• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Obama a lame duck?

Is Obama a lame duck?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 43.2%
  • No

    Votes: 21 56.8%

  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Is Obama a lame duck?

Yes.
No.
 

TOJ

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
4,513
Reaction score
641
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Depends on what definition you use.

.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
20,734
Reaction score
9,047
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, but I was saying that who ever was elected in 2008 was going to be a one term president.
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,229
Reaction score
14,235
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
No, don't insult the ducks by comparing them to Obama :mrgreen:
 

Morality Games

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
3,733
Reaction score
1,156
Location
Iowa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
That depends on the reception of the Republican House of Representatives and who the party selects as their candidate.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Obama is not a lame duck. The Republicans in Congress are a long, long way away from being able to over-ride him, and they're a long, long way from working with the Democrats.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I know they meant well, but they just illustrated Obama is as lame as lame can be.

Opinion | One and done: To be a great president, Obama should not seek reelection in 2012

They contend Obama would have some leverage if he didn't run in 2012. He'd have even less.
The guy is at the mercy of the House GOP, and Senate Dems know it. It will be interesting to see if they stick together or if there will be a fracture, as a ton are up for re-election, and their only hope is to move to the right and go against an unpopular president.

If a fracture emerges (thinking it will save their hides)... even a handful, Obama loses. If they stick together they lose. Either way they lose, and Obama loses. In the former... Americans win, in the latter, we win later on.

They think he can still be great. That train left the station long, long ago. There is no hope for that. None. The damage is done, and he is in the history books for a historic ass whoop'in of his own making.

.
 
Last edited:

Sadie

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
145
Reaction score
48
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yes, but I was saying that who ever was elected in 2008 was going to be a one term president.

I agree. I believe that Obama has his sights set on a global position beyond the USA. Quite frankly, I find him almost bored with being President of the USA. His remark about preferring to be a good one-term president was telling beyond the usual smack against GWB.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I agree. I believe that Obama has his sights set on a global position beyond the USA. Quite frankly, I find him almost bored with being President of the USA. His remark about preferring to be a good one-term president was telling beyond the usual smack against GWB.

After his term as president of Amerika, he'd be the ideal Secretary-General of the UN. He'd feel right at home leading that anti-American body.

.
 

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Obama is not a lame duck. The Republicans in Congress are a long, long way away from being able to over-ride him, and they're a long, long way from working with the Democrats.
According go the Democrats, when you win an election, the other side has to ride in the back.
:shrug:
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Do you have the capacity to comment seriously on anything, or are partisan one-liners all you've got?

The Republicans did not decisively win the election. They got a majority in one house, and firmed up their minority in the Senate. Nothing's going to get done on either side unless there's some cooperation.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Do you have the capacity to comment seriously on anything, or are partisan one-liners all you've got?

The Republicans did not decisively win the election. They got a majority in one house, and firmed up their minority in the Senate. Nothing's going to get done on either side unless there's some cooperation.

Oh my!

Has Pelosi joined Debate Politics? "did not decisively win the election"... ROTFLOL... Upstate NY importing BC Bud?

Earth to Nancy... ahhhhhhhh... the second largest midterm swing in history???..."did not decisively win the election"??? ROTFLOL...

As for the Senate, had the entire Senate been up for grabs, we would have kicked scrotum hard there too... but we made very decent progress... 23-seats are up in 2012... hold on to your sack, we're gonna boot yer junk... and hard.

This is only the start my friend, and you have revealed what "Other" means when describing your "Political Lean": Further left than Nancy.

I don't mind if nothing gets done, except starving ObamaKare. For nothing to get done, Obama will have his veto pen out, and that's OK with me. 2012 isn't far away, and once the incompetent is voted out... then we can start gutting & slashing the behemoth.

.
 
Last edited:

Sadie

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2010
Messages
145
Reaction score
48
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
After his term as president of Amerika, he'd be the ideal Secretary-General of the UN. He'd feel right at home leading that anti-American body.

.

Sounds possible.:shock:
 

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Lame Duck? No, not yet anyway. He's pretty close though. He needs to turn things around like Clinton was able to if he has a chance. My money's not on that happening though. He doesn't have the leadership attributes that Clinton had in terms of being able to talk to the people.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Oh my!

