Obama Poll Numbers

shagdrum said:
If you were joking around, then you were doing it poorly. A joke has to have some degree of truth to it. You called Fossten a facist; but he is a conservative. Fox would be closer to a facist, ideologically, then fossten (though she is not at all a facist). Your attempt at humor just shined a spotlight on your ignorance.

You really shouldn't take strong positions on things you don't know much about.
Click to expand...

The degree of truth was that they were polor opposites and i was in the middle.
 
Foss is not a fascist... Not even close.

Mr Wiggles, he is on the other side - more like an anarchist, but, probably not quite that far.

Fascists are just one degree to the right of Communists... they are considered 'left'.
 
foxpaws said:
Foss is not a fascist... Not even close.

Mr Wiggles, he is on the other side - more like an anarchist, but, probably not quite that far.

Fascists are just one degree to the right of Communists... they are considered 'left'.
Click to expand...

Best way I heard it put:
Progressivism was a sister movement of fascism, and today's liberalism is the daughter of Progressivism​
 
heck, I have always thought you were good looking Foss - I don't flirt with guys who aren't...;)

However, shag seems to think for some reason it is important to label liberalism as fascism's niece.

Heck, Nazism could be conservatism's lesbian 2nd cousin twice removed... :p
 
foxpaws said:
However, shag seems to think for some reason it is important to label liberalism as fascism's niece.
Click to expand...

I don't want to let lies be perpetuated. So I tell the truth. Can't have that now, can we. :rolleyes:
 
What we're doing is quibbling over two different definitions of liberalism, classic and social. The modern Democrat Party ascribes to social liberalism, which is nearly the opposite of classic liberalism.

Here's a good definition of social, or modern, liberalism. As you read, you'll note that it closely resembles Modern American Liberalism, and in NO WAY resembles the definition that fox pulled from Webster's.
 
Maybe we should start a defining thread - I think this is spreading over lots of threads, and that probably isn't healthy... we probably should be washing our hands more..;)
 
foxpaws said:
Maybe we should start a defining thread - I think this is spreading over lots of threads, and that probably isn't healthy... we probably should be washing our hands more..;)
Click to expand...

Heck, I think we should not only have one but sticky it. The problem is, most people don't understand the different ideologies. Liberalism and conservatism are first and formost political philosophies. Any accurate explaination stems from there. Otherwise you are just explaining the superficial things. What the ideologies seem to be like by watching the results of those ideas in practice and through the filter of politics.

It is like saying that a car is powered by pixie dust. If you the basics of how a car works, then that is just as plausible an explaination.
 
Originally Posted by foxpaws
Maybe we should start a defining thread - I think this is spreading over lots of threads, and that probably isn't healthy... we probably should be washing our hands more..
Click to expand...
It's a specious idea. You wouldn't be able to agree on any definitions.
 
we wouldn't, but we would keep it out of these threads and quit infecting them...
 
So can I chop this thread up and get back to bashing Obama?

I'll give you guys your own lib vs conserv thread..promise!

I haven't even heard his speech tonight but all I've seeen people send me is that he promised socialized everything, from education to heathcare.
 
Yea. It's official, he's also going to announce that he is going to run as a socialist president next year.

Last i heard socialism as a majority is based off.... producing goods and spreading the wealth around.

How will it be applied to education?
 
Here is a dose of hard truth for you Obama supporters....

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690358175013837.html

It is simply wrong for commentators to continue to focus on President Barack Obama's high levels of popularity, and to conclude that these are indicative of high levels of public confidence in the work of his administration. Indeed, a detailed look at recent survey data shows that the opposite is most likely true. The American people are coming to express increasingly significant doubts about his initiatives, and most likely support a different agenda and different policies from those that the Obama administration has advanced.

Much more at the linky....
 
Obama down to 4 Monday, back to +5 today.

Might I remind you he was +30 the day after his inauguration.
Give him another 30 days to go into the negative column.

Obama is giving new meaning to crash and burn.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...a_administration/obama_approval_index_history

Date 3-17-09
Presidential Approval Index +5
Strongly Approve 37%
Strongly Disapprove 32%
Total Approve 56%
Total Disapprove 43%
 
Date 3/20/09
Presidential Approval Index +4
Strongly Approve 35%
Strongly Disapprove 31%
Total Approve 55%
Total Disapprove 43%

Obama down to his lowest "Strongly Approve" number.

I'll give him another couple weeks to work that number into the negative. He has such a gift and such a long track record of success. You get what you pay for.:shifty:

And Putin is getting ready to sucker punch him. That will be fun to watch.
 
JoeyLincolnMK8 said:
I just want to know what those 35% actually approve of.
Click to expand...

Hope and Change.
Maybe some of them are real socialists, but I'd bet the rest are still projecting their optimism and ideals onto him, unaware of what he's actually doing.
 
Anybody notice a trend???

BO Approval Index.jpg
 
Damn people Grow! Up!, i thought we were here to talk about cars, Not political views.. Save it for another forum.. Jeeez
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 273 (members: 0, guests: 273)
Back
Top