Tell me again why Barack Obama has been such a bad president

[Oldstyle]

Why on earth do you portray opposition to the policies of this President as "greedy self serving gut reactions"?

People judge a president based on greedy self-serving gut reactions. Name the top 3 things people dislike about this president, or would have wanted him to fix. Regardless of who is asked, the response is almost always self-serving.

My point continues to be that there must be an established method of evaluating a president's actions. Unfortunately, many Americans are incapable of that goal. People get rabid when discussing this topic, focusing on non-specific insinuations and desires that are not goal-oriented, both of which you just produced. Citing failure because his solutions haven't worked is short sighted for the simple reason that there existed the strong probability that NO SOLUTION would have worked. For anyone.

Let's parallel this with a topic most people aren't so rabid about. Imagine for a moment you needed to evaluate the efficacy of local school systems in educating children. How would you start such a process? Do you listen to the lunatic in the back row screaming "I don't like how the basketball coach makes decision!" and base your evaluation off that? No. You come up with verifiable standardized methods of evaluating schools. Practically, this is done with standardized tests compared across the country. Note how this does not take into account which colleges are attended by high school seniors, or what professions are eventually attained. No, these end results are actually completely ignored, while the effort and extent of the potential, being the knowledge itself, is what's evaluated.

So my point has continued to be: create a specific standard with which to evaluate the president. The lunatic screaming about a bad economy being blamed on the president is similarly a poor method of evaluation. Again, smart Americans will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome.

We are evaluating this President is on his handling of the economy. I say that because the economy and unemployment specifically are overwhelming given by the American people as the issues that they are most concerned about.

As for your claim that "smart Americans" will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome? No offense but that's amazingly condescending. What you're saying, in essence, is that anyone who finds fault with this President's "results" is a "lunatic" and unintelligent because all that should REALLY count is that Obama made an "attempt" to fix the problems we face. I'm sorry but when you lobby for a job by promising that YOU have solutions and then your solutions don't work then YOU are going to have to face the consequences of not delivering on your promises. You can't turn around when you've been unsuccessful and demand praise because you've made an "attempt". People in leadership positions are judged by whether or not they can get things done not on whether or not they "tried".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Sorry, in the real world results are what matter. It might not be fair, but no one ever said life is fair.

Again, this is the self-serving crap that makes for horrible decision making. "I'm not getting what I want so therefore you are bad at your job." NO! You seem insightful enough to understand that life isn't fair, yet demand self-serving results as if it were.

The fact still remains that you have absolutely ZERO method of adequately assessing the results of the large majority of unique leadership actions because you have no standard with which to compare those results. Smart Americans understand this concept.

Let's move this discussion to a similar area that does not have 4 year terms: industry. What percentage of fortune 500 companies have outed their CEOs in the last 2 years because of hard times? The smart companies hunkered down, continued making smart decisions, and are waiting for this storm to pass. Their boards may be disgruntled that the president isn't specifically helping them become more rich just as you have your own self-serving desires, but they're not BLAMING their CEOs for the entire economy going south. Boards of directors are well aware that firing smart CEOs just because they demand even more growth would be stabbing themselves in the foot; an act you apparently don't desire to avoid, just because you're not getting your juice box when you want it.

Like I said, sorry. Personally, I think Carter was a much better president than most give him credit for. That does not change the fact that the world judges by results, not intentions. Like I said, it might not be fair, but life is not fair.

 

[FA_Q2]

Why on earth do you portray opposition to the policies of this President as "greedy self serving gut reactions"?

People judge a president based on greedy self-serving gut reactions. Name the top 3 things people dislike about this president, or would have wanted him to fix. Regardless of who is asked, the response is almost always self-serving.

My point continues to be that there must be an established method of evaluating a president's actions. Unfortunately, many Americans are incapable of that goal. People get rabid when discussing this topic, focusing on non-specific insinuations and desires that are not goal-oriented, both of which you just produced. Citing failure because his solutions haven't worked is short sighted for the simple reason that there existed the strong probability that NO SOLUTION would have worked. For anyone.

Let's parallel this with a topic most people aren't so rabid about. Imagine for a moment you needed to evaluate the efficacy of local school systems in educating children. How would you start such a process? Do you listen to the lunatic in the back row screaming "I don't like how the basketball coach makes decision!" and base your evaluation off that? No. You come up with verifiable standardized methods of evaluating schools. Practically, this is done with standardized tests compared across the country. Note how this does not take into account which colleges are attended by high school seniors, or what professions are eventually attained. No, these end results are actually completely ignored, while the effort and extent of the potential, being the knowledge itself, is what's evaluated.