Has Pelosi joined Debate Politics? "did not decisively win the election"... ROTFLOL... Upstate NY importing BC Bud?

Earth to Nancy... ahhhhhhhh... the second largest midterm swing in history???..."did not decisively win the election"??? ROTFLOL...

I guess you're in need of some remedial English. Observe:

de·ci·sive Adjective /diˈsīsiv/

1. Settling an issue; producing a definite result
  • the Supreme Court voided the statute by a decisive 7–2 vote
  • decisive evidence
2. (of a person) Having or showing the ability to make decisions quickly and effectively

The two parties now posses almost perfectly split control of the first two estates. The Democrats, of course, still hold the Presidency (since Obama's not up for re-election yet) and a majority in the Senate -- one too small to steamroller a fillibuster. The Republicans hold a majority in the House, and enough Senators to put up a good fight.

The President is free to sign or Veto as he pleases, since the Republicans couldn't possibly put together a 2/3 majority to override on any but the most urgent of legislative issues. The Republicans are free to pass whatever they like in the House. The battleground for the next two years will be the Senate.

Literally nothing will be accomplished from this point forward except where the two major parties cooperate.

That certainly is a victory for the party that was in the minority in both houses, but all that has been decided is that neither party has enough control to just do whatever the hell they want. That sounds like the opposite of decisive to me.

It's even less decisive when you take into account the fact that the party in the White House typically loses a certain amount of influence (almost by default) in the mid-term elections.

It's even less decisive than that when you take into account all of the bragging done about how the Republicans were going to seize both houses of Congress from the evil Democrats and set all the wrongs right.

They took a perfect storm and used it to coast in like a lazy boy on a bike, rather than marching in like gangbusters.

If that's decisive in your book, then be sure to say "hi" to Rush for me at the next circle-jerk. :lol:
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I guess you're in need of some remedial English. Observe:
Ahhhhhh.... Not the cunning linguist you think you are... not by a mile.

ROTFLOL... may I suggest Hooked on Memory Improvement?
Or perhaps the back-link button to review what YOU wrote.
Perhaps a remedial English course from the school at the end of this thread?

Remember this? You wrote it:
The Republicans did not decisively win the election.
Republicans won the election both decisively and historically.

You did use the word election... did you not?

de·ci·sive
   /dɪˈsaɪsɪv/ Show Spelled[dih-sahy-siv] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
having the power or quality of deciding; putting an end to controversy; crucial or most important: Your argument was the decisive one.
2.
characterized by or displaying no or little hesitation; resolute; determined: The general was known for his decisive manner.
3.
indisputable; definite: a decisive defeat. (or victory)
4.
unsurpassable; commanding: a decisive lead in the voting.

The election... your words... was a decisive victory for the Right.
The election...

That decisive victory has major implications. If it were a minor victory it wouldn't, but being decisive across the country, in state houses, governorships as well as Federally... it was one of the most decisive victories in the history of the country.

Insert Quarter and try again.


.
 
Last edited:

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Ahhhhhh.... Not the cunning linguist you think you are... not by a mile.

ROTFLOL... may I suggest Hooked on Memory Improvement?
Or perhaps the back-link button to review what YOU wrote.
Perhaps a remedial English course from the school at the end of this thread?

Remember this? You wrote it:

Yes, of course, I remember writing it. I even stand by it.

There is a distinct difference between simply calling something a victory and calling it a decisive victory. There are different flavors and varieties of victory -- pyrrhic being one of them, decisive being another.

The one thing that all flavors of victory have in common is that the victor achieved some variation of the result they desired. The difference is the degree to which the victor got what they wanted, and what the cost of victory was.

Equating "victory" and "decisive victory," as you are attempting to do, is like trying to equate a high wind warning to a tornado watch. Yep, they're both awfully windy, but the tornado has especially destructive qualities that puts it in a class by itself.

You simply cannot call a victory decisive where nothing has actually been decided. The people, as a collective whole, sent just enough Republicans to Washington that neither party can claim definitive control over any branch of government.

Republicans won the election both decisively and historically.

