Obama Negatives

[franklin lincoln]

Not for nothing, because I haven't watched many of the debates, but have Republican candidates proposed or even articulated a single workable response to any of the things Boom lists here?

Santorum's 0% corporate tax on manufacturing could help on long-term, structural unemployment. I know lots of conservatives don't like it because it's "picking winners," but he does a good job of explaining that the manufacturing and service sectors truly work in different realms. However, you need to combine that with an increase in the capital gains tax, or else you blow a huge hole through the revenue side of the equation.

 

[Starman]

I don't give a **** about budget deficits and you don't either.

I'm 53 years old and the U.S. has run budget deficits in 48-49 of those years. And anybody who signs the Grover Norquist blood oath forfeits any right to ever breathe a word about budget deficits.

Not for nothing, because I haven't watched many of the debates, but have Republican candidates proposed or even articulated a single workable response to any of the things Boom lists here?

no











see, this is the end result of 30 years of this Pavlovian "government is the problem" drumbeat:

1) they don't believe THIS government is fixing the problems;

2) they don't believe ANY government will fix the problems;

3) they don't WANT the government to fix the problems;

4) they will see to it the government does NOT fix the problems, because if it does, it will negate points 1 and 2 of their belief system.

It's like buying a car, then when it starts breaking down, taking it to the horse-and-buggy repairman who spends a half-hour yelling at you that these newfangled contraptions are never going to work, then hitting it with a hammer and laughing, "see, it's REALLY broken now."

Government is not always the answer. Sometimes government IS the problem. But the alternative is handing everything over to the corporations, who have no objective other than bottom line profit.

 

[franklin lincoln]

I don't give a **** about budget deficits and you don't either.

I'm 53 years old and the U.S. has run budget deficits in 48-49 of those years. And anybody who signs the Grover Norquist blood oath forfeits any right to ever breathe a word about budget deficits.

You're right: deficits don't matter; debt does. However, continuing deficits year-after-year leads to debt. We're at about 105-110% debt-to-GDP right now. We've only been over a 100% ratio of debt-to-GDP once before, during WWII. If we hit a recession three years from now, we will be looking to borrow to get to somewhere around 150-180% of debt-to-GDP. We've never done that before, and now that investors have easy access to other options, there's serious concern that we'll start getting squeezed.

 

[Zeke12]

Why are you crossing over -- don't like the GOP offerings or think Obama needs/deserves more time?

And let's be careful with this one, folks. This is a chance to show we CAN discuss politics like reasonable adults. I'm going to be very disappointed if proven otherwise.

This is the one, huh?

 

[heyabbott]

Oil companies raised gas prices to give Republican candidates an issue. The rise is consumer fuel costs is artificial and does not correspond with market conditions as much as padding profits and screwing Obama. Big oil fears alternative energy will have larger market share. As that happens alternative energy prices come down making it more competitive.

Oil needs to buy the Presidency and raising prices will help rightist candidates portray Obama as hurtful to average Americans.

 

[NoOneLikesUs]

Unless there is some great surprise at the Republican convention I will be voting for Obama. That said I do
think it's fair to look at his negatives:

1. Civil Liberties. instead of ending Bush policies he has ramped them up
2. Failed to close Gitmo as promised
3. Has not come out in favor of gay marriage
4. Unemployment still at very high levels
5. Started class warfare unnecessarily
6. High gas prices
7. Higher taxes ( see 5)
8. Escalated war in Afghanistan
9. Obamacare
10 Alienated strongest ally in The Middle East - Israel
11. Failure to develop strong illegal immigrant plan

1. He sure as hell did. A lot of the heavy-handed OWS policing came during his term too.
2. Yup.
3. There is absolute no reason not to do this. The writing is on the wall.
4. The unemployment situation is still very bad. I'm not convinced the unemployment numbers were lowered because people are getting jobs. Fuzzy math.
5. He has shown time and time again that he's pretty much indifferent or leaning slightly toward the side of corporate America. He has not taken a strong enough stance IMO.
6. He bares some blame. Didn't do anything to reign in the rampant speculation that helped cause the 2008 mess.
7. Higher taxes...meh. The local and state taxes are what really rape you.
8. No reason to be in Afghanistan fighting what are essentially Star Wars characters from the planet Tattooine.
9. He bailed on single-payer early, so yeah...it was a failure.
10. Israel hasn't done itself any favors.
11. From what I understand the economy sucks so bad that the flow of illegals has pretty much stopped.
---
12. His ramping up of the war on drugs in the last couple of years is troubling. (Rolling Stone did an excellent article about it a few weeks ago).
13. He did not go out of his way to show any sort of support for public workers targeted by governors in Ohio and Wisconsin.
14. Not enough using of the bully pulpit.
15. Not enough discussion of climate change. I'm especially upset that he doesn't talk about this when the pipeline issue comes up. That was the main reason hundreds of scientists and activists were getting arrested in front of the White House last year.

 

[I Should Coco]

12. His environmental record is very questionable and his handling of the Gulf oil spill was/is a disgrace.

This is a big negative for me. He's also had the EPA postpone cracking down on emission requirements, expanded off-shore drilling and botched support of alternative energy (the Solyndra scandal).

Of course, as I've said before on here, for those of us who want to hold Obama accountable on his environmental record, what is our alternative in 2012?

 

[Uncle.Ruckus]

I'm pretty sure your alternative on the environment is no regulation at all.

Romney, Santorum and Gingrich would do away with the EPA, and Ron Paul would have all EPA employees rounded up in the street and shot; he would then scrub all record of the EPA out of history, like Stalin would with photos of people he had eliminated.

 

[qtlaw]

The President is like the QB/Superstar: gets too much credit when its going good, too much flak when its going bad.

People fail to look at the Constitution; its a three branch government, not a dictatorship/monarchy. He/she can only do so much. The POTUS cannot unilaterally implement any laws, install any judges, even change the budget/deficit. The POTUS must get his/her proposals approved by Congress.

Now, the POTUS is still very powerful because he/she can make cabinet appointments which have a great impact on our day to day lives.

The list of pros and cons is unfair in substance because there is no way Obama could implement most of those on his own.

 

[bigpern23]

I've noticed it going around how "Gas only cost $1.69 per gallon when Obama was inaugurated! Look what he's done to gas prices!"

That, of course, conveniently overlooks two facts: It was at $1.69 per gallon at the depths of the recession. Nobody was spending, nobody was driving, there was no demand, so prices plummeted. And I do mean PLUMMETED. The national average was $4.12 per gallon during July of 2008. So let's not act like gas prices were fantastic under Bush.

I suppose certain policies and military actions can affect gas prices, but I think the President's influence over the price at the pump is wildly overrated.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

According to polling, 10 percent of Americans attribute rising gas prices to the law of supply and demand. And that's a BIG increase over the number who did so when they spiked in 2008.
We are a nation of spoiled children -- make that toddlers.

 

[Moderator1]

Why are you crossing over -- don't like the GOP offerings or think Obama needs/deserves more time?

And let's be careful with this one, folks. This is a chance to show we CAN discuss politics like reasonable adults. I'm going to be very disappointed if proven otherwise.

This is the one, huh?

Yes.
Thanks for the snark.
Now let's carry on the discussion.

 

[Boom_70]

I don't give a **** about budget deficits and you don't either.

I'm 53 years old and the U.S. has run budget deficits in 48-49 of those years. And anybody who signs the Grover Norquist blood oath forfeits any right to ever breathe a word about budget deficits.

You're right: deficits don't matter; debt does. However, continuing deficits year-after-year leads to debt. We're at about 105-110% debt-to-GDP right now. We've only been over a 100% ratio of debt-to-GDP once before, during WWII. If we hit a recession three years from now, we will be looking to borrow to get to somewhere around 150-180% of debt-to-GDP. We've never done that before, and now that investors have easy access to other options, there's serious concern that we'll start getting squeezed.

As more baby boomers retire debt/ deficit will be a bigger issue.

I would like to see Obama take a more serious look at Simpson Bowles recommendations.

 

[franklin lincoln]

I don't give a **** about budget deficits and you don't either.

I'm 53 years old and the U.S. has run budget deficits in 48-49 of those years. And anybody who signs the Grover Norquist blood oath forfeits any right to ever breathe a word about budget deficits.

