Polling shows independents aren't buying Obama’s promises of prosperity through Big Government

The Libertarian Party ^ | 5/11/09 | The Libertarian Party

[M203M4]

The media portrays Obama as a young, cool, hip, devoted husband and father and basically all-around great guy - and we like to see our leaders as a reflection of ourselves. Plus his skin color (different from "race", which, as modern genetics shows us, does not have any scientific meaning) makes lots of people (white, black, etc) feel good about themselves. At some level, opposing Obama (if the question is given directly, not indirectly as a query of specific policy) may lead to the fear of giving the impression of racism. Even if some Americans are racist, most of that small subset certainly do not want to define themselves that way. The media feeds that fear constantly (see recent "Tea Party" = "white power" comments from various talking heads).

A related dynamic is responsible for the dumb chick with the huge boobs and nice a** keeping the job she cannot perform properly - her coworkers like having her around because of the way she makes them feel about themselves.

I admit to being comforted by the fact that Americans did not dismiss outright a candidate because of his skin tone, while at the same time I fear large numbers of Americans voted for him because of the image they wanted to project to eachother and to the world (in part contingent upon said skin tone).

Obama's popularity is predicated upon his image, not his policies - this is the main reason direct media exposure is being used to promulgate the Democrats' message. The GOP needs to divorce Obama the person from his policies, and attack said policies. Hammer the policies, link the policies to Democrats, and remain vague/indifferent to Obama the man. Make it emotionally safe for independents to oppose Obama's policies while still "liking" Obama.

[griswold3]

But Bush wasn’t a conservative on anything but social and foreign policy issues.

You’re correct in stating that President Bush wasn’t much of a strong, morally sound fiscal conservative. The Dems did their part to dismantle any standing since 2001.
The only solace I have is that we had eight years to prepare, because if AlGore would have won in 2000, it would have been just like it is now.

[concerned about politics]

why are 0’s poll numbers still high ?

Something isn't right there. Do you sense it?
The media needs chaos in order to fill their 24 hour news slots. In my opinion, they create the news when they have none. Keeping people on edge keeps then tuning in.
It's hard to get real news these days. It's like 24 hour spin.

[Cheetahcat]

“Independent voters believed Candidate Obama when he said he would be mainstream. Their trusting votes gave him a narrow victory,”

Traitors .Communist Lackeys their protest symbolic vote and Acorn vote Fraud put the Communists in power..

If these people are that dam stupid not to see his past record then they should NOT be voting.

[staytrue]

“What’s worse is that Bush could’ve followed the Obama playbook and rammed through every single piece of conservative legislation in the first 100 days. “

In 2001, we had 50 senators plus Cheney. Then Jeffords jumped and we did not even have 50, let alone the 60 you need.

The dems had 58 and if franken gets in, they got 59 and with spectre, they get to 60.

[athelass]

Right on, sister. I've always equated independents with reeds blowing in the wind. No backbone. I contend the moderates should leave the GOP since they are the ones who have a problem. They can call themselves the Do-Nothings.

I can't go along with taking voting rights back to lords and peasants, but I sure do think that while you are on government assistance or your kids are in foster care you shouldn't be able to vote, just the same as felons are not allowed to vote, because you are no longer a contributing member of society. It's a clear conflict of interest, just like Congress voting themselves raises, which also has to stop.

[Landru]

I've *learned* the Libertarian Party USA is where true liberty loving Americans may find a real home.

Unfortunately, liberty scares more people then would admit.
What's worse than their fear(s) are their leaders.

Their leaders --D and R-- hold liberty in the highest contempt, have and do everything and anything in their power to subvert all the Republic once stood for.

Mine isn't an accusation, mine's a reading of what they've done -- all the proof one needs is what we see, today.

One day, God willing, there'll be an awakening. I want to be a part of that event. It'll be where the proverbial rubber finally meets the road for many.

[matginzac]

Forgive if this is a repeat but WTH did these dopes think they were going to get when THEY voted him in? Buyers’ remorse IS NOT ALLOWED! Because of the Messiah’s “charisma”, these idiots bought into his lies and screwed the whole country. NOW they poll differently - too damn bad...

[Emile]

No the left's agenda is:

I want to exercise total control over everyone's lives, using everyone else's money to finance my agenda.

The Repub agenda is:

I want to go along with the left, as long as they cut us in on some of their crumbs.

Assuming that all the Libertarians want to do is smoke pot (which is nothing more than a stereotype, as well as an ad hominen attack on the part of those who can't rebut their arguments), the question is: in the end, whose agenda as stated above is most harmful for the country?

[Dan(9698)]

who can't rebut their arguments

It is hard to rebut the truth.

Only Obama can