The only reason I’m guessing they are doing the segment is Bill O’Reilly is still mad that Obama was re elected and one way to get back at the President is to do a negative segment on Hawaii.
Maybe they get free stuff from the guvement. I swear, the level of stupidity is reaching new lows. The single worst thing Romney said before AND after the election was that liberals voted liberal because they’re a bunch of lazy bums. And this is the calling card the right is going to run with now. Sheer. Stupidity.
I don’t think O’Reilly is especially angry that Obama won. He didn’t seem too crazy about Romney, either. I think he was, and is, angry with both of them because neither would do his show this election cycle. Obama appeared on The Factor in 2008, I believe.
Well, first off… we can’t be so skeptical as to imagine what the segment will be, before we see it.
But secondly, as a more-conservative-kinda-(but not really)-person… I’d like to know why Liberal-voting areas are the way they are. In fact, I’d think that all politically interested people would be curious as to why and how political groups form. That way, we can either best serve the people with similar political stuff, or figure out better strategies to inject differing opinions.
I have no idea if that’s what’s going to happen, or that’s how the piece will be focused… but the question of, “Why do people vote the way they do,” is one worth asking… no?
Banfield needs to have that eyeglass prescription looked at…
That’s the “They’re doing something that we consider stupid, so let’s respond in kind”-business that Fox likes to do. It’s not a good sign.
Sorta like when Fox talks about Janeane Garofalo on every single show, as though anyone should give a damn.
This is a short version of a video that mocks celebs who support gun control. O’Reilly showed it last night. It’s very interesting but not as interesting as what O’Reilly said he thought about it at the end:
Big Hollywood has the full-length version with many more of these celebs shooting guns and some four-letter words at the end.
It’s a strawman. The current gun control movement is focused on limiting firepower, not banning guns. FNC creating a “problem”, then “exposing” it. Again.
The only reason I’m guessing they are doing the segment is Bill O’Reilly is still mad that Obama was re elected.
I think it’s cause Jesse Watters didn’t want to spend a week in the dreary, cold Northeast and he was able to con FOX into assigning him to a vacation spot.
Hey Roger Ailes, I’ve got a dynamite scoop that Joe Biden was born in Sydney! Send me to investigate!!!
Joe, FNC didn’t create a “problem.” This video has been all over the Internet. FNC was reporting on it. And Bill said he saw no problem with celebs shooting guns in their movies. And isn’t violence in the media one of the things that everyone wanted to look at after Newtown? FYI, Rev. Al, on his radio show, said he thinks the sale of knives should be regulated.
Fox was “reporting” on a Big Hollywood video. Fascinating.
I wonder what Tipper thinks of media violence.
Oh wait. I guess the left forgot about the Gore’s attempt to censor the media. My mistake.
Janeane Garafalo is still around? Haven’t heard about her in like a decade. I thought she was kinda funny – when I was 17. Who knew Republicans were such fans? Glad conservatives are keeping me updated on has-been liberal celebs.
Oh, and Laura, I am sure neither of us spelled her name right. Too lazy to google it.
I haven’t heard Janeane Garofalo’s name mentioned on FNC in, well, at least a year or two. Who mentions her and when was the last time she was mentioned?
“Fox was “reporting” on a Big Hollywood video. Fascinating.” – Joe
These are the types of subjects that Bill talks about during his weekly segments with Huddy – current media topics. Nothing heavy.
And, Joe, it wasn’t a Big Hollywood video. It was made by a gun-rights group. It’s on the Big Hollywood site, as well as many other sites, including CBS.
I find it ironic FNC wanted to talk as little as possible about the NRA speech yet when a NY State town decides to not release the names of gun owners after a news paper requests them they are all over the story and send a reporter there.
If MSNBC has a pro gun control bias then it seems clear FNC has a pro gun bias.
I happen to agree though that releasing the names was a bad idea.
I don’t care who made the video. Rightwing media is portraying it as A Thing. The only “Thing” it is is propaganda about a “Thing” that isn’t happenening: That liberals are trying to eliminate all guns. It’s slippery slope NRA BS that has no significant support in this country. The mainstream, might-actually-happen, argument is limits on firepower. Which does nothing to preclude actors portraying cops, military, and bad guys in movies.
Ok, Joe. Which guns do liberals want to ban?
I’m guessing the scary looking ones because they’re scary looking.
joe has problems with an opinion show on FOX doing a story on an independently-produced video that happens to have also been picked up by Big Brietbart.
joe has had no problems whatsoever with MSNBC basing their entire programming day on material produced directly by Think Progress, Media Matters, CAP, CBPP, Kos, etc.
And don’t bother talking about the Congress people who have actually talked about getting rid of all guns.
Those people aren’t “relevant” enough to discuss… apparently.
If Hardball starts brandishing a video production that pupports to combat something that isn’t actually happening, I’ll let you know. Fortunately, mainstream liberal media tend to keep their stuff in house.
No, a few “progressive” Congresspeople are about as influentual as Allen West on your side. There is no popular groundswell for a total gun ban. Period.
In other news, John Boehner was re-elected Speaker. He probably had the same reaction Obama did in Nov. 2008: “Crap.”
The Five is truly just filling time when the opening segment is about the Reagan Era supposedly being over, aren’t they?
Joe, I don’t think the celeb/gun video is propaganda against a “thing” that isn’t happening – wanting to ban all guns. I just think it’s a video that shows that celebs can be hypocritical in demanding gun restrictions when they don’t restrict themselves at all from using guns in their movies/TV shows. As I mentioned, I thought violence in the media was one of the things to be discussed to prevent further massacres. Maybe media violence leads to violence. I don’t know. O’Reilly doesn’t think it does. So it wasn’t like he was promoting the propaganda of this video because he doesn’t agree with its premise.
Anything other calling for a ban on random scary looking firearms is Fox News propaganda.
The concept is ridiculous. What are the charcters an actor will likely play that use a gun? Cops, military, spies..all authorized and qualified. Or criminals, who are potrayed as dangerous, and to be stopped. The idea that an actor who supports firepower limits can’t play these roles makes no sense. It’s NRA change-the-subject BS.
My only point in mentioning Garofalo is that Banfield/Kwanzaa seemed to have a similar flavor with some of the stuff Fox does. IE, try to build a story around some nobody that no one cares about, and see if you can stoke some ‘outrage’. I sometimes wonder if the only reason that Michael Moore gets booked on Piers is because they know he’ll say something that gets buzz on Fox. It’s a giant circle of BS.
Hollywood glamorizes gun use the same way they glamorize smoking. People (on the Left) are still complaining about that, so it’s totally valid.
“What are the charcters an actor will likely play that use a gun? Cops, military, spies..all authorized and qualified. ”
Hollywood glamorizes guns and you know it. Those jackasses don’t care about anything other than throwing in with the latest left-wing cause/fad. Being anti-gun is the cool thing at the moment. Just don’t take them away from their body guards or from their movies. You can’t be Hollywood without being a raging hypocrite.
It’s a ridiculous argument. Now Hollywood is supposed to stop making action pictures because some actors want to limit magazines? You’re all crazy.
This is the “discussion” that we’re supposed to have. As we already knew, when liberals talk about a “discussion”, what they mean is “Now is the time for everyone to agree with us”. Look at the movies that were considered ‘shocking’ in the 60′s, and today you’d watch them with your school-age kids. Pardon us for thinking that there might be a connection.
It’s a diversion. You’re suppplanting “actors are hypocrites” with “let’s talk about violence in media”, then pretending that was what we were talking about. So we started with changing the subject to something that isn’t happening (popular support for total gun bans), then changed it again. Let’s just keep moving the goalposts so we don’t have to consider limiting certain types of weaponry. Everyone will forget soon enough…
I saw where Charles Krauthammer and John Bolton say they have nothing to apologize for about mocking Hillary Clinton’s concussion even after it was discovered she had a blood clot in her head. What a couple of arrogant a$$holes.
Fox morons never apologize. They’re always right “in the bigger picture”.
Am I the only one who finds the conservative freakout over al-Jazeera’s purchase of Current hilarious? They are taking issue with an American company selling to an oil-rich, middle eastern country.
Maybe they should consider the fact that one of Fox News’ biggest share holders is a Saudi oil prince… Yet the amount of average strangely seems to be lacking with that. I’m sure it has nothing to do with ideology.
Are these morons completely devoid of hypocrisy or do they just not care?
Bill O’Reilly just had Laura Ingraham on as a guest for the first time since they mocked Hillary Clinton’s concussion on the 12/20 and of course they avoided the topic.
I wasn’t aware that conservatives were “freaking out” about it. The sale is certainly fodder for a few laughs but I doubt many really give a rat’s. I don’t.
Governor Granholm announced via Facebook yesterday that she’s leaving Current.
“I saw where Charles Krauthammer and John Bolton say they have nothing to apologize for about mocking Hillary Clinton’s concussion even after it was discovered she had a blood clot”
Hey, they were just going with the intelligence they had at the time. /susanrice’d
The only people that are going to make a big deal over the sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera are Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity because they don’t like Al Gore.
Current TV is a low rated channel anyway and turning it into Al Jazeera American I doubt is going to get it any better ratings.
No one’s freaking out. The difference is FNC is pro-oil whereas Al Gore lectures others on the perils of fossil fuels. The real hypocrisy is on the left on this matter.
I don’t see conservatives freaking out about. Poking fun at Algore for selling his unicorn tear operated tv station to some evil oil lovers, maybe.
” Now Hollywood is supposed to stop making action pictures because some actors want to limit magazines?”
We’re simply pointing out the continued hypocrisy of the holier than thou Hollywood crowd. They should stick to what they know. Namely, fantasyland, divorce and overdosing.
^And receiving subsidies from your debt-burderned federal government.
Just as I expected the Jesse Watters segment was just to bash Hawaii and get back at Obama for winning the election.
Useless and stupid.
Get back at Obama for winning the election? Seriously? Good Gawd.
Then tell me why they did the segment?
I couldn’t care less what some actor has to say. Rightwing media turning a video about them into an “event” is embarrassing. I’ve been hearing about the damn piece of NRA propaganda for days, and of course FNC had to “cover” it.
– Current Jazeera –
If by “freaking out” you mean “pointing out liberal hypocrisy”, then yeah, you nailed us.
Why shouldn’t they do the segment? Why should anyone ask people why they vote for someone or another?
What’s the problem Manny? Why aren’t you interested in that?
Hopefully Al Jazeera can cough up something resembling production values. HD would be nice, too. Current TV was unwatchable. The last thing I saw was the first interminable 15 minutes of Spitzer’s Countdown replacement. Blech.
I just found the Hawaii segment useless and questioned why they did the segment. It’s O’Reilly’s show and he can do whatever he wants.
Tell me about it? What happened? What questions don’t you feel were relevant?
Or is this just general, “I don’t like their assignment editor” whining?
Most of Jesse Watters’ segments are, by definition, useless filler. A third of his show seems to be that anymore, and the level is increasing.
To *stop* watching all US broadcast and cable news outlets from this point on.
The last year alone has made me sick to my stomach how the Big 3 Networks are so far to the left, and FNC and MSNBC have gone to a modern day version America’s Talking (google if you do not know what I am talking about.) And where is the serious reporting?
and blogs, typically of written medium. No video or audio, only if they are used for ideal soundbytes.
I typically watch FNC because they were the equal opportunity offender, but now with the drama they put on during their day, it’s disgusting. Between the 1 minute teasers that look like a report w no bumper music to the fake follow up questions coincidental clips to answer those “questions” as per to the Autoscript prompter to the dumb blonds on that channel.
I don’t even care about my local affiliates, they are just disgusting to watch. I live in the top ten DMAs too.
I don’t care if your’re a moonbat liberal, a wingnut conservative or what, but as an American, I am ASHAMED how low we have gone in “reporting”. Starts at the Big 3, the boring broadsheets in the major markets down to every other media outlet.
There is no other way to describe American reporting. I’m sticking to my New Years resolution
What are the charcters an actor will likely play that use a gun? Cops, military, spies..all authorized and qualified.
I counted at least 17 clips in that video where the person using the gun was a civlian. And at least 4 clips where the gun was being used strictly for self-defense against an assault/robbery/etc.
In the movies it’s okay, even cool and preferable to defend yourself with a firearm. But the same actors (who, btw, have their own personal armed bodyguards in real life) say “not for you”. That is blatant hypocrisy and deserves to be called out. Loudly.
Why the hell am I being asked to comment on some idiot on a talk show?
Why was he being interviewed on MSNBC… if he’s just some idiot?
You know all that whining that Liberals do about people on FOX, and how they’re influencing the right? Why isn’t that the same for the left and MSNBC? How can you casually dismiss those guests, while shrieking about some video someone on FNC talked about, like it’s the worse thing in the world?
All this picking and choosing and double standards… it makes my head spin.
I’m sure you’ll figure it out. This is your game: Deflect from the topic by finding some weird comparison that doesn’t directly correlate. It’s boring.
I wasn’t aware a “Free For All” had a topic.
Joe… I’m going to take this as, “I don’t really have an answer for this loon. I can’t defend him, and he hurts my argument. So I’ll blame you instead. Please just let it be, though. I hate what this happens.”
You take it whatever way you want. I’ve never heard of that idiot, and he has nothing to do with the propaganda video which sets up a strawman to deflect from the real gun control argument in this country.
“idiot … propaganda … strawman … real …”
Please don’t ask joe to defend his argument with something other than scorn and name-calling. It’s too taxing.
I defended my argument extensively. You, as usual, ignore any POV you don’t agree with, and insist we talk about something else. The guy on Hardball was a moron. That segment has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
The point of the Hardball reference was that there are a lot of anti-gun opinions floating out there right now. To suggest that the left has any one particular one, or isn’t in favor of a different, is incorrect.
The right is accurate to say that there are those who are actively pushing to take ALL guns out of circulation. Just as the left is accurate to say they (Liberals at large) don’t all agree with that, and that there are about a million positions between the two.
But to say “nobody is saying that,” isn’t right… this guy proved that. He is actively trying to bully and intimidate lawful gun owners of ALL kinds… and apparently has garnered enough attention to make it onto Hardball (which was recently fluffed by MSNBC management).
That was my point.
Hardball finding a “progressive” lunatic to express his bizarre opinion about reporting registered gun owners as a threat to the neighborhood, is just as ridiculous as rightwing media claiming “they’re coming to take all the guns”.
The problem with the video is its use as an NRA propaganda tool to further this lie, while moving the subject away from excessive firepower as a problem in the Aurora and Newtown massacres.
What’s more amusing, the fact that Al Gore tried to avoid higher taxes or the fact that he failed?
^ The inevitable spin and defense from Progressives who feel compelled to protect the Goracle.
I was thinking about Spud’s New Year’s Resolutions and I have a few of my own.
1.) If Morning Joe goes to CBS (and I hope it doesn’t because CBS This Morning is the best thing to happen in television news in my lifetime), MSNBC should consider moving UP to weekday mornings. I like the show format, just don’t like Chris Hayes.
2.) CBS really really really needs to launch a 24/7 newschannel. Their newscasts (CBS This Morning, CBS Evening News, 60 Minutes and Up To The Minute) are impressive. I need more real news and less BS.
3.) For someone to adopt a really good Capitol Hill program –something that’s a cross between Washington Journal and Morning Joe.
I’m just tired of the sound bites and these major stories of depth only taking three minutes to discuss.
^ “We have to leave it there!” Yes, because we don’t have 24 hours to fill..
It is odd listening to “progressives” praise a news outlet that is owned by a government that is a absolute monarchical dictatorship that offers zero political freedoms for its people.
Rupert Murdoch? Monster. Absolute monarchs? Not so bad.
Like I say, strange.
I also wish MSNBC and FOX had an online option like CNN.
“Rupert Murdoch? Monster. Absolute monarchs? Not so bad.”
I see stupid comments.
You so called “progressives” praise a network owned by a dictatorial government and haven’t expressed a single word of concern about such an entity having access to the American market.
Why would the President nominate a man to head the defense department that has opposed his major foreign policy actions against the Islamists?
Hagel was (is?) against the sanctions placed against Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah as well as North Korea. He’s opposed to naming the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terror group and thus limiting its financial operations. And he was against the surge in Afghanistan.
And oh year, Hagel voted for the Iraq War.
This makes little sense to me.
Because even Team Obama has been forced to admit there’s not a single Democrat alive who’d be credible as SECDEF. Besides, its not like Obama cares that much about foreign policy/defense anyway.
Dave Marash was one of the best TV reporters/anchors in the country. First rate journalist.
Google his name and read what he says about working for Al Jazeera. He worked there for several years and has some eye opening revelations.
“Because even Team Obama has been forced to admit there’s not a single Democrat alive who’d be credible as SECDEF.”
Maybe but there’s lots of folks that can do the job.
Hagel invites all kinds of questions about our policy towards Iran and the Islamists.
No doubt that Hagel is a patriot. But he has some odd views about America’s role in the world.
There is, after all, a sensible middle ground between the neocon interventionist (and disastrous) approach and the sort of “laid back” approach that Hagel advocates.
This Club For Growth goon on Hardball literally said we shouldn’t provide disaster relief for Sandy victims if we can’t find every penny to back it up. I’ll bet he also opposes tax hikes..
Seeing as how the “tax increases on the rich” didn’t manage to cover the tax breaks for corporations, I’ll go with Club for Growth’s approach.
Club For Growth’s approach is immoral. You don’t shut down disaster relief because of government budget problems.
Hey laura, I was just giving ya sh!t about Garafalo. Your point is right – it is an endless ring of BS. Personally, I would rather them ignore the quacks then confront them on the air. But, it gets their face on mediaite so all publicity is good publicity. That being said, the guy that Banfield went after was an elected official so he should be held to a different standard. Perhaps it is marginally better to expose the quacks who actually hold office. Really, the bar is low to get elected nowadays.
“CBS really really really needs to launch a 24/7 newschannel. Their newscasts (CBS This Morning, CBS Evening News, 60 Minutes and Up To The Minute) are impressive. I need more real news and less BS.”
Well said, Andy. Too bad CNN and CBS hasn’t teamed up yet. Its been rumored for years, yet nothing had happened and I doubt it will at this stage. As for Morning Joe, I am ready for it to die on the vine – it would only ruin CBS morning news if it moved. Joe Scarborough is losing his mind and Licht is no longer there to reel him in. It is impossible to watch MJ for 3 minutes without Joe giving an “I told you so” rant. Its unbearable. They still manage to get some good guests but I have to watch it with the remote in my hand ready to flip channels as soon as Joe revs up.
Afghanistan War – put it on the charge card, Iraq War – eh, we have a really high credit limit, massive tax cuts – govt doesn’t need your money to pay for wars and a new homeland security operation, medicare prescription drug benefit – who pays for stuff for old people?
Sandy Relief funds – yeah, can’t afford it. Sorry, its been spent. For the rest of you facing potential natural disasters, don’t even ask.
FNC is talking about ‘pork’ in the Sandy aid bill but no one else is reporting on it? Does it make the claims of unrelated spending false? Here’s an idea for all news sites, why don’t they have a url that directly links to the actual text of the bill for everyone to read?
Elle obviously hasn’t seen this chart yet. Despite the wars & tax cuts, we were shrinking the deficit. Right up until 2007. Anyone remember what happened the November previous to that?
I have seen that chart. It does not make your point. Note, those years prior to Bush. Just sayin’
You had a couple of years where you came close to competing with Clinton’s deficit busting budget but then the wheels came off the bus. The recession started in Dec 2007, which led to the financial crisis of 2008 – the largest economic crisis since the Great Depression. Yes, that event blew up the federal budget. If Republicans were so damn proud of Bush’s economic legacy, why have y’all spent the last 5 years running away from it?
The bill that passed today had no ‘pork’. FNC – as usual – is lying.
Today’s bill was 9.7 billion, as opposed to the previous one that was 60. I seriously doubt that FNC is “lying” about their being “pork” in it, but then I haven’t watched enough to make such a statement either way.
Republicans had better start defending Bush’s record, or at least point out that Dems are wrong/lying about what caused the financial meltdown. Their unwillingness to take that on is a big part of why Romney lost.
Bill O’Reilly’s comments on The Factor during a discussion after the Hawaii segment got the attention of The Ed show and discussed tonight.
Bill O’Reilly: “you know what is shocking? 35% of the hawaiian population is asian.
and asian people are not liberal, you know, by nature. they’re usually more industrious and hardworking.”
Bill basically said Asians are more industrious and hardworking and therefore not liberal.
The bill was stripped of extras, and Smerconish confronted the Club For Growth guy with this fact. He said it didn’t matter. Fox is lying about the bill.
Oops! I should have specified it was the previous bill. Sorry for the confusion there.
No one else seems to report ‘pork’ was a reason for why the GOP caused the delay. The BBC and AJE didn’t nor did anyone up north did. It would seem there is a deliberate attempt to slime the GOP for those who don’t follow US politics.
“Oops!”. Snort. Oh well, I’m sure they’ll be “lying” the next time…
The pork factor in the first bill was reported extensively on MSNBC. The problem with this initially being a mystery is that nobody knew what Boehner’s objection was to the first one until the next morning because he didn’t tell anybody. He just threw up his hands and went to bed.
^ That’s what I meant at the time; he just got p!ssed off and went home. After all the ‘fiscal cliff’ business, it’s a wonder he ever came back. Then Christie’s blowhole exploded and all hell broke loose.
If that’s the case, that would be a partial answer. The BBC’s DC reporter mentioned it was ideologically motivated but no mention of ‘pork’ or whatever non-US equivalent for it. That was two hours ago. I checked their site and no mention either. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20913713
Bill basically said Asians are more industrious and hardworking and therefore not liberal.
And Ed said, “Nuh-uh. They’re lazy and greedy, much like other Liberals.” And that’s a good thing?
Marash was on Hannity!!? Man..that’s a cheesy move.
It does not make your point.
It does, actually. Your claim was that the wars & Bush’s admitted over-spending was bad for the deficit. My point, as backed up by the facts, was that despite all that, the deficit picture was improving until the Democrats took over the purse in 2007 and spent us into Bolivian (h/t Mike Tyson).
I suppose, Laura… but personally, I’m not sure I have a problem with any of these things:
A working group led by Vice President Biden is seriously considering measures backed by key law enforcement leaders that would require universal background checks for firearm buyers, track the movement and sale of weapons through a national database, strengthen mental health checks, and stiffen penalties for carrying guns near schools or giving them to minors, the sources said.
Background checks… good.
National database… makes sense.
Mental health… important.
Increased penalties… great.
I’m okay with those.
“It does, actually. Your claim was that the wars & Bush’s admitted over-spending was bad for the deficit.” –savefarris
Are you, as a conservative, arguing the benefits of fiscal stimulus? Just wondering.
It takes ideological blinders to believe the House Democrats are the sole reason for deficits and conservatives are perfect little angels. Really. Um, financial Armageddon didn’t play a role at all in the budget? Really, not at all?!?!
The problem is, what people like regardless of party, is bad for the deficit. Stimulus spending to boost growth – bad for deficit, tax cuts – bad for deficit, military spending – bad for deficit, expanding entitlements – bad for deficit, more welfare – bad for deficit, tax rebates – bad for deficits. But nobody, NOBODY, wants to say NO. So let’s stop pretending y’all give a sh!t about deficits. Embrace D!ck Cheney – “Deficits don’t matter”
“Republicans had better start defending Bush’s record, or at least point out that Dems are wrong/lying about what caused the financial meltdown. Their unwillingness to take that on is a big part of why Romney lost.” –laura
Well, I agree with the part of defending Bush’s record but that is harder to do than you think. Romney lost because people aren’t buying the Republican economic argument. As for lying, well we may have some disagreements about how this crisis happened and how to fix it but lying isn’t part of the argument. There is enough blame to go around – no one has to make stuff up to make a good case against Wall Street, Government, Banks, Greedy Consumers, etc…
What I said, well-before the election, was that a moment had passed where Obama no longer had to “blame Bush” for the economy, which people were tired of hearing. All he had to do was to say that Romney would do what Bush did. Romney never once challenged the premise. Ever. All he managed to say was that he was somehow “different”, without ever explaining why or how. He ran on “Not Obama” without ever addressing “More of the same”.
This means that, at some point, Republicans have to stop cowering in fear over Bush, and talk about what actually caused the collapse. Tax cuts didn’t do it, two wars didn’t do it, and Medicare Part D didn’t do it (all of which many Democrats voted for). That all contributed to the debt, of course, but the debt did not cause the collapse or we’d be dead right now.
Romney made the same fatal mistake McCain did: He ran on “Hire me. I’ll fix it. No worries.” “Trust me” is not a good campaign slogan..
And that, btw, is why O’Reilly is so wrong. Yes, there’s an element of people wanting “stuff”, though intelligent adults should be able to find a better way of addressing it. The main problem is, if you can’t convince people that your policies will make things better, they’re going to stick with what they have, whether that “what” is a check or a President. Obama didn’t win by convincing people that his policies were better, he just convinced them that Romney would take them back to some mythical “worse”.