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.
He should never have given in on the public option. Better still, he should have cracked heads in his own party and got what we really need - something approaching single payer. It would have been a heavy lift, but a more skilled politician (LBJ comes to mind) might have been able to do it.
I agree, but as you say, he is not a skilled politician - which will negatively effect his job performance with historians in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives
He has done a stellar job given the disaster he inherited (from the worst president in history), and the obstructionism he has faced from the Republicans in Congress, who all but admitted to stalling the economic recovery in an effort to limit Obama to one term as president.
Yes, Obama inherited a disaster.
Are you honest enough to admit that Bush inherited a mess too?
Clinton left a legacy of (and he had bipartisan support for much of it):
-A recession officially starting 6 weeks after he left office
-A Dot-Com bubble explosion for Bush to clean up
-A Housing Market Bubble growing
-China into the WTO and a new permanent trade deal with China, which has led to increased outsourcing and trade deficit with China
-Bank deregulation that Clinton was "proud to sign into law", Obama blames this the most for the current mess
-A national debt that has increased every fiscal year since 1957
-Entitlement programs that needed to get fixed and still haven't as I type
-Bin Laden had already committed multiple terrorist plots out on the US
Presidents who enter under great adversity are usually treated well by historians. Besides, his presidency is only 60% completed. He'll be treated well, sorry.
Yes Andrew Johnson with the tough adversity of reconstruction is treated so well. Obama is another Andrew Johnson.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerJAX
Current Grade: B- (for relative references: Bush II, D; Clinton, B; Bush I, B-; Reagan, B+; Carter, C+; and, FDR, A-)
History might judge him to be a tad better in the long run.
Obama was successful at what he wanted to do, the problem of course is that his plans were destined for failure from the get go..
Things like the stimulus bill, which took money out of the economy so they could pump it back into the economy and then proclaim they are stimulating.. Total bull crap..
Don't you think the future would be a better judge of a president's accomplishments? You may believe he is a lame duck, but executive decisions and policies are not frozen in time.
The future will show the decisions made in the present.
Don't you think the future would be a better judge of a president's accomplishments? You may believe he is a lame duck, but executive decisions and policies are not frozen in time.
The future will show the decisions made in the present.
Yeah, there's some truth to that. But couldn't the same be said about Bush? I don't hear of too many liberals who willingly give George W Bush the same breathing room. In fact, the foremost defense of Barack Obama is that Bush destroyed everything. What gives?
I agree, but as you say, he is not a skilled politician - which will negatively effect his job performance with historians in the future.
Yes, Obama inherited a disaster.
Are you honest enough to admit that Bush inherited a mess too?
Clinton left a legacy of (and he had bipartisan support for much of it):
-A recession officially starting 6 weeks after he left office
-A Dot-Com bubble explosion for Bush to clean up
-A Housing Market Bubble growing
-China into the WTO and a new permanent trade deal with China, which has led to increased outsourcing and trade deficit with China
-Bank deregulation that Clinton was "proud to sign into law", Obama blames this the most for the current mess
-A national debt that has increased every fiscal year since 1957
-Entitlement programs that needed to get fixed and still haven't as I type
-Bin Laden had already committed multiple terrorist plots out on the US
Lmao, Clinton left Bush 4% unemployment, superb GDP growth, no wars, and budget surpluses. What a nightmare.
There was no housing bubble in 2001, that is a figment of your imagination. If the seeds were sown for one, Bush did little to reign them in, and he had the house and senate for most of 6 years.
OBL was a threat, who Bush promptly ignored until 9/11.
It's takes serious balls to even attempt to argue that Bush walked into a situation comparable to Obama's.
Yeah, there's some truth to that. But couldn't the same be said about Bush? I don't hear of too many liberals who willingly give George W Bush the same breathing room. In fact, the foremost defense of Barack Obama is that Bush destroyed everything. What gives?
To an extent, I must agree. Bush takes the fall for previous years of miserable policy just as Obama takes the fall for that miserable policy self-destructing during his presidency. However, people are extremely short-sided. Me, you, and millions of other Americans are guilty of laying blame entirely on one individual.
To say George W. Bush or Barack Obama ruined 200+ years of America is asinine.
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.
