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.
Seriously, I wouldn't even mention that in light of recent events.
Yes, 11% is worth mentioning. And it doesn't even touch what he did in his second term. The fact that Obama's doubling down doesn't change the fact that it's bad enough. Recall the poster I was responding to said, quote "unlike Obama, Reagan knew what to do".
Reagan was all for putting the pedal to the metal when it came to putting us in debt. He also granted amnesty to illegals and raised taxes. If that's knowing what to do, please let's not learn what incompetence looks like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
I'll take those Reagan and Bush deficits any day over today's, and I definitely prefer the numbers we had when Newt was running things.
I'll take no deficits on the scale of Reagan, Bush or Obama, if you please.
But I'll vote for him before most of these potential Republicans, and I'll offer to get people out to the polls, because the Republican solutions only work for the elites.
You're gonna find out real quick that many former Obama supporters won't be motivated to go to the polls.
Not anymore.. The Village Idiot in the white house broke that 4 year 11% increase during February 2010.. He is a real rocket scientist this one is.. February was the largest increase in the deficit in the HISTORY of the US..
He needs to be removed from office before he puts this country in the ground. Considering we are already on our knees he doesn't have that far to go..
The US is a country, not just an economy. Why does everyone measure the country in economic terms? What good is a great economy if people do nothing but make enemies of their neighbors for having a different opinion? Even if Obama magically fixed the economy, we'd still have millions of real idiots going around complaining about something else or about how some other sky is falling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odinloki1
I'm considered liberal by most and I don't approve of his job. He spent 2 years trying to reach out to the Republicans and he let every good idea get compromised and watered down into typical Democrat crap. I have a very negative opinion.
But I'll vote for him before most of these potential Republicans, and I'll offer to get people out to the polls, because the Republican solutions only work for the elites.
Do you really think Republicans are that popular with anyone who isn't making a 6 figure salary?
I agree. Given a simple choice, the logical one is to pick the Democrat since the Republican will overtly support corporations over citizens. I'd rather shoot myself in the face than vote Republican. They do not represent me, the middle class, or anyone I care about.
With just a little bit of scrutiny, however, both parties are guilty of caving in to the demands of our corporations. Both parties are one and the same. Their opposition to each other is a fabrication designed to make it look like we have a choice.
I got a robocall yesterday from an automated polling group that asked me all kinds of questions about local politicians. In NONE of the questions was I given the choice of voting for somebody other than a Republican or a Democrat. I vote for independents because I don't want either corrupt party running anything. It is no accident that everything we encounter in the media is limited to the two-headed monster.
Obama's approval may be 42% (4 in 7) now, but that in no way reflects what may happen in an election. I won't vote for either party, but I'll bet he wins seeing how the Republican alternative will be deliberately made to be a weak choice. The two parties will assure that the choice will be between someone you don't want and someone you REALLY don't want.
Obama is of course propped up by friendly media. Imagine if Bush had pompously lectured us on silly distractions from the important work, and then flew off to do the Glen Beck show and a bunch of fund raisers. The press would have gone ballistic and his approval would have dropped 5 points by the next day. For Obama, the only real distraction is one of those pesky catastrophes that conflicts with his tee time.
Can't say I know of any president who won a second term with a 42% approval rating.
I'm sure that more lectures on his green energy agenda, more taxes, more debt and the promise of more 0bamaCare waivers will see his poll numbers soar.
The better comparison would be, where was Carter and Clinton at this point in his term?
Reagan had Conservative policies, so the only place to go was up.
Carter, Clinton and Obama on the other hand, have very Progressive policies.
Carter got tossed...
Clinton had the 94 mid terms and Newt, that turned him to the right of the far left of where he was.
Obama has had the the 2010 mid-terms, and is fighting it with all he possibly can. There is a big difference and Reagan is not even comparable.
Obama is of course propped up by friendly media. Imagine if Bush had pompously lectured us on silly distractions from the important work, and then flew off to do the Glen Beck show and a bunch of fund raisers. The press would have gone ballistic and his approval would have dropped 5 points by the next day. For Obama, the only real distraction is one of those pesky catastrophes that conflicts with his tee time.
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.
