Splinshints: TV's Vinnie: And Sarah Palin in charge would have been better for America?

Always remember, America. No matter what you may think about Obama, having Sarah Palin in charge would have been much, much worse.

That's not the point.


No, that IS the point. All of this constant nagging about Obama is indirect support for the gop. Because no matter how much you may think life with Obama might be, imagine living in a USA under Sarah Palin, with Dick Cheney's VP powers to order the arrest/detention/torture of Americans.

I have yet to see as much ragging at Romney by Yahoo that they do against Obama. The bias is huge here.

Yahoo reports that Fox News reports that the Daily Caller reports that a 22 year old model had no comment on the President.

Why no news flash tag?

Dusk-You-n-Me: Splinshints: A lack of enthusiasm is pretty much the only reason republicans still win elections, so it's a bad sign for sanity when people who were really hyped up the last time are just kind of 'meh' this time around.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 466x500]

That chart doesn't look right at all. For comparison, here the Gallup polls on voter enthusiasm, from their web site.



If you go to the linked article, Gallup discusses how Republicans are slightly more enthusiastic than Democrats this year, and how Democrats are far less enthusiastic than they were last year.

IrateShadow: Epoch_Zero: I started reading that but as soon as I realized it was making me dumber I started imagining how cool it would be if Full Metal Jousting happened on motorcycles. Wouldn't that be cool?

You'd need robots or some stupidly heavy armor, otherwise you'd just have people stabbing each other in the chest with large sticks.

Isn't that the point?

Serious Black: I'm honestly surprised enthusiasm for Romney is higher than it was for McCain...

You could have the name of Ivan Von DeathMonster and run on a platform of exterminating all life on Earth, but so long as you run with an "R" next to your name, the mouthbreathers, bigots, and hillbillies will vote for you every time.

SomeAmerican: Dusk-You-n-Me: Splinshints: A lack of enthusiasm is pretty much the only reason republicans still win elections, so it's a bad sign for sanity when people who were really hyped up the last time are just kind of 'meh' this time around.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 466x500]

That chart doesn't look right at all. For comparison, here the Gallup polls on voter enthusiasm, from their web site.

[sas-origin.onstreammedia.com image 522x262]

If you go to the linked article, Gallup discusses how Republicans are slightly more enthusiastic than Democrats this year, and how Democrats are far less enthusiastic than they were last year.

The full poll that graph was taken from can be found here. The relevant question is #5; the graphic specifically pulls out the percentage of registered voters who said they are very enthusiastic about voting for their candidate.

And speaking just for me, I can believe that Republicans are more enthusiastic about voting in general but not very enthusiastic about voting for Mitt Romney.

Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: Carth: FTFA: "his story comes from the Yahoo! Contributor Network, where individuals publish their unique perspectives on some of the world's most popular websites. Do you have a story to tell? Become a Yahoo! contributor"

So Yahoo News is just a blog now?

Yahoo has been on a real anti-Obama tear these past few months. It's been "Fox News Lite" ever since.

Leave Obama alone!
[www.starbuddies.com image 450x313]

Nice try. But let's face it, Obama hasn't been cut one bit of slack since he took the oath of office. Every misstep has been scrutinized and given the unwritten words ".....so vote republican" at the end.

OMFG! Obama used his salad fork to eat his pork cutlet! MSNBC Talking Heads, scramble! SCRAMBLE!!

TV's Vinnie: And Sarah Palin in charge would have been better for America?

Always remember, America. No matter what you may think about Obama, having Sarah Palin in charge would have been much, much worse.

Are you that stupid that you don't know that Palin was not running for President?

Or are you just that afraid of women?

TV's Vinnie: Serious Black: I'm honestly surprised enthusiasm for Romney is higher than it was for McCain...

You could have the name of Ivan Von DeathMonster and run on a platform of exterminating all life on Earth, but so long as you run with an "R" next to your name, the mouthbreathers, bigots, and hillbillies will vote for you every time.

Or, you could look at it and say McCain was the old establishment guy who seemed a little nutty and volatile and was essentially a sacrificial lamb for the GOP as the Obama freight train came streaming down the tracks.

He was the guy trying to follow an historically unpopular Republican president just as the economy was deep in the shiater.

You could say he was Gerald Ford trying to follow Nixon. You could say he was old man Bob Dole being tossed on the Clinton popularity fire.

But with Romney there is a real possibility of victory. He has political and business credentials all the spin and denial of the far, far away lefties in the world can't dent.

Until people start believing the economy is improving in ways that make a difference in their lives Obama is vulnerable. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

kid_icarus: Even as a non-political scientist, I am somewhat skeptical that one shallow, mentally disturbed attention whore is an accurate depiction of the collective American mentality about the president.

And yet, Sarah Palin appears on Fox News every other night.

Dusk-You-n-Me: SomeAmerican: That chart doesn't look right at all. For comparison, here the Gallup polls on voter enthusiasm, from their web site.

Different polling organizations, different results. Also FWIW, the WaPo/ABC poll was conducted in May as opposed to February.

And that accounts for the 2008 results, how? I mean, we aren't talking about a small margin there - we're talking 52% versus 79%. That's a massive difference.

And 52% for 2008 doesn't pass the smell test. We all know that 2008 was not "business as usual"; the Democratic base was highly enthused. The Gallup numbers feel much more accurate.

Add to that all the articles about how Democrat enthusiasm has collapsed since the 2008 election, which isn't reflected on your chart at all.

Unless that's a local poll not a national poll (which would mean you are misusing it, by the way), I'm going to have to say those numbers are garbage.

She won't say who she's voting for thinking she'll escape some of the celebrity she brought on herself in 2008.

If she votes, she's still not voting for Romney.

SomeAmerican: Dusk-You-n-Me: SomeAmerican: That chart doesn't look right at all. For comparison, here the Gallup polls on voter enthusiasm, from their web site.

Different polling organizations, different results. Also FWIW, the WaPo/ABC poll was conducted in May as opposed to February.

And that accounts for the 2008 results, how? I mean, we aren't talking about a small margin there - we're talking 52% versus 79%. That's a massive difference.

And 52% for 2008 doesn't pass the smell test. We all know that 2008 was not "business as usual"; the Democratic base was highly enthused. The Gallup numbers feel much more accurate.

Add to that all the articles about how Democrat enthusiasm has collapsed since the 2008 election, which isn't reflected on your chart at all.

Unless that's a local poll not a national poll (which would mean you are misusing it, by the way), I'm going to have to say those numbers are garbage.

I pointed you to the full poll that the question was taken from. You can look at the results and demographics there.

kid_icarus: As a political scientist, I see this as a symbolic shift in the collective American mentality about the president. In one term, our leader lost the status he had in the minds of the American people.

Even as a non-political scientist, I am somewhat skeptical that one shallow, mentally disturbed attention whore is an accurate depiction of the collective American mentality about the president.

Do what Kim Kardashian does in these situations. Kneel before your bed and look up to the picture of yourself hanging above it and ask yourself for guidance.

hillbillypharmacist: Or, you know, it could be a function of a young person being four years older. Growing from 18 to 22 makes a big difference in how you feel about the world.



Good point. Now that she's older, I'm sure she's starting to come around to the idea that women shouldn't be able to control their own bodies, and that she shouldn't be paid the same amount as a man when doing the same amount of work.

Ah youth, the innocence of liberalism.

The "lack of enthusiasm" is due the fact that America, in general, has lost the ability to look at the big picture and has the attention span of a squirrel on speed and caffeine pills.

Serious Black: SomeAmerican: Dusk-You-n-Me: Splinshints: A lack of enthusiasm is pretty much the only reason republicans still win elections, so it's a bad sign for sanity when people who were really hyped up the last time are just kind of 'meh' this time around.

[24.media.tumblr.com image 466x500]

That chart doesn't look right at all. For comparison, here the Gallup polls on voter enthusiasm, from their web site.

[sas-origin.onstreammedia.com image 522x262]

If you go to the linked article, Gallup discusses how Republicans are slightly more enthusiastic than Democrats this year, and how Democrats are far less enthusiastic than they were last year.

The full poll that graph was taken from can be found here. The relevant question is #5; the graphic specifically pulls out the percentage of registered voters who said they are very enthusiastic about voting for their candidate.

And speaking just for me, I can believe that Republicans are more enthusiastic about voting in general but not very enthusiastic about voting for Mitt Romney.

Thanks... OK, I see what the deal is.

The enthusiasm numbers for 2008 in that chart were taken from June 2008, to align with our current point in the election cycle.

Enthusiasm for Obama continued to surge as the election approached, reaching a fever pitch as reflected in Gallup's 79% numbers.

This year, nobody believes that that will happen. Obama is very unlikely to hit the election with 79% enthusiasm.

Hence the discussion around a collapse in Democrat enthusiasm.

Is this where the Baby Boomer cons come here to convince others (and more importantly, themselves) that selling out their ideals when they got greedy and scared in old age was just part of the natural process of ageing?

Is anyone that suprised by this (other than the Obama dead-enders, anyway)?

The unemployment rate for people in their 20's is something like 12%. From 18-22 it's even higher - 17% IIRC. And that doesn't count the underemployment rate, where you graduate with crushing student loan debt but still end up folding clothes at the Gap and barely making ends meet. That's the Obama economy these days - and if you were one of the young voters who voted for Obama in 2008 on the hopes that he'd change the world for the better, you'de have to be a fool not to be disillusioned.

Obama promised to close Guantanomo - he didn't do it, and the facility is being expanded.

Obama promised to put tighter controls on executive authority and the war on terror - and now he's runnig drone strikes and has "kill lists" being sent out from the Oval Office.

Obama promised to reign in Wall Street - now he's begging them for money and hasn't done a damn thing to end "too big to fail."

Obama promised to help turn the economy around - now all he can do is cherry-pick figures and tell people that the economy is doing "just fine."

And that's if you're a liberal -- if you're a conservative, Obama stands opposed to damn near everything you value.

The only real achievement that Obama can point to is killing bin Laden, which he constantly tries to take credit for, even though all he did is give the order. That counts for something, but not much in the long run.

All the Democrats have right now is fear - trying to convince people that somehow the Republicans are evil and would make things worse. But fear doesn't get voters to support you, and right now Obama's base is not energized and he's not pulling the kind of numbers with independents that suggests a win. He's barely ahead in likely voter polls, which on average understate Republican performance by 3-4%. If that trend holds true, he's probably running just behind Romney nationally.

No pics?! You guys are useless.

kingoomieiii: "Obama Girl" Amber Lee Ettinger is not as excited about President Barack Obama now as she was during the 2008 election when she recorded her infamous "Crush on Obama" video, according to Fox News.

Farking of course.

Yeah. That's as far as I got, as well.

She's just done what every young voter does. She grew up and has begun to except reality.

Richard Flaccid: She's just done what every young voter does. She grew up and has begun to except reality.

There's a lot of unintentional truth in this.

TV's Vinnie: OMFG! Obama used his salad fork to eat his pork Fido cutlet! MSNBC Talking Heads, scramble! SCRAMBLE!!

Do it right, fella.

hillbillypharmacist: WombatControl: And that's if you're a liberal -- if you're a conservative, Obama stands opposed to damn near everything you value.

Obama must be quite talented to be able to take political action that is opposite both liberal and conservative ideologies.

Well, either that, or you're full of sh*t.

He's not full of shiat. Obama just happens to be the most evil living thing that has ever existed in all known and unknown dimensions of the multiverse and reality by an insurmountable margin.

Obama Girl's video displayed the belief the potential leader was on a different level than past presidents. This mentality was humorously displayed in an episode of "South Park" where residents were dancing in the street and praising the incoming president as some sort of American messiah who was going to raise the country from the economic downturn and replace our "doom and gloom" outlook with hope for a better tomorrow. Four years later, we live in a country not very different than when President Obama took office as the luster is gone.

He's missing something. In that episode while half the town was partying like it was 1999, the other half was holed up in bunkers afraid for their life and thinking everything was ruined forever. Tellingly, the partying is no more but the pants-shiatting other half is still at it.

tenpoundsofcheese: TV's Vinnie: And Sarah Palin in charge would have been better for America?

Always remember, America. No matter what you may think about Obama, having Sarah Palin in charge would have been much, much worse.

Are you that stupid that you don't know that Palin was not running for President?

Or are you just that afraid of women?

If you thought that McCain would have been in charge had the elction gone the other way, think again. Either she would have made McCain as her puppet or McCain might have keeled over before now and she steps right into the Oval Office, with her husband as First Husband.......the guy who wants the USA to break apart.

vernonFL: The only cure for Obama fever is extremely expensive, only the very wealthy can afford it. For most sufferers of Obama fever, the cure is worse than the disease more cowbell.

hillbillypharmacist: Serious Black: He's not full of shiat. Obama just happens to be the most evil living thing that has ever existed in all known and unknown dimensions of the multiverse and reality by an insurmountable margin.

He is not evil, but so different from humankind that he might as well be.

Obama is a Xeelee?

Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: Serious Black: I'm honestly surprised enthusiasm for Romney is higher than it was for McCain...

You could have the name of Ivan Von DeathMonster and run on a platform of exterminating all life on Earth, but so long as you run with an "R" next to your name, the mouthbreathers, bigots, and hillbillies will vote for you every time.

Or, you could look at it and say McCain was the old establishment guy who seemed a little nutty and volatile and was essentially a sacrificial lamb for the GOP as the Obama freight train came streaming down the tracks.

He was the guy trying to follow an historically unpopular Republican president just as the economy was deep in the shiater.

You could say he was Gerald Ford trying to follow Nixon. You could say he was old man Bob Dole being tossed on the Clinton popularity fire.

But with Romney there is a real possibility of victory. He has political and business credentials all the spin and denial of the far, far away lefties in the world can't dent.

