Any changes in opinion?

[Zoot Soup]

Completely depends on who the Republicans run against Obama, but I would definitely consider not voting for him though I did before.

[Randy Parker]

Most who post on here are pretty involved in the political process and are fairly engrained in there political beliefs imo. I just wondered if there were any posters who have changed their opinion on President Obama since he has taken office? For example, are there any posters who voted for President Obama, but would not do so now, or vice versa?

 

First off, this is a great question! Kudos to you!

 

As far as Obama, he's mostly what I thought he would be. I didn't vote for him in 08 and will not in 12. I am a bit surprised that he is very much like GWB, in that he's going to do what he wants to do, regardless of public opinion or the latest polls. Barry O is a principled man, and he's going to stand on those principles regardless of political fallout.

 

As for me personally, I am far less Republican than I have been at any point in life. Now, please understand, I'm not saying I'm more in line with Democrats. It's just that I see my party as a ship without a sail, so to speak. So many of the Republican candidates for 2010 aren't running on anything; they're just running as the "non-establishment" or "non-Washington-insider." They may win back the majority of the House and/or Senate, but I honestly don't see this making any improvement in the country.

 

I may very well register as a Cynic after the 2010 election cycle.

[Randy Parker]

Completely depends on who the Republicans run against Obama, but I would definitely consider not voting for him though I did before.

 

Curious to see who you'd vote for if it was Obama vs.:

 

* Romney

* Jindal

* Newt

* Palin

* Huckabee

* Bush (Jeb)

* Pawlenty

 

In a General election, Romney has the best shot vs. Obama. But I don't see him being able to get the Republican nomination.

 

My money says Obama gets re-elected regardless.

[Bluegrasscard]

Curious to see who you'd vote for if it was Obama vs.:

 

* Romney

* Jindal

* Newt

* Palin

* Huckabee

* Bush (Jeb)

* Pawlenty

 

In a General election, Romney has the best shot vs. Obama. But I don't see him being able to get the Republican nomination.

 

My money says Obama gets re-elected regardless.

 

Jindal not eligible.

[rockmom]

If by first part you mean my healthcare comment, I am sticking by it. Nancy Pelosi was a prime example of this when she made her comments about passing legislation basically saying we're going to pass it, no matter what.

 

He may meet with Republicans, but a big part of me feels he is only doing it because he has to to look good in the media eye that way he can go back and say " LOOK, LOOK, I DID IT!!" His comments about Republicans to the media however say something different. He is constantly bashing Republicans stances. Come on RM, saying that the Republicans are not even willing to give an inch is just absurd. You don't like what they're proposing so you and the liberal media just label the Republicans as Unwilling. Repubs are just going against something (example being healthcare) Are they against it because its Obama or are they against it because the overwhelming majority of Americans do no want it? Once they do not side with the Dems, Repubs are labeled "Unwilling". That's how politics is now-a-days. Sadly.

 

Yes I wasn't a big fan of Obama. That said, I really didn't like McCain either. Reminds me of South Park...You gotta vote for either a turd or a D-Bag. I wish I didn't have to vote for either.

 

Fair enough. But, I stand by what I feel. Much is overlooked in how the opposition deals with Obama. It's been noted that Obama actually doesn't draw a line in the sand, rather he refuses to let an issue die when he feels that there is better ideas to be heard. And, I'm not basing my comments on what the liberal media tell me. Rather, for instance, I listen when McConnell speaks and what he's saying. And marvel...he's essentially said "I ain't giving an inch". You can ignore that if you like. But it's the truth. And it's not from sound bites in the news. It's his stance in interviews on shows where he has plenty of time to clarify what he's saying.

 

Is it possible (if not likely) that the war in Iraq was going to end regardless of who was in office?

 

Is it possible (if not likely) that the economy was going to rebound regardless of who was in office?

 

I'm not a guy who hates Obama, but do you really believe that he deserves credit for (potentially) ending the war? Or for the economy rebounding? Or is he just in office at the right time?

 

I actually don't think the war would "likely" end regardless of who's in office. I firmly believe that if the Republicans had their way, we'd continue to escalate troop deployment and spend increasing amounts in Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

I actually do believe he deserves some credit for anything that is moving forward. It's theoretical to say he's the right person at the right time. And it's theoretical to say someone else could do it better, that it would be worse/better. It is what it is and it's his problem. If people want to blame him for the issues, I feel they should give him credit where due as well.

 

"He doesn't come come off as the "my way or your're wrong" sort of person..." What was it he said to McCain at one meeting, You lost or I won? Something really snide like that.

 

Not sure. Didn't hear about that one. Want to quote some McConnell to me?

[woodsrider]

I didn't vote for him in 08 and I won't vote for him in 12. The only thing he has come through on is passing healthcare reform. It's just sad it had to be a bill the majority of Americans disagreed with. He promised to have troops out of Iraq, not just a plan in place. He hasn't done that. The economy is as bad as it was when he took office. Anyone that thinks differently is just kinding theirselves. Spending is as high as it has ever been. He has been anything but a uniter or what I would consider a leader in one of this countries biggest struggles. He has been more worried about placing blame for the problems this country is facing instead putting in place real fixes. He is doing nothing to draw companies to the US or to give them incentive to add jobs here. Obama's fix for the economy to this point has been the equivalent of putting a band aid on a broken leg.

[jvdfc]

I didn't vote for him in 08 and I won't vote for him in 12. The only thing he has come through on is passing healthcare reform. It's just sad it had to be a bill the majority of Americans disagreed with. He promised to have troops out of Iraq, not just a plan in place. He hasn't done that. The economy is as bad as it was when he took office. Anyone that thinks differently is just kinding theirselves. Spending is as high as it has ever been. He has been anything but a uniter or what I would consider a leader in one of this countries biggest struggles. He has been more worried about placing blame for the problems this country is facing instead putting in place real fixes. He is doing nothing to draw companies to the US or to give them incentive to add jobs here. Obama's fix for the economy to this point has been the equivalent of putting a band aid on a broken leg.

:thumb:

[Randy Parker]

Jindal not eligible.

 

Why?

[Bluegrasscard]

 

Jindal not eligible.

 

Why?

 

Though he was born in the US his parents were not yet naturalized. They were still Indian citizens at the time though they later became citizens through naturalization. This would likely create questions on Article II 'natural born Citizen' status since the common standard for nbC is jus soli AND jus sanguinis - Born of the soil (in country) and the blood (parents are citizens). There are those that claim that one or the other is good enough for nbC and that even archor babies qualify under nbC. But that has never been tested. Even Obama's father was never a US citizen but his mother was. In Jindal's case both parents were definitely not US citizens at the time of his birth. Due to varying definitions on nbC his candidacy could create more questions than McCain's or Obama's in this area. I will leave it that as nbC debates can be very messy.

[Bluegrasscard]

As for opinion on Obama 2 years later - as Denny Green said of another team from Chicago - 'they are who we thought they were'.

 

Young, inexperienced, untested and surrounded and influenced by extreme left-wing, large-government advisers.

[75center]

Though he was born in the US his parents were not yet naturalized. They were still Indian citizens at the time though they later became citizens through naturalization. This would likely create questions on Article II 'natural born Citizen' status since the common standard for nbC is jus soli AND jus sanguinis - Born of the soil (in country) and the blood (parents are citizens). There are those that claim that one or the other is good enough for nbC and that even archor babies qualify under nbC. But that has never been tested. Even Obama's father was never a US citizen but his mother was. In Jindal's case both parents were definitely not US citizens at the time of his birth. Due to varying definitions on nbC his candidacy could create more questions than McCain's or Obama's in this area. I will leave it that as nbC debates can be very messy.

 

Based on this post, your other post is not accurate. You can't say he is not eligible. You can say there may be a question about his eligibility.

[Bluegrasscard]

Based on this post, your other post is not accurate. You can't say he is not eligible. You can say there may be a question about his eligibility.

 

Fair. Most would say he is not eligible. Personally, I like him and think he would do well.

[titletownclown]

No change in opinion here. I thought most politicians deserved to die before Obama, and still believe same.

[marvel]

Fair enough. But, I stand by what I feel. Much is overlooked in how the opposition deals with Obama. It's been noted that Obama actually doesn't draw a line in the sand, rather he refuses to let an issue die when he feels that there is better ideas to be heard. And, I'm not basing my comments on what the liberal media tell me. Rather, for instance, I listen when McConnell speaks and what he's saying. And marvel...he's essentially said "I ain't giving an inch". You can ignore that if you like. But it's the truth. And it's not from sound bites in the news. It's his stance in interviews on shows where he has plenty of time to clarify what he's saying.

 

Tell me Rockmom, whats the difference between Pelosi and McConnell? Initially they are saying the same thing? One is just which you agree with and the other is not? Correct me if I'm wrong?

 

I do not watch and listen to McConnell as much as I should. That said, I do know his stances on how big Government should be and where its place is. That is why I stand with him (even though I won't be able to vote for him any longer)

[Plato]

No change in opinion here. I thought most politicians deserved to die before Obama, and still believe same.

 

Agreed.