Obama, the Empty Canvas

Shadow_Ferret · Oct 27, 2008

Delarege said:
I'm not Obama happy. I just think McCain would be a bigger mistake than Bush.

I totally agree with this. I think, in the end, I'll be voting AGAINST McCain and the Republicans than actually voting FOR Obama.

And I think that's sad that there isn't a true stateman out there. The choices for President should be the best of the best available from all the political spectrum, not the just best dressed, or the sexiest, or the most experienced, or the best financed.

It should come down to a choice where the two candidates are so far head and shoulders above anyone else that it wouldn't matter which one we chose because they'd both do a damned fine job.

It's a dream of mine and one that will probably never come true.

willfulone · Oct 27, 2008

odocoileus said:
I'm not an Obama campaign volunteer. I'm not even a Democrat. I don't want to lead anyone anywhere. Since Obama may be the only Democrat I vote for this Tuesday - I haven't gone over the local races in detail yet - I'm probably not the best person to make the case.

I wasn't asking you to swing my vote. I was asking you to give specifics to support your generalizations. To lead me to understand what one sees in him as a candidate when I do not see what you see. Since you seemed open to discussion without some of the heat that can come up here, I asked you.

So, rather than giving big sweeping statements that say nothing, I was asking for specific detail on why you hold the esteem you do. And, in the doing, it would lead to learning for me. Not change my vote, but maybe give me respect for the man on a different level.

Smarts, charm, wit, great speaking voice (Voice that dude has - ability to speak without prompter,by rote or with notes - NOT - thus no ability), educated yepper. All great qualities.

I would wager that many of the AW members who are male fit that category.

One needs more than that to run the country - no? Yeah.

Christine

Christine N. · Oct 27, 2008

Well, beyond all the specifics, when I look at and listen to McCain, I hear more of the same crap. More war, more jobs overseas, more crap. Maverick my ass.

When I look at and listen to Obama, I can almost see a little bit of the America we used to be, and the one I want us to be again.

But that's just me.

Shadow_Ferret · Oct 27, 2008

Christine N. said:
When I look at and listen to Obama, I can almost see a little bit of the America we used to be, and the one I want us to be again.

But that's just me.

You could just be projecting your wants and needs on him, too. All I hear is "change, change, change, change, change" as if that means anything to anyone. The word is certainly meaningless to me.

Christine N. · Oct 27, 2008

I could just as easily project my needs and wants onto McCain, but I don't. I hear more of this...disaster. So why not with Obama? I don't know. When I look at his ideas, they're well thought out and make sense, with an eye to the future. Education, healthcare, etc...Not that any president can make all their campaign promises come true, but having them gives me a good idea of how he thinks.

McCain wouldn't know the future if it bit him.

Shadow_Ferret · Oct 27, 2008

You just answered your own question of why you project onto Obama.

Because when I look at Obama I don't see America how it used to be, I see a politician who wants my vote and is trying to say all the right things.

McCain, for whatever reason, is failing at that. I dont' know if he's just not cut out for campaigning, or if he didn't hire the right people around him to make his shine, or what. But his message isn't the same as Reagan's. He isn't talking about a bright shining city on the hill.

Obama is, more or less, and that is resonating with people.

Which is fine. Obama is more likable than McCain. But is he better than McCain?

Williebee · Oct 27, 2008

Okay this matters to me. Which is it? Present means "No" as you say or "Maybe" as Willabee says? For when one has a "No" and a "Yes", why do they need another "No"? It seems it is more "maybe" than "no". But, again I am asking for it is a bit unclear.

"Present" counts as a "no". You might say that anything that is not a "Yes" vote on the Illinois state leg. floor, is a no.

Or, you might say that "Present" is "No, not like it is written", whereas "No" is a politely worded "Oh HELL No."

mscelina · Oct 27, 2008

In my world, 'present' counts as a 'I was here but couldn't be bothered to cast a vote.' I find it very difficult to look at all those presents and come up with a reason to reward apathy.

Just sayin'...

dmytryp · Oct 27, 2008

Obama is a political opportunist. He is smart. He is ruthless when he needs to be (or at least his campaign is). If he becomes the president and actually shows that ruthlessness when tough decisions are needed, he might actually turn out to be a good president.
He is basically a left wing populistic demagouge. He is a good speaker that says to the masses what they want to hear. A lot of his talking points is singling out small unpopular groups (like wealthy, deregulators, warmongers) and turn the accusing finger at them. "It's all their fault".
My prediction (and it is based on gut feelings) that if he is elected, his policies together with Dem congress are going to prolong the financial crisis and it will still be there by the end of his first term.
Internationally, it very much depends on the circumstances, but I doubt I'll be plesantly surprised. So far, he talks standard liberal talking points without showing any deep understanding (I am not going to argue with anyone over this since it is only my opinion).

odocoileus · Oct 27, 2008

willfulone said:
odocoileus said:

I'm not an Obama campaign volunteer. I'm not even a Democrat. I don't want to lead anyone anywhere. Since Obama may be the only Democrat I vote for this Tuesday - I haven't gone over the local races in detail yet - I'm probably not the best person to make the case.

I wasn't asking you to swing my vote. I was asking you to give specifics to support your generalizations. To lead me to understand what one sees in him as a candidate when I do not see what you see. Since you seemed open to discussion without some of the heat that can come up here, I asked you.

So, rather than giving big sweeping statements that say nothing, I was asking for specific detail on why you hold the esteem you do. And, in the doing, it would lead to learning for me. Not change my vote, but maybe give me respect for the man on a different level.

Smarts, charm, wit, great speaking voice (Voice that dude has - ability to speak without prompter,by rote or with notes - NOT - thus no ability), educated yepper. All great qualities.

