Why do you want Obama for president?
- Thread starter RyanUTAustin
- Start date
JOSEYWALES66
100+ Posts
TexonLongIsland
2,500+ Posts
CottonEyedHorn
1,000+ Posts
In reply to:
Austintxusa
2,500+ Posts
Why I want Obama for president.
I'll get the domestic issues out of the way rather quickly because I believe our greatest challenges are going to be global. For those blaming Bush for the economy they are only right in so far as the enormous cost of the Iraq war and the misdirected use of those resources. A president is either lucky or unlucky on the economy primarily because they have little control of the cycles endemic to free market systems. The American presidency is historically pretty weak on the domestic front. This was intended by the Founding Fathers. The president's greatest power is setting the agenda primarily through cabinet choices and his/her skill at using the bully pulpit. On this front I believe Obama will be the most effective candidate because although he is most identified as an idealist, I believe him to be a pragmatist. He seems to have an innate ability to know when and where to expend political capitol. This is a gift. Ms. Clinton seems to come by her instincts through trial and error. While I do believe her to be a quick learner, she won't be allowed the luxuries of many errors due to her 51% presidency.
Since the advent of nation states, America for a short period of time was/is the sole superpower. Not since the Hapsburg empire came close, has one country had such an economic and military advantage over its competitors. The fall of the Soviet Union and the end of a bi-polar world should have given the United States the opportunity to create a new world order through diplomacy and relationship alliances to reduce tensions for increasingly scarce resources and to contain regional animosities. Instead we got the neoconservative movement.
Irving Kristol believed that one of the tenants of neoconservative was an Expansionist Foreign Policy: "Statesmen should ... distinguish friends from enemies." And according to Kristol, "with power come responsibilities ... if you have the kind of power we now have, either you will find opportunities to use it, or the world will discover them for you."
[Taken from Weekly Standard]
This is where we find ourselves now. While no country can take us on militarily, we will not have our economic superiority much longer. Any time an empire has imposed its will on smaller countries it finds a "concert of powers" take shape to correct the imbalance. To continue on the neocon path will prove our global superiority to be very short lived.
This is where I believe Mr. Obama can be our greatest asset. He provides a new face for American Diplomacy that none of the other candidates can. He will be viewed by the world, both friends and enemies, as a new face without the baggage of the foreign policy blunders of the past 40 years. His greatest strength is consensus building. The challenges of an ever shrinking world requires new skill sets that I believe only Obama possesses among the three candidates.
I'll get the domestic issues out of the way rather quickly because I believe our greatest challenges are going to be global. For those blaming Bush for the economy they are only right in so far as the enormous cost of the Iraq war and the misdirected use of those resources. A president is either lucky or unlucky on the economy primarily because they have little control of the cycles endemic to free market systems. The American presidency is historically pretty weak on the domestic front. This was intended by the Founding Fathers. The president's greatest power is setting the agenda primarily through cabinet choices and his/her skill at using the bully pulpit. On this front I believe Obama will be the most effective candidate because although he is most identified as an idealist, I believe him to be a pragmatist. He seems to have an innate ability to know when and where to expend political capitol. This is a gift. Ms. Clinton seems to come by her instincts through trial and error. While I do believe her to be a quick learner, she won't be allowed the luxuries of many errors due to her 51% presidency.
Since the advent of nation states, America for a short period of time was/is the sole superpower. Not since the Hapsburg empire came close, has one country had such an economic and military advantage over its competitors. The fall of the Soviet Union and the end of a bi-polar world should have given the United States the opportunity to create a new world order through diplomacy and relationship alliances to reduce tensions for increasingly scarce resources and to contain regional animosities. Instead we got the neoconservative movement.
Irving Kristol believed that one of the tenants of neoconservative was an Expansionist Foreign Policy: "Statesmen should ... distinguish friends from enemies." And according to Kristol, "with power come responsibilities ... if you have the kind of power we now have, either you will find opportunities to use it, or the world will discover them for you."
[Taken from Weekly Standard]
This is where we find ourselves now. While no country can take us on militarily, we will not have our economic superiority much longer. Any time an empire has imposed its will on smaller countries it finds a "concert of powers" take shape to correct the imbalance. To continue on the neocon path will prove our global superiority to be very short lived.
This is where I believe Mr. Obama can be our greatest asset. He provides a new face for American Diplomacy that none of the other candidates can. He will be viewed by the world, both friends and enemies, as a new face without the baggage of the foreign policy blunders of the past 40 years. His greatest strength is consensus building. The challenges of an ever shrinking world requires new skill sets that I believe only Obama possesses among the three candidates.
Very simply because he is the best leader of the bunch.
There is a tremendous difference between a leader and a manager. A leader has a bigger picture view, inspires and motivates. A manager worries about what the business cards will look like and who is ******* up the TPS reports.
Now, what we need in a POTUS is both, I understand that. It's not enough to inspire and motivate as POTUS, I agree.
Right now though I want the best leader, even if he doesn't have the same kind of management experience. I have much more confidence that a great leader can be a competent manager than a more experienced manager becoming a great leader.
Management experience does not make you a good leader. HRC and McCain have no relevant leadership experience, nor are they inspiring or motivating to, well, anyone. They have more management/"front office" experience, but this means nothing when you're talking about "leadership". I have no confidence that either would be a tenth the leader that Obama already is.
Give me a leader who learns the management side on the go over the manager who cannot lead.
There is a tremendous difference between a leader and a manager. A leader has a bigger picture view, inspires and motivates. A manager worries about what the business cards will look like and who is ******* up the TPS reports.
Now, what we need in a POTUS is both, I understand that. It's not enough to inspire and motivate as POTUS, I agree.
Right now though I want the best leader, even if he doesn't have the same kind of management experience. I have much more confidence that a great leader can be a competent manager than a more experienced manager becoming a great leader.
Management experience does not make you a good leader. HRC and McCain have no relevant leadership experience, nor are they inspiring or motivating to, well, anyone. They have more management/"front office" experience, but this means nothing when you're talking about "leadership". I have no confidence that either would be a tenth the leader that Obama already is.
Give me a leader who learns the management side on the go over the manager who cannot lead.
perhaps in a small office you'd be correct. when you're talking about a country-wide office though, i still stand by my assertion that i'll take the best leader who can learn the management on the go.
now, granted, it's not fool-proof. it could turn out horribly. however, the opportunity for greatness is there.
with HRC and JM, i don't see that same opportunity. i don't think either one has any strong leadership qualities at all, honestly.
now, granted, it's not fool-proof. it could turn out horribly. however, the opportunity for greatness is there.
with HRC and JM, i don't see that same opportunity. i don't think either one has any strong leadership qualities at all, honestly.
I wanted McCain and Obama as the nominees, and didn't care who won (though I will follow the election closely). Policy shifts back and forth, tax rates go up and down like skirt lengths. What we need above all else are effective managers as presidents. McCain was proven to me, and my assumption if Obama won the nomination was that he will have done so through a HIGHLY effectively managed campaign. He has proven that to be the case.
Either one will do.
Either one will do.
Austintxusa
2,500+ Posts
I'm going to steal something from George Will in his column today about Obama and Clinton. I hope he doesn't mind.
________________________
The president who came to office with the most glittering array of experiences had served 10 years in the House of Representatives, then became minister to Russia, then served 10 years in the Senate, then four years as secretary of state (during a war that enlarged the nation by 33 percent), then was minister to Britain. Then, in 1856, James Buchanan was elected president and in just one term secured a strong claim to being ranked as America's worst president. Abraham Lincoln, the inexperienced former one-term congressman, had an easy act to follow.
________________________
The president who came to office with the most glittering array of experiences had served 10 years in the House of Representatives, then became minister to Russia, then served 10 years in the Senate, then four years as secretary of state (during a war that enlarged the nation by 33 percent), then was minister to Britain. Then, in 1856, James Buchanan was elected president and in just one term secured a strong claim to being ranked as America's worst president. Abraham Lincoln, the inexperienced former one-term congressman, had an easy act to follow.
babysdaddy
100+ Posts
BrûléeOrange
500+ Posts
Because I look forward to hearing him speak whether it be good news or bad...he is inspiring and brings a breath of fresh air over the acrid politics of fear and division. He gives me hope and no new Scalia's.
Austintxusa
2,500+ Posts
Liberals are back BABY!!!!!!
We have a big tent, come inside or stay out and freeze your *** off.
We have a big tent, come inside or stay out and freeze your *** off.
blueglasshorse
1,000+ Posts
One thing I do like about Obama is that he seems to be the only canidate for any public office that, when speaking about education, he tells parents that they need to take more responsibility ("parents, put up the video games and make little johnny do his homework"). I have often wondered why politicians rarely tell the American people the truth... that the biggest problem with our education system is crapy parents.
LoneStarSpur
25+ Posts
Time for some new blood.
We baby boomers have screwed things up pretty badly over the last 20 years or so. On both sides of the aisle. Maybe Obama can bring some new folks in and shake things up.
We baby boomers have screwed things up pretty badly over the last 20 years or so. On both sides of the aisle. Maybe Obama can bring some new folks in and shake things up.
Texas_Curl
100+ Posts
i knew abe lincoln. i served with abe lincoln. obama is no abe lincoln.
lincoln was at the forefront of the debate over slavery for what 10 years before he was elected president. he was a leader of the new republican party. he was known and respected thru out the country. the folks in the south knew him too. Lincoln earned his place to head the ticket in 1860.
obama was a community organizer.
Curtis Sliwa has earned greater national repute than obama.
hook'em
lincoln was at the forefront of the debate over slavery for what 10 years before he was elected president. he was a leader of the new republican party. he was known and respected thru out the country. the folks in the south knew him too. Lincoln earned his place to head the ticket in 1860.
obama was a community organizer.
Curtis Sliwa has earned greater national repute than obama.
hook'em
I don't visit the West Mall much, but I can tell you this - the customer and voter is never wrong. Obama *****-slapped Hillary in the debate on this subject.
I do regularly visit the football boards and I liken Obama to the back-up quarterback or recruit - there's hope that he'll do better than the next. He'll definitely do better than Hillary, whose negative rating is off the charts and guarantees fundraising opportunities around the country for Christian Conservatives who make a big deal about oral sex in the White House.
Gobama!
I do regularly visit the football boards and I liken Obama to the back-up quarterback or recruit - there's hope that he'll do better than the next. He'll definitely do better than Hillary, whose negative rating is off the charts and guarantees fundraising opportunities around the country for Christian Conservatives who make a big deal about oral sex in the White House.
Gobama!
Austintxusa
2,500+ Posts
Weekly Prediction Contest
CFP Round 2 • Peach Bowl
Wed, Jan 1 • 12:00 PM on ESPN
AZ State game and preview thread
Recent Threads
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
-
Protecting our 2nd Amendment Rights
- Started by Austin_Bill
- Replies: 791
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
