Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Why is anyone supporting Obama?

  1. Jan 15, 2008 #1
    Seriously, no wisecracks, tricks, or traps.

    Looking at his record, comparing it to what you feel needs to be done, and assessing his ability to accomplish those tasks, what is it that his supporters see that leads them to believe that he can get us from here to where we need to be?

    He makes a good speech, but I really don't see anything in his record either in Ill. or so far in the US Senate that leads me to believe that he even supports the types of changes needed, yet alone that he can or will work toward actually achieving those changes.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 15, 2008 #2

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I for one don't care. I judged Bush based on character the same as I do Obama. And not only does Obama seem to understand what most concerns me, Obama is a good man with a great intellect who will prove most capable. I saw Bush as a crook and a buffoon, and I was absolutely right, so I'm sticking with my judgment of character.

    We don't need any more trained crooks. Obama can hire all the experts that he needs.

    Between Cheney and Rummy there was more experience than any President could hope to bring to office, and look where that’s gotten us!!!

    Surely you realize that what is promised on the campaign trail means very little when confronted with the reality of Washington. What matters is character, intellect, and his political philosophy. The rest will take care of itself.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  4. Jan 15, 2008 #3

    Integral

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    First of all virtually everyone running for the job is a politician, see my sig. So in that respect he is no better or worse then any of the others. History tells us that little said by a candidate during the campaign means much, so why even listen.

    I see Obama as a Olive branch to the rest of the world. The current administration has totally trashed the reputation of the US in the eyes of the world, Obama, just by being who he is will go a long way in healing some of these wounds.

    As Ivan says he seems to be intelligent, this is a lot more then can be said for the current pres.
     
  5. Jan 15, 2008 #4
    Well, a lot of people vote their gut. That's how Bush got elected. I was just hoping that there was some reasoning and supportive argument to something I had missed. Not that Hillary's any better, most who are supporting her seem to think they've found a loop-hole to get Bill back into the White House, or seem to be doing it solely because she is the first woman to have a legitimate shot at the job. Neither of which are any better, IMO, than your gut vote (and in fact are arguably worse), it sure isn't on the basis of her senate record or her "experience" prior to her senate seat.

    I just haven't made up my mind yet. The Republicans don't seem to have any new ideas just the same old bad ones (but moreso!). There don't appear to be any independents worth making a statement vote for. I was leaning toward Edwards early on, but I don't see it happening, even though delegate wise what's the current count Clinton-24, Obama-25, Edwards-18. (of course that's not counting the superdelegate pledges but those are fluid and can quickly shift) and the total needed to become the party's candidate is something like 2025 out of 4049. I don't see any of the main three backing off until the convention.
    I hate to say it but though I'd prefer a Democratic candidate to any of the Republican candidates, I just can't support Obama as a "gut-vote" (primarily because my gut doesn't tell me the same thing your's tells you evidently), nor can I support Hillary, simply because she's not running with an "R" after her name. It may well be the first time in more than 40 years of voting that I don't vote for a presidential candidate!
     
  6. Jan 15, 2008 #5
    Again, I don't see this aspect of him being any better or any more impressive than any of the other Democrats, and simply not being Republican is not a sufficient reason for me to vote for someone for president, and it certainly doesn't speak to why him specifically.
     
  7. Jan 15, 2008 #6

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That isn't what I said. I am talking about the basis of a decision. Basing one's vote on character and intellect is hardly voting by the gut. Would you elect an idiot and crook who talks a good plan? It seems to me that THIS is how Bush got elected. His supporters have nuanced this country right to the brink [the US has been unrecognizable in my opinion]. And you seem to want a track record from a junior Senator who clearly doesn't have much of one. As a US Senator he did author what has been called the most sweeping lobbying reform in recent history. And as a State Senator he came out early against the war and predicted almost exactly what would happen; to the point of sounding prophetic. Given the magnitude and signficance of this bold action at a time when level heads were called traitors by the Bush thugs, what more could you ask? He has already passed the acid test and nailed it dead on!

    What I have to wonder is how after all that's happened you would even think of not voting for a Democrat.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  8. Jan 15, 2008 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    - Barack Obama, October, 2002
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16903253/page/2/

    So much for Rummy and Cheney's combined 70+ years of experience. They are all eating the dust left behind the Senator from Illinois.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  9. Jan 15, 2008 #8
    I was just in several places in Europe and EVERYONE loves Obama. Not sure if they know alot about him, but they all seem to support his foreign policy and that is enough for them.
     
  10. Jan 15, 2008 #9
    And you know, beyond the fact that Obama can strign several words together appropriately, that he is significantly different than this, how? Not by anything he's done in Ill. or the US Senate so far, for sure.

    His record goes back a bit further than this.

    He's also stood up and supported nearly every piece of destructive legislation this White House has crammed down the throat of Congress. A Congressman that wanted my vote would have rejected these, stood up for election challenges when they had the opportunity, rejected these pieces of legislation, lobbied other congressmen to follow their lead, not have given the White House blanket approval on nominees that weren't acceptable. Given personal filibuster if necessary against even his own party leadership when they weren't following a course that protected the people and constitution. If there's a congress man that wants my vote, that's the kind of course they should have pursued. His speeches against the war carry little water with me, if he turns around and gives the president every thing he requests in order to pursue that war. I'm not impressed by hollow rhetoric. And Obama's echoes loudly. Hillary's is no better.

    Personally, The only difference I see between most of the candidates, Republicans and Democrats, is the flavor of their pandering and the letter they choose to follow their name.
     
  11. Jan 15, 2008 #10
    "Everyone" seems a bit exaggerated. I travel overseas frequently, and yes, some of the youth (those under 45), seem rather infatuated with Obama, but it is more in the same nature that they like any American Pop idol. I don't see that he is any more popular than any of the other Democratic candidates.

    And that is the point, its not that I don't think that any of the Democratic candidates wouldn't be better than what we have currently in office, nor that I don't think that any of the Democratic candidates wouldn't be better than any of the Republican candidates. Its just that I don't see that much difference between the main candidates, and what scares me a bit is that the two lead candidates seem to be more Republican-lite in their record and that I don't see anything in what they propose that is truly making an effort to lead us into "change."
     
  12. Jan 15, 2008 #11
    I've seen variations of Obama's argument. The obvious rebuttal goes something like this: despite the significant decline in Iraq's strategic and economic standing after 12 years of sanctions, the cost and risk of Hussein rebuilding his conventional military and NBC capability remains unacceptably high and ultimately outweighs that of military intervention.

    The point is that Obama made an assertion that's still hotly disputed today. Nobody argues now that the intelligence failed to detect Hussein's unilateral destruction of his stockpiles, but all parties now agree that he retained the knowledge and infrastructure to reconstitute CBW stockpiles on the order of months and nuclear explosives on the order of years once the sanctions were reasonably undermined or removed. His intent and capability is neatly described in the ISG final report section titled "Realizing Saddam's Veiled WMD Intent." The serious debate then proceeds to whether or not Hussein was on track to collapsing the sanctions regime between 1998 and 2003.

    This isn't to say that Obama's incorrect, just that his "wisdom" in 2002 is hardly obvious today--let alone then. For one, the second half his argument is irrelevant. Wars invariably see the strength of belligerents peak in their duration, not at the outset. If the threat is "grave enough," the risk your enemy will recruit within his natural constituency is hardly a reason to eschew fighting and has never the overriding concern in any American war to date. If the threat isn't "grave enough," then what cost in war is worth taking on?

    At the end of the day, people have to judge for themselves whether cost of fighting outweighs the risk of staying put and make a decision to support or oppose a war. Obama made his choice in 2002, and it's doubtful even the presence of CBW stockpiles would have changed his mind. I'd say this tells us a little something about how he'll deal with rogue states with publicly acknowledged programs that can be or have been quickly diverted to stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, but he does try and hedge a bit by at least being open to the possibility of confrontation with Baghad provided the US gathered a more solid international consensus before hand. That, combined with his remarks about ingressing force into the territory of a publicly acknowledged nuclear state like Pakistan makes it a little more difficult to gauge the depth of his strategic thinking.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2008
  13. Jan 15, 2008 #12
    Well, frankly this is all that matters much in politics.

    This may be true, but it seems that the presidency is one by the charisma and social skills of the canidate, rather than their intellectual ability or ideas.
     
  14. Jan 15, 2008 #13
    Originally Posted by Trakar
    He makes a good speech,

    No, this may be all that seems to matter to much of the electorate, but it is not the end-all purpose or utility of politics. "Politics" involves much more than convincing a majority of the electorate to side with you in an election, and even this is quite the task with an informed electorate embodied with critical thinking skills and an ability to compare rhetoric to record.

    Originally Posted by Trakar
    but I really don't see anything in his record either in Ill. or so far in the US Senate that leads me to believe that he even supports the types of changes needed, yet alone that he can or will work toward actually achieving those changes.

    All too often this is, unfortunately the case, and results in many if not most of the problems we have seen in recent history. I believe that is why our nation's Forefathers originally set up our presidential elections the way they did. Unfortunately, we do not follow that path today. But this is side-tracking the discussion.

    I would still like to have a good reason to support Obama above any of the other Democratic and Republican candidates, and would much appreciate any of his supporters who can make a reasoned case for doing so, to please present that case.
     
  15. Jan 15, 2008 #14

    ShawnD

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I don't know why people keep saying this. She's a very intelligent woman with a fairly strong voting record. She's an ideal person to lead the democrats. You can disagree with her policies but don't try to play it off like she's some kind of idiot or flip flopper. You might think a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bill, but I tend to think it was the other way around. She has probably had Bill on a leash for quite some time, even before the affair thing.
     
  16. Jan 15, 2008 #15
    In theory you are correct. Politics "should" be about much more than charisma, social skills, and the ability to tug at the heart strings of the public while simultaneously spewing mass amounts of bullsh*t. Unfortunately the "reality" of Politics is much different than it should be "in principal." My original statement was of "what is" rather than "what ought to be."
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  17. Jan 15, 2008 #16

    mheslep

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Which they believe is what? Just and approximation will do, as its not clear to me.
     
  18. Jan 15, 2008 #17

    ShawnD

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    What I get, without actually looking up any of his plans, is that he's an advocate of peace. He was against Iraq from the beginning while everybody else was on the bandwagon, so that by itself speaks volumes.
     
  19. Jan 15, 2008 #18

    mheslep

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Thanks for making my point. :biggrin:
     
  20. Jan 15, 2008 #19

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Is project Vote Smart a legitimate site?: Obama's voting record

    He seems to have voted how I would want him to. Although it's difficult to ascertain from just the titles what the bills were actually changing or promoting. I had to check out why he voted yes on the "Congressional Pay Raise Amendment" bill. Turns out it was a vote to not give congress the cost of living adjustment that year.

    I am impressed with his path through life. It makes sense to me that with the world getting smaller by the day, we should have a president who has actually lived somewhere else, and has family across the globe.

    And he will be the first president I've voted for that is younger than myself. I'm tired of the old farts.
     
  21. Jan 15, 2008 #20
    Actually, I think a vote for Hillary(or Obama) is a vote to largely continue business as usual, as it has been for the last 8-16(36) years. More largess and leeway to corporate America, more narrowing of individual rights and liberties, more power accumulation at the top, less freedom at the bottom.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Why is anyone supporting Obama?
  1. Why support the eu (Replies: 16)

  2. Hate Obama? Why? (Replies: 489)

Loading...