Has Obama really been that bad?
 

I only ask this question because its obvious by now that we are gonna have another 4 years of him.

his biggest problem is he isn't a good leader, he blames his failures on others and takes credit for the success of others.

He continually blames the GOP for him not getting things done, a good leader would have worked with them

he took credit for Osamas killing, a good leader would have praised the troops and stood in the shadows

But we're really lacking in gop offers to run against him

if you don't know the definition of 'signature strike' than you should look it up

and another political thread was born...

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...ag50CX_7g03vAe

Jesus, you really have a hard time facing reality.

Well said. No matter the outcome of the election, we're not likely to have a great president next year.

Obama's first two years, his party controlled the congress as well, both house and senate. It's pretty weak to blame the other side when you're in complete control.

How bad have the effects been? Unemployment nearly doubled, the deficit more than doubled. Pretty bad. The economy wasn't growing very fast for Bush's last couple of years, but it's really taken a nose dive under Obama.

On the republican side, nobody to get excited about. Ron Paul seems a bit nutty though he could hardly do worse, Gingrich is knowledgeable, but definitely an experienced politician.

You mean like the reality that he represents the american people and not just the democrat party?

As an obama supporter I have to admit I'm pretty disappointed. I think he could have done more to fix the financial meltdown so it doesn't happen again. But the fact remains he has been pretty good as commander and chief. And if he could get us out of afgan I would be very satisfied there. As far as jobs go. I propose that things could have been much worse. What if he lets detroit collapse? How many more jobs would be lost. Not just GM but all the suppliers and other businesses related to their cars. So no I don't think he has been that bad. I'm also disappointed with healthcare reform. He campaigned on a single payer option and also the fact is 25% of healthcare costs are overhead. You can get that down to 5% by
1) Nationalized Electronic Billing.
2) Single Billing System
so I think that was a major gift to the healthcare industry and insurance industry.
But its a tough metric. How bad could things really been. Lets think back to the great depression and the do nothing policies of the right back then.

democrats controlled the house and senate and were about as organized as a heard of cats

The republicans just haven't had anyone stick out as a true leader. The press will attack anyone that sticks out early in the GOP, thats how they work. Gingrich worked pretty well under a democratic president and the result was a balanced budget, but having the internet bubble probably helped that along.
But republicans have been battling the press for decades, soon as some right wing broadcaster pops up, the left politicians send letters to their bosses to try and get them fired.
All a big game, the people in the middle are waking up, but what can they do, the deck is stacked and the politicians have proven they don't have to follow the rules as they were meant to be followed. They just say well they did it, so I can do it, my answer is, were does that make it right?

TARP was Bush, not Obama, but according to Obama, most has been paid back, nice when you can get funds with no interest to recue your business.

He should have focused on the economy before tackling healthcare, his stimulus only created government jobs that cost the US private sector jobs, it was not well thought out

When more than one GOP leader has stated that their one goal is to ensure that he is a one term President it would seem to me that it becomes more than difficult to "work with them".

He took credit for giving the marching orders to the troops to carry out the mission to kill Osama and rightfully so as without his orders/leadership their would not have been a mission. I have heard him praise the troops repeatedly.

As to the OP...he has not been that bad...as long as one thinks that adding more than a trillion dollars per year to the National Debt is not that bad.

As for the Republican field...in my opinion...they do not have anyone in the field that would be helpful to the betterment of the country...so once again it comes down to the lesser of the two "evils"...or cast your vote for one of the other fifty parties that exist in the U.S.

I love how people go on and on blaming Obama for the economy... What happened in 2008 was not the start of a regular recession which can take a year or two to get out of.. It was a world wide financial disaster.. That takes years to work you're way out of.. Anyone that thinks otherwise is just delusional.

And yes... Other countries rebounded more quickly.. But that's because they have a more sound financial system in place in the first place. To fix the US system will take a lot of changes which are near impossible given one party doesn't want to regulate etc and is pretty much responsible for what happened in the first place.

Obama isn't perfect... But then again, none of them ever are.

Paaalleease .... filibusters anyone?


http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/ref...tureCounts.htm

The problem is Obama and all of the Little Obamas in Congress.

The one-two punch has delivered the worst economy in our nation's history.

He will probably win as the economy has rebounded and we are growing again. He has one more year to just sit back and do nothing. Employment etc will all get better and he will get the credit.
My understanding is that the raid on Osama was his call in the end. And it was pretty risky as we did not have perfect intel. He also bombed that Al Queida american guy. Not sure i support that but it was also gutsy. He just needs to use some of that on US internal issues. He caves to the party line to easily. The Republicans are so fucked up that it is hard to get deals done which doesn;t help.

Idiot,

Recessions don't happen over night. He was handed one of the worst economys and expected it fix it in 4 years, will not and won't happen. I'm not saying Obama is perfect or good by any means but putting the sole blame on him is stupidity.

This is what conservative values gets us....

Just look at President Reagan, he basically bankrupted us, knocking our economy and country back decades, he alone setup us to fail in the future and then his Hollywood trash flair allowed for moron criminals like Bush and one-two punchers like Obama to become President, all to continue the conservative deconstruction and destructive agenda of America.

It's nice to see Americans waking up to these evil bastards though... ie: the occupy movement

He was handed a slowly growing economy. Look it up. Growth sucked on 2007 - 2008, but it was growth. Obama's historic deficit spending turned slow growth into a nosedive.

To put it in porn terms, he turned Fran Drescher (not that hot, but a chick) into Danny DeVito (puke).

So the point of that chart is that Bush had to deal with more filibusters than Obama?

I tend to be Apolitical and I really don't give a shit. It's just the lesser of two evils at this point; It's business as usual in Washington. If anyone thinks McCain Palin could have done better, well, I think they are fooling themselves. I honestly believe the Republicans threw away the last election, and I was surprised it was as close as it was.

With that said, I wish Obama showed more leadership. He needs to be louder and more forceful. He's shining moment was getting Bin Laden - at least he had balls to do that.

People don't seem to understand the position we are in. This isn't a four year problem; It's a ten year problem. Obama wasn't / isn't our savior. He cant' fix this in four years.

As for the next election... I think it's gonna be Mitt vs Obama. And I think Obama is gonna win. But what do I know? I'm just an observer.

If you listen to his speech, he used the word "I" a lot, sorry, a good leader what ever his involvement should have stepped back and gave the spotlight to the troops that risked their lives and not let it be about political gain

Yes he was handed a bad economy, I wasn't putting the blame of the start of the recession on him and never have. I think the stimulus could have worked if done right, instead it grew the government ranks.

Instead of focusing on jobs, he focused on his agenda and the stimulus which was job one to create jobs , wasn't ran very well, "five programs accounted for more than 80% of the outlays from ARRA in 2009: Medicaid, unemployment compensation, Social Security... grants to state and local governments... and student aid."

In other words, what was labeled a "stimulus" bill was actually a stimulus to government transfer payments not creating jobs, getting people working and adding to the tax base would have greatly improved the US's economy by now

There has been slow growth during the present administration.

After Reagan, we didn't see bad unemployment numbers like the ones we have now.

most of that growth was false built on toxic loans, etc which hit the fan big time in the last quarter of 2008..america produces debt, not much else anymore and no president is going to be able to fix that.

Where are you getting your information from? President Bush inherited a budget surplus, cut taxes, growing the deficit to $400 billion a year. Then, the economy boomed between 2005 and 2008, reducing the deficit to $200 billion a year. Then, the financial crisis hit, and the Bush deficit ballooned to $400 billion again. President Bush actually increased federal spending by more than 2X as much as Obama has. So it is unfair to lay the explosion in spending at the feet of President Obama: Both presidents are responsible. President Obama took over amid the worst recession since the Great Depression.


http://i39.tinypic.com/11ts86a.jpg
http://i42.tinypic.com/k1azgx.png
http://i42.tinypic.com/1180tp1.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ebt.2C_and_GDP

I think you are a little off here.

Here are the numbers for the GDP growth/shrink in 2008/2009.

2008
Q1: -.7%
Q2:+1.3%
Q3:-4.0%
Q4:-8.9%

2009
Q1: -6.7%
Q2: -.7%
Q3:+1.6%
Q4:+3.8%

This information comes from here. Obama took office at the end of January 2009 so he was there for 2 months of Q1 of 2009. By the end of his first year the GDP was growing again and has been positive ever since.

I'm not saying he has done a great job, I have been pretty disappointed in him for a number of reasons, but to say that he was handing a slowly growing economy and crashed it simply not accurate.

Here is another graph showing the GDP growth and or shrink
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2010/...012810.top.gif

Obamas biggest thing is he flipped on a lot of campaign promises. Show me a recent president who hasn't.

He also pretty much fails in transparency. Remember how he was going to shake up Washington with transparency?

He also caves too much to pressure so he can try to look like a good guy. You can't always be liked as President.

