Why is Obama unpopular?

He has shredded our constitution and caused the most damage to our rights as all the other presidents combined. He has stifled the media with his blatant abuse of espionage laws and the signing of the NDAA giving himself unquestionable rights to imprison any American citizen indefinitely without charges.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/01/18/why-the-ndaa-is-unconstitutional/

 

Obama voted against the last Bush/Republican budget and its $161B deficit. He and his fellow Democrats then raised it to $400B in 2008. The 2009 budget resolution was held up because Bush would not agree to the Democrat spending and Obama had won the election. It was put together with HIS spending and signed into law by PRESIDENT OBAMA. So stop with the trying to wash his hands if it.

Not according to the left when it came to Bush, how often so we hear he "squandered" the surplus?

BULL, not only did he and the Democrats take the deficit from $161B to $1,400B in just two years they kept it over $1,000 for the next 4 years and it is still 50% higher than the worst Bush/Republican deficit during the 2000/2001 recession.

- - - Updated - - -

No because of the desperate attempts by the FED to keep the economy slumping along with 0 interest rates.

 

No where near the numbers they need and he had to delay it so the big failure will come now after his delay to fully impliment comes to an end.

Sorry that is rubish his own economic council said it would keep unemployment to just 8.5% it went to over 10% and stayed over 9% for four years inspite of the huge spending spree he went on during that time. It is still horrible 6 years later.

Geez do you just make this stuff up it WAS worldwide and Obama had a Cakewalk compared to what Reagan walked into with the double digit interest rates and double digit inflation.



LOL.[/QUOTE]

 

Notice how the Republican responds with a personal attack and fails to refute the TRUTH.

Thank you for confirming the 100% TRUTH.

 

LOL, They have the enrollment numbers growing all the time and predictions of failure by you are about as useful as a Romney landslide.

LOL, just stick to the numbers, Obama's unemployment came down faster through a much worse environment. We even seen reduced Federal employment, whereas under Reagan it rose. Along with the deficit.

LOL, the 2008 financial crisis was quite different from the 1980's recession. Reagan's term seen a sharp in oil related inflation & a banking crisis, corrected by high interest rates which were then lowered to create a boom and oil de regulated to create an oil boom. Obama had a banking crash with interest rates already lowered thanks to the Bush years. Despite that GDP has never dropped to the levels seen under Reagan, in fact thanks to Obama it held steady - indeed there has been little growth since but since interests are already low after the Bush years one cannot raise them to create a boom and the economy is already de-regulated, again thanks to the Bush years.

 

LOL, very astute, and would you say the GWB Presidency is an extended version of the Clinton Presidency?

 

You simply don't understand economics well enough to understand why the country ran a high deficit during the financial crash. You don't like Obama, and so you try to make the issue fit your viewpoint. During financial crises, tax bases shrink while existing programs are put under pressure. It doesn't take a mathematician to understand the consequences on a budget.

Bush had very little choice other than bailout the banks.

You're seriously trying to compare the recessions of 2008 with 2001? You're not even trying to avoid looking partisan.

[/quote]

The fed keep us out of a deflationary period.

 

Why is Hussein Obama so roundly despised?

To paraphrase Carville: "It's the policies, stupid!"

 

Nope. The unnecessary military deaths and injuries were nil under Clinton. Numerous tens of thousands under Bush. That's just a start

 

How is it being haunted now exactly?

 

I don't think you are in any position to tell me what I understand or to profess you understand something more than I.

If you want to have an adult discussion on an intellectual level then let's have it. If you are just going to get snarky when you can't refute the facts and your ignorance of them is exposed then go play in your sandbox by yourself.

So again and address the facts this time

Obama voted against the last Bush/Republican budget and its $161B deficit. He and his fellow Democrats then raised it to $400B in 2008. The 2009 budget resolution was held up because Bush would not agree to the Democrat spending and Obama had won the election. It was put together with HIS spending and signed into law by PRESIDENT OBAMA. So stop with the trying to wash his hands if it.

There was NO reason to run deficits that high except lousy fiscal and government policy, the $1,400B was 3.5 times the WORST Bush/Republican during the recession, dot.com bubble bust and 9/11 slowdown/recession/recovery, it is STILL six years later 50% higher. And not only that that was a one year $400B for Bush and the Republicans. Obama and the Democrats not only hit that $1.400B but kept it over $1,000B for the next 4 years. That is due to the horrible fiscal management or rather lack of it by Obama and the Democrats.

Me>> Not according to the left when it came to Bush, how often so we hear he "squandered" the surplus?

What on earth are you talking about, there was no bank bailout in the 2000/2001 recession/recovery? Again he get attacked over and over and is to this day "squandering the surplus" when in fact he came into office into Washington during a recession and recovery and policies and budgets he had NOTHING to do with where Obama had been a full voting Senator in a Democrat controlled congress that passed those budgets with his full support and failing to implement policies to mitigate the effects of the recession and mortgage bubble, he didn't just ride into town January 2009.

Spare me your lack of an intellectual response. Refute the facts instead of whining about them.

DUH. And it's what Presidents and Congresses do about that that matters, Bush succeeded in ushering us through the 2000/2001, Obama has total fallen on his face.

 

You're not an intellectual. Intellectuals try to be honest.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...isenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

You don't know what your talking about. You're just making a noise. Almost all economists surveyed say that Obama saved this country from disaster. I guess you are one of the 2%.

I thought you were referring to Bush's handling of the 2008 crisis. Yes, he did squander the surplus. Compare the actual spending of Bush to Obama. More simply, just read the link above.

[/quote]

I guess that is why the US looks good right now and the rest of the world's economy looks weak.

 

A President that has no clue about leadership instead places blame on anyone and everyone, who's world view is internationalism instead of protecting Americans, who does not take an interest in his job. Need I go on?

 

And those who have no intellectual response to the facts try to be dimissive. So are you here to just trade insults or debate the issue, so far you have presented none of the latter.

Ahhh once again can't refute the facts so just attempt to simply dismiss them.

No I was quite clear.

So Bush has a recession, the dot.com bust and 911 but his one year deficit of $400B was "squandering the surplus" which had already fallen in half before his first budget was even voted on but Obama and the Democrats taking rapidly falling, down to a platry $161B deficit to $1,400B in just two years is simply what happens in a recession and a bubble bursting, it was to be expected.

Want to reconcile the conflict in your logic there?

If there is something in it you think proves that then copy and paste it here, keeping in mind that the FY2009 budget was an Obama/Democrat budget which PRESIDENT OBAMA signed into law with his spending levels.

That we are not quite as bad as the rest is the best you got? That's really it?

 

You don't have facts. After all, you're trying to compare the recessions of 2008 and 2001 as if they are the same.

You didn't address any points of the article now did you? I guess Forbes is too liberal for your taste.

You didn't mention the 2001 recession until after the statement.

The 2001 recession was barely a recession at all. Unemployment for example didn't get above 6%. Bush expanded a lot of programs like medicare, and he launched two wars while giving huge tax cuts. He spent a lot of money doing that stuff.

Have you ever heard of copyright infringement?

 

And the lowest ranking that Truman gets is #9 out of 16 separate surveys.

 

Absolute BS. You are very badly misinformed by right wing reactionary ideologues whose purpose is to eliminate the middle class and turn the vast majority of Americans into serfs who are totally dependent on their corporate masters, and who have no way to advance in society without the say so of the corporate masters. You have been lied to.

 

How many of our military have been killed in the unnecessary and botched wars that he stepped into? How many physically wounded? How many suffering from various debilitating mental disabilities? From the sources that I've seen, those numbers are in the hundreds of thousands. This country will be paying for those deaths, dismemberments and disabilities well into the next century. That is not even taking into consideration the tangible side effects of alcoholism, drug abuse, broken families and suicides.

That's the George W. Bush legacy. Toss in a Katrina or so for the icing on the cake. That's why he already has been and will continue to be viewed as one of the worst Presidents in our history.

 

Obama lied to pass the Affordable Care Act and he refused to negotiate because he knew he had Democratic votes. ObamaCare has problems and is more expensive than promised. The government web site displayed incompatence as did the IRS and other scandals. Record numbers of people have dropped out of the work force, and welfare spending reaches new highs. More young people than previously live with their parents.

Bush was no winner, but he left Iraq as a fairly stable country with the promise of continued progress. Obama himself stated that as he wrongly pulled our troops out. His policy helped give us ISIS and other problems in the mid east. His immigration policy which has let millions of illegals into the country looks a little more threatening with Ebola and terrorists threatening to invade.

Bush cut taxes during the recession which began under Clinton and worsened after 9/11. The New York Times noted in 2004, that the government was taking in an unexpected large amount of money. The unemployment rate with a larger work force than now was as low as about 4.5.% Obama is unpopular because of the cumulative effect of bad news and broken promises he has given us.

Some complemented me on another thread about Obama and Iraq. Thanks.

 

Curmudgeon, YOU have been misinformed . What you wrote about the middle class describes what liberals are doing to this country. Look up the large number of rich donors for the Democratic party and the government, corporation cooperation to damage the middle class. Otherwise, how do you explain our poor economic condition with a wider disparity between rich and poor than we have had in years during a Democratic adminstration which had control of both houses and still has the Senate?.

 

Curmudgeon, I agree with your comment about Harry Truman. While not perfect, he was basically a good president. Obama will rank down with the presidents you mentioned.

 

Because of his inability to do things at the right time. America has grown up being that "don't mess with them, country". Now sadly we are looked down upon because of him.

 

Facts
Obama voted against the last Bush/Republican budget and its $161B deficit. He and his fellow Democrats then raised it to $400B in 2008. The 2009 budget resolution was held up because Bush would not agree to the Democrat spending and Obama had won the election. It was put together with HIS spending and signed into law by PRESIDENT OBAMA. So stop with the trying to wash his hands if it.

There was NO reason to run deficits that high except lousy fiscal and government policy, the $1,400B was 3.5 times the WORST Bush/Republican during the recession, dot.com bubble bust and 9/11 slowdown/recession/recovery, it is STILL six years later 50% higher. And not only that that was a one year $400B for Bush and the Republicans. Obama and the Democrats not only hit that $1.400B but kept it over $1,000B for the next 4 years. That is due to the horrible fiscal management or rather lack of it by Obama and the Democrats.

Again he get attacked over and over and is to this day "squandering the surplus" when in fact he came into office into Washington during a recession and recovery and policies and budgets he had NOTHING to do with where Obama had been a full voting Senator in a Democrat controlled congress that passed those budgets with his full support and failing to implement policies to mitigate the effects of the recession and mortgage bubble, he didn't just ride into town January 2009.

If there is something in the article that you believe supports your position then cut and paste it and I will refute it.

Balony, not only did we have the recession, we had the dot.com bubble bursting sending the stockmarket into a tail spend with thousands in the high-tech industries losing their jobs and then 9/11.

Yes because Bush did the right thing and then got out of the way and let business rebuild and start hiring again. THAT IS THE POINT DUH. Obama took the opposite tract and you see what happened.

And revenues soared and he and the Republicans brought the one year $400B deficit down to a paltry $161B, where did Obama and the Democrats take it then?

Ever hear of fair use doctrine, you are perfectly free to copy articles or parts of here as long as you attribute them.

- - - Updated - - -

And why would the right wing or corporations want to do that, what would they gain by making the vast majority of the citizens "serfs" who live in poverty?

 

We defeated the Taliban which was the goal, we removed Saddam and his government which was the goal. You do know that was a policy he inherited from the Clinton administration. Clinton failed to deal with al Qaeda and we had 9/11 and failed in his attempts to removes Saddam, Bush succeeded. In the latter our casualties were quite limited. The casualities came when al Qaeda decided to move the main front of it's war against us to Iraq. Does it matter if those casualities were in Afghanistan or Iraq, I don't think so. The fact is we defeated al Qaeda in Iraq because they made a strategic mistake by moving the main front there.

Hmmmm and Hillary Clinton too, let's not forget she was one of the most vocal and ardent supporters of using our military force to remove Saddam and was unequivocal in that support.

What about Katrina, Bush didn't cause Katrina and wasn't in charge of the response to it.

You left out 52 months of full employment, rising incomes, strong GDP growth and taking the deficit down to $161B before the Democrats took over.

 

Its too early to judge Bush's or Obama's places in history. Estimates change with the generations. Bush blundered into an invasion of Iraq with bad strategy, but the Surge saved the war and stabilized Iraq. It was no Germany, but conditions were improving. Obama disregarded a cardinal rule. The cost of a war is higher during the aftermath.He tried to take credit for Iraq's relative success and declared victory as he prematurely removed our troops.

The result, combined with a feckless policy during the Arab Spring provided conditions for the birth of ISIS. This is just one example of Obama's failures.