What Are the Consequences of Obama Failing?

[SirJosephPorter]

Obama is still dropping in the approval rankings.
He started off tied with Clinton and behind Bush junior in the ratings and he has been dropping ever since.

Trex as I said before, that is not unusual, all the presidents drop in popularity in the first year. They come to office with plenty of goodwill. However, as soon as they start doing something, some people get mad at them and their popularity drops.

Within one year of assuming office, both Clinton and Reagan were in their 40s, both of them were under 50% by November.

It doesn’t matter much what the president does or does not do, his popularity is almost totally related to the economy. Economy is showing signs of recovery. However there is no drop in unemployment yet. Unemployment lags behind by at least six months.

If the signs of recovery that we see at present are real and unemployment starts dropping in six months, Osama’s popularity will rebound, as did Clinton’s and Reagan’s. Drop in popularity at this stage in presidency means nothing.

 

[JLM]

Obama is still dropping in the approval rankings.
He started off tied with Clinton and behind Bush junior in the ratings and he has been dropping ever since.

Trex as I said before, that is not unusual, all the presidents drop in popularity in the first year. They come to office with plenty of goodwill. However, as soon as they start doing something, some people get mad at them and their popularity drops.

Within one year of assuming office, both Clinton and Reagan were in their 40s, both of them were under 50% by November.

It doesn’t matter much what the president does or does not do, his popularity is almost totally related to the economy. Economy is showing signs of recovery. However there is no drop in unemployment yet. Unemployment lags behind by at least six months.

If the signs of recovery that we see at present are real and unemployment starts dropping in six months, Osama’s popularity will rebound, as did Clinton’s and Reagan’s. Drop in popularity at this stage in presidency means nothing.

The ratings only count on the first Tuesday of November every Leap year- nothing else matters.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The ratings only count on the first Tuesday of November every Leap year- nothing else matters.

Quite right, JLM. If unemployment does not start dropping by middle of next year, that won’t affect Obama much, he would still have a long way to go. However, it may spell bad news for Congressional Democrats, who are up for election in November 2010.

A repeat of 1994 seems unlikely, Republicans have a much bigger mountain to climb this time (besides, more Republican than Democratic seats will be up of election in the Senate).

Also, Republicans still remain highly unpopular. The same opinion polls which say that Obama’s popularity has dropped, also say that Americans blame Republicans over Obama for the current economic mess, by a 2 to 1 margin.

However, even if Democrats do not lose control of the Congress in 2010, they will definitely suffer heavy losses it unemployment does not start dropping by the middle of next year.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The ratings only count on the first Tuesday of November every Leap year- nothing else matters.

Close JLM, but not entirely accurate. Year 2100 will be a presidential election year, but it won’t be a leap year.

 

[gopher]

''Is it because of Obama or would it have happened anyway?''

Obama is definitely fixing the mess created by Bush. The far right doesn't like it but that's their problem.

 

[gopher]

''all the presidents drop in popularity in the first year''

the numbers are lower for Congressional Republicans

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I remember seeing numbers that people blame Republicans over Obama for the economic mess by a factor of 2 to 1.

 

[TenPenny]

The ratings only count on the first Tuesday of November every Leap year- nothing else matters.

Actually, it's not the first Tuesday of November.

It's the Tuesday after the first Monday of November.

 

[JLM]

Close JLM, but not entirely accurate. Year 2100 will be a presidential election year, but it won’t be a leap year.

I'd already thought of that and should have thought you'd be the one to notice.

 

[JLM]

Actually, it's not the first Tuesday of November.

It's the Tuesday after the first Monday of November.

Okay it's the first Tuesday of November 6 times out of 7.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I'd already thought of that and should have thought you'd be the one to notice.

JLM, so you know that, do you? Good for you. I thought you would challenge my assertion that 2100 is not a leap year (and that will give me yet another chance to display my knowledge).

 

[Trex]

Did anyone watch CNN's National Report Card special last night?
Fairly interesting, I thought, hopefully CNN has it up on their web site or u-tube for those that are interested.

Anyway the format was 8 or so political analysts who ranged from hard right to hard left.
National live phone in polling was done across the country and they also had extensive advance polling by a professional polling organization country wide on all issues.

