where is the mandate for change?

#1
MG1968

MG1968

That’s No Moon…
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
28,387
Likes
19,291
#1
Sure Obama won several red states, but only by very narrow margins.

the popular vote? no, not really. In 2004 Bush received just over 62 million votes. Obama just under 64 million while McCain got just over 56 million. So it wasn't entirely a bunch of new democrats voting, it was also a lot of conservatives not voting.

Congress? The dems failed to acquire a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. In the House, many of the 25 new democrats are fairly conservative "blue dog" democrats.

Obama did win convincingly, there's no denying that, but to call it a mandate for change is a stretch. The nation is still very narrowly divided and Obama will not be able to govern from the center left and be reelected in 2012.
 
#2
#2
he thinks he has a mandate and that is all that matters. god help us all.
 
#3
#3
Either way he won and this is how our country works.

You want change........ 2010.....
 
#6
#6
MG1968 said:
stop being such a pragmatist, you're scaring me.
Click to expand...

Oh stop.......

:eek:k:

You know as well as I do that he is not the anti christ and Joseph Stalin.

Lefties said the same thing about Bush we are saying about Obama and in the end if he does any thing he promises all will be well starting in 2010.
 
#8
#8
This election certainly wasn't a mandate. It may have represented a slight shift to the left amongst the electorate, but that's about it.
 
#9
#9
Debate opens on Obama's mandate

"If Obama is to be a successful president, he has no choice but to be a transformative one, pushing for bold changes big enough to deal with the scale of our problems," said Robert Borosage, co-director of the liberal Campaign for America's Future. "Those who suggest he must govern by splitting the difference with conservatives ignore the reality of the mandate that he has been given and the reality that he has to deal with. He has no choice but to seek to build a broad coalition for fundamental change. The era of triangulation, of symbolic reform, of a cribbed conservative consensus, is over."
 
#10
#10
If Clinton received a "mandate" with only 43% of the popular vote, Obama is on a mission from *insert deity of your choice*.
 
#13
#13
I think that it is amazing how the largest margins ever posted in the electoral college, for example - FDR's 5xx to 0xx by whoever - still only constituted about 59% of the popular vote....or Reagan's 525 to Mondale's 13...still, only 59% of the popular vote.
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
the question is how in the world Mondale got any electoral votes, home states or otherwise.
 
#16
#16
Obama did win convincingly, there's no denying that, but to call it a mandate for change is a stretch. The nation is still very narrowly divided and Obama will not be able to govern from the center left and be reelected in 2012.
Click to expand...


I thought a mandate was defined by winning over 50% of the popular vote. Obama eclipsed that by any poll result, same way Bush did in 2004.
 
#17
#17
rjd970 said:
I thought a mandate was defined by winning over 50% of the popular vote. Obama eclipsed that by any poll result, same way Bush did in 2004.
Click to expand...
are we going to be mad at that 52% for voting themselves a pay raise like we are with congress when they give themselves more of our money?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#18
#18
Pres. Elect Obama has 364 Elec. Votes, well over 2:1. I'm calling it a mandate.

From MediaMatters.org:

"President Bush was re-elected in 2004 with 286 electoral votes, the smallest popular-vote margin since 1976 (excluding the 2000 election) and the lowest electoral vote count for an incumbent president's re-election since 1916. Nevertheless, many in the media were quick to echo Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that "the nation" gave Bush "a mandate." It remains to be seen whether the media will apply the same standard in assessing the results of the 2008 election."
 
#19
#19
dsbyrd said:
Pres. Elect Obama has 364 Elec. Votes, well over 2:1. I'm calling it a mandate.

From MediaMatters.org:

"President Bush was re-elected in 2004 with 286 electoral votes, the smallest popular-vote margin since 1976 (excluding the 2000 election) and the lowest electoral vote count for an incumbent president's re-election since 1916. Nevertheless, many in the media were quick to echo Vice President Dick Cheney's assertion that "the nation" gave Bush "a mandate." It remains to be seen whether the media will apply the same standard in assessing the results of the 2008 election."
Click to expand...

OK. It's a mandate. Now what?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#20
#20
I remember laughing about Cheney's comments...I REALLY don't think we should use that as any kind of standard.
 
#22
#22
dsbyrd said:
Get on board with the majority of voters and let's work together for our country. Or, be a bitter, obstructionist, sore loser.
Click to expand...

Oh come on...I'm sure you were just jumping up and down in 2000 and 2004 [here comes the obligatory...actually, I was...(fill in the poor attempt at independence here)]....

...as long as you're not harming the guy, it's OK to be very apprehensive about his presidency if you don't like what he was running on.

I hope Obama is a great president...I hope that the country betters under him. I hope that it will - but I am also worried that it might not.
 
#23
#23
dsbyrd said:
Get on board with the majority of voters and let's work together for our country. Or, be a bitter, obstructionist, sore loser.
Click to expand...
rah rah crap doesn't do it for me and I'm not going to be shamed into supporting a socialist, mandate language or no.

Now, let me know how your being vociferous for Obama is going to help me or our country? Then tell me how I'm obstructing anything by refusing to see the guy for anything but what he is?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#24
#24
BigPapaVol said:
rah rah crap doesn't do it for me and I'm not going to be shamed into supporting a socialist, mandate language or no.

Now, let me know how your being vociferous for Obama is going to help me or our country? Then tell me how I'm obstructing anything by refusing to see the guy for anything but what he is?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I'm so sorry you won't help, you are obviously very emotional about this loss for you and your party. Maybe time will heal your wounds.

I will pray for you and all the people who hate our new president.
 
#25
#25
dsbyrd said:
I'm so sorry you won't help, you are obviously very emotional about this loss for you and your party. Maybe time will heal your wounds.

I will pray for you and all the people who hate our new president.
Click to expand...

What about those of us that hate our current president?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top