Obama Sure Knows How To Pick Winners

Words matter, the structure of words matter more, what words don't say even more so. When I hear "[his victory] had little to do with principle and more to do with popularity" I also hear the implicit position of "if he wasn't popular he wouldn't have been victorious" and that "his principles leave much to be desired." The argument also lends itself to criticism because it is open to universal usage on presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and Andrew Jackson.

There is nothing dangerous about the election of Obama, don't take a dump on his election is all I'm trying to say. VP who moved up the ladder not withstanding, have we ever had a president that wasn't elected because he was popular?
I see alot of danger in his election and the direction he is taking this counrty. He is making Goverment the answer to everything and all the Goverment does is screw up more then it has ever fixed. Every goverment programe is basically a financial failure.

Matty it seems not too long ago that you and Saden had a new thread every other day when Bush was in office but now its F political threads now that Obama is in office.

Difference is I've backed off. I'm willing to give the guy a chance.

Difference is I've backed off. I'm willing to give the guy a chance.
Yea, you have backed off because its now the guy you voted for in office.

You can hear what you want. We all tend to. I'll grant you that popularity has always been a factor. I don't think I ever made a statement contrary. That doesn't make it right though. And I am not meaning to take a dump on Obama's election more than anyone else's. It simply is front and center right now.

Obama WAS elected because of popularity not principles. That isn't meant to deride his principles it is meant to deride the notion that this country is magiaclly leaning left all of a sudden. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't but his election is neither proof nor disproof either way. Hell he ran on "Change"...basically a marketers quick and efficient way to say "I'm not Bush..that guy we all hate so much".

Obama's election is only an example. I guess my issues are far more general. I think our system is very fundamentally flawed. Is it better than others? Yeah but it isn't perfect or even close and it seems to be getting worse to me.

But now we are totally off subject.

Perhaps I misunderstood, I guess we're discussing a) a utopian view of how elections should be won, b) how shift leftwards in ideology is unlikely, c) hating Bush was good enough to get elected.

I'm still confused about few things though, a) how does one become popular, b) isn't reputation of the Bush Administration the rejection of their principles and policy, and c) what constitutes a shift and does losing 51 house seats, 14 senate seats, and the presidency in 4 years qualify?

Perhaps I misunderstood, I guess we're discussing a) a utopian view of how elections should be won, b) how shift leftwards in ideology is unlikely, c) hating Bush was good enough to get elected.

I'm still confused about few things though, a) how does one become popular, b) isn't reputation of the Bush Administration the rejection of their principles and policy?, and c) what constitutes a shift and does losing 51 house seats, 14 senate seats, and the presidency in 4 years qualify?
When things go bad the party in charge always takes the hit. Obama ran for office at the perfect time and poeple were upset with the direction (or perceived direction) the country was heading which let Obama run with pretty much a free ride. Only a few people where pointing out his very leberal voting record and what little he had done while in office. He talked about goverment waist and all that stuff but his record told a different story. He ran as kind of a moderate but his record said he was a far left leberal and his current record says the same thing. While I like McCain he ran a poor campain and then brought in a VP who was not ready.

[Reagan] had rock-star celebrity status during his campaign. It was unprecedented, and there's no denying it. Sure every elected president has been popular, but [Reagan] took it to a whole new level, and I'm sure it played a big part in his victory. During his campaign he represented the antithesis of the [Carter] Administration, of which the entire [country] had tired.

IMO he was elected because of his masterful campaign and celebrity status more so than his politics and principles. Since he went from campaigner in cheif to Commander in Cheif, his approval numbers have dipped quite a bit.

Never mind that he promised to decreases taxes, increase military spending. He was the most popular president ever! Popularity wins elections!

Never mind that he promised to decreases taxes, increase military spending. He was the most popular president ever! Popularity wins elections!

I never said he won ONLY because of popularity/celebrity. I said it was MORE popularity/celebrity than politics and principles.

I was 2 years old when Reagan was elected, so I only know what I've read about his campaign.

Yea, you have backed off because its now the guy you voted for in office.

Ok.

Whatever.

There is an extent to which politics makes everyone a hypocrite. It's hypocritical for Conservatives to talk about "Bush Derangement Syndrome" and then compare Obama to Stalin. It is equally hypocritical for Democrats to spend eight years claiming that "dissent is patriotic" and then tell everyone to shut up and get in line two seconds after their guy wins.

This doesn't really bother me because I like arguing about politics. I overlook it. I am able to overlook it because politics is, in the grand scheme of things, about as important as the NFL. It is not a religion for me. I think the people who find political give and take distasteful are the people who look to politics for spiritual fulfillment - words like "hope" and "meaning" get tossed around. I think anybody that looks to politics to bring hope and meaning to their lives is begging to be disappinted.

There is an extent to which politics makes everyone a hypocrite. It's hypocritical for Conservatives to talk about "Bush Derangement Syndrome" and then compare Obama to Stalin. It is equally hypocritical for Democrats to spend eight years claiming that "dissent is patriotic" and then tell everyone to shut up and get in line two seconds after their guy wins.

This doesn't really bother me because I like arguing about politics. I overlook it. I am able to overlook it because politics is, in the grand scheme of things, about as important as the NFL. It is not a religion for me. I think the people who find political give and take distasteful are the people who look to politics for spiritual fulfillment - words like "hope" and "meaning" get tossed around. I think anybody that looks to politics to bring hope and meaning to their lives is begging to be disappinted.

I would be fine if both parties got ran out of town and we started from scratch on a new direction for America. The system is corrupt and I feel the only way to fix it is remove all corruption and that would mean by, by, Dems & Rep..