I voted for Obama in 2008.
- Thread starter Patagonia
- Start date
Ted Cruz is a pos..... There is no comparison.....please.
Let me elaborate-
1) Stock market more than doubled.
2) Unemployment cut by half.
3)Gas prices nearly half.
4)Corporate profits setting records.
5)GNP growth best of any OECD country.
6)Interest rates next to nothing.
7)Inflation next to nothing.
8)Bin Laden is dead.
9)Deficit going down.
10)Very few American lives being lost in foreign wars- especially by comparison to Bush.
Where is the god damned disaster?
Further- You have been told and therefore believed for seven years he was coming for your guns. The gun and ammo makers are now sitting on a mountain of money and laughing at your stockpiling gullibility. You've been played by your own team.
I personally am not very happy with Obama (for reasons I never hear mentioned on this board) but this "worst ever" denial of basic facts crap is just plain dumb.
When ever doing a job interview or around people mention this loudly and with much pride
You will thank me
Whatever you might think of Sarah Palin's intellect, she is absolutely 100 % correct on this particular point. Signed, A Scientist
Barack Obama - the ghost of Columbia University. Everything about his public profile is seen to be very cloudy if anyone bothers to look.
http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/barack-obama-the-ghost-of-columbia-university/
Wow you are nasty. Is this the typical hate from all Bernie Socialist voters?
Which statement? I meant the one in which she states she is as much a scientist as Bill Nye is. Do you think she is right?
I'm in my early forties. Work behind a desk on which there is a computer.
Three questions for you:
1) what is your point of view?
2) what is your age?
3) what is your occupation?
Last edited:
bush and obama both are the two guys sittng in the back of the classroom, avg students
bill clinton was our last intelligent president weve had since reagan
but like a few are ointing out- the parties are rigged
the way the system is set up with "delegates", "super delegates", and "electoral college". these allow the top 1% to control our outcomes and make us think it was our call.
the explosion of wifi and high speed data that the govt has tried to regulate and control mental thought hast happened as fast as they would like. and i hope they never are allowed to touch the internet.
should trump file charges against the RNC??
you guys should know who larry nichols is..
we started with this group
and down to 4. do you see anyone on the pic that is better than the 4 left?
Oh, I was avidly a Rubio supporter. But he entered one election too soon.we started with this group
and down to 4. do you see anyone on the pic that is better than the 4 left?
Yeah, I don't know what to say. No way in hell. If I had known McCain would have made it through 8 years, then I would have voted for him. But, to be honest, I worry about our defense budget. It is hugely inefficient.
man i used to be a huge mccain supporter, but then when i worked on the dole campaign and got to actually hang out with john, he wasnt the hero that i had a vision of.
to me, goes back to "Bob Dole". the guy from kansas. he was a special man. sure do miss politicians of this cloth
I'm guessing he's referring to the fact that Nye is not a scientist. His degree is in engineering and before becoming a "science guy" he was an engineer for Boeing.
Now, that's not to say that Nye isn't much more knowledgeable than Palin. He's obviously devoted the last couple of decades to learning about and passing on scientific knowledge, but he's not an actual scientist. His statements are simply a regurgitation of learned facts.
To me, the very fact that he goes on a stage and debates the likes of ken ham or Sarah Palin or even puts climate change up for a debate is a little distasteful. You can't debate facts and shouldn't give attention to people who so blatantly ignore them. By giving them a stage you lend credence to their position.
Facts.
Most on this board ignores that there are A LOT of positive things he's done in his presidency, including what you've listed. They are ignoring the fact that their properties, stocks, finances, etc. are in way better shape now than they were under W's regime.
I'm an independent that votes for who I think will be better for our country. I'm glad I cast my vote with Obama in 08' amd 12'. I also think that Obama has made some bad decisions as well that I'm not pleased with, but he will be viewed as a successful president in history no matter what most this board says.
Because of the ACA, gun regulations, gay marriage, and a deficit that has risen every year since W was put in office (after Clinton managed it well btw), they will say Obama is the worst president ever.
