Part of it is simply job description. But he wanted to get"I" and “me” in there, lest people miss the fact that he is President and Commander in Chief..
Most recent l could find, July 2012 from an MIT proffessor’s blog: 55% agree Obama born in US. The number is identical to what it was prior to release of his birth certificate.
I’ve taken note of your clairvoyance and will contact you the next time I go to Vegas.
Ok so this is what he should have said, right:
Got it.
Holy shit! Fareed Zakaria, is that really you?!!!
“Obama hasn’t done anything in office!”
“Well, I did this and this, and I also did-”
“Don’t be so selfish and self-absorbed!”
I hope that unlike Kerry, Team Obama puts out contrasting ads responding to the attack as soon as possible. Never good to let the narrative get away from you
Wow. I guess that’s the only other way things could have been said!!! :rolleyes:
This is a bad comparison to the Bin Laden thing and the effect of Birtherism on the election is going to be zero. At this point, if you believe Obama wasn’t born in the U.S., all it means is that you’re a Republican. It’s moronic, but it’s not going to cost him votes.
Ok, whattya got? What should he have said?
I know it was am imprecise comparison, but Marley, do you think Swiftboating cost Kerry votes? Do you think the “birther controversy:rolleyes:” cost Obama votes?
I suppose Obama could have used the passive voice to avoid calling attention to himself: “Terrorists were killed.”
Sure, if you want to lose the Microsoft Word Clippy vote.
Yes, I think it did.
In 2008 probably not, and at this stage, definitely not. The only people who think Obama might not be a citizen are far-right conservative loons.
Death to Clippy!
Most recent poll shows 20% sure he wasn’t born in the US, and 25% “not sure”.
That’s a lot of loons…I still fear you have too much in the common sense of the American voter. Of course, it also goes without saying that I hope you’re right. I doubt this stuff will cost Obama the election, and I hope they respond strongly.
Guess I should have changed ‘clairvoyance’ to ‘telepathy’, since you know exactly what Obama was thinking and why he chose the words he did. It will still come in handy at the poker table…
I don’t know why you keep citing the same fact. I know what the numbers say, and I don’t think it matters. The percentage has not changed in years. People have been pointing out for years that Birtherism became a proxy for conservatism. If people were refusing to vote for him or support him because they think he’s a fraud, you’d have something to worry about. That is clearly not the case. This Bin Laden thing is very simple: Obama made the decision and authorized the raid that killed him. Everybody knows that. Griping that he’s taking too much credit is irrelevant. Why is anybody supposed to vote for Romney just because Obama was indecorous in talking about the raid?
It seems to me there are 3 ways to impact an election: energize your base (more votes for you), discourage you opponents base, and convince the ‘swing voters’ in the middle. I just connect the dots a little differently than you do, I guess. You agree that Swiftboating probably cost Kerry votes, and it was also ridiculous on the face of it. By which of the 3 mechanisms do you think Swiftboating hurt Kerry?
Also, if you look at the poll I linked to, you’ll notice that there was some movement, about 4% I think it was, from people who were reassured by the release (59% Yes), which then over time regressed back to about 55%. I fear a similar effect, even 4%, could make a significant impact if Swiftboating Obama could move 4% or so of the US voting populace.
Larry King Live, July 28, 2008
KING: “If you were president and knew that bin Laden was in Pakistan, you know where, would you have U.S. forces go in after him?”
MCCAIN: “Larry, I’m not going to go there and here’s why, because Pakistan is a sovereign nation. I think the Pakistanis would want bin Laden out of their hair and out of their country and it’s causing great difficulties in Pakistan itself.”
Direct question, direct answer. Now maybe McCain would have changed his mind after he got in office, but based on his statements prior to the election, he strongly disagreed with Obama’s plan to pursue bin Laden into Pakistan without involving the Pakistanis.
In hindsight the Republicans like to pretend that anyone would have made the same call that Obama did. However, based on what McCain said on the campaign trail, that assertion simply isn’t true. If Obama hadn’t been elected President, the sort of raid that eventually killed bin Laden would have been off the table. McCain would have been too nervous about upsetting the Pakistanis to authorize it.