I would wager that many of the AW members who are male fit that category.

One needs more than that to run the country - no? Yeah.

Christine

Click to expand...

You don't appear to have actually read my posts.

What I recommend you do is read the endorsement editorials of every major newspaper and magazine which have endorsed Obama.

cethklein · Oct 27, 2008

Joe270 said:
I agree with this. The GOP is boxing shadows. But as a voter, the dodging tactic leaves me frustrated, too.

so who ARE you voting for, if you don't mind me asking? So far every one of your criticisms is equally valid for McCain.

Bob Barr perhaps?

blacbird · Oct 27, 2008

mscelina said:
In my world, 'present' counts as a 'I was here but couldn't be bothered to cast a vote.' I find it very difficult to look at all those presents and come up with a reason to reward apathy.

Well, your "In my world" pretty much says everything. The fact is that, in the machinations of the Illinois legislature, the voting of "present" has quite a different meaning, and is by no means a sign of apathy. It's a tactical vote, normally made as part of a larger or compromise legislative strategy. Remember, many legislative bills get voted on many times, with multiple interim changes made to try to gain approval.

caw

robeiae · Oct 27, 2008

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18348437

"There's a saying in Springfield that there's a reason why the present button is yellow," Miller says.

Okey-dokey.

"After having put some thought into it, I don't think that Barack Obama was necessarily a coward for voting present on those bills. In fact, I think he believed that he was doing the right thing, because something, in his mind, might have been unconstitutional," Miller says.

Good to know.

mscelina · Oct 27, 2008

blacbird said:
Well, your "In my world" pretty much says everything. The fact is that, in the machinations of the Illinois legislature, the voting of "present" has quite a different meaning, and is by no means a sign of apathy. It's a tactical vote, normally made as part of a larger or compromise legislative strategy. Remember, many legislative bills get voted on many times, with multiple interim changes made to try to gain approval.

caw

pfffft. He needed that many 'tactical' votes? Seriously?

he needs a better strategy then.

robeiae · Oct 27, 2008

mscelina said:
pfffft. He needed that many 'tactical' votes? Seriously?

he needs a better strategy then.

It's the new talking point, Celina. Must have gone out, today.

You'll note in that NPR piece, they had to try mighty hard to make the "present" votes appear "thoughtful." Tactical? Maybe once in a blue moon.

mscelina · Oct 27, 2008

That was kind of my take on it too. All I know is that I expect elected officials to vote on legislation, not try for some 'tactical' brainstorming time or equally ridiculous bullshit. What in the hell is the point of even showing up if all you're going to do is say that you're present.

Do your damn job. Leave the tactics outside of the legislative chambers.

odocoileus · Oct 27, 2008

mscelina said:
That was kind of my take on it too. All I know is that I expect elected officials to vote on legislation, not try for some 'tactical' brainstorming time or equally ridiculous bullshit. What in the hell is the point of even showing up if all you're going to do is say that you're present.

Do your damn job. Leave the tactics outside of the legislative chambers.

Because strategy has absolutely no place in politics.

mscelina · Oct 27, 2008

The strategy should happen during debates, not during the vote.

Del · Oct 27, 2008

mscelina said:
That was kind of my take on it too. All I know is that I expect elected officials to vote on legislation, not try for some 'tactical' brainstorming time or equally ridiculous bullshit. What in the hell is the point of even showing up if all you're going to do is say that you're present.

Do your damn job. Leave the tactics outside of the legislative chambers.

How can you vote absolutely on anything when the practice is to piggyback additional conditions in an attempt to get passed what won't pass on its own?

A "present" vote seems to say, I might vote on this if you clean it up.

Present, fail, alter, present. At some point the vote will be ya or neigh. I'd say he is watching the fine print.

robeiae · Oct 27, 2008

He voted "present" on a bill he sponsored.

robeiae · Oct 27, 2008

odocoileus said:
Because strategy has absolutely no place in politics.

mscelina said:
The strategy should happen during debates, not during the vote.

But you know, ultimately the strategy was to get to the Senate...and then the Presidency. That's the end game. So in that respect, Obama was covering his @ss. Nothing new.

mscelina · Oct 27, 2008

robeiae said:
He voted "present" on a bill he sponsored.

Well, that's about as indicative as you can get I guess.

odocoileus · Oct 27, 2008

robeiae said:
He voted "present" on a bill he sponsored.

Which is a perfectly reasonable action if the bill was changed in ways he didn't support.

He obviously didn't oppose the intent of the bill - he sponsored it - but if there were provisions added to it which he didn't support - why should he vote for it?

Seems like this is the circumstance for which the present vote was intended.

cethklein · Oct 27, 2008

Also, I don't get this "we don't know anything about Obama" argument. Sure you don't if all you watch is Fox News. I know plenty about him, and his plans. But I've also paid attention. I think this argument is more intended to raise fears. It sickens me how many people are still using it. It's no different than "he was taught in a maddrassa".

There is a bevy of information on all candidates. If you don't know anything about Obama (or any candidate) then you're either lazy or intentionally remaining ignorant.

Joe270 · Oct 27, 2008

Okay, ceth, since I, and others here are so lazy and ignorant, how's about you filling us in on how Obama's gonna raise the 900 billion plus bucks for these programs?

I've already subtracted the 100 billion he's gonna raise through taxing the rich, so you don't need to trouble with that much.

Obama, the Empty Canvas

Court Jester

I am a zebra...

haz a shiny new book cover

Court Jester

haz a shiny new book cover

Court Jester

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Touch and go

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Touch and go

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Sky isn't falling, ground is rising

Touch and go

Touch and go

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you