That's just not factually accurate.
yes some of those are facts that have been doctored.
like unemployment numbers. we used to just count only jobs worth enough to make a living but over the years we changed how we factor that.
remember how much bush doctored the books
Lol, really? Palin? If you want to kill a few brain cells read her endorsement speech for Trump.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/kyleblaine/...of-sarah-palins-bizarre-trump-spee#.iyXmDxJ03
What is a scientist then? Which boxes must be checked? And this guy disagrees:
Don't understand the beef with climate change....let's say the majority of scientists are wrong however we all end up with more sustainable energy, less pollution, less reliance on foreign oil, and more jobs in a new, cutting edge sustainable energy industry as a result of changes enacted to counter climate change. Is that a bad thing?
Agreed. Unemployment #'s also take out people who are no longer actively pursuing employment, so they are skewed.
I think you will agree though that the job market has become much stronger than it was in 02-08'.
I appreciate the thoughts but believe your observations are misguided as many often are without more facts and and the benefit time to judge the real long-term impact of government policies. We may disagree with one another, but here is where I am coming from. With respect to real estate and stock prices, you are correct that those assets have improved dramatically since the financial crisis as Bush was leaving office. However, this is primarily the result of a federal reserve policy to prop up the challenged economy coming out of the recession. We were at serious risk of deflation coming out of the recession, so the federal reserve adopted zero percent interest rates and injected a ton of liquidity into the market in order to prevent deflation (decreasing asset values). In other words, the fed has injected a market stimulus that is outside of the ordinary free market economic process. The fed has wanted to see the economy improve and grow at a more self-sustaining level and remove their substantial artificial economic stimulus. For example, the fed has wanted to increase interest rates for years, but every time they have mentioned it publicly or tried it (as they did one quarter point recently), the stock market declines rapidly and there seems to be an economic slowdown that delays any further action to increase the rates. We are an economy on meds from the federal reserve. As with any federal intervention in the economy or other free market activity, unintended consequences emerge and asset bubbles are created. The housing crisis at the end of the last decade, for example, often gets blamed on Wall Street. While there is no doubt blame to be placed there with bad actors, the real culprit was government policy that pushed government insured mortgage agencies to adopt lending practices to allow for greater home ownership for those who would not otherwise qualify for home loans based on credit quality and the ability to make down payments. The goal was a great one as home ownership is often considered part of the American Dream. However, the easy money loans to people that had no ability to repay them was a disaster waiting to happen. The easy money created huge demand for housing that was unsustainable - thus, a housing bubble. As a result, if you, sir, were in a similar debate in 2006 and someone cited the increased value of homes as a reason why Bush is a great President, time and facts would have proven that observation to be wrong. The current stock market valuations are driven, in large part, by easy money and cheap debt. Asset values would otherwise be correcting downward without such stimulus. In a deflationary environment, inflation is not a real risk. If, for example, interest rates to buy a home suddenly moved to 7-8%, a more normalized level, most people would not be able to qualify for loans to buy homes they might be able to purchase now with the benefit of much lower rates which provide lower mortgage payments. Bringing it back to today's stock market and house prices, I think we are in a very precarious position and are facing a very real risk of another correction, particularly in the stock market. Obama and the fed will do everything they can to continue to prop up the market and hope like hell he gets out of office before the bubble bursts on his watch.
That is my long winded way of saying that I agree with your observation of where we are currently, from a stock market and real estate asset point of view post recession, but believe it has nothing at all to do with sound policies of the Obama Administration. What is unfortunate is that good economic policy would have allowed us to grow at a much faster rate vs the current rate. US businesses are the best and most resilient in world. Companies have grown despite poor economic leadership from Washington. Continuing threats of higher taxes on corporations, incredible amounts of mind numbing regulation, and continuing intervention in the free markets have all led to uncertainty and decreased investment in the capital assets needed to grow business more rapidly and create jobs. Small business creation is at an all time low. These are the job creators; the risk takers that grow the next great American companies. Obama's policies have challenged entrepreneurship and investment. Further, Obamacare creates another entitlement program that we can't afford. Should we want everyone to have good healthcare - absolutely. But the economic reality is we have to find a better way to do it. I challenge all voters to research the tidal wave of mandatory spending on social security and medicare/medicaid, even before Obamacare, that is heading our way as the baby boomer population heads to retirement in massive numbers over the next two decades. It is jaw dropping. My friends, it is completely unsustainable. And that does not include interest on our massive and growing deficit. When interest rates do increase, the cost of the interest on that debt will increase dramatically as well. Democrats want to pander to voters by putting their heads in the sand and saying they won't make any adjustments. Something has to be done about it, even if the compromise is to start chipping away at it rather than some comprehensive solution. There are too few politicians with the political will to address this challenge.
