"Stimulas" failure

Originally posted by zeeblebot
was the economy that bad when he STARTED preaching gloom and doom?

Well - pretty much everyone was in a "gloom and doom" state of panic when the housing market crashed in Sep 2008. Except for McCain who briefly stated that "the fundamentals of the economy are sound".

I believe that this was a major reason why McCain lost. NOT because of his original statement, but because he didn't have the guts to stand by it and make the case that, despite the obvious issues involved with the housing bubble, the fundamentals of the economy were indeed sound.

So what do you think was the best approach during the fall of 2008?

1. McCain's initial "the economy is sound" approach
2. McCain's subsequent "cancel the debates!!" panic approach
3. Obama's approach.

(I think we can agree that McCain's effort to do all three approaches in quick succession was definitely the wrong approach.)

Originally posted by zeeblebot
was the economy that bad when he STARTED preaching gloom and doom?

Yes. Recession began at the end of 2007.

I'm sure you'll try to link to the primary campaigns now.

News alert! Great Recession caused by investor irrational response to Obama's pessimism! Those mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps were as good as gold until Obama criticized George W Bush.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
When President Obama was selling his $787 billion stimulus to the American people he promised unemployment would never rise above 7.8%

Surely this is simply a prediction that did not pan out?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
[b]Last week the Obama administration issued a report purporting to show that the President’s $787 billion economic stimulus plan had saved or created exactly 640,329 jobs. Such a precise number for such a fuzzy concept as jobs “saved or created” immediately raised doubts about the veracity of the report in any honest American’s mind.
And since t ...[text shortened]... .heritage.org/2009/11/06/morning-bell-10-unemployment-shows-objective-failure-of-obama-stimulus/[/b]

...and once again...it's A-OK when George W Bush, and the G O P pushes thru laws funneling massive stimulus money to the big 3 Auto Makers, Goldman-Sacs, Banks etc. I didn't hear you whining about that! But let Obama do it, and it becomes......SOCIALISM!!!😏

Originally posted by bill718
...and once again...it's A-OK when George W Bush, and the G O P pushes thru laws funneling massive stimulus money to the big 3 Auto Makers, Goldman-Sacs, Banks etc. I didn't hear you whining about that! But let Obama do it, and it becomes......SOCIALISM!!!😏

Obama and Bush act alike. The only difference is, Obama does it on a larger scale..

Originally posted by whodey
Obama and Bush act alike. The only difference is, Obama does it on a larger scale..

Get zeeble to admit that. Everyone else seems to agree with you on this, more or less.

Originally posted by telerion
Get zeeble to admit that. Everyone else seems to agree with you on this, more or less.

Don't be so hard on him. We all have been blinded by the partisan coolaide at one point or another. As for myself, I've had my fill. Now I am ready to open fire on both sides. Enough is enough!! 😠

Originally posted by whodey
Don't be so hard on him. We all have been blinded by the partisan coolaide at one point or another. As for myself, I've had my fill. Now I am ready to open fire on both sides. Enough is enough!! 😠

Perhaps your a little smarter than I first gave you credit for...😏

Originally posted by whodey
Don't be so hard on him. We all have been blinded by the partisan coolaide at one point or another. As for myself, I've had my fill. Now I am ready to open fire on both sides. Enough is enough!! 😠

Good post. Reality is we've been sold up the river by both parties acting irresponsibly. To wit: Ford, doing fine. Stimulus money: zero. GM? Yikes. What I do not understand from other posters is the mistaken idea that Bush gets a pass. He does not, but he's no longer in office, Obama is. Bush was a republicrat. Had he acted more Reaganesque perhaps we would not be in this pickle. No pass for Obama, however. He's in way over his head. Not an unintelligent man, but his inexperience is showing. He's being led around by the nose by Pelosi, Reid for one. In addition to this he is too ideologically glued to passing legislation while Rome burns. Obama fiddles in the meantime!

Originally posted by whodey
Don't be so hard on him. We all have been blinded by the partisan coolaide at one point or another. As for myself, I've had my fill. Now I am ready to open fire on both sides. Enough is enough!! 😠

I agree, excellent post.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
The debate is: Despite these figures,can anyone still say "the stmulas"is stimulating anything? and is it or is it not a failure?

Here in Az it has saved countless police officer and teacher positions. The local tribes have started infrastructure from the fund.

State governments have had their butts saved with these monies.

I see construction starts all over town from the plan.

Cash for clunkers. Start on a much needed electric grid.

Yes it is working.

Don't let your Obama hatred blind you so. he is a decent man.

Originally posted by scacchipazzo
Good post. Reality is we've been sold up the river by both parties acting irresponsibly. To wit: Ford, doing fine. Stimulus money: zero. GM? Yikes. What I do not understand from other posters is the mistaken idea that Bush gets a pass. He does not, but he's no longer in office, Obama is. Bush was a republicrat. Had he acted more Reaganesque perhaps we w ...[text shortened]... ideologically glued to passing legislation while Rome burns. Obama fiddles in the meantime!

Except that Reagan also ran up deficits. Perhaps if he'd been more Clintonesque then?

Unless you're willing to go back to pre-1970 to look for an example.

Originally posted by whodey
Obama and Bush act alike. The only difference is, Obama does it on a larger scale..

recced for being in touch with your Aussie side!

Originally posted by telerion
Except that Reagan also ran up deficits. Perhaps if he'd been more Clintonesque then?

Unless you're willing to go back to pre-1970 to look for an example.

As a money person, how close in your view did the economy come to tanking completely? I feel that time since Bear Sterns collapsing has given people a somewhat rose coloured view of how panicked the market had become and how dire the consequences were looking for groups like AIG and Fannie and Freddie. Its alarming to see a new amnesia developing among free marketeers who promote a scathing review of the bailout, now that the markets have steadied and now that a firm recovery looks certain with the likes of Buffet finalling calling the bottom of the market. If its ever been all about confidence, then surely going in hard was the least worst option facing Obama's administration at the edge of that yawning precipice we now affectionately refer to as the GFC.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
The debate is: Despite these figures,can anyone still say "the stmulas"is stimulating anything? and is it or is it not a failure?

Anecdotally I can tell you the economy has started up again for my immediate family. My Dad's getting regular contracting work again, my sister's making more money then she ever has in her life, my brother and his wife are lawyers and doing fine...I have thousands of dollars sitting in my account and my rent paid for the next four months, full coverage for my car paid for the next year (cost me four thousand bucks due to accidents on my record!)...