I think his leadership experience compared to his opponents will be his greatest hurdle.
He does lack experience, but he seems to make up for that with charisma and insight. He may be new to the scene, but I don't think that undermines his value, although it will be called into question. His ideas are fresh. He can heal a lot of wounds.
I completely disagree. Neither of those other candidates have ever been president before. We are looking for candidates we believe will guide this nation properly. They will all have to learn on the job.
Bush had tons of experience before coming to the job
oh wait he did, he was govenor of texas.. that gives you loads of experience in things like foriegn policy, one of our biggest problems today.. Oh wait, it doesnt.. Now lets see where could you get foriegn policy experience without being president... HMMMMMMMM the senate maybe?
We have also seen how far we get with these experienced politicians(lol and if bush is what we get when we look for experience, i would rather elect someone with none), you know perhaps it IS time for an unexperienced one.
Obamas biggest hurdle is getting bigoted middle america to ignore his name.. his problem isnt a lack name reconition, it too much name reconition. You know jesus christ could return, but if he was named adolf dalmer he wouldnt get elected to either. I wish this wasnt true but there i still a lot of ignorance and racists in this countries heartland. If you really need proof Bush did his best in 04 in heartland america, that just says loads about the people.
Given Bush's "success" as president, pointing out the he got elected with little experience to me is an argument against Obama, not for.
Obamas biggest hurdle is getting bigoted middle america to ignore his name
Which of course is not a generalized unbiased statement isn't it? There are no bigots, or racists in say; California, New England, Florida, Illinois, etcetra....
Your logic is flawed and unrealistic. There are bigots everywhere
The bigger problem is the people that don't pay attention. The people that have the right to vote but don't.
you absolutely right, there are bigots everywhere and my statement was very biased and bigoted itself, thanks for pointing that out. I hope you arent from middle america :). Still i appologise for the over generalization. Maybe i should have said the the bigoted and plain uninformed instead of singling out middle america.
It is kind of ironic being bigoted while complaining poeple are bigots. lol i will strive to do better.
I think his name is an advantage in that it's not generic. And it's fun to say!
The president of the United States controls rather than leads the electorate. In doing so, particularly when he is acting as the Commander in Chief he virtually controls the world. For that reason the next president should be committed to a model of government that best fits the needs of the United States and is most tolerable to the rest of the world. Al Gore is a good example. Any charismatic orator can be a cheer leader but that is neither a necessry nor sufficient condition for the prudent exercise of the powers of the presidency.
WE NEED TO KNOW MORE, MUCH MORE, ABOUT OBAMA BEFORE WE PUT THAT POWER IN HIS HANDS.
I like Gore. I support Gore. As far as I know, he has not thrown his name in the hat. Obama is working hard to learn the ropes and study policy. He has two years before debates start to really study up. He may surprise everyone by being a very quick study.
He may surprise everyone by being a very quick study.
I wouldn't be surprised.
how much have you known about past president before they came to power?
I didnt know bush outside of his job as governor. Obama is you havent noticed will be picked over by a fine tooth comb, i already know more personally about him than i did bush.
I know he did coke and marijuana.. just have very strong suspcions bush did coke and drank alot
I know where he went to school and grew up. That he went to a muslim school for 2 years and then to a christain school for a couple more years. I know he was part of his states legislator and did so well there that he was elected with that name at the hieght of our war.
I am not disagreeing with you, i wish more americans realized what president bush was like before we elected him as well, i am just saying we never know that much about president but your right this should change.
Gore would be unstoppable with obama as vp though.
I think it would be really funny if Obama managed to pull this off... it's interesting to imagine how the rest of the world would react if we elected someone with his darker-than-your-average-American complexion and broke the WASP streak. It would certainly mix things up, in a way they haven't been mixed in a long time.
I don't agree with many of his policy positions but I am glad he decided to jump into the race. I think he can bring a fresh new perspective and for once it feels like someone who isn't the lesser of two evils is a possibility.
He's on Facebook.
"His leading rivals for the Democratic nomination are far better known to voters, the Illinois senator said in an Associated Press interview the day after announcing his candidacy."
The media is doing everything they can to fix that little problem.
As far as I know, there's a big chunk of the 18-25 year old population that's already behind him. There's a lot of young Americans that see him looking out for them, that see him as much "cooler" than the alternatives. Even if they don't necessarily know all his campaign points, thus far he's got great recognition.
Also thanks to Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert.
Is it just me or am I the only one alive (besides John Stewart) that doesn't consider 'The Daily Show' real news? I mean really, it's like SNL, only funnier.
I think most people that watch The Daily Show and the Colbert Report are aware that it's not "real news" as you put it; at least, we recognize that they're deliberately being satirical. It is in fact still news, just with a comedic slant to it. They're still talking about the issues, they're just not being the stuffy anchors that the rest of the news channels feature. No, we aren't looking to Colbert and Stewart as full-blown serious news anchors. We are looking to them for a lighter take on the news.
I'll agree we need to see more of Barack in order to make any preliminary decisions, but I believe he will live up to the standards. I believe that if there are enough people capable of understanding and accepting his knowledge and understanding of humanity, he will prevail. I morally feel Barack is the way to go, Bush has proved to us that words mean close to nothing in terms of politics, Barack seems to have radical and practical changes that he wants to make, and I think the hole that America was thrown into needs dramatic attention. I'm ASTOUNDED at the number of closed-minded people who live by FOX News and O'Reilly (I personally know some of these people). It's pure manipulation.
This is worth watching:
The most necessary change is the polarization, something that Barack has pointed out. I don't care if my president smoke's cigarettes, has smoked marijuana, or has spent a few of his earliest years in a muslim school- WILL HE PROTECT ME AND MY FAMILY! That's all I am interested in at this point because when I'm ready to have a family, I want to know that my children will not be giving over their resources to something that they don't agree with and will not have made a positive change in the end.
TTommy and tigerblade, I agree with both of you, it IS satirical, but it also does present news you wouldn't see on FOX. You might see it on CSPAN but that's just not as fun!
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |