Sunday morning musings: Obama's campaign slogan (1 Viewer)

[radcen]

I consider President Obama's 2012 campaign slogan... "Forward"... as somewhat curious. It could easily be interpreted as, "Four years later, we can now move forward..."

Presuming the sitting President has been a capable and effective sitting President, as he no doubt desires to be viewed, he's in essence admitting he hasn't been capable, nor effective, the last four years. (Charges of opposition obstructionism would only confirm said perceived inability and ineffectiveness, btw, so he can't legitimately toss that in as a defense.)

Bottom line: I think his slogan is poorly chosen. He could have done better.

 

[Fishstyx]

They apparently left out a par of it. The complete slogan.

"Forward.....lemmings! Off the cliff!"

 

[AliHajiSheik]

As long as the next word isn't MARCH!

 

[Velvet Elvis]

Actually, that slogan was used before...

 

[nota bene]

Now that a slogan has been chosen, I'm looking forward to a positive campaign on which the President runs on his record rather than the backward and negative attack-ads.

 

[hazlnut]

I consider President Obama's 2012 campaign slogan... "Forward"... as somewhat curious. It could easily be interpreted as, "Four years later, we can now move forward..."

Presuming the sitting President has been a capable and effective sitting President, as he no doubt desires to be viewed, he's in essence admitting he hasn't been capable, nor effective, the last four years. (Charges of opposition obstructionism would only confirm said perceived inability and ineffectiveness, btw, so he can't legitimately toss that in as a defense.)

Bottom line: I think his slogan is poorly chosen. He could have done better.

For those of us who have been paying attention, the level of opposition and lack of good faith effort by the other party has been unprecedented.

It was reported that on the night the inauguration, John Boehner and other GOP power plays met to discuss a four year strategy of opposition to take back the WH. GOP members of the house signed a pledge to never increase taxes under any circumstances. How can any reasonable person argue they made a good faith effort to do the work of the American people.

 

[radcen]

For those of us who have been paying attention, the level of opposition and lack of good faith effort by the other party has been unprecedented.

It was reported that on the night the inauguration, John Boehner and other GOP power plays met to discuss a four year strategy of opposition to take back the WH. GOP members of the house signed a pledge to never increase taxes under any circumstances. How can any reasonable person argue they made a good faith effort to do the work of the American people.

Side-stepping and not really the point. He's portraying himself as "the person who can get things done", which is what one does when attempting to market oneself positively, and what we generally want to see in a President. Truman said it, but it applies to all Presidents... "The Buck Stops Here". This is precisely the question, and why his spin is off-mark... If he couldn't do it thus far, why should voters believe that status will somehow magically change if re-elected?

 

[Jarhead]

"Forward" ? Not even sure what that is supposed to mean. I'm sure we will hear speakers talk about how the President plans to "continue" to move "forward" with his agenda. We will constantly be reminded that President Bush "lost" 3 million jobs in the last 4 months of his presidency and that we are still moving "forward" from that. We will be reminded that the current administration has created XXXX number of jobs since 2008 and that, if given another four years to govern AND given a Democratic controlled House of Representatives (again), he will show all of us how his plans and policies are the correct ones for this country.......................

The reality is that his policies have failed. When people were questioning his experience during the 2008 election they were correct to do so.

 

[Fishstyx]

For those of us who have been paying attention, the level of opposition and lack of good faith effort by the other party has been unprecedented.

Yeah, this is often thrown out. Problem is, the majority of the time Obama has been in office, the Democrat Party had control of the legislature and the executive. With a filibuster proof majority for a year. This dog doesn't hunt as much of his agenda was accomplished. Healthcare, Stimulus, regulatory broadside of the energy instrusties, etc.

 

[Debra]

Yeah, this is often thrown out. Problem is, the majority of the time Obama has been in office, the Democrat Party had control of the legislature and the executive. With a filibuster proof majority for a year. This dog doesn't hunt as much of his agenda was accomplished. Healthcare, Stimulus, regulatory broadside of the energy instrusties, etc.

No no when the President came in jan 2009 the bush budget and policies were in force thru 2009 so 2010 was the first year of Obamas policies after that 2011 and 12 the GOP blocked everything. I was happy he got health care done , if the GOP had passed some of Obamas bills etc and things were moving this slow I might agree we need a change but to block everything and then blame the President is really ridiculous!

 

[Arbo]

For those of us who have been paying attention, the level of opposition and lack of good faith effort by the other party has been unprecedented.

Only if those people are not paying attention to the history of the nation.

It was reported

I believe Harry Ried also 'reported' that Romney didn't pay any taxes. :roll:

 

[Fishstyx]

No no when the President came in jan 2009 the bush budget and policies were in force thru 2009 so 2010 was the first year of Obamas policies after that 2011 and 12 the GOP blocked everything. I was happy he got health care done , if the GOP had passed some of Obamas bills etc and things were moving this slow I might agree we need a change but to block everything and then blame the President is really ridiculous!

First of all, budgets can be passed through reconciliation so a filibuster can't be used. The Democrats had the house and Senate for two solid years. Secondly, the first year had a supermajority where much of his agenda was passed, including the Stimulus which mostly went to State coffers that wouldn't get their fiscals house in order. Money ran out and he wanted to do it again, of course the GOP blocked it, as they should have. Dodd-Frank, Housing Relief, GM bailout, Cash for Clunkers, expanded SCHIP on the back of smokers (one of the largest regressive tax increases ever by the way).

So this "GOP Blocked EVERYTHING" is pretty much a big pile of BS.

 

[Jarhead]

I think I have it figured out.

"Forward" means; We are moving "forward" with our plan of not accepting responsibility for anything that went wrong during our term. We are moving "forward" with the plan of continually bashing President Bush for everything. We are moving "forward" with our plans of socializing the United States. We are moving "forward" with our plans to cut defense spending and again put this country at risk for another 9-11. We are moving "forward" to split this country between the haves and the have nots. We are moving "forward" with plans to make the rich poor because they don't really deserve what they have because they didn't build a darn thing.

 

[Objective Voice]

The slogan, "Forward," is meant to convey the nation's forward progress. It's left vague so that WE, THE PEOPLE can choose which way forward we want to go. If it is to be a land that has always moved forward after reaching difficult times, then that is the country WE will vote to have - a country that picks itself up, dusts itself off, realizes our values centered around human compassion and individual God given rights. Or we can go the complete opposite way and become a nation of sheep led to the slaughter with an old enemy reborn and poised against us on one end while sealing off another to whom we owe a great debt on the other end.

"Forward" does convey a very simple message: What country do you wish to live in and under what circumstances do you wish to be ruled?

If it's peace you want along with any chance for prosperity, you'll vote for the man whose party has not championed the call for war, but instead has emphasized reconstruction and reforms. But if it's another fight you seak, you will vote for the man who has championed returning to old an cold war enemy who could become an ally while also declaring he'd empose tarriffs against the nation that now holds our country's debt. America would be trapped on both sides with no way out.

"Forward" means we would begin nation building here at home for a change. We'd rally the world to take a bigger role in performing peace keeping missions and keeping the world saver for all man-kind.

"Forward" means seeing Congress compromise for a change where the party who many of its leaders have said "they're unable to govern right now" or "that their party is unrecognizable from the party of years past, that it's no longer the party of Ike".

"Forward" means those who can do more begin to contribute more so that this nation can remain vibrant and strong.

FORWARD has many connotations..YOU CHOOSE which country you wish to live in. May God keep and bless us or have mercy on our souls. Vote wisely.

 

[Objective Voice]

I think I have it figured out.

"Forward" means; We are moving "forward" with our plan of not accepting responsibility for anything that went wrong during our term. We are moving "forward" with the plan of continually bashing President Bush for everything. We are moving "forward" with our plans of socializing the United States. We are moving "forward" with our plans to cut defense spending...

You would be correct on all of the above. It was the economic policies of the Republican Party that caused the economic problems this country now faces. Therefore, blaming GW Bush would be very appropriate. But the threat of this country risking "another 9-11" may not come from the direction you perceive.

We are moving "forward" to split this country between the haves and the have nots. We are moving "forward" with plans to make the rich poor because they don't really deserve what they have because they didn't build a darn thing.

I wouldn't put it quite that way. It is true that the wealth-class does tend to see themselves as "captains of industry" and thus deserving of their prestige, but many are beginning to see the damage caused and are starting to change their tune. The debate about being "my brother's keeper" is an honest and worthwhile debate to have. Most people don't begrudge the rich. They just want the theory behind "trickle-down economics" to bare fruit. Can you honestly say that they have based on how we got to this point in our nation's economy under a Republican in the White House for 8 years? Far longer if you add up all the Republican Presidents since Ike (not that Ike and Ford were bad; they brokered peace initiatives). But ever since Reagan, this country has seen war on some level. Don't you think it's time we stopped making war and began to build up this great nation again?

The "socialism" you fear would not be permanent. No man wants to be beholding to another for too long if at all. But if this country continues going in the direction it's going - where the have's continue to make gains that far exceed the have nots, where unemployment and crime rates are high, where people aren't very well educated and our nation's infrastructer continues to crumbled, we choose our own fate.

This country needs a reboot, but that will never happen with a man who "will do as he is told", who has stated that we should return to facing a former Cold War enemy instead of trying to make them our ally, of emposing tarriffs against a nation we owe a huge debt to that happens to be an ally to a nation on our "Axis of Evil" list. If you want this country to regain its footing, you must cast your vote for the man who truly has shown PEACE through strength throughout his presidency while also championing its recovery.

FORWARD...you choose the way.

 

[code1211]

For those of us who have been paying attention, the level of opposition and lack of good faith effort by the other party has been unprecedented.

It was reported that on the night the inauguration, John Boehner and other GOP power plays met to discuss a four year strategy of opposition to take back the WH. GOP members of the house signed a pledge to never increase taxes under any circumstances. How can any reasonable person argue they made a good faith effort to do the work of the American people.

In fairness to the Republicans, the first big thing the Dems wanted to do was to pass the Failed Stimulus which is now revealed to have been a pay off, pay back, public sector union buy off bill that did not stimulate the economy and did squander a little less than a Trillion dollars for nothing more than Democrat Party vote buying procedures. There was nothing in this bill that would stimulate the economy and the Dems had no idea that there wasn't because they have no idea what would.

If you are opposing something that is hurtful and damaging, that's a good thing.

 

[Fruityfact]

So this "GOP Blocked EVERYTHING" is pretty much a big pile of BS.

First of all the super majority really only worked for 1 single piece of Legislation-Obamacare. Democrats do not vote on party lines like republicans
That being said the filibuster has been used an unprecedented number of times in this election cycle

 

[code1211]

No no when the President came in jan 2009 the bush budget and policies were in force thru 2009 so 2010 was the first year of Obamas policies after that 2011 and 12 the GOP blocked everything. I was happy he got health care done , if the GOP had passed some of Obamas bills etc and things were moving this slow I might agree we need a change but to block everything and then blame the President is really ridiculous!

Pelosi would not allow approval of a full year budget for 2009. The Bush Budget ran out in about February of 2009.

This whole mess belongs exclusively and completely to Obama no matter how much he and you try to pass the buck.

 

[OpportunityCost]

I find the blocking everything charge to be kind of spurious. The House has been passing a lot of bills that Harry wont even allow to a vote in the Senate. Including budgets, job bills, and things Harry and the dems claim to be "for".

I understand the why, I dont think it excuses it. If the ideas are terrible, debate them and vote them down or change them and send them back to the House. Its what they are supposed to be doing.

 

[code1211]

The slogan, "Forward," is meant to convey the nation's forward progress. It's left vague so that WE, THE PEOPLE can choose which way forward we want to go. If it is to be a land that has always moved forward after reaching difficult times, then that is the country WE will vote to have - a country that picks itself up, dusts itself off, realizes our values centered around human compassion and individual God given rights. Or we can go the complete opposite way and become a nation of sheep led to the slaughter with an old enemy reborn and poised against us on one end while sealing off another to whom we owe a great debt on the other end.

"Forward" does convey a very simple message: What country do you wish to live in and under what circumstances do you wish to be ruled?

If it's peace you want along with any chance for prosperity, you'll vote for the man whose party has not championed the call for war, but instead has emphasized reconstruction and reforms. But if it's another fight you seak, you will vote for the man who has championed returning to old an cold war enemy who could become an ally while also declaring he'd empose tarriffs against the nation that now holds our country's debt. America would be trapped on both sides with no way out.

"Forward" means we would begin nation building here at home for a change. We'd rally the world to take a bigger role in performing peace keeping missions and keeping the world saver for all man-kind.

"Forward" means seeing Congress compromise for a change where the party who many of its leaders have said "they're unable to govern right now" or "that their party is unrecognizable from the party of years past, that it's no longer the party of Ike".

"Forward" means those who can do more begin to contribute more so that this nation can remain vibrant and strong.

FORWARD has many connotations..YOU CHOOSE which country you wish to live in. May God keep and bless us or have mercy on our souls. Vote wisely.

You left out that "Forward", in this context, means that we will continue to mortgage the future of the country for short term luxury at the expense of succeeding generations.

Irresponsible, unpatriotic, poorly planned, immature and stupid are all good words for this campaign and you have accurately portrayed the head in the sand support that this empty and unrealistic little man has used to dupe you and others who don't understand the actual reality of the situation.

 

[code1211]

First of all the super majority really only worked for 1 single piece of Legislation-Obamacare. Democrats do not vote on party lines like republicans
That being said the filibuster has been used an unprecedented number of times in this election cycle

What planet are you from?

 

[a351]

In fairness to the Republicans, the first big thing the Dems wanted to do was to pass the Failed Stimulus which is now revealed to have been a pay off, pay back, public sector union buy off bill

that did not stimulate the economy and did squander a little less than a Trillion dollars for nothing more than Democrat Party vote buying procedures.

There was nothing in this bill that would stimulate the economy and the Dems had no idea that there wasn't because they have no idea what would.

It's been revealed to be no such thing, especially considering that a large chunk of the stimulus entailed tax credits, outright cuts and subsidies for private entities. It did prevent further public sector job losses in the short term, a measure that was rather prudent given the already steep and worsening budget shortfalls at the state and local level. Tell us, what are the positive effects that may result from sitting idle while massive layoffs continue unabated?

The only individuals who adhere to similar claims are either zealots or simply wholly disinformed on the topic at hand.

Well, it was chock full of measures not dissimilar to those proposed by Republicans in the present day, alongside a myriad of projects and stopgap measures that undoubtedly created or preserved a great deal of economic activity. These facts are evident to casual observers or curious google users.

 

[Debra]

First of all, budgets can be passed through reconciliation so a filibuster can't be used. The Democrats had the house and Senate for two solid years. Secondly, the first year had a supermajority where much of his agenda was passed, including the Stimulus which mostly went to State coffers that wouldn't get their fiscals house in order. Money ran out and he wanted to do it again, of course the GOP blocked it, as they should have. Dodd-Frank, Housing Relief, GM bailout, Cash for Clunkers, expanded SCHIP on the back of smokers (one of the largest regressive tax increases ever by the way).


Most of the stimulus went to tax cuts, helping GM was brilliant , we will get a great return on the investment and it saved millions of jobs, Dodd frank was absolutely necessary , Sept 2008 taught us all that wall st needs regulation! GOP has blocked jobs bill, transportation bill, energy bill, tax cuts for small businesses, etc etc I am just saying its no wonder everything is improving at a slower pace, the republicans have blocked everything since they came in two years ago! Even the debt ceiling a usual regular normal thing the house passes without much conflict became a fiasco under this GOP house, they should be ashamed . They might be making far right repubs happy but at the expense of the whole country so to turn around and say blame the President for everything IS ridiculous, the Forward slogan refers to moving ahead which is what this country should be doing not backwards like the Romney ticket will take us.

 

[Objective Voice]

You left out that "Forward", in this context, means that we will continue to mortgage the future of the country for short term luxury at the expense of succeeding generations.

Irresponsible, unpatriotic, poorly planned, immature and stupid are all good words for this campaign and you have accurately portrayed the head in the sand support that this empty and unrealistic little man has used to dupe you and others who don't understand the actual reality of the situation.

It is you who has your head buried in the sand. You see short term gains as absolute believing it to be the only way forward. There are aspects of socialism and nationalism in our American society, but none hamper our individual liberties. The unemployment compensation and welfare assistance you fear can only be made permanent (altruism) if this country fails to recognize that short term economic measures were necessary to save this country from collapse and that making peace around the world - these so-call apology tours - were necessary to regain America's trust and prestige around the world. People don't want to be beholding to another. They want freedom and peace, but most of all people what to able to provide for themselves. That means education. That means training and skills development. That means employment opporutnities if avenues are opened that lead to job placement. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, INNOVATION - they are the way forward at least to allow this nation time to heal.

 

[code1211]

It's been revealed to be no such thing, especially considering that a large chunk of the stimulus entailed tax credits, outright cuts and subsidies for private entities. It did prevent further public sector job losses in the short term, a measure that was rather prudent given the already steep and worsening budget shortfalls at the state and local level. Tell us, what are the positive effects that may result from sitting idle while massive layoffs continue unabated?

The only individuals who adhere to similar claims are either zealots or simply wholly disinformed on the topic at hand.

Well, it was chock full of measures not dissimilar to those proposed by Republicans in the present day, alongside a myriad of projects and stopgap measures that undoubtedly created or preserved a great deal of economic activity. These facts are evident to casual observers or curious google users.

The key words in you post that you just kind of passed by were "massive layoffs".

There are about 3.5 million more Americans working 4 years ago than there are today and there are about 11 million more Americans today than there were then.

This is failure.