How Barack and Michelle Have Normalized Black Prominence

[theworldismine13]

and a political system designed to make one person winner of everything doesnt determine what is normal either, this is retarded as hell.

actually it does determine what is normal, that is one of the points the article is trying to make, that the obama's have shifted what's normal in america, so for example if an ivy league educated black man like cory booker where to run for president most "normal" people wont be all shocked

the process of becoming president, where you are trying to maximize your votes, forces people into the center, so i think its safe to say that the president is representative of "normal" america, the president is actually a good barometer of what is normal

 

[NZA]

actually it does determine what is normal, that is one of the points the article is trying to make, that the obama's have shifted what's normal in america, so for example if an ivy league educated black man like cory booker where to run for president most "normal" people wont be all shocked

the process of becoming president, where you are trying to maximize your votes, forces people into the center, so i think its safe to say that the president is representative of "normal" america, the president is actually a good barometer of what is normal

that represents the roadmap to the whitehouse, one of the things to take into account for what is normal, but it alone is no barometer, jimmy carter certainly was no barometer for the temperature of america, neither was bush during his second term, and im sure al gore would dispute the first term. this article is a fluff piece

 

[theworldismine13]

that represents the roadmap to the whitehouse, one of the things to take into account for what is normal, but it alone is no barometer, jimmy carter certainly was no barometer for the temperature of america, neither was bush during his second term, and im sure al gore would dispute the first term. this article is a fluff piece

im not sure what you mean by barometer but the way the party structures and party elections are set up both the winner and loser of most presidential elections represent normal america because both candidates end up moving to the center, i think every president has been representative of "normal" america, if you want to know what "normal" in america is you just have to look at the president

where exactly do you get the notion that carter, bush, gore or obama do not represent normal america?

 

[NZA]

im not sure what you mean by barometer but the way the party structures and party elections are set up both the winner and loser of most presidential elections represent normal america because both candidates end up moving to the center, i think every president has been representative of "normal" america, if you want to know what "normal" in america is you just have to look at the president

where exactly do you get the notion that carter, bush, gore or obama do not represent normal america?

well for one, as i said already, you cant disregard a massive slice of the country just because they lose a winner take all election, as a matter of fact, cacs are the single largest voting block in america, to disregard them would be intellectually dishonest

two, the way one wins is an issue since the people i mentioned won with fewer states or won a contested state where the election proceedings were governed by a family member

three, winners are chosen by delegates, not popularity anyway

four, the approval of presidents changes over time, so an election is merely a snapshot, not an era. bush benefited from 9-11 but it wore off. carter became a joke quickly in his own term, bush was a joke after the 9-11 love dried up

america is too diverse in its interests to sum up "normal" based on a presidential election

and i wasnt saying gore is not normal, i was saying that gore would dispute that bush was more normal than him in 2000

 

[theworldismine13]

well for one, as i said already, you cant disregard a massive slice of the country just because they lose a winner take all election, as a matter of fact, cacs are the single largest voting block in america, to disregard them would be intellectually dishonest

two, the way one wins is an issue since the people i mentioned won with fewer states or won a contested state where the election proceedings were governed by a family member

three, winners are chosen by delegates, not popularity anyway

four, the approval of presidents changes over time, so an election is merely a snapshot, not an era. bush benefited from 9-11 but it wore off. carter became a joke quickly in his own term, bush was a joke after the 9-11 love dried up

america is too diverse in its interests to sum up "normal" based on a presidential election

and i wasnt saying gore is not normal, i was saying that gore would dispute that bush was more normal than him in 2000

I think you are confusing politics with reality, all recent presidential candidates whether Obama, McCain, Romney, bush or Clinton they all represented mainstream America, they all represented "normal" america

I'm not ignoring "cacs" at all, I'm saying Obama has carried pretty much the same policies as George Bush, and overall American policies would not have changed regardless of who won the election

American elections are always between two mainstream "normal" candidates, the choice is between a leftward leaning government and a rightward leaning government but the chances of a non normal candidate winning a nomination or being president is about zero

I have no idea why you thinks "cacs" are being ignored, assuming you consider George bush to be cac, then how is Obama not a cac when Obama has essentially followed bush's policies in most things

I don't agree that America is too diverse to sum up normal, I think the major candidates sum up normal quite well, if you combine Clive bundy with a New England liberal you would get somebody like a Obama, a Wall Street protector, promoting universal healthcare through a private system while bombing countries left and right, I think Obama is definitely normal and i think he simply represents the left leaning side of mainstream America, but he does not represent a break or a revolution from "cacs"

The notion that Obama represents some deviation from normal mainstream America is some bullshyt the right wing spouts for political reasons, the reality is that Obama represents the American mainstream through and through

The fact that you are pushing the right wing line is why I say you are suffering from PTSD, obviously the right wing has gotten in your head and is playing tricks on your mind

Polls or approval don't make you not normal, polls just mean you suk or are popular at a particular point in time

and I'm saying both bush and gore were normal mainstream candidates, it's only to partisan people that they represent something radically different

 

[NZA]

I think you are confusing politics with reality, all recent presidential candidates whether Obama, McCain, Romney, bush or Clinton they all represented mainstream America, they all represented "normal" america

I'm not ignoring "cacs" at all, I'm saying Obama has carried pretty much the same policies as George Bush, and overall American policies would not have changed regardless of who won the election

American elections are always between two mainstream "normal" candidates, the choice is between a leftward leaning government and a rightward leaning government but the chances of a non normal candidate winning a nomination or being president is about zero

I have no idea why you thinks "cacs" are being ignored, assuming you consider George bush to be cac, then how is Obama not a cac when Obama has essentially followed bush's policies in most things

I don't agree that America is too diverse to sum up normal, I think the major candidates sum up normal quite well, if you combine Clive bundy with a New England liberal you would get somebody like a Obama, a Wall Street protector, promoting universal healthcare through a private system while bombing countries left and right, I think Obama is definitely normal and i think he simply represents the left leaning side of mainstream America, but he does not represent a break or a revolution from "cacs"

The notion that Obama represents some deviation from normal mainstream America is some bullshyt the right wing spouts for political reasons, the reality is that Obama represents the American mainstream through and through

The fact that you are pushing the right wing line is why I say you are suffering from PTSD, obviously the right wing has gotten in your head and is playing tricks on your mind

Polls or approval don't make you not normal, polls just mean you suk or are popular at a particular point in time

and I'm saying both bush and gore were normal mainstream candidates, it's only to partisan people that they represent something radically different

politics are part of america's reality

however, we are not focusing on policy, we are focusing on the "normalization" of prominent black people. if anything, it is you who is conflating the two

my assertion has been that obama has only normalized himself to the left and maybe the more rational independents and old school republicans who are a dying breed today, not that his policies are too radical for most of the country. as a matter of fact, the fact that millions of people perceive him to be radical when he is not is actually the issue. i think the left has learned how moderate he is, but much of the right has not perceived him accurately, so he is not normalized to huge swaths of the public, breh

the only demographics that are "combined" are the ones that vote together which is why i said obama normalized himself on the left since that is an ideologically "combined" bloc. again, this is not about policy, it is about the left and the right's perception of prominent black people.

polls are attitudes about people, you can put two different people in office during the same event and get different polling results. if 9/11 happened on obama's watch, the response would be different than it was for bush. again, i am not talking policy, i am talking perception of prominent black people by the relevant voting blocs which is what this article is supposed to be about

 

[theworldismine13]

politics are part of america's reality

however, we are not focusing on policy, we are focusing on the "normalization" of prominent black people. if anything, it is you who is conflating the two

my assertion has been that obama has only normalized himself to the left and maybe the more rational independents and old school republicans who are a dying breed today, not that his policies are too radical for most of the country. as a matter of fact, the fact that millions of people perceive him to be radical when he is not is actually the issue. i think the left has learned how moderate he is, but much of the right has not perceived him accurately, so he is not normalized to huge swaths of the public, breh

the only demographics that are "combined" are the ones that vote together which is why i said obama normalized himself on the left since that is an ideologically "combined" bloc. again, this is not about policy, it is about the left and the right's perception of prominent black people.

polls are attitudes about people, you can put two different people in office during the same event and get different polling results. if 9/11 happened on obama's watch, the response would be different than it was for bush. again, i am not talking policy, i am talking perception of prominent black people by the relevant voting blocs which is what this article is supposed to be about

there were millions of people that thought bush was a nazi, a war criminal, war monger and should be impeached.............and? thats irrelevant, at the end of the day, bush represented the american mainstream regardless of the millions that thought he was a nazi etc

im not sure what you mean by different, but i guess on GP the 9/11 reaction would have been different, just like the reaction to obama conducting a massive drone war, increasing the number of troops in afghanistan and announcing that he has the right to kill american citizens overseas would have been treated differently if bush had done the same things

but both bush and obama represent the american mainstream, the difference is which way they lean politically, but overall there has never been an american president that isnt "normal" and that doesnt represent the american mainstream, the electoral process inevitably produces a mainstream presidential candidate ask rand paul

like i said, you have some kind of PTSD to the point where you are now carrying water for the radical right and are convinced that they determine what is normal

 

[NZA]

there were millions of people that thought bush was a nazi, a war criminal, war monger and should be impeached.............and? thats irrelevant, at the end of the day, bush represented the american mainstream regardless of the millions that thought he was a nazi etc

im not sure what you mean by different, but i guess on GP the 9/11 reaction would have been different, just like the reaction to obama conducting a massive drone war, increasing the number of troops in afghanistan and announcing that he has the right to kill american citizens overseas would have been treated differently if bush had done the same things

but both bush and obama represent the american mainstream, the difference is which way the lean politically, but overall there has never been an american president that isnt "normal" and that doesnt represent the american mainstream, the electoral process inevitably produces a mainstream presidential candidate ask rand paul

like i said, you have some kind of PTSD to the point where you are now carrying water for the radical right and are convinced that they determine what is normal

ok, breh. im beginning to think the obtuseness is not an act

 

[theworldismine13]

ok, breh. im beginning to think the obtuseness is not an act

im not obtuse, im just tryna straighten you out, its kinda said seeing how the right wing has done a number on you

SMH at a left winger writing essays about how the right wing determines what is normal and mainstream