Obama campaign seeks to reassure nervous Democrats

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 11, 2012 10:26 a.m.

    Re: ImaCaMan Oceanside, CA
    "This seems to have worked well for Romney and his fellow Republican cohorts."

    If what you say is true wouldn't it have been prudent for Obama to bring it up during his presidential debate with Romney? We've seen the two men side by side and Obama got his backsides kicked.

    In Obama's defense he did about the best he could in that debate.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    Oct. 11, 2012 4:37 a.m.

    President Uhhh says: "I got this." This would be funny, if it weren't so sad. He left the debate the other night thinking he had won. He's so incompetent, he doesn't know how bad he is.

    How many fruitless "Recovery Summers" do we have to experience before we realize this guy is all talk?

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 9:26 p.m.

    President Obama didn't appear to me to be upset when he was onstage during the debate. I believe he thought he won as Mitt Romney, according to the Obama ads is a goof and isn't a real person. That means he didn't have to give his all, if he had any of the all, as he didn't have to do this when he was organizing communities with federal and matching state funds that he didn't have to earn. He just showed up and got it greased into his organized communities hands.

    If he doesn't lead he doesn't have to think about those things on his own. The federal government has a system, though inefficient, to run day in and day out, without too much guidance from people as the regulations, procedures and techniques are spelled out, word for word.

    Military plans don't require much input from the President, fortunately. He gives the okay and hopes he made the right decision. Clinton was a similar type of President. Lucky for us they weren't in office for 9/11 but Clinton didn't push the agencies looking for Obama prior to 9/11.

  • Lone Star Cougar Plano, TX
    Oct. 10, 2012 5:21 p.m.

    Obama promised many things but did not deliver. Many people hoped he would succeed but we are not seeing it. Even the lower unemployment numbers are only showing how many people are not actively looking for work anymore.

    I remember an America that was full of promise and with VERY low unemployment numbers and there was a definite air of positivity across America. President Obama did not bring that back and instead blames everything or everyone else for the failure we have seen the last 3.6 years.

    It is time for a Positive Change.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 3:56 p.m.

    “(BO's) team says no major changes are expected in his ... strategy.”

    Run from your own record and distort Romney’s.

    “unmarried women in particular were not swayed by Obama's economic arguments but were open to Romney's approach.”

    With JOBS they can afford their own birth control and don’t need to rely on BO to buy it for them.

    Craig Clark,
    in a battleground state I’ve seen 2 ads BO approved. both were negative

    Saw 1 Romney approved ad – positive about what Romney would do. NOTHING about BO.

    Admirable job? 8%+ unemployment, $6 TRILLION in new debt, 1.2% economic growth is acceptable?

    Who is Romney? Successful in private enterprise, not-for-profit (Olympics), and governor (deficit to surplus).

    Lack of details – where were you when Obamcare was debated and nancy said “we have to pass it so we can see what’s in it?”

    Higher unemployment than he inherited is an upswing? 1.2% growth is an upswing? That S&P growth is going to your hated 1percenters; why is it now a good thing? NYT is not objective.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 3:26 p.m.

    atl134"That's a "vote me for and you'll find out what I do later" plan."

    Is exactly how Pelosie and Reid sold the Obama care. "We have to pass it to find out what's in it".

    But best quote of the day is Obama's "The president was asked about the debate on the Tom Joyner Morning Show. "Well, two things. I mean, you know, the debate, I think it’s fair to say I was just too polite, because, you know, it’s hard to sometimes just keep on saying and what you’re saying isn’t true," Obama said in response to the question."

    Catch that "just keep on saying and what you’re saying isn’t true"

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 10, 2012 3:18 p.m.

    "Romney Claims of Bipartisanship as Governor Face Challenge
    NY Times 10/12

    "Democrats complained he variously ignored, insulted or opposed them, with intermittent charm offensives. He vetoed scores of legislative initiatives and excised budget line items 844 times, according to Factcheck. Lawmakers reciprocated by quickly overriding the vast bulk of them."

    "Romney could be appealing and persuasive. But he also displayed political tone-deafness and a failure to nurture the constituencies he needed to make his initiatives succeed."

    "By 2004, the second year of his term, Romney mounted an unprecedented campaign to unseat Democratic legislators, spending $3 million in Republican Party money even hiring a nationally known political strategist to plan the battle.

    The effort failed spectacularly. Republicans lost, leaving them with their smallest legislative delegation since 1867. Democratic lawmakers were reported to have been deeply angered by the campaign’s tactics."

    "Educators largely credit reform of state schools 10 years earlier under Governor Weld. (reforms doubled state spending on schools and brought standards and accountability to administrators and students).

    “Romney doesn't get to take the credit for achieving that No. 1 ranking,” said Mike Gilbert, but it did happen while he was in office.”

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:40 p.m.

    Liberal Ted @ 2:25: You and I don't agree often, but well said. My opinion all along has been that Romney can't give us specifics because he wants to work in a bipartisan manner -- just like he did in Massachusetts. He can't say things that would alienate members of the other party and thus create hurdles before he even gets in office.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:25 p.m.

    @ atl134

    Stop your whining. obama preached and ran for 2 years stating things that he never explained how he would do. He has been in office over 3.5 years and still hasn't explained how his policies have helped us.

    Romney has listed loopholes he would cut, places he would cut funding. If you missed the debate or didn't pay attention. Romney explained to barack that you can't go in to negotiate and to work with the other side, by starting off it's my way or the highway. Too bad barack didn't figure that one out earlier on. Romney said he will work with both sides to make it happen. The fact of the matter is I believe Romney over barack. barack has had 5.5 years to get his policies in place and make it happen. Instead he spend his political capital on green energy for his buddies and cronies, health care that over 60% of the didn't want, and still hasn't created a net job. Even after fudging the job reports.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:25 p.m.

    "Those that don't learn from history are damned to repeat it."


    That nicely describes Obama's presidency. He obviously doesn't know his history concerning the Great Depression and what works (or doesn't work) to get out of such economic downturns. He obviously is blissfully ignorant of the ineffectiveness of socialist government.

    Does the fact that Obama has been unofficially endorsed by Hugo Chavez and the Castros mean anything to you?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:09 p.m.

    Economic upswing evidenced by:

    unemployment rate decreased from 10%-7.8%

    S&P up 81%

    manufacturing up 48%

    consumer confidence up 86%

    petroleum imports down 23%

    Yes, more work to be done. Mitt is offering a fantasy massive tax decrease he can't/won't explain--(just trust him) and budget cuts consisting of defunding PBS and the NEA; a healthcare policy that will cover pre-existing conditions only for those who've had continuous insurance coverage. He wants to maintain subsidies for oil, agriculture and increase spending on defense.

    But who knows? Mitt may just change all his positions again tomorrow!

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:08 p.m.

    @middle class

    "Who is Mitt Romney? What does he think? Why does he want to be President? No one seems to know the answers to these questions."

    Actually anyone paying attention knows Romney quite well; particularly after the debate.

    The only people confused are those deluded by the smoke and mirrors of Obama's attack ads that are motivated entirely by the fact that Obama cannot win based upon his own record, therefore he must spend hundreds of millions of dollars attempting to make his opponent toxic - regardless of the truth.

    After the debate it became abundantly clear that the Obama campaign has been lying profusely and that Romney is not the toxic person that Obama desperately needs in order to win

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 10, 2012 2:03 p.m.

    Re: Craig Clark Boulder, CO

    There is no economic upswing. To the contrary we are on the cusp of another recession ... or depression depending on how bad it gets.

  • ImaCaMan Oceanside, CA
    Oct. 10, 2012 1:55 p.m.

    Re: toosmartforyou

    You stated: As Abrham Lincoln reportedly said "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time."

    W.C. Fields also said: "you can fool some of the people some of the time- and that's enough to make a living!"

    This seems to have worked well for Romney and his fellow Republican cohorts.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 1:38 p.m.

