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.
Yes, his approval rating are similar to what Reagan had, but Reagan did the right thing, and Obama is already doing the wrong thing, and is about to do even more of the wrong things.
That is the difference.
Yes, his approval rating are similar to what Reagan had, but Reagan did the right thing, and Obama is already doing the wrong thing, and is about to do even more of the wrong things.
That is the difference.
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Many people believe Reagan's policies led to increased poverty and the greatest growth in disparity between the wealthy and middle class in our nation's history (well until the last few years). And that his policies led to dramatic increases in our deficit.
You might think Obama's policies will fail, I personally disagree with that, but you are entitled to your own opinion. However, to dismiss his chances outright because of what his #'s are 2 1/2 years before he has a chance at re-election (numbers which are exactly the same as Bush on the eve of Election Day 04) is just absurd. It would be just as absurd if someone said the same thing about Reagan in 82 or Clinton in 94, it would be absurd if someone said that Bush Sr would cruise to re-election because of his numbers in early 1990, or that Bush Jr would win in a landslide because of the numbers he had in early 02. Its just absurd to base someone's re-election prospects based off the numbers they have 2 1/2 years prior to when they will face re-election. Its absurd when the numbers are poor, its absurd when the numbers are good, and its absurd when the numbers are mediocre. Its even more absurd to think someone is going to be replaced on the ticket.
Obama will join the pantheon of worst American presidents along with Jimmy Carter , but at least Jimmy Carter was an honest man . The trifecta of Obama , Pelosi , and Reid is the biggest bunch of looney toons since "The Three Stooges" , although I think Larry , Moe and Curley would have done a better job of running the country . I actually like the president of France , Sarkozy , better than our president . How crazy is that , the world is upside down . Joe Biden is also a pathological and compulsive liar rolled up into one .
There will be a massive Republican landslide win in the midterm elections in November . A direct rebuttal of Obamanomics . I will also predict that Obama will remain just as rigid an ideology as he is now , even after the landslide win by the Republicans in November , because he is too arrogant and narcissistic to admit when he is wrong , and his lap dogs in the liberal media will still be telling us all how brilliant he is .
Obama will run and may/should win in 2012; however, the democratic party will lose many seats in the House and Senate in 2010, leaving Obama as a president that will never get any of his liberal tax and spend policies through congress. Another 7 years of stagnation is not going to be good for this nation, but still better than the slow slide into a nanny state.
That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Many people believe Reagan's policies led to increased poverty and the greatest growth in disparity between the wealthy and middle class in our nation's history (well until the last few years). And that his policies led to dramatic increases in our deficit.
You might think Obama's policies will fail, I personally disagree with that, but you are entitled to your own opinion. However, to dismiss his chances outright because of what his #'s are 2 1/2 years before he has a chance at re-election (numbers which are exactly the same as Bush on the eve of Election Day 04) is just absurd. It would be just as absurd if someone said the same thing about Reagan in 82 or Clinton in 94, it would be absurd if someone said that Bush Sr would cruise to re-election because of his numbers in early 1990, or that Bush Jr would win in a landslide because of the numbers he had in early 02. Its just absurd to base someone's re-election prospects based off the numbers they have 2 1/2 years prior to when they will face re-election. Its absurd when the numbers are poor, its absurd when the numbers are good, and its absurd when the numbers are mediocre. Its even more absurd to think someone is going to be replaced on the ticket.
of course no one should be dismissing his chances at this point, on the other hand, you have now explained something to me, from one of your responses to me, you are knowledgable about the world of politics, but you also, because of your age put way to much into studies, polls, stats and what you read. anyone of us can pick apart some of what you are saying: Bush senior, can we spell Parot? You are right it is way to soon to assume Obama will get beat, but as one who was there in every election you are referring to, I will repeat, things are very different today than 20 or 30 years ago..
I will give you just a little food for thought and then bow out for now: Reagan may have had similar approval numbers but he was one of the most loved Presidents in modern time, yes, in 82. Everyone liked him, whether they approved of what he was doing: 2-his landslide victory in 84 had a lot to do with a crappy opponent: This can be said about Bush Jr as well, Kerry was a horrible choise as was Dole in 96.
If the Republicans can find that candidate that will spark the people, Obama is deadmeat...If not, we will have him as our leader until 2016.
of course no one should be dismissing his chances at this point, on the other hand, you have now explained something to me, from one of your responses to me, you are knowledgable about the world of politics, but you also, because of your age put way to much into studies, polls, stats and what you read. anyone of us can pick apart some of what you are saying: Bush senior, can we spell Parot? You are right it is way to soon to assume Obama will get beat, but as one who was there in every election you are referring to, I will repeat, things are very different today than 20 or 30 years ago..