I don't think he is anywhere near as bad as some people here like to make him out to be.

I thought that there's been growth for over 2 years now, Q3 2009 on..

Looking at some data... 2000-2007 average growth was around 2.44%.. That number surprised me as I was expecting it to be higher... Since Q3 2009 on, the average growth has been around 2.47%... So yeah.. Don't know what you're talking about...

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Actually its obama has the most its actually record setting but u have to do that when your goal is not to help the country but make him a one term president.

True... But there was a "regular" type recession after Reagan and unemployment hit about 7.8 during Bush I's term... But it's nowhere near the same circumstances as what happened in 2008.

Oh give me a break.. He praised the seal team 6 countless times over the killing of bin Laden. Not to mention is it was Obama's ass that was in the hanger if something went wrong or it wasn't bin Ladens house.

Obama took a very big risk on his own part by giving the order for that mission essentially carrying out a combat mission in another country with out permission or prior notice. Had that one mission gone wrong or it ended up not being bin Laden's house it would have ended his presidency. To claim he shouldn't take credit for putting his own ass on the line is pretty dumb and he certainly gave credit where it was due to the troops whom carried out that mission.

Umm can we say Bush & his Mission Accomplished speech?

Overall I think Obama has done better than I expected with the wars but not a good as I expected here at home. However when he has to deal with a Congress that will do absolutely nothing then I can cut a little slack. Yet even still I think he could have done better here at home. Example was caving on the health plan way too early, that kinda pissed me off.

good points

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

1st answer ...

Do you have an ' Obama ' paging system or what ....

And all your answer is is a web of lies .... and I don`t like Obama anymore at all ....

I didn't compare Obama to any other president, I said a good leader would....

As for his risk, why did he continue to fly drones there after he was dead?

As for caving on healthcare, people were getting pissed on all sides, making it transparent as promised would have helped

Yes, he had to deal with a congress thats stalling his efforts, whats his excuse while working with a house and senate controlled by the democrats?

DF, I know you seem to have a Vendzilla paging System and I know you have a hard time understanding what goes on around here, but I will still not join your valentine list, the answer is still no!

It looks like I was mistaken. Thanks for posting those numbers and the reference. I must have misread something a year ago when I looked it up. I really appreciate you pointing that out and providing correct facts. I would hate to continue to believe and especially to SAY something that was factually incorrect. Some may think I push a conservative agenda, but I'm much more interested in pushing for truth, for what's actually correct and what really works.

Yeah we did.... both came into a peaking unemployment rate, by 82/83 it peaked higher than Obama's highest peak hit, by Reagan's 3rd year it was still about 9.5% - Obama's is lower. While Obama's isn't going to drop as fast - your support for Reagan performance and lack of support for Obama's performance is very misplaced.

Either both sucked or both are doing great... which is it?

Compare 1981 to current: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/unit...mployment-rate

LMAO, big fail there hause, I said after Reagan.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_g6an58evj_...-graphs400.jpg

Of course Obama's isn't going to drop as fast, he's doing the opposite of what Reagan did

No prob. I don't consider myself a conservative or liberal I am more libertarian if anything. I am no Obama fan. I admit I bought into the hype and voted for him, but it was mostly because I felt he was a better choice than McCain. While Obama has done some things I like and am happy about, I feel like day 1 he should have been focused on the economy and did everything in his power to help right the ship and it seems like he and the democrats were flush with power and decided instead to use that power to pass all of their little pet projects and left the economy on the back burner.

Whether he caused the problems or no; whether he made them worse or not, they are now his to deal with and it looks like he finally might be realizing that, but now faces a serious uphill battle to get anything done.

If anyone thinks the shitstorm of an economy he inherited can be fixed with the wave of a wand, then they would be pretty stupid.

Actually, Obama thought he could, so there's your answer

After Reagan? So we get to wait until after Obama is done next term for you to judge him? Your chart isn't after Reagan, so your statement is a bit confusing being that we're talking about rates during his Presidency.

Which doesn't dispute the fact that Obama's unemployment numbers are better than Reagan's.

And Reagan didn't have to deal with a record number of others filibustering everything the came across the table... hell, Obama is actually kicking his ass when all factors are considered.

Reagan didn't have a problem working with the other side unlike Obama, he worked with Tip O'neill. Maybe if Obama did what he said about reaching across the isle instead of going back on his word so he could blame the gop for his fuck ups, things would be better?

Obama said "I think we should approach it the same way Tip O?Neill and Ronald Reagan did back in 1983. They came together"

If Obama is kicking ass? why is unemployment average for Obama about 9.5% and 4 million people are underemployed?

12 million more added to food stamps, gas prices have gone up 80% since he took office, or are you just referring to the 140,000 new government jobs to handle the
45,696 pages of new regulatory rules were added to the Federal Register?

You know that 7 members of his economic team have resigned?

Maybe you are talking about his foreign policy where China owns 1.17trillion of our debt, or maybe going into more countries with out congress with troops and drones.

Of course maybe you love the environment, because the he spent 26 billion on the EPA and plans to spend more.


OK, lets see, what are you going to say he's done? well there's the new bank regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wall Street firms ? independent companies and the securities-trading arms of banks ? are doing even better. They earned more in the first 2 1/2 years of the Obama administration than they did during the eight years of the George W. Bush administration, industry data show. [...]

The largest banks, including Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo, earned $34 billion in profit in the first half of the year, nearly matching what they earned in the same period in 2007 and more than in the same period of any other year.

Securities firms ? the trading arms of big banks and hundreds of other independent firms ? have fared even better. They?ve generated at least $83 billion in profit during the past 2 1/2 years, compared with $77 billion during the entire Bush administration, according to data from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

or maybe he got the healthcare bill passed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Companies and Unions need to request waivers of the requirements for a $750,000 level of coverage and comprehensive services including vision, dental, and other services when they currently provide much lower levels of health insurance for their employees illuminates the central problem with the law. To paraphrase Jimmy McMillan: the cost is too damn high.

Most small companies can?t afford to provide comprehensive fee for service, unmanaged health insurance to their employees. If business can?t provide it now, the unaffordable of comprehensive insurance will be transferred to the taxpayers. Subsidies will be provided to the new insurance exchanges and we?ll have to borrow trillions of dollars more in the coming years to pay for it.

If Obamacare succeeds in its essential goal of providing comprehensive health insurance to another 30 million people, companies will be foolish not to put their employees into the newly created plans. Certainly all the companies and organizations that have requested waivers will be doing exactly that. They can?t afford comprehensive insurance now and won?t be able to afford it in 2014.

Maybe this is why whole states have opted out of obamacare?

Regardless of what Obama is or what has happened since he or whoever came into office, and pick any front runners at the time, they got a huge bag of flaming dog shit to fix. Sure the bag isent on fire now but hey.. it still smells like shit. If everyone cant look back to the late 90s as to now and not know why the US economy is where it is today... then well. There is no hope. :2 cents:

The other side isn't working with Obama, hence the record amount of filibusters. Even filibusters on things they've voted yes before, things they've tried to pass before, things Obama tried to work with them on, but they deny just about everything.

Obama's unemployment rate is lower than Reagan's with the same amount of time in office.

With more people in the Country than 20-30 years ago, you will have more unemployed people today, that's just natural.

Don't care how many have resigned.

Obama didn't create the China debt, he's just part of the reason it continues. And Congress did authorize the Nato operation already, I've shown you this already, several times, based on what Congress did sign with Nato - and other Presidents have used, and he did notify them too.... not that he has to.

Yep, bailouts that cover your bad debts mean you get to start fresh and make more money. Welcome to starting to understand part of the ows movement.

I love the healthcare bill.

Yep, they've negotiated for years for the deals they have, that's understandable. It's smart of the Obama admin to let those go through rather than deal with more delays and possible court issues, that unions would for sure start.

Sound good to me, I know the tax payer can afford it, we just need to get to pushing for cost regulations rather than pretending like moving forward is a bad thing, and cutting friv spending which will easily pay for it.

States think they have a right to opt out, thus some do - that's how our Country works until Congress says otherwise or agrees.



We can go into all the bat shit crazy shit Reagan did to fuck this Country if you like... record spending being at the top, savings and loans fuck up ie: bad bank deregs - that's the short and nasty list, before all the Reagan admin scandals of course.

Yep... right on par with Obama, just a different time period..

I gave facts, you gave opinions.

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

I agree with that. And I would like to see him put together a real concept that will create jobs. Its a vicious cycle. No jobs so low demand. so business dont expand.

My suggestion is to modify all unused manufacturing facilities to build wind turbines. My understanding is that they are putting them up as fast as they can get the turbines. There is enough wind from texas to ND to power the entire country. Get energy costs down with massive wind turbines program. create jobs. spend money now to stimulate economy that will have a long term benefit.