How did Obama become President?

18  2017-10-26 by Richard_Burt

Was it against all odds hard work, education, and intelligence?

Was he a figurehead boosted up the food chain by a secretive shadowy force?

Or, perhaps somewhere in between?

I have never seen a believable story on Obama official or conspiracy, it’s really odd how an interracial....certainly black in looks, man with no family in power, poor. He gets into Harvard, then from teaching becomes a State Senator, Senator, and President faster than most if not all of his predecessors.

Thoughts?

45 comments

1  bradok 2017-10-26

Obama was a "fresh face", as far as the average American was concerned. He was always Establishment through and through, however, which is how he gained the support of the donor class and undermined HRC in '08. He was a good public speaker and talked the talk, campaigned as a Progressive then governed as a Centrist and tried to shove TPP, TPIP, and TISA down your throats...all of which he started negotating just months after taking office in '09...which clearly shows where his loyalties were always at.

His rise to fame in the Democratic Party started in '04 when he gave the keynote speech at the Convention when Kerry was nominated...he showed up during the perfect storm of '08, when America was looking for change and it was going to be virtually impossible for a Republican to win after 8 years of control and a full blown recession forming the backdrop of the elections. To me, the main conspiracy with Obama's rise to power was his lies to the base of the party, who elected him on promises of Single-Payer, or at least Public Option, reigning in Wall Street, and providing a Middle Class bail out for the Great Recession...none of which he did, because again, he always planned to govern as an Establishment Centrist.

1  OutragedOgre 2017-10-26

Thanks for your opinion. I don't believe Obama ran to be a centrist, I do believe the party shoved him to the center that was obvious in how it was the Democratic Party leadership that pushed to drop the single payer not the President. The DNC leadership failed to support him on many other issues as well especially increasing the minium wage.

I honestly don't believe he or even some of the other Democratic realized how thoroughly compromised and taken over the DNC had become. The Clintons knew and were on board with it. Obama began to find out as soon as he became the candidate and most definitely after his inauguration.

1  bradok 2017-10-26

I don't believe Obama ran to be a centrist, I do believe the party shoved him to the center that was obvious in how it was the Democratic Party leadership that pushed to drop the single payer not the President.

Did you know Obama actually gave up Public Option while still in committee, voluntarily? He never intended it to see the light of day.

I honestly don't believe he or even some of the other Democratic realized how thoroughly compromised and taken over the DNC had become.

The reason I don't believe this is because of the timing of TPP negotiations. Obama started this stuff in '09, he planned from the very beginning to sell out what was left of our manufacturing base and middle class.

Obama began to find out as soon as he became the candidate and most definitely after his inauguration.

I think he knew beforehand. He was already taking their money and using Super PAC's. He's not pushing for Deval Patrick to run in 2020...who is currently a VP at Bane fucking Capital. He and HRC have different donor bases and thus power blocks in the DNC, but either one was always tolerable to the Establishment. If Obama really was an outsider, they would have done to him what they did to Bernie.

1  OutragedOgre 2017-10-26

I disagree with all of your comments and they are all canned talking points that have been in play since Obama became President.

And they are no more true now than when they were introduced.

1  bradok 2017-10-26

I disagree with all of your comments and they are all canned talking points that have been in play since Obama became President.

Lol whatevs bro. You can't deny the reality that Obama began TPP negotiations back in '09, that's a fact. It's also a fact that he gave up Public Option in committee...

Also, how is the Deval Patrick statement a "canned talking point", considering it's recent...lol...

And they are no more true now than when they were introduced

If you don't realize that Obama is, and always has been, an enemy of the Left, I don't know what to tell you, but go ahead and pretend I'm spewing "canned talking points". I look forward to the day Obama, HRC, and the rest of their Centrist ilk are thoroughly disgraced and removed from any positions of power or influence over the Party.

1  OutragedOgre 2017-10-26

TPP started well before Obama and if you were around during NAFTA you might remember how hard Bill Clinton got out and sold it hard to his voters and Obama only made the obligatory statements in favor of it when told told to you also seem blind to changes made to that agreement during the Obama adm, because they were of course kept secret from the people of all the nations involved.

The real reason it went down was the constant unrelenting propaganda that called it, Obama's trade deal, thus making it impossible for Republicans in Congress to support the very deal their wealthiest supporters wanted.

Another reason it was abandoned by Republicans is that it was according to them too friendly to labor and the environment and not harsh enough for the traders, manufacturers and resource extractors.

1  bradok 2017-10-26

TPP started well before Obama

Wrong in every regard, but keep re-writing history.

how hard Bill Clinton got out and sold it hard to his voters and Obama only made the obligatory statements in favor of it when told to

The fact that Obama supported TPP, TPIP, and TISA, is enough to show he always supported NAFTA.

The real reason it went down was the constant unrelenting propaganda that called it, Obama's trade deal, thus making it impossible for Republicans in Congress to support the very deal their wealthiest supporters wanted.

Considering Obama wanted, and achieved, fast track, and sites like Politico were talking about how Obama wanted TPP to secure his legacy...no thanks, not buying your revision. Obama knew and helped create TPP.

Another reason it was abandoned by Republicans is that it was according to them too friendly to labor and the environment and not harsh enough for the traders, manufacturers and resource extractors.

Please, keep defending TPP, TPIP, TISA, and their legacy...do keep trying to rehabilitate them. No one is buying it, unless they are already Neoliberal leaning centrists...

1  OutragedOgre 2017-10-26

TPP started well before Obama,

It began with the P4 agreement of 2006 and officially kicked off in January of 2008.

When did it start?

It began with the P4 trade agreement between just four nations - Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore - that came into effect in 2006.

That deal removed tariffs on most goods traded between the countries, promised to cut more and also to co-operate on wider issues such as employment practices, intellectual property and competition policies.

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32498715

The official kick off was January 2008,

In January 2008, the U.S. agreed to enter into talks with the Pacific 4 (P4) members regarding trade liberalisation in financial services. This led to 19 formal negotiation rounds, then a series of other meetings, such as Chief Negotiators Meetings and Ministers Meetings, leading to the agreement that was announced on 5 October 2015. For details on the negotiations process.

https://tpp.guide/information/the-history-of-tpp.html

1  hrccbr1000rr 2017-10-26

Deep stafe/CIA plant of course

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

Of course haha.

Really though has there ever been any kind of CIA influence outside of normal intelligence sharing with Obama?

1  hrccbr1000rr 2017-10-26

Other than his mother working for them?

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

See, this is what I want. Got a good link?

1  hrccbr1000rr 2017-10-26

There are a bunch but this one looks good http://rense.com/general84/cutut.htm

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

He was the elitist's perfect candidate imo.

He was well spoken, charming, funny and most importantly black.

He was able to convince the 99% that he had their interests in mind for an additional 8 years after Bush almost got the population to react how they are now over Trump.

1  DonnaGail 2017-10-26

Everyone always says he is well spoken and funny. I have never seen this. I've always thought he was boring.

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

He is well spoken compared to other Presidents. Especially George W. Bush who would always mix up cliche sayings.

He was "Jimmy Kimmel/Fallon/Fuckface etc." funny. Not Bill Burr funny.

In my opinion, George W. Bush was the funniest President of all time and this is why...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhmdEq3JhoY

1  DonnaGail 2017-10-26

I've never thought he was well spoken.

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

Well...if you can read your teleprompter verbatim...even if...he pauses...while he talks...it's considered...well spoken.

1  DonnaGail 2017-10-26

Yes. Still, his voice and tone are boring to me. He has never held my interest when he speaks.

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

I don't agree with it and I agree with you.

But, maybe it's cause he was younger...he really connected with the younger generation.

1  DonnaGail 2017-10-26

I'm not a fan of Bill Clinton. But Bill Clinton (when he was President) was more charismatic and held my interest more than Obama.

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

That is true too. I was a bigger fan of Bill Clinton as opposed to Obama.

But, I was also so blue pilled back then. I liked Bill Clinton because he played saxophone.

I liked Obama because I thought he was anti-establishment.

So for me...it feels like an unfair advantage (politically) for Clinton.

1  DonnaGail 2017-10-26

I'm actually looking at it from just a "personality and voice" and being impartial to what I think/thought of them politically.

I am fine listening and watches speeches of Bill Clinton from the 90s.

But Obama actually bores me and his voice is monotonous. I can't listen to him for long.

So let's put it this way. I would rather have Bill Clinton read a book to me (audio book) than Obama.

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

Makes sense.

1  come_on_sense_man 2017-10-26

If you really watched closely in 08 Obama got soft balled by every single media outlet that interviewed him aside from maybe 2 separate interviews where the questions weren’t given to him in advance. The guy was pretty awful without the prompter too. Trump was allowed to take a similar path with not answering questions with any substantive policy details though I think it is rather obvious it was not out of benevolence on the part of the msm.

1  Mtn_Duck 2017-10-26

Liberals pulled the race card

1  DontDownVoteJustDie 2017-10-26

That is true. I voted for Obama in 2008 because I honestly believed there is no way they'll let a black guy in the white house (even if he's white washed). It felt anti-establishment at the time. How wrong I was.

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

Feel like you didn’t read any of that, plus nice brain dead answer. Being black in America makes life so easy you can just Coast into being president. Get out of here with the drool for an answer.

1  Mtn_Duck 2017-10-26

I feel like you didn’t understand what I meant by that but o well others do

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

No, I understand. 20% of Americans are the real racists and use that racism to pressure at least 30% more to vote for a black guy.

Got it.

1  HugeTrumpSupporter 2017-10-26

His opponent was John McCain after 8 years of Bush. There was no way Obama was losing that election.

1  Mtn_Duck 2017-10-26

There was no way Clinton was losing that election

1  Klaudiapotter 2017-10-26

Every president in modern history is a figurehead/puppet for the deep state

1  Battlemace 2017-10-26

I think a lot of people voted for him because they hoped since he was black maybe he wouldn't be just a figurehead/puppet for the deep state. But as soon as a few of his cabinet members were announce you realized he was in fact a figurehead/puppet for the deep state.

1  trjb 2017-10-26

Not sure if you recall but Bush was very very unpopular, and the economy was shit at the time. The "Hope" meme went viral and people bought it. He beat McCain by 10 million votes. The dems could have ran a potato after eight years of Bush and win.

For fuck sake, he was nominated for a fucking Nobel Peace Prize 11 days after being being sworn in. By this time of year in 2009 he won it...

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

A Democrat was always going to win 2008, but did he beat Hillary on merit, or did he get a bump from outside the DNC?

1  trjb 2017-10-26

I guess he could have, but I don't think it was necessary. Obama is a likable person, he was younger and didn't have Clinton-family baggage. It's a noncontroversial opinion to say that HRC isn't a particularly popular or likable person, even in 2008.

Maybe that can explain the Trump appeal, Obama had a similar story - not beholden to special interests, populist support, etc.

1  allawkward_questions 2017-10-26

Yeah, even a lot of Dems don't like HRC. She has a very rabid fanbase, but most of the Dems I know who voted for her last election was because of the "anybody but Trump" mentality.

1  BizarreBazza 2017-10-26

or did he get a bump from outside the DNC?

I know David Geffen donated a lot for BO as he hates the Clintons.

1  raglan35 2017-10-26

Sheep dip

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

Like dip made from sheep?

1  showmeurboobsplznthx 2017-10-26

He got his illinois seat through corruption. After he left his replacement was accused of buying the seat...

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

His vacated senate seat was sold by the Governor, through no fault of Obama’s unless you know something I don’t.

1  showmeurboobsplznthx 2017-10-26

Not blaming Obama. Just like to point out illinois politics is hella corrupt.

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

Agreed there

1  Haterade_1010 2017-10-26

CIA pushed him to the presidency. Here's a story I found credible regarding CIA connections: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.globalresearch.ca/barack-obama-his-mother-and-the-cia/31756/amp In addition, there was a well connected school Obama had no business getting into in Hawaii--which further supports CIA connections.

How the public put him in office: start with the 2004 Democratic National Convention. People forget that 2004 convention speech. That speech put him on the map. It was pure Obama. Say all the right things--very inspiring.

It was a time when people hated Bush, but Democrats put one of the worst candidates, John Kerry on the ballot. Obama then stayed in the public eye--ran for Senate, wrote books, and then was able to out debate every candidate by pretending to be anti-Bush. He was going to get us out of Iraq, end the Patriot Act, close Guantanamo Bay. All that being said, Obama would have lost had McCain gotten Colin Powell as his running mate. Palin was a wild card, especially when a candidate appears so old.

Then we all know what happened. Not only was he not anti-bush, his presidency made Dick Cheney proud and envious.

1  Richard_Burt 2017-10-26

I remember that article, but only after beginning to read it as it must have been awhile thanks for that.

This is the best answer for sure!

1  project5150 2017-10-26

Affirmative Action?

/s

1  trumps_amygdala 2017-10-26

$1bn campaign and lost the popular vote to Hillary in the primary

1  OutragedOgre 2017-10-26

TPP started well before Obama and if you were around during NAFTA you might remember how hard Bill Clinton got out and sold it hard to his voters and Obama only made the obligatory statements in favor of it when told told to you also seem blind to changes made to that agreement during the Obama adm, because they were of course kept secret from the people of all the nations involved.

The real reason it went down was the constant unrelenting propaganda that called it, Obama's trade deal, thus making it impossible for Republicans in Congress to support the very deal their wealthiest supporters wanted.

Another reason it was abandoned by Republicans is that it was according to them too friendly to labor and the environment and not harsh enough for the traders, manufacturers and resource extractors.

1  Mtn_Duck 2017-10-26

There was no way Clinton was losing that election

1  hrccbr1000rr 2017-10-26

There are a bunch but this one looks good http://rense.com/general84/cutut.htm