Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 02:42 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Will president hit back? |
|
The president was attacked aggressively last night. Will he fire back, or seek conciliation and common ground with his attackers?
|
JoePhilly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 02:44 PM
Response to Original message |
1. What we need is more bluster!!! |
yurbud
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. what we need is a ball buster--and not the balls of base of supporters. |
emulatorloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. Neither Perry nor Romney are members of the House/Senate |
|
Most people would think Obama is nuts if he went off on them in an address on Jobs to the House and Senate. Maybe he will say something obliquely, but those pissants are irrelevant in this context/.
|
RaleighNCDUer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
8. It's not bluster if you can back it up. |
JoePhilly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
13. Would need the votes to back it up. |
Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
16. What we need is more triangulation! |
|
and appeasement! and more liberal-bashing! He's played that tune into a 54% disapproval rating! Go with it!
|
emulatorloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
3. It isn't a campaign speech, so Perry and Romney's bullshit isn't relevant |
|
to an address to Congress.
|
Vidar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:04 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Obama's first name should be "Neville". |
boxman15
(389 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
Comparisons to Neville Chamberlain are absolutely false.
|
tomg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-11-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #11 |
23. Actually, not so inappropriate, although |
|
Not in terms of simple appeasement. Chamberlain was, by and large, a very bad negotiator. The year before Munich, he had done an equally bad (although far less consequential) negotiation with the irish. Both seem to suffer, or have suffered from, the same problem in negotiation: an inability to recognize when those with whom you are negotiating have the same ends as yourself - the mutual resolution of a problem or the coming to a mutually acceptable solution to a condition - and when those with whom you are negotiating see negotiations as an extension of conflict, and the purpose of the negotiation is simply to gain advantage and simply as a stage in the conflict.
There is also another difference. The vast majority of people at the time supported Chamberlain, particularly British veterans. President Obama, in constantly compromising and seeking bi-partisanship is actually at odds with what the vast majority of the people want.
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:10 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
Tarheel_Dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:20 PM
Response to Original message |
elocs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:24 PM
Response to Original message |
9. You said "fire back", but nothing about tonight. Appeasement is the watchword |
|
for this administration along with bipartisanship and compromise. But probably he will consider himself above it all and ignore them personally.
|
boxman15
(389 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:25 PM
Response to Original message |
10. It's not going to be a full-on attack on the GOP. |
|
The focus is on jobs. The details need to be known by the people. Then, once the GOP rejects the bill, they can use public sentiment against the Republicans. He will probably take some jabs at the Republicans, but it won't be a huge partisan attack. Not yet at least.
Expect more of them after the bill gets shot down.
|
Hutzpa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:26 PM
Response to Original message |
12. He has every right to fight back |
|
and I'm sure he will in the way he has always done it.
At the end of the day he will leave people wondering what just happen.
|
elleng
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 03:59 PM
Response to Original message |
14. He has started hitting back in his road trips recently, |
|
and I think tonight's speech will become the foundation for hitting back against repugs who fail to negotiate, both in super-committee and in Congress, during the remainder of his term.
Like it or not our form of government requires negotiation/conciliation. Repugs must be seen as the ones making such difficult>impossible, and I think he's on the road to demonstrating that now.
|
Tx4obama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 05:33 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Obama will hit back hard, but not tonight. The speech to Congress is to get his jobs bill passed |
|
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 05:34 PM by Tx4obama
so he will need the GOP votes to get 'er done.
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-08-11 06:15 PM
Response to Original message |
17. The fact that you obviously think that "firing back" is more important than the content |
|
of his speech renders anything you say on this topic irrelevant imo.
|
Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-09-11 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
18. Well, his 2.5 years of appeasing has been a disaster for him and the country |
|
so maybe a new approach is in order
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Sep-09-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
19. You obviously missed this point of my post |
|
"renders anything you say on this topic irrelevant imo. "
|
Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Sep-10-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
|
Your view that appeasement, cowering, and adoption of right-wing policies by the president will help the situation renders anything you say on this topic irrelevant imo
|
Number23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-11-11 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. The fact that you have to try so hard to put words in my mouth (fingers) |
|
makes you look even more devoid of facts and legitimate perspective.
Your view that appeasement, cowering, and adoption of right-wing policies by the president will help the situation
Since I never said or even implied any of this stupidity, there's no point in engaging you in any further. Sorry your attempt at flamebait and idiocy got so little attention. I have no doubt you'll be trying again soon though.
|
bhikkhu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Sep-11-11 12:20 AM
Response to Original message |
22. What purpose does that ever serve? |
|
If there is a strategy, it would be to make the asshats on the other side look most clearly like asshats to the people who voted for them. To do that, he just has to forge ahead with his job.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:27 AM
Response to Original message |