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.
No The president is responsible for all things that happen while he is president that applies to all presidents past and present and future.
We as people have choices. Obama has made some he now has to own up to those. Enough of the excuses.
No one forced him to take this job enough whining about the past. Enough he and his party helped create the mess they complain about.
No one. Not on the right, not on the left or in the middle predicted the absolutely horrid job numbers that ended the last couple months of the Bush administration. No one, not on the left, not on the right, not in the middle predicted the absolutely horrendous 4th quarter earnings report. No one, not on the left, not on the right, not in the center predicted the 4th quarter GDP reports. Regardless this was a chart based off information known in mid December (which were preliminary November job #'s, which wound up being MUCH worse than initially reported, 3rd quarter earnings & GDP reports. Things got MUCH MUCH worse in the 4th quarter. The unemployment rate in which those predictions were based off of was 6.7%. In actuality when the Stimulus passed it was at 8.2%. That chart and the whole 8% figure was not mentioned by Obama, no one was talking about 8% once these reports came out, everyone knew it was going to go past that.
Anyway again I will ask. Do you think its fair that the time period for Obama to be able to turn things around should be a similar length it took Reagan to turn thins around?
Obama's role as a Senator was no more than ANY OTHER Senator - including EVERY SINGLE GOP Senator. As far as the Democrats in general. Sure - IN GENERAL they share some of the responsibility for creating the mess. Some - like Frank, have a pretty good-sized share, but Obama played little role in ANY of that and the fact is, that as the housing crises began to unfold it was the GOP who was in charge. It was apparent LONG before the Democrats took control of Congress that housing was going to create a BIG problem.
Do I think Obama's actions are "causing anything"?
Well - aside from good things I've mention previously, he's certainly increased the debt - which is NOT a good thing. Problem is, I don't see that there was much of an alternative. First off, MORE THAN HALF of the increase in the deficit was NOT due to any increase in spending but rather was due to the DECREASE IN TAX REVENUES because of the recession that he inherited.
Obama had 2 choices - try and stimulate the economy through government spending and reducing taxes (even if just temporarily) OR cutting government to reduce the deficit. He chose the former - and I believe it was the RIGHT CHOICE. The deficit NEEDS to be dealt with- but the in the midst of the worst recession in 75 years is NOT the time to do it. ALL cutting government would have done was throw EVEN MORE people into the unemployment line (which costs the government money ANYWAY because it pays for their unemployment) and thus make unemployment EVEN WORSE. Things indead were ugly, but they would have been a WHOLE LOT WORSE with any other alternative.
Ken
I am not saying his role was but so many seems to want to pretend that he wasnt a senator. Just like so many wants to pretend democrats hold no blame for the mess we are in now.
Check out this video of republicans trying to regulate Fannie and Freddie and check out the democrat responses to republicans.
What difference does it make? Either way, it'll still be a higher approval than even the 'wingers Sainted "Gipper" enjoyed during the the same time in his presidency.... and 'ol Bonzo didn't inherit a worldwide financial collapse and 2 wars to deal with! Presidential Approval Ratings from 1945-2008
No one. Not on the right, not on the left or in the middle predicted the absolutely horrid job numbers that ended the last couple months of the Bush administration. No one, not on the left, not on the right, not in the middle predicted the absolutely horrendous 4th quarter earnings report. No one, not on the left, not on the right, not in the center predicted the 4th quarter GDP reports. Regardless this was a chart based off information known in mid December (which were preliminary November job #'s, which wound up being MUCH worse than initially reported, 3rd quarter earnings & GDP reports. Things got MUCH MUCH worse in the 4th quarter. The unemployment rate in which those predictions were based off of was 6.7%. In actuality when the Stimulus passed it was at 8.2%. That chart and the whole 8% figure was not mentioned by Obama, no one was talking about 8% once these reports came out, everyone knew it was going to go past that.
Anyway again I will ask. Do you think its fair that the time period for Obama to be able to turn things around should be a similar length it took Reagan to turn thins around?
Do you know the last unemployment numbers that came down and influenced the Dow-Jones so much Friday? Now no part of that is Bush's fault but when they report that there were 441,000 new jobs in May and it turns out that 411,000 of those jobs were Census jobs, and therefore very temporary, it appears to me that little is taking place in the business arena like the Dems tried to make that number appear.
Oh well, I am sure that Bush can be blamed for that number and the attempt to make it appear so much better than it was. He will be blamed for every negative thing that occurs through this one and only term of Obama.
What difference does it make? Either way, it'll still be a higher approval than even the 'wingers Sainted "Gipper" enjoyed during the the same time in his presidency.... and 'ol Bonzo didn't inherit a worldwide financial collapse and 2 wars to deal with!
Three points:
1. Much of the 1980s media was anti-Reagan.
2. Reagan inherited a terrible economy. 22% interest rates and 13% inflation, for example.
3. The Cold War was still a very real threat.
Bush's approval rating was high only because people were scared and needed some reassurance. And his whole family legacy prides themselves on that. Had 9/11 never happened, the chimp would have been sent back to the zoo to scratch his ass and giggle at his own malapropisms in peace.
Bush's approval rating was high only because people were scared and needed some reassurance. And his whole family legacy prides themselves on that. Had 9/11 never happened, the chimp would have been sent back to the zoo to scratch his ass and giggle at his own malapropisms in peace.
Now there is an intelligent response. I think my 4th grade drandson could do better. And you want to be taken serious.
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.
mala what?
