All of what I said is true.
It is not "despicable" to refer to the disaffected coalition pandering candidates typically fielded by the liberal Dems as "socialists". They, by nature, present many rescue planks in their platform to appeal to the many "disaffected" groups, rescue planks that are intrinsically socialist.
I presented the kind of President the people need to elect, that, rather, the GOP needs to field, a candidate that is, obiously, not a disaffected coalition rescue candidate.
Your possible projection or transference that I'm an Obama-hater is false.
The rescue candidate socialist aspects of both Kerry and Gore were also quite obvious, and, thus obviously, they would not have been able to prevent The Great Recesssion, and would merely have hastened in all likelihood.
Obama won handly in 2008 because he was clearly a socialistic rescue candidate (Obamacare and ludicrous amnesty for 20 million illegals obvious indications) and because his skin was black, making him a hugely idealistically appealing candidate to the disaffected masses. Clearly, all such candidates do is make matters far worse.
The desired candidate I described in my previous post is far different from Obama, Kerry, and Gore and he is far different from Bush, McCain and Romney, and all six of these people I just listed could not have helped but bring America down.
We can do better.