Why do the public seem to prefer Republicans when they're afraid? (1 Viewer)

[GroveDiesel]

Huh? What about the Climate Change stuff? Or the stuff peddled to minorities about Republicans coming to take away their rights and enslave them again? Or that they'll take away the social net and push old people off of cliffs? It seems like both sides cater to it quite well.

I'm not sure why you didn't phrase it as a general question about why people respond politically to fear based tactics rather than assign the blame to one particular side.

 

[timschochet]

Huh? What about the Climate Change stuff? Or the stuff peddled to minorities about Republicans coming to take away their rights and enslave them again? Or that they'll take away the social net and push old people off of cliffs? It seems like both sides cater to it quite well.

I'm not sure why you didn't phrase it as a general question about why people respond politically to fear based tactics rather than assign the blame to one particular side.

lol.

I never assigned any blame. Let me restate my question for you:

When it comes to external threats such as ISIS and Ebola, the public seems to favor Republicans over Democrats to handle them. Why is that?

It's both frustrating and rather amusing to me that when I pose a question which is, if anything, rather complimentary to the Republican party, several of you rush in and assume that I am attacking Republicans. Go figure.

 

[RCon]

Link?

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-gfk-poll-most-expect-gop-victory-november-202133360.html

Thanks, but I meant one that says what you claimed in the OP.

In the OP I stated that more women would vote for Republicans this time around, and that two of the top reasons were fear of ISIS and fear of Ebola. All of that is in the article I just linked. What is your issue?

The article doesn't seem to say anything remotely like what you've posted. In fact, the only mention of ISIS at all is this:

What's deeply important to likely voters after the economy? About three-quarters say health care, terrorism, the threat posed by the Islamic State group and Ebola.

That's not remotely close to "the top two reasons women will vote for the GOP".

On Ebola, the article states:

Although handling the Ebola outbreak was among the top issues for likely voters, the poll shows little sign that either party could capitalize on fears of the virus as an election issue. More than half said either that they trust both parties equally (29 percent) or that they don't trust either party (24 percent) to handle public health issues like Ebola. The remaining respondents were about equally split between trusting Republicans (25 percent) and Democrats (22 percent).

So... what was your point again?

 

[dhockster]

I think it could be just that people are tired of Obama's actions not matching his rhetoric. "Okay, Syria fall in line or I'm going to..... I'm going to......I'm going to be really mad!!"

Other countries know that the U.S. under Obama is afraid to take any military action. People feel safer when their government is willing to challenge those who threaten their safety. Since democrats usually take

more of an anti-war stance, I guess people feel the Republicans are more likely to act militarily. Not that that is always good, but it is reality

You mean like when we got Syria to give up their chemical weapons without losing a single American life to accomplish it? Yeah that sucked.

I wasn't saying Obama should have gone into Syria; If he makes comments about crossing red lines and he then doesn't back it up, he looks weak. Thanks for totally missing my point.

 

[timschochet]

And again Grove Diesel, I want to state how important it is to differentiate between fears. When it comes to an issue like global warming, for example, Democrats have pushed specific solutions like cap and trade, and Republicans oppose those specific solutions. So an intelligent voter can make an educated decision on this issue, should he want to, and vote accordingly.

But in the case of ISIS and Ebola, there really haven't been specific solutions disagreed upon between the two parties. There's some shadow boxing going on, but basically those who vote Republican on these two issues do so out of a general undefined FEELING that the Republicans will be better at dealing with them than Democrats would. There is a general feeling that in dangerous times, Republicans can be trusted more to protect us. That's what I'm trying to get at: why this feeling is prevalent.

 

[GroveDiesel]

because liberals like change, hence the term progressive. people fear change so people are going to go back to those that have more traditional (conservative) values.

Liberals only like change if they are the ones calling the shots. Here in Wisconsin, anytime Walker changed anything, they challenged with endless lawsuits and whined like little babies.

This topic is stupid. To even pretend that democrats are not scaremongers of a way higher order than GOPers is beyond ridiculous. A prime example of this is global warming or 'climate change' as they like to call it now.

It took me less than a minute to come up with these examples:

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2014/10/21/democratic-turnout-flyer-if-you-want-to-prevent-another-ferguson/

http://eaglerising.com/9957/joe-biden-calls-tea-party-crazy-says-republicans-judgment/

For the last time, I never wrote that nor implied it. Both sides fear monger plenty. And I don't even write that necessarily as a criticism!

This topic was meant to be about why the public seem to prefer Republicans when it comes to dealing with external fears. That's all. It was not meant to be a criticism about either party.

For those two particular issues, it's probably more about media hype than it is conservative fear mongering. What network hasn't been covering those two issues extensively?

And the result shouldn't be surprising. I think the natural instinct for the majority of people when confronted with something like Ebola is to say "shut it all down and keep us safe here." So the Republicans are going to naturally benefit. And I think it's pretty clear at this point that more people trust Republicans on foreign policy issues than they do Obama. Right or wrong, Republicans have been pretty decisive on these issues while Obama and the Democrats have seemed adrift with no real plan. That alone scares people.

If we had just set temperature records with multiple 100+ degree days and the stock market and employment were shooting through the roof and none of that other stuff was going on, then they'd be the big news stories and Democrats would be piling on about the coming environmental disaster and patting themselves on the back for a great economy.

As is, Democrats all over the country have tried to use Ferguson, MO to rally the troops. But I think it's having little traction due to the limited media exposure now, the obvious localization of the issue, the evidence out now and the terrible labor market for blacks overwhelming the issue.

 

[Boston]

Political correctness...it has been around a while but I really believe your average Joe/Average Jane is catching on to it and they aren't happy with it...they are also seeing it more and more in their every day lives...when the government (i.e. the dems) start telling women how they should feed their kids or how much soda they can have or how their kids can have rubbers or abortions without them knowing you are hitting way too close to home...I think political correctness has started to overplay it's hand and it will begin to backfire on those who practice it...

I think you're right. I think there IS a backlash that will cause many people to vote for Republicans. I don't agree with you (i think) as to whether or not the backlash is deserved, but I agree with you that it's there, and it will favor Republicans. I also think that if there is continued rioting in Ferguson that will help Republicans as well: it's the main reason Richard Nixon was elected in 1968, because the public was sick of all the riots and Civil Rights protests and hippie protests against the war, etc. etc., and they wanted someone tough who put a stop to it.

However, this doesn't have too much bearing on fear of ISIS or fear of Ebola, unless I'm missing something.

That was more geared towards the women voting for the GOP...

As for the other stuff it is pretty simple...we live in a 24/7 news cycle...any problem gets magnified (remember the coverage of Abu Ghraib) and while this is not politically correct I think women can really get sucked into stuff and if they believe it can effect the well-being of their family than look-out...combine that with a President that currently shows absolutely no leadership skills (regardless of the issue) and I think women are very leery of the dems right now...

 

[timschochet]

Link?

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-gfk-poll-most-expect-gop-victory-november-202133360.html

Thanks, but I meant one that says what you claimed in the OP.

In the OP I stated that more women would vote for Republicans this time around, and that two of the top reasons were fear of ISIS and fear of Ebola. All of that is in the article I just linked. What is your issue?

The article doesn't seem to say anything remotely like what you've posted. In fact, the only mention of ISIS at all is this:

What's deeply important to likely voters after the economy? About three-quarters say health care, terrorism, the threat posed by the Islamic State group and Ebola.

That's not remotely close to "the top two reasons women will vote for the GOP".

On Ebola, the article states:

Although handling the Ebola outbreak was among the top issues for likely voters, the poll shows little sign that either party could capitalize on fears of the virus as an election issue. More than half said either that they trust both parties equally (29 percent) or that they don't trust either party (24 percent) to handle public health issues like Ebola. The remaining respondents were about equally split between trusting Republicans (25 percent) and Democrats (22 percent).

So... what was your point again?

My point is that we have more women voting for Republicans this time around, and that ISIS and Ebola are among their top reasons for doing so. (I relied on a CBS radio report at the top of the last hour which stated that they were the #1 and #2 reason, but the article I quoted listed both of them among the top reasons, so even if I am in error there, the overall point is still valid.)

