Republicans Like Obama's Ideas Better When They Think They're Donald Trump's

[GennGreymane]

Doubt I'd have any more luck. In the video I watched, they went around to randomers and read quotes from Obama, McCain, Palin, etc, and asked them to name who said it.

The issue with the video is, they fit a narrative to get views. They can do this more easily than polls since they can pick and choose. Like I said a bit earlier, I never give random street interviews weight.

[Stop Pretending]

Doubt I'd have any more luck. In the video I watched, they went around to randomers and read quotes from Obama, McCain, Palin, etc, and asked them to name who said it.

It was Jimmy Kimmel who did it. I found a Stern article ( linked above ), talking about the Kimmel skit.

- - - Updated - - -

The issue with the video is, they fit a narrative to get views. They can do this more easily than polls since they can pick and choose. Like I said a bit earlier, I never give random street interviews weight.

I don't think many people do, but it fits with the narrative that stupid people are easily swayed by changing a person's name.

[Dispraise]

The issue with the video is, they fit a narrative to get views. They can do this more easily than polls since they can pick and choose. Like I said a bit earlier, I never give random street interviews weight.

The one I saw wasn't the one linked, but it was random street interviews. And yeah, I got a chuckle from it, but it wasn't anything more than a comedy bit specifically edited to make people look stupid.

It was Jimmy Kimmel who did it. I found a Stern article ( linked above ), talking about the Kimmel skit.

Not the one I saw, but similar enough.

[GennGreymane]

It was Jimmy Kimmel who did it. I found a Stern article ( linked above ), talking about the Kimmel skit.

To me its irrelevant who does it. They do it to sell a story and prove a point. They can ask 1000 people and use 5 who they think will get them more of a reaction the other 995 could be the opposite of what they show. Polls tend not to be like this, while some do, most polls end up telling the same story or similar story, very rarly being drastic from one another since they require pools much larger.

[Eldar45]

Am I the only one that actually read the article? It says both side are doing that.

Basically we've got the same problem in the political spectrum as we do in the racial spectrum, in that people are raised to believe that only a certain group of people is good and right, and the other group is evil.

I'm a mostly right winged moderate, and I actually try to formulate my own opinions based on what I know.

[Deleted]

This same exact thing happened with Obama during his first election bid. I forget who it was, but they were telling people on the street Obama's platform, but it was actually McCains. When told who's platform, they were mad they were lied to, or made to look like a fool. So it happens on both sides.

Doesn't surprise me, a lot of people vote for a party / person without really knowing much about them aside from if they are democrat/republican labour/Tory etc.
The same would happen in this country if you quizzed people about labour / Tory policies.

[The Penguin]

HuffPost is back to covering Trump on their politics page now?

Arianna Huffington must be privately fuming. She should call the Clintons up. I'm sure Bill would be happy to console her and Hillary.

[Primalthirst]

I feel like politics would be much more reasonable if all you had to go on in the polling booth was:
Anonymous Candidate #1
Anonymous Candidate #2
etc
With a few paragraphs about their policies for each candidate. Strip away all the marketing hype and focus on the issues.

[Kokolums]

I think almost everyone who follows politics in the slightest understands that lots of voters are voting strict party lines, or for the person and not the policy. This news article doesn't tell us anything we don't already know.

[Merope]

This same exact thing happened with Obama during his first election bid. I forget who it was, but they were telling people on the street Obama's platform, but it was actually McCains. When told who's platform, they were mad they were lied to, or made to look like a fool. So it happens on both sides.

I was just thinking about this. I want to say it was one of the Jay Leno jaywalks, but I can't recall.

[Blur4stuff]

"gotcha" stuff like this is amusing, but not very accurate. different people can produce drastically different outcomes implementing the same idea.

people simply don't trust certain others to do a good job no matter what the policy is

[Wells]

"gotcha" stuff like this is amusing, but not very accurate. different people can produce drastically different outcomes implementing the same idea.

people simply don't trust certain others to do a good job no matter what the policy is

A program or idea's merits don't change just because someone else said them.

[Selastan]

I think almost everyone who follows politics in the slightest understands that lots of voters are voting strict party lines, or for the person and not the policy. This news article doesn't tell us anything we don't already know.

That is a big reason why I support Trump. He might actually do something himself rather than what the party tells him to do. Might.

[Elhaym]

That is a big reason why I support Trump. He might actually do something himself rather than what the party tells him to do. Might.

I'm having a hard time understanding what's wrong with people. Lets say a hypothetical guy is a business man who has had multiple businesses go bankrupt over the course of his career. In the case of one bankruptcy, he left the company to fend for itself and then sued them to have his name removed from their company. He sued his own bankrupt company to remove his name. Now, imagine this hypothetical guy is running for president of the united states and his name is Ronald Stump. Would you vote for him?

Well enjoy your completely retarded presidential candidate cuz that's who you like.

[Selastan]

I'm having a hard time understanding what's wrong with people. Lets say a hypothetical guy is a business man who has had multiple businesses go bankrupt over the course of his career. In the case of one bankruptcy, he left the company to fend for itself and then sued them to have his name removed from their company. He sued his own bankrupt company to remove his name. Now, imagine this hypothetical guy is running for president of the united states and his name is Ronald Stump. Would you vote for him?

Well enjoy you're completely retarded presidential candidate cuz that's who you like.

Without going too far off-topic, I would say that the average American, even I, have NO IDEA how business that big works. What I do know that Trump is still pretty rich after all of that. So calling him a bad presidential candidate because a few business he ran went under (note that even the great American car manufacturers even accepted bailout) is kind of an uninformed decision. Its presented by the media in a way to attack him, much like how they present his insults to specific people and make it sound like he is degrading everyone who ever lived.

[Only the Best]

I'm having a hard time understanding what's wrong with people. Lets say a hypothetical guy is a business man who has had multiple businesses go bankrupt over the course of his career. In the case of one bankruptcy, he left the company to fend for itself and then sued them to have his name removed from their company. He sued his own bankrupt company to remove his name. Now, imagine this hypothetical guy is running for president of the united states and his name is Ronald Stump. Would you vote for him?

I know you weren't responding to me, but I absolutely would vote for a guy like that, because then the country might truly hit rock bottom and we can actually get some actual change with regard to the political system. Bush was the most god-awful President in history, but even he wasn't quite bad enough for there to be real change after him. What we need is an even bigger disaster than Bush to wake people the fuck up and demand that there be significant changes to the system. I'm happy to pay the short-term price for the gains we'd get in the long term.

But if you are satisfied with the Obama-style "hope and change", I can understand why you want to preserve the status quo and vote for someone else.

[Healing Rain]

Just because Obamacare is unconstitutional and a terrible law does not mean that every idea Obama has is bad.

[Calfredd]

Just because Obamacare is unconstitutional and a terrible law does not mean that every idea Obama has is bad.

If it was unconstitutional, it couldn't be passed.

[Kokolums]

A program or idea's merits don't change just because someone else said them.

That's not what he said. He said different people implementing the same idea can get different results, not that the idea changes because someone else said them.

- - - Updated - - -

If it was unconstitutional, it couldn't be passed.

Unconstitutional laws CAN be passed. The supreme court can strike them down though!

[Demona3]

If it was unconstitutional, it couldn't be passed.

Hmmm... Obama has different ideas.

https://www.committeeforjustice.org/...administration