I guess it's just like the many of us who stopped supporting McCain because of Palin. . . or whatever personal reasons were (not the same for everyone).
But please explain your "Since he became a war president" statement. Exactly what are you referring to?
I've heard similar comments from people and this is referring to the fact that we're still in Afghanistan . . . to which I say, "YES! We're still in Afghanistan! He spoke about continuing and strengthening our involvement in Afghanistan because that's where the Taliban is - he never once said he was wanting to withdraw 100% of our troops worldwide ASAP." . . . he, in fact, ALWAYS supported that we should be involved worldwide in many issues BUT that we should be more passive or mediator-like - rather than an aggressor or occupier. . . which means that, no matter what, eh feels we still are "the big dog" and should be "in charge of the bullpin"
Yet MANY people supported him purely thinking he was somehow anti-war. :shrug: I fail to see how someone could draw that conclusion when pro-war in Afghanistan and other parts of the world came out of his mouth . . . I consider this a classic example of how people are led along in their path of political support but don't actually investigate *what* their candidate really believes.
It's called partisan politics - it's passive, not active.
Per the follow-up comments - I see such comments coming from people who had expectations for the President that are impossible for any President to meet. It seems that people became prey to political pandering - empty promises and hollow chants of 'change!!' - I'm not just sniding Obama with that comment. EVERY politician promises to go to Washing and "clean up that mess!" - to change things and take care of the little people and so on - everyone says that - what's the reality? In Washington politics and taxes come *first* - we're only good for our votes and the occasional drama.
So a lot of people have really just been drawn into classic Washington Campaign rhetoric, led to believe something that couldn't happen, and then is bitter because reality is ALWAYS different. . .that's just how things are.
In fact - it was MEANT to be that way. . .yep - the founding fathers (I know everyone rolls their eyes when they're discussed sometimes) but they fully intended for OUR political system to become a popularity contest:
We are a Representative Democracy *not a direct democracy* thus, our R.D. system is defined as
"any system of government in which leaders are authorized to make decisions - and thereby to wield political power - by winning a competitive struggle for the popular vote. . .They believed that the will of the people was not synonymous with the 'common interest' or the 'public good' . . .
"They believed that the government should mediate, not mirror, popular views, and that elected officials should represent, not register, majority sentiments. They supposed that most citizens did not have the time, information, interest, and expertise to make reasonable choices among competing policy positions. They suspected that even highly educated people could be manipulated by demagogic leaders who played on their fears and prejudices."
So - they had these beliefs and tried to avoid what they thought would happen . . . and they're happening anyway, especially the bolded in my quote.