Lowest of Any President At This Point...

[MaggieMae]

I never realized US Senators are mere "Community Organizers"

What does that make half term Governors?

Or that teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago from 1992 to 1996, or a practicing attorney with the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland for three years weren't "real" jobs. Do these people ever research ANYTHING?

A government job is not a real job, Academia is not a real job , and neither is working a few years for the pro-bono dept. of a law firm. He's a dilettante.

Idiot...

 

[Alvin]

You know what I love....?

The worst recession since Al Capone, and it gets blamed on the the guy who is 1/4 through his term.....

 

[MaggieMae]

Yeah, sure.

Reagan enjoyed a massive turnaround on the economy and his tax cuts are credited with producing millions of jobs. Obama has produced ZERO jobs thus far- he has lost 4 million jobs and counting- and he is talking about tax increases, increased regulations, and more entitlement programs. He's going exactly the wrong way and voters will punish him and his party for it.

Of course you conveniently forget that the hemorrhaging of jobs began in 2007 and accelerated at a record pace by the end of 2008. But it's still all Obama's fault.

You are giving him credit for saving jobs in one thread and exonerating him from losing jobs in another!! You must really love drinking Kool-Aid!! You can't have it both ways MM, he is either responsible for the economy or he isn't. Which is it?

Let's keep it simple. His plate was full when he sat down at the table.

 

[rightwinger]

Walter Mondale got his butt kicked by Reagan

Do the Republicans have anyone as good as Mondale for 2012?

Not even close


RON PAUL
I don't know if he will run again.... But either way our uneducated easily persuaded society would never give the glitz and glam to Ron Paul, like they did obama.

Ron Paul got around 1% of the Republican vote in the Primary. He was considered to be a crackpot....still is

First of all, he was considered to be a crackpot by the other Republican canidates.... Which in my mind, means nothing considering the Republican party has shifted to a kind of Neo Conservative way...
He never did win a state though, he did come second in 10 staes, and came in third in 17 states. He also got 35 delegate counts. Which to me was a great achievement given the fact that every single Republican sounded exactly the same. I would also like to mention alot of the Canidates dont have the slightest clue when it comes to our Constitution, especially Mitt Romney when he was asked " what would you to if you were to engage in military action against Iran?" He replied by saying "he would consult his attorneys". You should know that to declare war you need a declaration of war, something I feel you should know as a potential presedential canidate.
Ron Paul also set the record for most fundraising in a day, and had the most fundraising by active military personel.....
Your comment about him being considered a "crackpot" is totally distorted. Just because he's considered a crackpot by the neo conservatives running against him does not make him a crack pot to the American people.

The numbers don't lie. Ron Paul was a no show in the Republican Primaries. Outside of an internet following he has no measurable base.
In a general election his crackpot views only draw other crackpots

 

[rightwinger]

I never realized US Senators are mere "Community Organizers"

What does that make half term Governors?

Or that teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago from 1992 to 1996, or a practicing attorney with the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland for three years weren't "real" jobs. Do these people ever research ANYTHING?

A government job is not a real job, Academia is not a real job , and neither is working a few years for the pro-bono dept. of a law firm. He's a dilettante.

LOL

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Only Zander gets to determine what a "real job is"

Senator- Not a "real job"

State Legislator- Not a "real job"

Law Professor- Not a "real job"

Attorney- Not a "real job"

Is being President of the United States a "real job" ?

 

[namvet]

It's ironic when you think back and realize Bush's was so high because of 9/11 at this point.

I believe that the reason Obama's popularity level is so high is due to the fact that ACORN has probably padded that number like they created all of the illegal votes that got him elected.

You do realize that ACORN has nothing to do with this polling and has never been involved in illegal votes.

and we realize your lying out libtard ass !! !!

