September 26, 2014

Understanding the pain of long-term Obama lovers.

In about an hour, I'm recording a Bloggingheads episode with someone who has loved Obama for so long and may be about to come out and say it's over. Just to remind you: I voted for Obama in '08, but not because I was smitten. I was grimly practical, choosing between 2 less-than-perfect options. And then in '12, I voted for Romney:
[As I had written at the time, when I voted for him in 2008,] I didn't trust Obama, and I feared what he would do with a Democratic Congress. We all saw what he did with a Democratic Congress. He let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have their way with him. It was horrible. It led to the Tea Party and the trouncing Democrats took in 2010. I've felt no connection to the Democratic Party since then. Of course, I don't like half of what the Republicans stand for, but I've still voted for some of them, notably Ron Johnson and (twice!) Scott Walker, because... what choice do I have? The Democrats have been leading us into financial ruin.

If I could have been assured that the GOP would control both houses of Congress, I might have thought Obama would be good. I like balance, moderation, and pragmatism. If one of the hardcore righties had won the Republican nomination, I would probably have gone for Obama. But Mitt Romney got the nomination, which is what I had been hoping for (after Mitch Daniels decided not to run). It was time to pay attention again to Obama The Candidate, and his campaign centered on vilifying Mitt Romney in the most inane Occupy-Wall-Street style that was completely alienating to me. Romney seamlessly transitioned from being my choice in the primaries to being my presumptive choice for President. I remained open to Obama. Obama could have won me.
Now, I'm pretty supportive of Obama's stepped up war on terrorism and the implicit appreciation it shows for what George W. Bush had to deal with. So help me think about how to talk with somebody who's falling out of love with Obama.

Of course, the election looms, and everything potentially connects to that.

121 comments:

Anonymous said...

Tell them it is hard to reevaluate a relationship. You let someone touch you repeatedly in your secret special place, and then sometimes you don't want them to touch you in your secret special place, not right now please, but they keep touching and touching in your secret special place until it no longer feels so special or secret, it is like touching your secret special place is taken for granted, they can just touch you there whenever they want even if you just want to be listened to, just to feel like you exist as more than just a secret special place, you want to be listened to and appreciated for who you are, but you have the realization that this person is touching a LOT of people in their special secret places and then you realize the magic is gone. It takes awhile. Reclaim your special secret place. For YOU.

SomeoneHasToSayIt said...

I remained open to Obama. Obama could have won me.

That statement right there (made after we had real evidence of who and what Obama is) disqualifies you from any (sane) list of folks whose opinions should be valued.

And of course, it goes with the territory that you don't see that.

Anonymous said...

Then tell them it is turtles all the way down. Of course.

chickelit said...

Tell him it's "tortugas all the way down" the hatch until November.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I think the way to talk to them would depend greatly on why they are falling out of love with President Obama.

If it is because they are finally waking up to all the scandals, abuses of power, stifling of the economy, etc. then you should cheerfully welcome them to the tea party.

If it is because he is too militaristic, not forceful enough in his expansion of government, etc. then you might politely suggest that they put down the bong and pull their head out of their ass.

Bob Boyd said...

Don't try to fix it.
You always try to fix it when what they really need is just for you to listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg

MayBee said...

The love for Obama was unlike anything I've seen in politics in my lifetime.

I want us to remember it, so we may avoid it in the future if it starts happening again.

I can understand people liking Obama still because he is a Democrat and they believe in Democrat politics.
But I do want people who like him for that to recognize the way odd love relationship others had with Obama, how little he lived up to the promise he put forward beginning in 2004, and perhaps be more willing to engage in debate rather than name-calling the next time around.

Big Mike said...

... but not because I was smitten ...

Keep telling yourself that, ma'am, keep telling yourself that.

rhhardin said...

Obama will do a bus tour in a short bus this time.

rhhardin said...

If it's a woman, their failing is thinking that he means well.

If it's a man, he's just an idiot.

MayBee said...

Anybody who didn't fall a little out of love with Obama when he introduced The Office of President Elect, should have to go to reprogramming therapy.

gerry said...

It's the economy, stupid. Your children are doomed. For these two practical reasons, and because the renewed "War on Terror" is a dishonest and losing approach that lacks commitment (typical) and will result only in advancing Islamism worldwide, tell the despondent Obama follower:

Leave the loser, and swear never, ever, to listen to morally bankrupt and deceptive Progressive sentiment again.

Anonymous said...

Tell them it is not them, it is Obama. Honey, Obama is an ass freak, he is always wanting to make love in your ass, it is not normal, this relationship built on anal sex and empty promises. Sure, he can talk about the vagina, how special it is, but when it comes time it is straight to the ass, always, that is who he is, it is what he is: he is an ass freak, baby, for him it is all about the ass and you deserve more than that. You need to be more to him then just the back of a head in those special moments, but you are afraid: what will happen if you say 'no' to anal sex? Will he simply leave you, like you never even existed, and just move on to the next available ass partner? Be strong, baby: you are more than just your ass.

rhhardin said...

Women's special talent isn't politics.

It only works in an actual neighborhood, not a virtual one.

In a virtual neighborhood, every women's instinct makes them moronic voters.

Michael said...