 

[Thunderlips]

Six years into an Obama Presidency that hasn't exactly been all the biscuits and gravy that his supporters might have thought when he was initially voted in?..........Democrats should consider themselves lucky this mid-term elections are as close as they're polling to be.

 

[GroveDiesel]

And again Grove Diesel, I want to state how important it is to differentiate between fears. When it comes to an issue like global warming, for example, Democrats have pushed specific solutions like cap and trade, and Republicans oppose those specific solutions. So an intelligent voter can make an educated decision on this issue, should he want to, and vote accordingly.

But in the case of ISIS and Ebola, there really haven't been specific solutions disagreed upon between the two parties. There's some shadow boxing going on, but basically those who vote Republican on these two issues do so out of a general undefined FEELING that the Republicans will be better at dealing with them than Democrats would. There is a general feeling that in dangerous times, Republicans can be trusted more to protect us. That's what I'm trying to get at: why this feeling is prevalent.

I don't know, I think most Republicans have advocated not issuing visas to folks from countries with ongoing Ebola outbreaks as well as other travel bans.

I also think many Republicans have said that we need actual ground troops to fight ISIS as well as more than the limited bombings we've done so far.

I would also disagree with your characterization of the Dem useage of climate change. There is very much a fear mongering that accompanies it, not just advocacy of specific solutions.

 

[timschochet]

Political correctness...it has been around a while but I really believe your average Joe/Average Jane is catching on to it and they aren't happy with it...they are also seeing it more and more in their every day lives...when the government (i.e. the dems) start telling women how they should feed their kids or how much soda they can have or how their kids can have rubbers or abortions without them knowing you are hitting way too close to home...I think political correctness has started to overplay it's hand and it will begin to backfire on those who practice it...

I think you're right. I think there IS a backlash that will cause many people to vote for Republicans. I don't agree with you (i think) as to whether or not the backlash is deserved, but I agree with you that it's there, and it will favor Republicans. I also think that if there is continued rioting in Ferguson that will help Republicans as well: it's the main reason Richard Nixon was elected in 1968, because the public was sick of all the riots and Civil Rights protests and hippie protests against the war, etc. etc., and they wanted someone tough who put a stop to it.

However, this doesn't have too much bearing on fear of ISIS or fear of Ebola, unless I'm missing something.

That was more geared towards the women voting for the GOP...

As for the other stuff it is pretty simple...we live in a 24/7 news cycle...any problem gets magnified (remember the coverage of Abu Ghraib) and while this is not politically correct I think women can really get sucked into stuff and if they believe it can effect the well-being of their family than look-out...combine that with a President that currently shows absolutely no leadership skills (regardless of the issue) and I think women are very leery of the dems right now...

This is an important point as well.

I believe Obama does have very good leadership skills, but you wrote that he doesn't SHOW leadership skills, and I can't deny that. In presentation, he is more like Jimmy Carter than any other President I can remember. He comes as indecisive to the public, and that's the worst formula for success. And that's GOT to help Republicans in the polls.

 

[HellToupee]

Six years into an Obama Presidency that hasn't exactly been all the biscuits and gravy that his supporters might have thought when he was initially voted in?..........Democrats should consider themselves lucky this mid-term elections are as close as they're polling to be.

the Ds have 49% spotted to them before the 1st vote is cast in almost every election

 

[tommyboy]

According to the latest AP poll from earlier this week, more women are going to vote for Republicans this time around than they have in recent elections (which should help the GOP get a majority in the Senate, and expand their lead in the House.) When asked why, the women polled gave their top reasons. I would have thought it would be Obamacare, or a general distrust of President Obama, or local issues involving their candidates. But no. The top two reasons given were:

1. Fear of ISIS

2. Fear of Ebola

Putting aside the question of whether or not these are rational fears (IMO, the first is, the second is not), my question is why is it that when people get scared they turn to Republicans?

Fear that the incompetent Democrats currently in charge cant run the country correctly or honestly.

 

[jon_mx]

Republicans are going to cut social security....Grandma will have to eat dog food

Republicans are going to cut school lunch.....children will starve

Republicans are going to shut down government....the economy is going to collapses.

Republicans are not going to raise the debt ceiling.....we are all going to die

Yeah, it's those evil republicans that use fear.

 

[timschochet]

And again Grove Diesel, I want to state how important it is to differentiate between fears. When it comes to an issue like global warming, for example, Democrats have pushed specific solutions like cap and trade, and Republicans oppose those specific solutions. So an intelligent voter can make an educated decision on this issue, should he want to, and vote accordingly.

But in the case of ISIS and Ebola, there really haven't been specific solutions disagreed upon between the two parties. There's some shadow boxing going on, but basically those who vote Republican on these two issues do so out of a general undefined FEELING that the Republicans will be better at dealing with them than Democrats would. There is a general feeling that in dangerous times, Republicans can be trusted more to protect us. That's what I'm trying to get at: why this feeling is prevalent.

I don't know, I think most Republicans have advocated not issuing visas to folks from countries with ongoing Ebola outbreaks as well as other travel bans.

I also think many Republicans have said that we need actual ground troops to fight ISIS as well as more than the limited bombings we've done so far.

I would also disagree with your characterization of the Dem useage of climate change. There is very much a fear mongering that accompanies it, not just advocacy of specific solutions.

That will be VERY interesting. The public doesn't want ground troops, the polls show. Yet the public wants Republicans in part because they believe the Republicans will be tougher on ISIS. Apparently the public doesn't want to define what "tougher" really means.

 

[timschochet]

Republicans are going to cut social security....Grandma will have to eat dog food

Republicans are going to cut school lunch.....children will starve

Republicans are going to shut down government....the economy is going to collapses.

Republicans are not going to raise the debt ceiling.....we are all going to die

Yeah, it's those evil republicans that use fear.

Amazing how many people now have read that OP and came up with this same irrelevant response.

 

[Zow]

Same way it works for religion. Fear is effective.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Moderate Tim, fishing with dynamite again. Unless he really questions why fear works for Republicans without considering the other side. But I don't think that's possible after the extensive threads pointing out how liberal people perceive him to be and him denying it.

 

[Yenrub]

Whatever it takes to keep us safe

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/ysfr9u/a-million-ways-to-die-in-the-u-s-

 

[GroveDiesel]

And between your thread title and this statement in your first post: "my question is why is it that when people get scared they turn to Republicans?", is it any wonder why the thread has gone the way it has? Maybe you intended to reference just external threats, but you never even came close to saying that in your thread title or OP.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Republicans are going to cut social security....Grandma will have to eat dog food

Republicans are going to cut school lunch.....children will starve

Republicans are going to shut down government....the economy is going to collapses.

Republicans are not going to raise the debt ceiling.....we are all going to die

Yeah, it's those evil republicans that use fear.

Amazing how many people now have read that OP and came up with this same irrelevant response.

I went back and read the OP again (twice). It's your thread title, followed by your slanted approach. If you're wondering why multiple people are responding in a way that you think is irrelevant, maybe there's a different reason that you haven't thought of.

 

[jon_mx]

Republicans are going to cut social security....Grandma will have to eat dog food

Republicans are going to cut school lunch.....children will starve

Republicans are going to shut down government....the economy is going to collapses.

Republicans are not going to raise the debt ceiling.....we are all going to die

Yeah, it's those evil republicans that use fear.

Amazing how many people now have read that OP and came up with this same irrelevant response.

Because your premise is ridiculous. You see things in such a one-sided manner. Fear works for everyone. Fear is one of the top ways to motivate people which is why negative campaigns from both sides dominate elections. Come up with a premise that is not based on your world view that Republicans suck and Democrats don't.

 

[timschochet]

OK, you guys win. I give up.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

OK, you guys win. I give up.

 

[humpback]

Link?

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-gfk-poll-most-expect-gop-victory-november-202133360.html

Thanks, but I meant one that says what you claimed in the OP.

