Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama - Democratic Reagan?  
User currently offlinebmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2242 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

3 weeks ago there was an edition of Newsweek where Obama, if re-elected, would become the Democratic version of Ronald Reagan.

Can't go into specifics, you have to read the copy, but there is one similarity. Reagan had GOP majority in Senate but faced Democratic House. Obama has the opposite....

[Edited 2012-11-07 10:14:45]


The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
56 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8785 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter):
3 weeks ago there was an edition of Newsweek where Obama, if re-elected, would become the Democratic version of Ronald Reagan.

Can't go into specifics, you have to read the copy, but there is one similarity. Reagan had GOP majority in Senate but faced Democratic House. Obama has the opposite....

The big difference is that Reagan frequently invited the Opposition leadership to the White House for discussions. Tip O'Niell (the Democrat Speaker of the House), met with Reagan every single week, and they hashed out their differences over beers. They actually seemed to like each other quite a bit.

Obama is well known for very rarely inviting the opposition. I think Boehner said a couple of weeks ago that he has not been invited to the White House for nearly a year (apart for photo-ops and special events, where no business can be discussed).



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5416 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
The big difference is that Reagan frequently invited the Opposition leadership to the White House for discussions. Tip O'Niell (the Democrat Speaker of the House), met with Reagan every single week, and they hashed out their differences over beers. They actually seemed to like each other quite a bit.

Obama is well known for very rarely inviting the opposition. I think Boehner said a couple of weeks ago that he has not been invited to the White House for nearly a year (apart for photo-ops and special events, where no business can be discussed).

I am hoping that can and will change now with the election over. I think there has been an antagonistic element recently where anything someone says or does became fodder for the election and the opposition. So everyone basically stopped doing anything that could be used against them. It's pretty darned pathetic actually but I understand it too.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20364 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

Quoting bmacleod (Thread starter):
3 weeks ago there was an edition of Newsweek where Obama, if re-elected, would become the Democratic version of Ronald Reagan.

I don't know if I agree with the methodology behind his conclusions, but blogger Ben Smith agrees with your thread title.

Welcome To Liberal America

"The first post–baby boomer president was returned to the White House with the widest, clearest reelection win since Ronald Reagan won 49 states in 1984, yet a smaller mandate than his own 2008 victory. And Democrats now have, in Obama, their Reagan: A figure both historic and ideological, who can carry, if not quite fulfill, a liberal vision of activist government and soft but sometimes deadly power abroad that will define his party for a generation.

Obama lacks Reagan’s sweeping victory, and presides over a more deeply divided country than when he took office. But the breadth of his accomplishments have been validated by Tuesday’s vote."



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6278 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

If you mean as a useless mouthpiece yes, Obama & Reagan are the same.


Quit calling an airport ramp "Tarmac" and a taxiway "runway".
User currently offlinebmacleod From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 2242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Interesting to note from this election:

Obama won less electoral votes than Bill Clinton in 1992 & 1996.

1992 - Clinton won 370 EVs vs Obama's 365 in 2008.
1996 - Clinton won 379 EVs vs Obama's 303 in 2012 ( he may win Florida increasing his EVs to 332.)

But both times Obama got 50% of the popular vote; Clinton could only make 49%.

Also Obama got a lot more votes than Clinton did in both elections (increase in population and his voter appeal).

Second time since 2000 Florida vote count has not been finished as of yet...

Also like Al Gore in 2000, losing candidate Romney loses home state, MA.



The engine is the heart of an airplane, but the pilot is its soul.
User currently onlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20364 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting bmacleod (Reply 5):
Obama won less electoral votes than Bill Clinton in 1992 & 1996.

Clinton also had geography going for him, as the former governor of Arkansas. He picked up neighboring states such as LA, TN, and MO that Obama lost to Romney.

Quoting bmacleod (Reply 5):
Also Obama got a lot more votes than Clinton did in both elections (increase in population and his voter appeal).

