Barak Obama: Just WHY do you support him?

[Glocksman]

In my case, it's simply because he's by far the lesser of the evils.
Sure, he's anti gun.
However, there are other issues where I agree with him (health care, Iraq, etc), and I rank them above guns.


McCain? Shit, he's arguably more corrupt than the Clintons and his 'maverick' image is just that: an image. Fuck him and the cayuse he rode in on.
HRC? The last time I looked up 'corrupt opportunist' in Webster's, it was her picture I saw.


Better an honest President I have issue disagreements with than a corrupt asshole that I agree with on some issues.

[Xisiqomelir]

Obama has plans for many of my triggerpoint issues, most especially our dilapidated and decaying national infrastructure, particularly the telecoms infrastructure.

He's not my perfect candidate (that would have been Ron Paul) but I agree with nearly everything he says (infrastructure, immigration, Iraq, education, the deficit, oil, lobbyists/campaign finance, transparency, internet-enabled government), am neutral about most of the rest (healthcare, minimum wage, capital gains tax hikes), and he's not going to get anywhere with the stuff I oppose (guns, increased foreign aid).

[CaptainChewbacca]

I like Obama because he honestly, genuinely feels like it is his duty to do what is best for the country, and not necessarily what his party or other people say.

To me it seems like he'll actually TRY to do what's right, which is something I don't see McCain or Clinton doing.

[Flagg]

Basically I agree with him far more than the other candidates who have a chance in hell of winning. I was an Edwards supporter and Obama is basically the next down the line from him.

Assuming a Democratic victory in 2008, I'm likely going to put my support into the most liberal third party that looks like it has a chance in hell of actually gaining traction. Unless the Democratic party takes a big lurch to the left, that is. I long for the day when the Republicans are nothing but the far right nutters, the Democrats are the moderate/right party, and we have a real liberal political entity that can get votes.

[Flagg]

Obama has plans for many of my triggerpoint issues, most especially our dilapidated and decaying national infrastructure, particularly the telecoms infrastructure.

He's not my perfect candidate (that would have been Ron Paul) but I agree with nearly everything he says (infrastructure, immigration, Iraq, education, the deficit, oil, lobbyists/campaign finance, transparency, internet-enabled government), am neutral about most of the rest (healthcare, minimum wage, capital gains tax hikes), and he's not going to get anywhere with the stuff I oppose (guns, increased foreign aid).

Ron Paul? You like racist nutjobs who lie about being racist nutjobs while taking money from racist nutjobs?

[Xisiqomelir]

Ron Paul? You like racist nutjobs who lie about being racist nutjobs while taking money from racist nutjobs?

Ehh, I don't really buy the Kos talk about the newsletter, and taking money from individual lunatics is better than taking money from corporate lobbyists.

Eliminating the federal reserve and personal income tax would have been great, but I'm willing to settle for pulling out of Iraq and cutting the tax rate for most of the population.

[Anguirus]

Obama absolutely has a lock on me because of the miserable quality of the other candidates.

I WAS waffling between him and Edwards, but that decision got made for me.

Obama does keep doing incredibly classy things, like going into a Baptist church and advocating gay rights. I think maybe we need someone "inexperienced," aka not drenched with slime.

(I'll be sad if I wind up voting for Clinton, but she too is clearly superior to the entire GOP field. I am fairly repulsed by her tactics in running against Obama but that is nothing compared to what the GOP does routinely.)

[Jadeite]

Obama is the least anti-nuclear Democratic candidate.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Obama is the least anti-nuclear Democratic candidate.

An excellent, tangible, quantifiable reason. I did not know that.

[Anguirus]

Actually, I heard that myself, in the context that it was a Bad Thing. I thought instead "Shit, another reason to vote for him!"

[Battlehymn Republic]

Assuming a Democratic victory in 2008, I'm likely going to put my support into the most liberal third party that looks like it has a chance in hell of actually gaining traction. Unless the Democratic party takes a big lurch to the left, that is. I long for the day when the Republicans are nothing but the far right nutters, the Democrats are the moderate/right party, and we have a real liberal political entity that can get votes.

Green Party has a lot of big names this year- both Nader and Cynthia Mckinney.

[Glocksman]

Obama does keep doing incredibly classy things, like going into a Baptist church and advocating gay rights.

Really?
The more I hear about him, I think we've finally found someone who isn't a creature of the 'system' and actually believes in what he (or she) espouses.
Whereas both Clinton and McCain leave me with the impression that they'd sell their mothers into slavery if it meant that they'd win the election.

[CmdrWilkens]

I think Obama has me both on issues and rhetoric so from the top:

Issues:
Health Care: We need a single payer system but creating basically an open market that is actually monitored and regulated by the federal government while ALSO creating a publicly available version of the Federal Employee Health Benefit is an actual workable interim step. I say this because the program gives the federal government HUGE leverage on public health while still allowing competetively run health insurance firms to make money. The less greedy and more forward thinking (i.e. the ones who figure they can make more money now by buying into the program bigtime and gaining more customers at lower rates) HMOs and managed care companies will come onbaord and then we can start talking abotu single payer AFTER this system works and we start closing that 47million person gap.

Iraq: Talk to the commanders, ask when is the fastest we can get out without endangering the troops then get out. Honestly nobody else is espousing this and it should matter more to any "veterans" or "patriot" group than any other measure out there.

Internet: He's a net neutrality fan, wants a government CTO, will open up government deliberations and process so the average citizen can actually see what is going on. Many might not care but generally spekaing the dirties politicians always try to do their dealings behind closed doors so the more we open the harder it is to get said dirty deeds done.

Gvoernment Openess: Aside from the tech/internet related bits about making more committee and policy group decisions publicly available I like how he has ALREADY moved towards makign DC more accountable by crafting the elgislation which makes all earmarks and other budgetary requests public information.


As an aside on the not anti-nuclear bit. He has some ties to a big Illinois nuclear energy company (Excelon, which clinton made a stink of in Nevada) but he doesn't let that dictate his actions. When there was an uproar over previously undisclosed toxic releases from one plant he helped craft legislation (since shelved and re-introduced) that would require promptnotification of the local populace in the event of a release of radioactive material. Honestly given that his home state and electorate just went up in arms over being told that something like 6 million gallons of water containing above safe levels of tritium had been released he acted very calmly. There was no cry for shutting the plant down or massively increasing scrutiny, just an honest and workman's approach requiring prompt notificaiton and partnering with the NRC. Amongst the Dem candidates that's probably the best we are gonna get.

Rhetoric: This would seem to be the obvious thing but for everyone who has been touched by his words i think there is a need to relate WHY it works. There is an almost unidentifiable frission that he sends through my spine because he is speaking exactly the way I want my elected leaders to speak. The standard he rises to should be what every member of congress and major public official should live to. He elucidates his themes with very specific examples and he ties them all together with just the right mix of loud and soft notes. Listen to his pacing and his word choice. He isn't speaking in perfect candence but there is an almost lyrical quality to the way he speaks and it gives the words impact. The policy intermixed with the powerful means the message implants on a very subconcious level and THAT is the mark of someone who truly has the ability to LEAD. You need to be able to conenct with people on the conscious, with solid policy, and subconcious, with strong metaphor and imagery, level to get them not just to follow but to follow willingly. Note I don't want to say blindly. Moreso than anything else it is the fact that he reality checks himself within his speeches. Probably the single best example I can give of this is within hsi revised sump that was part of the post Potomac Primary speech. He spoke about how hope isn't blind optimism, how its recognizing the challenges and then deciding to overcome them because it is worth it and can be done. Hope is believing that action and effort CAN overcome doubt, cynicism, and the status quo.

So anyway that is why I am behind him.

[That NOS Guy]

The nuclear issue is big with me too, but the fact that the man actually feels like he won't dick me over at the drop of a hat is quite endearing.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I think people really WANT to believe in him, and WANT him to be able to do the things he can do. I saw a local news op-ed piece call him the 'Great Black Hope'. He kinda is. We want our country to be better, and so does he.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Ehh, I don't really buy the Kos talk about the newsletter, and taking money from individual lunatics is better than taking money from corporate lobbyists.

You don't buy it because you don't like it? And its better to be beholden to individual racists than stockholders?

Eliminating the federal reserve and personal income tax would have been great, but I'm willing to settle for pulling out of Iraq and cutting the tax rate for most of the population.

Why would leaving the interest rate in the hands of private banks without any restraint or oversight be better? And why would eliminating one of the only truly progressive/redistributive taxes we have, funding many important social services, be good? Sounds to me like you have taken his platform as beneficial on the basis of ideology, rather than logic and evidence.

[Glocksman]

I think people really WANT to believe in him, and WANT him to be able to do the things he can do. I saw a local news op-ed piece call him the 'Great Black Hope'. He kinda is. We want our country to be better, and so does he.

True.
In my case the old saw about a cynic being a frustrated idealist applies.
I *want* my country to be a beacon of freedom and prosperity by living up to its ideals, and am willing to support candidates who I believe genuinely share that belief and will work towards that end even if we disagree over specific means.

That's Obama in a nutshell.

[Spyder]

While he does seem better then the other candidates, once he gets into office it is vital that he doesn't get a free pass. Bill Clinton didn't draw anywhere near the level of criticism that George Bush is drawing and Clinton sure as hell was no saint.

[Glocksman]

While he does seem better then the other candidates, once he gets into office it is vital that he doesn't get a free pass. Bill Clinton didn't draw anywhere near the level of criticism that George Bush is drawing and Clinton sure as hell was no saint.

No doubt.
In 1992, I remember candidate Clinton talking tough on dealing with Chinese human rights and trade issues.
President Clinton simply swallowed the 'free trade' jizz.

[Spyder]

No doubt.
In 1992, I remember candidate Clinton talking tough on dealing with Chinese human rights and trade issues.
President Clinton simply swallowed the 'free trade' jizz.

It would have been nice if someone had held him accountable for the 1998 bombing of the Sudanese medicine factory, something which actually contributes to ongoing suffering in the region, rather then the blowjob.

Oh well, that's the priorities of the religious right for you.

[Xisiqomelir]

Ehh, I don't really buy the Kos talk about the newsletter, and taking money from individual lunatics is better than taking money from corporate lobbyists.

You don't buy it because you don't like it?

I don't buy it because I have yet to see an actual issue, or scans, of The Ron Paul Survival Report. For such a famed racist rag, it's an amazingly rare collector's item.

And its better to be beholden to individual racists than stockholders?

You cannot be beholden to small donors. What leverage do they have, threatening to withhold their $50 the next election cycle?

Why would leaving the interest rate in the hands of private banks without any restraint or oversight be better?

Because there'd be a sane market rate, not one set by crazed economists attempting to create an impossible perpetual economic boom.

And why would eliminating one of the only truly progressive/redistributive taxes we have, funding many important social services, be good?

I'd rather we eliminate that tax completely and make up for the shortfall by reforming corporate tax law to eliminate loopholes.

Sounds to me like you have taken his platform as beneficial on the basis of ideology, rather than logic and evidence.

I think Ron Paul's voting record is consistent with his stated beliefs.

Apologies for mini-derail.

[Darth Raptor]

Obama is the least anti-nuclear Democratic candidate.

I'm pretty sure that was Mike Gravel but, you know, snowball in Hell and all that.

[Glocksman]

No doubt.
In 1992, I remember candidate Clinton talking tough on dealing with Chinese human rights and trade issues.
President Clinton simply swallowed the 'free trade' jizz.

It would have been nice if someone had held him accountable for the 1998 bombing of the Sudanese medicine factory, something which actually contributes to ongoing suffering in the region, rather then the blowjob.

Oh well, that's the priorities of the religious right for you.

But that would have undermined the 'legitimacy' of the US as the World Cop.
God forbid that we simply mind our own damn business instead of trying be a global empire imposing democracy at bayonet point.

[Guardsman Bass]

As some other people have mentioned, Obama is, at least in the debates, more pragmatic on the use of nuclear power than Hillary Clinton (or John Edwards, back when he was running). I don't think this is simply campaign-pandering, either - there was an article in the New York Times a while back that sort of off-handedly mentioned that he took contributions from one of Illinois's nuclear power companies while he was in the State Legislature, so I doubt he has any form of ideological grievance with nuclear power (like a number of the environmentalists in the Democratic camp).

He's also done a terrific job of organizing a campaign creating a loyal cadre of activists from different groups (partially why he does so well in caucuses). This isn't something to dismiss lightly; it was partially Bush's coalition of activists and the like which allowed him enormous leverage in political power-clashes.

[darthbob88]

I'm with Glocksman. The only issue I disagree with him on is his stance on guns, and I'm less concerned about him taking my guns away than I am about the Republicans taking my civil liberties away. Plus, of course, he seems like a genuine good bloke who wants to do good for the country.