• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

How Obama got elected

Big Dog

Large Member
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Simply amazing how uninformed most Americans are, very disturbing!
 

RedRocker

Active member
So basically the news media picks the president, that video is frightening.
I won't be disappointed in our new President, the ones that elected him are in for a huge letdown and I predict they will turn on him with great gusto.
 

The Tourist

Banned
This might sound cynical, but that's what I expect from Americans of this time period.

If you asked a cross section of these same people why Clinton was impeached, they would say one of two things.

Either they would say that Willie was hounded because of a sex scandal, or they would say he "beat the charges." Both comments are incorrect, despite the fact that both misconceptions have been corrected in the media numerous times.

Clinton was impeached for lying to Congress. The 'impeachment' is the process or act of the procedure. Clinton was impeached--and the disposition of those charges has nothing to do with the final conclusion.

However, that's not the thing that troubles me. BHO got elected for the same reason OJ Simpson 'walked' on his murder trial. For all of the ballyhoo about how race should not be a factor, in the final analysis, it is indeed a consideration every time.

Within minutes of the projection of the election results, I heard numerous references to MLK. In truth, I think the black candidate would have won, or at least garnered the majority of votes along ethnic lines, even if that candidate was OJ himself.

Considering that BHO is also part caucasian, I wonder if the election would have turned out the way it did he had professed himself to be white. While a true statement, the black bloc of voters would have most likely turned on him.
 

rlk

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
For a long time, I have thought that in order to vote, you either need a license or to pass a test. This video, and others I have seen, prove my point.

Bob
 

mtntopper

Back On Track
SUPER Site Supporter
Voters.JPG
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Simply amazing how uninformed most Americans are, very disturbing!

I've been watching this thread and just shaking my head. There is a similar thread on the Catholic forums too. I've yet to see, on either forum, an Obama voter defend these voters. Clearly the McCain voters, at least on the forums, knew the candidates positions. Not sure if bubba on the corner could describe them? But in real life I know many of these Obama voters who haven't got a clue. My administrative assistant is a very well spoken, very intelligent black woman, we were talking politics before the election and she could not give me concrete policies of Obamas. I didn't think bad of her, because I couldn't do it either. That is one of the problems with his campaign style . . . or perhaps it is the genius of his style. Its all style and little substance.

Take for example the ACTUAL position of Obama and the ACTUAL position of McCain on pulling out of Iraq. The positions are, for all practical purposes, identical. Still, most people got hung up on McCain's statement of we'll be there for 100 years if that is what it takes. Obama said the same thing, but phrased it differently, by stating we'll pull our troops out as soon as we are able to. Both, if you actually read their positions, favor staying only until the new Iraqi regime is stabilized and self supporting.

Same belief, different way to express it. Voters hearing a different message, many of them hearing only inspiring prose.
 

CityGirl

Silver Member
SUPER Site Supporter
Neal Boortz summed up the black vote in an article I posted earlier.

The Race Factor

Are many black voters going to vote for Barack Obama primarily because of race? Of course, many will. Surveys and polling have shown that the figure may reach 20%. I think it’s well more than that. Is race a sound reason to cast a vote? Probably not. Is it understandable? Absolutely. I cannot fault a black American for voting for Obama. It may turn out to be a negative vote insofar as their dreams and goals are concerned. It may not work out all that well for their children, especially if they’re ambitions and talented. But I don’t think many of us can absolutely say that we wouldn’t be casting the same vote were we in their shoes.

If you are a white American there is no way in the world you can look at this election through the same eyes as a third or fourth generation black American citizen. Several months ago a caller to my show suggested that Barack Obama’s ascendency in the presidential sweepstakes was Black America’s biggest accomplishment. I disagreed. Though I can’t remember the exact words, I said that, in a general sense, the shining moment for Black America may have been the show of patience and restraint shown by black men when they returned from putting their lives on the line in World War II and in Korea to a country with segregated schools, colored waiting rooms, whites only water fountains, beatings, lynchings, water hoses, police dogs and systematic discrimination pretty much every where they looked. The restraint showed by black Americans during the civil rights struggles of the 50’s and 60’s, though not universal, was something to behold.

