Are Dems insane for vote for Obama again?

[Mr. Sandman]

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein

I think most Dems would say that his policies (and the results) haven't been bad, therefore, no need to change. And today, the debt will pass $16 trillion, $50,000 for every living American, and that doesn't include social sucurity and Medicare shortfalls, which are at least another $40 trillion.

[Raider Ronnie]

What are you talking about.
Just the other day during a campaign speech Joe Biden said
"we Are better off than we were 4 years ago"
I think he was giving a speech at a welfare office !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Just like in 2004, the vote is going to come down to a general comfort level with the candidates...and the devil you know often has the upper hand. This campaign is going to be like a boxing match, jab here...exploit their mistake there...

As for the "better off 4 years ago" rhetoric, it's a bunch of nonsense. 4 years ago the economy was on an artificial plateau about to come crashing down. The real question is if we've moved from the bottom which we certainly have.

-spence

[Bronko]

Ummm.... I Believe the real question is has 'hope and change' worked? Not have we 'moved from the bottom'. Must be nice to be able to lower the bar like that to illustrate results.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Spence seems nice but is likely delusional in a clinical sense.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Just like in 2004, the vote is going to come down to a general comfort level with the candidates...and the devil you know often has the upper hand. This campaign is going to be like a boxing match, jab here...exploit their mistake there...

As for the "better off 4 years ago" rhetoric, it's a bunch of nonsense. 4 years ago the economy was on an artificial plateau about to come crashing down. The real question is if we've moved from the bottom which we certainly have.

-spence

"As for the "better off 4 years ago" rhetoric, it's a bunch of nonsense.'

True, we shouldn't be asking if we're better off now then 4 years ago, because as you said, that was before Obama even took office. When people ask that, I think they mean "are you better off now than the day Obama was sworn in", and that's a valid question to consider...

"The real question is if we've moved from the bottom which we certainly have."

Why is that the real question? By definition, once you hit "the bottom", you literally have nowhere to go but up. So why does he get credit for the inevitable improvement from the bottom?


Since Obama took office, (1) the debt has been increased by $5 trillion, and (2) unemployment is higher than it was before he took office.

The man added $17,000 to the debt on behalf of every living American, and we have a net loss of jobs. That's not easy to accomplish. It means either (1) the situation was unbelievably difficult, or (2) Obama is incompetent.

And I'll disagree when you say we've certainly moved off bottom. Obama will add another $1 trillion to the deficit this year. He has no plans to address social security or medicare shortfalls in a menaingful way. We still have tons of foreclosures and homes underwater.

I fear we haven't even come close to hitting bottom yet.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Bronko

Must be nice to be able to lower the bar like that to illustrate results.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama spent his political career voting "present" in the IL state senate. He did that because this is a man who did not want to leave footprints behind that anyone could hold him accountable for. Now, unfortunately, he has a record we can look at.

I actually give him very high marks for the war on terror. But on the economy? How do you spend $5 trillion more than you took in, and have higher unemployment than when you started?

So, rather than brag about his record, the Obama machine does what you say. They keep moving the goalposts until it appears as though they scored a goal. It's dishonest and desperate. And somehow, effective.

A senior Obama campaign official said recently that the country is beter off now than it was before Obama took office, "by any measure". I can only assume that the list of measures that make Obama look great, does not include unemployment, debt, foreclosures, gas prices, or consumer confidence.

[Mr. Sandman]

Spence,
I suppose that depends on your perspective... If you are one of the 23 million unemployed or one of the youths that will get stuck paying for the trillions of debt incurred (more debt than all the presidents combined )
of $ wasted to prop big government or if you are one of the people (like me) who wants to invest in a new business but does not want to get bogged down a nightmare of regulations and fees from new taxes, insurance to healthcare that will start you so far behind the 8 ball from the get go that hope of being competitive with other nations is a pipe-dream in my lifetime OR you are a doctor who continues to get less and less reimbursements with more and more regulations and demands OR if you just one of the industries that consumes fuel OR if you need to heat your house OR if you are a student who studied advanced technology who can develop industries to help get us out of this mess and can't get a job because corpoations are unsure of what the future holds...I don't think they like the status quo or steady as she goes approach.

I suppose though if you are on the hand-out side of the equation then yes it pays to vote for someone who will give you something for doing nothing. What have you got to loose? you have nothing now, anything is better than nothing no matter where it comes from right?

In my view the Robin Hood approach is not the solution to growing the US economy (or anything for that matter)

[buckman]

If this whole Iran thing blows up like I believe it will then we will really see rock bottom
And doing nothing, as far as that situation goes, for the last 4 years will be the reason.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Obama's economy: A snapshot - Job growth (1) - CNNMoney

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Obama's economy: A snapshot - Job growth (1) - CNNMoney

before Obama even took office, most economists predicted that the economy would improve in 2010. It did, however it continued to improve at a much slower pace than expected and a smaller %.
There was no big surge and nothing that could be tied to O's stimulus. He is going to have to answer for that.

[Piscator]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Obama's economy: A snapshot - Job growth (1) - CNNMoney

Keep clicking to the next bunch of charts to get the whole story. Here are a few tid bits:

Part of the decline has come as some Americans have gone back to work, but also because many workers have dropped out of the labor force.

During the first three months of 2009, the economy slumped at an annual rate of 6.7%. Since then GDP has been growing and slowly recovering, but the rebound has been a lackluster one compared to those following prior recessions.

Home prices have moved up and down since the start of Obama's term. Lifted in 2010 on the back of the Recovery Act's homebuyer tax credit, prices later fell when the credit expired. But overall, the trend has been lower, and housing remains in a major slump.

Gas and food prices have had a few temporary growth spurts in the past few years, but overall, inflation has remained relatively low, held back by falling home prices and stagnant wages.

Three-and-a-half years ago, filling up at the pump cost around $1.60 a gallon. But then, gas prices began to climb, eventually topping out at nearly $4 a gallon in mid-2011, and coming pretty close again in 2012. Since then, prices have fallen back a bit, but at $3.35 a gallon, are still nowhere near 2009 levels.

The financial crisis of 2008 spurred a big chunk of spending increases and tax cuts to stem the pain of the downturn. That's a key reason why debt held by the public -- individual bondholders, big investors, and foreign governments -- has increased significantly since 2008. That jump will have to be paid off with interest.

Much of those emergency measures will end, so for the next decade annual deficits should be much lower than they've been recently. But over the long run, debt is still projected to grow faster than the economy. Policymakers will have to address it soon, or risk not being able to fund everything Americans expect their government to do.

The bank bailout and federal stimulus programs aimed at juicing the economy pushed up spending significantly in fiscal 2009, which began in October of 2008. Revenue, meanwhile, fell to 60-year lows as the economy slumped and millions of people lost their jobs. That, in turn, increased safety net spending.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by Piscator

Keep clicking to the next bunch of charts to get the whole story. Here are a few tid bits:

Part of the decline has come as some Americans have gone back to work, but also because many workers have dropped out of the labor force.

During the first three months of 2009, the economy slumped at an annual rate of 6.7%. Since then GDP has been growing and slowly recovering, but the rebound has been a lackluster one compared to those following prior recessions.

Home prices have moved up and down since the start of Obama's term. Lifted in 2010 on the back of the Recovery Act's homebuyer tax credit, prices later fell when the credit expired. But overall, the trend has been lower, and housing remains in a major slump.

Gas and food prices have had a few temporary growth spurts in the past few years, but overall, inflation has remained relatively low, held back by falling home prices and stagnant wages.

Three-and-a-half years ago, filling up at the pump cost around $1.60 a gallon. But then, gas prices began to climb, eventually topping out at nearly $4 a gallon in mid-2011, and coming pretty close again in 2012. Since then, prices have fallen back a bit, but at $3.35 a gallon, are still nowhere near 2009 levels.

The financial crisis of 2008 spurred a big chunk of spending increases and tax cuts to stem the pain of the downturn. That's a key reason why debt held by the public -- individual bondholders, big investors, and foreign governments -- has increased significantly since 2008. That jump will have to be paid off with interest.

Much of those emergency measures will end, so for the next decade annual deficits should be much lower than they've been recently. But over the long run, debt is still projected to grow faster than the economy. Policymakers will have to address it soon, or risk not being able to fund everything Americans expect their government to do.

The bank bailout and federal stimulus programs aimed at juicing the economy pushed up spending significantly in fiscal 2009, which began in October of 2008. Revenue, meanwhile, fell to 60-year lows as the economy slumped and millions of people lost their jobs. That, in turn, increased safety net spending.

too funny - I was going to post the same thing! The summary bullets for each graph are pretty negative for big O. The only area that really improved? The stock market! Hows that a message for "main st" vs. wall st??????

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Obama's economy: A snapshot - Job growth (1) - CNNMoney

He's been in office for 3.5 years. In that time, he added $5 trillion to he debt. In that time, unemployment is higher now than it was when he took office.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

He's been in office for 3.5 years. In that time, he added $5 trillion to he debt. In that time, unemployment is higher now than it was when he took office.

4/5 of the $5trillion is from policies enacted before he took office. Unemployment is higher, but job growth is about +1million per month



Spending was high when he took office. He would have had to made major cuts to change the deficit picture, cuts that couldn't be made because of two wars and a recession. Anyone who has a basic understanding of economics knows that spending cuts are the worst thing that can be done for an economy during a recession. For example, look up the jobs projections if the fiscal cliff deadline hits and the cuts are made. In any case, attributing the $5 trillion to him is either ignorance of the facts or intentional distortion of them

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.




• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.
Obama spending binge never happened - MarketWatch

[spence]

Most of the charts (aside from debt/gdp) show positive trends, just slow recovery. The only one that's really negative is about gas prices...but that's really misleading...2 months before the chart starts gas was over 4 bucks a gallon!

A good question is how a McCain scenario would have looked different.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

Most of the charts show positive trends, just slow recovery. The only one that's really negative is about gas prices...but that's really misleading...2 months before the chart starts gas was over 4 bucks a gallon!

-spence

yes, and recovery was forecasted without any action by this administration. So, how did he ADD VALUE?
We know he increased expenses, spent billions on stimulus, where is the value to offset?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

4/5 of the $5trillion is from policies enacted before he took office. Unemployment is higher, but job growth is about +1million per month



Spending was high when he took office. He would have had to made major cuts to change the deficit picture, cuts that couldn't be made because of two wars and a recession. Anyone who has a basic understanding of economics knows that spending cuts are the worst thing that can be done for an economy during a recession. For example, look up the jobs projections if the fiscal cliff deadline hits and the cuts are made. In any case, attributing the $5 trillion to him is either ignorance of the facts or intentional distortion of them

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.




• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.
Obama spending binge never happened - MarketWatch

Obama had a budget???

[basswipe]

Originally Posted by spence

The real question is if we've moved from the bottom which we certainly have.

-spence

We are now officially 16 trillion in the hole as of today.The jobs market is the worst its ever been in my lifetime and the housing market is in the same situation...and with the political climate as it is,it can and will get worse.

Its amazing you can say that with a straight face.

[RIJIMMY]

here is some taxpayer $$ well spent!

CNN) -- A federal court judge on Tuesday ordered Massachusetts officials to provide sex-reassignment surgery for a transsexual prison inmate, after determining that it was the only adequate treatment for the inmate's mental illness.

The state's Department of Correction said Michelle Kosilek, who is serving a life sentence without parole for murdering his wife, has a gender identity disorder.

He attempted to castrate himself and tried to commit suicide twice while incarcerated, according to a court order.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

yes, and recovery was forecasted without any action by this administration. So, how did he ADD VALUE?
We know he increased expenses, spent billions on stimulus, where is the value to offset?

Where was the recovery forecasted without any action?

How about if we didn't do TARP either?

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by basswipe

We are now officially 16 trillion in the hole as of today.The jobs market is the worst its ever been in my lifetime and the housing market is in the same situation...and with the political climate as it is,it can and will get worse.

Its amazing you can say that with a straight face.

4 years ago most people thought we were all going to die.

-spence

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

4 years ago most people thought we were all going to die.

-spence

And that was mostly fueled by Obama.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

And that was mostly fueled by Obama.

No, it was fueled by an imploding market, a terrified GWB and media reports that our economy was about to shut down...which it was!

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by zimmy

job growth is about +1million per month



[/url]

Not for his entire term, it's not. Zimmy, it's easy to say there is job growth when you ignore the months in which there was no job growth, and only consider months when there was job growth.

The last few months have seen job growth, I get that. But you don't get to ignore the bad months. If we ignore the last 3 months of Bush's presidency, the economy look spretty damn awesome.

Some good points in that post, though, seriously...

[Slipknot]

well I guess you got your answer Sandman

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

And that was mostly fueled by Obama.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not for his entire term, it's not. Zimmy, it's easy to say there is job growth when you ignore the months in which there was no job growth, and only consider months when there was job growth.

The last few months have seen job growth, I get that. But you don't get to ignore the bad months. If we ignore the last 3 months of Bush's presidency, the economy look spretty damn awesome.

Some good points in that post, though, seriously...

The comments prior to it were about today compared to "4 years ago". It isn't about ignoring bad months, it is about what things were like then and what they are like now. Then, the economy was dumping 800,000 jobs a month. The net difference today is about a million jobs a month better. The whole thing is sort of ridiculous. For example, ignoring Bush's last three months tells less of the story than attributing at least the first 6 months or so of 2009 to him. In that case, he should also get credit for some of the improvement in the jobs numbers because of TARP and some of the other things he did.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by buckman

Obama had a budget???

You do know who passes budgets don't you?