Karl`s PC Help Forums

Obama voters deserting him
scholar - 17-10-2010 at 15:15

here is an article

When your supporters look at what you've done and crywooty , you're in trouble.

And Speaker Pelosi is still saying that the Democrats will not lose control of the House.lips_sealed:P:P:P


Redwolf5150 - 17-10-2010 at 17:22

Obama hasn’t dug us out of Bush’s recession and 2 wars fast enough. That’s the problem.” – David Letterman


scholar - 17-10-2010 at 17:38

David Letterman?

:jester) The intellect of the Democrat party! roffle

Seriously, it's worth remembering that the financial collapse came as a result of the housing market crisis, which the Republicans tried to prevent with banking reform several times, but the Democrats blocked it each and every time. The collapse came on the Democrats' watch; they took over as a result of the 2006 elections.

Obama has lost support largely because the Democrat legislation which he has supported is harmful to the economy, killing jobs and diverting money from the private sector (which creates wealth and enduring jobs) to the government, which is a parasite.


delanti - 17-10-2010 at 19:20

Scholar it is a waste of bandwith trying to get voters to understand that it is not GWB's fault. They can't wrap their mind around the fact that GWB had a Democrat controlled Congress his last 2 years and they did the same thing the Republicans are doing now which is to do anything but pass anything that would make the President or his party look good.

That and the fact that Barny "make housing affordable to everyone" Frank is the head of the Finance Comitee. Truth about Barney Frank waveysmiley


marymary100 - 17-10-2010 at 19:28

How many "voters" do you think read these boards?


Daz - 17-10-2010 at 21:07

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
How many "voters" do you think read these boards?


We used to have a NYDaisy, or something? That'd make 4 or 5 I guess, but as two of them don't post anymore, I guess the total is 3...? confused2

;)


Redwolf5150 - 17-10-2010 at 22:57

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
How many "voters" do you think read these boards?


The bigger question is: How many people have visited this board, seen all of Scholar's ragging on the President, and left without posting/joining? Or how many have left because of said rants?

I know that is the main reason Jackie and I didn't come for a long time and will be the explanation why we won't be again.

But he doesn't care that he is looking like an arsehole, dragging the board down and drives away people.


Daz - 17-10-2010 at 23:08

Thick skin is what you need Red. Read, digest, forget and ignore.

Hmm? Or was that my school years?

confused2

Seriously though, I guess it might be more difficult what with you being a Yank, but for me, it's a case of you know what you're getting, so you know how to deal with it. It's not like posts are overly repulsive, major difference of opinions, yes, full of bile and abusive, no, not really. Same old same old, yes.


giron - 17-10-2010 at 23:14

Quote:
Originally posted by Daz
Thick skin is what you need Red. Read, digest, forget and ignore.




If that fails, try using this .............




[bad img]http://oi25.tinypic.com/35dawe1.jpg[/bad img]


Daz - 17-10-2010 at 23:16

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
Quote:
Originally posted by Daz
Thick skin is what you need Red. Read, digest, forget and ignore.




If that fails, try using this .............

Hmmmfff

Well, thanks very much! shocked_yellow

;)


Redwolf5150 - 17-10-2010 at 23:34

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
Quote:
Originally posted by Daz
Thick skin is what you need Red. Read, digest, forget and ignore.




If that fails, try using this .............




[bad img]http://oi25.tinypic.com/35dawe1.jpg[/bad img]


May I?

Really?

I'd be putting it in every thread of his, kind of like when I had him in tears with me monkeys.

:D


marymary100 - 17-10-2010 at 23:53

It would be a shame if posters deserted the boards because of anti-anything rants.


Redwolf5150 - 18-10-2010 at 00:12

It's a shame that an American would come on a BRITISH based message board and slam the Democratic party like he does. Especially after repeated requests to stop by said Brits.

Gee, I can remember when a certain member of a country and western trio made a slam about Bush in England and they were pillared back here in the states.

Guess it depends on which party the president is from if you can make remarks against them.


scholar - 18-10-2010 at 03:36

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
It would be a shame if posters deserted the boards because of anti-anything rants.
I draw your attention to the fact that my post about Obama's drop in popularity is factual, a news and observational article, not a rant.

