Reply With Quote
I saw this guy on, where else, Fox News last night. What a joke..
I saw this guy on, where else, Fox News last night. What a joke..
I know right - foxnews is like the national enquirer. I mean - it isn't real unless you get it from a reputable source like CBS , MSNBC - The New York Times -60 minutes... Where are those soldiers of integrity Chris Matthews and Keith Olberman ?
So now a one page, unsourced internet site is credible.
One page. Oooook.
Who said, "I can see Russia from my House!"
My initial gut reaction: Palin (thought about it one second and realized it was Fey - but still saw that clip A LOT)
read the whole page re . it is John Zeigler and he is making a do entary -- you know like that thing Al Gore put out ? and the ones that fat , bearded dude make ?
will he make a do entary that finds those folks who voted for Mccain because Obama is a muslim? Wouldn't that be the intellectually honest thing to do?
Oh, I get it, kinda like the do entaries Michael Moore makes. Or I know, like that really awesome do entary "Obssession" that was mailed to everyone in a swing state before the election.
Like that kind of do entary?
Exactly. In a country of 300 million people, any filmmaker or editor can make any side look either better or worse than they actually are.
All Obama voters have PhD's.
Good day to you, Dr.
Obama would have lost if SNL had someone that could do a decent Barack impression. Fred Armison sucks.
You are definitely an odd bird... you vote for Obama yourself, and then spend the next two weeks mocking him, his policies, and his supporters... do you have voter's remorse, or generally think that all politicians are bad... or what? I'd be interested to know what is driving your feelings at this point.
sure.
McCain voters who "attend Church weekly or more often", in exit polls, thought:
Obama IS a Muslim - 11.2%
Obama used to be a Muslim and has too many connections to Islam - 31.7%
He used to be a Muslim and is now a practicing Christian - 9.2%
I Don't Know - 24%
Meaning that only a quarter of very religious McCain voters knew that Obama was never a Muslim.
23% of ALL Texans believed that Obama was a Muslim according a poll right before the election.
The guys working on my house (nice guys by the way) both thought Obama was a Muslim AND the anti-christ and that he would lend a hand to terrorists.
It is an insane world.
he didn't vote for obama. he just couldn't take the shame of being a mccain fan.
Turd Sandwich vs. Giant , maybe? I think I can understand where DarrinS is coming from.
Some people voted for Obama because they thought it was the cool thing to do. Some people voted for Obama because they want to feel like they're cool with black people. Some people voted for Obama because they think he's going to heal the planet and keep the seas from rising. And some people only voted for Obama because they wanted to repudiate McCain for some reason, such as selecting Palin or not being sufficiently conservative.
I really struggled with this election. On policy, I agreed with McCain WAY more than I agreed with Obama. On style and temperament, Obama won hands down. And, I must admit, McCain's selection of Palin was a national embarrassment. But I just couldn't get past Obama's inexperience and leftist inclinations. For me, the decision was between voting for McCain (an anti-Obama vote) or not voting at all.
But I can understand an otherwise conservative person voting for Obama to "teach the Republicans a lesson" about how to win elections. I briefly considered pulling the lever for Obama. But I didn't, so don't blame me if things go wrong!
things already went wrong. republicans have ed this country for years to come.
Did it occur to you that a great number of people may have just thought Obama was a good candidate whose policy positions fairly or closely matched their own?
I find your options incredibly patronizing. I don't think he was the messiah. I don't give a about his heritage. He's not perfect. There are some issues I disagree with him on. HOWEVER, on 95% of the policy positions he holds, I am in strong agreement.
If McCain of 2000 was running, I would have had a more difficult time, but with his move from center-right to hard right, it was a no-brainer.
In other words, I voted FOR Obama because he was a good candidate. PERIOD.
This isn't a ing center-right nation, it's a center nation, and the conservatives need to realize it pronto.
Partisan idiot. Both parties have screwed the American people you re .
republicans want to give their leader a pass, partisan idiot.
You want patronizing? OK . . . I suppose I could define the word "some" for you.
I was merely pointing out that there are many non-issue based reasons--some more valid than others--that led SOME people to vote for Obama. I totally understand that a great many people agreed with Obama's policies--indeed, I have many friends who cast principled votes for him. But SOME people voted for him for stupid reasons, too. And SOME conservatives voted for him because they disliked McCain or disagreed with his choice of Palin.
Judging by his obvious buyer's remorse, DarrinS clearly doesn't love the idea of an Obama Administration. So I was speculating on why he could have possibly voted for him. Now take your self-righteous anger and shove off.
This statement against what you actually said makes you look like such a fake. That's not at all what you were doing. Every single one of the reasons you listed that "some" people might vote for Obama was either negative or more negative. There was no mention of any understanding on your part that "some" people (or even a majority of people) simply thought it was a good choice.
You're en led to your opinion, but spare us the fake outrage when you get called on being a condescending prat.
Further, your entire post was in answer to a question that one poster posed to another about their personal opinion. So before telling others to shove off why don't you ease up on the Jedi mind tricks and let Darrin speak for himself.
I've told you this before: you have trouble reading. Or at least, you like to interpret other people's posts so as to enable your own post-whoring.
"Turd Sandwich vs. Giant , maybe? I think I can understand where DarrinS is coming from."
That's how I introduced my post. DarrinS does NOT seem to like Obama very much. I was speculating about why someone would vote for a candidate they do not like. Why would I waste time writing about those who did their research and decided that Obama's policies were best for the country? It just doesn't seem relevant as to why he voted for Obama. Do we really need to have that disclaimer in every post about why people voted for Obama? Are Obama supporters really that weak and sensitive that they need to be constantly reminded that they're not stupid, that they made a good choice?
I mean, this is ridiculous. I was trying to explain that I'm a serious voter--admittedly, a right-of-center voter--who ended up considering both candidates because McCain dropped the ball. I did not vote for Obama. But I can understand those who ultimately voted for him because of their anger or dissatisfaction with McCain/Palin ticket. There are worse reasons to vote for Obama. Those reasons were definitely persuasive for SOME Obama voters.
Would you also like a definition of the word "some"?
I don't pretend to understand why you would waste your time writing about your impression of what another poster's opinion might be. What I do know is that whether intentionally, or simply because it's the way your brain is wired on the topic, you were presenting the point of view that there were only negative reasons to vote for Obama and anyone who did vote for him was simply choosing from a list of bad or worse.
I do not need a definition of "some" but perhaps you would benefit from learning how to better use it. When you say "some" by itself, it implies a segment of a larger whole. But when you say "some A, some B, some C, and some D" it implies you are representing the spectrum and not allowing for more.
So you can keep on the way you are, or you can just admit that you see how what you wrote doesn't necessarily match what you were thinking.
It might also serve you better to stop telegraphing your subtext in statements like this:
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
