07/03/2008 05:57:59 PM EST

OK, let's make a list: What has Obama flip-flopped on since the primary?

posted by jarett

All I see on the news today is how Obama is flip flopping on every principle he's ever had.  So, let's do it:

Email Print
Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit Facebook
Show me the money.  What has he gone back on?  Where has he directly contradicted himself?

I will almost certainly vote for the Democrat no matter what.  But if he IS doing this, why, when his poll numbers were so much better than McCain's?

< Palestinian Bulldozer Killer | My Take on NCMR 2008 >
 Display:
OK, let's make a list: What has Obama flip-flopped on since the primary? | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 hidden)
Re: (none / 0)

"why, when his poll numbers were so much better than McCain's?"

 Since when does substance matter in US politics?

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 06:50:27 PM EST

Exactly... (none / 0)
Jarrett, I know you want me to bite on this question, but Nick just nailed it on the head - it doesn't matter if he really "flip-flopped" on some issues, the perception is that he has, and that's all that really matters in the end... If you saw Maddow on RTWH on MSNBC today, you will see the perfect example of this - the perception overrules the reality. It doesn't matter what his position was, it only matters that there's a story or an idea that he changed his position... BTW, does Obama look sluggish and unprepared the last few days on TV? Where is the golden boy candidate that was gonna change the politics and change the way things are done? He almost looks like a Republican at this point - he better watch how much he "refines" any more positions!!! :)

by bobo1 on 07/03/2008 07:09:57 PM EST

[ Parent ]
"the perception is that he has," (none / 0)

To who? Mostly liberals who would vote for him anyways...the perception, which you agreed with me is all politics is...is in favour of Obama by HUGE margins. For instance:

The National Journal reports on a Time poll in which 60% of the respondents said that liked Barack Obama more than they like John McCain and only 23% said they liked McCain more. Historically, people tend to vote for the candidate they like best, rather than the one who knows more about government or even the one who favors their interests. Almost nobody thought George Bush knew more about governing than Al Gore in 2000, yet Gore did not get a landslide because many people thought Bush was a nice friendly guy, someone you could have a beer with, rather than a lecture on global warming. Being liked is the key to winning elections in America (unlike many other countries in which the candidates' proposed policies are what matters). On this score, Obama is currently ahead. Since it will be difficult for McCain to raise his likeability--he is what he is-- his campaign will probably focus on reducing Obama's.

Source: http://www.electoral-vote.c om/

So, using my logic, which you completely agree with...Obama seems to be on the road to victory more than anything else. Obama could flip-flop all he wants, if people like him, he's a shoe-in and liberals will NOT give up on him. I'm not worried.  

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 07:32:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I agree, to a point... (none / 0)
If the Democrats can't win in this political situation, then they are truly a bunch of bumbling losers... That being said, the problem for Obama (and the Liberals distorted views on Obama) is that he isn't as popular to the general electorate as you guys think he is - polls or no polls, facts are that he still has to win over a large chunk of the general electorate, namely poor working white people. He has begun the process by shifting some of his views (Gun control ruling is one good example) to the center (much to the chagrin of the Lefties), but he has a long way to go. The only avenue the pathetic McCain campaign has is to shape the way people see Obama and to change how they perceive him. Obama has set himself up during the primary as a man of "change" and "hope", but he is showing (and the McCain camp is exploiting) the fact that he (Obama) is just in fact another typical lying politician, and the media is following suit accordingly. Simply put, Obama cannot go around saying he is gonna change things and the turn around and do the same damn thing everyone else does. This is the time for Obama to be a leader and a trailblazer - and he is showing us that he is neither - he is a liar, just like the rest of them - and his word and message means nothing. Why should an undecided want to vote for yet another flip flopping politician? Thanks again for your comments. :)