[youtube]TkZrMpv0Pss[/youtube]

ACORN Front Group Nailed for Vote Fraud in New York [URL="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-complete-guide-to-acorn-voter-fraud/"]link[/URL]

you remind of bundled software. stupid idot and moron all rolled into one

 

[uscitizen]

Or that teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago from 1992 to 1996, or a practicing attorney with the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland for three years weren't "real" jobs. Do these people ever research ANYTHING?

A government job is not a real job, Academia is not a real job , and neither is working a few years for the pro-bono dept. of a law firm. He's a dilettante.

LOL

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Only Zander gets to determine what a "real job is"

Senator- Not a "real job"

State Legislator- Not a "real job"

Law Professor- Not a "real job"

Attorney- Not a "real job"

Is being President of the United States a "real job" ?

Not when you vote your own pay and benefits. And never worry about being downsized.
Offshored...perhaps if the neos keep on getting their way.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This, however, is my favorite part of Sammon’s article.

Obama’s immediate predecessor, President George W. Bush, had an approval rating of 86 percent, or 39 points higher than Obama at this stage.

Now, think: Were there any events in late 2001 that altered George W. Bush’s approval rating? Sammon doesn’t mention any.

New Adventures in Hackwork « The Washington Independent

Which is exactly why it's idiocy to think there's any meaningful value to these comparisons.

 

[oreo]

I'm not sure how meaningful polls are in terms of comparisons between presidents at measured months into their presidency. There are huge differences in what is going on. Bush was coming off of a 9/11 high - and to his credit he deserved the numbers. Other presidents governed with no real crisis to face. Obama is came in with two unpopular wars on his back, a record deficit and a crashing economy. I pity ANY candidate who takes office with that becuase there is no quick, palatable or popular fix. It will be more relevant to see the numbers in a couple of years when we see where the economy and wars end up.

Reagan came into office with inflation at over 10%--mortgage interest rates at 18% & above & 10% unemployment.

Americans believed Reagan--because he didn't B.S. them to death with job stimulus bills (telling that big government was going to create all these "temporary jobs") for them.

He instead cut taxes which in turn stimulated our economy into a growth period that lasted for over 2 decades.

That's the difference between Reagan's trickle down economics--compared to Obama's flood the basement economics.

When government is big enough to give you everything you want, it's also big enough to take everything you have. Thomas Jefferson

 

[Coyote]

I never realized US Senators are mere "Community Organizers"

What does that make half term Governors?

Or that teaching constitutional law at the University of Chicago from 1992 to 1996, or a practicing attorney with the law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland for three years weren't "real" jobs. Do these people ever research ANYTHING?

A government job is not a real job, Academia is not a real job , and neither is working a few years for the pro-bono dept. of a law firm. He's a dilettante.

Quite telling to see you consider educating to be dillitary.

 

[Rinata]

Because he was doing Afganistan, the war Obama is trying to clean up because Bush abandoned it for a war for profit built on lies.

Right on!!! Also, I don't know why they are even discussing Obama's approval ratings. When Bush's approval ratings were in the 20's, the right wing all said they didn't believe in polls. I wonder what changed???

You beat me to it, Rinata. I recall reading AOL straw polls which would show a bump in Bush's weak ratings and that message board would literally light up by the cons all screaming SEE? SEE? We told ya he'd bounce back. Then they'd need to be reminded how often they ^5'd each other that polls don't mean squat. By 2006, all those people had changed their screen names and pretended they were never Bush supporters at all.

Exactly!!! I remember all that as plain as day. It's just so hypocritical. We are always being accused of worship towards Obama and I could never understand it. But it's projection. They think we are like they were with Bush. Not!!!

I think if Bush had strangled Mother Teresa, the conservatives would have defended him.

 

[Rinata]

New Gallup information showing no other president has had as low approval as does Obama at this point in their respective terms.

Obama currently sits at 47% - and the bottom of the pile...