So my point has continued to be: create a specific standard with which to evaluate the president. The lunatic screaming about a bad economy being blamed on the president is similarly a poor method of evaluation. Again, smart Americans will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome.

This is completely asinine. Results are always the judge of actions. In the case of the presidency, there is no flat standard because there is nothing that can be used in that manner to judge a president. Each president takes the office in a different situation with different problems that need to be addressed. Crating a standard would be useless in this case. You're essentially advocating that all presidents were grate and we should not criticize them at all because we have created no baseline with which to compare them to and that is rather stupid. As you stated:

No. You come up with verifiable standardized methods of evaluating schools. Practically, this is done with standardized tests compared across the country. Note how this does not take into account which colleges are attended by high school seniors, or what professions are eventually attained. No, these end results are actually completely ignored, while the effort and extent of the potential, being the knowledge itself, is what's evaluated.

You are claiming that end results are ignored and that is flat out false. End results are the only thing that is tested with that end result being whether or not people learned and how much.


You want to know what this president is being judged by:

The economy is terrible and unemployment is still at 9 percent. Historically, unemployment and resections never lasted this long before recovery started. Government debt is hitting all time highs and staying there. We are spending an incredible amount of cash and the results are rather dismal.


Transparency was one of the cornerstones in his campaign. This has been completely ignored. People want a government they can monitor and is free from corruption. We have not moved forward in this regard whatsoever.


Healthcare has been a disaster. The left wants single payer, the right wants fewer regulation. We got nothing and healthcare costs continue to rise. Perhaps he will be vindicated if this bill magically works out but I am one of those that can't see how it is going to happen.


The yardsticks may be different than other presidents but they are there. People are not asking for magic solutions that fix everything now. They are looking for PROGRESS. That is all. Something that shows his plans have helped the economy. Progress in getting better healthcare. Progress in government corruption. We are not seeing progress, we are seeing stagnation all the while our debt increases.



You keep pointing out how you never mentioned Obama. This is evading the overall point. If you think that he has made good decisions then point out what and your measure for that. If you think the opposite, then point out that as well. Stop deflecting. The president will be judged and he should be judged. If you think that he has been judged unfairly because of the measure then give us you measure.

 

[Immanuel]

To use your analogy? The "captain" was promoted to his position commanding an aircraft carrier despite the fact that he didn't even have experience commanding a rowboat. To make matters worse he's surrounded himself with a "crew" that hasn't ever been to sea either.

This is one "ship" that never should have left the dock.

And this is precisely the type of useless speculation that makes for horrible decision making.

Whether you think he is too young, too inexperienced, too black, too muslim, too kenyan, too goofy looking, too short, or too American doesn't mean crap. The only thing that matters is if our president is taking the best steps available at the time. Note how that has nothing to do with whether those steps succeed. And this is the inherent difference between good decision making, and the logic of the average American. The average American bases their judgments off of "what do I personally get out of it?" If the president personally got you a job and gave everyone with your last name massive tax breaks, you'd think they were the best president ever, even if the policy was horrible. This is why middle school elections are often-times decided by which candidate gives out the best candy.

It's time to grow up people. It's time you start using logic instead of greedy self serving gut reactions. Is the president using the best solutions available, regardless of whether they work or not? Or is the president retreating to a dude ranch and doing no work whatsoever? Cuz it's not the storm the scares me, so long as the captain is on deck and giving the appropriate orders, even though those orders can't possibly control the weather.

Why on earth do you portray opposition to the policies of this President as "greedy self serving gut reactions"? I oppose Barack Obama because his "solutions" haven't worked and he's too rigidly entrenched in his progressive ideology to try something else. He ran for President because he said he had a plan to fix the problems he was inheriting. Ever since he GOT to the Oval Office however, he's spent most of his time blaming W., the Republicans or bad luck for his failings. At some point (and we're coming up on THREE YEARS!!!) it's not the fault of everyone else...it's Barack Obama's for not having a plan that worked.

I get the impression from STH, that it is fine and dandy for the President to point fingers and do nothing, but everyone else just has to accept the fact that neither the President nor Congress has done a damned thing to fix the problems and anyone who states that fact is just a greedy whiner.

The president made things worse with ACA and the Stimulus plan, but we are supposed to vote for him again and just be happy with four more years of nothing beneficial to the country. Why? Because he's the President and we owe him our undying devotion.

Immie

 

[SmarterThanHick]

As for your claim that "smart Americans" will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome? No offense but that's amazingly condescending. What you're saying, in essence, is that anyone who finds fault with this President's "results" is a "lunatic" and unintelligent because all that should REALLY count is that Obama made an "attempt" to fix the problems we face.

No. That's not at all what I'm saying. If you want to claim a politician's actions suck because they were negligent, horrible decision making, or ignored better solutions, you'd have a strong point as to why that's a bad politician. Again, smart Americans know this. If all you do is look at outcomes and claim that's what makes him bad, it's incredibly short sighted.

You continue making the mistake in assuming I am defending our current president. I'm not. I'm simply pointing out the ridiculousness of judging leadership by the outcome, especially in an environment that may have no actual solution. The fact that you can't even see this distinction despite my stating it explicitly supports my prior comments about how blindly rabid people are on this topic.

This is completely asinine. Results are always the judge of actions. In the case of the presidency, there is no flat standard because there is nothing that can be used in that manner to judge a president.

You are correct in stating there is no standard. That's my point. Judging a politician against such a non-existent standard is foolish. Results should NOT always be the judge of actions. Take for instance a doctor treating terminal cancer. Are you going to be so bold as to claim he's a bad doctor if he can't cure the unchangeable disease? No. You're going to say "he did the best he could given the situation." The only difference is that you were expecting that end result. But if one man can't magically cure a deranged economy, it's his fault? Ridiculous reasoning.

You are claiming that end results are ignored and that is flat out false. End results are the only thing that is tested with that end result being whether or not people learned and how much.

You believe that's the end goal of education? How much information someone can retain? You don't believe it has anything to do with, say, earning a job, being a productive and proficient member of society? Why do we teach things like math and science if the end result is just to test how much of stuff was learned? Perhaps we can teach drying times of various paints!

NO! The reason we use standardized exams to judge education is to measure the ability of someone to use relevant information appropriately, in a format that always has a correct answer and winnable outcome. We make sure the thought process is correct, regardless of its end use in society. Nonetheless the end results are the use of that information in pursuit of a career and functional ability in society.

The point still remains that you should evaluate the actions regardless of the outcomes because there may not be a solution. Do you want the doctor who makes all the right moves even though there is a high probability of failure? Or do you want the guy who makes all the wrong moves even though the ultimate outcome is the same?

You want to know what this president is being judged by:

The economy is terrible and unemployment is still at 9 percent. Historically, unemployment and resections never lasted this long before recovery started. Government debt is hitting all time highs and staying there. We are spending an incredible amount of cash and the results are rather dismal. < misses the point. prove to me it's the president's fault and you'd have an argument.


Transparency was one of the cornerstones in his campaign. This has been completely ignored. People want a government they can monitor and is free from corruption. We have not moved forward in this regard whatsoever. < now you're making a strong argument regarding the quality of actions


Healthcare has been a disaster. The left wants single payer, the right wants fewer regulation. We got nothing and healthcare costs continue to rise. Perhaps he will be vindicated if this bill magically works out but I am one of those that can't see how it is going to happen. < misses the point. prove to me the rising costs are the president's fault


The yardsticks may be different than other presidents but they are there. People are not asking for magic solutions that fix everything now. < that's actually exactly what they're complaining about They are looking for PROGRESS. That is all. Something that shows his plans have helped the economy. Progress in getting better healthcare. Progress in government corruption. We are not seeing progress, we are seeing stagnation all the while our debt increases. < again, this assumes progress is a possibility in this current economy. by complaining about the end products, you're still making a poor argument.

my comments in red.

You keep pointing out how you never mentioned Obama. This is evading the overall point. If you think that he has made good decisions then point out what and your measure for that. If you think the opposite, then point out that as well. Stop deflecting. The president will be judged and he should be judged. If you think that he has been judged unfairly because of the measure then give us you measure.

I have given you a smart measure. People generally aren't very good at understanding it because they only want to see results regardless of the playing field. This is immature reasoning. I am not deflecting anything regarding Obama. My point has little to do with him. My point continues to be in regards to how people evaluate a politician. Again, people are so rabid about the people they hate, they are almost incapable of understanding political science concepts.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Obama is a bad President for
A) 9/11
B) Pearl Harbor
and
C) the Great Depression

FUCK HIM!!! How could he DO THAT to us? HE HATES THIS COUNTRY (the little ******!)