Until people start believing the economy is improving in ways that make a difference in their lives Obama is vulnerable. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

LOL! McCain lost because he was meant to be the fall guy. Nice bit of mental gymnastics there, brah.

But, keep trying to shill Mormony McMagicPants there. Maybe you might find a convert or two.

Maybe.

EyeballKid: Richard Flaccid: She's just done what every young voter does. She grew up and has begun to except reality.

There's a lot of unintentional truth in this.

And what "reality" is that? Thinking that the best way to fix the economy is to put in charge a guy like RoMONEY who bullied kids in school and made a career out of taking over companies and sucking them dry like a vampire?

do not take me seriously: You mock, but this is only the tip of the iceberg. Hundreds of thousands of B-Rock Zero-Bamma supporters have dropped their support, but they weren't dancing around on the internet wearing hot-pants last time, so nobody cares.

It's a good thing though!. Romney is just the kind of President this country needs if we want to have any chance of joining the 21st century before it's over- to move forward we must innovate, and innovation requires a robust economy. The kind of economy Romney can make us.

Say what you will about his tactics, use derisive terminology like "vulture" capitalism, but the cold hard truth is that at Bain, as elsewhere, Romney made his clients money.

Don't you get it? if he's President we're ALL his clients, so we'll all get rich! A strong, decisive, and resolute mind like Romney can take the reins of this country and get it back on the track to greatness again, and the wealth will once again start to flow. Because it's not that trickle-down economics is counter-intuitive, logically fallacious, and patently absurd, it's just that the damn libs never leave the system in place long enough for the wealth to reach the bottom. It's trickle-down, not avalanche-down, you've got to be patient. Be patient, and don't let socialists like B-Rock break the system to reroute those trickling funds into their own pockets. It's just a good thing the good guys won back Congress in 2010, because without their stalwart efforts, B-Rock would have pilfered the treasury and moved back to Kenya right already. The only reason he's risking the run for re-election (and the reexamination of his dubious legitimacy) is because the Republicans have been so good at keeping him from robbing us all blind.

A vote for Romney is a vote for America's future.
and if you don't want to vote for Romney, then both sides are bad so you should vote third party.

y no sparkly eagle?

TV's Vinnie: EyeballKid: Richard Flaccid: She's just done what every young voter does. She grew up and has begun to except reality.

There's a lot of unintentional truth in this.

And what "reality" is that? Thinking that the best way to fix the economy is to put in charge a guy like RoMONEY who bullied kids in school and made a career out of taking over companies and sucking them dry like a vampire?

ac cept (v). 1. to take or receive (something offered); receive with approval or favor; 2. to agree or consent to;

ex cept (v.)1. to exclude; leave out; 2. to object (usually followed by to or against )

TV's Vinnie: EyeballKid: Richard Flaccid: She's just done what every young voter does. She grew up and has begun to except reality.

There's a lot of unintentional truth in this.

And what "reality" is that? Thinking that the best way to fix the economy is to put in charge a guy like RoMONEY who bullied kids in school and made a career out of taking over companies and sucking them dry like a vampire?

I think that perhaps you missed EyeballKid's point.

do not take me seriously: A vote for Romney is a vote for America's future.

Cool. I'm gonna run data for the Megacorps and get some sweet augments.

Seriously, an excuse for Amber Lee Ettinger and you all pass on it?

TV's Vinnie: But, keep trying to shill Mormony McMagicPants there. Maybe you might find a convert or two.

Maybe.

Not a big fan of any of the gawd-fearing but ouch, man. Bigot much?

Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: But, keep trying to shill Mormony McMagicPants there. Maybe you might find a convert or two.

Maybe.

Not a big fan of any of the gawd-fearing but ouch, man. Bigot much?

A genuine disgust in response to people who consider lime Jell-O with shredded carrots "food" is by no means bigotry.

I love how once a week or so there is a new column on some right wing hack site telling us all about the thoughts of Obama 2008 voters and how those voters no longer love Obama.

On that same note, if I want to get insight on the lives of ordinary Americans, I consult the al-Qaeda PR department.

HeartBurnKid: People change in 4 years. News at 11.

/at 18, I was a libertarian.
//by the time I was 22, once the world had its way with me, I was a liberal.

And at 50 you will be a conservative.

hillbillypharmacist: WombatControl: And that's if you're a liberal -- if you're a conservative, Obama stands opposed to damn near everything you value.

Obama must be quite talented to be able to take political action that is opposite both liberal and conservative ideologies.

Well, either that, or you're full of sh*t.

Maybe you should try to understand the argument first...

I gave specific examples of why liberal should be (and are) pissed at Obama: not closing Gitmo, not reigning in the war on terrorism, etc. Those are things that some conservatives give begrudging respect for -- which is why I argued that as a conservative Obama stands for "damn near everything" that conservatives object to.