Supporting Obama - Emotion or Logic? »
Posted By Spinward 1 year, 4 months ago in News
The emotional reasons for following Obama on this journey are many, but unfortunately, the logical ones are few. If we examine beyond the great speeches and grand platitudes, we find that his positions are not as savory as many of us would prefer and some of them are downright silly.
Read Full Story at spinwardslanding.blogspot.com »
1653 Views Share Story 50 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Spinward
As a U.S. Marine, I have a deep love for my country. As a world traveller, I have a respect for other cultures and ...
Other Related Articles: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 169 of 172 Comments (view all)
-
35%
Wolfie20071 year, 4 months ago
-
SpinwardComment removed: Spam22 Replies
-
-
39%
Spinward1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am shocked by the "lack of information" owned by Obama supporters.
Reply
When asked why they support him, most have VERY ambiguous responses... hope... change... feel good... like him.
Do the understand his tax policies? No.
Do they support his left-of-left position on abortion? No.
Do they imagine how he will pay for "free health care for all?" No.
I believe that the support is sheer emotion... and like any relationship, there should be some sound reasoning behind it or it's pretty much doomed.-
48%
buckncindykill1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Doomed you say Spin? Well, you're absolutely right. Fox news went out on the streets of Denver last night to interview young Obama supporters. The results were predictable. When asked to name any Obama accomplishments ... they couldn't. One said "Ahhh ... the children ... well ..." Then these kids were asked why they supported Obama in the first place. Well, he's young, he has a nice voice, he's handsome and he is a good performer. Remember ... as the Fox reporter said, the only vote many of these kids have ever cast was for American Idol.
Reply -
50%
pc251 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have posted this before and I will post it again. I work in the entertainment industry and after thousands of hours, if not tens of thousands of hours spent in control rooms, editing suites, and stages Obama is one of the most consummate performers I have ever seen. He is an extremely media savvy candidate and his campaign is run by people who are equally just as savvy. When he is on point his message of HOPE an CHANGE is an extremely emotional one and it is designed to elicit the maximum emotional response. He also happens to deliver it extremely well. A very charismatic figure with a million dollar smile, an impressive resonant speaking voice, impeccably attired. The GQ CANDIDATE. I sat in amazement during the Democratic debates and was literally in awe of his performances. He knows how to play to a television camera. He is acutely aware of what camera was live and he posed and gestured perfectly for maximum effect. When they switched to another camera he was aware of it and again played to that camera perfectly changing his pose, posture, facial expressions etc. He is extremely effective in delivering his message and I can see how people are impressed by him. I also see the performance aspect of it having been in the business for many years. I can see that it is an empty and hollow message, devoid of all substance, but delivered well. It sounds good, and looks great but as that old commercial used to say "where's the beef?' I have to give him his props though the guy is smooth but in the end his message and persona is designed to affect the maximum EMOTIONAL response from people.
Reply -
100%
willottica1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spin, I've seen countless members say why they support him. I've yet to see any show of support for McCain other than a deflection of "He's not Obama". Are you sure you're not emotionally clouded on this?
Reply
Without bringing Obama into it, can you tell us why you support McCain?
-
-
38%
Nixie1 year, 4 months ago
-
41%
White_Knight1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's how I see it.
Reply
I have very logical reasons to vote for McCain, but Obama seems like, after all of the grandiose speeches, that he is an empty suit.
Anyone can come in and make promises of the planet healing itself, but that doesn't seem well grounded and people who buy into it are not basing their decisions logically. -
47%
buckncindykill1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here are the results from Frank Lutz's focus groups of what people thought of Obama, John McCain and the Bush presidency.
Reply
* Obama: apocalypse, terrifying, scary, pizzazz, unknown, inexperienced, innovative, new, charismatic, smooth, unaffordable, change, hopeful.
* McCain: dependable, strong, experienced, scary, patriot, veteran, experienced, Bush Two, veteran, older generation, little boy, integrity, frightening, honest, older, cantankerous, repeat.
* Bush: self-centered, disciplined, unreliable, disappointing, conventional, dishonest, idiot, crook, nightmare, felon, self-assured, irresponsible.
It looks like they're really going to need to come up with some more buzz words and phrases. Wouldn't it be nice, though, if we were to campaign on substance instead of trying to trigger reactions with words? What all of this really does is show the shallowness of the American voter.
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
71%
Lurch1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A vote for McCain is a very emotional vote, there is not an ounce of logic to it. The guy has absolutely no judgment, no morals, an economic agenda that will just continue our slide toward the toilet, and no solutions whatsoever. Just stay the course.
Reply
The guy has more waffles than an IHOP. He is going to raise my taxes more than Obama, and he lies like he breathes - wheezing.
He is over the hill and senile. He is out of control and cannot even tie his own shoes without his aides help.
The only reason the powers that be want him is that he will be as easy to manipulate as Dubya has been. Meaning more counterproductive and unnecessary war. More showboating, cowboying and rushing America into a two-bit has-been empire.
McCain will raise taxes because he has to. He has zero plan to fund his extravagant spend, spend, spend agenda. McCain will continue the Republican agenda of transferring wealth from the working class to the trust-fund class.
McCain wants to continue taking rights and power from the people and giving it to politicians and political appointees. And if McCain is elected, expect more anti-american, anti-liberty activism on the supreme court.
Unless you are in the top 3% of all Americans in terms of wealth, there is no logical reason to vote for McCain. None.
The logical reason to vote for Obama is easy, he cannot be as bad as four more years of 95% Bush. America cannot afford four more years of another spend, spend, spend and mortgage, mortgage, mortgage our future neocon. -
hefaa1Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
78%
nostalgia1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Emory University did a study on this very subject
Reply
You might find the results interesting
Emory Study Lights Up The Political Brain
The investigators used functional neuroimaging (fMRI) to study a sample of committed Democrats and Republicans during the three months prior to the U.S. Presidential election of 2004. The Democrats and Republicans were given a reasoning task in which they had to evaluate threatening information about their own candidate. During the task, the subjects underwent fMRI to see what parts of their brain were active. What the researchers found was striking.
"We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," says Drew Westen, director of clinical psychology at Emory who led the study. "What we saw instead was a network of emotion circuits lighting up, including circuits hypothesized to be involved in regulating emotion, and circuits known to be involved in resolving conflicts."
Once partisans had come to completely biased conclusions -- essentially finding ways to ignore information that could not be rationally discounted -- not only did circuits that mediate negative emotions like sadness and disgust turn off, but subjects got a blast of activation in circuits involved in reward -- similar to what addicts receive when they get their fix, Westen explains.
"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged," says Westen. "Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones."
Partisans denied obvious contradictions for their own candidate that they had no difficulty detecting in the opposing candidate.
Notably absent were any increases in activation of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain most associated with reasoning (as well as conscious efforts to suppress emotion). The finding suggests that the emotion-driven processes that lead to biased judgments likely occur outside of awareness, and are distinct from normal reasoning processes when emotion is not so heavily engaged, says Westen.
"Everyone from executives and judges to scientists and politicians may reason to emotionally biased judgments when they have a vested interest in how to interpret 'the facts,' " Westen says.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060131092225.htm
It looks like this happens with extreme partisans on both sides
Might explain why the attacks on Propeller become so vicious - the more partisan you are the more you make political decisions emotionally-
corl64Comment removed: Spam
-
-
-
38%
dandt16121 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One of the delegates said last night, she is even more sure now after Hillary's speech that the Democrats have picked the WRONG candidate. This lady can not support Obama because she doesn't believe in him. He's ALL FLUFF like a marshmellow.
Reply-
56%
corl641 year, 4 months ago
-
fuzzy1967Comment removed: Spammer
-
-
29%
bigurn1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spinward, nice job!
Reply
I think you posted an outstanding synopsis of the effect of tax changes on tax revenues. Is there any chance you could expand on the other ideas as much as you did on taxes? I know that would make a much longer read, but I'd like to see it.
Nice, nice, job. -
90%
Bkumm1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can't help but wonder what would happen if great Americans like Spinward understood what was being done to them. His submission, while interesting, is an emotional appeal about an emotional appeal.
Reply
I say that because, while it may not appear to be on the face of it, any appeal to the American people about taxes IS emotional, because most people simply don't understand what's going on.
Senator Obama is talking about raising taxes on individuals making in excess of $250,000 per annum. He is not talking about raising taxes (in fact he is discussing tax credits for) small businesses, which provide the majority of jobs in the United States.
While you are correct that there was a growth in Federal tax revenue over the period from 2002 - 2007 this increase was not due, in the main, to personal income growth as you suggest. This increase was primarily due to an increase in corporate profits and a restructuring of how the numbers were run by the OMB.
So, to be clear, the evidence that you provide does not have much to do with individual Americans. While the facts are true, at least in the case of taxes, the whole truth is not there. If we continue down the path of letting ourselves be misled then we deserve what we get.
Here's a good resource:
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf
I am not suggesting in any way that Democrats and Liberals do not use this same technique, but its wrong when they do it too.-
38%
simonsez1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
$250,00 is no measurement of wealth ... you can barely get by in New York or San Fransisco on that amount. It also grabs most of the small business owners.
Reply
Small business owners pay a lot of other things besides income taxes that support government at every level. Unemployment, FICA (both sides for themselves), Medicare/Medicaid, flood insurance whether they need it or not.
You cannot tax your way to prosperity. Capital gains increases will actually decrease income for the government and Obama seems to know this.
-
-
67%
ConsAreNonGrata1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cons, are one to talk about emotion versus logic.
Reply
They were more than happy to send our kids to die in Iraq based on emotion.
Cons, said "EVERYONE said Saddam had WMDs!!!" Really? Then why the need for unilateral action?
Why couldn't Bush present PROOF? Because there was none. And everyone knew it.
Just duct tape your windows and hide under your beds, Cons. Better yet duct tape your mouths. Your Culture of Lies and Incompetence has done enough to destroy this nation. The only question left is if we can clean up your mess this time around.-
40%
StillUnashamed1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"They were more than happy to send our kids to die in Iraq based on emotion."
Reply
Every military person who went to Iraq and/or Afghanistan VOLUNTEERED. The U.S. has an all-volunteer army/military. No one was forced to go against their will (unlike Vietnam where the draft was still in effect).
"Cons, said "EVERYONE said Saddam had WMDs!!!" Really? Then why the need for unilateral action?"
It was in no way unilateral! Check your facts. And as to the non-existance of WMDs, how would we have known they did not exit contrary to all the intellegence collected by several different agencies if the U.S. AND OTHER NATIONS not gone in?
You also assume WMDs were the only reason for the war. WRONG, it was one of many reasons, and even without WMDs the war was justified, or would you rather the Butcher of Bagdag was still in power?
-
-
44%
simonsez1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no question Hillary has grown in stature and character since this campaign started. I was one that despised her in the beginning, mainly because she did seem to think the Presidency was her destiny regardless of how we felt about it..
Reply
She displayed depth last night that Obama doesn't possess and there is no question she would be the best candidate for the Democrat Party to support. I've actually grown to like her to some degree, but now I also respect her on her own terms. Excellent speech.-
-
50%
corl641 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If she would have won the nomination, I was considering voting for her. I have always voted republican, but McCain is not the best man they could put out there. If it were Hillary against McCain, I think she would have got my vote.
Reply -
OldoneComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
67%
hamy1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
But I don't understand. You fools elected Bush based purely on emotion. He had no track record to speak of. His governing record in Texas was spotty at best. His business record was even worse.
Reply
You elected him because of his name and because you could drink a beer with him.
How's that working out for ya?-
-
75%
jimdoze1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"How's that working out for ya?"
Reply
Frankly, it has worked out reasonably well... in fact, very well, considering the foreign policy disasters that Gore or Kerry would have been. Thank You.
There are a few things I might have changed at the margins... but, we all know that hindsight is 20-20.
-
-
SimplicitasComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
RIChrisComment removed: Retracted by user
-
33%
charles11111111 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I know that Obama is being attacked personally, however I can't vote for him because he is too much of an unkown quantity. He doesn't have enough of a track record for any of us to see success in any of his policies. However, if I were McCain, I would offer Obama a high level governement positiion (perhaps something in foreign affairs) so that he can gain management experience and show the rest of us what sorts of decisions he makes under pressure. Before electing him to the most important and influential office in the world, he needs to gain some high pressure experience in world level political management and then maybe run again in 4 or 8 years.
Reply-
-
100%
Lurch1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I were Obama, I would make this a character issue.
Reply
Obama definitely has the better character, morals, ethics. Look at their records.
Obama:
Self-made man who is living the American Dream of hard work equals success. He was on food-assistance as a child and now here he is the Dem candidate for Prez. No handouts, no entitlements, no legacy appointments, no Daddy`s connections or family name. No marriage into mafia money or connections.
When Obama left Harvard Law as magna *** laude and after being elected Harvard Law Review Editor by his peers, Obama had the choice of any judicial appointment or a job at any law firm in the country. Instead, he chose to join a faith-based community group serving under-represented neighborhoods in South Chicago.
McCain:
Legacy academy who graduated at the bottom of his class, crashed more planes than anybody else but still kept wings due to Dad/Grandad legacy. Nevermind McCain`s behavior as a POW, that can be forgiven because many of us would probably have done the same. However, when McCain came back he immediately went whooring around til he found his money ticket. He dumped his wife and mother of three for the money. He then used his father-in-law`s money and connections to start in politics. McCain has never done anything on his own or earned his way without Daddy`s connections, money, and reputation. The guy absolutely did not need a dime, but he still managed to rob the people in Keating Five. His weakness for adultery came back to haunt him at least once when he had the affair with Vicki Iseman and interfered with the FCC ruling on behalf of her employer. Since then he has flipped on torture, taxes, and just about everything important as a CinC.
McCain has the opportunity and was ripe in 2000. Now, it`s too late. He is more dangerous and reckless now than Bush was in 2000. McCain lacks the judgment necessary to be president and he is going senile as evidenced by his mountain of gaffes over the simple (# of houses and what kind of car he drives) to the deadly serious (who are Sunnis and Shiites, mixing up Iran and AQ, blowing his temper on Georgia before all facts in, etc). McCain was right about eight years ago, but now he is just a shell of his former self.
Obama is intelligent and wise beyond his years. He will make a great president. -
100%
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Charles1111111, I can't pos your comment; you are an unknown quantity.
Reply
True, I could just read your paragraph and decide if I approve of your words, but that would take effort of study, and how do I know you meant them?
I will wait till I feel I know what you are going to say before you say it; give it a year or three.
As for Obama; it is true he has a led a sheltered existence in American politics, without any pressure at al at all at all. He should practice being president first; maybe lead a book club or something, and gradualy work up to something with nuclear launch codes.
But McCain ought to practice 4 or 8 years more too; he seems kinda slack, like someone who has spent too long letting other people pay the bills.
-
-
100%
diogenes21st1 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There have been at least three posts on here recently citing the idea that emotion trumps logic if anyone disagrees with the author. But simply saying something you disagree with isn’t logic (and something you agree with is) is a non-intellectual shortcut to justify your beliefs.
Reply
Like the word Theory, many folks don’t really understand – or seem to want to understand – what the word Logic means. Theory they define as “a guess or opinion” on something (hence their utter inability to understand why Evolution, Big Bang, Global Warming, etc. are not “hunches” or “biases” but rather ideas and explanations built on thousands and thousands of verifiable facts, just like Gravity, Atomic and both types of Relativity). Likewise, they believe logic to mean anything that makes sense to them as individuals, not a well-constructed line of argument built on, yes here it comes again, facts.
Notice what these two things have in common: the need to understand and value facts. “Facts are stupid things.” Ronald Reagan said at the 1988 Republican Convention, and this blatant disrespect for evidence and logic is the guiding principle behind so many bad ideas.
Before anyone posts any more emotion vs. logic treatises, he or she should consult a dictionary. Look up “logic” and its hard-working servants: fact, evidence, theory, ad hominem, straw man, reductio ad absurdum, solipsism, post hoc ergo propter hoc, teleological argument, and more.
Those who do not wish to master Logic are the ones prone to resorting to emotion, which I might point out, although a perfectly natural human means of experiencing the world can also be the bread and butter of selling so many failed ideas (tax cuts for the rich are good because you might be rich one day; give up your rights because you are afraid of the boogeyman of the day; illegal immigrants are stealing your jobs, tax money, daughters, language, etc; liberals are baby-killing America-hating fellow-traveling pansies; and so on).
To look around you at what we’ve made over the past 30 years for ourselves, our families, our fellow citizens of America and the world and believe that the architecture of these failed ideas has not constructed something that has totally collapsed is, frankly, to apply emotion (what I want) over fact (what is).
To be sure, emotional argument is about what I wish and want to believe (tax cuts for the rich help everyone), to feel (America is the greatest nation on Earth), to experience (Bring it On! And kick some ass!). It doesn’t mean out-of-hand that you’re necessarily wrong, but it sure as hell doesn’t prove you’re right. Logic is about putting that aside to make a rational and well-reasoned judgment. You simply don’t get to redefine words unchallenged, especially not words as important as Logic and Fact. -
-
OldoneComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
0%
Georgia501 year, 4 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can't blame Dems for voting for O because they don't want McCain. I voted for Bush because of the alternatives, not because I liked Bush.
Reply
As Thomas Sowell says, the difference may come down to who is more likely to let Iran arm terrorists with nukes. Per Sowell, that makes McCain the clear choice.
My problem is that I can't get over the McCain campaign basically telling me to stay home on election day. When they said they would not "pander" to the conservative right, that's exactly what I heard them say, and I want them to suffer the consequences of saying it.
But I admit...Sowell's words have hang time.
More News
LA Times
UCLA study says legalizing undocumented immigrants would help the economy
Federal judge wants Prop. 8 trial shown to the public
Obama favors 'Cadillac tax' for healthcare
Northern Ireland's largest Protestant militia surrenders weapons
GOP senators voice reservations about TSA nominee Erroll Southers
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.