• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Interim Thread of Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Clevinger

Member
GhaleonEB said:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/189807.php

Interesting background on the woman who asked the lapel pin question.

Much more detailed background linked in that article:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/34071.html

I think this comment sums up my thoughts:

All I can say is that sometimes people let their preconceptions prejudice what they see. It amplifies everything that the other person does. And things that people think they see...didn't happen. Take the incident where she remembers Obama turning his back to the flag before the pledge ended. If such an event was recorded on TV it would have been played repeatedly to demonstrate precisely what she believes. But try to find that footage anywhere. What she "remembers" seeing, I suspect, is another image, a photograph where ALL the candidates are facing different directions while the pledge is given because there many different flags at the site. And in other image, widely distributed, Obama stands with his hands down while others are placing theirs over their heart...but it's while they are singing the Star Spangled Banner...not saying the Pledge of Allegiance.

Of course, being corrected on this, or asked to support her assertions, one becomes even more disliked. It's a fruitless task. When being able to answer and respond becomes a reason to hate, or thinks that someone hates their country it is tragic.

From my understanding Hillary grew up in an Upper Middle Class community in a Chicago suburb. While her grandfather was working class, her father rose to become a big businessman in wholesale textiles even before she was born. She went to the best prep schools, and went to Ivy League schools on merit, but her family was able to afford it.

Obama's life sounds a lot more like Mrs. McCabe's...not exactly...because he was fortunate to get some breaks that allowed him to use his abilities more. Obama's mother was twice divorced. He's lived in houses that had no regular electricity or running water. Not on a holiday...but for years. He attended public schools. For many years he was cared for by grandparents, and, in order to get into a high-quality school (for which he qualified on grades) had to apply for a scholarship.
And his mother died of brain cancer.

All I can say is the real tragedy was, not that Mrs. McCabe dislikes Obama, but that she used an opportunity to ask the candidates something that may have brought before the public an issue that has been ignored by the current Administration for the last seven years, and will be again ignored by Senator McCain, if elected. Instead she fed a question that suggests that if you don't wear a flag pin you are not a real American. She says it's not about that...but that's the question that Stephanopolous and Gibson chose to use.

One has to wonder why?
 

giga

Member
Clevinger said:
Much more detailed background linked in that article:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/34071.html

I think this comment sums up my thoughts:
haha wow

But to understand why Obama rubs McCabe wrong is to go beyond the question of what a flag pin has to do with patriotism — it's not really about the flag pin, she said in a telephone interview Thursday — and consider McCabe's life. It's no Hawaiian prep school and Ivy League story, unlike Obama's. It's a slice of working-class Pennsylvania, the core of Hillary Clinton's support there.

But she sees a difference between the two. In Clinton, she sees someone who has struggled for years, just like her, and has earned the right to be president. In Obama, she sees someone who rose like a rocket, always has a smooth explanation for everything — whether it's about his former preacher or the flag pin — and who makes it all look too easy.
 

APF

Member
GaimeGuy: I think you don't actually know much about this event, otherwise you wouldn't be asking that question.


mashoutposse said:
No, it is not "opposite" to Obama's suggestion since Obama's suggestion never included or hinted at a comparison to the voting tendencies of the better-off.
No, he was talking about the voting tendencies of the lesser-off, and explaining why they might not vote for him, as opposed to the better-off, who he was talking to and who were supporters. He was saying "wedge issues" took priority in their minds, when they're facing hard times economically. I think here you're deliberately trying not to understand the point.

mashoutposse said:
Essentially, Obama was trying to explain why the working class tends to be on the other side of these issues.
No, because that makes little sense in context. Obama's point, as he said in the debate, was that people who are struggling economically become disenchanted with government and prioritize social "wedge issues." The point of the article was to show that evidence, however, demonstrates voters do not do this. On the whole, they don't cling to social issues when determining who to vote for because they feel they can't prioritize, say, a candidate's economic policies due to bitterness. They do prioritize things like their candidates' economic policies. The correlation is the inverse of what Obama suggested: people who are better-off tend to consider social issues more than those who are lesser-off:

"Small-town people of modest means and limited education are not fixated on cultural issues. Rather, it is affluent, college-educated people living in cities and suburbs who are most exercised by guns and religion. In contemporary American politics, social issues are the opiate of the elites."

So, Obama got it wrong. Which should be fine with you, since you don't think he's an infallible messiah, right?
 

