Whether you like him or not, Obama is an accomplished orator. I've said it here before but the president of the United States must, at the very least, be able to lie to me with style. He or she has to be able to sell me, suspend my belief for a few moments, make me proud to call America my home.

Trump on his best day couldn't deliver a speech worth listening to or taking too seriously. I believe he is right about a great many things but he just doesn't have that presidential swagger. Pompousness yes. But presidential personality, no.

Hilary should be in jail at least 4 times over so she's out. Cruz is maniacal. Bush is mentally disabled. Carson strikes me as bluffing his way through an exam. Rand Paul is a crybaby. Rubio is slow to pay his taxes and comes across as a used car salesman. Kasich is another crybaby and unfortunately, another war hawk willing to place our troops anywhere and everywhere and Fiorina didn't have the business savvy to see Steve Jobs coming and thus tore a hole through HP. I can't have someone naive. Fiorina is naive.

That said, when you look at the candidates, who do you really think has the kind of presidential stature the office demands? Very few of them I think..

So who is the solution? Who can we realistically expect to win? and who actually possesses the attitude required of the office. Who can possibly win the swing vote which is all it takes to win?

The Berndog!

There I've said it. With the exception of abortion, I find myself listening to the berndog and not wanting to turn him off. He's strikes me as rational and fair. I think he'll be able to lie to me with the kind of dignity and enthusiasm I've come to expect in a US president.

The big show is going to boil down to the Berndog and Trump. Two extremes for what has become quite an extreme country.

The race will be close but Trump will lose in the end and the world will be a better place because of that loss.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Whether you like him or not, Obama is an accomplished orator. I've said it here before but the president of the United States must, at the very least, be able to lie to me with style. He or she has to be able to sell me, suspend my belief for a few moments, make me proud to call America my home.

Then, you must love being lectured! I've never heard a more arrogant, condescending, and pompous speech. He loves him some him!

He slammed Republicans. He claimed his Syria policy is smart. He took credit for frakking. The list is long and annoying. This was partisanship at its worst.

Syria is smart? Hundreds of thousands dead (so far) and millions fleeing--this is good?

The deal with Iran that will give them a nuke is good?

His stewardship of the economy is good?

His leadership is good?

Trump on his best day couldn't deliver a speech worth listening to or taking too seriously. I believe he is right about a great many things but he just doesn't have that presidential swagger. Pompousness yes. But presidential personality, no.

Comparing Trump with Obama is instructive. Obama knows how to build nothing. He knows how to negotiate nothing. He is capable of giving a speech. Last night was not it.

Only a liberal could have enjoyed that crap sandwich.

So who is the solution? Who can we realistically expect to win? and who actually possesses the attitude required of the office. Who can possibly win the swing vote which is all it takes to win?

The Berndog!

The socialist who thinks that more regulation and more taxation is the way to solve our problems?

Erm, okay.

There I've said it. With the exception of abortion, I find myself listening to the berndog and not wanting to turn him off. He's strikes me as rational and fair. I think he'll be able to lie to me with the kind of dignity and enthusiasm I've come to expect in a US president.

"With the exception of abortion . . ."

I can't except that--or accept it.

The big show is going to boil down to the Berndog and Trump. Two extremes for what has become quite an extreme country.

I doubt it. Even if Hillary is indicted, most Democrats will vote for her.

The race will be close but Trump will lose in the end and the world will be a better place because of that loss.

Because the world is a better place when America takes its hands off and leads from behind.

dag

The big show is going to boil down to the Berndog and Trump. Two extremes for what has become quite an extreme country.

Based on the recent polling Bernie has more chance now then Trump. But Bernie versus Cruz will be just as big a juxtaposition.
Clinton was in about the position she is in now in 08. And Obama ended up ahead. Perhaps Bernie's policies and his authenticity will prevail.
Trump has a ceiling. I think you are right that eventually an Extreme candidate will be put forward by the Republicans. Nikki Hayleys response last night was a little self-loathing.... and aimed at Trump. (Not that many of the others are that different. ) It seemed to be a recognition that dividing to win short term is a lousy long term strategy.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Whether you like him or not, Obama is an accomplished orator. I've said it here before but the president of the United States must, at the very least, be able to lie to me with style. He or she has to be able to sell me, suspend my belief for a few moments, make me proud to call America my home.

I think both Obama's and Haley's speech were great. My expectations were much lower for Haley and she crushed it. I already knew Obama was going to do a good speech, but I had memories of the terrible performances of Rubio and that guy from Indiana and had no expectation from Haley, but she was great.

rickyp wrote:dag

The big show is going to boil down to the Berndog and Trump. Two extremes for what has become quite an extreme country.

Based on the recent polling Bernie has more chance now then Trump. But Bernie versus Cruz will be just as big a juxtaposition.

This is just wrong.

Sanders has the edge in NH over Hillary. He has a slight edge over her in Iowa. However, nationally, it's not even close.

On the other hand, Trump is neck and neck with Cruz in Iowa and dominates NH. Nationally, he's way ahead.

Bernie can't win simply by winning Iowa and New Hampshire. Trump can easily lose Iowa and still get the nomination.

Nikki Hayleys (sic) response last night was a little self-loathing.... and aimed at Trump. (Not that many of the others are that different. ) It seemed to be a recognition that dividing to win short term is a lousy long term strategy.

She's a Tea Party-leaning person. What she said reflects what conservatives think.

If dividing to win is a lousy long term strategy, the Democrats are hurting.

geojanes wrote:

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Whether you like him or not, Obama is an accomplished orator. I've said it here before but the president of the United States must, at the very least, be able to lie to me with style. He or she has to be able to sell me, suspend my belief for a few moments, make me proud to call America my home.

I think both Obama's and Haley's speech were great. My expectations were much lower for Haley and she crushed it. I already knew Obama was going to do a good speech, but I had memories of the terrible performances of Rubio and that guy from Indiana and had no expectation from Haley, but she was great.

You didn't find Obama's speech a little bit self-worshipping? You bought the bit about Syria?

As for the response speech, it is very difficult. No audience means no feedback. It is a very artificial situation. Come to think of it, even the great orator, Barack Obama, seems stilted when he gives a speech to the camera in isolation. It's just unnatural.

Doctor Fate wrote:You didn't find Obama's speech a little bit self-worshipping? You bought the bit about Syria?

Sure, there was an element of "victory lap" to Obama's speech, but he talked to the good in all of us, "we're better than that," and appealing to higher principles rather than just naked self-interest. That's a powerful message to give to people, to get them to believe in the idea of our democracy, which actually only works if there is a "all-for-one, one-for-all" quality to it. It's the nature of a speech like that to spin things a certain way, and not be totally into the details, and we all know the details matter in reality, but this speech is more artistry than substance, and he gets an A for artistry. Maybe he gets a B or a C for substance, but artistry provides 80% of the grade.

The setting for Haley was a little artificial, but she still crushed it, appealing to the same ideas that Obama was, frankly, which was probably why I liked it so much.

Fate,

1. Thank you for a 10 minute laugh...."he loves him some him." Brilliant. I will have to use that in the future. And I believe you may be right.

2. You're not reading my post carefully. I agree with most of your points. I'm not suggesting that Obama is being truthful necessarily. Only that he's got the swagger. He's got that thing that makes you think for a second or two that he is legit. Of course he's a weasel. Give me a break for God's sake. They all are. That's my point. If you're going to lie to me, then do it in a way that suggests that you believe your own bullshit. Don't blink, don't stutter, don't put together words and half sentences that don't make any sense "strategery." Promise me the moon and do it with a believable passion that takes me away for a moment.

3. I truly admire you for holding your ground over abortion. I too feel very strongly about the topic but none of these politicians believe what they're selling us on that issue. The Republicans are fully aware that it is a hot button issue for a lot of voters and they milk it for votes. But where are the results after all these years under Roe v. Wade? Even with a Republican White House and Republican Congress, even with a court that in recent years is considered by some to be relatively conservative, virtually nothing has been done to stem the tide of abortions. Politicians at the national level are liars and will sell us the Brooklyn Bridge if they know it can win a vote. That's why I've moved toward a more pragmatic approach to the issue. I know abortion is not going away for good. All I ask is that abortions be limited to the first trimester. Anything after that is absurdity. Of course the entire issue is absurd. In my book there is only a two week window or so whereby personhood could be doubted and then only philosophically, not biologically. The two weeks is a reference to the time period prior to implantation after which point I believe there is no argument to made over personhood.