by bobo1 on 07/03/2008 08:02:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
RE: (none / 0)
Obama is more popular than McCain, thats a fact that cannot be denied. He is trouncing McCain in the national polls, and has a majority of the electoral college if the vote were held today. The composition of America is changing, the voters that are white racists are smaller than they used to be, I believe you are the one who is overestimating the power of the "white poor vote". The poor minority vote is more ample and leans much more towards the Democrats, mostly because they are not encumbered by false notions of America. I don't think Obama has to maintain teh "Change" and "Hope" message as much as he used to, that was geared mostly towards disaffected liberals. Obama has the liberal vote tied up, and now he has to appeal to the centre, he doesn't fear a desertion from the left...the left would be signing its own suicide note to give up on Obama and this golden opportunity. I think that Obama is a politician like any other, he wants to win. Where Obama did screw himself is by saying he is different from other politicians, and acted and spoke differently...now he is becoming more "mainstream", but does this mean once in office he will kowtow to the centre like he is now? I hope not.

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 08:44:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Who said anything about racists? (none / 0)
How come when I or anyone mentions white voters, Obama supporters start dropping words like "racist" into the conversation? I'm sure Obama doesn't have the KKK vote, so why do you bring it up? The majority of voters (especially undecided voters) are white lower/middle class. That is an undisputable fact. I'm not saying that McCain wins in a popularity contest - he doesn't because quite frankly he's a creepy guy... But that doesn't matter in our system - if McCain can convince the majority of undecided voters that Obama is not trustworthy or otherwise, he has a chance of winning. Yes, Obama has the black vote and the Liberal votes tied up, but what about the other 65 percent? Surely you don't think Obama can win just on his Lefty merits alone? Even Bill Clinton needed Perot to beat Bush in 1992. As it stands, Obama SHOULD have a cakewalk this election - why hasn't that happened? I think the chickens are getting counted before they're hatching! As for your electoral maps, if you are refering to those ones you posted a while back, you are dreaming - show me some more current projections! :)

by bobo1 on 07/03/2008 09:21:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Step one... (none / 0)
"How come when I or anyone mentions white voters, Obama supporters start dropping words like "racist" into the conversation?"

Because we aren't stupid, "poor/working class white voter" means racist, if it didn't then "white" wouldn't be used. If you are going to use code, please know what the code means. At least with Rev. Wright and Rev. Hagee, they expose their bigotry and vitriol in a un-obstructed way.

"But that doesn't matter in our system - if McCain can convince the majority of undecided voters that Obama is not trustworthy or otherwise, he has a chance of winning."

Wait...so substance does matter now?

"Yes, Obama has the black vote and the Liberal votes tied up, but what about the other 65 percent? "

How many of those 65% are going to vote? I think McCain has a bigger problem with the conservative base than Obama has with any constituency. The real question is with McCain, not Obama. It seems as if the GOP doesn't want to win this yr, figuring let the Dems take control when the economy tanks (a crisis they the GOP created). Think about it...

"Obama SHOULD have a cakewalk this election - why hasn't that happened? "

You got a time machine...? Sounds like it.

"As for your electoral maps, if you are refering to those ones you posted a while back, you are dreaming - show me some more current projections! :)"

Current projections are even more advantageous to Obama....check out the link I posted in an earlier post.

Where's the argument here Bobo?

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 10:00:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Just one more thing... (none / 0)

"Even Bill Clinton needed Perot to beat Bush in 1992."

 Exit polling indicated that Perot voters would have split their votes fairly evenly between Clinton and Bush had Perot not been in the race, and an analysis by FairVote - Center for Voting and Democracy suggested that, while Bush could have won more electoral votes with Perot out of the race, he would not have gained enough to reverse Clinton's victory. Clinton also led Bush in all polls after the Democratic Convention after Ross Perot's initial exit in two way races, and never lost the lead for the rest of the campaign.

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 10:09:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Err... (none / 0)

" Any criticism of Barack Obama whatsoever is automatically labeled "racist"."

Wrong, I critcize Obama myself, its not the criticism of Obama that is considered racist, its the use of the CODE's that disguise racism into a semi-legitimate discourse. "White Working Class" invokes an image, of undereducated, racist, trailer-park types...to deny that is to deny reality. Again, I'm trying to explain something to Ken...I'm the real idiot here.  

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 10:24:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Nick... (none / 0)
There is no argument - when I say 65 percent, I'm talking about the 65 percent OF VOTERS who are 1) not black or of any other Obama minority following group or 2) not Liberal in the sense of the word you understand. Being Canadian, you should know about ethnic majorities - here in the US, what you call "trailer park racist trash" is still the majority of the population about 70-30 to the non - that's our voting base that's who Obama needs to reach for, that's why he is shifting positions - that's all I was saying - it was you who threw the "racist" bullshit into the mix. Stay up north where you can stay insulated from the realities on the ground here in MY country! :)

by bobo1 on 07/03/2008 10:35:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Plz... (none / 0)
"There is no argument - when I say 65 percent, I'm talking about the 65 percent OF VOTERS who are 1) not black or of any other Obama minority following group or 2) not Liberal in the sense of the word you understand."

I don't see much of an argument (which you know it or not, you are presenting) considering that Obama is turning traditional GOP states pink and purple. Sure he won't win in Appalachia (wonder why? do you REALLY wonder why?), but he can win outside of the racist areas...yes they are racist. America's history has been a dialectic of race more than anything else, America is still not over it.

"here in the US, what you call "trailer park racist trash" is still the majority of the population about 70-30 to the non - that's our voting base that's who Obama needs to reach for, that's why he is shifting positions"

No, that constituency is relegated to areas where Democrats hardly ever win, at least since 1980; what is there to lose for Obama here? He can pander all he wants to these ppl, he will not win them over, they still think he's a Muslim and swore on the Qu'ran. The new electoral map is not about race or working class, its about education, rural/urban divide, and the inequalities brought forth by globalization and neoliberalism in the US. Reference my thread here for more info:

"it was you who threw the "racist" bullshit into the mix."

Nope, you did...if not...why bring up "white" aspect of the working class? There is a racialist aspect to your code, its not my problem if you are ignorant of the meanings of your own rhetoric.

"Stay up north where you can stay insulated from the realities on the ground here in MY country! :)"

Real rich coming an Amerikan, how many countries have you invaded and democracies has your country overthrown regardless of the "realities" on the ground in those countries? Don't even try that BS, I'm just returning the favour.

Blog: http://perspectivos.blogspo t.com/

by Nick86 on 07/03/2008 11:31:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
got news for u. (none / 0)
ur in mexico HA...

by Bungle on 07/04/2008 06:10:03 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Delusionland! (none / 0)

First, I don't recall anyone mentioning race (at least to call you racist) when you went on the drug smear thing.

Second, all I did was point out Obama never said he did crack.  That was something you inferred and then declared he admitted.

And third, Rush Limbaugh was a junkie drug addict like, RIGHT NOW!  These aren't youthful indiscretions.   Its the prime of his fat bloated worthless meaningless career!  Oxycontin and raping 12 year old Caribbean girls.  That is how he spends his leisure time.

by ProfRich on 07/03/2008 11:21:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Issues to debate (none / 0)

Ben Fergusen said that he hopes Obama makes this election about "experience."&nbs p;

 I hope McCain makes this election about Flip-flopping, b/c he'll be in for a whole world of hurt.  Bring on the flip-flop debate. 

by gnomeklpto on 07/04/2008 05:29:08 AM EST

Just politics as usual (none / 0)
Obama is only flip-flopping to win the election. Rest assured that when he moves into the White House he will do what you want, no matter your ideology.

by Twba on 07/05/2008 10:07:09 AM EST

OK, let's make a list: What has Obama flip-flopped on since the primary? | 15 comments (15 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: