FOX News Focus Group - Obama's Accomplishments

[Kalimantan]

Thanks Kalimantan.  This is going to be the problem with Obama.  Outside of what he did in Illinois, he doesn't have much to tie his name directly to in order to point out any major accomplishments.  That is what jumping from a first-term Senator to Presidential candidate will do to you.  Edwards had a similar problem in 2004.  If Obama would have waited to 2012, he would have had much more time to be active and gain more name recognition with major bills, but that also comes with risks.  He will be able to talk his way out of this lack of experience, but it will definitely be a target by his opponents.  Killary went softball on it, but I wouldn't expect her (if this primary drags out further and stays close) or McCain to hold back.

Cheers. A number of points in reply

1. Unarguable that he doesn't have the high-level experience of previous presidential candidates. Nevertheless, I can't think of a single candidate in the recent past that hasn't had their record scrutinised and numerous cases of contrary stances/voting records on various issues highlighted. This has generally been incredibly negative for those candidates - Kerry was killed as a 'flip-flopper', it hurt Romney, and McCain is going to be attacked mercilessly for it. Clinton is suffering with her voting record on the war. Obama has no awkward voting records (that I am aware of) for others to get their teeth into.Obama has deflected the in-experience tag perfectly well, with 'judgement is better than experience' and 'un-tainted by Washington cyncism' replies. In any other year it might hurt him more, but coming after Bush (and the various revelations abut Bill Clinton's dogdy deals) it seems many people really want this kind of change.

2. Its hard to see how Clinton (or McCain) can attack him more on this. All they can say is 'he is inexperienced'  - what more is there to it than that?  Clinton has mentioned 'ready to lead from day one' in every speech she has given - its a good line, but one that hasn't worked any better than her current standing in the race testifies for. In fact it seems to be her sole argument, apart from a slight difference in healthcare proposals.

3. Throughout his career (as shown in the record I posted above) he has shown a desire to stand for civil rights and against institutional corruption and lobbyists. People like that and that part of his record is good.

4. There seems to be something incredibly special about Obama. When he announced he was standing for president he was a two-year junior senator. He should be nowhere near the presidency! But he's beaten off numerous better-qualified people and he is supported by a slew of high-profile, respected and experienced senators, congressmen and governors - they all believe in him. People say endorsements don't matter, but they've convinced me that there is definite substance beneath the style. The most telling part of his record for me is that as soon as he entered the Senate he

"recruited a team of established, high-level advisers devoted to broad themes that exceeded the usual requirements of an incoming first-term senator. Obama hired Pete Rouse, a 30-year veteran of national politics and former chief of staff to Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle, as his chief of staff, and economist Karen Kornbluh, former deputy chief of staff to Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, as his policy director."

that tells me he wasn't happy to stand still and slowly find his feet -  he wanted to make a difference and knew the right way to go about that. I want a president who will make a real difference - the right difference - and I just don't see that with Clinton.

5. I find it hard to believe that a democrat won't win the white house in November. The only thing that could derail that for me is a serious and long-lasting downturn in the economy, where experience credentials will be sorely tested. Thankfully McCain doesn't stand too well on that issue either.

[MODU]

5. I find it hard to believe that a democrat won't win the white house in November. The only thing that could derail that for me is a serious and long-lasting downturn in the economy, where experience credentials will be sorely tested. Thankfully McCain doesn't stand too well on that issue either.

Don't underestimate the Democrats ability to lose an election.  In theory, they should not have lost in 2000 and 2004.  2008 is no different.

[Kalimantan]

5. I find it hard to believe that a democrat won't win the white house in November. The only thing that could derail that for me is a serious and long-lasting downturn in the economy, where experience credentials will be sorely tested. Thankfully McCain doesn't stand too well on that issue either.

Don't underestimate the Democrats ability to lose an election.  In theory, they should not have lost in 2000 and 2004.  2008 is no different.

In both the 00 and 04 elections the spectre of Bill Clinton hang over the democrat campaign. But in 08 .... oh sh**te

[Eraserhead]

5. I find it hard to believe that a democrat won't win the white house in November. The only thing that could derail that for me is a serious and long-lasting downturn in the economy, where experience credentials will be sorely tested. Thankfully McCain doesn't stand too well on that issue either.

Don't underestimate the Democrats ability to lose an election.  In theory, they should not have lost in 2000 and 2004.  2008 is no different.

Eh... 2004 was always going to be an uphill battle.

[Reaganfan]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

[Nutmeg]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

[Duke 🇺🇸]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

[Reaganfan]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

EXACTLY! Then they moan about "DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT RACE! BOO HOO! WHOA IS ME!!!" but then they do the exact same thing.