Now .. try, though you won’t succeed, to put yourself into the mind of a black American. How can you experience or understand the legacy of segregation, violence and second-class citizenry your ancestors went through and not take pride in a black American on the verge of winning the presidency? How many black American voters do you think are uttering to themselves: “If my grandfather had only lived to see this.” It takes a great deal of maturity and a clear understanding of the possible future consequences for someone to put their racial pride aside and swim against the tide on this one. So, there will be no name-calling, at least not here, for people who cast their vote on the basis of race in this election. As I said, It’s understandable.


That people vote without a grasp of the issues is a travesty but it happens each election. In this year's election, the contrast was marked but in the past many voted because they thought their candidate "looked" more presidential. I have no doubt age and appearance helped propel Clinton and Gore to the White House. I've no doubt many a woman voted for the young good looking guys.
 
D

darroll

Guest
Kathleen Parker















Bailing Out Ignorance
November 26, 2008






WASHINGTON -- So much for the wisdom of The People.

A new report from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) on the nation's civic literacy finds that most Americans are too ignorant to vote.

Out of 2,500 American quiz-takers, including college students, elected officials and other randomly selected citizens, nearly 1,800 flunked a 33-question test on basic civics. In fact, elected officials scored slightly lower than the general public with an average score of 44 percent compared to 49 percent.

Only 0.8 percent of all test-takers scored an "A."

America's report card may come as little surprise to fans of Jay Leno's man-on-the-street interviews, which reveal that most people don't know diddly about doohickey. Still, it's disheartening in the wake of a populist-driven election celebrating joes-of-all-trades to be reminded that the voting public is dumber than ever.

The multiple-choice ISI quiz wouldn't deepen the creases in most brains, but the questions do require a basic knowledge of how the U.S. government works. Think fast: In what document do the words "government of the people, by the people, for the people" appear? More than twice as many people (56 percent) knew that Paula Abdul was a judge on "American Idol" than knew that those words come from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address (21 percent).

In good news, more than 80 percent of college graduates gave correct answers about Susan B. Anthony, the identity of the commander in chief of the U.S. military, and the content of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech.

But don't pop the cork yet. Only 17 percent of college grads understood the difference between free markets and centralized planning.

Then again, we can't blame the children for what they haven't been taught. Civics courses, once a staple of junior and high school education, are no longer considered important in our quantitative, leave-no-child-behind world. And college adds little civic knowledge, the ISI study found. The average grade for those holding a bachelor's degree was just 57 percent -- only 13 points higher than the average score of those with only a high school diploma.

Most bracing: Only 27 percent of elected officeholders in the survey could identify a right or freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment. Forty-three percent didn't know what the Electoral College does. And 46 percent didn't know that the Constitution gives Congress power to declare war.

What's behind the dumbing down of America?

The ISI found that passive activities, such as watching television (including TV news) and talking on the phone, diminish civic literacy. Actively pursuing information through print media and participating in high-level conversations -- even, potentially, blogging -- makes one smarter.

The ISI insists that higher-education reforms aimed at civic literacy are urgently needed. Who could argue otherwise? But historian Rick Shenkman, author of "Just How Stupid Are We?" thinks reform needs to start in high school. His strategy is both poetic (to certain ears) and pragmatic: Require students to read newspapers, and give college freshman weekly quizzes on current events.

Did he say newspapers?! Shenkman even suggests government subsidies for newspaper subscriptions, as well as federal tuition subsidies for students who perform well on civics tests. They could be paid from a special fund created by, say, a "Too Many Stupid Voters Act."

Not only would citizens be smarter, but also newspapers might be saved. Announcements of newsroom cuts, which ultimately hurt quality, have become routine. Just this week, USA Today announced the elimination of about 20 positions, while the Newark Star-Ledger, as it cuts its news staff by 40 percent, lost almost its entire editorial board in a single day.

In his book, Shenkman, founder of George Mason University's History News Network, is tough on everyday Americans. Why, he asks, do we value polls when clearly The People don't know enough to make a reasoned judgment?

The founding fathers, Shenkman points out, weren't so enamored of The People, whom they distrusted. Hence a Republic, not a Democracy. They understood that an ignorant electorate was susceptible to emotional manipulation and feared the tyranny of the masses.

Both Shenkman and the ISI pose a bedeviling question, as crucial as any to the nation's health: Who will govern a free nation if no one understands the mechanics and instruments of that freedom?

Answer: Maybe one day, a demagogue.
http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/park081126.htm
 
Top