Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Obama is elected for a second term then this country is as dumb as a rock.
There is not one single thing he has done for the better of the people of America and for our country as a whole.
In fact, he has made things much worse in America in all aspects of his job.
Remember, just b/c you (and I) WANT Obama to lose and have been able to see that he has been a net negative for this country, it doesn't mean he WILL lose. You have to be unbiased when assessing his re-election chances. There are many people who (for whatever reason) think he has done a nice job. Given the GOP's top candidates (at least for now) like Romney, Obama's chances are good.
My reasons for thinking he is a bad President are many: spending hikes, massive deficits, increased regulatory burden (esp from the EPA), catering to unions, supporting open borders, Obamacare, desire for Cap-and-Trade, support of the DREAM Act, suing AZ for trying to deal with its illegal immigration problems, judicial nominees who don't strictly adhere to the constitution, offshore drilling bans (or more burdensome licensing process which may as well be a ban), supporting civilian trials for terrorists (such as the one who was acquitted on 284/285 counts), class warfare rhetoric, demonization of business, support for card check/EFCA, tax hikes through Obamacare and desire for more tax hikes (on the 'rich,' higher estate tax, I wouldn't doubt that he supports a VAT), finreg and credit card regulations (which are just going to lead to higher fees, tighter credit, etc). The financial reform bill has like 250 rules yet-to-be written AFTER it had been signed into law.
I'm sure there are many more reasons, but this is what I can think of for now. I don't see any evidence that he has America's best interests in mind and quite a bit of evidence for the opposite.
It would be nice if people would think one step past the headline. Opposing amnesty doesn't mean you hate Hispanics anymore than opposing same sex marriage or DADT repeal means you hate gays. If rich person X's taxes are raised, your life is not going to improve. The media's bias is helping Obama significantly.
One way to make the case against Obama is ask someone what life in America would be like if Obama had Cart Blanche. Think of how high the tax and regulatory burden would be and how anemic the Economy would be. I doubt there would be any private insurers and unions would control everything. I've found that logic, data, evidence and the like means nothing to a lot of Obama supporters.
Why are you trying to ruin Christmas season with talking about the next election. Nobody should have to endure this president and hear talk about a second term at the same time. That is cruel and unusual punishment. Now just hush and just say, Merry Christmas. He went to Hawaii. Let him stay there as long as he wants to. Out of sight, out of mind. Yipee!
Based on history there is nothing that show the Republican Party is uniquely qualified to cut federal spending. I'd have to go back to Eisenhower to find a Republican President that actually showed some fiscal restraint. Ironically a modern day Eisenhower would be criticized by the Republican Party as being too liberal. Here is the record for every post World War II two term presidential administration in rates of the rate of federal outlays versus the rate of increases in tax revenue.
Under George Bush:
During the Bush 43 Administration in 2001 total federal expenditures were 1.8629 trillion dollars. In 2009 total federal expenditures were 3.5177 trillion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 88.8%. Federal tax revenue increased by 26.56% during this administration.
Under Bill Clinton:
During the Clinton Administrations in 1993 total federal expenditures were 1.409 trillion dollars. In 2001 total federal expenditures were 1.8629 trillion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 32%. Federal tax revenue increased by 75% during this administration.
Under Ronald Reagan:
During the Ronald Reagan Administration in 1981 total federal expenditures were 678.2 billion dollars. In 1989 total federal expenditures were 1.143trillion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 68.53%. Federal tax revenue increased by 51.2% during this administration.
Under Richard Nixon - Gerald R. Ford:
During the Nixon and Ford Administrations in 1969 total federal expenditures were 183.6 billion dollars. In 1977 total federal expenditures were 409.2 billion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 122.87%. Federal tax revenue increased by 59.50% during this administration.
Under John F. Kennedy - Lyndon B. Johnson
During the Kennedy - Johnson Administrations in 1961 total federal expenditures were 97.7 billion dollars. In 1969 total federal expenditures were 183.6 billion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 87.92%.
Federal tax revenue increased by 62.76% during this administration.
Under Dwight D. Eisenhower
During the Eisenhower Administration in 1953 total federal expenditures were 76.1 billion dollars. In 1961 total federal expenditures were 97.7 billion dollars. So total federal expenditures increased by 28.38%. Federal tax revenue increased by 46.46% during the administration.
Remember, just b/c you (and I) WANT Obama to lose and have been able to see that he has been a net negative for this country, it doesn't mean he WILL lose. You have to be unbiased when assessing his re-election chances. There are many people who (for whatever reason) think he has done a nice job. Given the GOP's top candidates (at least for now) like Romney, Obama's chances are good.
My reasons for thinking he is a bad President are many: spending hikes, massive deficits, increased regulatory burden (esp from the EPA), catering to unions, supporting open borders, Obamacare, desire for Cap-and-Trade, support of the DREAM Act, suing AZ for trying to deal with its illegal immigration problems, judicial nominees who don't strictly adhere to the constitution, offshore drilling bans (or more burdensome licensing process which may as well be a ban), supporting civilian trials for terrorists (such as the one who was acquitted on 284/285 counts), class warfare rhetoric, demonization of business, support for card check/EFCA, tax hikes through Obamacare and desire for more tax hikes (on the 'rich,' higher estate tax, I wouldn't doubt that he supports a VAT), finreg and credit card regulations (which are just going to lead to higher fees, tighter credit, etc). The financial reform bill has like 250 rules yet-to-be written AFTER it had been signed into law.
I'm sure there are many more reasons, but this is what I can think of for now. I don't see any evidence that he has America's best interests in mind and quite a bit of evidence for the opposite.
It would be nice if people would think one step past the headline. Opposing amnesty doesn't mean you hate Hispanics anymore than opposing same sex marriage or DADT repeal means you hate gays. If rich person X's taxes are raised, your life is not going to improve. The media's bias is helping Obama significantly.
One way to make the case against Obama is ask someone what life in America would be like if Obama had Cart Blanche. Think of how high the tax and regulatory burden would be and how anemic the Economy would be. I doubt there would be any private insurers and unions would control everything. I've found that logic, data, evidence and the like means nothing to a lot of Obama supporters.
I agree that he has increased spending, I understand his reasoning for it, he was following the same montra of the Republican President before him, BTW, bailouts weren't a new idea.
Deficits have been on the rise for over 10 years. I'm not sure what we are going to do about it because 75% of the Republicans that ran on fiscal conservancy just passed another 1 trillion dollar stimulus, all money coming from China with no spending cuts.
EPA and cap and trade go hand in hand. I don't think they have done anything to stifle the economy with increased regulation as of yet. As long as we don't take the step to hurt business with the regulation, it doesn't really matter.
I disagree on open borders. President Obama has increased the size of ICE and the border patrol beyond any of the last 4 Presidents.
Obamacare was just a way to pay for national healthcare that was passed under the Reagan administration in 1989, that wasn't paid for. While I disagree with how it does it, it wouldn't have been a problem without Reagans screw up.
The DREAM act is fine with me, I understand your opinion though. Along the same lines, suing AZ was normal for the course. The federal government is holding onto power when it feels its threatened. Just like the states sue the government when they feel it oversteps its bounds. We make a big deal out of the natural process that the Constitution has set forth for checks and balances. Let the process work.
PLEASE on the judicial nominees. Every President elects nominees that share their views, but in reality most are very down the line with the Constitution. There are a few cases that everyone throws up, like RvW, but most of the judges are following the Constitution. Its about their interpretation, thats what the Judicial branch does. Again, its how the system is designed.
I'm all for off shore drilling bans. 1. I live on the gulf coast and my son had oil on him this summer. 2. Because it shut down a economy the size to Texas as well as opened up 1/3rd of the US sea food market to outside competitors. Thats just one mistake, imagine two? We can't drill ourselves out of oil dependence. We could go to the Oil Shale and be fine, with no ill effects on major economies and millions of people. Better options folks.
I could care less about terrorist trials. They were never going to let them go anyway.
Class warfare is just the opposite of tax cuts for the wealthy. I don't hear to much that is awful from the administration as far as their rhetoric. Its just politics. His "demonization" of business isn't anything I'd disagree with. But he just said the other day in a press conference that business is a great thing, so maybe he's changed his mind for you, IDK?
Taxes, we can't cut ourselves out of our debt. Taxes are going to have to go up, and spending is going to have to be cut. Both party ideals are going to have to change. Republicans will have to support tax increases and Democrats will have to support spending cuts if we are going to get out of this mess.
Financial reform everyone screamed for. The credit card regulation did increase fees, but it will also keep the market more stable, so it will help to make the next credit crisis more easily handled.
Look, I disagree with a lot of what the President did also. But many of the things you listed have different meanings than what have been sold to you. Its going to take a different kind of President to turn this around. Maybe Obama can learn, IDK, he'd be better than Sarah Palin or other idiots from the top tier Republican candidates. But as I said, we are going to have to cut spending and raise taxes, not realizing that, you're part of the problem.
If the economy is in decent shape, it will be because he has adopted Bush's policies. Like extending the Bush tax cuts. And he knows that. So by acting like Bush, he will try to get re elected.
Well, we have had those cuts for ten years and they didn't exactly fix the problem.
Remember, just b/c you (and I) WANT Obama to lose and have been able to see that he has been a net negative for this country, it doesn't mean he WILL lose. You have to be unbiased when assessing his re-election chances. There are many people who (for whatever reason) think he has done a nice job. Given the GOP's top candidates (at least for now) like Romney, Obama's chances are good.
That's the thing. It is obvious that "R" voters hate everything he does, just like "D" voters hate everything "R" presidents do, but a presidents success is measured by his/her ability to accomplish their goals. You may not agree with his goals, but the fact remains that he has been very successful in reaching them, and now it seems that the economy is coming back. The 401Ks have already come back big time because we have just witnesses the biggest stock market rally in US history. People care about their 401Ks because their futures depend on them. Gay issues etc are nice to talk about, but people don't really care about it because it has very little relevance in their own lives.
That's the thing. It is obvious that "R" voters hate everything he does, just like "D" voters hate everything "R" presidents do, but a presidents success is measured by his/her ability to accomplish their goals. You may not agree with his goals, but the fact remains that he has been very successful in reaching them, and now it seems that the economy is coming back. The 401Ks have already come back big time because we have just witnesses the biggest stock market rally in US history. People care about their 401Ks because their futures depend on them. Gay issues etc are nice to talk about, but people don't really care about it because it has very little relevance in their own lives.
and I see things a little differently than you. Yes, the stock market is coming back, but this is part of any recession which is controled more by the world economy than what a Pres does or does not do. If you insist on thinking the administration has that much control then 1-explain the unemployment rate compared to a few years ago and remember, things can only get so bad before they start getting better. That is about what happened until about 6 months ago. Things had to go up, they couldn't go any further down.
I will say one thing, which I don't like, but I am afraid it might be true: if the economy continues to improve and the unemployment rate is down to in the neighborhood of 8% the Republicans will put up a candidate that can not win and save our better, young and upcoming candidates for 2016. This is what happened in 1996.
Nita
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