___

The next 11 presidents, both Democrats and Republicans, all had higher job approval ratings than Obama at this stage of their tenure. Their ratings were:

-- George W. Bush, 86 percent
-- Bill Clinton, 52 percent
-- George H.W. Bush, 71 percent
-- Ronald Reagan, 49 percent
-- Jimmy Carter, 57 percent
-- Gerald Ford, 52 percent
-- Richard Nixon, 59 percent
-- Lyndon Johnson, 74 percent
-- John Kennedy, 77 percent
-- Dwight Eisenhower, 69 percent
-- Harry Truman, 49 percent


FOXNews.com - Obama's 47 Percent Approval Lowest of Any President at This Point

,,,

Ah yes, and here's Sinatra. The egomaniac who thinks his posts are so fucking important that he keeps bumping them up. Do you flex your muscles for the women at the bar when they ignore you, Sinatra?

 

[xotoxi]

An historical comparison of poll numbers: United States presidential approval rating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I was looking at the Bill Clinton graph. His approval remained relatively stable and actually slightly increased throughout most of his presidency. I don't even see much of a blip for the Lewinsky scandal.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Galup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Bill_Clinton.png

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Obama's numbers seem to be closely following Ron Reagans. Both entered office in a recession. Both were wildly popular at election and saw their numbers drop. Reagans popularity dropped over a two year period down into the thirties.
Strangely, when the economy recovered, Reagans popularity recovered and he won by a landslide in 1984 (Walter "wheres the beef" Mondale)

With the economy recovering, it looks like Obama's number will also recover. With the Republicans having nobody better than a Walter Mondale....look for an Obama landslide

Yeah, sure.

Reagan enjoyed a massive turnaround on the economy and his tax cuts are credited with producing millions of jobs. Obama has produced ZERO jobs thus far- he has lost 4 million jobs and counting- and he is talking about tax increases, increased regulations, and more entitlement programs. He's going exactly the wrong way and voters will punish him and his party for it.

Of course you conveniently forget that the hemorrhaging of jobs began in 2007 and accelerated at a record pace by the end of 2008. But it's still all Obama's fault.

It's his fault now because he refuses to curb spending. The reason why the U.S. economy tanked was entirely the fault of the 2007 Congress, Greenspan, Summers and Rubin....Democrats.
PBS Frontline: The Warning -- How Greenspan, Summers & Rubin Conspired To Silence Derivatives Whistleblower Brooksley Born - Home - The Daily Bail

 

[sealybobo]

If a poll doesn't smell right, its probably not.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Obama is a dilettante who reads a book and calls it "life". His sum total of experience was a few years as a "Community Organizer". This is a man who has never had a real job.

In my book, a "Community Organizer" is a glorified hippie. Hippies are good for one thing - punching in the face.

Next time you decide to elect a pot smoking hippie to the "highest" office in the land, don't be surprises when he fails. Better yet, punch the hippie in the face before he runs.

The best advice I've ever seen given on this board!!!!!

 

[IDSSTING39]

Ron Paul got around 1% of the Republican vote in the Primary. He was considered to be a crackpot....still is

First of all, he was considered to be a crackpot by the other Republican canidates.... Which in my mind, means nothing considering the Republican party has shifted to a kind of Neo Conservative way...
He never did win a state though, he did come second in 10 staes, and came in third in 17 states. He also got 35 delegate counts. Which to me was a great achievement given the fact that every single Republican sounded exactly the same. I would also like to mention alot of the Canidates dont have the slightest clue when it comes to our Constitution, especially Mitt Romney when he was asked " what would you to if you were to engage in military action against Iran?" He replied by saying "he would consult his attorneys". You should know that to declare war you need a declaration of war, something I feel you should know as a potential presedential canidate.
Ron Paul also set the record for most fundraising in a day, and had the most fundraising by active military personel.....
Your comment about him being considered a "crackpot" is totally distorted. Just because he's considered a crackpot by the neo conservatives running against him does not make him a crack pot to the American people.

The numbers don't lie. Ron Paul was a no show in the Republican Primaries. Outside of an internet following he has no measurable base.
In a general election his crackpot views only draw other crackpots

Numbers dont lie... i know, that's why I gave you the numbers... So hes a crackpot because he's different from all of the other Republicans who ran in the primary against him? You're not giving me the reason why you thinbk he is a "crackpot". You're basically saying, Ron Paul is an idiot because he lost the primary...

 

[Sinatra]

Obama is a dilettante who reads a book and calls it "life". His sum total of experience was a few years as a "Community Organizer". This is a man who has never had a real job.

In my book, a "Community Organizer" is a glorified hippie. Hippies are good for one thing - punching in the face.

Next time you decide to elect a pot smoking hippie to the "highest" office in the land, don't be surprises when he fails. Better yet, punch the hippie in the face before he runs.

The best advice I've ever seen given on this board!!!!!

That post was damn funny!!

 

[MaggieMae]

Ron Paul got around 1% of the Republican vote in the Primary. He was considered to be a crackpot....still is

First of all, he was considered to be a crackpot by the other Republican canidates.... Which in my mind, means nothing considering the Republican party has shifted to a kind of Neo Conservative way...
He never did win a state though, he did come second in 10 staes, and came in third in 17 states. He also got 35 delegate counts. Which to me was a great achievement given the fact that every single Republican sounded exactly the same. I would also like to mention alot of the Canidates dont have the slightest clue when it comes to our Constitution, especially Mitt Romney when he was asked " what would you to if you were to engage in military action against Iran?" He replied by saying "he would consult his attorneys". You should know that to declare war you need a declaration of war, something I feel you should know as a potential presedential canidate.
Ron Paul also set the record for most fundraising in a day, and had the most fundraising by active military personel.....
Your comment about him being considered a "crackpot" is totally distorted. Just because he's considered a crackpot by the neo conservatives running against him does not make him a crack pot to the American people.

The numbers don't lie. Ron Paul was a no show in the Republican Primaries. Outside of an internet following he has no measurable base.
In a general election his crackpot views only draw other crackpots

Ron Paul's ideas weren't necessarily crackpot, but so advanced in theory that the entire economic system would have been turned on its head indefinitely while such drastic changes he touted took place. Even Ron Paul has admitted that. So he remains a pure ideologue whose fiscal proposals don't stand a chance in the real world.

 

[Zander]

First of all, he was considered to be a crackpot by the other Republican canidates.... Which in my mind, means nothing considering the Republican party has shifted to a kind of Neo Conservative way...
He never did win a state though, he did come second in 10 staes, and came in third in 17 states. He also got 35 delegate counts. Which to me was a great achievement given the fact that every single Republican sounded exactly the same. I would also like to mention alot of the Canidates dont have the slightest clue when it comes to our Constitution, especially Mitt Romney when he was asked " what would you to if you were to engage in military action against Iran?" He replied by saying "he would consult his attorneys". You should know that to declare war you need a declaration of war, something I feel you should know as a potential presedential canidate.
Ron Paul also set the record for most fundraising in a day, and had the most fundraising by active military personel.....
Your comment about him being considered a "crackpot" is totally distorted. Just because he's considered a crackpot by the neo conservatives running against him does not make him a crack pot to the American people.

The numbers don't lie. Ron Paul was a no show in the Republican Primaries. Outside of an internet following he has no measurable base.
In a general election his crackpot views only draw other crackpots

Ron Paul's ideas weren't necessarily crackpot, but so advanced in theory that the entire economic system would have been turned on its head indefinitely while such drastic changes he touted took place. Even Ron Paul has admitted that. So he remains a pure ideologue whose fiscal proposals don't stand a chance in the real world.

Got any examples of Ron Paul's "advanced" fiscal proposals??

Seems to me that requiring a balanced budget, paying off the national debt, pulling out of foreign nations and foreign entanglements, and following the constitution are all quite FUNDAMENTAL.