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.
Republicans have shown their true colors lately. When the Country wants Congress to come together to solve the Country's problems their answer to everything is no. They have zero interest in working with this President who was elected by a clear majority of Americans. Factor in the recent violence perpetuated by words of Republicans in Congress and rwing talking radio heads, the Republican brand is as damaged now as it was the during W's presidency.
Unless the economy improves dramatically in the next 2 1/2 years, Obama has no chance of being re-elected, and there are too many minefields still ahead in the US economy to believe that a Democrat (check the current economies in IL, CA, MI, NJ, NY & CT for the irrefutable proof) can oversee an economic recovery, given their party's track record on the economy going back to the equally incompetent FDR.
The Democrats bear the overwhelming percentage of blame for creating and worsening the housing collapse, which led to the implosion of the economy, and have done nothing to address and correct the core issues, and don't have the guts to admit their culpability in creating it, let alone the nerve to abandon their 'social justice' mandate, which certainly accelerated the destruction of our economy.
Barney Frank's immortal and imbecilic 'I want to roll the dice as it relates to subsidized housing' quote says it all, and he's still in Congress.
You couldn't be more mistaken.
While I certainly don't hold Barney Frank out to be a beacon of virtue and blameless in this mess, he was nothing more than a bit player.
A very quick and superficial review of the financial tomfoolery reveals that when the housing mess at Fanny/Freddy was being mismanaged a few years ago, Frank was a minority member of a House committee controlled by the GOP. He couldn't get anything pushed through w/o Republican approval.
I realize that he's become a favorite GOP whipping boy for obvious reasons. But he's nothing more than a scapegoat and it's very easy to check up on what I've just posted.
Of course, it's even easier to ignore me and continue to swallow what Limbaugh and O'Reilly are dishing out.
BTW, I've voted Republican since Nixon. I've voted Dem once. I've wanted to think the GOP were the good guys (and they used to be), but the events of recent years have definitely turned me sour on them. They've made a horrible mess of things. And they're doing nothing to correct their course. They're trying very hard to pass the blame and at the same time, block all attempts to repair their damage. It appears they've succeeded in raising your anger. But be aware that you're being manipulated.
If he goes through with a VAT, even a flea could beat him. The ballot will just have to say:
Obama
Not Obama
We've had VATs on many items for decades and you've never even suspected it. The VATs are hidden in the retail price of many items. It's nothing new or different.
How did you expect us to pay for the record Bush deficits? How did you expect the feds to repair our damaged economy? I don't favor tax increases either, but I understand that w/o some, we'll face an even more precarious future with a faltering economy and weakened currency.
Basically, opinion polls at this point aren't going to matter much in the elections of 2012, just as opinion polls in April aren't going to mean much this coming November. It's according to where the economy is, the jobs numbers, among other things that are going to matter.
People have a surprisingly short memory, especially when it comes to politics.
Republicans have shown their true colors lately. When the Country wants Congress to come together to solve the Country's problems their answer to everything is no. They have zero interest in working with this President who was elected by a clear majority of Americans. Factor in the recent violence perpetuated by words of Republicans in Congress and rwing talking radio heads, the Republican brand is as damaged now as it was the during W's presidency.
and Obama wants to work with the Republicans? Doesn't this work both ways? yes, he was elected by a clear majority, but that was then, now we are talking 2 plus years the other way. Many who supported him, thought he would be what he hasn't proven to be.
The Republicans have far too many superstars waiting in the wings to hammer Obama with 4 years of nothing but failures, mistakes and embarrassment.
Obama would not win an election if it were held today.
It would take a total miracle for him to even have a chance with his track record.
Funny someone comes up with this when Obama is clearly tanking to the bottom and the demwit congress is at 11% approval rating.
Liberalism will be over soon thanks to the gift of Obama.
Sorry, but considering that even at the depth of the recession, Obama's approval rating is hovering just a bit below 50% that bodes pretty well for him as the economy recovers. Reagan was at 35% at the depth of his recession - WAY lower than Obama.
Sorry, but considering that even at the depth of the recession, Obama's approval rating is hovering just a bit below 50% that bodes pretty well for him as the economy recovers. Reagan was at 35% at the depth of his recession - WAY lower than Obama.
I think we need to take into consideration a few other issues: 1-the recession isn't the only thing to consider even though it is probably number 1 to many, 2-Reagan was virtually loved by so many, this is different from the approval ratings, 2-the low numbers were for a short, less than a month polling period, 4-much depends on who is doing the polling and 5-Reagan had a very weak candidate running against him in 1984 and by then Reagan was very popular. We don't know what will be the situation with Obama a few years from now. And last but not least we are living in a different century.
I think we need to take into consideration a few other issues: 1-the recession isn't the only thing to consider even though it is probably number 1 to many, 2-Reagan was virtually loved by so many, this is different from the approval ratings, 2-the low numbers were for a short, less than a month polling period, 4-much depends on who is doing the polling and 5-Reagan had a very weak candidate running against him in 1984 and by then Reagan was very popular. We don't know what will be the situation with Obama a few years from now. And last but not least we are living in a different century.
Nita
Reagan's numbers were not low "for a short time". He was SOLIDLY below 50% from mid Dec 81 straight on through until mid Oct 83 - that's almost TWO YEARS of <50% poll numbers. His EXTREME LOW numbers (ie below 40%) was for a short period of time but his LOW numbers (ie below 50%) lasted for well more than a year and half.
In comparison, Obama's LOW numbers (ie below 50%) streak has never lasted more than about 2 weeks at a time. He's dipped below that threshhold several times, but never very far below and never for an extended period of time. He's dipped down into the mid/upper 40's then popped back up to 50% again, then dropped back down, then back up.
Reagan's numbers were not low "for a short time". He was SOLIDLY below 50% from mid Dec 81 straight on through until mid Oct 83 - that's almost TWO YEARS of <50% poll numbers. His EXTREME LOW numbers (ie below 40%) was for a short period of time but his LOW numbers (ie below 50%) lasted for well more than a year and half.
In comparison, Obama's LOW numbers (ie below 50%) streak has never lasted more than about 2 weeks at a time. He's dipped below that threshhold several times, but never very far below and never for an extended period of time. He's dipped down into the mid/upper 40's then popped back up to 50% again, then dropped back down, then back up.
Ken
Ken, for now i am going to let you have the last word on this, you will anyway..You have your feeling about Obama and his future, compared to Reagan, we were in DC when Reagan was President and have a very close idea of the difference in 1982 to now, that being said, we will have to agree to disagree and wait until 2012. I certainly am not saying Obama is finished but I am saying he could be. You are bound and determined he will win and probably in a landslide. So be it!!
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.