You're right: deficits don't matter; debt does. However, continuing deficits year-after-year leads to debt. We're at about 105-110% debt-to-GDP right now. We've only been over a 100% ratio of debt-to-GDP once before, during WWII. If we hit a recession three years from now, we will be looking to borrow to get to somewhere around 150-180% of debt-to-GDP. We've never done that before, and now that investors have easy access to other options, there's serious concern that we'll start getting squeezed.

As more baby boomers retire debt/ deficit will be a bigger issue.

I would like to see Obama take a more serious look at Simpson Bowles recommendations.

That's a long-term concern that needs to be addressed soon. I want to point out that we might start feeling the effects far earlier, though, if we have even a moderate economic hiccup.

 

[Batman]

I'm not a registered Republican, though I do lean that way. I didn't vote for Obama in 2008, nor do I plan to vote for him in 2012.
I will give him credit, however, for the way he's handled Iraq, Afghanistan and the terrorism issue. We'd run our course in Iraq and we're leaving. Afghanistan and terrorism are going to be problems for a while, but we're trying to deal with it. For those that think we can ignore that front, remember that we more or less ignored it for a decade before 9/11.
He's done a better job than I thought he would on those issues.

 

[Starman]

Once in office, he has failed to strongly articulate the messages which got him elected and that are still attractive to most voters, thus ceding the court of public opinion to lunatic fringe GOPers who bastardize pretty much everything he stands for.

Ding-ding-ding-a-ding ding.

There is One Word, which if Obama would use Just Once in a press conference, which would probably boost his approval ratings 25 percent.

That word is "bull****."


Faux Fascist Noise Flunky:

“Your critics will say on Capitol Hill that you want gas prices to go higher because you have said before that will wean the American people off fossil fuels onto renewable fuels,” Henry said. “How do you respond to that?”

Obama: "Bull****."

Nation roars in approval.

Michael Douglas's "American President" speech boiled into one word.

 

[Zeke12]

Once in office, he has failed to strongly articulate the messages which got him elected and that are still attractive to most voters, thus ceding the court of public opinion to lunatic fringe GOPers who bastardize pretty much everything he stands for.

Ding-ding-ding-a-ding ding.

There is One Word, which if Obama would use Just Once in a press conference, which would probably boost his approval ratings 25 percent.

That word is "bull****."


Faux Fascist Noise Flunky:

“Your critics will say on Capitol Hill that you want gas prices to go higher because you have said before that will wean the American people off fossil fuels onto renewable fuels,” Henry said. “How do you respond to that?”

Obama: "Bull****."

Nation roars in approval.

Michael Douglas's "American President" speech boiled into one word.

I wish I also thought that were true.

But I truly don't.

 

[Starman]

Well, think about it, if Obama actually said that (he kinda did but of course in much much more diplomatic terms), who would become suddenly enraged?

People who decided long long ago they hate him anyway. So what?

They would hate him just as much, or more, if he said, "gee ya know something Ed, you might really have a point there." :

Who would be suddenly energized?

The people who decided long long ago they love him anyway of course, but also the huge number of people in the middle who think he has been indecisive, waffling and weak.

Plus of course the astronauts on the far far left who have abandoned him for constantly caving to the wingnuts would come stampeding back in a rush.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Two things. 1. Federal taxes are lower under Obama than they were under Bush, due to the stimulus package and the ongoing payroll tax holiday. Americans NEVER believe taxes have gone down, even when they do (poli sci research again), or think somebody else got the cut and not them.
2. A quite legitimate complaint about Obama is that he has been a slipshod administrator, apparently unconcerned with staffing the executive branch, letting holdover appointees dictate policy at important agencies (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, etc.).

 

[Zeke12]

Well, think about it, if Obama actually said that (he kinda did but of course in much much more diplomatic terms), who would become suddenly enraged?

People who decided long long ago they hate him anyway. So what?

They would hate him just as much, or more, if he said, "gee ya know something Ed, you might really have a point there." :

Who would be suddenly energized?

The people who decided long long ago they love him anyway of course, but also the huge number of people in the middle who think he has been indecisive, waffling and weak.

Plus of course the astronauts on the far far left who have abandoned him for constantly caving to the wingnuts would come stampeding back in a rush.

The inside-the-beltway political press would flog him from now until he was out of office. The David Brooks' of the world would has a sad, and that would trigger an endless negative news cycle.

You're right that it's a wash in terms of voters. It would energize those who like him as well as those who hate him. It's just not worth the ****storm.