Posted on 04/23/2009 7:56:03 PM PDT by Frantzie
Sorry for the Vanity but I have been thinking about this for a bit.
He said two words that cheered me up "David Dinkins."
NYC is obviously a liberal town but NYC could not get rid of Dinkins fast enough. First black mayor, fawned over at first, etc etc.
Look at Paterson - his favorable poll numbers are about 27% and dropping. They are harder to manipulate than O's oversample Dem and undersampled Repub polls.
Obama has the drooling and fawning media plus his (faux) "hipness."
On the other hand - if you are twenty-something who graduated from college, you have student loans, no job, may have encountered affrimative action discrimination and Obama is dumping trillions (with a T) of debt on your back - how long will this clown remain "hip?"
My impression is in 100 days - Obama has done as much damage as Paterson or Dinkins, though NYC got pretty bad under Dinkins. Paterson on the other hand seems like a half decent guy while Dinkins was an semi-arrogant but at times kindly old buffoon.
Obama is just a younger but more arrogant Islamo-buffoon.
So at 11% unemployment headng to possibly 15% - how do we insure Obama becomes Dinkins II while the media keeps worshiping him?
Note my friend mentioned Dinkins and I agreed but there have been examples of white lib Dems who appeared to have teflon for a while. Gray Davis in CA is one that comes to mind. Corzine is not looking to popular in NJ either. So this is not just about race. It is about a popular lib Dem politician that is fawed over at first then tanks.
You are reading my mind. He is so Dinkins!!!
>So at 11% unemployment headng to possibly 15% - how do we insure Obama becomes Dinkins II while the media keeps worshiping him?
Why stop at only 15%? Why not 20%, or 40%... or, if we’re really lucky, 50%!
Based on his recent policy decisions, Mr. Obama appears to be resolved to replicate the one term Mayoralty of New York City Mayor David Dinkins. Dinkins catered to the unions and Democrat special interests groups; resulting in (1) a record loss in private and public sector jobs, (2) tax increases over $1B, (3) a record low investment in the city , (4) high crime, (5) unsanitary streets and, (6) and at one point, an inability to meet the payroll for public employees. Similar to some in this Administration, Dinkins himself was discovered not to have paid taxes for five years, whereupon, he issued his infamous Clintonism: “I haven’t committed a crime. What I did was fail to comply with the law.”
wegotsarah 3/4/09
Yup he is Dinkins. The GOP needs to stop walking on egg shells because of his race.
The GOP needs to mock him and have absolute contempt for him. He is a disaster. The GOP needs to study how Dinkins imploded and Rudy can probably help.
the GOP needs the guts to attack, not because of his race or that he may be ineligible and an is probably an illegal alien but because he is clueless marxist.
His administration and other Democrats are totally corrupt and the TARP funds are the taxpayers being looted.
Are you kidding? You people need to dig in for the long haul. Obama is smart and cunning and cool. He is massively popular right now and super-confident. Clinton himself made enormous errors and blunders in his first term and still won re-election handily. No minor screw-up is going to derail this guy.
Massively popular- the polls and media told you that? I don’t think so. He is no dummy but he is wrecking the economy.
After a while unemployed people will not be able to blame Bush. This disaster is all O’s and the Democrats.
Clinton also had a very minor recession we were coming out of. Maybe two Q’s of slighty down GNP.
I loathe Bill Clinton but he was a moderate. He even said he wanted to come back after he died as the bond market to scare people. In other words he was very careful not to piss off the bond market. He also had a pretty sharp GOP Congress that kept him from doing dumb things.
Anyone else I might say you would be right. Obama is banking on an economic recovery and I would not hold my breath. He is a marxist Dinkins. He is destrtoying the economy and will bankrupt it. Clinton was very careful about the economy.
Also: Tonight someone posted an American Thinker articles (great blog and part of the American Spectator).
They showed a few recent polls and Dems are massivesly oversampled, Repubs undersmapled and Indeps oversampled.
The pollsters are trying to coverup that he is dropping. Even the rank and file in the UAW can only blame him and the Dems (and themselves) for the destruction of Chrysler and GM.
A Pres Romney might have saved Detroit if we had drill here drill now and the UAW/Bond holders/ and management put together a package. Also car sales and the economy would not have imploded if Romney or even Hillary had won.
Confidence imploded when the marxist was elected.
Micheal is Shaphire, Biden is a very good Calhoun..
i.e. Amos n' Andy..
LOL! The polls are being manipulated and oversampled.
This can only help so long when unemployment is soaring and rags like NewsWeak and the NY Times are going down in flames. The published lib media (mags & newspapers) wanted change and they got it. He is horrible for the economy.
You again, newb?
The popularity index will sink rapidly as the economy dies. He's not confident at all...witness the idiotic appointments to his cabinet and the teleprompter dependency.
For the first term, the False One will be able to blame Bush. In the second term, people will begin to lose patience with him and demand results. I expect the side effects of the “Change” will show up in the second term.
Are you kidding? There won’t be a second term.
Hussein Dinkins? That has a good ring to it
Good comparison....BH Obama to David Dinkins
As for “polls”....remember that Bush 41 enjoyed high poll numbers in 1991....and lost to Clinton one year later. Those poll numbers will change as the economy slides.
A frontal lobotomy.
He has stood behind every appointee from Geithner to Solis to Napalitano, and he doesn't care what they did, he backs them until they win. His TARP manager is embroiled in a NY investment scandal--and he keeps him there, even after the NYT called for his firing. Because he doesn't need the NYT. He doesn't even invite them to his conferences. He knows he has power and he is super arrogant. He is influenced by his wife who is a ruthless, bitter racist who wants to settle scores and makes hillary look like Mother Teresa (and the media covers for her and dutifully creates a false icon for the public). I am not being naive and thinking as you seem to be, that Obama is destined to fall on his ass. What if he DOESN'T? what then? What's the plan? Expecting his failure is not a plan. We need to be proactive, dig up dirt and expose it, relentlessly barrage the public with an alternative, muscular world view.
to sum it up, my view is that everyone from Chicago hacks to Hillary to Limbaugh to McCain has assumed that Obama was not up to the task and would fail. And he has not. We either accept this and change strategies, or continue to watch as he wins again and again.
It won’t be long. He isn’t really ‘hip’ but has been okay at pretending he is. That won’t last. He is essentially a ‘poseur’ in need of constant re-assurance that he is special. People are starting to see that he is really quite ordinary ... and phony.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.