Will Obamamania Sweep The Nation Like It Did Back In 08'??

Ruski

Am I the only person that sees a resemblance?

FrostyJack

prinz wrote: »

LOL. Everything that's wrong with American politics all wrapped up right there. The irony.

Why do you believe the statement to be untrue? Feel free to enlighten me.

Father Damo

D1stant wrote: »

The game is up. Even if he wins everyone now knows that he is just a good actor ala Tony Blair, perhaps with a little less IQ and resolve

Obama left a lot of people down and the shamless arse licking when he visited here was appalling

Oh please. The only promises he broke were the ones he was unable to force through the Congress.

A Republican dominated Congress.

Voted for, by the people.

Stiffler2 wrote: »

tbf I think he's only that famous because he is the first "black" president.
2nd time round won't be as big a thing


Now if a "woman" became president you'd have all the women crying

I would be bawling in fear if Clinton or Palin had got elected. Palin especially.


Anyone who is intending to vote for Romney does not deserve to be allowed a vote. Sometimes democracy quite simply should not be in the hands of a general public if they are not intelligent enough to use it wisely.

Father Damo

dttq wrote: »

I feel a little bit betrayed by Obama, thought he would be more liberal, as well as devoted to ending America's wars in the Middle East. Still though, I hope he gets a second term considering the nutcases in opposition, often tied to the likes of the religious right and the tea party.

He has no war in the Mid East He pulled out of Iraq and is planning the same in Afghanistan, which is not even in the ME anyway.

Cybercubed

Father Damo wrote: »

I would be bawling in fear if Clinton or Palin had got elected. Palin especially.

I presume you mean Hilary, because Bill Clinton was probably a better president than Obama, and the recent polls of Americans also believe this.

You say he hasn't broke any promises, but didn't he sign NDAA allowing the right to assassinate americans abroad and lock them up indefinitely, authorize warrantlass wiretapping, extend the patriotic act, extend the Bush taxcuts, expand the the war in Afghanistan to record levels. He's also made sure Wall Street have their men in government that'll protect them (i.e. by supressing Occupy Wall Street).

I see lots of mistakes but I don't see how the GOP, despite how evil they are, can be blamed for all of them?

Even his healthcare law is basically a statewide version of Romneycare, originally supported by people like Newt Gingrich. Heck even Nixon's healthcare bill was more liberal back in the 70s.

Cybercubed

Father Damo wrote: »

He has no war in the Mid East He pulled out of Iraq and is planning the same in Afghanistan, which is not even in the ME anyway.

He pulled out of Iraq because the Iraqis could not guarentee them safety. Remember it was GW Bush who actually signed the pledge to removal all troops by the end of 2011, not Obama, so in effect he was just following Bush's orders. Infact by him trying to keep them in there longer he was in effect almost out Bushing Bush.

Combat troops are to be removed by 2014 in Afghanistan, but around 20,000 special forces (a bit like with Iraq) are expected to stay till potentially 2024.

Ellis Dee

Stiffler2 wrote: »

tbf I think he's only that famous because he is the first "black" president.
2nd time round won't be as big a thing


Now if a "woman" became president you'd have all the women crying

e
t
c


e
t
c

Actually, he's 50-50 black and white.

As Bill Maher has pointed out, he has been disappointing in his first term. However, that's largely because he has to think of getting re-elected, and that means being more like a conventional white politician. In his second term, however, he won't have that problem and maybe he can bring about some real change.;);)

prinz

FrostyJack wrote: »

Why do you believe the statement to be untrue? Feel free to enlighten me.

So a vote for a Republican candidate is a vote for abortion clinic bombers and gay bashers? O Rly? That kind of rubbish is as bad as..

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002581623/namr-74193523506_xlarge.jpeg

Utter stupidity. I'd rather waste my time trying to enlighten a turnip.

johngalway

Only the foolish were taken in by him.

super_furry

What you gonna do sucka, when Obamamania runs wilds over you!?!?

prinz

super_furry wrote: »

What you gonna do sucka, when Obamamania runs wilds over you!?!?

I'm going to build a ramp and watch it get stranded like a fish out of water.

FrostyJack

prinz wrote: »

So a vote for a Republican candidate is a vote for abortion clinic bombers and gay bashers? O Rly? That kind of rubbish is as bad as..

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002581623/namr-74193523506_xlarge.jpeg

Utter stupidity. I'd rather waste my time trying to enlighten a turnip.

That isn't what I said, even a turnip would know that. I said the people who vote for them support issues like that, people with special interest, big oil etc. The GOP pander to them. Did you not watch any of the debates? God told 3 of them to run for example. The dems lazily pander to their own, but the majority of it isn't sinister. You wouldn't hear someone shout "let him die " at one of their debates. Not all republicans are loons but most support them now because of some stupid belief e.g. feck the environment I want a job or Obama is a communist. Turn on Fox news for a few hours and tell me if it isn't pandering to stupidity. I would rather they got rid of the two parties and definitely their voting system.

Funglegunk

No, but God help America and the rest of the world if they vote Romney in.

hooradiation

DarkDusk wrote: »

No because he proved to be useless, like most politicians.

Read more of this insightful political commentary in DarkDusk's new book

"GM Alive, Osama Bin Laden Dead: The failures of the Obama Administration"

Washington Irving

No, the novelty wore off last time

Calibos

hooradiation wrote: »

Read more of this insightful political commentary in DarkDusk's new book

"GM Alive, Osama Bin Laden Dead: The failures of the Obama Administration"

Unfortunately I can only 'Thank' your post once.

This almost follows Poe's law

Because of the insanity, lies and bubble (as Bill Maher describes it) that the Republicans live in, one couldn't say with 100% certainity that that book title wasn't a genuine book

Calibos

No surprise which way Prinz leans given his beliefs

Pedant

I want Romney to win just so there's a big war or something to watch on TV.

Helix

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Thousands of people had tears in their eyes when he won here in Ireland, he is afterall still a massively popular guy in this country, especially at my univerisity and amongst students, people were crying when he won.

every single one of those people need a kick to the face

mikemac1

From reading a section on an American football forum it seems liberal is a curse word and socialism is a vile insult

Yeah I moan about about wasters in the Dáil but American politics seems to be rightly vicious and divided and full of hate

You can even read Obama and the c word.
Communist :eek:

Why are people so frightened?
Why do they say Obamacare will bring in "death panels"

I don't know if he'll get back in, I know some people think he's the devil himself and will ruin their country

ZeitgeistGlee

I'd probably rather see Obama win over Romney, but I've no real interest in it this time around. To be honest I thought a lot of the furore around Obama the first time on both sides was deeply weird, and the Nobel Prize was simply inappropriate.

FrostyJack

ZeitgeistGlee wrote: »

I'd probably rather see Obama win over Romney, but I've no real interest in it this time around. To be honest I thought a lot of the furore around Obama the first time on both sides was deeply weird, and the Nobel Prize was simply inappropriate.

It is slightly ironic that since he got the peace prize he has been drone attacking people left right and centre, killing many innocent civilians. I suppose though compared to Bush he is rather peaceful, only kill hundreds not thousands. In 08 everyone was looking for change, Obama had a great campaign and everyone was sick of Bush so that was the main reason of the furore, we had the same messing when FF were kicked out of office. It seems everyone thought there would be "change" too, but with all politics it is meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

mikemac1 wrote:

Why are people so frightened?

Fox news, talk radio and the likes. If you hear everyday the world is getting worse, economy is in the crapper, you start to believe it. All the birther, musilm, communist stuff just keeps coming up. I talked to smart people who believe all that stuff because that is all they hear and to challenge it is like challenging their religion. One girl I know who would be considered liberal wanted Trump to get into office, because he could save the economy with his "business experience".

Funglegunk

Funglegunk wrote: »

No, but God help America and the rest of the world if they vote Romney in.

What's he gonna do, continue all the current wars, invade Libya, maybe put more pressure on Syria?

prinz

Calibos wrote: »

No surprise which way Prinz leans given his beliefs

Which way do I lean? Other than thinking that moronic stereotypes about both sides in a two party system gets nobody very far. If you want my position in America, it would be a floating vote between both sides. I wouldn't fit 100% into either Democrat or Republican.. on the other hand I find posters here getting involved in the kind of rubbish you'd expect from extremists on both sides of the American divide hilarious.

LoYL

It won't because of the billions going to spent to stop him mobilizing the people against the Republican scum who believe their narrow USA is the only USA. If Romney wins there will be war in the Gulf by March 2013.

LoYL

LoYL wrote: »

It won't because of the billions going to spent to stop him mobilizing the people against the Republican scum who believe their narrow USA is the only USA. If Romney wins there will be war in the Gulf by March 2013.

That's brilliant, it really is.

dermo88

If Romney wins there will be war in the Gulf by March 2013.

If it wipes the House of Saud off the face of the earth, I'll be happy. A couple of nukes in Riyadh is a price worth paying to remove those scum.

EZ24GET

There will not be rampant support for Obama but I think he will win because Romney's record is not to shining an example. However I think no matter who wins the US has major problems to deal with and most voters are tired of our government policing the world.

FrostyJack

Deleted User wrote: »

What's he gonna do, continue all the current wars, invade Libya, maybe put more pressure on Syria?

How about push to get things like stem cell research canned again, overtly attack Iran, get rid of the EPA (helping to melt the icecaps which affects the world) there are but a few things that are "off the table" under Obama.

prinz wrote:

Other than thinking that moronic stereotypes about both sides in a two party system gets nobody very far

When do stereotypes become facts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfdEtW5DCAk

mikemac1

Is it Biden again?

I've heard Brian Schweitzer from Montana tipped for that job
Fun fact: He was over in Waterford and did interviews for RTÉ Pat Kenny show a few months back, the second governer of Montana was from Waterford so he was over for the flag festival
Gave a speech there, impressive guy. Who knows, future President one day maybe



Who has Romney selected or is that not decided yet?

FrostyJack

mikemac1 wrote: »

Who has Romney selected or is that not decided yet?

No one we know of yet, but as stated in previous posts, who ever he picks could make or break him.

FrostyJack

FrostyJack wrote: »

How about push to get things like stem cell research canned again, overtly attack Iran, get rid of the EPA (helping to melt the icecaps which affects the world) there are but a few things that are "off the table" under Obama.

He wouldn't go after stem-cell research and Obama hasn't done a great job on simplifying that mess either. Same as Obama didn't close Guantanamo, talk is cheap especially when telling people what they want to hear.
So overtly attacking a country is what, better or worse than screwing with them but saying you're not? Whoever's president will make little difference as to whether or not anything happens in Iran. If 4 years ago Obama said they'd still be in Iraq and Afghanistan (yeah technically they're just part of a peacekeeping force in one of them) and also go ahead and overthrow Gaddafi would his "hope and change" spiel have gained much traction?
He won't close the EPA.
Seriously this is like the most recent election episode of South Park, the paranoia and feverish ramblings about what'll happen if the other one gets elected.

EZ24GET

I think one of the worst things about elections are the tv promos. Shame for all, and not just presidential ads, many local and state politicians sling mud right along with them. It is enough to cause you not to vote at all and I think this is the aim of a lot of them. Can't believe anything you hear or read- all slanted one way or the other.

prinz

FrostyJack wrote: »

When do stereotypes become facts?

You are looking at a video entitled 'misinformed redneck' and somehow extrapolate that out to everyone who votes Republican? Facts is right, Jesus wept. Cue some gob****e lining up a rambling 'Communist pinko liberal yadda yadda' and claiming it represents everyone who votes Democract and round and round we go.

Deleted User wrote: »

Seriously this is like the most recent election episode of South Park, the paranoia and feverish ramblings about what'll happen if the other one gets elected.

+1. Comedy Central.

Corkfeen

dermo88 wrote: »

If Romney wins there will be war in the Gulf by March 2013.

If it wipes the House of Saud off the face of the earth, I'll be happy. A couple of nukes in Riyadh is a price worth paying to remove those scum.

Troll or serious? :eek:

Suryavarman

Father Damo wrote: »

Oh please. The only promises he broke were the ones he was unable to force through the Congress.

A Republican dominated Congress.

Voted for, by the people.

A Republican dominated congress? What was his excuse for the first 2 years when the Democrats had control of both the Senate and the House? His budget proposal this year was so bad that it couldn't get a single vote in either the Senate or the House.

Anyone who is intending to vote for Romney does not deserve to be allowed a vote. Sometimes democracy quite simply should not be in the hands of a general public if they are not intelligent enough to use it wisely.

So because somebody disagrees with you they shouldn't be allowed to vote? Lovely.

RobbingBandit wrote: »

No, he will win though as too many Americans won't want to vote for Romney due to his faith. Mormon is too strange a religion for most. Also his wealth will put many off him. Obama will win by 60:40. I would like to see Ron Paul run as an independent, he wouldn't win but it would throw a spanner in the works for both Obama and Romney.

Obama will not win 60:40. With the American economy in the mess that it is in there is no way he'll even get close to 60% of the vote.

Calibos wrote: »

The problem is you have the racist tea party and christian right effectively taking over the republican party combined with a black democratic president. The americans do what they always do and give the opposition, the republicns in this case a majority in congress, who embark on mis-information, lies, insane ranting and willful policy obstructionism, and personal dis-respect to the president on a personal level, never before seen in history. If Obamas for it, we're against it. If we suggest an idea, Obama compromises for us and accepts it, we now reject our own idea !! Doesn't matter whats best for the country, doesn't matter if it harms the country for us to block everything Obama tries to do, in fact all the better, the people will kick him out cause he's getting nothing done. They'll vote us in even though it was us who stopped him getting anything done.

Its just staggering to watch. I don't blame Obama one bit. He faces the worst most obstructionist, most insane, most racist republican congress in history

Racism is a pretty serious thing to accuse people of. Any proof to support those claims?

Funglegunk wrote: »

No, but God help America and the rest of the world if they vote Romney in.

Obama hasn't exactly been a very good president. How could Romney be any worse?

hooradiation

Suryavarman wrote: »

Obama hasn't exactly been a very good president. How could Romney be any worse?

Thankfully, I doubt we'll ever find out.

T.C.O.B

hooradiation wrote: »

Thankfully, I doubt we'll ever find out.

Don't be so sure, stranger things have happened!

Wacker The Attacker

He's a failed president who hasnt lived up to the hype surrounding his election.

He'll only be elected on the basis that his oppostion is worse than he is. Not because he is\was a good president.

Wacker The Attacker

LoYL wrote: »

It won't because of the billions going to spent to stop him mobilizing the people against the Republican scum who believe their narrow USA is the only USA. If Romney wins there will be war in the Gulf by March 2013.

If Obama is elected there'd still be war in the gulf. Dont think Barack Obama has any power to stop this.

If war in the gulf really is a runner it may not be halted by a us president

dsmythy

FrostyJack wrote: »

No one we know of yet, but as stated in previous posts, who ever he picks could make or break him.

Condoleezza Rice. Winner!

FrostyJack

Deleted User wrote: »

So overtly attacking a country is what, better or worse than screwing with them but saying you're not? Whoever's president will make little difference as to whether or not anything happens in Iran.

What are you on about? When did America screw with Iran? Sanctions? That is the same as invading them like the Presidential hopefuls said? You may pass it off as pandering but the threat of action did not help the price of oil over here. If Bush had not snubbed Iran after 9-11 against his advisors wishes, they would probably be considered allies now (and Iraq would not have been such a bloody mess), so the President can have an affect.

prinz wrote:

You are looking at a video entitled 'misinformed redneck' and somehow extrapolate that out to everyone who votes Republican?

Again you post something I didn't say, I never said everyone is a redneck in the Republican party, the youtube video is titled "redneck" but the clip was made by Alexandra Pelosi and featured on Bill Maher show, she also did one in New York showing people collecting welfare which puts Liberals in a bad light. There are flaws on bothsides but it is not apples with apples. Since you are the expert on all things GOP, what would you be the core demographic for the conservative voters?

FrostyJack

FrostyJack wrote: »

What are you on about? When did America screw with Iran? Sanctions? That is the same as invading them like the Presidential hopefuls said? You may pass it off as pandering but the threat of action did not help the price of oil over here. If Bush had not snubbed Iran after 9-11 against his advisors wishes, they would probably be considered allies now (and Iraq would not have been such a bloody mess), so the President can have an affect.

I wasn't referring to Iran as such but you're not looking too far back in history if you don't know about the US messing with Iran. :pac: What's happening right now in Syria just doesn't ring true. The US (and the rest) supported Assad to begin with but not enough so he snubbed them and suddenly things really took off. How much of it is organic opposition is something we're never going to know. Obama set plans in motion to invade Libya but I'm guessing that's fine. Also bombing Pakistan dozens of times with drone attacks. I suppose there weren't many civilian casualties but it's hardly surprising when they define any males of military age as potential combatants. Extraordinary renditions continue, etc. There's minimal at best differences in outcomes between the two parties and in this case candidates, just different companies and friends profit from whatever seemingly ill-advised escapade the country gets into next.

FrostyJack

Deleted User wrote: »

I wasn't referring to Iran as such but you're not looking too far back in history if you don't know about the US messing with Iran. :pac: What's happening right now in Syria just doesn't ring true. The US (and the rest) supported Assad to begin with but not enough so he snubbed them and suddenly things really took off. How much of it is organic opposition is something we're never going to know. Obama set plans in motion to invade Libya but I'm guessing that's fine. Also bombing Pakistan dozens of times with drone attacks. I suppose there weren't many civilian casualties but it's hardly surprising when they define any males of military age as potential combatants. Extraordinary renditions continue, etc. There's minimal at best differences in outcomes between the two parties and in this case candidates, just different companies and friends profit from whatever seemingly ill-advised escapade the country gets into next.

We can only go by recent history, the last time the GOP were in power they started 2 wars for no good reason, Obama has started none. I have already mentioned the drone strikes earlier, even though I don't agree with them, they are prefereable to the previous admins tactics of putting boots on the ground killing 100 of thousands. America didn't invade Libya? Preparing plans isn't the same as carrying them out. Yes both parties are in bed with the military industrial complex, Obama has increased budget spending on it. During 08 election he pandered to the supporters saying he would end the wars, close Gitmo etc. Romney has said the opposite, so is he likely to end all military interventions? I think not. Neo cons and tea partiers make for scary combination.

FrostyJack

FrostyJack wrote: »

We can only go by recent history, the last time the GOP were in power they started 2 wars for no good reason, Obama has started none. I have already mentioned the drone strikes earlier, even though I don't agree with them, they are prefereable to the previous admins tactics of putting boots on the ground killing 100 of thousands. America didn't invade Libya? Preparing plans isn't the same as carrying them out. Yes both parties are in bed with the military industrial complex, Obama has increased budget spending on it. During 08 election he pandered to the supporters saying he would end the wars, close Gitmo etc. Romney has said the opposite, so is he likely to end all military interventions? I think not. Neo cons and tea partiers make for scary combination.

I just think the hysteria about what'll happen if the other crowd get in is very over-done. Obama pandered like **** in the last cycle, ended up extending the stay in Afghanistan over the plans put in place when Bush was in. Now one could say that it was because the country was in such a mess but if the parties were reversed some would say it was to keep it going a bit longer and to safeguard the reconstruction works contracted to certain American countries.

I'm guessing you hope Ron Paul wins in Nebraska this weekend? :pac: Would give him 15 minutes speaking to the RNC which will completely wreck Romney if any of the major news channels decide to acknowledge Paul for the first time in a few years.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Bush's domestic policies were more successful than Obama's. The Oirish will always fawn over the Democrat, Their gangster philander pal Kennedy was one after all.

cristoir

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Bush's domestic policies were more successful than Obama's. The Oirish will always fawn over the Democrat, Their gangster philander pal Kennedy was one after all.

How so?

FrostyJack

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Bush's domestic policies were more successful than Obama's.

I would love to hear the reasoning behind this, please do tell.

FrostyJack

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm guessing you hope Ron Paul wins in Nebraska this weekend? :pac: Would give him 15 minutes speaking to the RNC which will completely wreck Romney if any of the major news channels decide to acknowledge Paul for the first time in a few years.

I would actually nearly rather Romney to Ron Paul, even though I fully agree with nearly everything he believes. His foreign policy is spot on, he seems honest and genuine and most of his views are spot on re drugs etc, but he is so far out in others, bring back the gold standard and stuff like that scare me. Also he stood there as people said "let him die" and he is a doctor!! It was shameful how he was threated by the media in the contest, just shows how money works in political circles.

DEFTLEFTHAND

cristoir wrote: »

How so?

He pursued and achieved meaningful reform in the US education system. He also worked tirelessly for immigrant reform and was very open to a solution that suited both sides. In medicare he expanded prescription coverage.

His tax relief measures in his first term were also considered to be a success despite dissenting voices from many at the time.