APF

Member
Except in terms of their political careers, every move of Hillary has been a struggle, whereas the perception of Obama is that he's had a meteoric and easy ride.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
Except in terms of their political careers, every move of Hillary has been a struggle, whereas the perception of Obama is that he's had a meteoric and easy ride.


this is just not true... unless you are talking about the current perception.
 

Tamanon

Banned
APF said:
Except in terms of their political careers, every move of Hillary has been a struggle, whereas the perception of Obama is that he's had a meteoric and easy ride.

Didn't Obama lose his first state senate run? :p
 

tanod

when is my burrito
grandjedi6 said:
For you latecomers out there I'll summarize the thread so far:

-APF spots a negative Obama article. Do to his compulsion to post anything anti-Obama, APF posts the article asap.
-Tanod spots the number 2004 in the article and tries to use it to discredit APF. He doesn't read the article though
-Tanod and APF get into an argument but neither clarify their arguments
-Political GAF is confused
-Posters who dislike APF immediatly jump on the bandwagon. They don't read the article either
-No one has yet to talk about the article itself

Yeah. I over-reacted there. I should have read the whole thing. Though I think everybody will agree that voter attitudes about their government has changed in the 4 years since that study. I believe that is what Obama was speaking to.
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
this is just not true... unless you are talking about the current perception.
Which political moves of hers have not been a struggle? Even her Senate run had her battling with the press, battling with negative exposure on a national level. When has Obama faced anything like that politically, except within the last couple of months?


tanod: so four years is equivalent to 25 years? Are you a dog or something?
 
Is that Obama stuttering montage from the Daily Show online yet? Link it up!



"I uh, it's the uh, well, uh"

"alright just give me the damn flag pin" :lol
 

APF

Member
FlightOfHeaven said:
If you are talking about the last 6 months, mayhaps.

But if you look at their lives...
Six months, what? How old are you? I'm talking about their political careers and when they've had national exposure.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Hillary only really had a struggle in the Primary, not in the Senate general one, although one might argue that she has been in the public eye more because she wanted to be, in order to build a Presidential campaign.

BTW, not a superdelegate, but Robert Reich to officially endorse Obama today. Kinda a surprise that he's actually endorsing.
 

APF

Member
Tamanon said:
Hillary only really had a struggle in the Primary, not in the Senate general one, although one might argue that she has been in the public eye more because she wanted to be, in order to build a Presidential campaign.
She's been a whipping-girl for the right--and to a lesser but still prevalent extent, the press--for over half my life and for as long as she's had national exposure, and this level of struggle is what many people see when they consider her. Again, I feel there is some deliberate obtuseness going on in you folks trying to debate this--even Obama himself has hinted to her struggling in this manner.
 

Triumph

Banned
APF said:
She's been a whipping-girl for the right--and to a lesser but still prevalent extent, the press--for over half my life and for as long as she's had national exposure, and this level of struggle is what many people see when they consider her. Again, I feel there is some deliberate obtuseness going on in you folks trying to debate this--even Obama himself has hinted to her struggling in this manner.
A lot of that whipping has been justified. Maybe she's into it. :p
 
I know you guys are probably going to ignore this post and continue arguing, but can somebody post the Independence Day President speech .jpg? I'm getting desperate - I need it bad.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
New Rasmussen poll (I know) puts PA at three points.

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_.../pennsylvania_democratic_presidential_primary

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state shows Hillary Clinton with 47% of the vote and Barack Obama with 44%. This election poll was conducted Thursday night, the night following a nationally televised debate between the candidates. Last Monday, Clinton was leading Obama 50% to 41%.

And this is rich. Hillary is going on TV hitting Obama for "complaining" about the debate. She did a full PR blitz, including that SNL skit, after the MSNBC one. :lol
 
3 points? Zomg. Still don't trust polls. The news story I want to see the mainstream media pick up on is Hillary's "Screw em" quote from 1995.
 

Cheebs

Member
Obama did not lose his first state senate run. He won his state senate seat and then in 2000 ran for Congress and lost badly.
 
I could go either way. A better angle on the hand would have given us a better impression whether it was one or two fingers.

(By the way, that post was a joke you manbabies.)
 

Cheebs

Member
I dont think he flipped her off. Mainly because he ALWAYS uses his middle finger. In interviews he always scratches his nose or face with his middle finger and he often points and dials with it. Its the main finger he uses.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Yup, you caught him, he's been flicking people off this entire time, because with how well his campaign's been run, that's what he'd choose to do:p
 

Zabka

Member
AdmiralViscen said:
Check the comments, someone links to another video where he apparently did the same motion at the same time in the same speech.
Because that is the EXACT same speech, just filmed from a different angle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom