What are people on the left wing going to do when Obama rules from the center right?
musicismylife78
Posts: 6,116
Seeing as from his cabinet picks he clearly is anything but a radical or left winger. Most if not ALL of his cabinet voted for the war in iraq.
Hillary clinton for one, I remember on some c span special, talking about how she wouldnt apologize for voting for the war. This was in 2007.
I am sure she still believes this.
So, what are the people who elected him going to do about it?
He was elected, because people were pissed off, about the economy, war and all the lies.
Evidently, this is lost on mr obama.
Remember the 2006 midterms? Democrats won big, all because people wanted the iraq war to end. And of course we know how the dems delivered on that promise right?
Obama presented himself, and the left wing believed he was some radical or a person who wouldnt play politics like they have been played for all of american history.
How can people say he is anything other than a politician by his cabinet picks?
Hillary clinton for one, I remember on some c span special, talking about how she wouldnt apologize for voting for the war. This was in 2007.
I am sure she still believes this.
So, what are the people who elected him going to do about it?
He was elected, because people were pissed off, about the economy, war and all the lies.
Evidently, this is lost on mr obama.
Remember the 2006 midterms? Democrats won big, all because people wanted the iraq war to end. And of course we know how the dems delivered on that promise right?
Obama presented himself, and the left wing believed he was some radical or a person who wouldnt play politics like they have been played for all of american history.
How can people say he is anything other than a politician by his cabinet picks?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
i'm gonna call bullshit on that one.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
In fact, going by definition, could someone who received a majority in an election even be considered "radical"? Getting a majority, it seems, would mean the person presented himself or herself as pretty mainstream.
I guess what I'm saying is, if a hard-left liberal who voted for Obama is too pissed off right now (I say "too pissed off" because on average everyone gets a little disappointed over something, no matter their political stripe), then he or she probably wasn't very informed. Pragmatic liberals like myself (who can still be far-out-liberal in ideals) are still pretty hopeful, though. See, while Hillary might not be my perfect choice, she does know how to get things done. And those "things" are all at Obama's discretion. The SoS, Chief of Staff, etc. do not act independently of the President. They are all there to follow orders. So it remains to be seen where President Obama will govern from, not where President-Elect Obama picks his team from.
My guess? He'll probably govern from the center left.
I don't think it's necessarily a valid criticism, but I think it's a more logical critcism to say his cabinet has a few too many familar faces than this one that because he is appointing center-right people in the administration? Hell, he promised during the general election campaign he would appoint Republicans to his cabinet, and now he has at least two, and two that are in important positions. That's a bipartisan move. He continually claimed to be left on social issues, and moderate left on national security and the economy. And he seems to be appointing people from the moderate left and right. What were the leftists on this board expecting him to do? And where is this notion coming from that Obama was far left on national security matters?
Fascism ala Disney....
Just for the sake of keeping score.
Let me see if I'm clear here...
During the election....he was a SOCIALIST
And NOW...he's going to rule from the Center Right????
Hmm...Interesting Theory.
I guess that would make President Elect Barack Obama a:
CENTER RIGHT SOCIALIST
Well Alright...
That makes about as much sense as the term...Progressive Conservative.
Nice work Kent!!!
so much for progress, eh?
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
during the election it was this dynamic:
obama-left winger, who will change washingtn politics forever and end the war.
and mccain-same old same old-war for 100 years, etc...
so to suggest obama was portrayed as some centrist is absurd.
He never was a radical, thats my whole point. people acted like he was to bring great change to the nation and end the war and save us.
how can he do that if his whole cabinet is made up of people who continue to believe iraq was the right war to fight?
obama isnt a socialist. never was never will be. but the left bought into it. they thought obama would end the war and change things.
i didnt vote for obama for one reason. one big one-he wasnt going to pull out troops of iraq soon enough-16 months is what I last heard. Thats not soon enough for me. Another reason I didnt vote obama was because I didnt believe he was a "new kind" of politician. one that doesnt lie, one who thinks of the people instead of money, greed and power.
I guess I was right...
And I never quite understood this whole "obama wants dems and repubs to work together" stuff.
I have firmly believed to balance out a radical right wing presidency the ONLY thing that makes sense is to have a radical left wing president. Obama is not that. The time isnt here to work together, the time is here to start bringing the troops home.
I want the troops home, I want the war ended. Why do people in politics, yes you pelosi, clinton, reid, obama and others find it so hard to say "end this damn war"?
The majority of americans oppose the war and want the troops home. It isnt a left wing stand to want it over. its an american position.
So if obama fails to do this, he isnt governing by and for the people
I'm going to disagree with this. Sure, opposition to the Iraq War was reason for Democratic gains in some places ... In others, Republican corruption, scandal, and spending was a bigger reason than opposition to the war.
Another point I'd make is that I'd wager fewer people support an unconditional withdrawal from Iraq than did in 2006. We are a nation of fair-weather fans.
That said, Obama would be wise to rule more from the middle than the far left. America is a center-right nation. Ruling from the far fringe is what fucked the Republicans.
If he rules from the nutso far left wing, he will be out of office in 2012.
for the least they could possibly do
Did you fall asleep in 2006 and forget to wake up? By and large, the war in Iraq IS over. The troops ARE coming home.