1. Obama said, outright, that he wanted to change America. You have to ask yourself if you believed in the necessity for change with a capital C or if you just thought that was something politicians said. Because he meant it with a capital C
2. You overlooked his thin,barely visible, resume and assumed that anyone with degrees from Harvard and Columbia could run the country. You actually believed that was all that was required.
3. You wanted to believe that a handsome black man with degrees from schools you could not yourself get into could run the country. Like most people you have a very low expectation of black people and he seemed to exceed those expectations by magnitudes.
4. You believed that soaring pretty talk would mesmerize the bad players on the world change just as it mesmerized you.
5. You never dreamed that this pretty black man with the great degrees and beautiful family could be such a mean spirited divider. It would never have crossed your mind that the tactics he used to get elected in Illinois would be employed against anyone who stood in his way.
6. You never would have dreamed that this pretty black man with the great degrees and beautiful family could be a petulant baby.
7. You might have thought he would have surrounded himself with people who knew more than he did but then you did not think that he thought he knew everything.

And more. Much more.

Jim said...

Tell them to stick it out "for the good of the children."

NotquiteunBuckley said...

It's not Obama's fault.

The path he has taken was chosen for him. Facing no resistance compared to his powerful Chicago connections, he did think he had a gift and merely had to speak and it (peace in our time) would be.

He does believe people who disagree with him are genuinely selfish people with no regard for Obama's people.

Tribal.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

Obama's tribe is Larry Tribe and Ivy Leaguers by the way, not black or Muslim or Kenyan.

Original Mike said...

"We all saw what he did with a Democratic Congress. He let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have their way with him. It was horrible. It led to the Tea Party ..."

It led to ObamaCare, inevitable rationing and having to off yourself at 75. Your "grimly practical" logic led to a disastrous result. Your only solace is that one vote doesn't matter.

rhhardin said...

There's a dead vulture in the road on the bike commute, untouched for a couple of days now.

It's professional courtesy.

jacksonjay said...

I'm pretty supportive of Obama's stepped up war on terrorism ....

Bwahahahaahhahaha!

"I didn't call em the JV!

"Shock not Awe"

"manage the barbarians"

"not war, counter-terrorism effort"

"We will not have boots on the ground!"

"Fore"

It really is hard for lady parts to turn-off the love for Swaggy!

Original Mike said...

"So help me think about how to talk with somebody who's falling out of love with Obama."

At this point, what difference does it make? Seriously. The only thing you can do is make the case for not doing stupid stuff in the future. And, if this person is falling out of love because Obama did not govern far enough to the left, then any conversation isn't worth your time.

Bob Boyd said...

I don't think there's anything you can say.
You're dealing with people who believe they have been involved in an amazing storybook love affair when in fact they have been humping a plastic blow-up doll blind-folded while a gang of thieves carry all their valuables out the door and put them into a van.

Tank said...

Tell them:

1. Everything is Awesome. Everything is Awesome.

2. Economy is great.

3. Wall Street way up for rich people.

4. Lots of good jobs available.

5. Al Quada is dead.

6. Bin Laden is dead.

7. Joan Rivers (that Israel loving scum) is dead.

8. Free healthcare for all. Free. Free. Free.

9. Free birth control.

10. Free abortion.

11. Transparency.

12. Ethics.

13. 85.

14. Putin is almost dead.

15. Romney wants to run again, and again and again.

16. If you don't know who the mark is, you are the mark.

17. Derek Jeter.

18. Everything is awesome. Everything is awesome.

MadisonMan said...

The world's a different place than it was in 2004. That it's a different place requires change.

I don't think Obama has changed in a way that is good for the Country. I think he's just been left behind, kind of flailing away, trying to find something that works and failing.

campy said...

Anyone who doesn't love Obama is a racist!

Anonymous said...

Baby, it's me, Obama: don't believe what your friends are telling you. Remember all of our special times? It's always been you for me, baby, we got a good thing and it would be a shame to lose this good thing just because of a few bumps in the road. How about tonight we have some Chinese take-out delivered, just you and me, we'll light some scented candles, play some Al Green and then I'll make slow, sweet love to your ass, just how you like it, slow sweet ass sex. Call me daddy, baby: call me daddy.

jacksonjay said...

Tell Lena she is still smarter than Ricky.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

Because John McCain is a near Democrat, I don't blame anyone who voted against him, also considering Obama was an unknown quantity in many ways. The turtles all the way down here are with McCain Immigrate REFORM Comprehensive would have been already accomplished by 2014 and millions of new voters, given their constitutional rights to be out of the damn shadows like second-class citizens, would guarantee financial misery as soon as Obama has.

I voted Palin in 2008.

chillblaine said...

While you may have been grimly practical, most everyone else was irrationally exuberant.

MayBee said...

MadMan:
I don't think Obama has changed in a way that is good for the Country. I think he's just been left behind, kind of flailing away, trying to find something that works and failing.

Part of the problem is he was never the guy he put forward in 2004 for the keynote speech, nor the guy he campaigned as in 2008. Those were all just speeches his handlers had written for him. Now, he may have believed he was a guy who respected all sides of an argument, but that was only because he wasn't really exposed to people who thought differently than he did.

So I agree with you that he hasn't changed in a way that's good for the country. But the way he is now was visible in 2008 for people who saw beyond his speeches.

