Why You Should Still Vote for Barack Obama

[The Marquis de Leech]

The problem with Obama is that while he has been screwed by Congress (more specifically the Republican minority in the Senate), he has allowed his opponents to frame the issues too often. Rather than insisting on 'jobs', he got roped in to the thoroughly insincere obsessions with 'deficits'.

He seems to have this strange idea that his political enemies have some sort of interest in helping him, and that they are remotely interested in doing the right thing for the US as a whole. The overall effect is that he comes across as a sort of second Jimmy Carter.

[Horza]

Actually for me the reason I don't trust him is because he hasn't hit the bottle hard and started lacing his speeches with expletives and calls to resolve deadlocks with flintlocks on the lawn of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue at noon.

This inhuman reserve disturbs me.

[karaddin]

You know who I think is probably even more disappointed? Barack Obama. I guess you can never really know, but that's my suspicion.

I agree with this as well, I really do think he came in wanting to change things up and serve what he saw as the greater good. Then he ran head first into reality.

[Lord O' Bones]

But, he smokes cigarettes!

[Horselover Fat]

But, he smokes cigarettes!

A powerful argument indeed. Ok, I'll vote for him.

[Shryke]

The problem with Obama is that while he has been screwed by Congress (more specifically the Republican minority in the Senate), he has allowed his opponents to frame the issues too often. Rather than insisting on 'jobs', he got roped in to the thoroughly insincere obsessions with 'deficits'.

You gotta blame 2010 for that. The legislative defeat gave him some strange ideas about what the "American People" wanted, so he spent awhile on that track till the debt ceiling debate convinced him it was useless and he transitioned to his current narrative of "the do-nothing republican congress".

He seems to have this strange idea that his political enemies have some sort of interest in helping him, and that they are remotely interested in doing the right thing for the US as a whole. The overall effect is that he comes across as a sort of second Jimmy Carter.

I think he really really wanted to change the game. And couldn't. He wasn't prepared for the GOP going to even further levels of intransigence and stone-walling then ever before. And he either couldn't figure it out or thought the bipartisan thing would still play well.

It's hard to figure out with this stuff whether he really believed it or not. Did he think it would really work? We're his people convinced it would? Or was he just convinced it was what the voters wanted to see?

I'm kinda sympathetic to the idea that he just wasn't the kind of guy who could conceive that someone would be willing to go that far just to try and damage him politically. You could almost see it in his speeches towards the end as it seemed he just wanted to start fucking yelling "What the fuck is wrong with you people!?!?!?".

Either way, he seems to have finally abandoned that bullshit and any hope of working with this GOP congress.

[The Progressive]

I don't get it why liberal idiots still keep blaming the non-closing of Gitmon on Obama. If you followed the news at the time, it was because Congress shut that proposal down hard because nobody wanted to trial the detainees in their states.

[Spring Bass]

I'm voting for Obama again. I went into the 2008 voting for him because I knew that he would sign universal health care legislation, and I'm voting for him in 2012 because I'll be damned if I do anything at all that might help put Republicans in a position where they could try and do a complete repeal of the health care bill.

[LuisDantas]

I'm not even American (or a voter in America), but it seems to me that Obama is more a result than a cause. He fury and thunder that his opponents direct towards his is very troubling indeed, and shows that whatever problems the USA have go much, much deeper than a simple matter of choosing the right President.

From my perspective, it seems that there is a serious lack of courage to question things in a large segment of US voters. A dangerous segment, because it is at once afraid of change, of trusting those who aren't too familiar (to the point of going out of their way to "denounce" them as not being "really american", whatever that might mean) and worst of all, of learning that trust. You have actually reached the point where the only clear agenda of the GOP is to obstruct and demean Obama just because he is Obama and not a Republican. They seems to say so openly and not to realize how destructive that attitude is. And then they go on to complain how they are misunderstood and persecuted by those rabid fanboys of the other side.

Really, it is scary. I don't see an easy solution, but to the extent that I see any it must occur at the level of conquering the fear of the Tea Party and making them realize how pointless their attitude is, how more constructive the alternatives are. And in the short term, actuallly voting is probably a good idea, as is seeking those ugly political discussions that don't seem to ever lead anywhere. Unpleasant as they are, I don't think they can really be avoided. At some point the need to make the scared voters realize that the world won't accomodate for their delusions will have to be fulfilled, painfully as it will be. And the sooner, the less damage.

[Horza]

What I notice is that there is a substantial gap between what Americans (politically active or otherwise) expect from their political system and what it can functionally deliver.

The presidency is in some ways the biggest victim of this - while presidential executive powers have expanded within living memory the position remains a Head of State rather than the Head of Government function of a Westminster prime minister. By design Obama doesn't have a huge amount of power over the legislative process or domestic policy but the impression has formed that the POTUS does, which he's stuck with.

That gap is also apparent when we consider the nightmarish steampunk jabberwocky that is the US electoral system, its hi-tech convention centres and social media GOTV infrastructure resting atop cumbersome 18th century cogwork. The electoral college, as one example, just about approximates the workings of a popular vote in a modern representative democracy but that isn't what it was designed to do, and it sometimes doesn't work that way, like a gigantic appendix, a failed experiment that US politics has worked around without ever writing out of its procedural DNA. You can say the same for Congress, voter registration, redistricting - people expect these things to function in a sensible, representative model, which all developed democracies seem to approximate but technically, they aren't required to, and its been politically advantageous for both sides to keep them from working that way.

Ironically, despite being the first modern representative democracy and one of the earliest movers on full adult male franchise US democracy has largely rested on its laurels, to the point where, when you take in the gerrymandered districts, franchise restriction by stealth, moneyed legislatures and big tent two-party system it begins to resemble Victorian Britain post-Third Reform Act rather than any contemporary system.

[IheartTesla]

I cant vote, or he'd have mine. Luckily I can donate to a superPac, which is probably better than my one measly vote could do. Woohooo! Thanks Citizens United, for making this possible.

Or I could just give it to Colbert 2012 for the entertainment value.

[Lord O' Bones]

I'm not even American (or a voter in America), but it seems to me that Obama is more a result than a cause. He fury and thunder that his opponents direct towards his is very troubling indeed, and shows that whatever problems the USA have go much, much deeper than a simple matter of choosing the right President.

From my perspective, it seems that there is a serious lack of courage to question things in a large segment of US voters. A dangerous segment, because it is at once afraid of change, of trusting those who aren't too familiar (to the point of going out of their way to "denounce" them as not being "really american", whatever that might mean) and worst of all, of learning that trust. You have actually reached the point where the only clear agenda of the GOP is to obstruct and demean Obama just because he is Obama and not a Republican. They seems to say so openly and not to realize how destructive that attitude is. And then they go on to complain how they are misunderstood and persecuted by those rabid fanboys of the other side.

Really, it is scary. I don't see an easy solution, but to the extent that I see any it must occur at the level of conquering the fear of the Tea Party and making them realize how pointless their attitude is, how more constructive the alternatives are. And in the short term, actuallly voting is probably a good idea, as is seeking those ugly political discussions that don't seem to ever lead anywhere. Unpleasant as they are, I don't think they can really be avoided. At some point the need to make the scared voters realize that the world won't accomodate for their delusions will have to be fulfilled, painfully as it will be. And the sooner, the less damage.

I can't like this enough times.

[Reposado]

Biliion dollar bailouts to finaincial institutions, check.

Expanded overseas wars, check.

no thanks.

I don't care what minor victories he may have won. He failed completely in the two most important tasks he had. In fact, he worked hard in the wrong direction in both of these areas.

If he really wanted to slow down the war on terror, apparently he was so incompetent, he couldn't even make it look like it was his goal.

Either he is a liar, or he is someone that just cannot get anything done. Becuase whatever the excuse, four years have resulted in jack shit worth anything.

Either way, I will vote for "none of the above."

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Raidne,

How is Obama's disappointment in himself any recommendation? I voted for the man because in was under the mistaken impression that he understood the limitations of the utility of Government power like Carter. Boy was I wrong. As to open government, I don't care what programs he has behind he scenes when he's still closing access to things we should be able to see. Further, I don't are for how he putlobbiests into positions of power days after his innaguration when he clearly promised not to.

I will not give Obama my vote again. I do not know, at this time, who I will vote for.

Bass,

The ACA is not "Universal Health Care".

[Fez]

If you are on the left and are disappointed in Obama and I have 2 reasons why you should vote Obama. Actually I have many more, but this 2 are irrefutable.

1) Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 78

2) Antonin Scalia is 75

It is highly likely that both will step down before Jan. 21, 2016. For anyone on the left it should be vitally important that both are replaced by another Kagan or Sotomayor.

A Romney presidency would ensure that even if Kennedy does swing towards the liberal side of the court on a case it will still be a 5-4 decision in favor of the conservative side.

ETA: Reason 3) Kennedy himself is 75. So there's another. Don't you want a liberal court again?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Fez,

You mean like the one Eisenhauer brought into being, hard core liberal that he was?

[Guest Raidne]

Scot, what this thread was intended to be about was whether Obama was a salesman - a typical politician, in it because he's wanted to be a player since high school, and wanted the power of the Presidency since here entered politics, and says what he needs to say to make that happen, or whether he's a leader, someone who really is trying to do what they think will improve the country, or whether he is no longer either because he turned out to not be capable of inspiring us to do more than we would have done without him, and whether, even if the last is true, that means we should vote for a salesman over him.

I'm not saying you should vote for him because he seems disappointed in himself (and that's not really what I meant anyway).

I'm saying that integrity is still a really, really rare thing in a Presidential candidate, and I do still think he has that. Which is more than I can say for any other candidate besides Ron Paul.

Now, of course, I would never vote for Ron Paul because I think his policy positions are fucking crazy. For this reason, I never understood in 2008 why the hell you were voting for Barack Obama. In the future, maybe you should ask yourself - what would this person do in the midst of something like the Great Depression? If the person is a Democract and your answer is not "pass government spending programs to kick-start growth and take the edge of unemployment" you need to ask yourself some fundamental questions about your understanding of the political parties.

[Horza]

Scot, you guys already have an Eisenhower Republican in the Oval Office and if there are any left in the GOP they sure aren't running for president this year.

[Guest Raidne]

By the way Horza, great previous post. This is a really excellent point that requires some serious consideration. Maybe, as voters, we should demand that people run on making reforms to the legislative process.

[S John]

Or say rather that cool, interesting, alive people do not seem to be the ones who are drawn to the political process. Think back to the sort of kids in high school who were into running for student office: dweeby, overgroomed, obsequious to authority, ambitious in a sad way. Eager to play the Game. The kind of kids other kids would want to beat up if it didn’t seem so pointless and dull.

Hah. This rings true for me a little bit. You pretty much have to dedicate your life to ass-kissing in order to become involved in politics. And 'the Game' they are referring to is typically convoluted and underhanded. I cannot understand why anyone would want to sacrifice their identity to become a political figure, because in our country you have to fit into a certain mold. You absolutely have to look and act the part of the most bland motherfucker you can imagine. You'd either have to be a saint - to have a burning desire to serve the people to the best of your abilities and willing to play the game in order to see that happen - or you are the devil. A sniveling little fuck motivated buy power and self-interest. Probably no surprise that I think > 90% of world politicians fall into the shit head category.

For younger people I think that definitely is the appeal of Obama - you have to admit that he seems like a pretty cool guy as far as politicians go. That there is an actual personality in there somewhere.

That said, I probably won't vote for the guy again. However I also will not vote for any of the Republicans save Paul. If Paul got the nom, I'd vote for him. But I suspect it'll be Romney, in which case I will probably vote 3rd party. I'll vote for the nuttiest motherfucker I can find.