In the OP I stated that more women would vote for Republicans this time around, and that two of the top reasons were fear of ISIS and fear of Ebola. All of that is in the article I just linked. What is your issue?

You should spend less time posting and more time reading. It doesn't say that at all, and that isn't exactly what you said in the OP.

According to the latest AP poll from earlier this week, more women are going to vote for Republicans this time around than they have in recent elections (which should help the GOP get a majority in the Senate, and expand their lead in the House.) When asked why, the women polled gave their top reasons. I would have thought it would be Obamacare, or a general distrust of President Obama, or local issues involving their candidates. But no. The top two reasons given were:

1. Fear of ISIS

2. Fear of Ebola

Putting aside the question of whether or not these are rational fears (IMO, the first is, the second is not), my question is why is it that when people get scared they turn to Republicans?

whatever. Obviously you have some point you want to make about how I got something wrong about the article. I suspect that it's not really pertinent at all to the discussion, but some people around here seem to get a thrill when they can demonstrate how I screwed something up. So go ahead and make your point already.

You said when women were asked why, the top 2 reason they gave were 1. Fear of ISIS and 2. Fear of Ebola. The question was "how important are each of the following issues to you personally", not "what is the reason you are voting republican". The answers weren't broken out between male and female, but the article clearly says that the top issue was the economy, then health care, terrorism, threat of ISIS and Ebola. You got both the question and the order of the answers wrong.

You wanted to start a thread about republicans being fear-mongers, and completely twisted a poll to do so. Congrats!

 

[RCon]

Link?

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-gfk-poll-most-expect-gop-victory-november-202133360.html

Thanks, but I meant one that says what you claimed in the OP.

In the OP I stated that more women would vote for Republicans this time around, and that two of the top reasons were fear of ISIS and fear of Ebola. All of that is in the article I just linked. What is your issue?

The article doesn't seem to say anything remotely like what you've posted. In fact, the only mention of ISIS at all is this:

What's deeply important to likely voters after the economy? About three-quarters say health care, terrorism, the threat posed by the Islamic State group and Ebola.

That's not remotely close to "the top two reasons women will vote for the GOP".

On Ebola, the article states:

Although handling the Ebola outbreak was among the top issues for likely voters, the poll shows little sign that either party could capitalize on fears of the virus as an election issue. More than half said either that they trust both parties equally (29 percent) or that they don't trust either party (24 percent) to handle public health issues like Ebola. The remaining respondents were about equally split between trusting Republicans (25 percent) and Democrats (22 percent).

So... what was your point again?

My point is that we have more women voting for Republicans this time around, and that ISIS and Ebola are among their top reasons for doing so. (I relied on a CBS radio report at the top of the last hour which stated that they were the #1 and #2 reason, but the article I quoted listed both of them among the top reasons, so even if I am in error there, the overall point is still valid.)

No, that's not what the article said. The article did NOT say that women (or anyone) is voting for the GOP due to concerns over ISIS or Ebola, as a top concern, or any concern. The article stated that among likely voters, some of their top issues are ISIS and Ebola. That's an entirely different statement.

Edit: Or... what humpback said. You misread the question in the poll, misread the answers, and misread the connection between the two.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Tim, great googlymoogly, you are the king of assumptions.

 

[RCon]

Serious answer? ISIS and Ebola have dominated the news lately, and every story is "OMG - the world is ending!!1!1!!". Democrats are currently in power, and therefore get the blame. I really don't think it's any more complicated than that.

I don't think it's that simple. Suppose we had reports of global warming crises every night on the news, yet had Democrats in power. Would the Dems get the blame? Would the public vote for Republicans in that situation? I doubt it.

And again Grove Diesel, I want to state how important it is to differentiate between fears. When it comes to an issue like global warming, for example, Democrats have pushed specific solutions like cap and trade, and Republicans oppose those specific solutions. So an intelligent voter can make an educated decision on this issue, should he want to, and vote accordingly.

But in the case of ISIS and Ebola, there really haven't been specific solutions disagreed upon between the two parties. There's some shadow boxing going on, but basically those who vote Republican on these two issues do so out of a general undefined FEELING that the Republicans will be better at dealing with them than Democrats would. There is a general feeling that in dangerous times, Republicans can be trusted more to protect us. That's what I'm trying to get at: why this feeling is prevalent.

Looks like you answered your own question anyway. Back to my original answer:

Media: OMG!!! ISIS!!1!! Ebola! WTF!?!!?

Public: These things are new and scary! Democrats are in power! Let's put someone else in charge!

 

[GroveDiesel]

OK, you guys win. I give up.

Or, you could change the thread title and your OP to reflect what you claim you meant in the first place. Instead of making the much more broad claims that you're actually making in the title and OP.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

White women voted for Romney 56-42%. Whatever the "war on women" bs that's floated around by the Demo - which is fear based - it sure didn't work on all women in 2012 that's for sure.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls

 

[HellToupee]

OK, you guys win. I give up.

 

[HellToupee]

White women voted for Romney 56-42%. Whatever the "war on women" bs that's floated around by the Demo - which is fear based - it sure didn't work on all women in 2012 that's for sure.

http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls

Married woman went with Mitt. The free birth control types not so much

 

[17seconds]

According to the latest AP poll from earlier this week, more women are going to vote for Republicans this time around than they have in recent elections (which should help the GOP get a majority in the Senate, and expand their lead in the House.) When asked why, the women polled gave their top reasons. I would have thought it would be Obamacare, or a general distrust of President Obama, or local issues involving their candidates. But no. The top two reasons given were:

1. Fear of ISIS

2. Fear of Ebola

Putting aside the question of whether or not these are rational fears (IMO, the first is, the second is not), my question is why is it that when people get scared they turn to Republicans?

Because Republicans talk tough.

Yup - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBl8Ddsaf4U

Best. Speech. Ever.

Treasurers are really important I guess. sheesh

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Fear is what drives religion

You can do the math from there

Video killed the radio star?

 

[Insein]

When did the Republicans corner the market on fear?

To seniors: "They'll take your Social Security!"

To immigrants: "They'll deport you!"

To union workers: "They'll take yer jobs!"

To everyone else: "They'll give tax cuts to the rich!"

This seems like a standard politician thing. Divide and conquer.

 

[timschochet]

I changed the title of this thread. It was never supposed to be about Republicans deliberately fear mongering, or which party fear mongers more, or why fear mongering works. I never intended to attack the GOP.

The thread was supposed to be about why people in times of.crisis seem to prefer Republicans? Or do they?

 

[tommyboy]

I changed the title of this thread. It was never supposed to be about Republicans deliberately fear mongering, or which party fear mongers more, or why fear mongering works. I never intended to attack the GOP.

The thread was supposed to be about why people in times of.crisis seem to prefer Republicans? Or do they?

because in general terms when #### gets tough, you want some old school ####### redneck locking stuff down (ie General Honore during hurricane Katrina http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel_L._Honor%C3%A9)

most of the times those old school rednecks are what you'd identify as "conservative" or "republican" (not always, FDR was old school asskicker but a liberal dem, same with John Kennedy)

in times of relative peace, which our country has experienced by and large since Vietnam with a few minor skirmishes since, we have time to fret about frivolous things like kids school lunch, "war on women", common core, islamophobia etc....

you generally don't care who's running things as long as your life continues on unfrettered.

so i'm not sure we always turn to Republicans in times of fear, but I would say the most recent downturn in opinion of D's is because they've done a pisspoor job, much like the R's did a pisspoor job from 2000-2008. The last 14 years, the country has been run poorly. This is why 6 years ago when D's were talking about liberal utopia forever and the R's would splinter and become zero opposition, i said enjoy it while you can because inevitably "events" happen and the party in power will get the blame or the credit depending on what happens.

 

[jon_mx]

I changed the title of this thread. It was never supposed to be about Republicans deliberately fear mongering, or which party fear mongers more, or why fear mongering works. I never intended to attack the GOP.

The thread was supposed to be about why people in times of.crisis seem to prefer Republicans? Or do they?

They don't. Fear is how Obama got elected. Fear works both ways.