Another factor played into this, being that in '92 a very popular third party candidate, Ross Perot, picked up 18.9% of the popular vote. Perot picked up another 8.4% of the popular vote in '96.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
Obama is well known for very rarely inviting the opposition. I think Boehner said a couple of weeks ago that he has not been invited to the White House for nearly a year (apart for photo-ops and special events, where no business can be discussed).

Well, in that case you must blame Boehner and the Republicans. If people don´t want to talk with you, it makes no sense at all inviding them. Obama after all had a Republican Minister of Defence in the beginning.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13508 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting columba (Reply 7):
Obama after all had a Republican Minister of Defence in the beginning.

Secretary of Defense, not Minister.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineMax Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 4359 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Exactly, the Republicans have basically been so impossible to deal with in the last four years there's no point in reaching out as they refuse to reciprocate.


Their arrogance is a big part of why they were so overwhelmingly defeated.



The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13508 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Max Q (Reply 9):
Their arrogance is a big part of why they were so overwhelmingly defeated.

Actually, the Republicans shot themselves in the foot; they didn't even turn out in the same numbers that supported McCain/Palin in 2008! Had they turned out the same numbers they did for Bush in 2004, we'd be talking about President-elect Romney.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7057 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 8):

Quoting columba (Reply 7):
Obama after all had a Republican Minister of Defence in the beginning.

Secretary of Defense, not Minister.

uupss. yes sorry my fault but still my point is still the same.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 10):
Had they turned out the same numbers they did for Bush in 2004, we'd be talking about President-elect Romney.

So if a different amount of people voted for someone in an election the result could have been different?
Thanks Yeah sure

Fred

[Edited 2012-11-12 03:35:02]

User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13031 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

There is no doubt in the view of 'liberals' and 'progressives' that President Obama is more like Ronald Reagan than historical Democrats. Part of that is so he and the Democrats keep executive contol of government where the real power is and so have to make deals with Republicans to satisfiy their demands to keep their power position.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12333 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Actually the first post in the 'Fiscal Cliff' thread points out that Obama called Boehner to discuss the topic, amongst others.

As for not inviting him over, I suppose that's poor form, but then again it's more important they have a working relationship rather than a social one.

Personally I wish Obama was as good a politician as was Reagan, but IMHO Reagan was an exceptional politician, although I don't agree with his fiscal or social policies. Obama's style is to work the phones in the background over time, not to bash things out in big summit meetings like Reagan did. Obama hardly ever uses his "bully pulpit", Reagan did all the time, at all levels of discourse.

IMHO LBJ was a better politician too. Even though he had lots of skeletons in his closet and one can question his motivations, the fact is he that he was a master at getting Congress to do what he wanted them to do via the carrot and stick technique.

Obama's main skills seems to be in the rhetorical domain, but he claims he's been learning more about how to be President, and we shall see if he has or not. He seemed shocked that his base was pissed at him for caving into the GOP on the last extension of the Bush tax cuts, he won't be able to claim that if it happens again.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinedl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Whoever said that is stumping for President Obama. He is nothing like Presidnt Reagan, and got nowhere near the popular vote percentage, and nowhere near the mandate. He doesn't seek to cooperate, or negotiate. His idea of bipartisan leadership,is to tell the Republicans to fall in line or he's going to blame them for not giving in.

President Reagan gave Tip O'Neill and the Dems when he asked for things, while maintaining his principles in most cases.

Another case of the media trying to elevate the stature of Pres. Obama.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7571 posts, RR: 32
Reply 16, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
The big difference is that Reagan frequently invited the Opposition leadership to the White House for discussions. Tip O'Niell (the Democrat Speaker of the House), met with Reagan every single week, and they hashed out their differences over beers. They actually seemed to like each other quite a bit.
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
Obama is well known for very rarely inviting the opposition.
Quoting columba (Reply 7):
Well, in that case you must blame Boehner and the Republicans.

