Forum Post: Speak up if you voted for Obama in 2008.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 21, 2011, 3:19 a.m. EST by asauti
(-113)
from Port Orchard, WA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
This is just an informal poll. Call me a "curious cat".
Oh, and if you say that you didn't... my next question is: was it McCain, then?
I voted Obama. I will vote for Obama again.
I was wondering a few days ago: what went so wrong? Did he lie? So, I looked at his 2008 platform http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/bios/view.bg?articleid=1063110
: Health care reform, check. Pull out of Iraq, check (I was satisfied with ending combat operations even though I knew there were 40k trainers still there which are to be phased out by the end of this year). I think the only things on his platform not covered were things that were sidelined because of the economy such as energy and immigration reform.
We are conditioned to hate the guy. After people we know who are nuts (fox and Limbaugh) continue to yell the same message for 4 years now people tend to believe it. I don't. He's done pretty much almost all that he campaigned on. No, the economy isn't great and it won't be for a long time no matter who is in the whitehouse. So, yes I voted for him and I'll vote again for him.
He also did slow down the rapid job decline we were in in 2008. Most people try to say we still were losing jobs and wouldn't give him credit even though he had made a lot of progress stopping the loss of jobs.
yeah, but the economy is a big one! its not like we really have a choice. cant imagine having another republican president again and digging ourselves another hole for four or eight more years.
People need to stop saying that "we don't have a choice" you do and I would hope the message becomes "I want Obama as President because I like him as President."
The time to primary Obama has passed. He has two positives that make him much more appealing than his opponents.
Obama is done almost everybody that voted for him and cheered in the streets is talking about what a let down he turned out to be ... Clinton and Biden scare me just as much as the republican nut jobs do
The Health care reform is not what he promised We are not out of Iraq and even now you have to read the fine print almost all the troops What about Habeas corpus or ending the rendition program in fact he stepped up assassinations and regime change economy does suck and got worst and he bailed out his bosses on wall street .... He fulfilled none of his promises ... "TruePatriots" you must be crazy or a democrat shill
It's tough for you to see but he's done almost all he has promised. You have no "facts" especially since it's official we are outta Iraq. Buh bye.
We are not out of Iraq "almost all troops" and what about Habeas corpus ?
Well, at least you believe in the person you voted for. I cannot and will not try to attack you for doing that. Every American should vote for the person they truly believe in.
I will say, though, that the following list is made up of the things I feel reveal Obama as a "business as usual" president who doesn't really believe in "defending the Constitution" and who is ultimately a puppet for the Federal Reserve, the Military-Industrial Complex and for the large, multi-national Corporations:
Before I go "on and on", maybe I should just stop and allow you to respond to these select few.
2 I think that's a good thing. Lets not dwell in the past.
3 I did not follow that in 2008. If he said so...I guess...idk.
The first has nothing to do with Obama, the second and third are hardly reasons to vote him out. I give you his great foreign affairs record with capturing Osama and liberating Libya without ground troops and having the international community begging us for our help. Genius.
I'm enjoying the discussion. I think most people enjoy intelligent debate. The question then might be: What do you mean by "intelligent"?
On item Number 1: Do you like it that a Federal Reserve note is backed by NO Tangible Asset, as it was before 1913? And why can't America return to the original approach of the Constitution that "only Congress can coin money"?
On item Number 2: "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it".
Money is money because it is perceived to have value. Credit. It's no different than gold. We perceive gold to have value even though it's usefulness is limited. Gold or silver is only as valuable as society perceives it to be. It's all credit.
Congress does coin money. In order to print money it must be done through the Department of Treasury which it and only it can print or coin money (a misconception on this forum is that the Federal Reserve prints money: it does not). The Mint and the Bureau of engraving and print are both part of the Treasury. Now that we got that out of the way the Fed does buy and sell bonds to inflate or deflate the money base but they don't print that money they simply add zeroes to bank accounts that are held at the Federal Reserve.
Sorry, I have to go... have to get to the airport for a trip... I do want to respond, but I will have to pick this up with you later.
Actually, here's a quick realization: You didn't answer my question - "Do you like it that a Federal Reserve Note is backed by NO Tangible Asset?" I mean, if you could choose... wouldn't you rather have it BE?
Do you want any bank to be able to "devalue a currency" by basically waving a wand? An entity would not be able to devalue a currency that has value unto itself, after all. But if you don't "look to history", you won't know that this has happened before... and the people were left holding "nothing"... nothing but paper, that is.
Watch "Money As Debt" on YouTube... wow, I gotta go!
If I had to choose...I'd say keep it as it is now. I do like it having no tangible assets backing up. It allows for flexibility and I like that.
I'm with you on that. Despite the enormous power vested in the institution that gets to print the money - in this case, banking institutions via fractional reserve banking - fiat currency is also more responsive to and flexible for monetary policy. I would say this is more of an argument for ending fractional reserve banking than going back to a gold-backed dollar.
In the end, having the currency "backed" by something - like gold - is nothing more than the transference of faith in value from USD to gold. We have this irrational belief in the "inherent" value of gold, but there's nothing to it other than shared faith.
To illustrate my point, I introduce the cowrie shell. Throughout the entirety of human history, the cowrie shell has had a longer history - and in more regions throughout the globe - as the store of value and the medium of exchange. Cowrie shells were money way before gold, way longer than gold, and it was accepted in more places than gold. Would anyone today advocate having a currency backed by cowrie shells?
Amen. Wow, you brought up crowrie shells it's been a while since I last heard about them.
Yeah, he was better than a Republican.
About this years republican candidates though, I have to say that Romney has me intrigued (not that i would vote for him). He admits global warming is real, and that's usually a good sign, especially in conservatives.
why not vote for a independent some body that not just a tool of the rich
this is from one of my previous posts, but it fits:
The political game is rigged. Two parties control the entire political system, but besides rhetoric, are they really all that different? Impossibly high barriers prevent third parties from every gaining ground in the election process. Namely, the fact that we have what is called a WINNER-TAKES-ALL SYSTEM. It basically means that whichever party/candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes in a state gets all of those votes. For example, California gets 55 electoral votes. If one party gets just 28 votes (which is barely a majority), all 55 votes count to that party/candidate in the general election. This effectively means that ANY VOTE FOR A THIRD PARTY IS ALWAYS A WASTED VOTE. What we need is proportional representation (used in Europe). This would allow for a multitude of parties to flourish, effectively breaking the status quo of our stagnant political system and allowing for real, significant change. Additionally, a dynamic political system such as this would by its very nature SEVERELY LIMIT THE POWER CORPORATIONS HAVE OVER OUR POLITICAL PARTIES. As more factors define our election process, it gets exponentially more difficult for corporations to influence our government. Now naturally, nothing has ever been done by Congress to really institute this kind of reform, as it is obviously against the interests of the two parties to have their positions of power so radically altered. But I ask you this: How many times during an election do you vote for the LESSER OF TWO EVILS? How many times have you wanted to vote for an independent candidate, only to recoil at the prospect of a WASTED VOTE? The only way to win the game, is to change the rules! Bring about change by DEMANDING that congress institute political party reform... They say we don't have a defined goal. We do... To break the STATUS QUO. This single demand, by itself, could change everything.
This provides some good information on the third party and the barriers it faces: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_party_(United_States)
I know The political game is rigged .... but what is anyone going to do about it? Nothing .... just like in Greece right now Nothing you can do about it now.
The best way to go about it is to start small, push for it your city, and once people realize that proportional representation is the fairest, it will spread.
nteresting Note: Proportional representation was instituted in New York for a time, causing other cities to follow suit. It resulted in a very vigorous political system with five political parties. It significantly reduced the power of the individual party bosses though, and it threatened the whole "two-party" political dynamic that democrats and republicans had tried so hard to cultivate. They launched a very successful fear campaign during the Red Scare telling Americans how PR was a "the political importation from the Kremlin," "the first beachhead of Communist infiltration in this country," and "an un-American practice which has helped the cause of communism and does not belong in the American way of life." PR was repealed by a very wide margin. Once PR had fallen in New York, many other cities followed suit. In Cincinnati (1957), the two parties utilized racism by warning that PR would result in a "Negro Mayor". There is only one city remaining today with a PR system: Cambridge, Massachusetts. The home of Harvard and MIT, and one of the smartest cities in the nation.
I don't see PR getting Cambridge, Massachusetts much or changing anything
but New York getting PR, that would be highly symbolic
yes i did
I voted for Obama. He has disappointed me because of his refusal to stand up to the far, far, far right. However, he remains the only choice for 2012. No alternative running.
Sad, but true.
He's a banister globalist. This/discussion is/far to polite, Obama didn't lie and did everything he was elected on? How or why would you even entertain this nonsense? Are you kidding me? The original poster and his her supports here are fucking blind, satisfied with Iraq? What about the two new/wars? Ask the active military if they got what they voted for? Please don't vote or breed
serenitychuck, humor me for a minute: What is your definition of "the far, far, far right". I ask because I am "vague" on who or what you are referring to.
To expain further, when it comes to the "concept of government", I learned that there is a "spectrum". One one side of this spectrum you have TOTAL GOVERNMENT. One the other side of this spectrum you have NO GOVERNMENT. So, to you, of these two, how is the "far right" defined?
Its pretty much the Republican Party these days. Perhaps, twenty years ago it was a minority within the Republican Party. Especially, since Clinton adopted more moderate or center-right policies while in office. Ever since, the Democratic Party has become more centrist or just center-left from where it was twenty or thirty years ago.
Please re-read my actual question. I don't feel that you answered it. I didn't ask "Which party do you feel represents the far right"? I asked which side of the spectrum, to you, is "the far right"? Is it "no government" or "total government". Hopefully we can agree that those two extremes do, in fact, cover the entire spectrum, from one end to the other.
It is clear that "the far right" advocate for as little government as possible. Hence, you have policies to deregulate certain industries and remove environmental protections that has been the voice of the "far right."
Well, first of all, I would hope that the so-called Left and Right both advocate for a policy of protecting the U.S. Constitution. Do you feel that one side is more for doing that than the other? Do you feel that our Constitution is something that should be preserved?
The Founders made plain their view, the Constitution is meant to be a malleable document, meant to be changed as the times and the majority of Americans (through the Congress and state legislatures) see fit. It is not holy writ. I mean, the Prohibition Amendment, then the amendment to get rid of the Prohibition Amendment, one just thirteen years after the other?
Yes, there is nothing that you just said that I dispute.
the best person to help me is me
nobody knows more about me than me
Matt Holck: Is this a response to my post?
I was musing what might be far right
I think I get it now. :)
I did, and was dancing in the streets when he won. My girlfriend was crying as we celebrated with hundreds of people on a closed off intersection in Seattle while Journey "Dont Stop Believing" was playing from a roof top. It really was a amazing night. Fast forward to now and I have stop believing and will never vote for him again.
For those who won't vote for Obama again, read this first:
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html
Would you rather have any of the republican alternatives win when they all vow to get rid of "Obamacare." I know that now the law says I can at least get an annual physical now before I never meet my outrageous deductible with an outrageous premium for an individual policy. And what about all those kids with preexisting conditions that could never get health insurance before and can now? It's no single-payer, but it's a start.
Read that list and then complain that he did nothing and sit home on voting day, while all the religious freaks and brain dead fox hounds go vote.
Nope, never again.
You know, til I read this I had forgotten about how emotional Election Night was. Even though I knew Obama was a compromise-y centrist, I was still sooooo happy & optimistic. I remember watching that night with my fam, we were really so hopeful and even the days after we were still celebrating.
Sigh. So much hope, so little change.
I don't want to sound insulting, but you voted for a "false prophet". Obama had "little-to-no" voting record. This enabled him to say whatever he wanted. I suggest every American pays close attention to the voting record of the person they might vote for. That record is the real indicator of whether they truly back up their words and their principles with a definable and complementary action.
Hey, I didn't vote for him because I thought he was a prophet. See my other response that explains that a bit.
Part of our joy on election night was 1 - the Bush nightmare was finally over. 2 - The historical election of the 1st non-white American president 3 - Sarah Palin was not going to anywhere near the "red button"
Yea I voted for Sold-You- Out- Obama. Well, what choices do we have?! The stupid, the vicious RePubicCunts or the weak, the lame DummyCrats. Choose your poison.
I choose neither. I say we completely remove the party component of our government and force every candidate to run as a true independent. That would solve a lot of problems.
"Well, what choices do we have?!"
Is that a rhetorical question? Are you saying that you truly had only two choices?
Oh sorry, my bad. I actually had four choices
A little comedic relief mixed in... nice. :)
Just to let you in on "my world". I voted for Ron Paul in 2008. I voted for him in the primary, and when he wasn't one of the two choices served up for me on the final ballot, I "wrote him in". Did I "waste my vote"? Well, you tell me, did I? You voted for Obama... and it sounds to me now that it was actually you who "wasted your vote". You wish you could take it back, after all. And that sounds a little "wasted" to me. :) I'll tell you another thing: I wouldn't take my vote for RP back.... no way, Jose.
Even a hog feeds on the inside of a trough. Go figure.
I voted for Obama in 2008 and I will again. However, I also spent a lot of time organizing for Obama, and I highly doubt I'll do as much for him this year. If I do, I want to do it in the context of a non-Democratic Party group that is fighting for a progressive agenda way to the left of Obama. He hasn't done shit for the left wing, and maybe that's not even his job -- but someone has to, and the someone is us. That slogan "we are the change we've been waiting for" actually makes sense -- but we aren't doing enough for change by just electing Obama again.
tl;dr - voting for Obama may be necessary, but it sure isn't sufficient
I voted for him and I'll be damned if i vote for that degenerate again. Why would you vote for some one who has continually capitulated to the corporate and finance elite? Do you really believe that if this president was a success for the majority there would even be an ows movment?
Yes. I believe he was sincere, he started with a grassroots campaign of the people. Then the BIG money got him. Goldman Sachs got him. And all the rest of the BIG money. And when the BIG money grabs on, it does NOT let go! He has become a willing victim of the 1%. Just like all the rest.
1% buys their representation, 99% are left with the scraps.
Healthcare reform?? Scraps. This is not enough to compensate for the wholesale destruction of our economy and democracy by the 1%. Besides which, I don't even believe in a national healthcare system. This was only necessary because for YEARS the healthcare industry successfully lobbyed against common sense reforms (ie: competition across state lines). Which if the common sense stuff was done all along, there would be no need for big government healthcare reform. The healthcare industry itself CREATED the bigger government!
Bottom line, the BIG money got him. Wall Street is a dictatorship over our government.
Cue the sadness.
Only solution is the get the money out of politics.
This demand must go public and official. We need to take this protest to another level. Going official with Campaign Finance Reform is the way to do that.
Yes in 2008 and Yes in 2012
I voted Obama ... what a let down ... will not be voting for him again i don't care who wins
I voted for Obama. Simply due to the fact that he is very much the lesser of the two evils. John McCain would have continued right where Bush left off and we would have been way worse off then we are now.
I wrote in Ron Paul. I figured it was a step more viable than writing myself in, the previous election. I don't vote for parties, I vote for the best candidate.
Fun fact, the marina in Port Orchard is named after my grandpa, who was mayor and got it put in. Nick Repanich.
Very nice, about your grandpa! And also, "very nice" for writing in Ron Paul! I love to hear of people voting for exactly who they believe in, and not just choosing between the "selected two"!
http://www.themultitude.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=256
I'm sorry Mike, but I am not there with you on Obama. I just don't see him as a true "defender of the Constitution". To give just one example of this: In his ramping-up of the Federal "War On Drugs" (want references?), since getting elected, he is participating in a direct violation of the 10th Amendment which declares this issue be up to the states to decide for themselves.
I'm a Ron Paul fan, and it will be pretty hard to bring me away from him. I view RP as the biggest "defender" of our Constitution of the past 50 years. And he has the long-standing voting record to prove it. Obama hardly had a voting record to examine. He was in the Senate for, what... one term?
http://www.themultitude.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=264&p=1370#p1370
http://www.themultitude.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=256
Would have, but I was 16. I will still vote for Obama most likely in 2012, because I see him as the best electable candidate. As TruePatriots stated, he did fulfill as much of his campaign promises as he was conceivably able to do. Yes, he fell far short of his campaign promises, but all you can really ask from him is that he works in good faith toward the achievement of these promises and he did. People seem to overestimate the power of the presidency, viewing it as far more decisive and far more instrumental in making public policy than it actually is. Sorry for the link, but Neustadt explains it far better than I could: http://wikisum.com/w/Neustadt:_Presidential_power
I may be an "anomaly". I didn't vote for anyone in 2008. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Obama due to his total lack of economic understanding. I couldn't vote for McCain because he was part of the "old guard" that got us where we are today.
I know the lame argument: "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain".
BULL SHIT.....I paid "6 figures" in taxes last year. That bought me a "shit load" of "bitch tickets".
You say you "couldn't vote for Obama" and "couldn't vote for McCain"...
My complaint about your approach is: Stop buying into the "only two candidates" game. You have all the choices in "the world". Find someone you believe in... and, Jesus Christ, vote for them... even if you have to write them in! There is no shame in that. And if anyone ever tells you that you wasted your vote. Give them this quote from John Quincy Adams:
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
Look at how many people regret their vote for Obama! Were those not wasted votes, only now realized?
So far....so good this year. Herman Cain has peaked my interest. If he doesn't implode, he may get my vote in 2012. Time will tell.
I voted for Obama in 2008
I didn't know who he was
He showed up last minute
I knew I wanted the wars to end
If I was the first of my race to be President of the United States of America I would sacrifice all I have to ensure a lasting legacy for my children, my race and for the good of all citizens of America. I would tell the bankers thanks for the contribution, now go to Hell!
I would shake up the military industrial complex by shutting it down and redistribute the trillions of dollars that had went to the wars. Each family would receive 1 million dollars and will not need to pay taxes for the next 5 years. We would still have enough money left over to balance the budget. Then I would be assassinated like MLK and JFK for trying to shut down the military industrial complex. I will then become a martyr and the plaque on my statue will quote Nathan Hale, "I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country."
Alas, it’s just a dream. In reality I would probably say whatever it takes to get your votes, take as much money I can get from the banksters sell you out to the highest bidder and live happily ever after.
Ninety9to1: To make reference to a Metallica song, "Sad But True".
I have to agree with your overall point, and it's sad... our president (or someone like Gandhi, or MLK, or JFK) either fights against "the powers that be" and takes their chances, or they join them.
But in terms of how I personally vote? I will continue to cast my vote for truth, transparency in government, the U.S. Constitution.. and for The Freedom Fighters of this world! (Go Ron Paul in 2012).
I didn't think his cozying up to clean coal was a good sign, but I thought he was the best President America could actually get elected, and by now, I just want to prove that idea wrong. Obama is the last time I'll ever vote for a Democrat or Republican. We need to reform the elections completely before they'll matter again.
Sorry, I must protest! :) A candidate's "political party" has little to do with it. You fall into a trap of not listening to what the candidate is actually saying when you allow the "party-line" to influence your decision making. Please, make your decision on whether to back "your candidate" based on their Principles... and their "Message"... and, of course, their voting record.
I think you're right, until money's involved. At this point neither party line can be believed. The culture war is a sideshow, never meant to be won by either side, but to get people worked up and distracted while the country is stolen away. What I'm saying is, I'm never voting for either of the two corporate parties again. Nobody gets far in them without having kissed the banker's ring.
Yup, I did.
I didn't vote for him in the primary but I damn sure wasn't gonna vote Republican after Bush and with Palin in the mix.
And I used to think 3rd party was a wasted vote. I may rethink that.
I voted for Obama just because I knew that McCain would not change anything that Bush had put into place. As soon as I saw that the GOP got Congress I knew we were screwed because Obama would not be able to get any of his own proposals through. And that is pretty much what happened.
Politics is supposed to be an Us and Them kind of thing where the two parties work TOGETHER to get things done. It has become Us vs Them where our elected leaders go to Washington only to make sure that nothing gets done. I do not see anyone working together. If your party gets a majority in Congress you have a chance that you will get what you want. However when the Senate is leaning one way and the House is leaning the other way just hang it up and wait for another election. this is not how Congress is supposed to work.
I can't really argue with what you are saying, in terms of how Washington works. But your statements are suggesting that Obama is and always has been fighting to enact the policies he "stood for" in '08. Do you believe that he is doing this... backing up the things he said then, by still saying them now? Regardless of actually being able to stop it, is he at least still as vocal about ending war as he was then?
And what about the immensely powerful private bank called The Federal Reserve? As far as I know, he was NEVER vocally critical of it. Or maybe that is something you believe is NOT deserving of any criticism?
He has spent several months pushing his jobs bill which the house was opposed to I think mostly because they oppose anything he does. He has almost no support even from his own party in Congress. I doubt they even bother to read the bills he presents.
