Obama named worst president in 6 decades

A place for intelligent and well-thought-out discussion involving politics and associated topics. No nonsense will be tolerated at all.
User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

telcoman wrote:
szh wrote: Irrelevant attempt to side-track ... the real issue is the massive increase in national debt that Obama has overseen! That is the real point to be looked at.

And Bernie would only make it far, far worse!

Z
The massive increase in national debt is mostly the result of the republican controlled congress refusal to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires along with the fiscal meltdown mess Obama inherited from Bush.
Utter rubbish! :rolleyes:

As has been shown many times (including in prior posts from me ... using *REAL* data from the IRS and GAO), even collecting one hundred percent of all income from all "millionaires and billionaires" would not make a sufficient difference to dent the government over-spending that has occurred in Obama's time in office.

When income (revenue) slows down, so should spending. But politicians - particularly tax-and-spend Democrats (including in California) - are notorious for their blinders when it comes to entitlements. Build in enough of those, and, in time, we will end up like Greece ... without any reality check of belt-tightening in tough times. Abuse of the entitlements is horrific in that country, and the UK and USA are heading to the same brick wall.

You really should look at actual data - not spout financial nonsense that a politician primes you with! But I doubt you will ever bother to understand government economics and finance, of course. Sad. :tisk:

Z


User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

telcoman wrote:1-Jobless claims down this morning
It is temporary and "seasonally adjusted". The real data is always quite cyclical: http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dsho ... ent-Claims

Thus, one short period report does not indicate much - the long-term trends are what count. And that data is coming down, but not yet certain.
telcoman wrote:2-Gasoline prices down
Only because of over-production of US shale oil (which Democrats want to stop, btw), over-production around the world, Iran oil coming in to production, less oil being used due to economic slowdowns in many countries. Possibly also an effort (this is a conspiracy theory - so take with a grain of salt) by the US to hurt Russia financially by causing oil prices to drop dramatically.

And, what you need to understand beyond the effect it has on your personal pocket book, is that this precipitous drop (as opposed to change that is less of a shock to the system) is actually going to hurt the global economy quite seriously. With a backlash leading to a US recession within 12 to 18 months.

From the NY Times (your favorite newspaper): http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/upsho ... appen.html
This will put those countries’ economies under pressure. Global investors will discover more poorly run companies and weak governmental structures than they had generally assumed existed during the emerging markets boom, when an influx of foreign money masked those problems.

The steep drop in oil prices is both a cause and effect. For oil-producing countries (in the Middle East, certainly, but also the likes of Russia, Brazil, Mexico and Nigeria), falling oil prices mean a drop in revenue and a lot of stress on major oil companies. And the slowdown in economic activity across global emerging markets reduces demand for oil, creating a vicious cycle.
telcoman wrote:19 million additional Americans have health coverage
Lots of cracks in that facade ... too many to bother showing the detail here.
telcoman wrote:3- Economy continuing to improve
You have absolutely zero understanding of what the economy is likely to do this year. The Feds are concerned, the major economists are concerned. All indications are that we are heading to another recession.

Even your favorite newspaper is saying the same thing: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/upsho ... appen.html
More and more news headlines and stock market analysts’ reports have started predicting, or at least insinuating, that a recession could be near in the United States.

...

What we’re dealing with isn’t just a run-of-the-mill economic slowdown in emerging markets, but the reversal of a 15-year cycle in which capital has flowed into emerging markets year after year while debt grew. Now that’s reversing, and we’re seeing a version of Warren Buffett’s maxim that “you only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out.”
Another quote from an article (also in the NY Times) with my bolding and underlining in an effort to get your attention: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/upsho ... rkets.html
That is to say, global stock, bond and especially commodity markets have, in the first three weeks of the year, swung in ways that suggest this is a perilous time. Their volatility and direction are consistent with the prospect of a new crisis or global recession. (The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index closed down 1.2 percent Wednesday after dropping more than 3 percent earlier in the day.)

The price of oil is where most of the action is, with West Texas Intermediate Crude trading below $27 a barrel Wednesday, down from around $37 at the end of December, $60 in June and $100 in mid-2014. The broad S.&P. is down 9 percent so far in 2016, and stock indexes in many emerging economies are down even more. Bond and currency markets point to economic troubles in oil-producing nations. (Considering a trip to Quebec? Good move. The Canadian dollar is down 19 percent against the United States dollar since May).