    Romney throws out all sorts of nonsense about how his tax plan doesn't cut revenues but refuses to name a single loophole he'd close to balance out what otherwise would be a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. That's not a comprehensive tax plan. That's a "vote for me and you'll find out what I do later" plan. Romney says he's the guy for deficit reduction but all he says he'll cut is Obamacare (which is something paid for with medicare cuts and taxes, getting rid of Obamacare in its entirety actually increases the deficit) and getting rid of funding for PBS and Planned Parenthood. That's not a balanced budget plan. That's a "vote me for and you'll find out what I do later" plan.

    The question that should be asked is how. How are your plans actually going to create jobs? How are your tax plans going to do what you say they'll do? How are your plans for addressing the deficit actually going to reduce it substantially? If voters don't do due diligence and ask how, then they deserve to be blindsided by surprise changes in February.

  • Whoa Nellie American Fork, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 1:19 p.m.

    Craig Clark - What economic upswing?

  • Belching Cow Sandy, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 1:11 p.m.

    @Craig Clark
    "I'd like to see the President leave the negative attacks on Romney to surrogates an concentrate on emphasizing the economic upswing."

    Uhhh..what economic upswing? I'm sure not seeing it.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 1:06 p.m.

    That's a Good One

    Romneys' tax policies are similar to GWB and the differences we are not sure about, because he does not provide any details. Just as you can only judge BO by what he's done and said, we can only do the same for Willard. Willard has been an elected public servant once, Govenor of Massachuetts. He left office after only one term with a 35% approval rating. Massachuetts had one of the worst job growth rates in the coutnry during this time. The budget was a mess and people overwhelming viewed Mitt unfavorably. Fast forward to this election. His proposed policies mirror those of GWB. So, as an independent I have to view him on his record as a public offical and what he is proposing. I am doing the same with BO. To me they both have serious faults. I wish Clinton had a third term, but unfortunatly he does not.

  • t702 Las Vegas, NV
    Oct. 10, 2012 12:59 p.m.

    Since the debate debacle the only thing Obama talks about is Big Bird - need we more evidence that BO is clueless? There are countless issues, ie jobs, economy, debts, the foreign policy disaster in Libya, etc ...and Big Bird is the "Big" issue? What a classic show of incompetence, November doesn't come fast enough!

  • ImaUteFan West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 12:59 p.m.


    "If he can't glare, act mean, and make unreasonable promises . . . "

    Isn't that what Romney did during the first debate?

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 12:21 p.m.

    Desperate times for desperate people. The pointing, snarling image of Obama is appropriate. If he can't glare, act mean, and make unreasonable promises, he might as well drop out of the race.

    Hey, that's a good idea!

  • That's A Good One Meridian, ID
    Oct. 10, 2012 12:08 p.m.

    FT @ 11:45am "He's George Bush"

    Man, I wish I had a dollar for every time an Obama supporter has said that. I wouldn't still be fearing for my self sufficient economic life and worrying every day that Obama's continued policies would result in nationwide dependency on the government for survival.

    But then, when you have no record to run on after 4 years you resort to saying "I guess we need to change the topic" during debates when you perform like a train wreck, or repeating the phrase "7 trillion dollar tax cut for the rich" enough times that you actually start to believe it as truth yourself. Or, your spend millions turning out 'Big Bird' TV commercials because you have no real argument of substance that can hold water.

    Obama is not cutting it and needs to go back to Chicago where he can be quite successful at organizing community events for Rahm Emmanual.

  • That's A Good One Meridian, ID
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:48 a.m.

    middle class @ 11:28am "Who is Mitt Romney? What does he think? Why does he want to be President? No one seems to know the answers to these questions."

    Huh? Like him or not it't hardly accurate to say that no one seems to know the answers to your questions.

    More accurately, following the 1st debate, the questions that need to be asked are "Who is Barack Obama? How does he operate without a teleprompter? Why is it that following that debacle last week his only response is to churn out 'Big Bird' TV commercials (commercials which Sesame Street is now decrying)?"

    The answers are quite simple. The "Bush's fault" excuses are worn out, the newness of 'change' has gotten old, the economy isn't much better now than it was 4 years ago, etc.

    Again, you may not like Romney but he's a proven commodity when it comes to finances and economics, America's biggest single need RIGHT NOW.

    Furthermore, if you think Democrats were embarrassed after the first debate, wait until after the VP debate this week. You'll likely think President Obama's performance was stellar in comparison.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:45 a.m.

    For those of you who wonder who Mitt Romney is the answer is simple. He's George Bush. Look at his proposals and he'll pursue similar policy changes. If elected, he'll be similar to GWB2 in popularity, arounda 25% approval rating. Those that don't learn from history are damned to repeat it.

  • Leopard Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:33 a.m.

    It's a little hard to argue a bankrupt politcal philosophy and perverse economic policies, so look for an October surprise to change the losing narrative. Hope the American people are finally awake and get rid of Obama and company.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:33 a.m.

    middle class
    your comments are laughable, steady handy? that's a first. sorry your boy will be out in january, but it is for the best of the country to see the community organizer go back to planning picnics and hanging posters on lightpoles.

  • middle class Cedar City, 00
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:28 a.m.

    Who is Mitt Romney? What does he think? Why does he want to be President? No one seems to know the answers to these questions.

    Obama has done an admirable job stabilizing America after a near-epoch tsunami of economic and housing collapse. It has been long enough that many have forgotten what happened 48 months ago.

    Obama's steady hand has been stabilizing.

    Romney is an enigma. He changes positions so fast no one can define his beliefs!

  • metamoracoug metamora, IL
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:26 a.m.

    I find it interesting that one of the charts indicates that Illinois will go for Obama. In the 2010 election, incumbent Democratic Governor Quinn retained his post by winning only three counties out of 102 -- two poor western counties and Cook (Chicago). Every other county in the state voted overwhelmingly for his opponent by 55-75%. I'm absolutely certain the results in the presidential election will be the same. The only difference may be that after four years of poor economic performance, Cook county voters may be more apathetic than in 2008. I can only dream and pray that downstate can make its voice heard over the Chicagoland political din.

  • Anti Government Alpine, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:23 a.m.

    The reality is that Romney has been winning for a while.

    The polls are just so disparate now that even the democrat-heavy skewed sampling can't hide the facts any longer.

    Most polls have been using "modeling" that mimics the demographic turnout of 2008. Who believes all those same usual non-voting groups have the same enthusiasm for a now proven failed leader?

    They won't turn out in record #'s nation-wide like they did. The newness has worn off. The horrific economy and trillion dollar annual deficits have not.

    The other factor is the "undecided" voter. Uh, who do you think the majority will vote for if they haven't already decided to vote for the president whom they have seen in action now for almost 4 years? Clearly if they are undecided this late that means they are unhappy with the president and still getting comfortable with Romney.

    Undecideds will break Romneys direction when it comes time to vote. Romney will get the majority of them.

    Mark my words, the liberal media will act stunned when the numbers are tallied.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 11:03 a.m.

    Americans should be on edge that this empty suit could be re-elected. Not likely, but possible. A nightmare

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 10:59 a.m.

    As Abrham Lincoln reportedly said "You can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time." After 3 1/2 years of "It's George Bush's fault" people are starting to see that "Change you can believe in" really was a bad plan for the American people. Being a great orater and being a new, refreshing face that historically broke a racial barrier, was what people wanted, but now they are going to vote with their pocket books and their children's futures so Obama is one-and-done.

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    Oct. 10, 2012 10:29 a.m.

    I typically vote democrat, and I called this three months ago. Obama is ready to be finished and hand the country over to Romney, so let's hope Romney can do what he says he can do. Again, it's one thing to say you're going to do something; it's another to actually accomplish it, just as most conservative posters are so quick to point out with Obama.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    Oct. 10, 2012 10:27 a.m.

    I'd like to see the President leave the negative attacks on Romney to surrogates an concentrate on emphasizing the economic upswing.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Oct. 10, 2012 10:21 a.m.

    That's good. Even an Iota of complacency is too much.