And people wonder why the US is so divided

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

And,the point of my posts are to disagree with your comment that Obama is the most partisan President in US history.

 

What I'm saying is that the country is extremely divided right now not just because of Obama but because of both sides and the republican leadership is just as much to blame.

 

Sorry you can't see that.

The part about him being the most Partisan President is a fact according to Gallup and other polling outlets. I do hold Congressional leadership responsible too, but let me ask you this:

 

1. When there is a tragedy like this shooting in Oregon, a major tornado that has ripped through a community, etc..., which elected official is usually asked to go and help heal the community?

 

2. When there is a conference at the UN with other countries leaders presenting, who from the US typically speaks on behalf of America?

 

3. When there is a major foreign policy decision to go to war or consider going to war, who speaks to the American people on this topic?

 

You seem to miss the point that of all 539 elected officials at the federal level, there is one, and only one, that has more power and ability to influence the tone and dialogue in the nation, regardless of party.

The only thing those polls show is how good the republican propaganda is working.

 

Great job for falling for it.

[rawhide]

dissing the gallup; oh the humanity

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

And,the point of my posts are to disagree with your comment that Obama is the most partisan President in US history.

 

What I'm saying is that the country is extremely divided right now not just because of Obama but because of both sides and the republican leadership is just as much to blame.

 

Sorry you can't see that.

The part about him being the most Partisan President is a fact according to Gallup and other polling outlets. I do hold Congressional leadership responsible too, but let me ask you this:

 

1. When there is a tragedy like this shooting in Oregon, a major tornado that has ripped through a community, etc..., which elected official is usually asked to go and help heal the community?

 

2. When there is a conference at the UN with other countries leaders presenting, who from the US typically speaks on behalf of America?

 

3. When there is a major foreign policy decision to go to war or consider going to war, who speaks to the American people on this topic?

 

You seem to miss the point that of all 539 elected officials at the federal level, there is one, and only one, that has more power and ability to influence the tone and dialogue in the nation, regardless of party.

The only thing those polls show is how good the republican propaganda is working.

 

Great job for falling for it.

 

 

So given what you said, I should assume that any polling showing George W Bush had a fairly high partisan divide and had high unfavorable ratings in his second term was simply Democratic propaganda?

 

If that is really your response, I think my job here is done.

[BigRedBuster]

Good, I'm glad you are finally catching on.

 

This spiral into the cess pool has always been there some but started getting ramped up under the Clinton administration. Now, I am no fan of the Clintons and I don't trust Hillary at all. But, under this administration, the Republicans/conservatives learned how powerful propaganda is with todays technology. They had Rush Limbaugh spewing crap for hours every day. I know....I listened every single day. With this type of crap filling the airwaves, even if the President did anything worth while, it was immediately beat down and all the ditto heads immediately believed it was some sinister plot to destroy America. Then enter Fox News and it got ramped up even farther. Like I said, I am not a fan of the Clintons. But, I'm pretty sure they weren't as bad as I thought they were back then.

 

Then, Bush comes to office. It was like the Dems were pissed that the Republican propaganda worked so well so they decided to ramp up their own. Sure...they started using MSNBC but that wasn't good enough. They basically hired Michael Moore to put out some nice little movies that basically convinced certain people that Bush was the devil incarnate, planned 9/11 and he and his father threw a party that night because they knew they and all their friends were going to get rich from the vast military industrial complex.

 

Well.....the Republicans aren't just going to let that slide by. So....when this new President comes to office. ATTACK!!!!!! Oh....so he was born in Hawaii to a parent that was born somewhere else? He is black?.....oh...He must be Muslim. He must be secretly plotting to support terrorists. He must actually be anti American. It is absolutely amazing some of the crap I receive almost daily through either an email or on Facebook and the absolute total crap some people believe.

 

If the population is told constantly through propaganda that someone is evil, eventually, more and more people believe it and the world becomes polarized. People now days don't go search out information to actually inform themselves. They search out information that validates their most extreme views. So, if you are liberal, you are going to tend to read very liberal web sites and be on liberal email chains that validate your beliefs. The same is true with conservatives.

 

So....yes.....the propaganda machines are well at work and they have been for a very long time. Technology now days have made them extremely efficient at their jobs.

