Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What Else Did Obama Not Run On?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
andyrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:24 PM
Original message
What Else Did Obama Not Run On?
Just curious as to what else I may have been misinformed about concerning his platform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
1. He did not run on not bombing Yemen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
33. He did not run on not bombing Pakistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
andyrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Actually he did run on that one.
He made a major defense policy speech in effect saying, "If UBL was kicking it in Pakistan and they didn't do something about it, we will."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
2. He did not run on making scientology our national religion
Promise kept
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarLeftFist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. He did not run on de-escalating the Afghan war.
Edited on Tue Dec-22-09 10:29 PM by FarLeftFist
Edit: replied to myself. Didn't mean to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
andyrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. i guess it really could be worse
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. Did not run on leaving Gitmo open indefinately
Edited on Tue Dec-22-09 10:26 PM by AngryAmish
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:27 PM
Original message
I too would like a good list. I am not fond of surprises. n/t

Kill the bill.


Forcing people to buy insurance is no more the answer to a failed health care system than forcing people to buy houses is the solution to homelessness.

:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Let's all write and ask him to let us know what other issues he did not run on nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
andyrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Agreed. Didn't enjoy being blindsided
with this public option 180.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thickasabrick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. LOL.....I wish I hadn't been drinking something when I read that.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. Bank reform, NAFTA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. The NAFTA (non) promise is a stinger
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Maybe those Canadians were right that he wasnt telling the truth
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. He did not run on cancelling NAFTA
Much to the chagrin of people who equate "negotiations" with "elimination".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Text to where I said "Cancel"?
He promised to renegotiate it, in tougher language than Clinton did. Then the Canada leak came
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Text to where I said you did?
And "tougher" means... what? I recall him talking about environmental and labor conditions changes, not any major restructuring.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-02-20/news/17190753_1_beggar-thy-neighbor-policies-austan-goolsbee-nafta

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. "talking about environmental and labor conditions changes, not any major restructuring"
LOL, did you just type that? :)

What was actually said:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23354734/page/5/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23354734/page/6/

Note:

Sen. Clinton: No. I will say, we will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it. And we renegotiate it on terms that are favorable to all of America.

....

Sen. Obama: I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about, and I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.





Read the ENTIRE thing and figure out the CONTEXT. They aren't talking about a few piddly changes. They are talking about a devastating trade agreement spreading hardship throughout the country that they will quit unless it is fixed. Read it.


Shortly thereafter, we learned BOTH Clinton and Obama contacted Canada and said...basically..."just kidding".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. Thanks... but Obama's still saying minor labor & environment changes.
The "opt-out" is leverage for those changes.

They both weren't serious about actually opting out, such a thing would devastate the US economy... too much change, too fast. She was talking about making bigger changes, he was talking about smaller ones. She lost, he won.

That's how I read it, anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. LOL. Right. Minor changes to a "bad bill" that is devastating American workers
Im lauging my ass off over here.



And at the end of the day, he didn't even mean that. Google "NAFTA OBAMA DEBATE CANADA LEAK"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Aren't you up north of me, in Canada?
Wow, just googled it, seems that Canada totally freaked out... are worker/environmental conditions bad up there?

Or is this more about unskilled labor being so much cheaper (and exploited) in Mexico?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. You don't get it. The leak: Obama told Canada he was lying in the debate
Canada did not freak out. They knew he was lying to get elected
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. You're equating a leverage threat with a lie?
Did I get it right this time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #34
35. No, Im equating a lie with a lie
Obama never intended to reopen NAFTA. He never intended to use leverage. He told Canada this PRIOR to the debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. We've moved from "renegotiate" to "reopen"?
Obama never intended to fundamentally change NAFTA, beyond a few points of contention.

That's what you seem to be missing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. He never intended to change it at all, and thats what you are missing.
And yes, "re-open" is language he used when talking to Canada (assuring he would not do so). It is synonymous in this instance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. Working For The Middle Class, the Rule of Law, Equality For Gays nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. He did not run on change
He might have run on hope as in hope you all survive my presidency. And, hey, thanks for your vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #9
27. If you'd have been listening close enough
you'd have heard him interject "chump" before he said change. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. Lol!
Gallows humor always gets me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
unkachuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
11. and he didn't run as a Republican....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CAG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
13. he did not run on smothering kittens....
although I wouldn't mind if he did something to cats
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
andyrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
23. whoa!
:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
15. Habeas corpus.
Apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
16. He never promised to not nuke Berkeley
I guess I'm fucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
17. Good question. Perhaps someone in the corporate media will ask him just that. nt
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
20. Banking reform..
cleaning up TARP, going after the Wall St. fat cats.

Pretty sure he didn't run on any of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WT Fuheck Donating Member (392 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-22-09 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. He never said nothing aobut leaving Iraq.
He didn't make no damned promises about rolling back bush's tax cuts.

He didn't promise to create teh number one green economy in the world.

In fact, I don't remember one damn thing he *did* promise now that you mention it.

So get off his unpromisin' ass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
25. He did not run on "change"
nor "hope"

made no mention of keeping lobbyists out of his administration

nor to negotiate the health care bill in public

nor to allow re-importation of drugs

didn't hear a thing about habeus corpus

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
28. Secularism, Financial Regulation, Pacifism...
He's been studiously vague on many things. To many of his strongest supporters, this very slipperiness is part of his greatness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wardoc Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-23-09 05:18 AM
Response to Original message
39. Simple. He did not not choose to not say he wouldn't not do it. Hope that clarifies! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC