What could Obama do that would make you not vote for him?

I am upset by Obama's stand on FISA and abortion, his militaristic talk against Iran, his support for funding faith-based programs, his weakened commitment to leaving Iraq in 16 months, his new-found support for the death penalty, and so on. If he had shared these views in the primary, I doubt he would have won. He lied or distorted his views to win the primaries, and he is most certainly doing the same thing now. He's a great orator, but he's a typical politician. He has had a superb marketing campaign that some fell for, but others saw through all along. But, whether we saw through him or not, what we continue to see is the consummate politician who is willing to do whatever it takes to win the election. That is what we want, isn't it?

At the very least, Obama will appoint good bureaucrats, Supreme Court Justices, support some form of national health care, and embrace other traditionally Democratic positions. The Obama people seem to know how to run a campaign, and they know they can ignore people like me because I will vote for Obama as long as he remains to the left of McCain, which is easy to do. Those who are angry at Obama now fell for the hype, got caught up in politically empty phrases about hope and change, or never liked him in the first place. I'm not surprised at what Obama is doing, but I am concerned that as he reaches to the center, it's as if he's reaching for 50.1% of the electorate rather than being a leader and trying for a much larger margin.

But, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since he came from nowhere to win a very formidable Democratic primary and elections are more than anything else about winning. I may not like a lot of his stands, but it's hard to imagine what he could do that would stop me from voting for him. And I think the vast majority of us, having seen the cruelty of the Republican Party, will stand by him no matter what.

That's an easy one.

:shrug:

That's one thing that'd do it for me.

NGU.

why do you assume he "will appoint good bureaucrats, Supreme Court Justices, support some form of national health care, and embrace other traditionally Democratic positions"

I also am bitterly upset about the litany of items you mention. I am not sure why he should be trusted to do what you think will be done "at the very least".

Comfort me.

Right now I am just going from an "anyone but McCain" stand. I am deeply disappointed in my candidate and my Party.

However- I am proud of my state delegate. The Legislators from Massachusetts understand the need for government not to invade on our privacy. Every single one voted against this awful piece of legislation. There are many days I wish my state were it's own country.

Not surprisingly, all my reps supported this illegal action.

being its own country. Texas. For different reasons, of course. :)

I lived there when I was young and have always had a soft spot for it. Then Bush came along. Now I sometimes wish they would just secede again.

He came out against the California state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage:

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html

On other issues, he's merely to the left of McCain, but still in the center or even to the right.

The fact that he voted against both Alito and Roberts suggests to me that he would appoint at the worst centrist SC justices, which is a big improvement over the Bush appointees, and considering that Justice Stevens is 87, I think the SC is very, very important.

that alone suggests a vote for a D. I just wish I felt more comfortable that he would appoint a left-leaning one.

With his recent stands on FISA, abortion etc suggest a more centrist. Which shifts the overall leaning of the court to the right.

(I can't actually imagine there is any one issue that would make the difference. Any dem will be better than McCain.) That said - the enthusiasm factor is not high except for the idea of dems across the board. Oh and getting rid of Bushco. Now THAT is VERY exciting and worth working for.

...I'm hopeful he'll reverse some of this stuff once in office but I ultimately doubt it.

I just want my country to stop bleeding and eroding and falling apart at the seams and even if Obama can do that and have no MORE rights taken away from us then I'll be o.k. with it.

my hope.

I have an 11 year old and I'm downright scared of where we're headed if things don't stop.

A constitutional law professor -- hell, someone who takes an oath to defend the constitution -- and then shits on the 4th amendment? Well, that's a deal killer for me.

Undervoting the presidential in Texas kind of frees up my conscience, in addition to my time, energy, and money. I feel like he didn't get the message before, maybe he will now.

n/t

That's enough of a cross to bear, especially around here, but because this state remains electoral-red as a baboon's ass, it simply won't matter if I don't vote the top race on the ticket. There's lots of states besides Texas like this, and lots of states where the opposite is true.

that, technically, didn't count (The filibuster was doomed either way.) But you will passively endorse the national status quo because you say your presidential vote doesn't matter. Ok.

Either way, that's not the sort of presidential candidate I can vote for, and since my vote doesn't amount to much for the realities previously described, Obama doesn't really lose anything either.

But that doesn't translate to McLame winning, or even gaining anything. That's leaping to an illogical conclusion.

Now he can't run ads saying "My opponent voted against surveilling our enemies!"

Obama's vote one way or the other would not change the outcome - it was too heavily lopsided as it was.

Which is better, a 'good' vote that could cost him the election, or a 'bad' vote that could put him in a position to actually do something about this situation?

even though I had it on all day.

They only got 28.

You do know the Senate rules, right?

As explained above, my lack of vote against his opponent doesn't matter in the electoral scheme of things.

how could he ever have been sold that bill-of-goods. I live in Florida and it was obvious joe was not going to help delivering the state.

Gore is a smart guy - he never ever ever should have been sold that clown.

If he did something **that** bad, he'd be replaced as nominee, and I'd vote for whoever the replacement was.

I would probably still show up to vote for him. :)

I'm voting for the "D" no matter who it is,there is no other realistic choice.

Continue shredding the Constitution, continue breaking down the barrier between church and state, continue to swing to the right.

I was a latecomer to Obama, and mainly supported him because he wasn't Hillary. If he continues to go down this path he's walking, it will be impossible for me to pull the lever for him come fall. I don't reward those who shred the Constitution.