 

[Iceberg_slim]

Obama is a bad President for
A) 9/11
B) Pearl Harbor
and
C) the Great Depression

FUCK HIM!!! How could he DO THAT to us? HE HATES THIS COUNTRY (the little ******!)

This is the response you get when you lay out a good point SMARTERTHANHICK

 

[Dude111]

“Tell me again why Barack Obama has been such a bad president?” Jonathan Alter writes in his column.

Sorry John,there are TOO MANY THINGS to list!!

 

[Iceberg_slim]

He got Bin Laden

 

[Dude111]

BS,Bin laden died in 2001!

www.rense.com/general93/laden.htm

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

What about Obama's Presidency and Decisions has been bad?

1. Unconstitutional requirement to buy a product from a private corporation in order to be a citizen in good standing and not face fines and other penalties. (Obamacare)
2. Failure of a Stimulus plan and the desire to do more of the same that didn't work
3. steady 9% unemployment
4. GDP growth under 1%
5. Most debt, per year, ever added by a single president by far
6. Extending the debt ceiling without guaranteeing govt spending cuts and overall govt cuts.

There is more...........

 

[FA_Q2]

As for your claim that "smart Americans" will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome? No offense but that's amazingly condescending. What you're saying, in essence, is that anyone who finds fault with this President's "results" is a "lunatic" and unintelligent because all that should REALLY count is that Obama made an "attempt" to fix the problems we face.

No. That's not at all what I'm saying. If you want to claim a politician's actions suck because they were negligent, horrible decision making, or ignored better solutions, you'd have a strong point as to why that's a bad politician. Again, smart Americans know this. If all you do is look at outcomes and claim that's what makes him bad, it's incredibly short sighted.

I look at outcomes where he provided the yardstick with which to measure and the outcomes of policies that he enacted. There is nothing short sighted about that. You seem to be focusing on people that are blaming him for the color of the sky and while there are people out there like that, focusing on that wacko element is not constructive. Reputedly, many here have pointed out good arguments for why the president has not done an adequate job. I believe that I have pointed out such reasons. If you truly wanted a good debate, you might try addressing those concerns instead of derailing this thread to address partisan hacks that are not going to listen anyway. THOSE are the people and arguments I am concentrating. Why waste time on the insane?

You continue making the mistake in assuming I am defending our current president. I'm not. I'm simply pointing out the ridiculousness of judging leadership by the outcome, especially in an environment that may have no actual solution. The fact that you can't even see this distinction despite my stating it explicitly supports my prior comments about how blindly rabid people are on this topic.

That's a no go. Your distinction is meaningless devoid of any actual example. As I stated above, I don't care about the rabid idiots that blame everything that is bad on the president. You DO judge leadership by the outcome or what else do you have to judge it by? Tell me what YOU would use to judge a presidents decisions?

I do not feel that the president has done the best that could have been done. There are a myriad of solutions out there that have not even been touched. Tons of ideas that have not been approached or even talked about. Your position relies on the fact that I would accept he has done the best that he can do in this situation. That is asinine. There are solutions out there that need to be tried. Solutions that have even been brought to the table but ignored.

Again, if not by outcome WHAT WOULD YOU USE TO JUDGE A PRESIDENTS ACTIONS?

You can always say, well he did the best he could but that can never be proven. Simply put, his actions have failed to bring about positive changes that this country needs. I understand what you are saying. I am not ignoring it but we need something to judge the president's actions by and use to determine where our vote will go in the future.

This is completely asinine. Results are always the judge of actions. In the case of the presidency, there is no flat standard because there is nothing that can be used in that manner to judge a president.

You are correct in stating there is no standard. That's my point. Judging a politician against such a non-existent standard is foolish. Results should NOT always be the judge of actions. Take for instance a doctor treating terminal cancer. Are you going to be so bold as to claim he's a bad doctor if he can't cure the unchangeable disease? No. You're going to say "he did the best he could given the situation." The only difference is that you were expecting that end result. But if one man can't magically cure a deranged economy, it's his fault? Ridiculous reasoning.