I honestly don't know your stand well enough to know if you're a Republican water-boy, a hater of the Democrat party, or some of each. Regardless, you're quite emphatically promoting one party over the other.

The result seems to be that you're viewing this entire situation of rah-rah Republicans, boo-boo Democrats. I, for my part, hate both parties, so I tend to take a somewhat more objective view.

Think about it like this: The Republicans had the Presidency and both houses of Congress for 6 years. In that 6 years, they blew their wad so hard that they lost a lot more control than they thought they would in the 2006 mid-terms, and they lost even worse in 2008. The Democrats, for their part, capitalized on the anger at Bush going into 2006, continued hyping it into the 2008 elections, and then blew their wad on health care.

This historic victory you're touting is only historic because the Republicans got the snot kicked out of them in 2006 and 2008 and are only now making a comeback. In other words, it's historic because they started so far behind the line that just about any kind of victory for them could be touted as historic.

In other words, it's not that they're great, it's that after 4 years they're finally reconnecting with the electorate and regaining some lost ground.
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Lame Duck? No, not yet anyway. He's pretty close though. He needs to turn things around like Clinton was able to if he has a chance. My money's not on that happening though. He doesn't have the leadership attributes that Clinton had in terms of being able to talk to the people.
I fear that you are correct...
Maybe Obama is 20 years ahead of his time.
And our nation will be 40 years behind the world, rather than 20.
And of course the Republicans did decisively win the recent election, why would anyone debate this?
The Democrats have no good and effective counter to Beck and Limbaugh...and Fox...
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
How can you call it a decisive win when nobody controls the government?

1. Your opening sentence claimed the election was not decisive.

2. The election was decisive, and when it is so overwhelmingly decisive, and historic in its result, it marks a tidal shift in the citizen's political mood.

3. That decisive win can/might have just enough Dems running for cover in the Senate on key votes (going along with R's)... for they see the writing on the wall. Perhaps not. Then we have Obama's Veto Pen. Dems just might vote to cover their asses, knowing Obama will veto said legislation.

4. Nobody will know until it's been played out, for NOBODY could have forecast the defeat handed D's thanks to Obama. It was unfathomable 2-years ago.

5. Nobody could have foreseen a political uprising from the Right... for it hasn't happened in this manner in my many decades of following politics. It marks uncharted territory, and the decisive win on Nov. 2 reflects that monumental shift. It took a mere 2-4 years depending on how you look at it. The decisive 1994 win took 40-years.

6. But to our argument about the usage and meaning of the word "DECISIVE", points 3, 4 & 5 don't mean squat.

Contrary to your statement, the election was decisive; from the State houses, governorships, and the House and Senate.

What results from the decisive election is another story that we can only surmise, for I'm not clairvoyant. Are you?

The election: D E C I S I V E... and H I S T O R I C.

.
 
Last edited:

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
1. Your opening sentence claimed the election was not decisive.

It wasn't, for the reasons I've clearly stated.

The election: D E C I S I V E... and H I S T O R I C.

You: Completely ignoring my rather lengthy post where I laid out just how wrong you were, responding only to the one-liner that I posted in response to someone else. :lol:

Repeating yourself over and over and over with no substance to back up your repetition may qualify as a worthy argument in your mind, but to me all it means is that you've got precicely Jack and ****.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
It wasn't, for the reasons I've clearly stated.



You: Completely ignoring my rather lengthy post where I laid out just how wrong you were, responding only to the one-liner that I posted in response to someone else. :lol:

Repeating yourself over and over and over with no substance to back up your repetition may qualify as a worthy argument in your mind, but to me all it means is that you've got precicely Jack and ****.

ROTFLOL... you enjoy having your pants pulled down and your ass spanked I see.:spank:

Your lengthy post was a throat clearing smoke screen; nothing more.

I repeat myself because it's the core of the argument based on yer werdz 'n yer sentanz.

Election won decisively. End of story. Whatever happens after is moot in this argument.

You into more B&D.

Waiting...

PS. Precisely, not precicely.


.
 
Last edited:

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Well, then, you should have no trouble whatsoever addressing what I said. If it's that easy to see through, it should take no effort at all.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and going LA LA LA does not constitute an appropriate rebuttal.
 
Top Bottom