What makes these falling prices unnerving is that it’s hard to tell a simple story about what is driving them.
I have to ask (with futile shaking of my head): What fantasy land information are you reading? :confused: Does reality and true facts ever intrude into your space?
telcoman wrote:The right wingnuts were ...
As always, you insist on insult rather than rational discourse.

The folks on the right are busy trying - desperately - to manage the financial mess and minimize the damage that the folks on the left are leaving our children and their children in the next two or three decades.

Z

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Under President Obama, for the first time ever, the United States lost its perfect credit rating. :slap:

FACT: There are more black Americans living in poverty today–10.8 million at 26.2 percent–than there were in 2009 (25.8 percent), when President Obama took office.
FACT: A jarring 26.4 percent of black households receive food stamps assistance, despite black Americans being just 13 percent of the total population.
FACT: Black children under the age 18 made up 27 percent of the black population in 2014 but are 38 percent of blacks in poverty.
FACT: The black jobless rate is currently 9.1 percent, nearly double the national average.

46.5 Million: Average Number Of Americans Receiving Food Stamps In FY 2014. (Department Of Agriculture, Accessed 1/14/15)
13 Million: Average Number Of Americans Who Have Joined The Food Stamp Program Since FY 2009. (Department Of Agriculture, Accessed 1/14/15)
7 Million: Number Of Americans Who Will No Longer Have Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Due To ObamaCare. (Congressional Budget Office, 4/14/14)
$4,154: Increase In Family Health Care Premiums Under Obama. (The Kaiser Family Foundation, 9/10/14)
5.5 Million: Americans Who Have Fallen Into Poverty Since Obama Became President. (U.S. Census Bureau, Accessed 1/14/15)

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This thread and its title is so disrespectful of our president who by the way was elected twice by the American people.
You and some others are examples of why this country has such problems after our previous president and the republican party have put the United States into a HUGE clusterfvck. And I mean HUGE

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/opini ... inion&_r=0

"IN early 2009, as Barack Obama was about to take office, Mitch McConnell, the leader of the Republican minority in the Senate, assembled his caucus at a retreat in West Virginia. There, he laid out his strategy for taking on the new president, who was sweeping into office on a tide of popularity, historical resonance and great expectations barely diminished by the economic free fall then underway."

"The key, Mr. McConnell told his fellow Republicans, was to stymie and undermine Mr. Obama, but to do so in subtle ways. As one of the senators present, Robert F. Bennett of Utah, later recalled to me: “Mitch said, ‘We have a new president with an approval rating in the 70 percent area. We do not take him on frontally. We find issues where we can win, and we begin to take him down, one issue at a time. We create an inventory of losses, so it’s Obama lost on this, Obama lost on that. And we wait for the time where the image has been damaged to the point where we can take him on.’ ”

The anger within this country by the younger generation, women, and many other ethnic voters is going to surprise people like you this coming November.

Perhaps you and others that think like you should consider moving to another country or planet?

The pending increase in democratic socialism that you and a few others are so afraid of is going to increase as it has in almost every other democratic country and it is about time the rich living in the United States have their taxes increased to pay for the well being of all United States citizens.

Whether it is Hillary or Bernie that wins in November, if that result is going to upset you perhaps you should start packing up now?

Telcoman

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Touched a raw nerve have we? As the saying goes, the truth will out. During George W. Bush's time as President, and still to this day, the left was far more disrespectful (death threats), and he was elected twice as well. Even the Wall Street Journal said The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace.

Remember this? Imagine the reaction if this had been said about Obama.
Bill Maher, the comedian-pundit, was having a conversation with John Kerry. He asked the senator what he had gotten his wife for her birthday. Kerry answered that he had taken her to Vermont. Maher said, “You could have went to New Hampshire and killed two birds with one stone.” (New Hampshire is an early primary state, of course.) Kerry said, “Or I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.” (This is the same Kerry who joked in 1988, “Somebody told me the other day that the Secret Service has orders that if George Bush is shot, they’re to shoot Quayle.”) Also in 2006, the New York comptroller, Alan Hevesi, spoke to graduating students at Queens College. He said that his fellow Democrat, Sen. Charles Schumer, would “put a bullet between the president’s eyes if he could get away with it.”
How about a list of all the insulting nicknames? Bushitler, Bushollini, Caligula Jr., Darth Moron, idiot-in-chief, and many more.

There are so many old clichés I could insert here, but I think you get the point.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Rogue One wrote:Touched a raw nerve have we? As the saying goes, the truth will out. During George W. Bush's time as President, and still to this day, the left was far more disrespectful (death threats), and he was elected twice as well. Even the Wall Street Journal said The Treatment of Bush Has Been a Disgrace.
Perhaps it has something to do with the Iraq invasion, thousands killed, many more thousands wounded, no WMD, destroying the US economy, the huge debt increase by failing to raise taxes to pay for the two wars, medicare part D, and numerous others.

We've got plenty of pissed off people and that is why the upcoming election is so important
We are going to find out which group is pissed off the most to choose our next president.
And don't forget the 19 million that would lose their newly acquired healthcare under a republican win in November
How many of those hearing republican candidates speak of repealing the ACA are going to vote for them?

Telcoman

User avatar
themadscientist
Posts: 29308
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 3:30 pm
Car: R32 GTR, DR30 RS Turbo, BRZ, Lunchbox, NSR50 Sportster 883 Iron
Location: Staring down at you with disdain from the spooky mountaintop castle.

Post

Wait, so comparisons to Hitler and simulated assassination movies are ok if you're really, REALLY mad? Got it. :rolleyes:

Well, at least Barry reduced the deficit, oh.
http://www.truthfulpolitics.com/http:/t ... cal-party/
Image

and closed Gitmo, yeah.
http://time.com/4178779/obama-close-guantanamo-bay/
Image

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hillary to the rescue

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/us/po ... pe=article

"LAS VEGAS — Buoyed by the support of minority voters and enthusiastic workers in the city’s big casinos, Hillary Clinton defeated Senator Bernie Sanders in the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, thwarting his momentum and proving to an anxious Democratic Party that she can assemble a broad coalition to carry her to the general election."

These minorities will not be supporting any republican anytime soon

"Voters in many predominantly Hispanic and black neighborhoods backed Mrs. Clinton after she worked hard to connect with them, most notably when she comforted a tearful young Latina who feared her parents would be deported. That moment was turned into a powerful ad here for Mrs. Clinton, whose message of solidarity with minority voters stood in contrast to Mr. Sanders’s more esoteric attacks on Wall Street and the campaign finance system."


Telcoman

User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

telcoman wrote:Perhaps it has something to do with the Iraq invasion, thousands killed, many more thousands wounded, no WMD, destroying the US economy, the huge debt increase by failing to raise taxes to pay for the two wars, medicare part D, and numerous others.

We've got plenty of pissed off people and that is why the upcoming election is so important
We are going to find out which group is pissed off the most to choose our next president.
And don't forget the 19 million that would lose their newly acquired healthcare under a republican win in November
How many of those hearing republican candidates speak of repealing the ACA are going to vote for them?

Telcoman
I hope you have the same outrage for the Obama "Death Without A Trial" process ... that he ordered escalated secretly (and the Justice Department continues to block attempts to get good data and oversight).

From this site: https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2 ... ly-update/

Using facts, rather than clueless assertions, this is the CIA drone attack data from one country (Pakistan) alone - let alone the others in Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, etc.:
Bush 2004 - 1
Bush 2005 - 3
Bush 2006 - 2
Bush 2007 - 5
Bush 2008 - 38
Obama 2009 - 54
Obama 2010 - 128
Obama 2011 - 75
Obama 2012 - 50
Obama 2013 - 27
Obama 2014 - 25
Obama 2015 - 13
Obama 2016 - 1

In these strikes, nearly 4000 people have been killed in Pakistan, and another 1700 injured.

By US government estimates, nearly 1000 were known innocent civilians (including more than 200 children). The US government declares that the others were not civilians ... a "fact" that is disputed by many experts, BTW!

From this article: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... n-afghani/ you can see the following:
Obama-led drone strikes kill innocent civilians 90% of the time
Ryan Devereaux, a journalist with the website, reported that “During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets.”
Nevertheless, the U.S. government considers many of these casualties to be enemy combatants, according to the the source, despite the strikes more often than not ending in the deaths of women, children and other civilians who become collateral damage of targeted attacks and are subsequently written off as adversaries killed during war, regardless of status.
Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU National Security Project, condemned the revelations: “The Obama administration’s lethal program desperately needs transparency and accountability because it is undermining the right to life and national security.”

“These eye-opening disclosures make a mockery of U.S. government claims that its lethal force operations are based on reliable intelligence and limited to lawful targets. In fact, the government often claims successes that are really tragic losses,” Ms. Shamsi added.
This site calls it "The Children Killed by America’s Drones. “Crimes Against Humanity” committed by Barack H. Obama.: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-childr ... ma/5320570

The data on attacks from another site - this was quoted (sourced) in the NY Times article below too:
Image

Even your favorite source, the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/world ... l-die.html says the following:
Every independent investigation of the strikes has found far more civilian casualties than administration officials admit. Gradually, it has become clear that when operators in Nevada fire missiles into remote tribal territories on the other side of the world, they often do not know who they are killing, but are making an imperfect best guess.
But over the Obama presidency, it has become harder for journalists to obtain information from the government on the results of particular strikes. And Mr. Obama’s Justice Department has fought in court for years to keep secret the legal opinions justifying strikes.
There are traumatized kids: http://www.channel4.com/news/drone-atta ... f-children as a result of our efforts:
He gave the example of eight-year-old Yasmin (not her real name), who was next door to a house targeted in a presumed drone strike.

"Her father said that she vomits every day, and also when she hears aircraft, or drones, or anything related," said Dr Schaapveld. "She said, in her own words, 'I am scared of those things because they throw missiles.'".
This is all from our Nobel Peace Prize Winner ... I wonder if the Nobel selection committee stays up nights at all questioning their decision?

So ... what are your thoughts on this Obama-led drone campaign? Do you think it is okay for Obama to order killing people in other nations abroad ... without any trial? If so, what about the 45 in the above list from Pakistan who were US citizens?

Do you see why many nations outside the US also consider him the worst POTUS we have ever had? Do you see why we drive people into terrorism as the only way for a poor person to try to retaliate against a country that kills innocent people remotely with $60,000 drones - each one of which costs more than that person would make in their lifetime?

Z

PS, I would never consider voting for Hillary Clinton for the same reason ... she is equally guilty of the same crime during her tenure as Secretary of State.

User avatar
szh
Posts: 18857
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 12:54 pm
Car: 2018 Tesla Model 3.

Unfortunately, no longer a Nissan or Infiniti, but continuing here at NICO!
Location: San Jose, CA

Post

telcoman wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This thread and its title is so disrespectful of our president
He earned it.

Z

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

telcoman wrote:^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hillary to the rescue

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/21/us/po ... pe=article

Telcoman
Or not...
Clinton loses voters who value honesty by 70 points in Nevada
Hillary Clinton may have won Nevada, but entrance polls of the state carry a troubling sign for what is considered her chief weakness heading into a general election: trustworthiness.

Among the 25 percent of Nevada Democratic voters who cited "honest and trustworthy" as the top quality they were seeking in a president, they favored Sen. Bernie Sanders 82-12 percent, according to the CNN entrance poll.

Continued questions surrounding Clinton's use of a private email server while secretary of state have eroded many voters' trust in her. In New Hampshire, where Sanders dominated Clinton, he captured voters who were seeking honesty and trustworthiness by an even wider margin — 93-5 percent.

Public skepticism of Clinton has made Republicans confident that she would be vulnerable in a general election.
South Carolina shatters voter turnout records - for Republicans
South Carolina voters showed up to the Republican primary Saturday night in record numbers, according to the state's election commission. Republican National Committee spokesman Sean Spicer noted that South Carolina is the third earliest voting state to beat any previous records on voter turnout. Both Iowa and New Hampshire attracted a greater number of voters this year than in previous presidential elections.

Meanwhile, voter turnout in Saturday's Democratic caucuses in Nevada declined nearly 33 percent in comparison to what it was in 2008.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

^^^
Don’t look now, but Barack Obama is suddenly popular

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... y-popular/

Telcoman

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

SIMPLY THE WORST=> Obama is First President Ever to Not See Single Year of 3% GDP Growth
The rate of real economic growth is the single greatest determinate of both America’s strength as a nation and the well-being of the American people.

On Thursday the Commerce Department announced that the US economy expanded at the slowest pace in two years. GDP growth rose at an anemic 0.5% rate after a paltry 1.4% fourth quarter advance.

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

Barack Obama will be the only U.S. president in history who did not deliver a single year of 3.0%+ economic growth.

According to Louis Woodhill, if the economy continues to perform below 2.67% GDP growth rate this year, President Barack Obama will leave office with the fourth worst economic record in US history.

Assuming 2.67% RGDP growth for 2016, Obama will leave office having produced an average of 1.55% growth. This would place his presidency fourth from the bottom of the list of 39*, above only those of Herbert Hoover (-5.65%), Andrew Johnson (-0.70%) and Theodore Roosevelt (1.41%)

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Rogue One wrote:
SIMPLY THE WORST=> Obama is First President Ever to Not See Single Year of 3% GDP Growth
The rate of real economic growth is the single greatest determinate of both America’s strength as a nation and the well-being of the American people.

On Thursday the Commerce Department announced that the US economy expanded at the slowest pace in two years. GDP growth rose at an anemic 0.5% rate after a paltry 1.4% fourth quarter advance.

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

Barack Obama will be the only U.S. president in history who did not deliver a single year of 3.0%+ economic growth.

According to Louis Woodhill, if the economy continues to perform below 2.67% GDP growth rate this year, President Barack Obama will leave office with the fourth worst economic record in US history.

Assuming 2.67% RGDP growth for 2016, Obama will leave office having produced an average of 1.55% growth. This would place his presidency fourth from the bottom of the list of 39*, above only those of Herbert Hoover (-5.65%), Andrew Johnson (-0.70%) and Theodore Roosevelt (1.41%)


Image


Telcoman

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Image

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Image

Image

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

^^^^^^^

Things certainly would have been better if the republicans had not decided to do everything they could to make Obama look bad.
In spite of republican opposition to everything Obama tried to do, overall he has done an outstanding job.
Just imagine how much better off we would have been if our do nothing republican congress had done their work.

Image

Telcoman

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

R/T Hemi wrote:I think history will view Obama in a very favorable light. I'm also going to put you'll on notice that we're in for, at the very least, 8 more years of a Democrat in the Whitehouse. What truly amazes me is how the Republicans are all so willing to criticize the Democrats instead of fixing their broken party, which in and of itself, is one of the reasons our president(s) will be wearing a blue tie in the future.
Review: ‘Bush,’ a Biography as Scathing Indictment

Books of The Times

By PETER BAKER JULY 3, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/books ... below&_r=0

"Mr. Smith leaves no mystery where he stands on Mr. Bush’s place in history. The first sentence of his book: “Rarely in the history of the United States has the nation been so ill-served as during the presidency of George W. Bush.”

The last: “Whether George W. Bush was the worst president in American history will be long debated, but his decision to invade Iraq is easily the worst foreign policy decision ever made by an American president.”

"In between are more than 650 pages of fast-paced if harsh biography. In this telling, Mr. Bush’s religious piety took on messianic fervor leading him to turn democracy promotion into a mission from God. He didn’t listen to the generals and diplomats. He badly bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina. He presided over the diminution of American values by authorizing torture and bugging.

“Believing he was the agent of God’s will, and acting with divine guidance, George W. Bush would lead the nation into two disastrous wars of aggression,” Mr. Smith writes. “Bush’s personalization of the war on terror combined with his macho assertiveness as the nation’s commander in chief,” he adds later, “were a recipe for disaster.”

The worst United States President will never be President Obama

Telcoman

User avatar
R/T Hemi
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 10:11 am
Car: 2010 Challenger R/T
2012 TSX
Location: Sandy Eggo.

Post

I'll bet my left nut that 8 years from now, the Republican's on this board will be claiming Hillary was the worst president ever and electing Warren will be a big mistake. Then, for the following 8 years, they'll complain about Warren. I see a Democratic White House for at least the next 16 years. Obama spend several years trying to clean up the Bush mess. Hillary won't have that problem.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

Obama's Economic Recovery Is Now $2.2 Trillion Below Average

Economists were surprised Friday when the Commerce Department reported that growth in the second quarter of this year was a mere 1.2%. But the real surprise is that anyone is surprised when the economy underperforms, since that's what it has been doing for the past seven years.

There has not been a single year in the past seven when the economy did better than President Obama promised, or that most economists expected.

Indeed, the real problem isn't the tepid growth in the second quarter, after an equally tepid first quarter. The real problem is that under President Obama's economic stewardship, the economy has grown far more slowly than it did in any of the previous 10 economic recoveries since World War II.

What this means in terms of wealth and prosperity can easily be seen when you compare the actual results under Obama to the average results of those previous recoveries.

What it shows is that, had Obama's recovery — which is now in its 28th quarter — been as robust as the average of the past 10 recoveries, the nation's economy would be $2.2 trillion — with a "t' -- bigger than it is today. That translates into more than $17,000 per household. (It's worth noting that many of those previous recoveries had suffered a subsequent recession 28 quarters after they started, so Obama is doing worse despite the current recovery's longevity.)


In other words, if Obama's recovery had merely been average, millions of people who are unemployed today would be working and paying taxes instead of worrying and collecting benefits. There would be millions fewer stuck in poverty today, and millions fewer dependent on food stamps and other government programs to get by.

If Obama's economy had merely been average, spending would have automatically been lower -- because so much of it is tied to benefit programs -- and revenues would have been higher. As a result, the country wouldn't be straddled with a national debt of more than $19 trillion, and Medicare and Social Security would be on somewhat sounder footings.

Just as important, had Obama's economy been average, the country wouldn't be in such a foul mood, and wouldn't so easily fall sway to the empty promises of a socialist, or the demagoguery and blame games being peddled by the major parties' presidential candidates.

More than three decades ago, Jimmy Carter delivered his infamous "malaise" speech (in which Carter never actually used the word "malaise"). Just like today, the economy was dead in the water, and there seemed to be no hope for anything better than mediocre. The country was told then to lower their expectations, just as the Obama administration and various liberal economists are busy telling us today.

But just like in the late 1970s, today's malaise isn't a permanent condition. And it is most emphatically not the fault of "bad" trade deals, or insufficient government spending on roads and bridges, or income inequality, or any of the other things being targeted by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

This malaise is the entirely the result of the Obama administration's anti-growth tax and regulatory policies, which have smothered what could have been and should have been a robust recovery from the terrible 2007-2009 recession.

At the Republican Convention in Cleveland, Govs. Scott Walker and Trump's running mate, Mike Pence, explained how their states thrived after they cut taxes and reined in government. As Indiana Gov. Pence said, "Indiana is a state that works because conservative principles work every time you put them into practice."

Every quarter and every year of disappointing growth under Obama is proof that the liberal principles don't.

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Rogue One wrote:
Obama's Economic Recovery Is Now $2.2 Trillion Below Average

Economists were surprised Friday when the Commerce Department reported that growth in the second quarter of this year was a mere 1.2%. But the real surprise is that anyone is surprised when the economy underperforms, since that's what it has been doing for the past seven years.

There has not been a single year in the past seven when the economy did better than President Obama promised, or that most economists expected.

Indeed, the real problem isn't the tepid growth in the second quarter, after an equally tepid first quarter. The real problem is that under President Obama's economic stewardship, the economy has grown far more slowly than it did in any of the previous 10 economic recoveries since World War II.

What this means in terms of wealth and prosperity can easily be seen when you compare the actual results under Obama to the average results of those previous recoveries.

What it shows is that, had Obama's recovery — which is now in its 28th quarter — been as robust as the average of the past 10 recoveries, the nation's economy would be $2.2 trillion — with a "t' -- bigger than it is today. That translates into more than $17,000 per household. (It's worth noting that many of those previous recoveries had suffered a subsequent recession 28 quarters after they started, so Obama is doing worse despite the current recovery's longevity.)


In other words, if Obama's recovery had merely been average, millions of people who are unemployed today would be working and paying taxes instead of worrying and collecting benefits. There would be millions fewer stuck in poverty today, and millions fewer dependent on food stamps and other government programs to get by.

If Obama's economy had merely been average, spending would have automatically been lower -- because so much of it is tied to benefit programs -- and revenues would have been higher. As a result, the country wouldn't be straddled with a national debt of more than $19 trillion, and Medicare and Social Security would be on somewhat sounder footings.

Just as important, had Obama's economy been average, the country wouldn't be in such a foul mood, and wouldn't so easily fall sway to the empty promises of a socialist, or the demagoguery and blame games being peddled by the major parties' presidential candidates.

More than three decades ago, Jimmy Carter delivered his infamous "malaise" speech (in which Carter never actually used the word "malaise"). Just like today, the economy was dead in the water, and there seemed to be no hope for anything better than mediocre. The country was told then to lower their expectations, just as the Obama administration and various liberal economists are busy telling us today.

But just like in the late 1970s, today's malaise isn't a permanent condition. And it is most emphatically not the fault of "bad" trade deals, or insufficient government spending on roads and bridges, or income inequality, or any of the other things being targeted by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

This malaise is the entirely the result of the Obama administration's anti-growth tax and regulatory policies, which have smothered what could have been and should have been a robust recovery from the terrible 2007-2009 recession.

At the Republican Convention in Cleveland, Govs. Scott Walker and Trump's running mate, Mike Pence, explained how their states thrived after they cut taxes and reined in government. As Indiana Gov. Pence said, "Indiana is a state that works because conservative principles work every time you put them into practice."

Every quarter and every year of disappointing growth under Obama is proof that the liberal principles don't.
It takes a long time to turn around the HUGE ship which is the US economy after the disaster the previous republican president left president Obama to fix.

However, he has done all he could to turn things around despite continued republican obstructionism and the latest results are in.

U.S. Household Income Grew 5.2 Percent in 2015, Breaking Pattern of Stagnation

By BINYAMIN APPELBAUMSEPT. 13, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/14/busin ... 12643&_r=0

"WASHINGTON — Americans last year reaped the largest economic gains in nearly a generation as poverty fell, health insurance coverage spread and incomes rose sharply for households on every rung of the economic ladder, ending years of stagnation.

The median household’s income in 2015 was $56,500, up 5.2 percent from the previous year — the largest single-year increase since record-keeping began in 1967, the Census Bureau said on Tuesday. The share of Americans living in poverty also posted the sharpest decline in decades.

The gains were an important milestone for the economic expansion that began in 2009. For the first time in recent years, the benefits of renewed prosperity are spreading broadly."

Thank you President Obama

Telcoman

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Pretty soon the title in this thread will change to Obama named best president in 6 decades

Obama's approval rating reaches new high

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/o ... val-229224

"President Barack Obama’s job approval rating hit 55 percent in a new poll released Thursday, the highest that number has been at any point during his second term in office."

Telcoman

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Unfortunately threads like this do the man's legacy an injustice. He hasn't faced the test of time, when people will view him more objectively. The people who are weighing in on this now are seeing it through partisan and/or short term personal experience.

I believe that in the test of time he will be viewed favorably, especially in light of the fact that he had to attempt to get anything done with a do-nothing Congress.

User avatar
Rogue One
Administrator
Posts: 8789
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 10:15 pm
Car: 2011 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Nissan Rogue SL
2012 Honda CR-V LX
2022 Honda Pilot Special Edition
Location: Florida, USA

Post

srellim234 wrote:Unfortunately threads like this do the man's legacy an injustice. He hasn't faced the test of time, when people will view him more objectively. The people who are weighing in on this now are seeing it through partisan and/or short term personal experience.

I believe that in the test of time he will be viewed favorably, especially in light of the fact that he had to attempt to get anything done with a do-nothing Congress.
:lolling:

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

Rogue One wrote:
srellim234 wrote:Unfortunately threads like this do the man's legacy an injustice. He hasn't faced the test of time, when people will view him more objectively. The people who are weighing in on this now are seeing it through partisan and/or short term personal experience.

I believe that in the test of time he will be viewed favorably, especially in light of the fact that he had to attempt to get anything done with a do-nothing Congress.
:lolling:
The title of this thread will have to change soon

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

Trump's favorability rating historically low, poll finds

"President-elect Donald Trump has a historically low favorability rating ahead of the inauguration.

According to a new Gallup poll, 55 percent of Americans have a negative view of Trump, making him the only president-elect of the four most recent presidents-elect whose unfavorable rating outweighs his favorable score.

Of the 1,032 adults polled across the U.S. from Jan. 4 through Jan 8, 40 percent had a favorable view of Trump compared to President Obama, who enjoyed a 78 percent rating ahead of his inauguration.

George W. Bush meanwhile held a 62 percent favorability rating and Bill Clinton a 66 percent rating."

Telcoman

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

George Will: Trump is now the worst-ever president

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/36485 ... -president

Although I never cared for George Will's opinions when he appeared on Fox, I am somewhat amazed that this conservative has finally seen the error of his ways.

What is sorely needed now is for the FBI to interview everyone that was present at the meeting last week with Trump when he used the "s#ithole "comment where we now have some republicans lying over what trump said in that meeting.

Lying to the American people by our president is now over 2000 lies in only his first year.

Lying to the FBI is a felony punishable by jail time where Trump belongs.

Telcoman

User avatar
srellim234
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 8:12 am
Car: 2007 silver Versa SL
hatchback w/CVT
(sold 08/2011)
2008 red Toyota Prius
(purchased 04/2016)
Location: Laughlin, NV

Post

Telco - Swearing and calling people/countries expletives is meaningless. Trump's feet need to be held to the fire for violating the emoluments clause, obstruction of justice, etc. etc. Tangible things that may warrant charges. Lots of people, presidents included, swore. I believe Lyndon Johnson was a master at it and it certainly doesn't warrant impeachment. Even if it were to come out under oath that he actually said it (and I believe he did), big deal. You honestly can't accomplish anything with that information.

You need to focus on things that really matter and quit grasping at every straw no matter how trivial it is. Doing so diminishes anything you're trying to accomplish.

krimsonviper
Posts: 21055
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:04 pm
Car: 2010 MS3 -PAID
2010 Mazda 3i Touring -Totaled
2006 Mazda 3i Sport -Totaled
1989 S13 -Sold
1990 S13 -Sold
Location: NorCal

Post

I'm honestly curious if some of the people who participated in this thread now feel about Trump compared to Obama in terms of killing innocents in other countries we are not at war with. I've read some of the comments from this last page and I'm shocked at some of the things people have said. So many responses held with tunnel vision data.

I'm not an Obama worshipper, but there really is no denying that he saved the country from another depression and created jobs and then people have the nerve to come in and complain about the minute things. His foreign affairs was atrocious, but many of his domestic accolades were positive steps in the right direction. Obama isn't perfect. The republicans that were in office when Obama were in office were something else. The TEA party and the tactics used to create the TEA party (which was propaganda, mind you) is by far the worst thing to hit our political system that I know of. It's Tanya Harding attacked another pair of knee caps, but the person is still performing albeit with Special Olympics quality at the regular Olympics level.

wa-chiss
Posts: 2569
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:23 pm
Car: 1990 Nissan S13 H/C KA24E
2005 Toyota Sequoia
1976 Honda CB750F Super Sport
Location: San Angelo, TX

Post

telcoman wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:30 pm
Lying to the FBI is a felony punishable by jail time where Trump belongs.
As well as Hillary

User avatar
telcoman
Posts: 5763
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:30 am
Car: Tesla 2022 Model Y, 2016 Q70 Bye 2012 G37S 6 MT w Nav 94444 mi bye 2006 Infiniti G35 Sedan 6 MT @171796 mi.
Location: Central NJ

Post

wa-chiss wrote:
Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:55 pm
telcoman wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2018 5:30 pm
Lying to the FBI is a felony punishable by jail time where Trump belongs.
As well as Hillary
What was Hillary found guilty of for you to make that statement?
Trump has made over 2000 false statements to the American people including Obama was not born in the US and the size of his crowd at his inauguration.
Trump should be questioned under oath by the FBI and if it is proved that he lied to the American people he is the one that should be jailed.

Telcoman


Return to “Politics Etc.”