When President Clinton lost Congress to the Republicans, they worked to pass welfare reform and better budgets. By working with their ideas where he could agree, he co-operated in some good accomplishments.

It appears President Obama will have a similar opportunity, if he chooses to take it. Of course, the actual numbers from the elections will determine whom he will have opportunity to work with.:)


marymary100 - 18-10-2010 at 06:01

I would draw your attention to the fact that it is a persistent pattern that you have. For someone with an oft quoted attention deficit disorder you don't seem capable of moving your focus to something more interesting instead. Normally people with ADD find it difficult to concentrate on the one thing all the time.


giron - 18-10-2010 at 08:12

If scholar has a medical condition and is able to produce a doctors note to verify it, then I think perhaps we should all try to be a bit more tolerant of his ludicrous posts.


scholar - 18-10-2010 at 10:17

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
you don't seem capable of moving your focus to something more interesting instead. Normally people with ADD find it difficult to concentrate on the one thing all the time.
I don't stay on one focus all the time.

Look at my posts in the Late Night Club UK--they are usually about friends I see there, music, food, and my day.

Look at my recent post about Rich Whitney, listed as Rich Whitey on the ballot. Look at how I commend the Democrat Senator who originally sponsored legislation requiring that ballots be sent to servicemen by an early deadline, so their votes would be counted. With respect to President Obama, I support him when he does well, such as when he allowed men from the American navy to shoot some pirates to free their hostages. You can certainly count on variety in my posts.kewl_glasses

The election is very much on my mind because I see and hear political ads all day on television and radio. Their outcome is important to England and to Europe because measures which harm the American economy (such as when the US government encouraged risky mortgage loans) harm the economies of others to whom our financial dealings are linked. And, on the other side, when measures are taken to strengthen the American economy, others are helped. It is possible that the outcome of this election will change the direction of one or both houses of Congress.


Mary2 - 18-10-2010 at 12:07

It's not on our minds though as we are not Americans and as we have now all pointed out only 3 of you who have voting rights and regularly post here are.

To the rest of us it's just D U L L...waveysmiley

hth.


giron - 18-10-2010 at 12:16

I think it's fair to say that there are people that don't always agree with your views, but at least you are making an effort to post and people have the option of not reading what you post of choosing not to reply, if they feel strongly about it.

You also need to bear in mind that you will receive criticisms concerning what you post, particularly if you haven't taken the trouble to do some basic research before posting, one example of that was your thread concerning CF light bulbs.

That said, you shouldn't be deterred from posting, we desperately need members that are willing to take an active part in the forums.


delanti - 18-10-2010 at 13:35

Just musing. Even though this is primarily a board consisting of my English brethren, the thread is clearly labeled American Politics.

I find it interesting that considering that even though many Englishmen and ladies have great disdain for America and Americans that they seem to enjoy participating in the discussion of American politics.

I too grow tired sometimes of Scholars long drawn out narratives but I neither reply or comment in any way so as to not prolong the discussion. The more comments, aggravating remarks made tend only to continue and escalate the posting.

Interesting and self condemning is MM's response to my post to Scholar suggesting he reduce his posting "How many "voters" do you think read these boards? " If you are not a voter and you are posting on this thread I wonder why? Is it only to throw barbs at the
Americans, encourage more lengthy anti Obama posts or just to make mean spirited derogatory posts?

Since my ancestors came from Yorkshire and I have relatives who still live there, I consider myself of English heritage. During my visit last fall, I was fortunate to meet and associate with many wonderful and gracious English people. Fortunately I have the ability to understand that the one or two I met who were not so friendly probably do not represent the majority.