 

[jon_mx]

OK, you guys win. I give up.

And the show goes on....

 

[timschochet]

I changed the title of this thread. It was never supposed to be about Republicans deliberately fear mongering, or which party fear mongers more, or why fear mongering works. I never intended to attack the GOP.

The thread was supposed to be about why people in times of.crisis seem to prefer Republicans? Or do they?

They don't. Fear is how Obama got elected. Fear works both ways.

you believe people voted for Obama because they were afraid?

 

[the rover]

fear of a white planet

 

[jon_mx]

I changed the title of this thread. It was never supposed to be about Republicans deliberately fear mongering, or which party fear mongers more, or why fear mongering works. I never intended to attack the GOP.

The thread was supposed to be about why people in times of.crisis seem to prefer Republicans? Or do they?

They don't. Fear is how Obama got elected. Fear works both ways.

you believe people voted for Obama because they were afraid?

Obama ran against Bush. His whole campaign was based upon McCain = Bush.

 

[proninja]

Fear is what drives religion

You can do the math from there

Whoa, we got a scholar in here

 

[FlapJacks]

When it comes to external threats such as ISIS and Ebola, the public seems to favor Republicans over Democrats to handle them. Why is that?

with respect to those two, we've witnessed the party in charge right now kind of screw things up

 

[Jim11]

freebeacon.com/national-security/top-iranian-official-obama-is-the-weakest-of-u-s-presidents

The Iranian president’s senior advisor has called President Barack Obama “the weakest of U.S. presidents” and described the U.S. leader’s tenure in office as “humiliating,” according to a translation of the highly candid comments provided to the Free Beacon.

The comments by Ali Younesi, senior advisor to Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, come as Iran continues to buck U.S. attempts to woo it into the international coalition currently battling the Islamic State (IS, ISIL, or ISIS).

And with the deadline quickly approaching on talks between the U.S. and Iran over its contested nuclear program, Younesi’s denigrating views of Obama could be a sign that the regime in Tehran has no intent of conceding to America’s demands.

“Obama is the weakest of U.S. presidents, he had humiliating defeats in the region. Under him the Islamic awakening happened,” Younesi said in a Farsi language interview with Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency.

“Americans witnessed their greatest defeats in Obama’s era: Terrorism expanded, [the] U.S. had huge defeats under Obama [and] that is why they want to compromise with Iran,” Younesi said.

The criticism of Obama echoes comments made recently by other world leaders and even former members of the president’s own staff, such as Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

 

[the rover]

Iranian official statements have always been complimentary to US Presidents until now.

 

[James Daulton]

WTF is bueno?

 

[jon_mx]

In today's speech, he hit McCain early and often in his speech, saying that his call to renew the Bush tax cuts during war time was irresponsible. "John McCain once opposed these tax cuts -- he rightly called them unfair and fiscally irresponsible. But now he has done an about face and wants to make them permanent, just like he wants a permanent occupation in Iraq. No matter what the costs, no matter what the consequences, John McCain seems determined to carry out a third Bush term," Obama said.

The "Bush-McCain policies," Obama continued, had "ballooned" the national debt.

Using the words of Robert Kennedy, "past error is no excuse for its own perpetuation," Obama claimed that McCain has refused "to learn from the failures of the Bush years."

"Instead of offering an exit strategy for Iraq, he's offering us a 100-year occupation," Obama said. "Instead of offering an economic plan that works for working Americans, he's supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest among us who don't need them and aren't asking for them.

Seems kind of like fear-mongering to me.

 

[avoiding injuries]

When it comes to external threats such as ISIS and Ebola, the public seems to favor Republicans over Democrats to handle them. Why is that?

with respect to those two, we've witnessed the party in charge right now kind of screw things up

This is exactly it. And when republicans were in charge, people favored democrats to handle what was not working well. I don't think Obama was elected based on fear. In fact, I think of hope and change as the opposite of fear. People basically want what's different than what they currently have.

 

[jon_mx]

Quite an ironic Quote from Obama on the campaign trail: ‘The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and that’s what I intend to reverse.’