[elcorazon]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

EXACTLY! Then they moan about "DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT RACE! BOO HOO! WHOA IS ME!!!" but then they do the exact same thing.

what a load of crap.  I'm not going to claim obama hasn't benefitted in certain respects from being black.  But believe me, not just any black could pull this off.  Obama's special.  And by the same token, had George Bush not been born the son of a former president, he'd never have been elected dog catcher.  And had Ronald Reagan not been a successful actor, he'd never have been able to get the blush onto his senile cheeks, and had John Edwards been black he'd never have been elected Senator of NC.  Point is we are who we are.  Obama's a black guy who galvanizes a large segment of the country.  Whether he would have been able to do so had he been blond haired and blue eyed is irrelevant. He's not.  Doesn't mean he's not the real deal.  Also doesn't mean he's the one making it about race.  He's not.  Maybe he gets some benefit, just like W benefitted from being a "good ol boy" which is a load of crap too, but the point is we play the cards we're dealt. 

The Clinton's attempts to marginalize Obama were understandable, but turned out to be a horrible miscalculation.

[Keystone Phil]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

EXACTLY! Then they moan about "DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT RACE! BOO HOO! WHOA IS ME!!!" but then they do the exact same thing.

what a load of crap.  I'm not going to claim obama hasn't benefitted in certain respects from being black.  But believe me, not just any black could pull this off.  Obama's special.  And by the same token, had George Bush not been born the son of a former president, he'd never have been elected dog catcher.  And had Ronald Reagan not been a successful actor, he'd never have been able to get the blush onto his senile cheeks, and had John Edwards been black he'd never have been elected Senator of NC.  Point is we are who we are.  Obama's a black guy who galvanizes a large segment of the country.  Whether he would have been able to do so had he been blond haired and blue eyed is irrelevant. He's not.  Doesn't mean he's not the real deal.  Also doesn't mean he's the one making it about race.  He's not.  Maybe he gets some benefit, just like W benefitted from being a "good ol boy" which is a load of crap too, but the point is we play the cards we're dealt. 

The Clinton's attempts to marginalize Obama were understandable, but turned out to be a horrible miscalculation.

The point is that Obama would never have received the praise, the media hype, etc. if he was your average, charismatic, white, liberal Democrat and you know it.

[Reaganfan]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

EXACTLY! Then they moan about "DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT RACE! BOO HOO! WHOA IS ME!!!" but then they do the exact same thing.

what a load of crap.  I'm not going to claim obama hasn't benefitted in certain respects from being black.  But believe me, not just any black could pull this off.  Obama's special.  And by the same token, had George Bush not been born the son of a former president, he'd never have been elected dog catcher.  And had Ronald Reagan not been a successful actor, he'd never have been able to get the blush onto his senile cheeks, and had John Edwards been black he'd never have been elected Senator of NC.  Point is we are who we are.  Obama's a black guy who galvanizes a large segment of the country.  Whether he would have been able to do so had he been blond haired and blue eyed is irrelevant. He's not.  Doesn't mean he's not the real deal.  Also doesn't mean he's the one making it about race.  He's not.  Maybe he gets some benefit, just like W benefitted from being a "good ol boy" which is a load of crap too, but the point is we play the cards we're dealt. 

The Clinton's attempts to marginalize Obama were understandable, but turned out to be a horrible miscalculation.

The point is that Obama would never have received the praise, the media hype, etc. if he was your average, charismatic, white, liberal Democrat and you know it.

The man from Pennsylvania is correct.

[elcorazon]

Amazing...if his skin were one shade lighter...he wouldn't even be considered a possible candidate.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

No. Because rather than being a breakthrough candidate who can transcend race, he would've been just another white guy. It helps when 90% of a race will vote for you no matter what. That is a nice handicap to have entering a race. If his skin was a few shades lighter, he wouldn't be in the race by now and Hillary would've wrapped it up. It helps to have 90% of the blacks, the academics, and the college idealistic kids behind you who actually believe the BS he says he can do.

Without his dark skin, he'd lose most of the south. Outside of race, the Clinton's are very popular in the south. If he was just a white liberal from Illinois, he'd have made no headway. It has all to do with his race.

EXACTLY! Then they moan about "DON'T MAKE IT ABOUT RACE! BOO HOO! WHOA IS ME!!!" but then they do the exact same thing.

what a load of crap.  I'm not going to claim obama hasn't benefitted in certain respects from being black.  But believe me, not just any black could pull this off.  Obama's special.  And by the same token, had George Bush not been born the son of a former president, he'd never have been elected dog catcher.  And had Ronald Reagan not been a successful actor, he'd never have been able to get the blush onto his senile cheeks, and had John Edwards been black he'd never have been elected Senator of NC.  Point is we are who we are.  Obama's a black guy who galvanizes a large segment of the country.  Whether he would have been able to do so had he been blond haired and blue eyed is irrelevant. He's not.  Doesn't mean he's not the real deal.  Also doesn't mean he's the one making it about race.  He's not.  Maybe he gets some benefit, just like W benefitted from being a "good ol boy" which is a load of crap too, but the point is we play the cards we're dealt. 

The Clinton's attempts to marginalize Obama were understandable, but turned out to be a horrible miscalculation.

The point is that Obama would never have received the praise, the media hype, etc. if he was your average, charismatic, white, liberal Democrat and you know it.

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

[MODU]

The point is that Obama would never have received the praise, the media hype, etc. if he was your average, charismatic, white, liberal Democrat and you know it.

Possibly.

Given his outlook on our country and its politics, I'd certainly have supported him regardless of his appearance.  I think that's the case for many of the millions who have voted for him so far.

He's pretty much taken a page out of Reagan's play book and focused on the promise of the future (while being vague about what is in store), which transcends party lines.

[Keystone Phil]

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

No, it's not irrelevant or ignorant. Both parties like to hype minority candidates. It's appealing, something new. I don't understand what the double standard is either.

[elcorazon]

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

No, it's not irrelevant or ignorant. Both parties like to hype minority candidates. It's appealing, something new. I don't understand what the double standard is either.

let me spell it out for you...

Young white man gets elected Senator in Tennessee.  Family in politics.  NEVER does ANYONE EVER say - you know, the only reason this guy is where he is is because of the color of his skin.  A black guy with his resume would never have been elected.

Yet when a young black man who has galvanized the nation like no one else in at least 20 years, the big gripe is he got there BECAUSE of the color of his skin.

That white guy - Al Gore
The black guy - Barack Obama

seriously, it is definitely a double standard.  Anytime a black person accomplishes anything, it is questioned.  When a white does it, it is deserved, or at least never questioned.  that's all.

[Keystone Phil]

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

No, it's not irrelevant or ignorant. Both parties like to hype minority candidates. It's appealing, something new. I don't understand what the double standard is either.

let me spell it out for you...

Young white man gets elected Senator in Tennessee.  Family in politics.  NEVER does ANYONE EVER say - you know, the only reason this guy is where he is is because of the color of his skin.  A black guy with his resume would never have been elected.

Yet when a young black man who has galvanized the nation like no one else in at least 20 years, the big gripe is he got there BECAUSE of the color of his skin.

That white guy - Al Gore
The black guy - Barack Obama

Ok, let me spell it out for you...

I don't see how the two are connected. Gore got lucky since he was from a political family. Obama has natural skills and I have always admitted that. However, the hype is especially intense because he is black.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, it's not. I don't question that Obama overcame serious obstacles at Harvard Law and several political obstacles. I'm simply saying his status as an intelligent, young, charismatic black man gives allows far more hype than an intelligent, young, charismatic white man.

By the way, you want to talk about how I have a double standard because I don't do this to successful whites? Where the hell have you been? You don't see me attacking the priviledged Kennedy's and Bob Casey, Jr.? Give me a break.

Don't try to make me into a racist just because you don't like my reasoning.

[Duke 🇺🇸]

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

No, it's not irrelevant or ignorant. Both parties like to hype minority candidates. It's appealing, something new. I don't understand what the double standard is either.

let me spell it out for you...

Young white man gets elected Senator in Tennessee.  Family in politics.  NEVER does ANYONE EVER say - you know, the only reason this guy is where he is is because of the color of his skin.  A black guy with his resume would never have been elected.

Yet when a young black man who has galvanized the nation like no one else in at least 20 years, the big gripe is he got there BECAUSE of the color of his skin.

That white guy - Al Gore
The black guy - Barack Obama

seriously, it is definitely a double standard.  Anytime a black person accomplishes anything, it is questioned.  When a white does it, it is deserved, or at least never questioned.  that's all.

That's the world we live in! You may think its a bad way to be, but it's the truth! Obama would be no where if he wasn't black. Hillary Clinton would be nowhere if her last name wasn't Clinton. Obama is the black candidate. 90% of the black population is voting for him. It also helps that he is from a very Democratic state to get elected in and he ran against a very weak opponent. He also has the backing of the academic world and idealists.

Why deny that Obama hasn't made it this far because of his race? I can't believe anyone would believe otherwise. We get places because of what we are and what we have. That's our society. He's taken advantage of his gifts of being black and being able to attract 20-30% of the white population with this idealist message he preaches.

[elcorazon]

I'm not calling you a racist.

I'm just saying that while you may call out a Kennedy or a Bush for being born into a political family, would you call out someone like Bill Frist.  I don't think Frist could have had any political success had he been black.

As if that matters.  He's not black.

I will actually even say that you could be correct that part of Obama's appeal is that he's black.  Or at least that it helps to make him more appealing.  The truth is that people and their race cannot be separated and the fact of singling him out is the kind of rationalization that goes on all the time that keeps the powerful in power and the less powerful unable to reach their peaks.

here's another one.  Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson - ALL got their status for things that had NOTHING to do with their own abilities politically - they had name recognition and fame as actors - otherwise they'd ALL have been political peons, especially the deified mr. reagan.

[elcorazon]

and if Mike Huckabee were black he'd have never been elected governor.  he'd still be a preacher.  and if John McCain were black he'd likely have been homeless. 

seriously, listen to yourselves, with your double standards.  I've NEVER heard of a white politician being singled out as only successful due to his skin color.  Yet miraculously 90% of our elected representatives are white.  They must just be even that much better than all the other races.

seriously irrelevant ignorant argument.

No, it's not irrelevant or ignorant. Both parties like to hype minority candidates. It's appealing, something new. I don't understand what the double standard is either.

let me spell it out for you...

Young white man gets elected Senator in Tennessee.  Family in politics.  NEVER does ANYONE EVER say - you know, the only reason this guy is where he is is because of the color of his skin.  A black guy with his resume would never have been elected.

Yet when a young black man who has galvanized the nation like no one else in at least 20 years, the big gripe is he got there BECAUSE of the color of his skin.

That white guy - Al Gore
The black guy - Barack Obama

seriously, it is definitely a double standard.  Anytime a black person accomplishes anything, it is questioned.  When a white does it, it is deserved, or at least never questioned.  that's all.

That's the world we live in! You may think its a bad way to be, but it's the truth! Obama would be no where if he wasn't black. Hillary Clinton would be nowhere if her last name wasn't Clinton. Obama is the black candidate. 90% of the black population is voting for him. It also helps that he is from a very Democratic state to get elected in and he ran against a very weak opponent. He also has the backing of the academic world and idealists.

Why deny that Obama hasn't made it this far because of his race? I can't believe anyone would believe otherwise. We get places because of what we are and what we have. That's our society. He's taken advantage of his gifts of being black and being able to attract 20-30% of the white population with this idealist message he preaches.

haha.  you mean 40-50%.

and i guess ultimately what bothers me is not that someone makes the point, but that one might deem the point important, and that it would cause one to like Obama less.

If I were to say that part of Obama's appeal to me is his being a symbol that America can see through one's skin color, and I were to like Obama even more because of it, isn't that a good thing?

somehow the thread here seems to be that because his appeal has some sort of racial connection, we should therefore not support him.

all i'm saying is that there are TONS of politicians who have a wide variety of traits that make them appealing beyond their own abilities and positions.  In Obama's case he has HUGE abilities, and happens to have additional appeal to some because of his race (incidentally, he also apparently has some negatives because of his race as well - that some of you conveniently ignore)... i guess I should have just responded with a big SO WHAT.

[Duke 🇺🇸]

I don't think Frist could have had any political success had he been black.

Of course he wouldn't. Michael Steele proved that black people don't vote for Republicans even if the candidate is black.

[Keystone Phil]

I'm not calling you a racist.

I'm just saying that while you may call out a Kennedy or a Bush for being born into a political family, would you call out someone like Bill Frist.  I don't think Frist could have had any political success had he been black.

As if that matters.  He's not black.

I will actually even say that you could be correct that part of Obama's appeal is that he's black.  Or at least that it helps to make him more appealing.  The truth is that people and their race cannot be separated and the fact of singling him out is the kind of rationalization that goes on all the time that keeps the powerful in power and the less powerful unable to reach their peaks.

here's another one.  Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson - ALL got their status for things that had NOTHING to do with their own abilities politically - they had name recognition and fame as actors - otherwise they'd ALL have been political peons, especially the deified mr. reagan.

As I stated, I call people out for doing nothing and just being a name or part of a priviledged family.

[elcorazon]

I'm not calling you a racist.

I'm just saying that while you may call out a Kennedy or a Bush for being born into a political family, would you call out someone like Bill Frist.  I don't think Frist could have had any political success had he been black.

As if that matters.  He's not black.

I will actually even say that you could be correct that part of Obama's appeal is that he's black.  Or at least that it helps to make him more appealing.  The truth is that people and their race cannot be separated and the fact of singling him out is the kind of rationalization that goes on all the time that keeps the powerful in power and the less powerful unable to reach their peaks.

here's another one.  Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson - ALL got their status for things that had NOTHING to do with their own abilities politically - they had name recognition and fame as actors - otherwise they'd ALL have been political peons, especially the deified mr. reagan.

As I stated, I call people out for doing nothing and just being a name or part of a priviledged family.

you totally missed the point. ugh