Comments on: Don Quixote’s Thought for the Day: We underestimate Obama http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/ Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:19:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Don Quixote http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89984 Don Quixote Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:43:52 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89984 <p>Oldflyer & JJ, I hope you're right. </p> Oldflyer & JJ, I hope you’re right. 

]]> By: Bookworm http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89964 Bookworm Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:44:12 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89964 <p>I think our biggest mistake will be to overestimate the Republicans' ability to benefit from the mistakes Obama has already made, and the mistakes he will continue to make.  I too rank Obama medium high as a campaigner (he was helped by two awful opposing candidates and a completely complicit media, which ran interference and led the cheer-leading for him), but I think his governance has proven to be mediocre to bad.  He's never risen to good and, with two wars and a recession, we need good.</p> <p>But back to those Republicans, think of Lincoln's famous words:  "That's just like [General Ambrose] Burnside. Wringing yet another remarkable defeat out of the jaws of victory."  That should be what we fear most.</p> I think our biggest mistake will be to overestimate the Republicans’ ability to benefit from the mistakes Obama has already made, and the mistakes he will continue to make.  I too rank Obama medium high as a campaigner (he was helped by two awful opposing candidates and a completely complicit media, which ran interference and led the cheer-leading for him), but I think his governance has proven to be mediocre to bad.  He’s never risen to good and, with two wars and a recession, we need good.

But back to those Republicans, think of Lincoln’s famous words:  “That’s just like [General Ambrose] Burnside. Wringing yet another remarkable defeat out of the jaws of victory.”  That should be what we fear most.

]]> By: Ymarsakar http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89961 Ymarsakar Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:31:14 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89961 <B>And of course her black dialect was much worse than Obama’s.  Which proves my assertion: the very fact that she was idiot enough to try that – even once – in public is a pretty clear indication of how awful her campaigning instincts are.</b>   There's an layer of artificiality on Senator Clinton. Even though she tries to connect with grassroots, she attempts to mirror their views and prejudices. Slightly different from Obama the blank state technique.   Bill clinton also did that with the First Black President thing. And his feel the pain thing.   Clinton also seemed to have gotten better ratings from progressives, while Obama got votes from the middle independents and other slightly clueless individuals on the right (the obvious network of good old boys). It was the delegate system Obama fixed, most likely with his foreign donations turned into liquid bribe cash.   <B>I’m afraid we in the Bookwormroom underestimate Obama.</b>   There you go with the nebulous, ambiguous, and unprovable "we" again, DQ. That's not really an argument to begin with. Just a statement of your opinion. Whenever you use that word, DQ, it's like when Obama uses the word "I" or "we are the ones we have been waiting for". It doesn't really mean anything substantive.   <B>And of course her black dialect was much worse than Obama’s.  Which proves my assertion: the very fact that she was idiot enough to try that – even once – in public is a pretty clear indication of how awful her campaigning instincts are.</b>
 
There’s an layer of artificiality on Senator Clinton. Even though she tries to connect with grassroots, she attempts to mirror their views and prejudices. Slightly different from Obama the blank state technique.
 
Bill clinton also did that with the First Black President thing. And his feel the pain thing.
 
Clinton also seemed to have gotten better ratings from progressives, while Obama got votes from the middle independents and other slightly clueless individuals on the right (the obvious network of good old boys). It was the delegate system Obama fixed, most likely with his foreign donations turned into liquid bribe cash.
 
<B>I’m afraid we in the Bookwormroom underestimate Obama.</b>
 
There you go with the nebulous, ambiguous, and unprovable “we” again, DQ. That’s not really an argument to begin with. Just a statement of your opinion. Whenever you use that word, DQ, it’s like when Obama uses the word “I” or “we are the ones we have been waiting for”. It doesn’t really mean anything substantive.
 

]]> By: Ymarsakar http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89960 Ymarsakar Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:23:08 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89960 Btw, Obama's not just an ideologue. He's a megalomaniac. Btw, Obama’s not just an ideologue. He’s a megalomaniac.

]]> By: Ymarsakar http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89959 Ymarsakar Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:22:23 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89959 CM is right in saying that the racist charge is far more dynamic and deadly than the misogynist charge.     CM is right in saying that the racist charge is far more dynamic and deadly than the misogynist charge.
 
 

]]> By: jj http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89957 jj Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:13:02 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89957 Don't know, DQ, but I think I have to go with Oldflyer: I don't seem to be observing the same rocket scientist you are.   I don't think he did that well with the Republicans.  The best measure of how well he might have done is to take a look at the result - and  it seems most of them are either laughing at him, or hold him in contempt beneath laughter.  At any rate, he certainly cannot claim to have moved them, or reached much anything that could be referred to as an "understanding" with them.   I don't think - again to agree with Oldflyer - that "endorsing" Bernanke is indicative of much of anything.  Who else was he going to "endorse?"  Not many people seem to want the job at the moment, and I certainly never heard any other name being floated by him.   And beating Hillary Clinton - well, don't know about that one, either.  She may be many things, but I don't actually consider her a seasoned campaigner.  The Clinton <em>machine</em> may be seasoned campaigners, but I'm uncertain what her contribution to that might have been.  In NY the reptile Schumer turned out his lockstep idiots and she had no opposition, so how much of your actual "campaigning" did that require?  Indeed, every time she opened her mouth her numbers dropped, so that was purely a machine-run and boosted-by-Schumer deal.  I think the boys in the back room - and Clinton himself - were astounded by what a lousy candidate she turned out to be.   And of course her black dialect was much worse than Obama's.  Which proves my assertion: the very fact that she was idiot enough to try that - even once - in public is a pretty clear indication of how awful her campaigning instincts are.   I think things are falling apart fast on young Barry, and watching his reactions thus far I don't see that he - or the people around him - have much of a clue what to do about it.  He has squandered an enormous amount of political capital and trust in a year - the modern record - and nobody believes a damn word he says that seems to indicate a tack to the center or any attempt at conciliation.  He is an ideologue so rigid as to be set in concrete, and that doesn't strike me as exemplifying a supple mind.   He isn't furiously signaling his willingness to work with Republicans, he's furiously signaling that he doesn't want to lose control of everything in November, and doesn't want to be a one-term bomb two years from November.  Regrettably everybody knows this, nobody trusts him, and he's encountering zero cooperation.  The Republicans, up until Brown was elected in Mass. had absolutely no say in anything - not a word. They were ignored, and not even invited into the back room.  So at this point none of them at this point believe a word of this nonsense - and why should they?   No, sorry.  Many a dope has been graduated from an Ivy League school; here's another one. Don’t know, DQ, but I think I have to go with Oldflyer: I don’t seem to be observing the same rocket scientist you are.
 
I don’t think he did that well with the Republicans.  The best measure of how well he might have done is to take a look at the result – and  it seems most of them are either laughing at him, or hold him in contempt beneath laughter.  At any rate, he certainly cannot claim to have moved them, or reached much anything that could be referred to as an “understanding” with them.
 
I don’t think – again to agree with Oldflyer – that “endorsing” Bernanke is indicative of much of anything.  Who else was he going to “endorse?”  Not many people seem to want the job at the moment, and I certainly never heard any other name being floated by him.
 
And beating Hillary Clinton – well, don’t know about that one, either.  She may be many things, but I don’t actually consider her a seasoned campaigner.  The Clinton machine may be seasoned campaigners, but I’m uncertain what her contribution to that might have been.  In NY the reptile Schumer turned out his lockstep idiots and she had no opposition, so how much of your actual “campaigning” did that require?  Indeed, every time she opened her mouth her numbers dropped, so that was purely a machine-run and boosted-by-Schumer deal.  I think the boys in the back room – and Clinton himself – were astounded by what a lousy candidate she turned out to be.
 