It would have been that way if Bush were re-elected for a third term.
for the least they could possibly do
No, we're not high. I think I'm making clear arguments.
During the general election campaign, Obama was the candidate who promised an end to the war in Iraq, a new green economy, tax cuts for the middle class, etc. He was NOT the far left candidate. Ralph Nader was the far left candidate. Cynthia McKinney running on the Green Party ticket was the far left candidate. Brian Moore from the Socialist ticket wasw the far left candidate. Obama was not the far left candidate. The center decides elections, and Obama was left of center. Americans typically don't seem to like Presidents that are far from center, which explains why Bush was such a disaster.
Who's fault is it if the 'left' bought into something that Obama never promised and never stated? We're supposed to hold him accountable for promises he never made in the first place? You mention that you didn't vote for Obama because you thought he would take too long to remove the troops. Which is a fine reason, but it's your reason alone. Obama never promised to remove the troops quicker and is now going back on his word. His promise was barring unforseen circumstances, he wanted us out of Iraq in 16 months. You're holding him accountable to a promise you never made; can't do that.
All of the opinions that "now's not the time to work together, now's to bring the damn troops home", etc. are all your own opinions, so you can't really pretend to speak for the general public. The general public is primarily moderate. They favor bipartisanship and dislike absolutism. That's our country, despite the extremes that exist within it. You make my case for me when you say "I thought Obama was a politician who lied...I guess I was right." It's like you don't even realize you're taking him to task for breaking promises he never made. Isn't THAT buying into the hype in a way?
If the troops aren't back by the end of Obama's first term, then we'll have something to talk about, but you're stating he is not going to bring the troops home when he said he would due to his cabinet appointments. How exactly are you making that leap? As I said before, this isn't about strengthening the far left, and if you thought it would be, that's your misjudgment. It's about an increasingly divided right and left coming together to work for a common purpose and a common good.
You're seemingly upset that Obama will govern from the center left as opposed to the far left, and that's frustrating, but let's not pretend like the general public was hoodwinked into thing he was a far-left liberal, and are now fooled because he will act as a center-left president. You can't have it both ways. So I ask again; where is this notion coming from that Obama was a far-left politican? When did he ever 'sell' himself in the general election as such? What promises are you claiming he has broken?
uhhh ... how so?
only people calling obama a socialist were the dumbass right ... what truly lefty policies does this guy have? ... as you can see already by his appointments - he's governing from the centre ...
Afghanistan?
Bush would bring the troops home?
That's a good one.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Americans support troops in Afghanistan. its Iraq that people want to end, and it is. the agreement to bring troops home from Iraq is being done during the Bush administration and will happen under Obama's
how is that if mccain would not put a timetable on that withdrawal that the GOP would have instituted a pull out prior to Obama taking over?
time table is being set regardless of what McCain says. Iraqi parliament votes tomorrow on the agreement stating troops leave at the end of 2011.
Aren't they just getting shuffled over to Afghanistan by and large?
who is coming home?
Bush wants to go into Iran, and elsewhere eventually. how is that "coming home"
seems silly to say anyone is really coming home in the big picture.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
afgahistan will never have more then 100,000 soldiers there. Iraq has close to 170,000. yes some will go over there, but most will come home.
and secondly Bush is not going to invade Iran during his last 50 days in office. and Obama definitely wont. so that statement is simply laughable
Figures say something like 500,000 troops are needed. You know the drill, surge, surge, surge. Iraq was a piece of cake compared to Afghanistan logistically. If Bush had a third term was the criteria not 50 days.
Saying Obama definitely won't means nothing. When push comes to shove, he will and has said he will again and again.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
500,000 eh? why not just say a million. no no, maybe 2 million.
there are currently about 35,000 american troops there. Gates says about 20,000 more are needed. according to math, thats alot less then 500,000. keep in mind, we are not the only force there. NATO is in command.
http://telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/rss/article/491387
U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates said last week at a meeting of his counterparts in Cornwallis, N.S., that as many as 20,000 additional American troops will flood into Afghanistan next year.
and if you think Obama, a lefty liberal, someone who says he will actually talk to Iran's wacky president, having just gone through 6 years of an unpopular Iraq war, in the middle of an economic crisis, will take our country to war, I'd say you are living in a dream land.
The figures are always low balled. You know that...everyone knows that.
War is only unpopular until the next "terrorist incident"
let's not be naive
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
how is it that is attributed to bush?
bush is still president correct?
lowballed? I thought they were exaggerated. besides your personal estimates are HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS higher then the Defense Sec. I think I'll go with him over you. no offense.
What the hell is a left person anyway???? blah blah blah.. will he be honest? will he listen to his cabinet, and the people and make decisions with integrity? if so - he will be a great president. Left, Right .. what is the difference.. why would anyone want to limit him to some script written by either political club.. that would be dumb...
I'm sure they're telling the truth...always a source of truth that MIC is.
pretend all you want. I won't
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
its easy to just make up numbers to suit your beliefs.. I'm sure it makes you feel really good about yourself. I however will go with estimates from multiple people who are close to the situation.
Right... Afghanistan is going to be a cake walk. I think you're dreaming, and so are the people feeding you the sleeping pills.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")