4. I believe the Berndog comes across to the "on the fence voters" as more presentable for the office than Trump. And remember, this is what the election boils down to, those voters who are on the fence. You're responses to my post involved logic. Your responses are rational. You missed my point entirely. This election is not about rationality. It's not about positions. It's not about policy.
Those days are gone. In the end, you've got to be able to sell yourself to the American swing voter who is neither a Democrat or Republican. We are a nation and a people who innately know what it means to sell. Trump is damn good at it but he lacks something I can't quite put my finger on. I think he misfires when he allows for his emotions to clip his passion. The Berndog is passionate. He's believable. He can sell himself to the swing voters in ways that Trump can not. The Berndog comes across as fair and a voice for the underdog, someone reasonable. Trump almost succeeds at this as well but like I said, he's missing an allure of some kind.

5. This time when you respond. If you respond. Please don't get caught up in the rightness or wrongness of a particular candidates' positions/policies. Try to stay focused on what I'm attempting to throw light on here....that is, the sizzle as it directly impacts the swing voters who I maintain chase the sizzle and who are not necessarily caught up with the details of the steak but who are the king makers in the end.

6. Rome is the mob Fate. Axelrod, Plouffe and Obama knew this nearly 8 years ago. How else do you explain taking down a Clinton in her prime?

geojanes wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:You didn't find Obama's speech a little bit self-worshipping? You bought the bit about Syria?

Sure, there was an element of "victory lap" to Obama's speech, but he talked to the good in all of us, "we're better than that," and appealing to higher principles rather than just naked self-interest. That's a powerful message to give to people, to get them to believe in the idea of our democracy, which actually only works if there is a "all-for-one, one-for-all" quality to it. It's the nature of a speech like that to spin things a certain way, and not be totally into the details, and we all know the details matter in reality, but this speech is more artistry than substance, and he gets an A for artistry. Maybe he gets a B or a C for substance, but artistry provides 80% of the grade.

I don't agree re artistry. His "we're better than that" is nothing less than lecturing. He KNOWS everything and anyone who doesn't agree with him is told "we're better than that." His regret expressed last night was laughable. This is the man who came in promising to unify. His three major legislative accomplishments: Obamacare, Stimulus, and Dodd-Frank all passed without a single GOP vote. They used reconciliation to pass the ACA. He derisively told Republicans "Elections have consequences." He went many, many months without even talking to Boehner. He was a partisan from the get-go and NEVER did anything but give bipartisanship occasional lip service.

Maybe the biggest pile of hypocrisy was his "plea" to get money out of politics. Um, who broke the system? Who refused to fix it after winning?

To his supporters, it was a fine speech. "Artistry" would mean he got others to buy some of what he was selling.

Listen, when Clinton was leaving office, there was a bit of me that admired him. I have zero admiration for Obama. He has governed in precisely the opposite manner he seeks to portray himself as having governed.

There is a worse President in American history, but he led the Confederacy.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Trump is damn good at it but he lacks something I can't quite put my finger on. I think he misfires when he allows for his emotions to clip his passion. The Berndog is passionate. He's believable. He can sell himself to the swing voters in ways that Trump can not. The Berndog comes across as fair and a voice for the underdog, someone reasonable. Trump almost succeeds at this as well but like I said, he's missing an allure of some kind.

Let me help. I think you're sensing that Trump is vastly more likely to blow in the wind than Bernie, who has been an old-time Brooklyn socialist for the past 60 years. He's a rock. You may not agree with him, but you know he'll give it to you straight, and he will never surprise you. Hillary's biggest problem is that she is much more like Trump in this regard than Bernie.

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Fate,

1. Thank you for a 10 minute laugh...."he loves him some him." Brilliant. I will have to use that in the future. And I believe you may be right.

You're welcome.

There's no modesty in him--from the Greek columns in Denver to last night. He killed Bin Laden. He solved the fiscal crisis. He gave us frakking. I'm surprised he didn't shed a tear and say "I fear for this nation without me at the helm."

2. You're not reading my post carefully. I agree with most of your points. I'm not suggesting that Obama is being truthful necessarily. Only that he's got the swagger. He's got that thing that makes you think for a second or two that he is legit. Of course he's a weasel. Give me a break for God's sake. They all are. That's my point. If you're going to lie to me, then do it in a way that suggests that you believe your own bullshit. Don't blink, don't stutter, don't put together words and half sentences that don't make any sense "strategery." Promise me the moon and do it with a believable passion that takes me away for a moment.

If he'd mix in a little honesty and a little modesty, I'd be right with you. He's had so many opportunities to make even me feel proud of him. Every single time, without exception, he's whiffed.

3. I truly admire you for holding your ground over abortion. I too feel very strongly about the topic but none of these politicians believe what they're selling us on that issue.

Legally and morally, the Democrats' position is reprehensible. I want a POTUS who will do the opposite of Obama: ensure genuine conservatives are appointed to the USSC. Obama got super-libs on the Court, those who don't give a fig about the Constitution. I want some who put it first.

4. I believe the Berndog comes across to the "on the fence voters" as more presentable for the office than Trump.

When an Independent is a threat for the nomination of your party, it shows how shallow "the bench" is. Democrats have no one. If Hillary gets indicted, it will get really interesting.

Bernie will get crushed. Why? Because, at some point, even the dumbest voters have to realize the math isn't there. What's Bernie's vision? I'll tell you what it is: everyone in the US equally broke.

5. This time when you respond. If you respond. Please don't get caught up in the rightness or wrongness of a particular candidates' positions/policies. Try to stay focused on what I'm attempting to throw light on here....that is, the sizzle as it directly impacts the swing voters who I maintain chase the sizzle and who are not necessarily caught up with the details of the steak but who are the king makers in the end.

I think you're dead wrong if you think Bernie has "sizzle." He is, actually, the one person I think Trump could beat. He's like a US government prof--bad hair included.

6. Rome is the mob Fate. Axelrod, Plouffe and Obama knew this nearly 8 years ago. How else do you explain taking down a Clinton in her prime?

She's a bad retail politician. He's a great retail politician. And, there was the excitement of electing the first African-American.

geojanes wrote:

dag hammarsjkold wrote:Trump is damn good at it but he lacks something I can't quite put my finger on. I think he misfires when he allows for his emotions to clip his passion. The Berndog is passionate. He's believable. He can sell himself to the swing voters in ways that Trump can not. The Berndog comes across as fair and a voice for the underdog, someone reasonable. Trump almost succeeds at this as well but like I said, he's missing an allure of some kind.

Let me help. I think you're sensing that Trump is vastly more likely to blow in the wind than Bernie, who has been an old-time Brooklyn socialist for the past 60 years. He's a rock. You may not agree with him, but you know he'll give it to you straight, and he will never surprise you. Hillary's biggest problem is that she is much more like Trump in this regard than Bernie.

What happens to Bernie in the south?

Answer: he gets crushed like a stale cookie.

Doctor Fate wrote:

rickyp wrote:dag

The big show is going to boil down to the Berndog and Trump. Two extremes for what has become quite an extreme country.

Based on the recent polling Bernie has more chance now then Trump. But Bernie versus Cruz will be just as big a juxtaposition.

This is just wrong.

Sanders has the edge in NH over Hillary. He has a slight edge over her in Iowa. However, nationally, it's not even close.

On the other hand, Trump is neck and neck with Cruz in Iowa and dominates NH. Nationally, he's way ahead.

Bernie can't win simply by winning Iowa and New Hampshire.

As was said above, Hillary was in the same position 8 years ago. And she got a higher vote in NH than Obama did.

The national polling will be covering people who are not paying attention to the primary races, and you do see an amount of change as a bandwagon starts up. If Sanders wins the first two primaries, it does not make him a shoe-in, but it does dent Hillary's position nationally.

She is further ahead now than she was in Jan 2008, and still is the favourite, but it will not be easy for her.

Trump can easily lose Iowa and still get the nomination.

He can, but surely you don't want that.

This isn't exactly what I was going for Geo though it's an interesting take and I certainly hope you're right about him. To think that he will deliver is naive though. Why? Because he is a national politician.

Incidentally, I am purposefully making an intentional distinction here by referring to him as a national politician since I truly believe that the further down the political food chain you go, the more human these politicians seem to be. Some of our local politicians are wonderful people who really do sign up for the right reasons and really do care and really do stand by their word.

What's the timetable for the primaries ? I seem to recall that Iowa happens pretty soon, but I can't remember.