Therefor I see no purpose to participate in a forum where I disparage a Country or it's people based on my limited contact with them. I can only hope that the other participants will have the same consideration and compassion for me that I have for them. waveysmiley


LSemmens - 18-10-2010 at 13:41

Gee, Giron, what have you been eating??? That post was almost intelligent! ouch)



Oh, and one that I happen to agree with, BTW.


giron - 18-10-2010 at 13:48

Quote:
Originally posted by delanti
Just musing. Even though this is primarily a board consisting of my English brethren, the thread is clearly labeled American Politics.

waveysmiley


Yes, and that was done for a specific purpose, which was to keep all the rants about American politics in one section of the forums, as was indicated when it was originally set up.


Daz - 18-10-2010 at 20:17

Quote:
Originally posted by delanti

Interesting and self condemning is MM's response to my post to Scholar suggesting he reduce his posting "How many "voters" do you think read these boards? " If you are not a voter and you are posting on this thread I wonder why? Is it only to throw barbs at the
Americans, encourage more lengthy anti Obama posts or just to make mean spirited derogatory posts?


None of the above, your honour.

I visit KF as a whole. My first click, once logged in is "Todays Posts" and I make my way down the list accordingly, and comment when the urge takes me. I have little idea what sub-board I may be posting in/on other than when I come across a tech or photo post. I specifically avoid only the "late night club" thingy, as it's not my cup of tea.

Here to clarify.


LSemmens - 19-10-2010 at 11:13

Sounds like my way of "catching up" too, DAZ, I rarely look at the forum, just at he recent posts.


LSemmens - 19-10-2010 at 11:16

Sounds like my way of "catching up" too, DAZ, I rarely look at the forum, just at he recent posts.


giron - 19-10-2010 at 11:36

You don't know what you're missing. :)


Mary2 - 19-10-2010 at 12:16

Quote:
Originally posted by Daz
Quote:
Originally posted by delanti

Interesting and self condemning is MM's response to my post to Scholar suggesting he reduce his posting "How many "voters" do you think read these boards? " If you are not a voter and you are posting on this thread I wonder why? Is it only to throw barbs at the
Americans, encourage more lengthy anti Obama posts or just to make mean spirited derogatory posts?


None of the above, your honour.

I visit KF as a whole. My first click, once logged in is "Todays Posts" and I make my way down the list accordingly, and comment when the urge takes me. I have little idea what sub-board I may be posting in/on other than when I come across a tech or photo post. I specifically avoid only the "late night club" thingy, as it's not my cup of tea.

Here to clarify.


While I am interested - as I used to live in America - I am only too well aware that the other UK posters on here aren't. It is the persistent abuse of your president that irks. There is never an opportunity lost to share a negative thought about the man, that unlike George Bush, had a clear mandate to lead your country.

Dot had to set up this US politics bit of the board during the last election because the scattergun attack on anything to do with Clinton/Obama for the two years prior to the actual election was dominating the board in general and filling up the "new posts" page. The result of this was that any posters that we already had were turned off and any potential posters looked elsewhere.

It is perhaps time to tell you that there has been a recent mass exodus from a well known commercial website by digital photographers. It is important that you are aware that these UK posters chose to join a completely new site rather than join here. It would have been great, imo, to have had these rather frequent posters who between them have a lot of talent and also like to chat about life in general (neither British or American in particular) and write prose/poetry. But that opportunity has passed now.

We are not anti-American. We are Pro-KF.

hth waveysmiley


delanti - 19-10-2010 at 17:11

I have on occasion expressed my dissatisfaction with the President but I don't feel it has been to the excess or even to the level that GWB was berated during his last couple of years by everyone on the board.

If the problem with the board seems to be just one person, why has no one been able to come up with a solution. My self, if you banned mention of anything to do with American politics would not hurt my feelings a bit. I get enough of that on the news every day. I find it perplexing that if it is such a problem that no one has been able to find a solution to the detriment of the board and other members.

Take a stand before all that's left is 5 of us voicing our displeasure about the content of the posts. Just my 2 cents.


Daz - 19-10-2010 at 18:36

Quote:
Originally posted by Mary2

We are not anti-American. We are Pro-KF.

hth waveysmiley


Good post M2. kewl_glasses


giron - 19-10-2010 at 19:05

I'd just like to say - well done Boner Obama, keep it up. lips_sealed


scholar - 19-10-2010 at 23:41

I would have liked to have had an influx of new people, too.

KF is set up in such a way that, so long as the posts are not deceitfully labeled, there is no reason for anyone to read a post they don't care to read. If someone posts about sewing, and I don't like posts about sewing, I don't click on the sewing posts. I DON'T jump into a thread I don't like, and then complain that I am in a thread I don't like, and berate any posters in the thread. I just "tune to another channel" in KF, one that I think I may like.


scholar - 19-10-2010 at 23:43

I may come across a dozen articles critical of Obama and/or the Democrats each day, but I don't post about all those topics; instead, I am very restrained and highly selective. Just now, I checked the "today's" page and found that there are six topics on the page, two of which were orginated by other posters. Of the four that I started, two are bits of silliness when a candidate misspoke and when a candidate was listed as "Rich Whitey", another commends Democrat Senator Schumer for his work to get early ballots to servicemen. Only one of the six post topics started out in any way negative toward Obama, and that was a factual observation about how HIS SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN DESERTING HIM (I do commend him when he does well, such as when he alloed the navy to shoot three pirates, but I would hardly call myself a supporter. The point of the article is that many people who voted for him have decided they don't like what has been happening. That's his own doing.)

Incidentally, he does have two years yet in which to turn things around. President Reagan was not greatly popular two years after he became President. It took some time for his tax cuts and spending restraint to bear fruit in a booming economy.


delanti - 20-10-2010 at 13:40

shocked_yellowshocked_yellowshocked_yellowroffle


LSemmens - 20-10-2010 at 13:53

Quote:
It is perhaps time to tell you that there has been a recent mass exodus from a well known commercial website by digital photographers. It is important that you are aware that these UK posters chose to join a completely new site rather than join here.
It begs the question, though, did they consciously make a decision not to join KF, or did they decide to join this other site as a group without even being aware of us?


marymary100 - 20-10-2010 at 16:16

They were pointed in this direction so yes I'd say it was a conscious decision.


giron - 20-10-2010 at 18:48

To be perfectly honest, if I were looking for a photography forum I'd go for a specialised site, not here.

KF is more of a general chat site, nothing wrong with that, of course.


marymary100 - 20-10-2010 at 18:58

Yes I know. Our serious photographers don't post here often but if we think about it, there is a lot of "chat" about the photos and other things by these posters.


giron - 20-10-2010 at 19:07

Yes, but we have a lack of active members, so wouldn't it be logical for them to choose a more active site ?


marymary100 - 20-10-2010 at 21:39

Not to those of us who are pro-KF.


giron - 20-10-2010 at 21:50

All the people that regularly post here are ' pro-KF ', but the fact that we don't seem to attract many new members is surely a concern, isn't it ?


marymary100 - 20-10-2010 at 22:16

Indeed.


delanti - 21-10-2010 at 02:03

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
To be perfectly honest, if I were looking for a photography forum I'd go for a specialised site, not here.

KF is more of a general chat site, nothing wrong with that, of course.


I disagree on it being a General chat site. Back eons ago I made a comment about Montgomery and thought I started WWIII.lips_sealed


giron - 21-10-2010 at 07:48

Quote:
Originally posted by delanti

I disagree on it being a General chat site. Back eons ago I made a comment about Montgomery and thought I started WWIII.lips_sealed


Yes, you should have got a jolly good birching and a spell in the cold showers for doing that, there was no need for it ! waggyfinger


delanti - 21-10-2010 at 19:25

I took the cold shower but no one was available to do the birching. I asked my girlfriend and she thought I said bitching so I had to listen to her for 3 hours. Worse than the birching.waveysmiley


giron - 21-10-2010 at 20:39

It's an easy mistake to make.


Daz - 21-10-2010 at 20:47

Damn, that's bad luck Delanti. My sympathies! :D


giron - 6-11-2010 at 13:25

[bad img]http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/1807/662279n7oeum9.jpg[/bad img]


LSemmens - 7-11-2010 at 11:55

I thought Matilda was the one with the birch, though, you'd have to ask Giron about that, he seems to know almost everything. We really only have one member here that thinks he knows everything, but we won't mention his name, will we.......RW!!! ;)


CarterM - 9-11-2010 at 07:43

Some 57% of voters said they were more willing to take a chance on a candidate with little political experience. More than a quarter said they’d be happy to vote for somebody with views that “seem extreme.” The poll—which found that Republican voters are a lot more enthusiastic about voting this time around than Democrats—is largely good news for the GOP, though with 78% of respondents saying that they believe congressional Republicans should compromise to get things done, it points to potential trouble ahead within the party if a sizable number of Tea Party candidates get elected.


scholar - 9-11-2010 at 15:22

I appreciate your thoughtful, serious post, Carter. doffs_cap

The idea of the Republicans compromising to get things done could be a real challenge in two ways:

1--It is a real problem to compromise on things that are harmful. In this fragile economy, who in good conscience can compromise by agreeing to destroy 100,000 jobs in the health insurance industry, or the oil industry, or the coal industry, instead of destroying 200,000 jobs as an uncompromised bill proposes to do? President Obama said during the campaign that he would tax coal burning power plants out of existence. Where would be the compromise--tax them so badly that electricity rates would double to cover the increased taxes?

Polls indicate that most Americans oppose the Democrat health plan that was passed. Among other things, it increased the cost of health care, gave more control to government, gave a financial incentive to employers toward dropping good health insurance plans (because the payment the government will accept is less than the cost of good health insurance), took $682 billion from Medicare (for senior citizens), and increased Medicaid (which requires the states to share in paying for a greater number of poor people). It also incorporates bribes which favor certain states above all the rest, which was necessary to buy the votes of their Senators. A good compromise would be to repeal this beast, and instead to pass measures that really do bring down the cost of health care. Two ways to do this: allow health insurance to be bought across state lines, and enact tort reform which would prevent outrageously high malpractice suits from inflating health care costs (by defensive medicine, and by increasing the cost of malpractice insurance).

2--Compromise requires a measure of co-operation from the Democrats. Some liberals think that measures which have been passed are already too weak, already a compromise. It is not uncommon for politicians to think, "If we settle for a lesser measure, we'll never get what we really want."

It is worth remembering that under Reid as Democrat leader in the Senate, the final health care bill was written secretly in his office--he didn't allow the committee process, which would have allowed the Republicans to offer improvements. Up to now, the Republicans have been locked out.

When the Republicans did well in a congressional election during President Clinton's administration, Clinton adjusted his aims toward policies where the Republicans could find common ground. If President Obama and the Democrat leaders would do the same, compromises could indeed be reached. But, to this point, when Obama has asked Republicans to work with him, he has meant he wants them to agree to his party's proposals.


LSemmens - 10-11-2010 at 14:16

You wouldn't be Scholar's mate, would you Carter? Scholar will be over the moon to receive an "intelligent" reply to one of his O'Bummer posts.


Redwolf5150 - 10-11-2010 at 16:05

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Compromise requires a measure of co-operation from the Democrats.


Gee, like the compromise that the repubs have been doing for the last two years?

That is, try to block EVERYTHING the democrats were trying to do?

The next two years will be a waste of time as the repubs will attempt to undo the work of the last two years and all but the most important legislation will be blocked or vetoed.

As for jobs, one freshmen-elect senator from Wisconsin said any American jobs sent overseas must not be that important of jobs in the first place.

Excuse me, tell that to the Wisconsin 30 graphic designers who learned two weeks ago that their jobs were being given to a company in the Philippines and they were going to be out of work just before Christmas.

Bet THEY and their families thought their jobs were important!

And I close this post with my new mantra:

[bad img]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/spidermonkey_fullpic_artworktest.gif[/bad img]


scholar - 11-11-2010 at 02:00

Quote:
Originally posted by Redwolf5150
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Compromise requires a measure of co-operation from the Democrats.

Gee, like the compromise that the repubs have been doing for the last two years?
When Republicans have had ideas with merit, such as measures to reduce the cost of health care instead of increasing it, or cutting bad spending from the stimulus bill (like the cocaine-for-monkeys project, or the African-genitals-washing project, or the buy-wind-turbines-from-China project), they were locked out. They were not allowed to offer amendments that would make the legislation better.

