But the number of votes cast for Senate candidates and for the minimum wage increase was basically the same. So, is your theory that there were another 200,000 voter who cast ballots for Senate candidates but not the minimum wage proposal?
Seriously, your theory is as detached from plausibility as those who deny global warming.
Until the Democrats bravely make that case and actually persuade voters of that fact, it will continue to be everything.
This is definitely one of my very favorite adaheristic aphorisms. I shall remind you of it, from time to time.
Are you proposing, as a policy, that “most fossil fuels must remain the ground”? If so, what are the real world ramifications?
Nuclear power, for one, at least it produces wastes we know how to sequester; and, more solar and wind power. Beyond that, upgrading and expanding rail transportation networks, both passenger and freight (I mean conventional, not high-speed; HSR is important, but of secondary importance) and local mass-transit systems. That leaves the fossil fuels for air travel – can’t think of any substitute there that is not too dangerous to consider, we certainly don’t want nuclear-powered airplanes in the skies.
It’s not just Obama who is on a winning streak: my prediction that this SOTU would be the lowest rated yet was corrrect:
So what happens if the President is supposedly on a winning streak but no one is paying attention to him anymore?
Then he still wins, because we win, whether we pay attention or not.
It’s a special kind of grotesque that bases the success of a state of the union address on how it did in the ratings. It’s typically Republican, though.
Um, the success of a speech is in large part a function of how many people are listening. And guess who was and wasn’t listening?
His own supporters are still as disconnected and unmotivated as ever. His audience, like the midterm electorate, leaned conservative.
Uh, isn’t the right wing dogma that the audience for CNN and MSNBC consist entirely of left-wing loonies? If so, my math says that 4.5 million pinkos watched the speech, and only 3.5 million Sarah Palin-approved Real Americans did.
There are a lot more channels than cable news that play the state of the union address. I watched on ABC for instance.
Do you really think ‘cable news watchers’ is a representative group to make claims about America as a whole? Remember, according to many conservatives, every channel other than Fox is left-leaning and liberal. The “lamestream” media, you may recall it being called by a prominent Republican candidate. So don’t you have to count the viewers on every channel other than Fox as Obama’s audience? How much does that tilt the “lean” to the left?
So then the 2012 election proved that Americans support Obama’s recovery policies, no matter what you argue. Because the economy is “everything.”
However, Obama’s policy does not explicitly include “Leave most fossil fuels in the ground”. As a matter of fact, he’s lauding the increase in oil production. Which, while helpful to him, is not very helpful if you want to get Americans to prioritize climate change over the economy.
From the article.
That’s spin. It MIGHT be right, but they don’t know. I notice you didn’t demand a cite from them.
Here’s the most important thing about this SOTU address, I think.
Put that way . . . Wow. Just, wow.
Critiquing Obama from a decent LW perspective, I have often found him wanting. Why didn’t he demand a “public option” in the ACA?! Why didn’t he prosecute the Wall Street malefactors?! Why the indefinite detentions and drone-strikes?!
But this explains a lot. Sometimes “the art of the possible” that is politics finds a truly great artist. I recall some pundits early in this Admin asking whether Obama was just flailing or “playing some seven-dimensional game of chess only he understands.” Well. There, above, is your seven-dimensional chess game, and Obama is winning it, which means we the people are winning it.
That’s from the article you posted to prove rating were down.
Which doesn’t make it any less spin.
Hopeful progressives are mistaking his occasional bouts of brilliance at oratory with actual accomplishments. Obama has completely and utterly failed to move the country to the left. Basically, Obama is reprising his ambition that he stated before he was elected. He wanted to be a transformational President like Reagan. So six years later, he just declares victory.
And he does that in front of a Republican Congress, which has two houses. We should know: they won both of them.
What spin? It’s not spin to point out facts. If people are not watching on TV because of streaming on the web or reading online(which is what I did), then that’s a factor in reduced TV ratings.
From here.
Also, how many of your political buddies watched the edited version the GOP put out? That would also take away from TV numbers.