• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Clinton Email Problem

ONW said:
That's a pretty significant statistical change in around 08-09. Thoughts on why?
Click to expand...

Thanks Obama. In all seriousness. Obama is polarizing one way or another. Not blaming him necessarily, just reality that Republicans get really bent out of shape with Obama (and probably Hillary as well). Thanks for sharing the chart. I think it is interesting that the two parties trend are exact mirrors with the Pubs leading the way consistently over the years. I would be interested to see that chart every 4 years or so and see if the trend continues. I am a mixed bag family of Democrats and Republicans so I think I project my experiences on the masses sometimes wrongfully.
 
Wrangor said:
Thanks Obama. In all seriousness. Obama is polarizing one way or another. Not blaming him necessarily, just reality that Republicans get really bent out of shape with Obama (and probably Hillary as well). Thanks for sharing the chart. I think it is interesting that the two parties trend are exact mirrors with the Pubs leading the way consistently over the years. I would be interested to see that chart every 4 years or so and see if the trend continues. I am a mixed bag family of Democrats and Republicans so I think I project my experiences on the masses sometimes wrongfully.
Click to expand...

I think that it is more the narrative built around Obama than Obama himself that made him a polarizing figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ONW
Absolutely, but that is a significant change in perception/acceptance in a year or two as compared to the previous 50 years.
 
ONW said:
Absolutely, but that is a significant change in perception/acceptance in a year or two as compared to the previous 50 years.
Click to expand...

I don't think it as recent as that.
I think the media has made it more more apparent in recent years.
 
silk said:
I don't think it as recent as that.
I think the media has made it more more apparent in recent years.
Click to expand...

"A pair of surveys asked Americans a more concrete question: in 1960, whether they would be "displeased" if their child married someone outside their political party, and, in 2010, would be "upset" if their child married someone of the other party. In 1960, about 5 percent of Americans expressed a negative reaction to party intermarriage; in 2010, about 40 percent did (Republicans about 50 percent, Democrats about 30 percent)."


Maybe silk, but the internet and a 24 hour news cycle didn't start in 2009.
 
ONW said:
"A pair of surveys asked Americans a more concrete question: in 1960, whether they would be "displeased" if their child married someone outside their political party, and, in 2010, would be "upset" if their child married someone of the other party. In 1960, about 5 percent of Americans expressed a negative reaction to party intermarriage; in 2010, about 40 percent did (Republicans about 50 percent, Democrats about 30 percent)."


Maybe silk, but the internet and a 24 hour news cycle didn't start in 2009.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing with that poll. But news today ain't the same as news way back.
Today news, both left and right, today, seems more like 24 hours of fan magazine.
 
Last edited:
Back to Hillary's problems...

"The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.
The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.
The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends."

http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/
 
it'll be interesting to see how much this stuff sticks/atters when the general rolls around
 
I'm just praying that she makes it past the Democratic primary. I don't even think she will be competitive. All of the blatant corruption will just cause Democratic leaning moderates and independents just stay home. :cool:
 
UNCG Deac said:
I'm just praying that she makes it past the Democratic primary. I don't even think she will be competitive. All of the blatant corruption will just cause Democratic leaning moderates and independents just stay home. :cool:
Click to expand...

When faced with the GOP potentially holding all 3 branches of government, I doubt they'll stay home.
 
WFFaithful said:
I think that it is more the narrative built around Obama than Obama himself that made him a polarizing figure.
Click to expand...

Of course you would :). That is what the left thinks. And the right says the same thing about W. It was just the narrative. My opinion is that it is both, but always leans more on the individual than the media/culture. Eventually if you are a good president, the fruit shows itself. No matter how much Republicans hate Democrats, most of them admit that Clinton was a pretty good president. A lot of Pubs hate Obama, but he hasn't given them anything to prove he is not a pretty awful president. His only accomplishments are very partisan driven.
 
Wrangor said:
Of course you would :). That is what the left thinks. And the right says the same thing about W. It was just the narrative. My opinion is that it is both, but always leans more on the individual than the media/culture. Eventually if you are a good president, the fruit shows itself. No matter how much Republicans hate Democrats, most of them admit that Clinton was a pretty good president. A lot of Pubs hate Obama, but he hasn't given them anything to prove he is not a pretty awful president. His only accomplishments are very partisan driven.
Click to expand...

adorable
 
The Republicans had impeached Clinton at this point in his presidency. Only through the lens of history did they admit he did a good job. That's a silly comparison.

Wrangor, what has Obama done to be divisive?
 
WFFaithful said:
Hilldog is the worst. Yet she is somehow still better than the GOP candidates.
Click to expand...

Except she is not. This is a falsehood that is trying to be sown into the narrative. Christie would make a GREAT moderate president. Romney to be honest would be a much better president than Hillary. I won't say the same thing for Cruz (would never vote for him), or Jeb (would probably make a pretty moderate president, but just can't vote a third Bush into office). Don't know enough about Walker to have a strong opinion. I think Rand would make for a VERY interesting president. He certainly isn't beholden to the traditional Republican power plays. Might be a great mix to get some meaningful things done on civil liberties and foreign policy.

There are several very good options on the Republican side that would make fine presidents. I know that that you will never vote for an R in this election, but just because you are partisan doesn't mean there aren't solid options. It is a falsehood perpetuated by the left that is simply just another power play. That is the one thing that Hillary Clinton is really good at....power plays. She has proven to be untrustworthy over and over again. For the life of me, I cannot see the appeal of voting for her. She is literally Richard Nixon part 2. Politically accomplished, smart, powerful, but insanely deviant and self absorbed.
 
Wrangor said:
Of course you would :). That is what the left thinks. And the right says the same thing about W. It was just the narrative. My opinion is that it is both, but always leans more on the individual than the media/culture. Eventually if you are a good president, the fruit shows itself. No matter how much Republicans hate Democrats, most of them admit that Clinton was a pretty good president. A lot of Pubs hate Obama, but he hasn't given them anything to prove he is not a pretty awful president. His only accomplishments are very partisan driven.
Click to expand...

They didn't think Bill was a good POTUS until they had several years of W's presidency
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top