MayBee said...

Lesson: Do not elect anyone David Axelrod is "managing"

The Drill SGT said...

MayBee said...
The love for Obama was unlike anything I've seen in politics in my lifetime.


Not intending to invoke Godwin's law but see:

Peronism
Nazism
Fascism
Marxism
Chavezism
Maoism
Pol Pot 'ism :)
DeGaulism

MayBee said...

Also-

Did Obama refer to Eric Holder's wife yesterday as an "OB-gynie"?

I think he did. Gross.

Lance said...

It's not just the President. The current crop of Democrats are all terrible leaders. Reid, Pelosi, Wasserman-Schultz, Schumer, Jerry Brown, Bill de Blasio, Andrew Cuomo, Rahm Emanuel, etc. etc. Good politicians, maybe, some of them, but horrible leaders.

This is the crew that refuses to believe the U.S. has a debt problem. They refuse to grapple with their underfunded entitlement programs (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions, etc.). Sure they want to raise taxes, but not to meet government's obligations. Rather they want to expand government commitments.

Obama is just the tip of the iceberg. The problem isn't that the President has been unable to sell the Democrats' platform, it's the platform itself that's broken. To say "I'm not in love with Obama anymore" isn't enough.

Christopher said...

Now, I'm pretty supportive of Obama's stepped up war on terrorism and the implicit appreciation it shows for what George W. Bush had to deal with.

Well, one thing you could say is that Obama's actions don't show anything of the sort. Obama is doing the least damage to ISIS that is possible, with the goal of dropping this on the next president's doorstep and deceiving low-information voters into believing he's serious about the problem. Anyone paying attention to his language about making ISIS "manageable" can see that's where his heart is.

Of course, anyone who knew anything about Obama in 2008 beyond the puff pieces and psychodrama of voting for a skin color could have foreseen pretty much the entire wreck since he was sworn in, so you might not be the best person for this.

Original Mike said...

Obama's stepped up war on terrorism is just to get the Dems past the upcoming election. Drop a few bombs, get a brief uptick in the polls. After 6 years, there are no more mysteries about this guy.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said... So help me think about how to talk with somebody who's falling out of love with Obama.

I think the answer to that depends on what your goal is. If it's just to listen, commisserate, and make the other person feel okay about their new feelings your best bet is probably asking questions about how the person saw/sees Obama as a symbol vs. how they judge what he has done or accomplished. Given your own history I think you could make progress pointing out the need for both "idealistic" beliefs and practical "conservative" actions and policies--highlighting the difference between teenage slogans and adult responsibiliies, for instance. You could ask if the person believes Obama himself has changed or if they've simply reevaluated how they see Obama (back again to the difference between what Obama represents vs who he actually is and what he's done).

If your goal is to persuade others to come to the same conclusions you have (and this person might be coming to) you'd want to tie any failures or shortcomings they see in Obama to the larger Dem/Left movement and point out that those problems are ideological and thus larger than Obama himself. This lets them feel better about coming to dislike the man by placing the blame on the movement (where it belongs). This easily segues into a discussion of how the media hyped and built up Obama and his Admin, how that may have insulated them from legitimate criticism and made them less able to change/react when appropriate, etc.

If your goal is to persuade the discussion should start w/Obama himself but probe how the changes/failings they see in him are actually tied to the larger Dem platform/value system. If your goal is to simply understand how their opinion has evolved you should probe the specific things the person feels Obama has done wrong and ask what they expected instead--focusing as well on whether their expectations were reasonable and, if not, why those were there exepectations to begin with.

RecChief said...

take the Obama approach and tell them that they aren't responsible for the consequences of their actions.

Anonymous said...

Baby, it's me, Obama: what do you mean you don't want me to put it in your ass anymore? Don't you understand that is how I can best express my special love for you? Oh - wait, I get it: it's because I'm black, right? White boys, they can pound you in the ass left and right, but when it comes to a black man, now it's off limits? Your ass is now segregated? Don't try to explain - just stop. Let me be clear: there are millions of people who would give everything they have for me to put it in their ass just once -- you realize this, don't you? And you are still going to hold out on me now? I'll give you one more chance, baby, but that's it: One. More. Chance.

RecChief said...

I'm not buying the "grimly practical" you're human after all. Grimly practical would have been to vote for McCain (more of a blue dog democrat than a republican) with a Democrat Congress than to hand the keys over to the Democrat Party

But the inability to temper your expectations with the evidence (and it was there) that he wasn't what was presented makes me wonder if you are asking for advice on how to come to grips with it yourself.

The Drill SGT said...

Now, I'm pretty supportive of Obama's stepped up war on terrorism and the implicit appreciation it shows for what George W. Bush had to deal with.

Whether he's like Bush, doan know. He surely isn't like the guy who could have been our first black President. Remember the Powell Doctrine?

1. Vital Interest?
2. clear objectives?
3. risks and costs accounted for?
4. Exist strategy?
5. Consequences analyzed?
6. International and US Public support?
7. Plan to use overwhelming force to minimize US losses?

What Barry is doing is political-military theater, driven by polling, designed to pretend to take action, when it will only cost us lives, treasure and make matters worse when we fail, which we surely will, with this half assed implementation.

There is a military maxim that says:

An 80% solution, implemented promptly and with vigor beats the perfect plan, implemented halfheartedly and too late.

which option are we pursuing?




Original Mike said...

"The Democrats have been leading us into financial ruin."

You could talk about that. At the very least, I'd like to hear the discussion with someone who, I'm guessing, doesn't see the train barreling down the track at us. What is her/his thought processes about our financial straits?

carrie said...

I have yet to meet an Obama supporter who will admit that voting for Obama was a mistake or that Obama has not lived up to their expectations (I can only assume that they did not have any expectations).

Lem said...

Tell him or her that it was not him, it was his lovers.

A Joan Didion experience.

Unknown said...

re support for Obama's military excursions, CNN reports "A post office, a recruitment center and a building in the governor's compound were among the structures in Raqqa hit by U.S. airstrikes."

A Tomahawk missile costs about $1.4 million. Assuming only one missile per target, we spent at least $4 million to destroy a post office, a recruiting center, and a storage shed.

This is an extremely expensive side show.

Drago said...

The Drill SGT:
MayBee said...
The love for Obama was unlike anything I've seen in politics in my lifetime.

Not intending to invoke Godwin's law but see:

Peronism
Nazism
Fascism
Marxism
Chavezism
Maoism
Pol Pot 'ism :)
DeGaulism



I think MayBee meant "in this country".

But given the left is the same everywhere (it's cult of personalities all the way down) it was as inevitable here as it is anywhere else.

glenn said...

Just tell em that if they knew about the Rev Wright, and Bill Ayers, and Tony Rezko, and the 135 "present" votes in the Senate and voted for Obama anyway they are stupid. And if they didn't know any of that stuff they should have stayed home.

MayBee said...

Yes, Drago, thank you.

In this country. And in politics.

dreams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Renee said...

It's not Obama, it's what happened to the Democratic Party.

It's like Obama gave up....

Tibore said...

"So help me think about how to talk with somebody who's falling out of love with Obama."

I'd better bow out of giving advice, then. Because the first words out of my mouth to that person would be "you should never have been in love with him to begin with!".

Renee said...

Remember the anti war rallies/marches under Bush.

Well rallies/marches take money & organization, none to be found.


I do follow a nonviolence anti war on Facebook. Very small, no funds, but a group of sincere people mostly in their upper 60s/70s. Probably active since mid1960s.

Does anyone care about nuclear disarmament anymore???

HoodlumDoodlum said...

RecChief said...
take the Obama approach and tell them that they aren't responsible for the consequences of their actions.


Let me be clear: there are those who say we are responsible for our choices and the consequences they cause. The future does not belong to those who think this way. As I've said, I will not allow contrary opinions to be treated with respect, and obviously the term "converstation" means lecturing others and accepting their subsequent apology. I will draw this red line today and make these bold statements, but don't anyone get the idea that we mean them or should be held accountable for changing our minds and dropping the issue altogether later. Government is just a name for what we do together, and boy do we deserve to have it done. Oh, and inequality, Wall Street, corporations, and health care.

Henry said...

So help me think about how to talk with somebody who's falling out of love with Obama.

Someone left a cake out in the rain.

The Drill SGT said...

MayBee said...
Yes, Drago, thank you.

In this country. And in politics.


haven't seen Louisiana Politics lately? Or Urban Congressional races?

Edwin (dead girl or live boy) Edwards?
John Edwards?
Huey Long?
William Jefferson?
Adam Clayton Powell?
Jesse Jackson Junior?
Alcee Hastings?

I could go on...

kcom said...

The love for Obama was unlike anything I've seen in politics in my lifetime.

I would rephrase as:

The unwarranted love for Obama was unlike anything I've seen in politics in my lifetime.

In another vein, voters really are stupid. If four years in office doesn't tell you who the man is, what will? A few pronouncements on the campaign trail is going to win someone over when there is an actual record to compare against? The whole concept of "tacking to the center" after the primary after first tacking to, what, the edge, during the primary, is ridiculous. How can somebody fundamentally change their outlook in a few weeks? Why do people take that hocus pocus at all seriously. When politicians try that, they ought to be laughed at. Show us what you've done, don't tell us what you'll do that you've never done before and never will.

Henry said...

Or remind them of the words of Beyonce de Toqueville:

You must not know 'bout me
You must not know 'bout me
I will have another you by tomorrow
So don't you ever for a second get to thinkin'
You're irreplaceable (irreplaceable)?

RecChief said...

HoodlumDoodlum said...
RecChief said...
take the Obama approach and tell them that they aren't responsible for the consequences of their actions.

Let me be clear: there are those who say we are responsible for our choices and the consequences they cause. The future does not belong to those who think this way. As I've said, I will not allow contrary opinions to be treated with respect, and obviously the term "converstation" means lecturing others and accepting their subsequent apology. I will draw this red line today and make these bold statements, but don't anyone get the idea that we mean them or should be held accountable for changing our minds and dropping the issue altogether later. Government is just a name for what we do together, and boy do we deserve to have it done. Oh, and inequality, Wall Street, corporations, and health care.


You forgot "For the Children," as well as "And the Middle Class."

Henry said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
pm317 said...

'you got punk'd'

MayBee said...

Edwin (dead girl or live boy) Edwards?
John Edwards?
Huey Long?
William Jefferson?
Adam Clayton Powell?
Jesse Jackson Junior?
Alcee Hastings?


I don't think the devotion for these guys comes anywhere close.

TreeJoe said...

I don't think Obama has it in him to be this self-reflective and humbled, but I'd love to see him in 5 years grabbing lunch with Bush once a month.

It's humorous when political opposites - who are not friendly off-stage - are both put in the same situation and make nearly the same choices.

kcom said...

"Does anyone care about nuclear disarmament anymore???"

No, for two reasons (at least). Or more, now that I think about it.

1) It's impossible because it's unenforceable. Hard to gin up a lot of interest for something like that.

2) When it was "popular" it was mostly a front used to hide other motives. The money and motivation was there to gin up the interest.

3) You're "treating" a symptom, not a cause when you're talking disarmament for its own sake. Notice how the atmosphere radically changed when the cause of much of the problem was eliminated. The money to promote the cause went away with it, too.

4) The world has moved on to new crises and other problems are bigger at the moment.

Henry said...

Is he cake or irreplaceable? For those who loved him it's time to decide.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

RecCheif said...You forgot "For the Children," as well as "And the Middle Class."

Dude, I forgot "women!" But, you konw, with the war on, maybe that's just always implied.

Also, is "the pain of long-term Obama lovers" supposed to inspire likely-sexist jokes or snark about STDs, overly-agressive sexual activity, or something? Geez, get your mind out of the gutter Althouse.

chillblaine said...

I wonder if the Law Prof saw, "How To Get Away With Murder," last night. The lead character might be described as 'cruelly neutral.'

Her first assignment included bringing her client, a defendant in a current case, before her students. She then instructed them to each devise unique strategies to defend her.

MayBee said...

ANd seriously? Huey Long? How old do you think I am?

The Crack Emcee said...

Tell them to look at the neanderthals in your comments section, as a reminder of what OB's up against.

That should bring 'em around,....

wendybar said...

Blogger glenn said...
Just tell em that if they knew about the Rev Wright, and Bill Ayers, and Tony Rezko, and the 135 "present" votes in the Senate and voted for Obama anyway they are stupid. And if they didn't know any of that stuff they should have stayed home.


9/26/14, 9:43 AM

BINGO!!!!!WINNER!!!!

Drago said...

The Drill SGT: "haven't seen Louisiana Politics lately? Or Urban Congressional races?"

I don't disagree in principle. I think it's a matter of degree that led me to differentiate in the way that I did.

Renee said...

Oh, I just got an email from Organizing for Action asking me tobsdign a petition on climate change!

There you go.

kcom said...

He should have been a non-viable candidate the moment he said that he had no idea what was going on inside Rev. Wright's church. Either it was a huge, huge lie or he was completely clueless. Neither look is good on a U.S. president.

Then again, considering how many things he's learned about only after the press reported them (cough, cough), maybe it's true. Maybe he is that clueless. Again, not a good quality for a president.

Alexander said...

I object to Crack's bigoted use of the word "Neanderthal", as these noble native Europeans were ultimately wiped out by the hateful and savage race of Homo Sapiens who apparently weren't satisfied with Africa and so had to steal our subcontinent. As an descendant of these noble ancient people, it is apparently not enough for Crack's ancestors to murder and rape my people to extinction, he must bash the dead with hurtful rhetoric even to this day.

It's turtles all the way down.

However, Homo Sapiens, there is a solution. To start, you lot need to get with reality and make retributions for your ways. Of course, we're talking about continent-size theft that originated 40,000 years ago, so you've got some work ahead of you paying off that sort of interest!

Us survivors (of course, there are no true survivors, all of our ancestral mothers being victim of your rape and you pillaged our continent after coming out of Africa, and so like our noble Native American brothers, we are forced to carry the shame of your seed within our DNA) will never forget what was done to our people. Neanderthal Power!

Turtles, man. Turtles.

#Neanderthalleigance

tim maguire said...

Here's how you talk to this person: "too late. Maybe if you opened your eyes and saw the obvious earlier you could have made a small gesture to improve your country. You choose not to because stupidity was more comforting. I don't care that you admit the obvious now, it is far too late to matter."

I lost respect for people who voted for Obama in 2008. I have nothing but disdain for people who voted for him on 2012. There was never a reason to think he was up to the job. I beleve even Obama understood and entered the race to lay the groundwork for replacing Hillary in 2016. Who could have realized then the depths of depravity of our media and the stunning irresponsibility of the average voter giving the most powerful and important job in the world to a man with no accomplishments to his name.

It's cool to vote for the black guy. That is the alpha and the omega of Obama support.

Drago said...

Of course, you really couldn't have an obama (or any lefty) cult of personality that was politically effective if the vast majority of media didn't play along.

With the big things and the small things.

For instance, with DeBlasio in NY (now there's a hard core leftist for you) we now find this (courtesy of AceofSpadesHQ):

http://nypost.com/2014/09/25/groundhog-dropped-by-de-blasio-died-of-internal-injuries/

There is literally nothing the media won't do for dems (since they are one and same; "fused" as Ace says).

It's groundhogs all the way down.......to the ground.

And then a very sudden stop!

Michael said...

Alternatively, you could explain that in his six years in office he has had absolutely nothing to say about white supremacy, four hundred (400) years of slavery, Jim Crow or redlining. Not one speech about the Civil War, not a phrase about the hanging culture, the KKK or Bull Conner. Crickets from our dear leader. His only enemies have been political opponents.

Instead, he has made it clear that he would not get within a fifty foot pole of reparations. In six years he has urged rule upon rule to require useless licensing for nail salons and hair braiders and any other profession that could easily help people of color out of poverty. No, he has given us rules. Taxes.

Anonymous said...

I'd say something like, "Look, I'm still convinced I made a logical decision in 2008 when I voted for Obama. I can't even see how I was manipulated then, which means the same thing will happen to me again, because I refuse to see my own shortcomings. How the hell am I going to help you if I can't even help myself?"

The conversation doesn't need to be longer than 2 minutes. If you include the pleasantries.

JPS said...

The Drill SGT, 10:01:

"Edwin (dead girl or live boy) Edwards?"

Ah, but his reelection in 1991 was a great moment in American politics:

"Vote for the crook. It's important." It was.

HoodlumDoodlum said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

Ann Althouse (from one of her linked older postings): "But this morning, I decided to make an effort to say which man had done the better job. It was Barack Obama. And I'm not saying this just because I admired his relaxed demeanor and youthful image and felt uneasy about the older man's jerky movements and desperate grimaces."

I think you are discounting how easily your eyes transmitted the dreamy obama message to your inner cortex.

Of course McCain has jerky movements. After you've been tortured by hero's of the left for over 5 years then it's likely you'll have a number of "structural" and "mechanical" issues for the rest of your life.

But hey, it was only 5 years in captivity.

The only captivity most cared about in 2008 was that of being captive to obama's wonderfulness.

Drago said...

HoodlumDoodlum, you link doesn't work.

St. George said...

American banks have nearly $280 trillion of derivatives on their books, and they earn some of their biggest profits from trading in them....from NYT earlier this month.

The federal deficit is $17.7 trillion.

Funny how one never hears anything about cutting the deficit any more. Not Obama.

CWJ said...

I'd like to second Original Mike's 8:46 comment. I had much the same reaction when I read Althouse's post.

Althouse wrote -

"We all saw what he did with a Democratic Congress. He let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have their way with him. It was horrible. It led to the Tea Party ..."

I don't even know at what she was getting. What is the terrible irrevocable consequence of the Tea Party compared to Obamacare and the Trillian dollar stimulus that stimulated exactly nothing but the bank accounts and paychecks of a small number of favored groups.

If I find myself fighting for my life or that of a loved one not against disease, but rather against a governmental medical version of the DMV, my first thought will not be about whether or not the Tea Party was a good or bad idea.

Likewise, in one year the Democrats managed to squander as much money on the stimulus as it took the previous administration years repeat years to spend on the Iraq war. And yet the latter is what is supposed to exercise our emotions and outrage.

Newsflash, if we didn't have the money for the one, we surely didn't have the money for the other! Or a farm bill that is 85% food stamps for cripes sake.

Rant off.

Original Mike said...

If Althouse were really concerned about the deficit, she'd be celebrating the Tea Party. Their issue is the deficit. Or does Althouse buy all the other crap that the left tries to pin on them? Don't get fooled again, AA.

tim in vermont said...

Mockery is the only response to somebody who still likes Obama.

chuck said...

... but not because I was smitten ...

You wanted to teach those rascally Democrats a lesson.

Fernandinande said...

Sing to them ...

The Mulatto Song
by Dewey Cox




If you’ll permit me I’d like to sing a song about the mulatto
Live and let live even if there’s mixed blood that’s my motto


One half Voodoo, one half Wisconsin,
He’ll do your taxes but he won't stop dancin’

Slaves holding wipes, halfros with hips
That's the Mulatto

Half Boogie, half uptight, half day and half night mulatto
Coffee with cream like a billion at playing the lotto

One whole is good but two halves is better,
Run through the jungle in a powder blue sweater

Listen think twice I say lets be nice to
The mulatto

Jive talking sister who don’t move her hips
Big hammer, big nail with great golfing tips

Guys who can box and have pool memberships
It’s time to come to grips with the mulatto

Mulatto!


tim in vermont said...

"Not because I was smitten."

Oh, perish the thought, obviously Althouse was influence by Obama's long executive tenure at the top of large organizations, extensive foreign policy experience and success, and most of all, his very specific and actionable platform of "Hope and Change."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Drago said...It's groundhogs all the way down.......to the ground.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAYL5H46
QnQ

DeBlasio's not a part of your system!

Just Mike said...

"stimulus". Ha Ha.
Gates: breached.
Treasury: sacked

Original Mike said...

When does the Bloggingheads piece get posted?

Drago said...

HoodlumDoodlum: "DeBlasio's not a part of your system!"

LOL

Very timely comment as I've been working on a system Concept of Ops for a client and you are right. DeBlasio is not part of it!

Hmmmm, maybe I should animate a graphic of DeBlasio and the groundhog to pop up in the middle of the presentation.

No, I better not.

DeBlasio's dreaminess might impact one of the weaker members of the audience and lead them to send money to DeBlasio due to his "pragmatic" approach for implementing leftist policies in NYC.

I don't think I could live with myself if my actions led to that.

Cedarford said...

Tim McGuire -
"It's cool to vote for the black guy. That is the alpha and the omega of Obama support."

No, the great problem voters had was that Obama was untested and voters did not know what the (likely) less than truly qualified black man would do. It could be bad, worse than Bush....but there was a chance on the dice throw that he would turn out better than the economic disaster on Bush;s watch because his attention was on his failed neocon dreams of uplifting Muslims at gunpoint.

All while they knew exactly what John McCains capacity to lead and his judgment on matters was. And it was dismal. As bad or worse than Bush on wanting more neocon wars of adventure and leving "surging troops" in Afghanistan and Iraq "at least 10 more years until democracy takes hold". McCain said he was not big on economic matters as a Senator because military matters were bigger. And everyone knew McCain would ram Amnesty through 6 months into office.

2008 was inevitable.

2012 was Romney and Republicans unable to counter the Obama and liberal/progressive jewish Media Slime Machine.

Drago said...

Cedarford: "008 was inevitable.

2012 was Romney and Republicans unable to counter the Obama and liberal/progressive jewish Media Slime Machine. "

You had me right up to "jewish".

Like "jewish" is even relevant and not simply "leftists".

Jupiter said...

"He let Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have their way with him. It was horrible."

Actually, he let them have their way with us, not with him. And yes, it was, and is horrible.

CWJ said...

No C4,

The "slime machine" did it's best but it was not decisive. BHO pulled something like at least 9MM fewer votes than in 2008. The difference is that the true believers sat on their hands rather than vote for a less than pure Republican, or worse not vote for a Mormon.

hombre said...

People with even a vestige of Obamalove remaining couldn't possibly care about hearing reasons to give it up and probably couldn't understand them anyway.

gerry said...

Be strong, baby: you are more than just your ass.

Betamax3000 perfection.

tim maguire said...

Cedarford said...the great problem voters had was that Obama was untested and voters did not know what the (likely) less than truly qualified black man would do. It could be bad, worse than Bush....but there was a chance on the dice throw that he would turn out better than the economic disaster on Bush;s watch..."

You are too easy on Obama and too hard on Bush. The key to your mistake is the "(likely)"--likely? and in brackets (an after thought!)

Nothing likely about it. No sentient person could think Obama was in any sense qualified. And it bears repeating--we are talking about the most powerful and important job in the world. Obama voters knowingly gave that job to someone who had never done anything with his life except pursue jobs he then did not do.

Bruce Hayden said...

Interesting article on how Obama won in 2012. A lot of things came together. One was a comprehensive data mining program, where all the Dem groups came together and shared their data - something Reps wouldn't do. That plus commercial databases they bought, and they knew the hot buttons for key demographics. Those ObamaPhones (that we all pay for through a tax on our own phone bills)? So they could text their targets repeatedly on Election Day until they replied that they had voted (at least once), repeatedly hitting all their hot buttons. DoJ killing voter ID laws, etc? Because a lot of these voters don't plan far enough ahead to get IDs, or even register to vote. Which is why, for the first time in a long time, Reps could win "likely voters" and independents, but lose the election.

Romney got in trouble with his statement about the 47%, but the reality is that Obama and the Dems really have bought a large part of the citizenry by making them takers, instead of makers. And, as long as they can be pushed into voting to maintain their access to government largess, the Reps are going to have a hard time winning elections.

BTW - this is part of why the 7th Cir case is so important - it probably means that Walker will be reelected.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

McCain has finally made a decent decision and decided to not help Cory Gardner.

Thank God.

Johnny and Mo Udall were friends so Johnny doesn't wanna help out Gardner, who is an establishment guy not a tea party guy, as Gardner is facing Mo's boy Mark.

Mark, by the way, is the angriest candidate I've ever seen. He's real upset about abortion and birth control and women's rights and shit.

He's fighting mad about Gardner and Washington, D.C.

jacksonjay said...

Shorter Bruce Hayden: via Limbaugh, "You can't beat Santa Claus!"

n.n said...

More relationships are left on the rocks due to premature evacuation than any other issue, except progressive devaluation of capital and labor, progressive corruption, and legalized genocide.

Anonymous said...

Althouse did not get punk'd. She self-punk'd.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Ann,
DOn't waste your time. You were stupid in 2008, but you're still trying to justify it. So how are you going to be able to talk to someone who was stupid at least twice, and probalby their whole life?

Mikio said...

I was grimly practical, choosing between 2 less-than-perfect options. -- Althouse today

"Practical"? Does this make sense to any of you Althouse regulars? It doesn't make sense to this passing-by hardcore lib either.

Going to have to be blunt here because it's gorgeous out and I can't wait to get on the bike. Okay, here it is then... Althouse only voted for Obama because he's black, believing it would give her a lifelong Not A Racist card (like Instapundit -- didn't he vote for Obama in '08 too? If so, same reason). How can one deduce this was the only reason? Because she said at the time she wanted a conservative in the WH:

Look at how McCain failed to promote conservatism. -- Althouse 0ct 8, '08

I would like some good conservatism. -- Althouse Nov 8, '08

So there it is. That's the entirety of the "practical" in her (and Instaputz's IIRC) "practical vote" in a nutshell. The Get-Out-of-Racist-Jail card. There is no other explanation that makes sense. Okay! Gotta go!

Larry Nelson said...

Oh come on, give him a break. I knew he was a serious man when he returned Churchill's bust, then told Harry the pedophile and Pelosi Galore to fix the world while he went fundraising and golfing.

Larry Nelson said...

Oh yeah, speaking of cult of personality...Marion Barry. A jailbird right in the nation's capital.

Charles said...

Please let it be Michelle Goldberg

CWJ said...

Bruce Hayden,

With respect to your first paragraph, that may be true but ultimately it's irrelevant. For all their data sharing etc., Obama's vote count declined something like 15%.

McCain was not an exciting, or more importantly compared to Romney, even competent option for President. And yet, with anything like McCain numbers, Romney would have comfortably won the popular vote.

I can't see this as anything other than an "own goal" on the R's part.

You can admire the true believers devotion to purity, but I don't. And you don't win. We live with the consequences.

Michael K said...

"You overlooked his thin,barely visible, resume and assumed that anyone with degrees from Harvard and Columbia could run the country. You actually believed that was all that was required."

No one who bought that package of nothingness will admit they were wrong. They may speak, more in sorrow than in anger, like a few supporters such as Nick Kristoff are doing about specific policies. Nobody will admit the whole phony image stuff fooled them into voting for and electing a cipher.

Kerry was a bigger phony but he was a standard American phony politician, sort of like Dukakis.

McCain was too old in 2008 but I supported him in 2000 over Bush who seemed too new on the world scene. Little did I know what could happen 8 years later.

The electorate in perfectly capable of electing Hillary in 2016 and then wondering why things are not going well. I am very pessimistic.

campy said...

"The electorate in perfectly capable of electing Hillary in 2016 and then wondering why things are not going well. I am very pessimistic."

The electorate will not wonder why things aren't going well. The media will explain every day how it's the republicans' fault.

Christy said...

Michael, I like your 8 (?) point list, except for part of #3. You know, don't you, that women undergrads were not welcome at either Columbia or Harvard until after Althouse matriculated? You are purposefully hurtful to bring that up.

John Christopher said...

Althouse, I think both Bob and you sounded consistent with you tone you've both presented since 2004.

Bob still slightly gives Obama the benefit of the doubt (the excuse he made for Obama being "hounded for being weak" as the main example), but I don't remember him being over the top in his criticism of Bush.

Drago said...

Christy: "You know, don't you, that women undergrads were not welcome at either Columbia or Harvard until after Althouse matriculated?"

Althouse, always the trailblazer!

John Lynch said...

Here' my Unified Theory of Obama.

He runs the USA as if it were Chicago. It's all about paying off Democratic constituencies. All policy is driven by the need to feed the donor base and get Democratic votes.

Since foreign policy is not something the Mayor of Chicago has to deal with, Obama doesn't know what to do. So far, foreign policy has been driven by the need to keep it out of the news and by whatever the domestic base cares about at the moment. There's some fuzzy-headed academic critique of tactics from the Cold War and War on Terror. But it isn't a real guide to what the President does. It's all driven by what will win elections.

All Presidents have to do these things to win office, but most of them have a vision to guide what they're doing. Getting power is a means to an end. For Obama, it isn't. Being the President is what's important. Think of how many articles you've read where Obama says "I'm the President of the United States." He's a prideful man, and when his pride is wounded he does stupid things. He has no idea what to do, and he resents the fact that the world won't leave him alone to be President.

The next two years are a very dangerous time.

CWJ said...

John Lynch,

Ding Ding Ding!!!

Yep your analysis captures much truth.

The Chicago Machine hoisted Obama up and figured they could run him. He was a very beautiful face and a pleasant voice. The machine never much cared who was the face as long as they pulled the strings.

Obama was perfect because he actually believed he was special. The best puppet is the one who doesn't see the strings.

This is nothing new. Machines have always and forever put a face up front to absorb the hits if things go pear shaped.

Sometimes the front man surprises them by having an occasional thought of his own and grows into his own person. I'm thinking Truman here for example.

But most of the time the front man is happy to be the face thinking he actually is worthy and that he is indeed the smartest one in the room and that those who put him up did so because they recognized his brilliance.

The best tool is the one who doesn't realize it.

jr565 said...

Obama has been terrible on the war on terror. Only he's been better than I hoped considering he was coming from an anti war position. But my guess is, anyone, no matter how hpfar left or right is going to have to moderate their views, based on their ideology when they get smacked by reality. Thst would go for Rand Paul too.

jr565 said...

Let me reiterate though he has not been good on the war on terror. The only metric I'm basing that on is comparing it to candidate Obama's words.he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to every single executive decision on the war on terror and usually decided the choice that was least hard for him and thus would prove to be less than ineffectual.

But again, Obama the candidate was promising to talk to dictators without preconditions. So you take the positive where you can find it.

Kirk Parker said...

Drago @ 10:56am:

Nicely put. Does anybody still think the 19th Amendment wasn't a huge mistake?