Your friend's a moron. They certainly did not 'love' them, most insurgents were actually Iraqi (none of the insurgents were Iranian/Syria), and their efforts were screwed the second the neocons decided it would be a swell idea to start a war there. But I don't need to tell you any of that...why did I even feel the need to reply to thatNutter: Pulling the Iraq card huh? We came in and they loved us. Saddam was a problem and we took care of that. Too bad we had to deal with the insurgents(mostly Iranian/Syrian), that screwed the our entire efforts up in the region. GWB did a much better job than Obama has so far.
POLITICO: When did you realize the auto bailout would be politically helpful?
AXELROD: “I was in the room when we made the decision. And I got to tell you, I had the polling data in front of me: Even in Michigan, people were opposed to the auto bailout. I wasn't trying to influence the President's decision, but I felt it was my obligation to tell him what the politics were. In fact, I always joke that I like him so much because he listens to me so little. There are so many decisions on which the polling said one thing and he said another, and this was one. And he said, ‘We're in the middle of the worst recession since the Great Depression. How do you just let the American auto industry collapse? There are a million or more jobs you're going to lose. As long as there's a plausible way forward that has a reasonable chance to work, we ought to pursue it.’ And he did. ... By last spring and summer, [you saw] a real resurgence, ... and you realize this really was a great decision. ... One in eight jobs in Ohio is related to the auto industry, and that was an incredibly important decision for those Ohioans.”
POLITICO: What did the data tell you at the time?
AXELROD: “People were jaundiced about bailouts. ... [The polling] said it would be a disaster.”
POLITICO: Did you tell the President that?
AXELROD: “I was very plain with him. I said, ‘Mr. President, even in Michigan, people are opposed to this, so you need to know that.’ My great and deep admiration for him is in part rooted in the fact that he never turned to me first. I always had to sort of force my way into the conversation, and invariably, he would be polite and listen and then he would go his own way. ... t's not as if he has suicidal political instincts. He's not unaware. ...
“[Similarly, on health care,] in the summer of 2009, when all the demonstrations were going on at the town hall meetings and the numbers were very, very clear that we were taking on some water, I went in to report on this. He had just gotten back from a trip. I'm standing in the Oval Office. He listens to me very respectfully, and then when I'm done he said, ‘Look, I know you're right. I'm sure we're taking on water on this. But I just got back from Green Bay, and I met a woman who was 36 years old, two small children -- her husband and she both have jobs. They have insurance. But she has Stage IV breast cancer now. She's hit her caps. And she's just terrified that she's going to leave her family bankrupt -- that she's going die and leave her family bankrupt. That's not the country we believe in, so let's just keep on fighting.”
so obviously never happened. That's a campaign speech not an actual event.“[Similarly, on health care,] in the summer of 2009, when all the demonstrations were going on at the town hall meetings and the numbers were very, very clear that we were taking on some water, I went in to report on this. He had just gotten back from a trip. I'm standing in the Oval Office. He listens to me very respectfully, and then when I'm done he said, ‘Look, I know you're right. I'm sure we're taking on water on this. But I just got back from Green Bay, and I met a woman who was 36 years old, two small children -- her husband and she both have jobs. They have insurance. But she has Stage IV breast cancer now. She's hit her caps. And she's just terrified that she's going to leave her family bankrupt -- that she's going die and leave her family bankrupt. That's not the country we believe in, so let's just keep on fighting.”
Everyone said 08 was a one off - special circumstances, a young Black man going for the Presidency. A ton of hate for Bush and the republicans etc etc.Has to make you wonder a bit that so many were leaning towards Romney, or maybe I'm paranoid.
Then what about the 'likely voters', the fact Nate Silver's meta-poll was dead on, it seems to me the pollsters had the tools to get it right.Everyone said 08 was a one off - special circumstances, a young Black man going for the Presidency. A ton of hate for Bush and the republicans etc etc.
4 years later, the pundits thought the 'novelty' had worn off, and a lot of those 1st time voters wouldn't come back this time around - they were wrong.
Like others have said, and the pundits + media have finally started to realize, Obama had his shit down. He kept the core of the 08 election campaign going and added to it in the last 4 years. The entire party machination was geared towards this, and their confidence in retrospect makes perfect sense.
i guess community organizing experience is quite handy for this sort of situation.
Ever since the coming of the 24 HR news channels I reckon.Has our media always been so conspiracy and witch-hunt driven?
Is it a reflection of our society?
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20121112_In_59_Philadelphia_voting_wards__Mitt_Romney_got_zero_votes.htmlIn 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes
Spot on. That's also why it devolves into voyeuristic coverage of things like car chases and the like. It becomes a matter of ratings. It's strange how, for all the time they have in the day, they actually do so few in depth programs. They've got the opportunity to really educate people, but don't seem interested in it.Ever since the coming of the 24 HR news channels I reckon.
Simply on an average day there isn't 24 hours worth of news to talk about. So they have to gin up every issue and analyze it from all angles to even have enough to talk about in every cycle.