I will give you just a little food for thought and then bow out for now: Reagan may have had similar approval numbers but he was one of the most loved Presidents in modern time, yes, in 82. Everyone liked him, whether they approved of what he was doing: 2-his landslide victory in 84 had a lot to do with a crappy opponent: This can be said about Bush Jr as well, Kerry was a horrible choise as was Dole in 96.
If the Republicans can find that candidate that will spark the people, Obama is deadmeat...If not, we will have him as our leader until 2016.
Nita
If anything Reagan was viewed better after he left office than during the time he was in office. His average approval for the 8 years he was in office was 53%. It just happened to peak at the right time for him, with a poor opponent resulting in a landslide.
As far as Obama's chances in 2012, a big part of that will be determined by the economy. The economic conditions which played a big role in Regan's approvals dropping to the mid 30's in early 83, improved in 83 and 84, and with that Reagan's #'s improved. Reagan's weak opponent played a role in his landslide no question, but the fact the economy was quite a bit better on Election Day 84 than it was two years earlier is the key reason he won big. If the economy improves over the next couple of years, his approval will likely improve as well, which makes defeating him very difficult no matter who the GOP candidate is. If the economy only improves slightly than a strong GOP candidate can pick him off. If its stagnant or gets worse than he is likely in a bit of trouble
However, I really don't think you can say he is dead meat if the GOP has a strong candidate in 2012 (for starters I don't think anyone who has a chance at the nomination can be one, but thats another argument). If the economy is improving, Obama's #'s will increase, and it would be virtually impossible to knock him off even with a strong candidate. Generally once an Incumbent has an approval around 50%, its virtually impossible to knock them off. Really the only recent situation that an Incumbent with decent ratings lost was a situation which can't be compared to Obama, and that is Chafee in R.I in 2006. He lost for no other reason than the R next to his name in one of the most Democratic states in the nation, at a time the Republican President had an approval in the low 20's in his state.
Also as far as dismissing his chances outright that is exactly what the OP was doing by making the suggestion has no chance at 2012 and would be replaced in the Primary. That is just a plain ridiculous statement.
If anything Reagan was viewed better after he left office than during the time he was in office. His average approval for the 8 years he was in office was 53%. It just happened to peak at the right time for him, with a poor opponent resulting in a landslide.
As far as Obama's chances in 2012, a big part of that will be determined by the economy. The economic conditions which played a big role in Regan's approvals dropping to the mid 30's in early 83, improved in 83 and 84, and with that Reagan's #'s improved. Reagan's weak opponent played a role in his landslide no question, but the fact the economy was quite a bit better on Election Day 84 than it was two years earlier is the key reason he won big. If the economy improves over the next couple of years, his approval will likely improve as well, which makes defeating him very difficult no matter who the GOP candidate is. If the economy only improves slightly than a strong GOP candidate can pick him off. If its stagnant or gets worse than he is likely in a bit of trouble
However, I really don't think you can say he is dead meat if the GOP has a strong candidate in 2012 (for starters I don't think anyone who has a chance at the nomination can be one, but thats another argument). If the economy is improving, Obama's #'s will increase, and it would be virtually impossible to knock him off even with a strong candidate. Generally once an Incumbent has an approval around 50%, its virtually impossible to knock them off. Really the only recent situation that an Incumbent with decent ratings lost was a situation which can't be compared to Obama, and that is Chafee in R.I in 2006. He lost for no other reason than the R next to his name in one of the most Democratic states in the nation, at a time the Republican President had an approval in the low 20's in his state.
Also as far as dismissing his chances outright that is exactly what the OP was doing by making the suggestion has no chance at 2012 and would be replaced in the Primary. That is just a plain ridiculous statement.
we were in DC during the Reagan years, regardless of what you are reading about his ratings, much depends on where you are getting your figures. He was highly thought of and very much loved, this is the difference right now. I do agree with you, it is rediculous to say Obama will be gone in 2012 at this stage..Incumbents are hard to beat, but lets look at 1980 and 1992 as examples. To you, that might not be modern day elections because of your age, to many of us any election in the past 30 years or so would be considered modern day. You can continue to believe in Obama and I have to admit I am glad to see young people take such an interest in politics, but don't be too surprised if he does loose or at best sneaks out a victory. Again, you can't begin to realize the difference in our political enviornment 30 yeras ago and today..
2012 is a long way away and a lot can change.
Most Democrats do in fact still adore Obama and since he's incumbent, it's almost 100%certain they'll be running him again no matter how much he screws up.
It's not a matter of whether or not the Dems will support him but more a matter of how many dems will be left.
I heard Jimmy Carter is coming back. that's why he spoke up on Obama, to prime his own return.
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.
