008 when I considered voting for him - when he mentioned he was for an all out building program for nuclear plants - I personally see THAT as the lynchpin to making all progress for this nation. Free us from the costs of energy, and the economy moves.
BUT -
Like many other issues - such as LGBTQ issues - he spoke out of both sides of his mouth. He walked back all of the nuclear talk because he linked it to disposal of nuclear waste, and after hearing Harry Reid on the subject - I knew THAT was his way of weaseling out of it. I knew he wasn't for nuclear energy in the slightest. Same with gay marriage and such - he said he was against it in 2008 for votes - and then had an epiphany later. I pretty much realized he was not a transformational candidate but just another left wing candidate saying the same stuff.
