07 Aug 11
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-flashback-my-presidency-will-be-a-one-term-proposition-if-economy-doesnt-turn-in-3-years/
Staying with the theme of predictions like my last thread, Obama predicted that if things do not turn around in 3 years, he would not seek a second term.
So we have 6 months to go. If nothing changes or gets worse, should he step aside? In addition, what criteria can or should be used to assess if things are not "turning around"?
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by whodeyNo. The U.S. economy is hugely better now than it was in September 2008. Seeing as Obama is still probably going to get re-elected, suggesting he should resign is a level of facetiousness that says more about jaundiced partisanship than authentic political analysis.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-flashback-my-presidency-will-be-a-one-term-proposition-if-economy-doesnt-turn-in-3-years/
Staying with the theme of predictions like my last thread, Obama predicted that if things do not turn around in 3 years, he would not seek a second term.
So we have 6 months to go. If nothing changes or gets worse, should he s ...[text shortened]... In addition, what criteria can or should be used to assess if things are not "turning around"?
Originally posted by whodeyLook, we all get that you're giddy about the downgrade and that our recovery has slowed to a standstill, but this is still a democracy.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-flashback-my-presidency-will-be-a-one-term-proposition-if-economy-doesnt-turn-in-3-years/
Staying with the theme of predictions like my last thread, Obama predicted that if things do not turn around in 3 years, he would not seek a second term.
So we have 6 months to go. If nothing changes or gets worse, should he s ...[text shortened]... In addition, what criteria can or should be used to assess if things are not "turning around"?
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFAs I read the Facebook blurp that my Republican congressman wrote in response to the news that S&P had downgraded the US credit rating, in which he squarely placed the blame entirely on Obama and Reid's "lack of leadership at the top," I couldn't help but imagine what that blurp would have said had S&P done the same during the 2008 financial crisis when Bush was still in office.
No. The U.S. economy is hugely better now than it was in September 2008. Seeing as Obama is still probably going to get re-elected, suggesting he should resign is a level of facetiousness that says more about jaundiced partisanship than authentic political analysis.
In the world of hyperpartisanship, blame surely transcends all barriers.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaI don't think the current Republican schadenfreude is going to cut the mustard with swing voters when they go to the polls. I could be wrong but I think Obama is probably going to get a second term.
In the world of hyperpartisanship, blame surely transcends all barriers.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaThat's actually hilarious. The Republicans in Congress have the complete and total ability to block and obstruct bills indefinitely. So they do just that and then say it's because of Obama's "lack of leadership."
As I read the Facebook blurp that my Republican congressman wrote in response to the news that S&P had downgraded the US credit rating, in which he squarely placed the blame entirely on Obama and Reid's "lack of leadership at the top," I couldn't help but imagine what that blurp would have said had S&P done the same during the 2008 financial crisis when B ...[text shortened]... still in office.
In the world of hyperpartisanship, blame surely transcends all barriers.
The separation of powers was put in place on the premise that elected officials would actually want to help this country.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFWhat criterea are you using to say that the economy is better?
No. The U.S. economy is hugely better now than it was in September 2008. Seeing as Obama is still probably going to get re-elected, suggesting he should resign is a level of facetiousness that says more about jaundiced partisanship than authentic political analysis.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by FMFI think he probably will, too, but I imagine he will be chosen as the lesser of two evils rather than the better of two options.
I don't think the current Republican schadenfreude is going to cut the mustard with swing voters when they go to the polls. I could be wrong but I think Obama is probably going to get a second term.
What I'm saying, though, is that Republicans who place all (as opposed to some, not "none" ) of the blame for our economic woes squarely on Obama know deep down that that kind of assumption isn't reasonable.
07 Aug 11
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFComparison of Economic Conditions – Jan 2008 to Jan 2011
No. The U.S. economy is hugely better now than it was in September 2008. Seeing as Obama is still probably going to get re-elected, suggesting he should resign is a level of facetiousness that says more about jaundiced partisanship than authentic political analysis.
Category...........................Jan-08.......Jan-11..... Difference
Unemployment Rate...........4.80%...... 9.40%...... 142%............... Higher
Foreclosure Rate (Residential)1.9%..... 3.90%...... 200%....... Higher
Median Home Sales Price... $232,400...<= $213,000.... -$19,400... Lower
Stocks – DJIA............$12,800............ $11,577..-$1,223............... Lower
Consumer Confidence........87.3..........56.5......... -30.8 Lower
National Deficit (yearly).$480,000,000,000..$1,400,000,000,000.$920,000,000,000 -Higher
Gasoline Price (per gallon)..$3.10....... $3.07....... -$0.03.............. Lower
Small Business Optimism Index..95..... 92.5...........-2.5..................Lower
Non-Res. Construction Spending. $400 billion....... $250 billion.-$150 billiion.Lower
Residential Const. Spending.$395 billion..$220 billion..-$175 billion.Lower
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperWhen a couple of users asked general questions like, "What are you doing to combat the unemployment rate?", the representative almost inevitably responded by saying something along the lines of, "We've passed several job-spurring tax breaks for Americans, but Senate Democrats have killed those bills. It's no surprise though, because it's been [a gazillion] days since the Senate has passed a bill..." etc., etc., etc. No mention of trying to work together with Democrats, no mention of trying to find common ground; always spin and blame.
That's actually hilarious. The Republicans in Congress have the complete and total ability to block and obstruct bills indefinitely. So they do just that and then say it's because of Obama's "lack of leadership."
What's scary as hell is watching posters (not just one, but many) come along and criticize the representative for daring to work with Democrats to pass compromise legislation and for caving to Democrats' and liberals' agenda. The "default rather than borrow" crowd is still alive and well.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by utherpendragonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
[b]Comparison of Economic Conditions – Jan 2008 to Jan 2011
Category...........................Jan-08.......Jan-11..... Difference
Unemployment Rate...........4.80%...... 9.40%...... 142%............... Higher
Foreclosure Rate (Residential)1.9%..... 3.90%...... 200%....... Higher
Median Home Sales Price... $232,400 ...[text shortened]... billion.-$150.Lower
Residential Const. Spending.$395 billion..$220 billion..-$175 billion.Lower[/b]
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaYep, it's been a long time coming, but things don't look good for Obama and his multi-million dollar team of advisors, rather than having a big spend up with stimuli and healthcare plans the brakes should have been on long a go, that would have been un-popular for Mr Smile and Wave and popularity (and buying that popularity with other peoples money) was the priority rather than doing the right thing - stop spending.
I think he probably will, too, but I imagine he will be chosen as the lesser of two evils rather than the better of two options.
What I'm saying, though, is that Republicans who place [b]all (as opposed to some, not "none" ) of the blame for our economic woes squarely on Obama know deep down that that kind of assumption isn't reasonable.[/b]
The one good thing that has come from all this is the realisation - no more magic money.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by wittywonkaHaha, luv it, when that stats go the way of the poster it's: Correlation implies causation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
When the stats go against the posters POV it's: Correlation does not imply causation.
"How to Lie with Statistics" Darrell Huff.
07 Aug 11
Does anybody else find it ironic that Michele Bachmann--one of the most vocal Congressional critics of raising the debt ceiling, as far as I am aware--has blamed Obama for "destroying" the United States' credit rating? This, from the very same person who insisted that if the United States went past August 3rd without raising the debt ceiling that the United States' credit would be just fine?
http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/michele-bachmann-on-standard-poors-u-s-credit-downgrade/