• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Opposition to Obama grows - strongly

Status
Not open for further replies.
whysoserious said:
Or the truth that the economic downturn that caused all of those stats happened while a George W. Bush was in office. Do you really want to blame a poor economy on Obama? The economy was in shambles when he took office, don't forget that.

Don't be a hack, man. What you are doing is no different than the idiots who used to blame Bush for the attacks on September 11th. Do you want to be that guy?
Click to expand...

The economy was in shambles when Reagan took office, it was in shambles when Clinton took office, and it was in shambles when GW Bush took office.

The difference............ they corrected the problem and the economy was humming along within 3 years.
 
Conservative said:
Only another liberal would buy the half truths. That fits you well because you want badly to believe Obama has better results than he actually does. With such great results that you bought why is his approval rating so low?
Click to expand...

You wanna man up and go through your bogus list one by one? I'd love to. Why don't we start with this claim of yours:

Conservative said:
Obama economic results in 2011
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Click to expand...

We were downgraded by the S&P because the S&P said the Republicans were playing chicken with the debt limit. The S&P themselves said this.

OK... ur turn.
 
Gill said:
Romney would then reply, "the troops got Bin Laden, the Libyan's got Gadhaffi, and you are bringing the troops in Iraq home on Bush's schedule.

Now Mr. President, let's talk about your 9% unemployment, 4 trillion dollar plus deficit, and the highest misery index in 30 years."
Click to expand...
to which obama would respond, "yes, our troops got him, on my watch, on my order, God bless our troops....yes, the libyans got Gadhaffi, using our technology, and again, this happened on my watch, and yes , Mr. bush had mentioned bringing those troops home, but never got around to it....and again, ON MY WATCH, we brought our men and women home from iraq. "
 
Conservative said:
Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

I have an answer for this:

Here you go...
 
Conservative said:
Really? What were the GDP numbers in 2010 and what are they for the first two qtrs of 2011? I blame the currrent economy on Obama and know that Obama contributed to the economy that he inherited for that is what Congress does
Click to expand...

News Release: Gross Domestic Product and Corporate Profits
Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property
located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 1.3 percent in the second quarter of 2011,
(that is, from the first quarter to the second quarter), according to the "third" estimate released by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the first quarter, real GDP increased 0.4 percent.
Click to expand...

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdphighlights.pdf
gdp by quater.webp

What's your point, other than proving mine? In fact, if you do not count the first two quarters of '09, since he just took office, GDP has risen in every quarter since.
 
Last edited:
Gill said:
The economy was in shambles when Reagan took office, it was in shambles when Clinton took office, and it was in shambles when GW Bush took office.

The difference............ they corrected the problem and the economy was humming along within 3 years.
Click to expand...

Yes yes... they were alll in the same boat. False equivalence ftl. lol
 
Conservative said:
Fact, we were down graded on Obama's watch and Obama inherited a AAA rating
Click to expand...
Fact, we were downgraded because republicans wanted to play chicken....you can't spin that
 
whysoserious said:
News Release: Gross Domestic Product and Corporate Profits


http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdphighlights.pdf
View attachment 67117093

What's your point, other than proving mine? In fact, if you do not count the first two quarters of '09, since he just took office, GDP has risen in every quarter since.
Click to expand...

If you spend over a trillion dollars you are going to get GDP growth, it was a short term sugar high that has played out. GDP Growth in 2011 is meager yet that doesn't seem to matter to you. Why is the 2011 GDP growth so much lower than 2010?
 
Conservative said:
I have seen your charts, what good are they with net job losses, a declining labor force, and 25 million unemployed and under employed Americans?
Click to expand...

Well, they are damn good at doing a point by point debunktion of just about everything you posted.

See? It's right here.
 
poweRob said:
Fact, it was the Republican's fault.

Look at you still clinging to date blaming instead of looking at facts. You poor thing.
Click to expand...

Of course it is, it always is because liberals have no responsibility for anything. Obama had total control of Congress for two years where was the increase in the debt limit? By the way where is the 2011 budget? Easy to blame Republicans when you ignore the actual facts.
 
randel said:
to which obama would respond, "yes, our troops got him, on my watch, on my order, God bless our troops....yes, the libyans got Gadhaffi, using our technology, and again, this happened on my watch, and yes , Mr. bush had mentioned bringing those troops home, but never got around to it....and again, ON MY WATCH, we brought our men and women home from iraq. "
Click to expand...

Bush "mentioned" bringing the troops home ?????

I guess you never heard of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed by U.S. and Iraq officials on Nov. 16, 2008.

Article 24
Withdrawal of the United States Forces from Iraq
Recognizing the performance and increasing capacity of the Iraqi Security Forces, the
assumption of full security responsibility by those Forces, and based upon the strong
relationship between the Parties, an agreement on the following has been reached:
1. All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than
December 31, 2011.
Click to expand...

A bit of knowledge on the subject you are trying to debate would be useful. I suggest you study a bit more before talking about things you know little about next time.
 
randel said:
Fact, we were downgraded because republicans wanted to play chicken....you can't spin that
Click to expand...

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/07/debt-deiling-debate-moodys-puts-us-on-review-for-downgrade/
“If the debt limit is raised again and a default avoided, the Aaa rating would likely be confirmed. However, the outlook assigned at that time to the government bond rating would very likely be changed to negative at the conclusion of the review unless substantial and credible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction.”
Click to expand...

S P Downgrade | S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating - Los Angeles Times
"The political brinkmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective and less predictable than what we previously believed," said S&P, one of three leading credit rating agencies.

"The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy."
Click to expand...

Straight from S&P, and Moodys told us before as well. We were downgraded because republicans have turned the democratic process into such a circus, uncertainty has reached a whole new level and that makes the market wary. All they had to do was raise the debt ceiling, just as they had every other time, but they wanted to "play chicken", as you said, and it cost us.
 
Gill said:
Bush "mentioned" bringing the troops home ?????

I guess you never heard of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed by U.S. and Iraq officials on Nov. 16, 2008.



A bit of knowledge on the subject you are trying to debate would be useful. I suggest you study a bit more before talking about things you know little about next time.
Click to expand...

I don't think that included the massive embassy they built there and the thousands of troops that were to be left behind to "guard" that embassy.
 
poweRob said:
Just curious... is that how you feel about the 9/11 attacks?

Somehow I doubt it. :lamo
Click to expand...

How do you feel about the lost jobs that the 9/11 attacks cost and how do you feel about the 2003-2007 11 million jobs created?
 
randel said:
Fact, we were downgraded because republicans wanted to play chicken....you can't spin that
Click to expand...

Fact is, we were downgraded because Obama and the Democrats would not agree to cut the budget:

The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.
Click to expand...

<from the link provided>
 
Gill said:
Bush "mentioned" bringing the troops home ?????

I guess you never heard of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) signed by U.S. and Iraq officials on Nov. 16, 2008.



A bit of knowledge on the subject you are trying to debate would be useful. I suggest you study a bit more before talking about things you know little about next time.
Click to expand...
bush could have brought them home anytime up till the time he left office, he didnt.....notice the part "no later"? perhaps you should read the entire section, just sayin'
 
Conservative said:
Sorry, your turn]

You show a net private sector job growth so how can that be with a 2.6 million net job loss?
Click to expand...

You are parsing now. I answered your incredibly false and redundant cut and paste job and now you are moving the goal posts. You were wrong. On all accounts. It's OK. The sun will still rise tomorrow.
 
Conservative said:
If you spend over a trillion dollars you are going to get GDP growth, it was a short term sugar high that has played out. GDP Growth in 2011 is meager yet that doesn't seem to matter to you. Why is the 2011 GDP growth so much lower than 2010?
Click to expand...

Did you not look it up before hand or something? That's the best you can do, "Oh well, the growth is meager at best and we spent a lot". Yawn, do you have any sources, proof, data, or logic behind whatever point you are trying to make? Look man, throwing around bull**** data works on Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, but some of us have brains, so it won't make the cut here.
 
poweRob said:
I don't think that included the massive embassy they built there and the thousands of troops that were to be left behind to "guard" that embassy.
Click to expand...

You mean like the embassy personnel we have in every country in the world ??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom