Supporters of Obama in 2008: Have you changed?

Timeline


the warnings were there. as far back as 2001

no. I didn't vote for Obama. never will

I hadn't seen this information before. I was leaning on the side that held the Bush Administration responsible for much of, not all, but much of the current mortgage housing crisis. Bit of an eye opener. Thanks.
 
I would suggest that the Tea Party goes further than just point out that the "Emperor has no clothes" because most people I talk to see them more as the political wing of the KKK than a voice of reason now I admit that these people are not Tea Party supporters but they are both Democrats and Republicans, the Tea Party's problems are based on the fact that they are seen as to far from the mainstream to get the moderate vote and it is that section of the electorate that wins elections.

I personally think this was the problem with the McCain/Palin campaign as well, I recall 5.56 saying something about how Palin was galvanising the base support and that may well have been true but it was the far right base she was uniting and they were never going to vote for Obama anyway however her drive to do this alienated the moderates and left, in my opinion having Palin as McCains running mate did more to elect Obama than the Democrats did.

Much like Chess winning elections is about controlling the centre not the extremes.

Oh and I found this which I think explains it well...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/17/o...-E-FB-SM-LIN-CTP-081711-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click
I have no idea how the TEA Party could be seriously linked to the KKK except those who have bought into the line that "Republicans only oppose Obama because he's black" b******t. The 1st 2 years of the Clinton Admin mirrors Obama including the opposition to ClintonCare. Polls of TEA Party affiliated people show 60% Rep, & 40% Dems & Independants. A lot of those upset with the TEA Party have the I don't care if were going bankrupt was long as I get my check mentality. The MSM did a great job of not vetting Obama while demonizing Palin, who had more expierience than Obama did @ the time. Yeah, Palin obviously wasn't dialed in on national politics & other things, but today people can't seperate what Palin said vs Tina Fey's quips. Here in Fla. TEA Party backed Rick Scott got elected despite serious concerns over his time as head of HCA/Columbia Corp. Funny how fiscal responcibility is now considered by some, @ least, to be "extreme", Business as usual will see us in a situation like Greece & other Nations who skidded too far down the Nanny State path.
 
I hadn't seen this information before. I was leaning on the side that held the Bush Administration responsible for much of, not all, but much of the current mortgage housing crisis. Bit of an eye opener. Thanks.

you've only heard the half of it as democrats lied to to protect their so called "cash Cow"............mack and mae

dems caught lying


Barney Frank, 2005: What Housing Bubble?


Barney Flintstone here was connected with ACORN who for years has been selling mortages to minorities who don't even have a job. this so called party has reached an all time high in corruption. it should be legally eliminated and dissolved.
 
you've only heard the half of it as democrats lied to to protect their so called "cash Cow"............mack and mae

dems caught lying


Barney Frank, 2005: What Housing Bubble?


Barney Flintstone here was connected with ACORN who for years has been selling mortages to minorities who don't even have a job. this so called party has reached an all time high in corruption. it should be legally eliminated and dissolved.
Frank in the last election was still blaming Republicans for the meltdown that he was a central person in helping happen.
 
so how did ACORN get banks to write these default loans??? easy. like the mob they had a muscle dept. they went into banks and threatened bankers to write the loans. even going so far as to follow them home and threaten their families. archive from 08

In one of the first book-length scholarly studies of ACORN, Organizing Urban America, Rutgers University political scientist Heidi Swarts describes this group, so dear to Barack Obama, as “oppositional outlaws.” Swarts, a strong supporter of ACORN, has no qualms about stating that its members think of themselves as “militants unafraid to confront the powers that be.” “This identity as a uniquely militant organization,” says Swarts, “is reinforced by contentious action.” ACORN protesters will break into private offices, show up at a banker’s home to intimidate his family, or pour protesters into bank lobbies to scare away customers, all in an effort to force a lowering of credit standards for poor and minority customers. According to Swarts, long-term ACORN organizers “tend to see the organization as a solitary vanguard of principled leftists…the only truly radical community organization.”

story
 
I have no idea how the TEA Party could be seriously linked to the KKK except those who have bought into the line that "Republicans only oppose Obama because he's black" b******t. The 1st 2 years of the Clinton Admin mirrors Obama including the opposition to ClintonCare. Polls of TEA Party affiliated people show 60% Rep, & 40% Dems & Independants. A lot of those upset with the TEA Party have the I don't care if were going bankrupt was long as I get my check mentality. The MSM did a great job of not vetting Obama while demonizing Palin, who had more expierience than Obama did @ the time. Yeah, Palin obviously wasn't dialed in on national politics & other things, but today people can't seperate what Palin said vs Tina Fey's quips. Here in Fla. TEA Party backed Rick Scott got elected despite serious concerns over his time as head of HCA/Columbia Corp. Funny how fiscal responcibility is now considered by some, @ least, to be "extreme", Business as usual will see us in a situation like Greece & other Nations who skidded too far down the Nanny State path.

Which polls are you referring to? Can I see the source 40% Democrat? I havent met a single Democrat who was even remotely enchanted by the TP. Nor have a met a single Democrat politican the TP has endorsed, which is practically impossible with a supposed 40% makeup.

The teaparty is overwhelming white, conservative/libratarian, republican and evangelical.

Lets call a spade a spade, the TP is nothing but a group of dissatisfied Republicans supported by conservative thinktanks and institutions.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/01/tea-party-survey-old-cons_n_522336.html (POLL IS FROM THE WINSTON GROUP, A CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK)

Sixty-five percent of Tea Party respondents called themselves "conservative" compared to the 33 percent of all respondents who did the same. Just eight percent of Tea Party respondents said they were "liberal."


Forty-seven percent of Tea Party respondents said that Fox News was either the top or second source of news they turn to, compared with 19 percent of the overall public who said the same thing.

More than 80 percent (81 percent) of Tea Party respondents expressed very little approval of Barack Obama's job as president, which exceeded disapproval levels held even by Republicans (77%) and conservatives (79%).

All these data points suggest that the Tea Party crowd is comprised predominantly of conservatives. And, not surprisingly, the demographics of the movement seemingly align with those who traditionally vote for the conservative candidate as well. Fifty-six percent of Tea Party respondents are male; 22 percent are over the age of 65 (compared with just 14 percent who are between the ages of 18 and 34); and 23 percent fall in the income range of $50,000 and $75,000.


The MSM did a good job demonizing Palin? Really? lets listen to Sarah in her own words:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npUMUASwaec"]Palin: Bailout is about healthcare! - YouTube[/ame]


The MSM doesnt get the blame on this one, its Sarah that Demonized herself.
 
Last edited:
Which polls are you referring to? Can I see the source 40% Democrat? I havent met a single Democrat who was even remotely enchanted by the TP. Nor have a met a single Democrat politican the TP has endorsed, which is practically impossible with a supposed 40% makeup.

The teaparty is overwhelming white, conservative/libratarian, republican and evangelical.

Lets call a spade a spade, the TP is nothing but a group of dissatisfied Republicans supported by conservative thinktanks and institutions.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/01/tea-party-survey-old-cons_n_522336.html (POLL IS FROM THE WINSTON GROUP, A CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK)

Sixty-five percent of Tea Party respondents called themselves "conservative" compared to the 33 percent of all respondents who did the same. Just eight percent of Tea Party respondents said they were "liberal."


Forty-seven percent of Tea Party respondents said that Fox News was either the top or second source of news they turn to, compared with 19 percent of the overall public who said the same thing.

More than 80 percent (81 percent) of Tea Party respondents expressed very little approval of Barack Obama's job as president, which exceeded disapproval levels held even by Republicans (77%) and conservatives (79%).

All these data points suggest that the Tea Party crowd is comprised predominantly of conservatives. And, not surprisingly, the demographics of the movement seemingly align with those who traditionally vote for the conservative candidate as well. Fifty-six percent of Tea Party respondents are male; 22 percent are over the age of 65 (compared with just 14 percent who are between the ages of 18 and 34); and 23 percent fall in the income range of $50,000 and $75,000.

The MSM did a good job demonizing Palin? Really? lets listen to Sarah in her own words:

Palin: Bailout is about healthcare! - YouTube


The MSM doesnt get the blame on this one, its Sarah that Demonized herself.
Linky There are Conservative Ind & Dems, espicially in the south.
 
It doesn't say 40% of Democrats, it says Democrats AND independents. It doesn't seperate the two which is misleading.

Since The poll doesn't differentiate at all, I'll wager anything this 40% is mostly likely made up of Libertarians, with Conservative Democrats and other Independents and making up the tiny difference. I know conservative Democrats, they have far more in common with the mainstream DNC than they do with the TP. There are very few conservative Democrats in the Democratic party and even fewer in the Tea Party.

The other thing is that this article is a year and a half old, and I would wager anything that number is now obsolete. Alot has changed since 2010, and the Tea party isn't as popular now as it was then.

Logic dictates this cannot be right George, because if it was the TP would have won every race in 2010, they did well in the House (but know are at risk of losing the house) but all the TP senate candidates lost except for 1.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't say 40% of Democrats, it says Democrats AND independents. It doesn't seperate the two which is misleading.

Since The poll doesn't differentiate at all, I'll wager anything this 40% is mostly likely made up of Libertarians, with Conservative Democrats and other Independents and making up the tiny difference. I know conservative Democrats, they have far more in common with the mainstream DNC than they do with the TP. There are very few conservative Democrats in the Democratic party and even fewer in the Tea Party.
I said 40% Dems & Ind. There are a lot of Conservative Dems in many places around outside the Liberal areas. One big reason the Dems regained controll of Congress in '06 was a lot of people were upset with Bush II & the big govt Reps that were with him & voted for Dems who were running in many races to the right of incumbent Reps. People forget that voting for Conservative Dems empowers Libs like Pelosi, Read, Frank & Shumer.
 
I said 40% Dems & Ind. There are a lot of Conservative Dems in many places around outside the Liberal areas. One big reason the Dems regained controll of Congress in '06 was a lot of people were upset with Bush II & the big govt Reps that were with him & voted for Dems who were running in many races to the right of incumbent Reps. People forget that voting for Conservative Dems empowers Libs like Pelosi, Read, Frank & Shumer.

the dems got in by promising to end the war. which they didn't
 
the dems got in by promising to end the war. which they didn't
That was only part of it. I know a lot of Republicans who were totally frustrated with Bush. We (Including me) expected the govt spending & size to be cut, instead he bloated both. So quite a few either quit the Party & went Ind. or sat out the elections or voted for those Dems who were running to the right of the Rep. incumbents as a protest.
 
I’m with George, I was born in CA and was a left coast liberal until Carter broke my heart.

I was republican until this last Bush (although he wasn’t the devil the left and the US Media make him out to be) went against too many Repub. Principles.

I now consider myself to be a right leaning Indy and feel that Obama is one of the worst mistakes the “ignorant” US masses have ever made.
 
Jon Huntsman is sounding better, he's wowing the crowds with such comments like "Science is not a myth" and "Hanging The Federal Reserve Chairman is not a sound economic plan".

Kudos to Huntsman for sounding like the only Republican Presidential Candidate who isn't a total nutcase or fraud. Shame he is only at 2.2%

Still, lets hope this latest disease of sanity spreads to the rest of the GOP.
 
Last edited:
the dems got in by promising to end the war. which they didn't

In a technical sense, they are still carrying out their promise on that. When they said "end the war" did you think it would be done overnight? No, it will take years before a drawdown to that magnitude will happen and it will still be accurate of them.

I plan on voting Obama, mainly because most other options are pretty stupid to me. This will be my first presidential vote!! :rambo:


Because I am independent, I completely disagree with any politician who is so stuck in his political party, that they would disagree with any plan no matter what as long as it was not their party that created it.

Though you guys don't like Obama, the true people to blame for things not progressing is Congress itself. Think about it; we almost defaulted on our debts thanks to blind disagreements!

Also in my opinion Democrats are better handling economic affairs. I do support higher taxes on the rich (on all levels tbh, but the medium to poor classes can not handle any tax increases at this moment). Yes I do think we should increase revenues through taxes. I think most taxes should be implied on things people do not need and are unhealthy (this can have a negative effect to a certain extent if taxed to high). Despite what many believes; small businesses are the ones that employ most of the American population.

Granted a good deal if not most of the big businesses are important as well, bust mainly because they have the most technology oriented things. Such as Intel, GE, GM, etc. Also they are pretty big in the manufactering sector.

I do think we can due better by reducing corperate taxes, but most of the big corporations only go to other countries for selfish max profits. Even if we did lower corporate taxes, there is absolutely no guarantee they will bring the jobs they shipped out, back.

http://economics.about.com/od/smallbigbusiness/a/us_business.htm
http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/7495/8420 - source to prove what I said.

I also DO NOT believe United States should be considered a christian nation because if it was, then we clearly go against our constitution. Not sure if the founding fathers realized this contradiction when they wrote the Bill of Rights the way they did. Now that I said that, I couldn't possibly care what religion Obama was whether it was, Scientologist (ROFL if you don't know that one, I suggest looking it up for a good laugh), Christian, Hindu, Budhist, Jewish, or Muslim.


I do believe we should have a nationalized health care; this will take the pressure off of businesses having to have a health care program for their employees. This will also lower taxes.

I however do think Social security should be reformed (since I believe in nationalized health care, we wouldn't need a medicaid or medicare).

Having national healthcare itself can increase employment in this country. National healthcare should only occur once the government find the magic land of proper money spending.

I also believe America really needs to start investing in renewable energies. Without investment, there will be no technological increase in those fields, therefore we will be stuck relying on oil for god knows how long.

I been reading up on this site for awhile despite not posting. I decided to post my opinions here.
 
Last edited:
In a technical sense, they are still carrying out their promise on that. When they said "end the war" did you think it would be done overnight? No, it will take years before a drawdown to that magnitude will happen and it will still be accurate of them.

I plan on voting Obama, mainly because most other options are pretty stupid to me. This will be my first presidential vote!! :rambo:


Because I am independent, I completely disagree with any politician who is so stuck in his political party, that they would disagree with any plan no matter what as long as it was not their party that created it.

Though you guys don't like Obama, the true people to blame for things not progressing is Congress itself. Think about it; we almost defaulted on our debts thanks to blind disagreements!

Also in my opinion Democrats are better handling economic affairs. I do support higher taxes on the rich (on all levels tbh, but the medium to poor classes can not handle any tax increases at this moment). Yes I do think we should increase revenues through taxes. I think most taxes should be implied on things people do not need and are unhealthy (this can have a negative effect to a certain extent if taxed to high). Despite what many believes; small businesses are the ones that employ most of the American population.

Granted a good deal if not most of the big businesses are important as well, bust mainly because they have the most technology oriented things. Such as Intel, GE, GM, etc. Also they are pretty big in the manufactering sector.

I do think we can due better by reducing corperate taxes, but most of the big corporations only go to other countries for selfish max profits. Even if we did lower corporate taxes, there is absolutely no guarantee they will bring the jobs they shipped out, back.

http://economics.about.com/od/smallbigbusiness/a/us_business.htm
http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/7495/8420 - source to prove what I said.

I also DO NOT believe United States should be considered a christian nation because if it was, then we clearly go against our constitution. Not sure if the founding fathers realized this contradiction when they wrote the Bill of Rights the way they did. Now that I said that, I couldn't possibly care what religion Obama was whether it was, Scientologist (ROFL if you don't know that one, I suggest looking it up for a good laugh), Christian, Hindu, Budhist, Jewish, or Muslim.


I do believe we should have a nationalized health care; this will take the pressure off of businesses having to have a health care program for their employees. This will also lower taxes.

I however do think Social security should be reformed (since I believe in nationalized health care, we wouldn't need a medicaid or medicare).

Having national healthcare itself can increase employment in this country. National healthcare should only occur once the government find the magic land of proper money spending.

I also believe America really needs to start investing in renewable energies. Without investment, there will be no technological increase in those fields, therefore we will be stuck relying on oil for god knows how long.

I been reading up on this site for awhile despite not posting. I decided to post my opinions here.

This will be my first presidential vote!!

congrads. but your views are more in line with liberals.

In a technical sense, they are still carrying out their promise on that. When they said "end the war" did you think it would be done overnight? No, it will take years before a drawdown to that magnitude will happen and it will still be accurate of them.

we're 3 years in and no end in sight for the war in afghan. in fact he's escalating it. in your opinion how long should it take???

Also in my opinion Democrats are better handling economic affair

is that why we're 10 trillion in the hole??? democrats don't solve problems. they throw money it.

the voting age should go back to 21. or higher

how obama got elected
 
Raymankiller3

I'm confused. You want to lower corporate taxes but admit that doing so wont accomplish very much (which I agree with). Well then whats the point?

Furthermore corporate taxes in the USA are much lower then they are elsewhere and because of the loopholes they exploit many of them don't pay any tax at all. Example Exxon Mobile in 2009, they are actually given tax rebates ($156 Million in Exxon's case) despite paying no US income tax and their profits in 2009 were $19 Billion.

But whose taxes does the GOP want to raise? The poor.

BTW most corporations move operations overseas because labor costs less not because of taxes. They actually keep their HQ in the USA because if they were to move it abroad they would no longer be considered a US Company (and lose all the loopholes and freebies).

So its actually sicker that what you say. They ship US jobs overseas and pay the employees their peanuts, make huge profits and pay no US corporate income tax, but still collect tax rebates.

I agree that people are deluded to think lowering corporate tax will bring US jobs back. Those jobs are gone. A union job that pays $29 an hour assembling cars can't compete with the same job being done for .50 cents an hour in Indonesia. And US corporations see only green, not red, white, and blue.

The problem is the Democrats. Aside for a few like Bernie Sanders, these spineless wimps did nothing when Obama shifted to the right. Obama is supporting what USED to be GOP positions before the GOP went off the deep end trying to convert America into a Pseudo-Christian theocracy run by oligarchs.

My solution would be to raise taxes and close all loopholes and rebates that they use. Also use the IRS to find monies hiding in foreign bank accounts and criminally prosecute all tax cheats.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't a simple flat tax, which everyone can understand and abide by, and completely eliminating the IRS as it is now structured, be more sensible?
 
Wouldn't a simple flat tax, which everyone can understand and abide by, and completely eliminating the IRS as it is now structured, be more sensible?

I think most Americans would be in favor of exterminating uh eliminating the IRS :lol:
 
Wouldn't a simple flat tax, which everyone can understand and abide by, and completely eliminating the IRS as it is now structured, be more sensible?

In a nutshell: No. (Besides a flat tax is really meant for personal income tax, not corporate tax). You'd still need the IRS for collection, aid, and enforcement. Otherwise no one is going to pay taxes. This has been argued at length but essentially a flat tax would raise everyones taxes except the very, very, wealthy.

Why?

For a flat to to be viable it would have to 27-29% without bankrupting the government. Thats the calculated figure.

Thanks to the Bush taxcuts, the rich pay 35% taxes -so right off the bat thats a significant drop for them. It was 47% before the Bush Tax cuts. The middle class pays about 16% which means their taxes go up by about 12% and the poor who pay little if any taxes would be taxed into homelessness.

Besides in 2011 we are paying the LOWEST taxes now than in the past 50 years. The idea that we are being "crushed by taxes" is a bit silly. I live in Europe where taxes are considerably more.

And personally I have no problems that the wealthy pay more. The system we have in the U.S gives a lot of help for people/businesses to make tons of money. Asking them to put something back into the federal tin cup is not much to ask in my opinion given all the advantages they get. Remember these are multi-billion dollar people and companies, they aren't exactly in the poorhouse.

Its greed, pure and simple and it will shift the tax burden to the poor and middle class and away from those who truly don't need it.

Coincidently the right wing government in France just last week announced that they were increasing taxes on the very wealthy and nobody raised any objection. So I find the idea that the wealthy in America (a much rich country) to be "suffering" to be quite unbelievable. Indeed even Warren Buffet admitted as such last week when he suggested that the wealthy (like himself) in America need to pay more.

Finally, with a $14 Trillion annual deficit goes anyone really think its a good time to CUT taxes and thus decrease Federal revenue?

Lastly food for thought: Of the 24 countries that have a flat tax: Bosnia, Bulgaria Albania Czech Republic Estonia Georgia Guernsey Hungary Kazakhstan Iraq Jersey Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Macedonia Mongolia Montenegro Mauritius Romania Russia Serbia Slovakia and Ukraine

Most of them are ex-communist, all of them have small, failed, or stagnant economies. Many of them have huge class rich-poor welfare gaps. Conclusion: this is not the example example we need to follow.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top