Obama '08?

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Come on, we're talking first year in the presidency. President Bush was most hated of any president on election day because the Democrats couldn't stand
that he won the election.

I don't recall this being true - and I voted for Bush in 2k.

Quote:

Evenso, his approval ratings for the same time period that Obama has been in office was not that far off the mark. And after 9/11 he was in the 90% area, a mark I doubt seriously Obama will ever reach no matter what he does.

Well, that's what will happen when a scared and panicky populace looks for reassurance. I agree that Obama will likely never hit 90%. But Bush didn't hit 90% because of any action he took, or any good moves on his part. It had nothing to do with him.

Quote:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2009/44.president/the.first.year/approval.chart/

Let's see how President Obama looks after he has been in office a few years if you want an honest comparison.

It's immaterial to me if you want to pretend that the last several years of Bush's term don't represent recent presidential history; they clearly do. We are not comparing Bush v. Obama at the start of their terms, but Bush's ratings for the last several years vs. Obama's ratings now. Clearly many who are voicing their approval of Obama now are not partisans, which directly contradicts your stated case.

I can understand why you are changing the subject - the reality of the situation isn't helpful to your argument - but please try to refrain from doing so in the future.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I don't have to pretend. It IS immaterial what President Bush's approval ratings were the last several years when you are comparing him to President Obama still in the first half of his first year. To make any kind of reasonable comparison of approval ratings, you have to compare the same period of the presidency. That is, of course, unless one is a blind faith adoring and unapologetic Obama worshipper who arranges numbers to make him into a god.

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Oh, you mean like okie who has already determined within Obama's first 100-days that he's a failure?

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I don't have to pretend. It IS immaterial what President Bush's approval ratings were the last several years when you are comparing him to President Obama still in the first half of his first year.

No, it isn't.

We aren't comparing two machines, or the career of two baseball players; but the approval ratings of politicians. There's no reason to go back to the early days of the Bush admin, to make some sort of point about how the country loves new presidents; it's easy enough to see that the majority of the country, including many Republicans, strongly disliked the last guy for the majority of his term, and most of the country, including many Republicans, like the new guy. This directly contradicts your claim that partisanship is responsible for Obama's current good ratings, as he is getting plenty of approval from non-partisan voters.

Quote:

To make any kind of reasonable comparison of approval ratings, you have to compare the same period of the presidency. That is, of course, unless one is a blind faith adoring and unapologetic Obama worshipper who arranges numbers to make him into a god.

The failure of your argument has apparently forced you to backslide into ugly innuendos, which is sad. Your above contention is false; we can make reasonable comparisons between two people's approval ratings irregardless of how many years they are into their term. In fact, I don't see why it is meaningful at all, the year of the term in question, that we would have to go back to a president's first year. Perhaps you can explain why? The only logical answer I can see, is that it lets you somehow pretend that several years of extremely poor ratings didn't exist, and that the public has not clearly repudiated the person and persona behind them.

To put it simply: your original contention was false. You have not provided any evidence to show that it was true. Your attempt to use statistics from the beginning of Bush's term to show that your argument was true are not material to this discussion, but a distraction. My point remains that Obama's approval ratings are far higher than Bush's were for the last several years. And they are not that high due to partisanship on the part of those taking the surveys.

You also failed to indicate what you meant when you said,

Quote:

When you say 'the 'approval' doesn't seem to hold up on a case by case evaluation,' what do you mean?

What did you mean when you stated that? I have seen no evidence that what you have claimed is true, and you certainly have provided none.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

It takes 20 years after a presidential term ends to BEGIN to judge how well they did. Think about Reagan, till 10 months ago he was highly regarded, but now that both the economy and the GOP have crashed and burned, and it is clear the Reagan set the failures into motion, we know now the he did a more poor job than we had thought. Talking final conclusions about Obama now, and even Bush the younger, is premature.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

It takes 20 years after a presidential term ends to BEGIN to judge how well they did. Think about Reagan, till 10 months ago he was highly regarded, but now that both the economy and the GOP have crashed and burned, and it is clear the Reagan set the failures into motion, we know now the he did a more poor job than we had thought. Talking final conclusions about Obama now, and even Bush the younger, is premature.

Does that make those of us who thought Reagan was a terrible president more than 10 months ago prescient?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

The exception to the rule would be Obama. This community activist is well on
his way to being remembers as the most terrible president in American history.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't recall this being true - and I voted for Bush in 2k.
Cycloptichorn

You voted for Bush? What happened to you since then? Did you hit your head, or what? Bush is the same guy, but apparently you are far far different now than you were a few short years ago. Something happened to you.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

It takes 20 years after a presidential term ends to BEGIN to judge how well they did. Think about Reagan, till 10 months ago he was highly regarded, but now that both the economy and the GOP have crashed and burned, and it is clear the Reagan set the failures into motion, we know now the he did a more poor job than we had thought. Talking final conclusions about Obama now, and even Bush the younger, is premature.

You post some pretty good things at time, but it doesn't take 20 years to "begin" to judge a president. It might take 20 years to come closer to a final conclusion about a president, perhaps not THE final conclusion, but closer. But there is no doubt that some policies are terrible and we know it at the time they are beginning. Don't count some of us among those that are going to sit here and allow Obama to screw everything up before judging the screwups.

0 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I don't recall this being true - and I voted for Bush in 2k.
Cycloptichorn

You voted for Bush? What happened to you since then? Did you hit your head, or what?

Bush declared that it 'wasn't that important' to catch Osama Bin Laden, that's what happened. And turned his sights towards Iraq.

I was ******* disgusted and began to question a bunch of the stupid pap that I had been fed, growing up as a Conservative young man in Texas.

When you start questioning things you often find problems, and I think we all know that the Bush admin wasn't a good time for a young Conservative to start questioning. After my friends from Kileen started returning from Iraq with PTSD and other f'ed up problems (including one dude who came back half a man, if ya know what I mean, thanks to his bravery) I gave up on the Republican party completely.

Quote:

Bush is the same guy, but apparently you are far far different now than you were a few short years ago. Something happened to you.

You're absolutely right - I grew up.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Yankee,

parados wrote:

f the Bush tax cuts had not occurred we would be in much better shape financially in this country.

That is what I said. It has little relation to what you claimed I said.

Yankee wrote:

No son, you said Bush tax cuts are THE reason we are in the current financial mess.

I don't need it explained at all. Let me know if you need the logical fallacy you just used explained. For someone that claims to be objective you make some pretty out there arguments.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

I for one hope you're still around Yankee. I don't know whether I would identify you as a MAC as yet, but you express enough sensible and common sense views to qualify you as at least an honorary member of the club.

Ahhhh. That's sweet! Foxfyre is giving a great big hug to her sock puppet!

1 Reply

@parados,

Have you noticed? These MACs are good at off the wall comments without the ability to remember anything accurately. Their thinking doesn't match what the facts or evidence. I'm not sure if it's plain sloppyness, forgetfulness, laziness, or they are just plain liars.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

How about the inability to recognize facts. And the ability to twist statements to mean what they want them to mean rather than thier true meaning.

1 Reply

@rabel22,

That's even better than my explanation!

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

What are you going to do when your friends come back from Afghanistan, all shot up? Or from Pakistan? Or from Iraq after Obama was sworn in?

0 Replies

News from Iran:

"The pro-government Basij militia has held back its full fury during this week's street demonstrations. But witnesses say the force has unleashed its violence in shadowy nighttime raids, attacking suspected opposition sympathizers...."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,527762,00.html

Thats why it is so dangerous to have these groups like ACORN and Americorp in the hip pocket of a president. Government funding of such quasi-political action groups has no place in America, in my opinion. I think Clinton started Americorp, but Obama seeks to expand Americorp tremendously.

One of the reasons I think Obama is dangerous is his statements, I will remind everyone of the statement that he wants a national security force just as strong and powerful and well funded as the military. I think he may try to use Americorp and ACORN in that way, possibly creating a new name or something. He won't do this all at once, but look for it down the road if he becomes emboldened. That is what he wants to do. He is another dictator in the making. We tend to forget some of the outlandish ideals Obama has come forth with, but that one is a really bad idea, one to be viciously opposed. I think he deserves impeachment based upon that statement, if he pursues it, as it is clearly a gross abuse of power.

1 Reply

@okie,

Boy, on the day we learn the NSA under Bush was illegally accessing Former President Clinton's communications, okie ignores that to get all upset about something Obama might do in the future.

Did Fox lead with that story okie to try to keep you from knowing what the Bush's NSA was really doing to US citizens?

1 Reply

@parados,

I read about the Clinton thing, not a big deal in my opinion, it should be looked into and if people crossed the line, the situation should be corrected. Clinton has had questionable dealings with foreign interests, so why would intercepted communications be surprising? I would like to know more about it, but bottom line, I don't trust Clinton, never did, and probably never will. He was a national security risk.

By the way, didn't Clinton use NSA to wiretap Americans?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1553101/posts

2 Replies

@okie,

Right, you wouldn't want to be concerned about what is clearly an illegal act in the Bush WH. It is illegal to intercept communications of US citizens without a warrant. This was done and you could care less. So much for your concern about the freedoms of Americans.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know