Obama's Grade B+

[random3434]

Clift: On First 100 Days, Obama Gets a B-Plus | Newsweek Voices - Eleanor Clift | Newsweek.com

Despite the current controversy, Obama gets high marks; not an A, because we still have to wait for outcomes, but a solid B-plus. He has established himself in the office, the country is more upbeat, but the hard decisions are yet to come. The great asset he has is the collapse of the Republican Party. They have neither a credible message nor messenger. They're railing against big government, when the core issue is the failings of capitalism. They call for smaller government and berate Obama for moving toward socialism when people are not hungering for tax cuts. They're looking for jobs so they can pay taxes. Instead of developing alternative policies, they're back to attacking FDR. He won four elections. Politico reports that House Republicans have fastened on a new book, "The Forgotten Man," that celebrates Wendell Willkie and denigrates the New Deal. Willkie—a Wall Street industrialist who had never held elective office, was a decent-enough fellow but lost to Roosevelt by a landslide in 1940—is an unlikely hero on which to build a new GOP.

At a time of crisis, when Americans look to Washington for help, the GOP has reverted to an outmoded form of libertarianism, calling for government to get out of the way when, if government had been more watchful, we might not be in this mess. There are opportunities for Republicans in the public's apprehension over the rising deficit, and in the discomfort many feel over the various bailouts. But a party is not serious when its headliners are a radio talk-show host and a discredited former vice president. Newt Gingrich is back as a rising star and Republicans are battling FDR, giving the GOP a rather retro feel. That gives Obama lots of latitude looking forward

.

 

[jillian]

I'd give him a B to B+ so far, too. I want to see how his foreign policy actions play out and where he goes with them. And I'd like to see them actually work on infrastructure.

not sure i agree with her on Newt. He's just filling the space that supposed to be where the smart republicans are.... unfortunately, he's a lone voice in the wilderness.

 

[xsited1]

That's not too good if a liberal columnist just gives him a B+. I think everyone here can guess what kind of grade I would give Obama. BTW, I thought this was amusing:

Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift - Liberal Racist Free Speech Hating Anti-Christ Employee

 

[Xenophon]

In the real world he rates an F.

Way to spend a trillion on things we can't afford and don't need you fucking bozo BO.

 

[auditor0007]

I really could care less how anyone wants to grade Obama at the present time. What I look at is how any president will be graded ten or twenty years after they have left office. Bush's legacy is yet to be determined. Most likely, he will be left with a subpar legacy as he will deservedly take some of the blame for this economic fiasco we are now going through.

As for Obama, we will have to wait to see where his policies actually lead us long term. My fear is that his initial actions show us where he wants to go. While the current budget deficit is unbelievably large, it can be argued that it was necessary. There is good argument for the stabiliziaton of the banking industry as well as many of the bailouts. The stimulus package, whether any given person likes it or not was most certainly necessary. How it was put together can be argued though.

What scares me and many others is the idea that Obama's policies longterm are set to bring forth the largest expansion of the federal goverment that we have seen in a very short time. We already know that these deficits will remain astronomically huge for the duration of his presidency. If that is eight years, then things could get very ugly. The numbers we are currently looking at do not even include what he plans on spending for healthcare, nor does it address the shortfalls in SS and Medicare, which are hitting us much sooner than expected due to the contraction of the economy, which has led to a shortfall in collectible revenue.

Over the last fifty or so years, federal spending has fluctuated between 18% to 24% of GDP. All of a sudden, under Obama, federal spending is jumping to what looks like will be over 30% of GDP, and this is before any new healthcare plan or necessity for increased spending on SS and Medicare. Will Obama take steps to reduce this percentage or will in continue to increase toward 40%. The fact is that if federal spending moves toward 40% of GDP, this country is in dire trouble. Even at 30%, we are in trouble.

When government spending eats up such a large percentage of GDP, it reduces the ability of the private sector to grow. And because the money being used to support this government spending is based on borrowed money, it will further reduce the ability of the private sector to grow as it will force massively higher tax rates for everyone which will reduce private investment even more, which will result in even higher taxes. It becomes a huge problem where the government becomes the driving force of the economy, and we all know that cannot and will not work.

It really doesn't matter what the programs fund; it matters how much we spend, regardless for what the purpose may be. Even the most liberal of the liberal must certainly understand that government spending cannot be the driving force of the economy. To that end, it seems more and more apparent that Obama is on the wrong track long term. And I believe that will cost the Dems dearly down the road.

Young people, who for so long have been enamored with the idea of a utopian society where everyone gets everything they desire, will soon come to find out that this ideology will lead to their own demise and the reduction in their own standard of living. The end result is likely to be an emergence of conservatism among our younger voters in the very near future.

All in all, I say this bodes very badly for Obama and his long term goals. The fact that he doesn't seem to understand any of this leaves me wondering. Hopefully, it will leave many others wondering why he is the one leading us down this path.

 

[DiveCon]

That's not too good if a liberal columnist just gives him a B+. I think everyone here can guess what kind of grade I would give Obama. BTW, I thought this was amusing:

Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift - Liberal Racist Free Speech Hating Anti-Christ Employee

Clift
yeah, like SHE is an unbiased source

 

[WillowTree]

two words bell curve.

 

[Red Dawn]

The great asset he has is the collapse of the Republican Party. They have neither a credible message nor messenger. They're railing against big government, when the core issue is the failings of capitalism

C'mon, that's a pretty unfair assessment. The GOP has Sarah Palin, Boss Limbaugh, Bobby Jindal, and Sean Hannity at the helm of the party.

I agree Obama gets a B plus politically.

I'd give him around a B minus ideologically. He's still got too many Clinton hacks who were almost as wrong as republicans were on free trade and regulation. On the plus side, its great to have a president that doesn't think the earth is 6000 years old, and doesn't feel a childish need to insult allies.

 

[editec]

Are we grading on a scale which includes that last fifty years of POTUSs or something


Because, friends, they ALL sucked more or less.