Im so sick of this RW bullshit being posted here. YOU obviously didnt take the time to learn about his positions. That. Is. Not. His. Fault.

You're claiming this is RW bullshit and admitting that he has these relatively conservative stands? Sounds to me like you either opposed him or supported a conservative candidate! LOL. I supported him all along because he ran a great campaign and that's what counts, but it's obvious that he ran in the primary as a liberal, so he fooled a lot of people in that way. The ones he didn't fool read his position papers. But, the ones who listened to him or saw his ads were often fooled. Did you embrace his dishonest primary campaign (as I did) or do you not support him?

When he has not. Basing support for someone on the way the campaign was run, as you claim you have, is simply not smart. You supported Obama but didnt bother to learn his positions? You based your support on TV ads? LIV much?

Unlike you, I actually took the time to LEARN about him. And no, he's not conservative at all. Saying that just further proves your ignorance.

Apparently, you're saying you supported Obama even though you knew he was against abortion in some cases where most liberals are for it, even though you knew his promise to leave Iraq was anything but ironclad, even though you knew he supported states rights when it comes to using the death penalty for child rapists, even though he largely supported the Supreme Court's defense of the second amendment (amazing that you read he supported something even before the Supreme Court ruled on it -- do you have link? LOL.). I supported Obama pragmatically, while you come across as a starry-eyed groupie who did not read his positions; otherwise you wouldn't post such nonsense. And, yes, Obama was a liberal before he ran for President. That Obama is easy to support. The new Obama is either a liar or much harder to be enthusiastic about. And if you think supporting the death penalty, limitations on current abortion standards, and gun rights is liberal, then you ought to look up the meaning of the word. Start with the dictionary. Not even his insurance-ass-kissing health care plan is liberal (though neither was Hillary's).

:rofl: I read his positions. And both his books. You admittedly and obviously did not. So please dont embarass yourself by trying to argue what you think his positions were. Unlike you, I never thought Obama was a "liberal". So save your tired little ranting for someone who wasnt paying attention.

See, I educated myself. While you did not. Which is why your arguments have no basis in fact. Do yourself a favor and read his book. Its ALL about his political positions. After that, maybe we can engage in conversation. But you'll need to stop acting like such an ass.

I said I supported Obama pragmatically.

I knew he was running as a centrist. Even now I support him pragmatically, but unlike you I don't pretend he's something he's not. Apparently you read that that he supported the Supreme Court's stand on gun control before they made the stand and apparently you read that he supported the death penalty for child rapists before the issue came up. Those are lousy positions on his part, and certainly not positions he makes plain in his books or his position papers. I did read Audacity of Hope and I know he's quite moderate on economic and religious issues, but I also know that's not the image he used to win the primaries. And, as long as you call me ignorant, I'm certainly not going to show you any respect. I did not start this by insulting you. You did when you chose to call me ignorant.

It was all available.







http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

i could have voted for Lincoln, even though he only freed slaves in slave states.

i could have voted for FDR even though he did the awful internment of the Japanese Americans.

i guess i'm depraved.

I haven't thought of an election in 'make it worse so it'll get better' terms since 1968, but I'm getting there.

Electoral politics - bah!

Can't vote for someone who would steal my girl :rofl:

One more shoe drops and that may be it.

Are you an American living in Italy?

There are Democratic clubs thriving in Rome, Florence and other centers.

So yes, I could, though I am not living there at present.

I wasn't sure if you were Italian or an American living in Italy.

OH, Firenze still in my profile!!!

I am back in the USSA now.

Wish I wasn't, but then, Italy has gone nuts too lately.

...that is about the ONLY thing Obama could do in order to make me NOT vote for him. I would not vote for McCain, but I would just figure Obama went over the edge.

There is NO way, no matter what Obama does ~~ excepting endorsing McCain ~~ that would make me do other than vote for Obama. Too much is at stake to NOT defeat McCain this coming November.

JMHO

Hey... you asked.

:shrug:

preferably a baby.

Stuff like that.

on national TV--something along those lines.

Oh he already did ...

He could be hawkish with Iran, he could plan to stay in Afghanistan, plan to go into Pakistan, and plan to continue the war on terror.

He could support merit pay and charter schools. He could want to fund and fix NCLB, instead of dumping it.

He could support NAFTA/CAFTA.

He could run a faith-based campaign, and be willing to extend government support and tax dollars to faith-based enterprises.

He could reach out to homophobes and allow them to campaign for him.

He could leave health care in the hands of insurance companies.

He could vote for FISA.

Of course, he wouldn't do any of those things, would he?

I may reach the opint where I no longer feel a strong urge to vote 'for' Obama but I am always going to vote against McCain and the republicans.

If Obama changes his views on the need for universal healthcare or helping the poor in an effort to appeal to 'reagan Democrats' I will not vote because I like him anymore, but I'll still vote for him since he is the lesser of two evils. But I personally doubt he'd go 'that' far to the right wing.

East. That would be a deal breaker for me.

The only other deal breaker would be to overtly appeal to anti-Arab and Anti-Muslim racism and bigotry.

I don't see him doing either.

But there are "Democrats" who might be inclined to do either or both.

That would be a deal breaker for me. And I would NEVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER support ANY candidate from ANY party who did either or both and I would actively work for their defeat.

But as I said, I do not see Sen. Obama doing either. He has done and said some things that have disappointed me. But nothing that would lead me to cease supporting him.

In fact, I'll send him money to buy more kittens to eat.