We had a more intelligent form of government 30+ years ago when a President knew he had to work with the opposition, and the other party knew they had to work with the President to get things done.

We've seen hundreds of candidates run for office this year on a public vow to NEVER WORK WITH THE OTHER PARTY.

And people vote for them.

That is where the root of the problem exists - with voters who would rather their congressmen and senators do nothing than actually work with the administration.

We have met the enemy and he is us.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7801 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 16):
We've seen hundreds of candidates run for office this year on a public vow to NEVER WORK WITH THE OTHER PARTY.

And people vote for them.

Yeah it is extremely ridiculous. They'll complain about the other side not compromising, then when they are presented with a bill that slightly raises taxes while slashing a lot of the budget, they refuse! That's why in this year's senate race, I voted for the guy I agreed with less because from his website, he actually seemed like he'd work for compromise while the other guy ranted, didn't give any specifics, and basically resorted to name calling. Luckily, my guy won



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2055 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 12):

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 10):
Had they turned out the same numbers they did for Bush in 2004, we'd be talking about President-elect Romney.

So if a different amount of people voted for someone in an election the result could have been different?
Thanks 

No, it's more interesting than you make it out to be. If you lose enough voters to another party, you lose the election, that's pretty obvious. But in this case, Republican voters didn't switch to the Democrats, they simply stayed at home. It'd be interesting to know why they did so. I can see why Obama would attract less voters than in 2008 when he was carried by a huge wave of public enthusiasm. But why would significantly fewer people vote for Romney than for McCain? McCain didn't run a particularly engaging campaign after all.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7801 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1495 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 18):
I can see why Obama would attract less voters than in 2008 when he was carried by a huge wave of public enthusiasm. But why would significantly fewer people vote for Romney than for McCain? McCain didn't run a particularly engaging campaign after all.

Honestly, I think that the haze from right wing media fooled us all. They built up a world where most of the American people HATE the President and screw polls, there's no way the President will win reelection! That seemed to be the rhetoric from that side this year. It was so intense, it actually bled off a bit and made us think that at least the Republicans would come out in record numbers...

Both accounts were wrong... the American people may not love the President, but they do not hate him and they actually liked him enough to get reelected over the GOP challenger. Also, the fervor from the right about this being the most important election in our nation's history and the right was going to flood the polls was also wrong, to our surprise.

I think this delusion is why the right lost this election and wasted the past 2 years. I don't mean delusion in a negative way, I just think they shut off many other media outlets and other ways of thinking and mostly talked among themselves... when this happens, it perpetuates many feelings and intensifies them. In their minds, public opinion was a lot more anti-Obama than reality.

But that situation is human nature. It's not that Republicans are stupid people. It can happen to any group of people. They lost and I think they realized what happened now. I'm actually optimistic for the next 4 years... I see compromises in the works. I can only hope



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2978 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
Obama is well known for very rarely inviting the opposition. I think Boehner said a couple of weeks ago that he has not been invited to the White House for nearly a year (apart for photo-ops and special events, where no business can be discussed).

It's pretty difficult to 'invite the opposition' when the opposition said that they would not work on anything with the president. Of course, when the 'opposition' sees its favorite things threatened with cuts, they cry foul and say that the president will not work with them.

Republicans in the House (at least in the Senate there are a couple more who are moderate enough to cross party lines) must see that the president was reelected. Their goal of a one-term president is no longer functional, and while it's true that they maintained their majority, it's also true that either they work together or together they fall. Of course, Obama has nothing to worry about. His second and final term is about to begin, so if the fiscal cliff happens, he'll still serve up to January 2016, but the Republicans in the House will face an election two years prior.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently onlinekngkyle From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 392 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1497 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Well, in the last 100 years only 4 presidents have won the popular vote with >50% in both election and re-election: Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Obama.

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12333 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1499 times:

Quoting dl021 (Reply 15):
He doesn't seek to cooperate, or negotiate. His idea of bipartisan leadership,is to tell the Republicans to fall in line or he's going to blame them for not giving in.

I think that was true in his first 2 years (Obamacare) but not in his second (debt ceiling crisis, renewal of Bush tax cuts).

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 19):
Also, the fervor from the right about this being the most important election in our nation's history and the right was going to flood the polls was also wrong, to our surprise.

It certainly motivated those who did not want to see the right wing in control to get out and vote.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13508 posts, RR: 62
Reply 23, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 12):
Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 10):Had they turned out the same numbers they did for Bush in 2004, we'd be talking about President-elect Romney.

So if a different amount of people voted for someone in an election the result could have been different?
Thanks

Way to miss the point!   

Rara understood:

Quoting Rara (Reply 18):
If you lose enough voters to another party, you lose the election, that's pretty obvious. But in this case, Republican voters didn't switch to the Democrats, they simply stayed at home. It'd be interesting to know why they did so. I can see why Obama would attract less voters than in 2008 when he was carried by a huge wave of public enthusiasm. But why would significantly fewer people vote for Romney than for McCain? McCain didn't run a particularly engaging campaign after all.

It's interesting how not only were conservative pundits wrong about projected GOP voter turnout, but they were staggeringly wrong and that GOP voters who came out for McCain stayed home for Romney for some reason.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11208 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1499 times:

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 23):
Rara understood:

Quoting Rara (Reply 18):
If you lose enough voters to another party, you lose the election, that's pretty obvious. But in this case, Republican voters didn't switch to the Democrats, they simply stayed at home.

Actually, that does not look so much like the case.

Voter turnout was on par with 2008 turnout in most states, but even improved in most of the contentious states.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...s-but-many-votes-remain-uncounted/

The problems that the GOP are going to have to wrap their brains around is that 1) contrary to their belief, America does not hate Obama and his policies, and 2) America does not particularly like the GOP. America has not shifted to the left, but rather, the GOP has become so far extreme to the right that it no longer can capture the votes it needs to survive.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
25 Revelation : It seems to me that the right has very well developed "talking circles" that seem to convince themselves that they are mainstream when they really ar
26 Post contains images DeltaMD90 : And honestly, if they drop a bit of their more social issues, compromised a bit better, and didn't oppose the President on EVERYTHING, I could see th
27 Ken777 : I believe that Obama will be the "Reagan" for people of color. Bill Clinton will probably be the Democrats Reagan. Just look at the reception he recei
28 Post contains images EA CO AS : Are you sure about that? Re-read the chart from Nate Silver's blog that you posted: As Mr. Silver himself says: turnout in the battleground states ov
29 Dreadnought : Taxes for the poor and middle class are already rock-bottom. There is nothing more to reduce. Dems have said for years that things were peachy under
30 rfields5421 : This quote is from the blog quote in Reply 28 - Not the words of EA CO AS My personal opinion is that as the public has become more aware of the impor
31 DeltaMD90 : This is why I think there should be some sort of proportional awarding of EVs. In each state, 2 will go to the candidate with the most votes and the
32 Ken777 : Taxes for the poor should be rock bottom, because that is only income taxes. Now add in all the other taxes the poor pays. Start with FICA, sales tax
33 rfields5421 : I disliked George as governor and as president for a lot of reasons. One of which was leaving us with Rick Perry for Gov. However, I have to give him
34 Dreadnought : Most of those are state and local. They don't count. FICA supposedly goes to your own "account" (cough, cough). I'm talking about the General Fund -
35 Post contains links Revelation : Mitt's solution was to have them 'self-deport' - what??? Now we read: Senators Propose Comprehensive Immigration Changes which says: Seems the GOP ha
36 D L X : It still blows up your thesis, that Republicans lost because of turnout. Of the 9 swing states plus Pennsylvania (which wasn't really a swing state),
37 Dreadnought : That's funny - It's pretty much the same general proposal that the GOP has been advocating for at least a decade. Secure the borders first, then we c
38 casinterest : This seems so simple, yet it is highly complex, and as the recent Jeep episode shows us, there are countless ways that a " Wall " can be comprimized.
39 EA CO AS : No, it blows up your statement of yours: It actually reinforces my point, which was if the voters had gone for Romney in 2012 in the same numbers the
40 casinterest : Not really, the numbers were lost because the electorate is changing. Even if the 9% in those states had shown up, who is to say it would have benefi
41 flipdewaf : He explained it in the way you agree with. So how the fuck are they republicans then?!? I once worked in a pub, doesn't make me a barmen for the rest
42 Rara : OK, so if you prefer: people who voted for McCain/Palin in 2008 stayed home in 2012 in sufficient numbers to enable the re-election of Barack Obama.
43 rfields5421 : One key responsibility of a candidate is to excite members of his/ her own party enough that they actually go vote. I don't think Romney did this. Al
44 D L X : Dude. Did you completely forget the argument you were trying to make? A reminder: Now, tell me how my chart shows support for your position at all. T
45 Rara : Yeah, you're correct. I didn't check properly. McCain in 2008 had fewer votes than Obama in 2012. With that, I retract all my previous statements in
46 EA CO AS : Apologies, my first statement was put in an incorrect manner; I had meant to say Romney would have won if voters went for him the same as Bush in 2004
47 tommy767 : I don't buy it. He's a slightly better version of Carter in my book. Romney is more of a republican John Kerry, however. It's amazing how Obama got re
48 Revelation : Despite the economy, exit polling showed voters felt that Obama and Romney were both equally suited to fix it. This gives credence to the fact that t
49 rfields5421 : He was good with the Congress because he grew up there in an age of statesmen. And he knew where the bodies were buried. Heck, he help bury most of t
50 pu : Thanks for the refreshing dose of cynicism. I do think most of the work of government, even most policy choices, is done by a nameless crew of men be
51 BN747 : That was a different era, people were a lot less cynical and caught up in 'gotcha politics'. For that to match up to have validity, Reagan would have
52 stratosphere : Yep that about sums it up. I came out of hiding and voted for the first time since 1984 and I didn't vote for Obama. I voted for Romney even though i
53 D L X : Yup, and add to that certain factors (the conservative entertainment complex, for instance) that excoriate certain people for being seen with the oth
54 Revelation : Seems Romney used his large war chest to beat everyone else into submission, but we now know that left him broke when he needed to respond to issues
55 DeltaMD90 : And you know, on this site, I'm the annoying voice for "reason and understanding," but really, I think I'm being perfectly center on this issue and t
56 zippyjet : Now all we need is for Michelle to re-decorate the White House and buy fancy chi chi China patterns on our dime. Have Michelle consult an astrologer.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Obama Poised To Win 303 Electoral Votes posted Tue Nov 6 2012 03:34:33 by Revelation
Obama - Less Merciful Than Other Presidents? posted Fri Nov 2 2012 14:52:20 by AeroWesty
Hurricane Sandy To Help Obama? posted Wed Oct 31 2012 09:49:44 by bmacleod
Obama's Birth Filmed posted Fri Oct 26 2012 10:56:03 by einsteinboricua
Obama: Romney Is A BSer posted Thu Oct 25 2012 12:04:08 by Revelation
Obama Bribing For Votes? Free Obamaphones? posted Fri Oct 5 2012 00:12:26 by Superfly
Bombshell Video Of Obama In 2007 posted Tue Oct 2 2012 19:12:25 by ltbewr
Sam Jackson's "Wake The **** Up" Obama Ad posted Fri Sep 28 2012 18:52:57 by Aaron747
Obama's UN Speech posted Wed Sep 26 2012 08:23:32 by Dreadnought
David Axelrod - Obama's Karl Rove? posted Wed Sep 19 2012 07:21:03 by bmacleod