Obama is becoming the new hero of our party

I think he'll be the new great Democratic hero, the "great communicator" that was able to inspire a huge chunk of voters across the aisle to vote Democrat, the man that will empower the progressive movement in this country for years to come; our "Teflon" president.

I sense that when I see Obama.

(Edited for the sake of some people who were highly offended by the comparison, even though Obama himself recognizes my point on "The Audacity of Hope").

hes the next Bill Clinton. Hillary is not.

eom

I hope Obama would be better than a sell out, NAFTA cost me a job of 25 years. Bill Clinton helped destroy my income.

that comparison doesn't help Obama. Reagan was a con-man, an empty suit, B grade actor.

Obama will do wonders for us, seasoned.

Just don't. Thanks. Even H. Clinton, whom I don't support, would not deserve to be compared to that sh*thead.

He was a pig and did piggish things to the people of our country.

Obama has what it takes to do great things for this country and empower Dems like we haven't been empowered in decades.

and the trickle down catsup movement.

We have to be real and not some pie in sky ronnie reagun movement whom his own son renounced his actions cause he's one of the good guys.

movement. He did wonders for munitions and war machine, and super rich and kept middle class down.

What does seasoned mean ---on the job training?

:wtf:

political smarts and a message that resonated. I did not like him, I thought he was a mediocre president, and I think his resurrection as the saint of the GOP was our fault, because we let them do it. Instead of telling the truth and having a debate on his disastrous policies, he became the rallying focus.

He will divide it like it has never been divided before.

Just sayin'.

Except he's not old, white, insane or evil.

I hated Regan with a passion.

Still do.

Reagan was a shallow, fascist, sociopathic freak actor who did a lot of damage to this country.

nt

They are so different. I suggest Obama is a man unto himself and has earned whatever kudos he gets w/o a comparison to a rethug.

that man had some real life work experience and a good resume.

Talking Regan makes some people suspicious--DLCer bought into
Regan and the country is a mess.

you can't understand my point. Think about what Reagan did for the GOP, for conservatives. The man was a political giant, like it or not. Bill Clinton was a huge figure for the Dems, but not as big as what Reagan is for the GOP.

I think Obama will be as big for the Democratic Party as Reagan is for the GOP.

That bunch did more damage the country than any group save Bush Jr's (which is filled with the same crew).

and the conservative movement.

gotcha, loud and clear...

Obama might do the same with stupid repukes - but I repeat myself there...they're ALL stupid...

something America has never seen before.

Maybe in 50 years, they'll be saying someone else is like Obama, but Obama isn't like anyone else I've ever seen.

It is about communicating with the people. Obama does that and no other candidate of either party has that ability. Regardless of Reagan's inadequacies as a policy maker, he was able to communicate and inspire the American populace. Obama is much the same.

Hillary has communicated with me.

Edwards has even done so to a degree.

But, Obama?

Sorry --I don't get it.

~

OK, I was in a different phase of my life than I am now, but I loved that man. I cried for two days when he died !

You are right.. he had "it".. a way to make people feel good about themselves, about him, about our country. Politics aside, he had that. Obama has it, he definitely does.

in homelessness, Housing and Loan disaster which cost us billions.

I think a lot of americans want a king not a president.

Honestly do you think you are ready to be a citizen in a representative democracy? Are you willing to look beyond your feelings.

I am not intending to insult. I am truly worried about Americans willing to follow blindly a leader who the think has the It factor. Germany followed Hitler for the same reason.

popular, I was in a VERY different place. I had small children, 3 of them, and worked full time. I did not follow politics closely.. just like some people today don't follow the intricacies of the nuts and bolts. I woke up after Iran Contra, and after some life changes, but good lord.. my comment was about a man who made a lot of people feel good. I cannot believe the posters on this board, so willing to attack.. so ready to flame someone and bring up the fucking HITLER reference. I did love Reagan, the MAN, the father, the husband. I did cry when he died. You want to take that as me being a Hitler follower or maybe you're insinuating that Obama followers are such.. then knock yourself out. But it insults us all.

personality or charisma. JFK had it, early colonists wanted to make Washington a king, Mussolini had it (very popular in Italy as a manly man until things deteriorated).

My point about Hitler is that he was legally elected because many people responded emotionally to him and gave him the office and the benefit of the doubt until it was too late to turn away from disaster. It seems similar to me to the Bush presidency. He made people feel good , Gore didn't and now we are a country that tortures and kills for no good reason Fairly Hitler-like to me.

I know a lot of people who voted for Reagan and I found it discouraging at the time. I could understand people who voted on the economics, because of the gas prices or high interests rates but voting on feelings is, to me, a dangerous thing.

Morning in America seemed to me to be an empty phrase. His record and statements should have told people he would be a rich man's president.

It's not too late to edit! :hi:

I'm trying to make.

was manufactured and his policies sucked!

you say is true. There were, after all, a huge block of Reagan Democrats.

unify his party and have a big influence on the consevative movement, so Obama will unify the party and have a big influence on the Progressive movement. You're not directly comparing them. I think a lot of people are misunderstanding that.

You could have done worse -- you could have drawn a comparison to Pol Pot or Mao.

And was the ultimate patsy who let his handlers ruin so much for generations.

I would expect much more from Obama and you have just insulted him.

You aren't going to convince anyone with that post.

to take silver tongued puppet asshole.

I understand what you are saying, but thnk that it is an unfortunate comparison. It is perhaps the very last thing that a pro-Obama person should say, if they hope to encourage other people at DU to see the his potential. In fact, I would expect this from some of the people who support other candidates, and say insulting things about Senator Obama.

Note: The OP was edited while I was writing this.

or maybe Jesus Christ.

would not vote---we need citizens who think and reason. The emotional needy destroy democracy.

I want a fighter

And negotiate with the special interests

Have confidence in Obama.

Check it out.

C'mon, I know you can. :)

He's all fluff and no details except negotiation

He strikes as a very naive salesman.

Reagan was a "great communicator" (per the media), but inside he was just an old school "dad" type. He had no business being president at all on his merits. Reagan was just a pathetic front man. He needed attention; the scum he fronted for needed a pretty face. Reagan was a world smarter and a better human being by far than the current Oval Office pipsqueak, but still just a figurehead. I have no respect for figureheads or people who want them as president.

Unlike Reagan, Obama could be a reasonably good president based strictly on his resume. He is a serious human being. However, his communication skills are not there yet (except written). I don't like the preacher-style speeches like this last one. He runs very close to asking for someone to mock him as trying to channel MLK. His other speeches are fine, and as good as Reagan. But Obama's improv is nothing like as good as Reagan's, IMO. In debates, I have seen him score some good rhetorical points, but his style is mediocre, IMO.

Platitudes do not a progressive make!

hardly...

I'm not sure about his empowering the "progressive movement" but I think he'd work to forge agreement with others -- he really gets people onboard with him.

It's a slogan and a book title he used because
Americans feel hopeless after 7 years of Bushit.

If America were dying of thirst I'd write a book
called the "Audacity of Wetness" but that wouldn't make it rain.

Just because he claims to be Americas "Hope"
doesn't make it any more true than Hillarys claim
to "Inevitability"(we see where thats going)!

Hope is people buying lottery tickets as a way to get rich.
Thats an investment in hope with odds of 1 in 7,000,000 it will pay off.

Hope is street people, hands out, appealing to our better nature to survive.
Kind of like our Democratic Senators and Reps hoping the Repugs will play nice.
(hows that working out?)

"Hope" is all your left with when you have nothing else.

A few minutes at his website might ease your mind a little. He is a committed progressive with a penchant for making peaceful solutions seem like common sense, instead of the "weakness" that Democratic politicians fear.

:puke:
Raygun was a mean, dumb, senile old man that the media made into some deity...The only difference from Bush is that he was speaking his lines a bit better, hence the "communicator" BS

and he was in actuality a barely functioning figurehead who kept the masses distracted while his henchmen robbed them, that is hardly an inspiring idea.

Keep running with that.



GREAT Campaign stuff.
Don't give up because of a few Negative Nellies on this thread!
:thumbsup: