I saw this too and haven't mentioned it yet because it seems like it would be way too obvious, but as arrogant as our current administration is it really wouldn't suprise me.
Hard to pull too much truth from that...it's not a news article, it's an editorial from the editorial page of the Washington Examiner. He sprinkles some facts in there, but nothing that I would say points authoritatively to a conspiracy. The "Auto Prophet" mentioned in the article does a good job of explaining what we're seeing, I think.
It's interesting, I guess. I mean, if you look at the total number of dealerships against the total number that contributed to republics (and this is an assumption) I'm guessing that it's approximately comparable, percentage-wise. Regardless of your opinion on Obama, he's a smart guy who knows how to work a crowd. I'd like to think that if he were going to close targeted dealerships down, he'd do it in a much more clever way. Bad PR is something that he could easily avoid by doing this through shadow tax agencies.
The hype kind of proves the point, though. There is incredible hype surrounding him because he created it. He's incredibly charismatic.
and that means exactly nothing when it comes to the success of running a country. it just means that people will get excited about what he says regardless of if it is a good plan or a poor one.
I agree, what I'm saying is, he has the ability to cover this up or do it in a much more indirect manner. He's very PR-minded, for good or for bad, I feel like if he wanted to do this intentionally, he would have found another way.
Agreed. the phenomenon I'm talking about is usually chalked up to a transitional leader taking power. It carries with it the possibility of the concept called group-think, which is psychologically defined as people in a social group following similar patterns at the risk of ostracism if the patterns are not followed. Group-think is incredibly dangerous, because it usually creates a situation where the leader's actions are not questioned or really paid attention to. It will take another transitional leader or a royal screw-up to break the trend.
Agreed. the phenomenon I'm talking about is usually chalked up to a transitional leader taking power. It carries with it the possibility of the concept called group-think, which is psychologically defined as people in a social group following similar patterns at the risk of ostracism if the patterns are not followed. Group-think is incredibly dangerous, because it usually creates a situation where the leader's actions are not questioned or really paid attention to. It will take another transitional leader or a royal screw-up to break the trend.
True, but if this was really group think, President Obama wouldn't have the lowest approval rating of any president in the last 25-30 years at this point in their presidency.
Yeah, but I don't think it's terribly fair to judge him just yet. I liked him, though I didn't vote for him. I still want to see what he'll do a year or so down the line.
Although, I didn't address this, you do make an excellent point about approval ratings.
a government that owns 72.5% of an automaker, sounds a hell of a lot like socialism to me doesnt it? how long until all car sales are gone, taxes go through the roof and every is issued a 10 hp car, and existing cars are confiscated?
The hype kind of proves the point, though. There is incredible hype surrounding him because he created it. He's incredibly charismatic.
and that means exactly nothing when it comes to the success of running a country. it just means that people will get excited about what he says regardless of if it is a good plan or a poor one.
The conundrum here - a really this issue is a microcosom of this entire thread throughout it's history - is that you and I (and lots of other people on this thread) are going to have very different ideas about what it means to be "successful" in running a country.
The hype kind of proves the point, though. There is incredible hype surrounding him because he created it. He's incredibly charismatic.
and that means exactly nothing when it comes to the success of running a country. it just means that people will get excited about what he says regardless of if it is a good plan or a poor one.
The conundrum here - a really this issue is a microcosom of this entire thread throughout it's history - is that you and I (and lots of other people on this thread) are going to have very different ideas about what it means to be "successful" in running a country.
Yea, but if you want to see what happens when liberalism "successfully" runs an entire government, just look at the state of the economy in California. It's like a glimpse into our nations future.
The hype kind of proves the point, though. There is incredible hype surrounding him because he created it. He's incredibly charismatic.
and that means exactly nothing when it comes to the success of running a country. it just means that people will get excited about what he says regardless of if it is a good plan or a poor one.
The conundrum here - a really this issue is a microcosom of this entire thread throughout it's history - is that you and I (and lots of other people on this thread) are going to have very different ideas about what it means to be "successful" in running a country.
Yea, but if you want to see what happens when liberalism "successfully" runs an entire government, just look at the state of the economy in California. It's like a glimpse into our nations future.
The hype kind of proves the point, though. There is incredible hype surrounding him because he created it. He's incredibly charismatic.
and that means exactly nothing when it comes to the success of running a country. it just means that people will get excited about what he says regardless of if it is a good plan or a poor one.
The conundrum here - a really this issue is a microcosom of this entire thread throughout it's history - is that you and I (and lots of other people on this thread) are going to have very different ideas about what it means to be "successful" in running a country.
Yea, but if you want to see what happens when liberalism "successfully" runs an entire government, just look at the state of the economy in California. It's like a glimpse into our nations future.
dont forget detroit.
Exactly! If liberalism worked, California would be the richest and most prosperous state in the country. But instead, they are in the crapper and Texas, one of the most conservative states, has a strong healthy economy and one of the lowest poverty rates and one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country. Hmmm... How did that happen if socialism is so freakin great??
Comments