Poll: 44% of Americans Worse Off Under Obama

[Teatownclown]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-22/americans-worse-now-than-when-obama-inaugurated-by-44-34-margin-in-poll.html

And had that been McCain in the chair, it would be more like 80%. Republicans say "No" until Obama is viewed as a failure by the public. Lets make sure that we get Republicans firmly back in control so they can finish the job. Too bad Obumma isn't the leader to face them down.

care to discuss?

[RecycleMichael]

I think President Obama has been a failure in many areas. I think he underestimated the power of a congress controlled by the other party, I think he was completely wrong in sending more troops to Iraq and I think he was stupid to give more money to Wall Street gamblers.

I am disappointed in him, no doubt.

But at this point, I don't see anyone else who I could vote for. I also believe that next year will be a strong one for the economy and Americans will see him differently.

[Teatownclown]

I seem to feel the same. I hope you are right. OUR country could use his success.

[Hoss]

Could be worse.  He could have an 8 percent approval rating like Congress does right now.

[Conan71]

I think President Obama has been a failure in many areas. I think he underestimated the power of a congress controlled by the other party, I think he was completely wrong in sending more troops to Iraq and I think he was stupid to give more money to Wall Street gamblers.

I am disappointed in him, no doubt.

But at this point, I don't see anyone else who I could vote for. I also believe that next year will be a strong one for the economy and Americans will see him differently.

The opposing Congress has only been seated for six months.  That's a weak excuse for his failures.  He's had both houses controlled by his party for 80% of the term he's served so far.

As far as TTAC's assertion that 80% of Americans would be worse off under McCain is stupid speculation. Considering McCain's track record, he might well have done many of the same things President Obama has done to try and stimulate the economy.  The only difference would be no Obamacare.  Since the effects of that really won't be felt in it's entirety for a few more years, I honestly don't see how McCain could have fared any worse.  At least McCain has some semblance of leadership skills. 

[Hoss]

The opposing Congress has only been seated for six months.  That's a weak excuse for his failures.  He's had both houses controlled by his party for 80% of the term he's served so far.

As far as TTAC's assertion that 80% of Americans would be worse off under McCain is stupid speculation. Considering McCain's track record, he might well have done many of the same things President Obama has done to try and stimulate the economy.  The only difference would be no Obamacare.  Since the effects of that really won't be felt in it's entirety for a few more years, I honestly don't see how McCain could have fared any worse.  At least McCain has some semblance of leadership skills. 

If he hadn't let his handlers choose a mental midget for a running mate, and chosen someone like Pawlenty or even the Lieberman, he might have won.  I might have voted for him over Obama, because he wasn't my first choice for a Democrat nominee.

[Conan71]

If he hadn't let his handlers choose a mental midget for a running mate, and chosen someone like Pawlenty or even the Lieberman, he might have won.  I might have voted for him over Obama, because he wasn't my first choice for a Democrat nominee.

Of course there is the Palin issue.  Maybe his leadership skills aren't so great after all.  

Pawlenty would have been a far better choice.  Even without her, I don't think McCain could have garnered enough votes.  I think people were war weary and blamed Republican policy for the big economic disaster that hit right about convention time.  

There were far better candidates he could have picked to rope in the far conservative right if that's what he was attempting to do in the first place.  How he possibly thought he could make an undereducated and under-experienced governor from one of the least populated states an attractive or serious running mate is beyond me.  The media went right to work focusing on her instead of McCain as if she was at the top of the ticket.  Bringing in such an unknown was a really poor tactical move.  The media did a great job of pitting her against Obama instead of Biden, not that she didn't foment that.

IMO, I really don't see the hard-line conservatives sitting at home if they think the POTUS and VP are too moderate.  It would be more preferable in their minds to elect moderates than to allow communist/socialists (in their mind) be elected.  If the GOP wants the White House, they need a moderate ticket, because there might be just enough pissed off and disaffected independents and Democrats who voted for Obama in '08 who might go the other way.  I find that scenario far more likely than people further to the right voting for Obama.

[nathanm]

The opposing Congress has only been seated for six months.  That's a weak excuse for his failures.

The GOP is still filibustering his executive appointees in the Senate. That's right, over two years later, there are still a substantial number of agencies running without a "permanent" head. That's how deranged the Republican Senators have been. They have been so desperate to deny him even the appearance of success on anything that they filibuster nearly everything. When he does get something done, the left whines and complains that it's not to their liking either. Politics is so infantilized these days it's maddening.

[Cats Cats Cats]

I was going to post that, you don't need to have a majority to filibuster anything and everything.  Up or down vote?  Not when they are in office.


"Gas prices are higher"  Higher than what?  Last week?  When the world economy went to the shitter?  Yeah, they are higher than that.  It drives me nuts when I see somebody say "we have to raise prices because gas is higher".  Really?  because gas was another 40 to 50 cents a gallon more expensive the LAST TIME you did that.  You never reduced your price.

http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?city1=USA Average&city2=&city3=&crude=n&tme=60&units=us

[Teatownclown]

The opposing Congress has only been seated for six months.  That's a weak excuse for his failures.  He's had both houses controlled by his party for 80% of the term he's served so far.

As far as TTAC's assertion that 80% of Americans would be worse off under McCain is stupid speculation. Considering McCain's track record, he might well have done many of the same things President Obama has done to try and stimulate the economy.  The only difference would be no Obamacare.  Since the effects of that really won't be felt in it's entirety for a few more years, I honestly don't see how McCain could have fared any worse.  At least McCain has some semblance of leadership skills. 

Now that's as whack as the doctor next door who still sports a McCaint/Palin schticker on his bumper.

Obama was tortured by republicans/teabaggers. McCain by Commies. Palin by her own devices.

To stimulate the economy? McCain did not advocate for TARP and therefore we'd be in a much deeper hole.

[Conan71]

The GOP is still filibustering his executive appointees in the Senate. That's right, over two years later, there are still a substantial number of agencies running without a "permanent" head. That's how deranged the Republican Senators have been. They have been so desperate to deny him even the appearance of success on anything that they filibuster nearly everything. When he does get something done, the left whines and complains that it's not to their liking either. Politics is so infantilized these days it's maddening.

More excuses and apologies for a job poorly done.  Filibustering appointments is nothing new and both sides use it, rarely for legit reasons, IMO.

He's appointed czars as a way to circumvent legislative logjams as well as avoid any scrutiny as far as their qualifications nor what their job duties will entail.  So it's not exactly as if there's parts of the country which have been sitting paralyzed because he can't get his quid pro quos run through the Senate.

[nathanm]

Not on this scale, Conan.



That's the number of cloture votes each president's executive appointments have required.



(I don't like where the image second image came from, but it's the best I could find in a quick Google Image search)

[Teatownclown]

More excuses and counting.  If he were a better leader he would understand compromise is a part of smart leadership.  Other than Fox News, Obama has had a sympathetic ear throughout the MSM and more targeted liberal media sites.

You do realize all this "opposition" is racist in nature, right?

The opposition is not racist but many of the opposers certainly do practice racism and most unknowingly.

[Gaspar]

More excuses and counting.  If he were a better leader he would understand compromise is a part of smart leadership.  Other than Fox News, Obama has had a sympathetic ear throughout the MSM and more targeted liberal media sites.

You do realize all this "opposition" is racist in nature, right?

Actually my news agregator has been returning negative stories on the president for the past few months.  With the exception of MSNBC and the Daily Show, he has lost much of his holiness.  Though the thrill still runs up Chris Matthews leg on the "I can't get a job" news channel, the remaining media left has become increasingly critical of him.

I read Huffington every morning to soften my stool, and even they are upset with his lack of leadership.  Sure he had a free ride for the last three years, but he's getting much of the same push-back from the media that a Republican president gets. 

[Conan71]

Actually my news agregator has been returning negative stories on the president for the past few months.  With the exception of MSNBC and the Daily Show, he has lost much of his holiness.  Though the thrill still runs up Chris Matthews leg on the "I can't get a job" news channel, the remaining media left has become increasingly critical of him.

I read Huffington every morning to soften my stool, and even they are upset with his lack of leadership.  Sure he had a free ride for the last three years, but he's getting much of the same push-back from the media that a Republican president gets. 

Nate made it sound as if the GOP had been controlling the news cycle ever since Obama was elected.