Poll News: Not Good For Team-O

[Vast LWC]

Really.

You mean Reagan had a 12 point lower approval with a doting and fawning mainstream press worshiping his ever move?

Huh...

I know it's hard, but try not to be a dumbass for a few hours.

Doting and Fawning?

You must be lost in some bubble world of your own creation there bud. There hasn't been a "doting and adoring press" for Mr Obama since right after election day.

And the same thing went for Ronald Reagan.

50% of the press, the right wing portion that is, has been openly hostile to the president since day 1, and the rest is perhaps slightly on the supportive side of neutral, but often openly critical.

You really should try to actually read and watch the "Mainstream Media" you keep referring to, rather than just listening to what Rush Limbaugh and FoxNews have to say about it, before making stupid ass comments like that one.

 

[Vast LWC]

But you've already proven that black people can't be good leaders, right?

The only thing that has been proven so far, Is Obama can't be a good leader.

He has NEVER been a good leader...his responses change at the drop of a hat...or the WORD of his handlers.

A Leader would require takiing action irrespective of politics...and doing the right thing for his countrymen...so far? He's done everything AGAINST his country, and countrymen...OBAMA...LACKS that quality...Obama lacks American SPIRIT...

Again, Obama is 12 points above Reagan at the same point in their respective presidencies.

You all can make all the rationalizations you want about it, but since popularity is in fact a measure of successful leadership, apparently Obama is a better leader than your hero was at this point.

Now, I don't and didn't dislike Reagan, I'm just pointing out the obvious flaw in your argument.

 

[Vast LWC]

Obama is a LIAR...an oppritunist...and that is NOT the quality of a leader...he is a follower...but as to whom he follows...or answers to is UP in the air...

Obama is a FRAUD.

Blah, blah, blah, blah.

Keep on spouting. What a bunch of garbage.

 

[Vast LWC]

The only thing that has been proven so far, Is Obama can't be a good leader.

He's 12 points above where Reagan was at the same point in his presidency...

...So Reagan must have been an AWFUL leader.

Except polls don't prove or disprove leadership.
Reagan had gotten the hostages freed, faced down the air traffic controllers, and implemented bipartisan tax cuts that were responsible for turning the economy around and creating the largest peacetime expansion post WW2.
Obama has pretty much done the opposite.

Reagan had a 10.4% Unemployment rate, and the "tax cuts he implemented" were essentially completely reversed through alternate methods of taxing well before the economy started turning around. And the "Reagan recovery" hadn't even started by this point in his presidency, in fact, we were in a second recession at this point.

And he "freed the hostages" by providing weapons to Iran.

Feel free to fool yourself with delusions of some sort of alternate history, but the facts don't change just because you want them to.

Oh, and good poll numbers are the very definition of "good leadership". Approval ratings mean people would be willing to follow him, thus, "leadership".

I believe the quality you are attempting to describe is "good decision making", which is an entirely different thing.

 

[Vast LWC]

I'm hoping the DNC sees fit to put up an alternate candidate, such as Kucinich, so I won't be forced to vote for Obama again. Because he has been a terrible disappointment. I am completely disgusted with him and his bullshit.

Indeed........the 179 people who would vote for him!!!!!


I love when those with the political IQ of a small soap dish come in here...........

There are few times that Skook and I agree on anything.

This is one of those times. Kucinich is perhaps the worst potential cadidate for the presidency ever. Personally I don't understand how he won the congressional seat he holds. The man has all the charm and personality of an Iguana.

 

[Jack Fate]

It should be clear to all by now that BO is not presidential material. He should be a good will ambassador, nothing more. He should never ever ever be given any power of any kind. He hasn't got a clue.

 

[Vast LWC]

It should be clear to all by now that BO is not presidential material. He should be a good will ambassador, nothing more. He should never ever ever be given any power of any kind. He hasn't got a clue.

Apparently there are quite a few people that disagree with you.

And, since the unemployment numbers are now falling, to match the recovery of rest of the economy, it seems the facts are proving your statement wrong too.

Obama hasn't done anything stupid as far as I can see, but then I'm not a media-brainwashed sheeple.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Poll News: Not Good For Team-O

"If Bachmann and David Koch dominate their party’s debate, the Republicans maybe should forfeit next year’s elections. All Obama has to do is stand back and watch."

Preppin' For 2012!!​

 

[Vast LWC]

What I love is that FoxNews is now having Dennis Kucinich as a regular guest.

Apparently they forgot about the fact that they had previously considered him to be bat-shit crazy..

 

[The Rabbi]

He's 12 points above where Reagan was at the same point in his presidency...

...So Reagan must have been an AWFUL leader.

Except polls don't prove or disprove leadership.
Reagan had gotten the hostages freed, faced down the air traffic controllers, and implemented bipartisan tax cuts that were responsible for turning the economy around and creating the largest peacetime expansion post WW2.
Obama has pretty much done the opposite.

Reagan had a 10.4% Unemployment rate, and the "tax cuts he implemented" were essentially completely reversed through alternate methods of taxing well before the economy started turning around. And the "Reagan recovery" hadn't even started by this point in his presidency, in fact, we were in a second recession at this point.

And he "freed the hostages" by providing weapons to Iran.

Feel free to fool yourself with delusions of some sort of alternate history, but the facts don't change just because you want them to.

Oh, and good poll numbers are the very definition of "good leadership". Approval ratings mean people would be willing to follow him, thus, "leadership".

I believe the quality you are attempting to describe is "good decision making", which is an entirely different thing.

And when Reagan left office, the rate was 5.30%. Do you want to bet that Obama will have the same numbers when he leaves?
The United States Unemployment Rate
Whatever you spin does not negate that Reagan's policies were responsible for restoring this country. Obama's policies have been responsible for destroying it.

The press hated Reagan. They took every opportunity to portray him as doddering, senile, out of touch, and a cowboy. The press loves Obama and takes every opportunity to portray him as cool, urbane, and in touch with Europe and modern values.

 

[Vast LWC]

And when Reagan left office, the rate was 5.30%. Do you want to bet that Obama will have the same numbers when he leaves?
The United States Unemployment Rate
Whatever you spin does not negate that Reagan's policies were responsible for restoring this country. Obama's policies have been responsible for destroying it.

The press hated Reagan. They took every opportunity to portray him as doddering, senile, out of touch, and a cowboy. The press loves Obama and takes every opportunity to portray him as cool, urbane, and in touch with Europe and modern values.

Yep, I'll take that bet.

And, again, when compared to the Reagan presidency AT THIS POINT, Obama's doing better.

That's all the actual data we have to go on. You can make BS predictions all you want, but the facts are the facts.

And again, half the press (the right half) HATES Obama like the plague. And the rest of the press, the ones you say "love" him, are quick to turn on him whenever there's ratings to be had.

You can keep restating the the "press loves Obama" all you want, it doesn't make it true.

 

[Vast LWC]

And again, I do not dislike Reagan. Never have. Oh sure, he had his faults, but I thought he did a pretty decent job considering the bag of garbage Carter left him with.

I'm just pointing out that by the standard of Reagan, Obama's doing a pretty bang-up job.

 

[The Rabbi]

And when Reagan left office, the rate was 5.30%. Do you want to bet that Obama will have the same numbers when he leaves?
The United States Unemployment Rate
Whatever you spin does not negate that Reagan's policies were responsible for restoring this country. Obama's policies have been responsible for destroying it.

The press hated Reagan. They took every opportunity to portray him as doddering, senile, out of touch, and a cowboy. The press loves Obama and takes every opportunity to portray him as cool, urbane, and in touch with Europe and modern values.

Yep, I'll take that bet.

And, again, when compared to the Reagan presidency AT THIS POINT, Obama's doing better.

That's all the actual data we have to go on. You can make BS predictions all you want, but the facts are the facts.

And again, half the press (the right half) HATES Obama like the plague. And the rest of the press, the ones you say "love" him, are quick to turn on him whenever there's ratings to be had.

You can keep restating the the "press loves Obama" all you want, it doesn't make it true.

RealClearPolitics - The Obama Infatuation
So tell me what's changed here. Show me studies of negative coverage anyplace other than Fox.

 

[Spoonman]

anybody check out the load of crap on obama's campaign site? What a tool.

 

[The Rabbi]

And when Reagan left office, the rate was 5.30%. Do you want to bet that Obama will have the same numbers when he leaves?
The United States Unemployment Rate
Whatever you spin does not negate that Reagan's policies were responsible for restoring this country. Obama's policies have been responsible for destroying it.

The press hated Reagan. They took every opportunity to portray him as doddering, senile, out of touch, and a cowboy. The press loves Obama and takes every opportunity to portray him as cool, urbane, and in touch with Europe and modern values.

Yep, I'll take that bet.

And, again, when compared to the Reagan presidency AT THIS POINT, Obama's doing better.

That's all the actual data we have to go on. You can make BS predictions all you want, but the facts are the facts.

And again, half the press (the right half) HATES Obama like the plague. And the rest of the press, the ones you say "love" him, are quick to turn on him whenever there's ratings to be had.

You can keep restating the the "press loves Obama" all you want, it doesn't make it true.

RealClearPolitics - The Obama Infatuation
So tell me what's changed here. Show me studies of negative coverage anyplace other than Fox.

YooHoo, Vast. ANy studies to support your contention that Obama's press coverage is less than favorable?

 

[Vast LWC]

YooHoo, Vast. ANy studies to support your contention that Obama's press coverage is less than favorable?

Oops, wasn't paying attention.

Note the date on that opinion piece. Just before the health care hubbub.

Since that time, the media has cooled significantly on Obama...

...That is, the half of the media that wasn't already firmly against him from Day 1.

As for the study you quote, what it fails to take into account is that conservative viewers watch a far smaller variety of media, but that media has larger audiences. So, basically, FoxNews equals, say 3-4 MSNBCs, in terms of audience reached.

So, for instance, if Fox News runs a negative story on Obama, and MSNBC and PBS run a positive story, the negative story is still reaching more viewers, because Conservatives generally watch FoxNews religiously. (After all, god forbid they should watch the "LameStream" media). Liberals, meanwhile, tend to watch a wider variety of lower rated media sources, creating more "positive" stories to take into account.

Now, as for studies done since that point, no, I don't have any, though the facts are available online.

Of course, that's mainly because the only people that would have any interest in running a study of that nature are Conservative media centers, as such a study would bolster a sense of credibility, if the evidence pointed to a media bias for Obama. And since any such study that showed results that did not bolster their credibility would not be shared, we find that there are absolutely no studies at all available, one way or the other, since the time of that article. In this case, the lack of any such study at all being available online is telling.

 

[The Rabbi]

Now, as for studies done since that point, no, I don't have any, though the facts are available online.

OK. As I saw, case closed. You have no evidence and are simply talking out of your ass. Thanks for admitting so.

 

[KissMy]

I bet Paul Ryan could take obama in 2012.

 

[The Rabbi]

I bet Paul Ryan could take obama in 2012.

Maybe.
Does he have a pulse?
Does he have an R next to his name?
Does he have a birth certificate?

If we can answer yes to all these then he's a shoo-in!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

And again, I do not dislike Reagan. Never have. Oh sure, he had his faults, but I thought he did a pretty decent job considering the bag of garbage Carter left him with.

.....If you consider murdering women, children, priests & nuns.....

....a pretty decent job.