 

FYI....the graphic a few posts above confirms what I'm talking about. If/when a Republican president takes office. Hold on to your hats. The Dems/Liberals are going to ramp their propaganda up to the next level. They will basically convince their base that whom ever is President is the next Hitler, hates poor black people, women, gays, mexicans...etc. and is out to kill all of them off.

[HuskerNation1]

Good, I'm glad you are finally catching on.

 

This spiral into the cess pool has always been there some but started getting ramped up under the Clinton administration. Now, I am no fan of the Clintons and I don't trust Hillary at all. But, under this administration, the Republicans/conservatives learned how powerful propaganda is with todays technology. They had Rush Limbaugh spewing crap for hours every day. I know....I listened every single day. With this type of crap filling the airwaves, even if the President did anything worth while, it was immediately beat down and all the ditto heads immediately believed it was some sinister plot to destroy America. Then enter Fox News and it got ramped up even farther. Like I said, I am not a fan of the Clintons. But, I'm pretty sure they weren't as bad as I thought they were back then.

 

Then, Bush comes to office. It was like the Dems were pissed that the Republican propaganda worked so well so they decided to ramp up their own. Sure...they started using MSNBC but that wasn't good enough. They basically hired Michael Moore to put out some nice little movies that basically convinced certain people that Bush was the devil incarnate, planned 9/11 and he and his father threw a party that night because they knew they and all their friends were going to get rich from the vast military industrial complex.

 

Well.....the Republicans aren't just going to let that slide by. So....when this new President comes to office. ATTACK!!!!!! Oh....so he was born in Hawaii to a parent that was born somewhere else? He is black?.....oh...He must be Muslim. He must be secretly plotting to support terrorists. He must actually be anti American. It is absolutely amazing some of the crap I receive almost daily through either an email or on Facebook and the absolute total crap some people believe.

 

If the population is told constantly through propaganda that someone is evil, eventually, more and more people believe it and the world becomes polarized. People now days don't go search out information to actually inform themselves. They search out information that validates their most extreme views. So, if you are liberal, you are going to tend to read very liberal web sites and be on liberal email chains that validate your beliefs. The same is true with conservatives.

 

So....yes.....the propaganda machines are well at work and they have been for a very long time. Technology now days have made them extremely efficient at their jobs.

 

FYI....the graphic a few posts above confirms what I'm talking about. If/when a Republican president takes office. Hold on to your hats. The Dems/Liberals are going to ramp their propaganda up to the next level. They will basically convince their base that whom ever is President is the next Hitler, hates poor black people, women, gays, mexicans...etc. and is out to kill all of them off.

 

Wow, I guess you are more naive than I thought...that certainly is the missing piece in the puzzle. I'm certainly not catching on to your thinking and don't buy into the notion that the primary reason any President or political figure is not viewed favorably is due to propaganda. I agree that both parties are constantly out to get the sitting President of the opposite party, and that will always be the case. But to dismiss major misteps and/or poor policy decisions that are reflected in negative approval ratings as simply being the result of propaganda is way off base. This buys right into Hillary Clinton's persistent argument that anything she may have done wrong that has resulted in voters saying she is not trustworthy is simply the result of the opposing party, and she is not responsible. I do think that her personal decision to go against the federal government's direction of using private email is a big deal, regardless of what is uncovered in the emails. She chose to break the law, and pointing fingers at the opposing party as if they are to blame is ridiculous. I was very critical of Aaron Schock (a Republican) when the news came out that he was abusing taxpayer dollars for his own personal gain and wanted him to step down, and am glad he so. I don't think it would have been appropriate for him to blame Democrats for his own mistake.

 

So getting back to the topic that started this thread, the President's words after the Oregon shooting were inappropriate and a mistake, and I don't think the opposing party is to blame for that. If he was truly serious about finding ways to reduce fatalities from gun violence, he should have been working his tail off these past few weeks trying to find a way to bring all sides together for real reform. Perhaps he is doing so, but I have not seen any steps he's taken since his speech.

[Enhance]

I'm a registered Republican, but have been supportive of many of Obama's policies, including some I disagreed with at first and learned to appreciate.

 

I think the timing of his choice to politicize gun control in the wake of a terrible mass shooting was questionable, and some of my friends, who are staunch Obama supporters, agreed.

 

But, in my opinion, it's more ridiculous that we've spent years battling back against mass shootings and the terrible, visual reminders of the destruction of human life. Yet, we've also chosen to do little about it at the national level. Clearly, there is a problem in this country. Something has to change. Obama's decision may be viewed as tactless, but letting mass murderers continue to wreak havok on this country is worse.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Good, I'm glad you are finally catching on.

 

This spiral into the cess pool has always been there some but started getting ramped up under the Clinton administration. Now, I am no fan of the Clintons and I don't trust Hillary at all. But, under this administration, the Republicans/conservatives learned how powerful propaganda is with todays technology. They had Rush Limbaugh spewing crap for hours every day. I know....I listened every single day. With this type of crap filling the airwaves, even if the President did anything worth while, it was immediately beat down and all the ditto heads immediately believed it was some sinister plot to destroy America. Then enter Fox News and it got ramped up even farther. Like I said, I am not a fan of the Clintons. But, I'm pretty sure they weren't as bad as I thought they were back then.

 

Then, Bush comes to office. It was like the Dems were pissed that the Republican propaganda worked so well so they decided to ramp up their own. Sure...they started using MSNBC but that wasn't good enough. They basically hired Michael Moore to put out some nice little movies that basically convinced certain people that Bush was the devil incarnate, planned 9/11 and he and his father threw a party that night because they knew they and all their friends were going to get rich from the vast military industrial complex.

 

Well.....the Republicans aren't just going to let that slide by. So....when this new President comes to office. ATTACK!!!!!! Oh....so he was born in Hawaii to a parent that was born somewhere else? He is black?.....oh...He must be Muslim. He must be secretly plotting to support terrorists. He must actually be anti American. It is absolutely amazing some of the crap I receive almost daily through either an email or on Facebook and the absolute total crap some people believe.

 

If the population is told constantly through propaganda that someone is evil, eventually, more and more people believe it and the world becomes polarized. People now days don't go search out information to actually inform themselves. They search out information that validates their most extreme views. So, if you are liberal, you are going to tend to read very liberal web sites and be on liberal email chains that validate your beliefs. The same is true with conservatives.

 

So....yes.....the propaganda machines are well at work and they have been for a very long time. Technology now days have made them extremely efficient at their jobs.

 

FYI....the graphic a few posts above confirms what I'm talking about. If/when a Republican president takes office. Hold on to your hats. The Dems/Liberals are going to ramp their propaganda up to the next level. They will basically convince their base that whom ever is President is the next Hitler, hates poor black people, women, gays, mexicans...etc. and is out to kill all of them off.

 

Wow, I guess you are more naive than I thought...that certainly is the missing piece in the puzzle. I'm certainly not catching on to your thinking and don't buy into the notion that the primary reason any President or political figure is not viewed favorably is due to propaganda. I agree that both parties are constantly out to get the sitting President of the opposite party, and that will always be the case. But to dismiss major misteps and/or poor policy decisions that are reflected in negative approval ratings as simply being the result of propaganda is way off base. This buys right into Hillary Clinton's persistent argument that anything she may have done wrong that has resulted in voters saying she is not trustworthy is simply the result of the opposing party, and she is not responsible. I do think that her personal decision to go against the federal government's direction of using private email is a big deal, regardless of what is uncovered in the emails. She chose to break the law, and pointing fingers at the opposing party as if they are to blame is ridiculous. I was very critical of Aaron Schock (a Republican) when the news came out that he was abusing taxpayer dollars for his own personal gain and wanted him to step down, and am glad he so. I don't think it would have been appropriate for him to blame Democrats for his own mistake.

 

So getting back to the topic that started this thread, the President's words after the Oregon shooting were inappropriate and a mistake, and I don't think the opposing party is to blame for that. If he was truly serious about finding ways to reduce fatalities from gun violence, he should have been working his tail off these past few weeks trying to find a way to bring all sides together for real reform. Perhaps he is doing so, but I have not seen any steps he's taken since his speech.

 

Hmmmm....so now we are moving the goal post. The discussion was about your statement of why the US is so divided or "he is the most partisan President ever". That is what my comments are about. For which I stand behind my comments and the graphic above helps prove my point. Ever wonder why the red and blue blobs become two distinct blobs right around 1993?

 

Now, if you want to have a discussion about a political figure not being viewed favorably, that's an entirely different discussion. At this point, I don't view any of these people favorably including Obama. I have never voted for him and even if he was to run again, I still wouldn't. If you had been on this board longer than you have, you would know that I have been extremely critical of his policies and actions in office. That doesn't make him the "most partisan President ever". That simply is a guy in office I disagree with.

 

The fact is, all these policy issues get almost completely glossed over and not even seriously discussed because for years the right wants to concentrate on "OMG....I don't think he was born in America". "He must be Muslim", "He's hates America and is going to take all of our guns away".........bla bla bla bla.....BENGHAZI!!!!!

 

All that crap does is divide America and solidifies the Republican base against the Dems and the President. Which isn't a bad thing if it were actually based on policy and issues. But....it's not. AND...wait for it.....it further divides America and makes all of us more partisan....ding ding ding....and (getting back to it) that is what this discussion was about.

 

But...hey.....if you want to just sit back and keep drinking the poison then I can't stop you. Chug-a-lug

 

If I had the desire, I should post on here for one week the absolute crap I get either sent to me or see on Facebook that us completely BS propaganda that does absolutely nothing but brainwashes some people into believing Obama and the Dems are evil and out to destroy everything that is good in America.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

Good, I'm glad you are finally catching on.

 

This spiral into the cess pool has always been there some but started getting ramped up under the Clinton administration. Now, I am no fan of the Clintons and I don't trust Hillary at all. But, under this administration, the Republicans/conservatives learned how powerful propaganda is with todays technology. They had Rush Limbaugh spewing crap for hours every day. I know....I listened every single day. With this type of crap filling the airwaves, even if the President did anything worth while, it was immediately beat down and all the ditto heads immediately believed it was some sinister plot to destroy America. Then enter Fox News and it got ramped up even farther. Like I said, I am not a fan of the Clintons. But, I'm pretty sure they weren't as bad as I thought they were back then.

 

Then, Bush comes to office. It was like the Dems were pissed that the Republican propaganda worked so well so they decided to ramp up their own. Sure...they started using MSNBC but that wasn't good enough. They basically hired Michael Moore to put out some nice little movies that basically convinced certain people that Bush was the devil incarnate, planned 9/11 and he and his father threw a party that night because they knew they and all their friends were going to get rich from the vast military industrial complex.

 

Well.....the Republicans aren't just going to let that slide by. So....when this new President comes to office. ATTACK!!!!!! Oh....so he was born in Hawaii to a parent that was born somewhere else? He is black?.....oh...He must be Muslim. He must be secretly plotting to support terrorists. He must actually be anti American. It is absolutely amazing some of the crap I receive almost daily through either an email or on Facebook and the absolute total crap some people believe.

 

If the population is told constantly through propaganda that someone is evil, eventually, more and more people believe it and the world becomes polarized. People now days don't go search out information to actually inform themselves. They search out information that validates their most extreme views. So, if you are liberal, you are going to tend to read very liberal web sites and be on liberal email chains that validate your beliefs. The same is true with conservatives.

 

So....yes.....the propaganda machines are well at work and they have been for a very long time. Technology now days have made them extremely efficient at their jobs.

 

FYI....the graphic a few posts above confirms what I'm talking about. If/when a Republican president takes office. Hold on to your hats. The Dems/Liberals are going to ramp their propaganda up to the next level. They will basically convince their base that whom ever is President is the next Hitler, hates poor black people, women, gays, mexicans...etc. and is out to kill all of them off.

 

Wow, I guess you are more naive than I thought...that certainly is the missing piece in the puzzle. I'm certainly not catching on to your thinking and don't buy into the notion that the primary reason any President or political figure is not viewed favorably is due to propaganda. I agree that both parties are constantly out to get the sitting President of the opposite party, and that will always be the case. But to dismiss major misteps and/or poor policy decisions that are reflected in negative approval ratings as simply being the result of propaganda is way off base. This buys right into Hillary Clinton's persistent argument that anything she may have done wrong that has resulted in voters saying she is not trustworthy is simply the result of the opposing party, and she is not responsible. I do think that her personal decision to go against the federal government's direction of using private email is a big deal, regardless of what is uncovered in the emails. She chose to break the law, and pointing fingers at the opposing party as if they are to blame is ridiculous. I was very critical of Aaron Schock (a Republican) when the news came out that he was abusing taxpayer dollars for his own personal gain and wanted him to step down, and am glad he so. I don't think it would have been appropriate for him to blame Democrats for his own mistake.

 

So getting back to the topic that started this thread, the President's words after the Oregon shooting were inappropriate and a mistake, and I don't think the opposing party is to blame for that. If he was truly serious about finding ways to reduce fatalities from gun violence, he should have been working his tail off these past few weeks trying to find a way to bring all sides together for real reform. Perhaps he is doing so, but I have not seen any steps he's taken since his speech.

 

Hmmmm....so now we are moving the goal post. The discussion was about your statement of why the US is so divided or "he is the most partisan President ever". That is what my comments are about. For which I stand behind my comments and the graphic above helps prove my point. Ever wonder why the red and blue blobs become two distinct blobs right around 1993?

 

Now, if you want to have a discussion about a political figure not being viewed favorably, that's an entirely different discussion. At this point, I don't view any of these people favorably including Obama. I have never voted for him and even if he was to run again, I still wouldn't. If you had been on this board longer than you have, you would know that I have been extremely critical of his policies and actions in office. That doesn't make him the "most partisan President ever". That simply is a guy in office I disagree with.

 

The fact is, all these policy issues get almost completely glossed over and not even seriously discussed because for years the right wants to concentrate on "OMG....I don't think he was born in America". "He must be Muslim", "He's hates America and is going to take all of our guns away".........bla bla bla bla.....BENGHAZI!!!!!

 

All that crap does is divide America and solidifies the Republican base against the Dems and the President. Which isn't a bad thing if it were actually based on policy and issues. But....it's not. AND...wait for it.....it further divides America and makes all of us more partisan....ding ding ding....and (getting back to it) that is what this discussion was about.

 

But...hey.....if you want to just sit back and keep drinking the poison then I can't stop you. Chug-a-lug

 

If I had the desire, I should post on here for one week the absolute crap I get either sent to me or see on Facebook that us completely BS propaganda that does absolutely nothing but brainwashes some people into believing Obama and the Dems are evil and out to destroy everything that is good in America.

 

 

Polling outfits that are showing a partisan divide are the same ones that show the favorability/unfavorability ratings of a political figure, and you were the one suggesting that Gallup polling should not be trusted on whether Obama is the most Partisan President ever. If you discount that data point, how can you not discount the favorability ratings too?

 

You also seem to assume that all voters responding to polls are super political partisans, which is not the case. I never listen to talk radio, and watch little television. I usually stay informed through news updates and various editorials from realclearpolitics. I also do not do facebook, so whatever depiction you have of me or many other voters is way off base. Perhaps you hang out in social circles where that propaganda is constant, but what does that say about you or your friends if you allow that to sway your own personal opinion. Most voters understand the basic differences between the parties on social and fiscal issues. I don't think you will find many voters swayed to be pro-life because they've listened to Rush Limbaugh talk about it, or they've read an editorial from a Conservative journalist. Just as I don't think the anti-war crowd has come to that opinion because the left has pushed an anti-war agenda. I think they are truly against war.

 

As for the "birthers" on the right, and the "truthers" on the left, these are fringe elements and do not represent a majority of the mainstream parties. Now I agree the media likes to sensationalize stories such as these, but that's a cop-out answer to excuse a President's actions from true scrutiny. As I just stated, if the President really meant what he said, and was serious about finding solutions to the nationwide problem with gun violence, he would be leading the charge, and making it an open, transparent process for all Americans to observe. I would have much more respect for the guy if he actually led in that manner, and I think all Americans would, and his partisan divide would not be so strong. His leadership style is his choice, not the choice of medial outlets and propagandists, and he owns that, even if you choose to blame others.

[BigRedBuster]

I guess what ever you want to think. Most of the public is becoming more and more blind to the roll political powers play in the crap we consume through all of the various technologies we use.

 

If you can't see it then I'm not going to be able to convince you. Jim Jones would be proud.

[HuskerNation1]

I guess what ever you want to think. Most of the public is becoming more and more blind to the roll political powers play in the crap we consume through all of the various technologies we use.

 

If you can't see it then I'm not going to be able to convince you. Jim Jones would be proud.

 

I'm also not going to be able to convince you that the POTUS has the power of the bully pulpit and is uniquely positioned to set the tone for how things get done in Washington, and has the ability to go directly to the people in a positive way (unlike how he did after the Oregon shooting) to influence fair and honest debate in order to achieve real results. You keep mentioning the start of the divide in 1993. I agree that the rise of more television and web options for conveying news has resulted in some of the partisan divide, yet it was after 1993 when a Democratic President and Republican Congress worked well together to deliver real reform (welfare) that the American people wanted. It was January, 1995 when a Democratic President accepted the results of the voting public from the 1994 mid-terms and stated "the era of big government is over." That acknowledgement by the POTUS set the tone for some good results and is a template of how a POTUS can get the job done for the American people in this post-1993 era. However, if you want to continue to defend our current POTUS and suggest he does not have the ability to set the right tone to get results achieved as Clinton did, so be it.

[BigRedBuster]

 

I guess what ever you want to think. Most of the public is becoming more and more blind to the roll political powers play in the crap we consume through all of the various technologies we use.

 

If you can't see it then I'm not going to be able to convince you. Jim Jones would be proud.

 

I'm also not going to be able to convince you that the POTUS has the power of the bully pulpit and is uniquely positioned to set the tone for how things get done in Washington, and has the ability to go directly to the people in a positive way (unlike how he did after the Oregon shooting) to influence fair and honest debate in order to achieve real results. You keep mentioning the start of the divide in 1993. I agree that the rise of more television and web options for conveying news has resulted in some of the partisan divide, yet it was after 1993 when a Democratic President and Republican Congress worked well together to deliver real reform (welfare) that the American people wanted. It was January, 1995 when a Democratic President accepted the results of the voting public from the 1994 mid-terms and stated "the era of big government is over." That acknowledgement by the POTUS set the tone for some good results and is a template of how a POTUS can get the job done for the American people in this post-1993 era. However, if you want to continue to defend our current POTUS and suggest he does not have the ability to set the right tone to get results achieved as Clinton did, so be it.

 

What part of this don't you understand that I said in several posts?

 

your complaints may be very valid.

Chug a lug.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

I guess what ever you want to think. Most of the public is becoming more and more blind to the roll political powers play in the crap we consume through all of the various technologies we use.

 

If you can't see it then I'm not going to be able to convince you. Jim Jones would be proud.

 

I'm also not going to be able to convince you that the POTUS has the power of the bully pulpit and is uniquely positioned to set the tone for how things get done in Washington, and has the ability to go directly to the people in a positive way (unlike how he did after the Oregon shooting) to influence fair and honest debate in order to achieve real results. You keep mentioning the start of the divide in 1993. I agree that the rise of more television and web options for conveying news has resulted in some of the partisan divide, yet it was after 1993 when a Democratic President and Republican Congress worked well together to deliver real reform (welfare) that the American people wanted. It was January, 1995 when a Democratic President accepted the results of the voting public from the 1994 mid-terms and stated "the era of big government is over." That acknowledgement by the POTUS set the tone for some good results and is a template of how a POTUS can get the job done for the American people in this post-1993 era. However, if you want to continue to defend our current POTUS and suggest he does not have the ability to set the right tone to get results achieved as Clinton did, so be it.

 

What part of this don't you understand that I said in several posts?

 

your complaints may be very valid.

Chug a lug.

 

 

You say a lot of things that try to have it both ways, and sometimes a President can simply be wrong, period, without all sorts of "buts" and explanations that others are to blame, its new propaganda, blah, blah, blah. Just accept it for what it is...

[BigRedBuster]

I have said some very definite things but you won't accept reality.

[knapplc]

I'm a registered Republican

 

<blocks Enhance89>

[Malth]

"I don't like Obama"