And of course her black dialect was much worse than Obama’s.  Which proves my assertion: the very fact that she was idiot enough to try that – even once – in public is a pretty clear indication of how awful her campaigning instincts are.
 
I think things are falling apart fast on young Barry, and watching his reactions thus far I don’t see that he – or the people around him – have much of a clue what to do about it.  He has squandered an enormous amount of political capital and trust in a year – the modern record – and nobody believes a damn word he says that seems to indicate a tack to the center or any attempt at conciliation.  He is an ideologue so rigid as to be set in concrete, and that doesn’t strike me as exemplifying a supple mind.
 
He isn’t furiously signaling his willingness to work with Republicans, he’s furiously signaling that he doesn’t want to lose control of everything in November, and doesn’t want to be a one-term bomb two years from November.  Regrettably everybody knows this, nobody trusts him, and he’s encountering zero cooperation.  The Republicans, up until Brown was elected in Mass. had absolutely no say in anything – not a word. They were ignored, and not even invited into the back room.  So at this point none of them at this point believe a word of this nonsense – and why should they?
 
No, sorry.  Many a dope has been graduated from an Ivy League school; here’s another one.

]]> By: suek http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89955 suek Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:00:57 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89955 DQ... You didn't finish the sentence...   It should read "We underestimate Obama AT OUR OWN RISK"... DQ…
You didn’t finish the sentence…
 
It should read “We underestimate Obama AT OUR OWN RISK”…

]]> By: Gringo http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89942 Gringo Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:09:59 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89942 Here is an updated link for the Weekly Standard article that Mike cited. <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/clinton-voters-jump-ship" rel="nofollow">http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/clinton-voters-jump-ship</a> Here is an updated link for the Weekly Standard article that Mike cited.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/clinton-voters-jump-ship

]]> By: colorless.blue.ideas http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89935 colorless.blue.ideas Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:44:58 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89935 Perhaps the above comments are pointing out the same thing:  Obama is <strong><em>wily.</em></strong> He has several advisors who are similarly attuned to the aggregation of political power.  Whatever ignorance they may have of economics, the military, etc., and however much we may laugh at Obama's narcissism, we ignore those strengths at our own and our country's peril Perhaps the above comments are pointing out the same thing:  Obama is wily. He has several advisors who are similarly attuned to the aggregation of political power.  Whatever ignorance they may have of economics, the military, etc., and however much we may laugh at Obama’s narcissism, we ignore those strengths at our own and our country’s peril

]]> By: Danny Lemieux http://www.bookwormroom.com/2010/02/08/don-quixotes-thought-for-the-day-we-underestimate-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-89934 Danny Lemieux Tue, 09 Feb 2010 12:23:30 +0000 http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=10785#comment-89934 DQ, whereas I agree that an opponent should never be underestimated,  it is also important to properly define your opponent. Once defined, his strengths (oratory, rhetoric) and weaknesses (narcissism, ideology, intellectual shallowness, reflexive anger, etc.) become clear. Then it becomes a matter of minimizing his strengths while maximizing his weaknesses, even in little ways. I suspect, for example, that little things like the laughter that greeted his SOTU comment about the "overwhelming evidence" of man-made global warming cut deep into his narcissistic self-image. Now that his ideological rigidity has been exposed for all to see, it can be used against him. Alinsky understood this all too well, but conservatives are learning fast. DQ, whereas I agree that an opponent should never be underestimated,  it is also important to properly define your opponent.
Once defined, his strengths (oratory, rhetoric) and weaknesses (narcissism, ideology, intellectual shallowness, reflexive anger, etc.) become clear. Then it becomes a matter of minimizing his strengths while maximizing his weaknesses, even in little ways.
I suspect, for example, that little things like the laughter that greeted his SOTU comment about the “overwhelming evidence” of man-made global warming cut deep into his narcissistic self-image. Now that his ideological rigidity has been exposed for all to see, it can be used against him. Alinsky understood this all too well, but conservatives are learning fast.

]]>