When the Democrats said, "Here is the legislation [sometimes written in secret, with a vote scheduled before there is even time to examine thebill]--shut up and vote for it, we won't allow amendments"--there wasn't really any opportunity for compromise, was there?


Redwolf5150 - 11-11-2010 at 04:38

Sorry, no cigar.

When specifically asked to be a part of drafting health care reform, the repubs instead stonewalled the process.

[bad img]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/spidermonkey_fullpic_artworktest.gif[/bad img]


scholar - 11-11-2010 at 05:58

Quote:
Originally posted by Redwolf5150
When specifically asked to be a part of drafting health care reform, the repubs instead stonewalled the process.
gif[/IMG]
False.

1-The Republicans were vocal in their support of REAL healthcare REFORM, and made their proposals public. Two of their best ideas were allowing people to buy insurance across state lines (which would mean they could buy whatever health insurance best suited them from all the kinds available in the whole country, instead of being limited to those that were already available in their states), and tort reform. The Democrats did not allow these ideas to become part of their Government Tyranny Health Plan.

2-One of my Democrat Senators, Dick Durbin, holds the number 2 Democrat position in the Senate, after Majority Leader Harry Reid. Senator Durbin was asked about the content of the Democrat bill, and he said that Reid was working on it secretly, not letting even him know what was in the bill. Not only did the Democrats lock out the Republicans by circumventing the committee process, they kept their own people in the dark.

Fortunately, as the American people got to be better informed about the bill, they came to hate it. It makes health care more expensive, takes away personal freedoms, gives the government more control over our lives, and takes $682 million away from Medicare for senior citizens. That is one of the greatest reasons that the Democrats lost seats in both the Senate and the House.

It's good to know that simple truths--the government is supposed to serve the people, not harm them--prevailed in the elections.


Redwolf5150 - 11-11-2010 at 06:48

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar

It's good to know that simple truths--the government is supposed to serve the people, not harm them--prevailed in the elections.


That's not how I and a bunch of my friends see it.

Here in Wisconsin, more money was spent by groups from OUTSIDE the state pushing negative ads then the candidates themselves spent.

Also on a NATIONAL LEVEL big corporations -- along with the National Chamber of Commerce (aided by millions of dollars from OUTSIDE THE US) -- basically bought this last election.

We'll see how much the repubs care about the average American after January.

Be prepared for a constant stream of "I TOLD YOU SO" posts from me, too.

Spin history all you want, Scholar. The truth is the repubs have tried to thwart every major initiative President Obama proposed in his first two years. This will only get worse after January.

[bad img]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/redwolf5150/spidermonkey_fullpic_artworktest.gif[/bad img]


giron - 11-11-2010 at 11:33

[bad img]http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/7857/11430333dsj98ko.jpg[/bad img]


scholar - 11-11-2010 at 13:49

Quote:
Originally posted by Redwolf5150
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
It's good to know that simple truths--the government is supposed to serve the people, not harm them--prevailed in the elections.

That's not how I and a bunch of my friends see it.

Here in Wisconsin, more money was spent by groups from OUTSIDE the state pushing negative ads then the candidates themselves spent.

Also on a NATIONAL LEVEL big corporations -- along with the National Chamber of Commerce (aided by millions of dollars from OUTSIDE THE US) -- basically bought this last election.

We'll see how much the repubs care about the average American after January.

Be prepared for a constant stream of "I TOLD YOU SO" posts from me, too.

Spin history all you want, Scholar. The truth is the repubs have tried to thwart every major initiative President Obama proposed in his first two years. This will only get worse after January.

.
If you don't agree that the government is supposed to serve the people, not harm them--

it's no wonder you speak on the side of the loser Democrats.


There was a time when the Democrat Party stood strongly against Communism, favored a strong military, and proved that the best way to increase government revenue and stimulate the economy was to lower taxes--and President John Kennedy did all of these. I wish more Democrats would live up to their party's former glory.