Have Obama Haters Hit Rock Bottom?

[FuryOfFirestorm]

and i would be willing to say that dems' hatred of The President of the United States, George W. Bush, was just as strong as what you describe ...

ill will, vitriol and investive flys from all sides when either side starts slinging the feces ...

no shortage of it from dems or repubs ... just look in CE&P if you want to see pointless invective

I can't speak for other people, but while I disagreed with how Bush II ran things, I never wished him death or harm. Nor did I refer to any of his family as "whores". To dislike or disagree with someone is one thing, but hatred and personal attacks are too far, no matter which side you're on.

 

[chance1]

I agree Spooger the vitriol was over the top four years ago as well. That doesn't excuse this behavior in any way. Just makes the majority of outspoken voices of each party repulsive.

I can't speak for other people, but while I disagreed with how Bush II ran things, I never wished him death or harm. Nor did I refer to any of his family as "whores". To dislike or disagree with someone is one thing, but hatred and personal attacks are too far, no matter which side you're on.

agree with both

the fringes of both parties unfortunately speak the loudest and/or get the most coverage from media types who love to stir the pot

as for the race card being played by the usual suspects ............. it's lame x 10 and reflects an overall mindset that looks to portray legitimate criticism of the President and his policies as something racial - people with eyes/ears/brain waves don't react well to that characterization - to his credit I don't recall the Pres. or his primary handlers playing that card

 

[bw92116]

Character assassination is a major chapter of the Republican playbook. They use it continuously, even when there is no campaign going on. But they ramp it up dramatically during a campaign. They operate entirely on perception, instead of substance. Their strategy is to throw anything they can think of at the screen, in hopes that something will stick. So they will make up stuff and throw it out there, just to see if it sticks. If not, then they really haven't lost anything. They just try something else. Sooner or later, something they throw will capture the public's imagination, even if only for a week. Family members or associates, even associates from long ago, are targets as well. Nothing is off-limits to them. Anything that they can say to make even a tiny dent in someone's reputation is good, in their minds. They are also skilled at buzzwords and hot-button phrases and at labeling people. It's all about perception, and reality has nothing to do with their campaigns. And they have been doing this for my entire lifetime... I don't know about before that. And as a result of this, campaigns have become all about perception and not facts or reality.

 

[Jack Springer]

This is funny.

Read some of the crap people say about Romney on CEP -- not exactly nice stuff.

Going back --- so much crap said about Bush.

Give me a break -- you guys are so funny.

 

[chance1]

Character assassination is a major chapter of the Republican playbook. They use it continuously, even when there is no campaign going on. But they ramp it up dramatically during a campaign. They operate entirely on perception, instead of substance. Their strategy is to throw anything they can think of at the screen, in hopes that something will stick. So they will make up stuff and throw it out there, just to see if it sticks. If not, then they really haven't lost anything. They just try something else. Sooner or later, something they throw will capture the public's imagination, even if only for a week. Family members or associates, even associates from long ago, are targets as well. Nothing is off-limits to them. Anything that they can say to make even a tiny dent in someone's reputation is good, in their minds. They are also skilled at buzzwords and hot-button phrases and at labeling people. It's all about perception, and reality has nothing to do with their campaigns. And they have been doing this for my entire lifetime... I don't know about before that. And as a result of this, campaigns have become all about perception and not facts or reality.

seriously? what campaign are you watching this year

Obama's entire campaign is ANTI ROMNEY
he's a rich plutocrat
he flip flops
he's anti women
he's only for the rich
etc.

ALL of their stuff is ANTI-ROMNEY

why? cause talking about their record is not such a good story

it's like your entire post is ................ a george costanza OPPOSITE moment

sure there's a small section of america that hates obama - and perhaps some of it is racially motivated

but as a party focus? it's just a wet dream for over progressive supporters

"HOW COULD YOU NOT LIKE OBAMA ???? YOU MUST BE A HATER/RACIST, ETC."

did you check out the post debate narrative by the Obama campaign?

as usual they took no responsibility for the President's listless and losing performance - his closing remarks BTW were BRUTAL

instead it's Mitt is a LIAR

so please try to keep up with what's really going on really being said and written

 

[Seasoned]

There's a difference when allowing and taking advantage of Obama hatred within one's campaign and calling Romney a liar. During the primaries didn't Gingrich call Romney a liar and say that Romney would say anything to get elected? There's a real danger in electing Romney. There's the possibility of waking up to a different Romney on a daily basis. Personally I like calm. It's been a relief these past 4 years.

 

[chance1]

There's a difference when allowing and taking advantage of Obama hatred within one's campaign and calling Romney a liar. During the primaries didn't Gingrich call Romney a liar and say that Romney would say anything to get elected? There's a real danger in electing Romney. There's the possibility of waking up to a different Romney on a daily basis. Personally I like calm. It's been a relief these past 4 years.

and in 2008 Bill Clinton told the world that Obama "played the race card on Hillary" so your "Newt said" is sorta ....... whatever

There's no DANGER in electing Romney just as there was no danger in electing Obama

not sure what u mean about "calm" - my guess is you're working or well off - I don't think the 20+% of the population that are un/under/stopped looking for employment ...... would agree with you about the "calm" or "relief"

and the "different romney" is just a progressive and now democrat talking point - it's happy horseshit - michael nutter was on candy crowley today (cnn) and he was a talking point zombie about "lies"

it's sad that Pres. Obama and his band of merry zombies can't talk to accomplishments only to Mitt's flaws/evil/lies etc.

guess what - the 67 million people who WITNESSED the first debate know better

for months Pres. Obama and his crack staff dedicated to re-electing the listless one ....... have produced ads and done talk shows speaking to the evilness of Mittens

67 million people now know better

it's very powerful to experience something vs. hearing it

much more powerful

and much more REAL

and now the lies will actually be regarded as LIES

Team Obama only has ONE note in their sad song

and it's sour and cranky and now it's been exposed

 

[Rolyo85]

I find it disgraceful and a travesty for a gay man to equate the "hate" coming from people on JUB toward Republicans to the hatred they have for everyone "not them".

Hatred is never good. But it is at least a bit justified when the one you hate wants to limit your rights and kick you into a closet of denial and self-repressing. When somebody wants to HARM you, you're allowed to feel enmity. Doesn't matter that it's not direct physical harm, it's harm all the same.

When you hate someone because they have a different colored skin, or different sexuality, or different faith, that hatred is not justified. It is pathetic, ugly and repulsive. And I will not accept the two being equated with each other. This is not a "you do it too" thing.

 

[Rolyo85]

Actually polls have been showing a huge gain for Romney since the debate, but he is still in the lower 20% chance of winning.

What bothers me is that the 67 million people clearly DON'T know better if they could change their mind based on the fact that the douchebag can lie with a firm conviction and sarcastic smirk. If THAT'S the quality we look for in a president, then 67 million people are morons.

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

A bump following the debate shouldn't surprise any of us. Whether or not the bump recedes or holds is another matter entirely. I'm less concerned about the national polling than I am about the races in OH, VA, and FL. We shall see after a week or so where we actually are.

 

[Kulindahr]

I've long wondered when Dinesh D'Souza was going to stop wading in the sewers and just dive into the treatment tank. He's finally done it.

 

[ReadyWithReadyWit]

seriously? what campaign are you watching this year

Obama's entire campaign is ANTI ROMNEY
he's a rich plutocrat
he flip flops
he's anti women
he's only for the rich
etc.

ALL of their stuff is ANTI-ROMNEY

why? cause talking about their record is not such a good story

it's like your entire post is ................ a george costanza OPPOSITE moment

sure there's a small section of america that hates obama - and perhaps some of it is racially motivated

but as a party focus? it's just a wet dream for over progressive supporters

"HOW COULD YOU NOT LIKE OBAMA ???? YOU MUST BE A HATER/RACIST, ETC."

did you check out the post debate narrative by the Obama campaign?

as usual they took no responsibility for the President's listless and losing performance - his closing remarks BTW were BRUTAL

instead it's Mitt is a LIAR

so please try to keep up with what's really going on really being said and written

Well, I mean, to be fair...
he's a rich plutocrat check
he flip flops double check
he's anti women check (I mean, women seem to think so based on the immense polling gap, unless they are just dumber than men on average...)
he's only for the rich sorta check (He's may not be only for the rich, but he is certainly not in favor of helping the poor directly... he just hopes they are magically lifted up by the job creators )

And, if you don't like the personal attacks, I would suggest you pass on the following to Romney: actually stand for ANYTHING on the actual issues... then we can attack your positions and not your person... but, if you refuse to stand for anything and, worse, even turn your back on the very few positions you do hold... what do you expect? In this case, all we can do is point out you have no real ideas and rightfully call you a liar (which gets old eventually) and infer what your positions are based on who you are, how you made your livelihood and what you have said in private around your peers...

 

[Benvolio]

Dream on. It is silly to think that a failed President like Obama can be reelected. Think Carter. There is the University of Colorado computer prediction.http://www.colorado.edu/news/releas...ting-model-still-points-romney-win-university

 

[Jack Springer]

ReadyWithReadyWit - What I think Chance is asking you -- what is Obama's vision for the USA in the next four years. You responded pretty much the same as the Obama Campaign has been doing - criticizing Romney.

Let's here what you have to say about the next four years with Obama at the helm.

Well, I mean, to be fair...
he's a rich plutocrat check
he flip flops double check
he's anti women check (I mean, women seem to think so based on the immense polling gap, unless they are just dumber than men on average...)
he's only for the rich sorta check (He's may not be only for the rich, but he is certainly not in favor of helping the poor directly... he just hopes they are magically lifted up by the job creators )

And, if you don't like the personal attacks, I would suggest you pass on the following to Romney: actually stand for ANYTHING on the actual issues... then we can attack your positions and not your person... but, if you refuse to stand for anything and, worse, even turn your back on the very few positions you do hold... what do you expect? In this case, all we can do is point out you have no real ideas and rightfully call you a liar (which gets old eventually) and infer what your positions are based on who you are, how you made your livelihood and what you have said in private around your peers...

 

[Rolyo85]

Sure, let's see that. Right after we see your interpretation of the 4 Romney years. I even posted a topic for your convenience. I'm sure you can find it.

 

[Kulindahr]

ReadyWithReadyWit - What I think Chance is asking you -- what is Obama's vision for the USA in the next four years. You responded pretty much the same as the Obama Campaign has been doing - criticizing Romney.

The Obama campaign does that because four years of an Obama with no plan at all would be far better than four years of Romney, which by the few things he has told us would result in an unemployment rate of over 15% and a national debt a stone's throw from $25 trillion.

 

[Kulindahr]

Nate Silver and several other models show that Obama is going to win. How on earth will Romney get 330 electoral votes? That's just not going to happen. That model is wrong.

That model relies on nothing but economic data and a comparison to the past. Thus it misses two big points:

1. People do not rely entirely on economic data.

2. This is not the past.

 

[Benvolio]

Romney only needs 270 electoral votes. Heres how, from Real Clear Politics Com Romney now has 181. FL 29, most recent 2 for R.
MO average R +5.2.
NC average R + .8
OH most recent tie, will go R
VA most recent O + .3. Will go R
Then one of the following IA 6, NV, NH, or CO (now O +.2)
I don't expect you to accept this but it does show that Romney is much closer than you think. He will get MO, and the other four are essentially tied.
I continue to predict a Romney landslide.

 

[ReadyWithReadyWit]

ReadyWithReadyWit - What I think Chance is asking you -- what is Obama's vision for the USA in the next four years. You responded pretty much the same as the Obama Campaign has been doing - criticizing Romney.

Let's here what you have to say about the next four years with Obama at the helm.

Chance is more than capable of framing his own points/questions. However, for your benefit , here is what I think Obama offers for the next four years:

Continued steady, responsible, more equitable growth (admittedly, hopefully at a slightly faster rate) with the unemployment figure continuing to drop, the DOW continuing to rise, consumer confidence continuing to rise, the housing market continuing to bounce back, etc.... That is... a safe economic recovery to continue. I expect the election to create more certainty in the nation, the president to learn from his bargaining mistakes in the past, and likely actually move to the right (unfortunately, for many on this forum) on some of his economic compromising... as history shows presidents tend to move to the center in a second term. I think business will start to embrace Obamacare (they won't have a choice) once the uncertainty over its future is lifted and, if implemented correctly, the program will prove to be a success. I think changing direction (what direction that is btw... who knows) is risky with little actual upside potential and, based only on the shreds of a plan Romney now denounces, not politically feasible especially in the long run. Oh, and as a bonus, Obama will do so while creating a atmosphere conducive to opening dialogue about and extending gay rights...

As with every knee-jerk "I'm rubber, your glue" reaction by the Romney campaign... (you know... the... We're not out of touch... Obama is... We're not waging a war on women... Obama is.... etc...), this too is an entirely false equivalency instigated to muddy the water. What is Obama going to do to bridge the gap in the deficit? You know very damn well what he intends to do... he hasn't changed his position for political convenience. He is going to ask the rich/ big business to pay 3-4% more in taxes... when you maintain a semblance of reasonability and accept that revenues are a part of the balanced solution... you don't have to answer questions about filling a $4.8 trillion dollar void... it doesn't exist. Thus, the Obama administration wants to focus on demand/ small business-driven growth... you know those individuals that actually have to spend to survive and those businesses that actually have to reinvest capital into their businesses (instead of sitting on profits while the country crumbles around them)... and, because of this, 98% of small business would likely not even be subject to to the higher income tax rate.

And, to reiiterate my point, you can criticize Obama's record because he actually has one. If you want to know where he stands on the issues, look back at the last four years. All I'm asking is for Romney to suggest what he will do differently from Obama and, more importantly the failed administration before him. Is this really asking too much?

 

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

Romney only needs 270 electoral votes. Heres how, from Real Clear Politics Com Romney now has 181. FL 29, most recent 2 for R.
MO average R +5.2.
NC average R + .8
OH most recent tie, will go R
VA most recent O + .3. Will go R
Then one of the following IA 6, NV, NH, or CO (now O +.2)
I don't expect you to accept this but it does show that Romney is much closer than you think. He will get MO, and the other four are essentially tied.
I continue to predict a Romney landslide.

I can't imagine why RealClearPolitics is still counting MO as a swing state. Romney has a comfortable 7 point lead and Obama has NEVER taken the lead there in any poll. I think it's safe to assume that MO's 10 electoral votes can be put in the Romney column.

That being said, all President Obama has to do is pick up NV, CO and IA (he has consistently led in all three, with more than a 5 point lead in IA and NV) and he gets to 272 electoral votes. Even if we give ALL of the "big money" swing states (OH, FL, VA, NC) to Romney (and OH still isn't very likely) Romney only gets to 266.

For anyone interested in playing, the CNN map allows you to choose scenarios to see how they play out with an interactive clickable model:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/ecalculator#?battleground