His economic plans were more about getting American companies to hire American workers. I asked my co-workers rajarthanam and Nabin how they would feel if their jobs were given to Americans and they said they hope that doesn't happen or they will have to go back to their country. Congress and the corporations opposed him on this because ... Well I wish I knew what reasoning they had. With no suppose in congress Obama probably lacks the power needed to get Ben Bernanke to stop giving our tax money to his friends. I believe he needs us to show our support so that he can do something about it.
i voted for obama in 2008, will likely not in 2012... but its a ways off yet so dont hold me to that
I did, but I won't be doing so this time. I'll find an independent candidate.
Your honestly is most appreciated.
I did. I drank the hope & change kool-aid he was selling. I got screwed!
Not again. Obama has no credibility. None of them have credibility.
To you, too... Your honestly is most appreciated.
No. . . . .and no.
gnomunny: Did you cast a vote for the president of the U.S. in 2008?
I know this will make me look bad but you deserve an answer. I did not vote in 2008. Now, please don't give me that tired "if you don't vote you can't bitch." I believe my vote is too important to waste on a couple of crooks and sellouts. I will, however be voting next year so I hope that makes up for any negative impression I may have given you initially.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
Damn! I can't watch any youtube videos on my computer because my speakers are broke. It pisses me off, I've been missing a lot of good ones over the last week or so. Thanks, though.
headphones are your friend
I feel like an idiot. Why didn't I think of that (hint: alzheimer's).
I won't use the words "if you don't vote, you can't bitch". I've never liked that response... even when I was a little kid. Something about that response doesn't quite make sense. But voting is one of the few tools an American citizen has to affect change. It's a tool that should be used, with every opportunity... and hopefully wisely by the person casting it.
I opted out of the political process a little while back because I got so disgusted with it. I felt the whole process was corrupt. I still think that. But when I found this website about a week and a half ago, well, I've been hooked. I see hope in what's going on and I sincerely hope something positive can come out of it. And if something can get a cynical person like me back into the process, it's already done something. Now, if we can get the other umpteen million back, we may be onto something.
I was disgusted with it, too... until I discovered Ron Paul. He cured my apathy. How? I had never heard anyone talk like him before. And the more I learned about him and the more I really listened to him... the more excited I was to cast my vote for him. And my vote is based on his message...it doesn't even really matter if he is 20 years old, or 90 years old. I love his message of, basically, a much more strict "adherence to our Constitution."
They always seem to promise good things while they're running. That's what disgusted me; once they get in, no matter who it is, all those promises seem to go out the window. From what I'm gathering from this site, though, is a lot of it has to do with Congress, which makes sense. So, Congress seems to be one of the targets OWS should ultimately focus on. But I have been hearing some good things about Ron Paul. Far too soon for me to make any decisions though.
I definitely agree with your statement about Congress. The OWS protesters should focus their attention there, and not on Wall Street. It's Congress after all, that has the ability to enact the laws that the OWS people would like to get passed.
We often hear that we don't want "career politicians" in office.
I want everyone to reconsider this. Why?
Think about how we have "a documented record" of how a person in office votes... on measures, amendments, bills, etc. We as citizens should value this information. With Obama, he could say whatever he wanted and we just might believe him. But how did he actually vote on things? We hardly knew... because he was in the Senate, for what?... one term? He had very little "voting record". How can we really feel like "we knew him"?
Now, for me, I voted for Ron Paul in 2008. Unfortunately, I had to write him in. I believed in him then and I believe in him now. HE HAS A SUBSTANTIAL VOTING RECORD. I feel like I can read a potential bill and make a pretty good guess on how Ron Paul would vote on it. And that's why I will vote for him, I believe in his principles that are backed up by a long history of congressional record. And that record, time and again, reflects a true commitment to defending our country's Constitution.
Neither. Some of us were actually paying attention. Remember, the wall street money came BEFORE he got elected.
I hear crickets chirping.... nobody out there voted for Obama?
Guess it must have been McCain that got your vote, huh?
I was prepared to vote for Obama. Then I researched where his money was coming from and realized that it was a smoke and mirrors con being put on by a guy who gives stirring speeches and says some of the right things when he does it. But McCain is a nutjob; I couldn't vote for him, either.