I think the observation that I found interesting was the one on oil prices. The US has the opportunity to be the leading energy producer in the entire world and the Obama Administration has fought it the entire way by denying drilling rights on federal land to the lowest level in recent history. Oil producers and new technology allowed enterprising companies to produce record amounts of oil. With more supply, prices started to decrease, in spite of the Obama Administrations actions and policies. Now, OPEC countries have increased their supply to try to drive the fracking companies out of business by driving down the price of oil. Not Obama. More energy produced in the US provides a competitive advantage for US companies and makes us less dependent on Middle East oil. This in turn helps us from a national defense/foreign policy point of view.
Last soap box comment - foreign policy. This Administration, having experimented with the national apology tour for all of America's past actions, befriending our enemies, and alienated our allies, has created one big geopolitical mess. Our military has been weakened with this Administration and we are at much greater risk now than any time I can remember. Our projection of weakness before Russia and China has them taking provocative actions that we have not seen since the Cold War. When America is not a leader and does not project strength, we enable the bad actors to set the table for history to repeat itself.
In summary, I predict history will judge this Administration as being very comparable to the Jimmy Carter years. I will leave it to you to judge your view of Carter's presidency. I found the dialogue in this thread interesting as it seemed to imply that intelligence is the most important factor in choosing a President. While I agree that it is one of the important factors to be considered, I find the candidate's values/beliefs and leadership experience/ability to be even more important. Given those two factors, I did not vote for Obama in either election as he falls well short on both counts in my humble opinion. There was some talk of Reagan's intelligence in this thread, or lack thereof. Whether we agree or not, Reagan was a great leader of people and had served as a leader when Governor of California. He had a charismatic personality, was firm and tough, but fair, with adversaries (foreign and abroad), had a compelling vision for how to rebuild America, made both Democrats and Republicans feel important and valued in reaching across the aisle to cut deals, and strengthened our defense to the point that the success of his economic policies and the military arms race bankrupted the Soviet Union and ended the Cold War. And Mr. Reagan loved his country.
Now I am going to reach for an analogy here, so don't make too much fun of me. These Reagan qualities of uplifting a demoralized country, creating a compelling vision, and recruiting top talent to make America great once again. Does that leadership skill set sound like someone we all know? As you may have guessed by now, I am not suggesting that it is Obama. Instead, I am referring to our own Dabo Swinney. Most thought he was goofy and not very intelligent - heck, many still feel that way. But that guy is a leader and can sell a vision to players, coaches, fans and the Clemson administration that many Clemson fans never thought would ever come close to being realized. You and I know there are smarter coaches. I don't need the smartest guy, but I will take a smart guy who is a heck of a leader, surrounds himself with great people, has a compelling vision, is trustworthy, and loves his constituency (team/country). That is why he has been successful.
In this political season, its easy to get sideways with each other as we debate our views. I think we can all agree that we are blessed to live in a great country where we have the right to vote for our own leaders and share our opinions openly. We should encourage debate. Sometimes we will just have to agree to disagree on various issues. I think we are at an important inflection point in our country where American values are at risk. Try to avoid falling prey to the usual talking points from one side or the other and lets try to pick a good leader whose values drive that person to do whats best for the country over whats best for their party. I hope someone like that emerges as its difficult to see who that is right now. As for me, I will pick the person I perceive to be the best leader with the values I believe to be most important: Very strong military; less government, more individual liberty; free market economy/less regulation; tax reform; and energy independence.
With that said, on a lighter note, I am stoked about this football season - its a great time to be a Tiger - Go Tigers!
He sought to surround himself with experienced, intelligent experts implemented a plan that I believe is the blueprint we need now m
@rladams5
im not sold on the job market
seems like most are part time or most are $12 or less in pay per hour with no benefits
id say at least half to 75% of the jobs offered require the employee to seek a second job or use uncle sam to make ends meet
we should only count jobs that are full time and pay enough to be self sufficient
all the rest is just noise to doctor numbers
I think you bring some great facts to the debate that most due not when they let emotion or bias drive their commentary.
Agreed on the interest rates being a key driver in housing. I also agree on the dislike for the Affordable Care Act. Finally, 100% agree that the intelligence argument that is common in this thread is absolutely not the most important trait of a the POTUS. Just like coaching (Dabo), business, etc., vision, resiliency, identifying/recruiting talent, etc. is key. You can argue on the level of experience that is needed depending on which of the jobs we are discussing, but you do need some for sure. Sometimes too much experience can be a detriment to leadership bc one may not be the time of change agent needed for a role. Intelligence is important, but not the #1 trait.
As far as foreign policy, we will have to agree to disagree. He has made a lot of moves as president that was needed, including eliminating threats, getting us out of wars that were not smart to participate in, rebuilding relationships with other countries, and cutting some Military spending for a country that was spending more than the next several largest countries combined. I'm a military brat who's father fought in Vietnam and still think that some of those moves where needed, especially after Bush's moves that started to accelerate the deficits growth after Clinton flattened it during his presidency.
During your statement you practically gave Obama no credit for the moves he made that helped our nation during his presidency, but praised Reagan's moves. I think we both are smart enough to realize that President's don't have as much power as a lot think, but they are judged by what happened in our great country during their time as POTUS.
I did enjoy reading your points and insight. Very well thought out and written.
Heard on NPR that Palin is backing a movie about debunking climate change.
Looking forward to that discussion.
Called Climate Hustle.
Looking forward to that discussion.
Called Climate Hustle.
Thanks for your thoughts as well. A agree with your points regarding a candidate's experience. Also, like a quarterback, Presidents sometimes do get too much of the credit or the blame, no doubt. With respect to foreign policy, I have a tough time getting there with you. While getting out of the wars needed to happen, the manner in which it was executed was devastating and contributes significantly to the issues we face today with ISIS and Syria. I too am from a family with a strong military influence. I bet we both can agree on the importance of projecting military strength to the world, and just as importantly, standing behind the words and commitments we make to our allies. Military spending, while important to be carefully managed, is extremely small as a percentage of the budget as compared to entitlements and interest on the national debt. I can tell you right now, that a great deal of attention is being directed to the Chinese and Russian threats.
Enjoyed hearing your thoughts and enjoy the weekend.
I think Obama has been a disappointed but has been far from a terrible president. I think a lot of his ideas and goals were things most ,Americans would agree with to some extent or another. However, the final product was so bastardized by the process that it was full or flaws.
Not being able to get the SOFA with Iraq is not all obama's fault.
Obama has had to work with some real knuckleheads too. So much instability in the ME with deposed leaders and that arrogant Bibi.
I want a strong military, but I too am tired of free-loaders and projects like the Zumwalt.
Not being able to get the SOFA with Iraq is not all obama's fault.
Obama has had to work with some real knuckleheads too. So much instability in the ME with deposed leaders and that arrogant Bibi.
I want a strong military, but I too am tired of free-loaders and projects like the Zumwalt.
I still think Romney would have been a hell of a good President.
Actually, Nye's education is as an engineer, not a scientist. So it's arguable if Palin was right about him. But that quote about throwing climate deniers in jail (if accurate) is terrifying.
Never got the whole Obama/Palin comparison. Obama was running for president, Palin for Vice president. A better comparison would be Palin/Biden, which is kinda like picking between South Carolina and UNC.
so far so good @Johnnyboy8 i got to the "fed dumped liquidity on the market"
all that means is that they are borrowing money n the credit of main street american taxpayers to replinish money that was stolen by wall street.
should not have bailed out with socialism. we should have let capitalism work itself out.
Tough problems in the ME, no debate; those are some messed up people from centuries of hatred toward one another. SOFA required conviction and a dedication to achieving the right result versus what I perceived to be the pursuit of scoring political points by pulling out as quickly as possible above other goals. My guess is that if you were the leader of Israel and every other country around you spoke daily of wanting to wipe you and all of your people off of the map, you would be a hard ass SOB too.
+. Because Palin would have been President if something happened to McCain. McCain was pretty old and had lived through a lot by then. The risk of Obama not being able to serve out his terms was far less.