Others will probably see it differently and I am just going by memory but here, roughly is how it panned out.

Obama and the Democrats: Polled C- to F- across the country (something like 49% of respondents gave the party an F).

The Republicans: pretty much the same as the Democrats. The main criticism is that in a time of need and recession the Republicans are refusing to work with the Democrats for the good of the country.

Health care: Something like 81% polled are happy with the existing system and 75% are opposed to any change. This one looks dead in the water to me.

The House and Pelosi: D to F . Pork, pork and more pork. More than 50% polled gave an F.

The Senators: Every single Senator in the Union received a C-,D or an F except one guy.
The Senator from North Dakota.

Joe Biden: A B to a C. Surprisingly the VP is doing quite well. Supposedly he just works really hard at his job and does the best he can for Americans.

Hillary Clinton: B+. Polled as by far the most popular and effective member of Obama's administration. One major issue was the fear that Obama was weak and wishy- washy on tough foreign affairs issues. Clinton solves that problem as she is considered to have a larger set of cojones than Obama when it comes to foreign affairs.

Obama as president: C-. I was surprised he got that frankly.
Most Americans are willing to give President Obama more time before they loose faith in him. The general consensus seems to be that he is underachieving in virtually all expectations however it is unfair to pass judgment without giving him a full term.

So thats the report card from the American people.

My opinion is that Obama has 6 to 12 months at most to get his wish list built and in place.
If he fails to do that he will become a do nothing president.
It will be 4 lost years, a non event.
Obama got elected as a great and moving public speaker. He had a dream. He had a plan. He had a vision.
He was elected by the people as a messiah with a vision for America.
Now nothings happening.
Was it all rhetoric or can the guy really lead?
I think not electing Hillary Clinton is panning out to be a huge mistake.
Time will tell.

Trex

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Health care: Something like 81% polled are happy with the existing system and 75% are opposed to any change. This one looks dead in the water to me.

Trex, it may be dead in the water for all I know, but that poll is not representative of country as a whole. CNN also conducted an opinion poll, and 50% of Americans support Obama’s health care plan (a bit less than that oppose it).

One has to be careful about on line polls, it reflects what the participants think, but it really does not have a whole lot to do with public opinion.

 

[EagleSmack]

Maybe the response at town meetings can give you an idea then.

Now the Democrats are trying to have an "invatation only" town meetings.

What a debacle!

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Maybe the response at town meetings can give you an idea then.

Now the Democrats are trying to have an "invatation only" town meetings.

What a debacle!

And a good idea too. The purpose of the Town Hall meeting is so that people can question their representatives, hold their feet to fire, ask them hard questions.

Instead, Republicans hired rent a mob to trash the meetings. The birthers, the racists (one poster showed a cross between Obama and Hitler) and all kinds of extremists, hate mongers come to the meeting with the purpose of trashing the meeting, with the purpose of heckling, shouting the speaker down.

That is not the purpose of a Town Hall meeting. Town Hall meeting should produce light, not heat. Reminds me of this forum, when some Trolls tried to trash the forum, and the moderators (quite rightly) cracked down on it, closed the Steel Cage.

Invitation only meetings would not be the first choice. However, in view of the violent, destructive Republican rent a mob that shows up and trashes every meeting, that is the next best alternative. Half the invitations could be sent to those who support the proposal, half to those who oppose it. That way one can be sure that all kinds of questions will be asked.

Not only they should be invitation only, but the first yahoo who shouts, yells and in general makes a nuisance of himself should be tossed out.

 

[EagleSmack]

And a good idea too. The purpose of the Town Hall meeting is so that people can question their representatives, hold their feet to fire, ask them hard questions.

Which is what they are doing.

Instead, Republicans hired rent a mob to trash the meetings. The birthers, the racists (one poster showed a cross between Obama and Hitler) and all kinds of extremists, hate mongers come to the meeting with the purpose of trashing the meeting, with the purpose of heckling, shouting the speaker down.

How does the kool-aid taste?

I see you bought into the Democrat reasoning of people "DARING" to speak out against their messiah.

Now the Dems are hiring Union thugs to rough up people trying to be heard.

That is not the purpose of a Town Hall meeting. Town Hall meeting should produce light, not heat. Reminds me of this forum, when some Trolls tried to trash the forum, and the moderators (quite rightly) cracked down on it, closed the Steel Cage.

What a rump swab.

Invitation only meetings would not be the first choice. However, in view of the violent, destructive Republican rent a mob that shows up and trashes every meeting, that is the next best alternative. Half the invitations could be sent to those who support the proposal, half to those who oppose it. That way one can be sure that all kinds of questions will be asked.

Rent a mob! :lol:

The Democrats are absolutely STUNNED at being at the business end of a protest. So the only way they can respond is to silent the opposition. For the first time ever the liberals are getting it fed back to them and now shouting and anger has become "unproductive".

Oh where is Cindy Sheehan, MoveOn DOT org and Code Pink when you need them.

Not only they should be invitation only, but the first yahoo who shouts, yells and in general makes a nuisance of himself should be tossed out.

THAT my friends sums up the liberals for you!

So much for Freedom of Speech!

 

[TenPenny]

And a good idea too. The purpose of the Town Hall meeting is so that people can question their representatives, hold their feet to fire, ask them hard questions.

Instead, Republicans hired rent a mob to trash the meetings. The birthers, the racists (one poster showed a cross between Obama and Hitler) and all kinds of extremists, hate mongers come to the meeting with the purpose of trashing the meeting, with the purpose of heckling, shouting the speaker down.

That is not the purpose of a Town Hall meeting. Town Hall meeting should produce light, not heat. Reminds me of this forum, when some Trolls tried to trash the forum, and the moderators (quite rightly) cracked down on it, closed the Steel Cage.

Invitation only meetings would not be the first choice. However, in view of the violent, destructive Republican rent a mob that shows up and trashes every meeting, that is the next best alternative. Half the invitations could be sent to those who support the proposal, half to those who oppose it. That way one can be sure that all kinds of questions will be asked.

Not only they should be invitation only, but the first yahoo who shouts, yells and in general makes a nuisance of himself should be tossed out.

It's funny how you've come up with these rules now.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Which is what they are doing.

And a good thing too, EagleSmack.

I see you bought into the Democrat reasoning of people "DARING" to speak out against their messiah.

Now the Dems are hiring Union thugs to rough up people trying to be heard.

There is no question of buying into any reasoning, Democratic or Republican. One only has to see the coverage of meetings on CNN or similar to know that these hate mongers don’t attend the meeting with the purpose of asking questions and finding out more about the issues, but with the sole purpose of trashing the meeting, with the aim of shouting down the speaker and disrupting the meetings.

When I see questioner asking why Obama doesn’t produce his birth certificate (and then the hate mongers ‘spontaneously' break into the Pledge of Allegiance), when I see a poster of Obama, with Hitler mustache drawn on to him, when I see the faces of rent a mob contorted with hate, the conclusion is obvious, at least to me.

This is the mob hired by Republicans with the single purpose to trash the whole concept of Town Hall meetings.

The Democrats are absolutely STUNNED at being at the business end of a protest.

This is not protest, they are getting the business end of hatred, of vicious mob mentality.

So the only way they can respond is to silent the opposition.

Such hate filled mob, birthers, yahoos who compare Obama with Hitler should be silenced. They have freedom of speech, but not inside the Town Hall, let them spew their poison, filth outside.

It is one thing to ask tough, penetrating questions, it is another thing altogether to come to the meeting with the single purpose of trashing the meeting.

For the first time ever the liberals are getting it fed back to them and now shouting and anger has become "unproductive".

Shouting and anger is always unproductive, EagleSmack.

 

[EagleSmack]

It's funny how you've come up with these rules now.

My thoughts exactly.

Funny...but really not unexpected.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

So much for Freedom of Speech!

You have a rather strange, distorted concept of freedom of speech, EagelSmack. Freedom of speech means that the hate mongers have the right to say what they want (demand that Obama produce his birth certificate, or compare Obama to Hitler etc.), but nobody is obliged to provide them a platform to speak.

It is not the responsibility of the meeting organizers to give the hate mongers a platform to spew their hatred. They have the right to spew their venom, but let them do it outside the Town Hall, nobody is required to give them a platform to speak.