Two things:
1. your damn right I am going to judge the doctor by the outcome. Would you be willing to go to a doctor that kills every patent that he treats? The difference here is that the doctor has a very concrete yardstick to measure with. If a disease has a 75% fatality rate and that doctor has a 90% fatality rate treating it, he is a crap doctor. If his rate is 50% then he is a damn good doctor. Simple as that. In this case, there is no clear cut way to measure the economy so we have to revert to what we think should be occurring and what we have seen in the past. That is why I specifically mentioned this is the LONGEST it has ever taken to get a recovery. That tells me we are doing something incorrect. Obama has also FAILED to address the driving factors that are keeping this economy down. We can debate about those factors and that is why some think he has done fine with this economy and other think he has not but to say that we cannot judge him based on those factors is asinine.


2. For a second time, I have not asked for magical cures to the economy and many here do not expect that. What we expect is that steps are taken to get things moving in the right direction. Those steps have not been taken. Again, why are you wasting your time with the hacks that are asking for the magical cure?

You believe that's the end goal of education? How much information someone can retain? You don't believe it has anything to do with, say, earning a job, being a productive and proficient member of society? Why do we teach things like math and science if the end result is just to test how much of stuff was learned? Perhaps we can teach drying times of various paints!

NO! The reason we use standardized exams to judge education is to measure the ability of someone to use relevant information appropriately, in a format that always has a correct answer and winnable outcome. We make sure the thought process is correct, regardless of its end use in society. Nonetheless the end results are the use of that information in pursuit of a career and functional ability in society.

The point still remains that you should evaluate the actions regardless of the outcomes because there may not be a solution. Do you want the doctor who makes all the right moves even though there is a high probability of failure? Or do you want the guy who makes all the wrong moves even though the ultimate outcome is the same?

Addressed above.

You want to know what this president is being judged by:

The economy is terrible and unemployment is still at 9 percent. Historically, unemployment and resections never lasted this long before recovery started. Government debt is hitting all time highs and staying there. We are spending an incredible amount of cash and the results are rather dismal. < misses the point. prove to me it's the president's fault and you'd have an argument.

The incredible amount of cash does not need to be proven.

As for unemployment - the presidents actions can be boiled down to throwing cash at the problem with ZERO thought as to what is damaging the economy in the first place. THAT is a complete failure on his part and has caused a trillion in wasted cash. He has failed to address the loss of jobs through bad trade policies, hostile conditions for business through regulation (of which he has made far worse) and cost of doing business within this country, and unfair tax policies in relation of small companies and large corporations (again, has gotten worse). In all honesty, even if he did nothing to make the situation worse (and I do believe that he has actually made it far worse) he is not in a position of doing nothing. None of the real problems have been addressed. I honestly believe that part of the problem is that this situation is different than previous ones and he is trying to apply similar fixes. Reducing taxes and spending is not going to fix the problem. Raising taxes will not either. Closing loopholes is likely the only thing that he has suggested that can make some difference and yet the way he is going about it is completely ass backwards. The cooperate jet loophole is not the problem but that is the one he wants to attack publicly...


No, I have not simply said (nor ever even suggested) that he is a terrible president because my wallet is not bigger this year. There are measures even though we night not agree on them. If you want to debate those things that is another story. Simply saying that I am off base because I can't measure what he has done is unacceptable though.

Transparency was one of the cornerstones in his campaign. This has been completely ignored. People want a government they can monitor and is free from corruption. We have not moved forward in this regard whatsoever. < now you're making a strong argument regarding the quality of actions

??
Do you agree with the statement then? This is one of the things that he promised and, although other presidents have failed in the same capacity, they did not set an expectation to begin with. I judge him here by his own yardstick.

Healthcare has been a disaster. The left wants single payer, the right wants fewer regulation. We got nothing and healthcare costs continue to rise. Perhaps he will be vindicated if this bill magically works out but I am one of those that can't see how it is going to happen. < misses the point. prove to me the rising costs are the president's fault

The fact that the increases got BIGGER after is one indication but that is neither here nor there. If rising prices have nothing to do with him at all (and that is a possibility I am more than willing to explore) he still failed. Healthcare was hit top priority and he created a boondoggle that DOES NOT ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEMS. Seems a habit with him. Instead, we got a bill that is, in my opinion, completely unconstitutional. That alone leave something to be desired. The one thing he promised, and we NEED to address, is the rising cost of healthcare. An item that is crushing our economy. He failed to do so in any matter. Worse, I believe that this bill is setting us back as far as addressing this problem for several reasons that I will not get into ATM. My post is getting long

The yardsticks may be different than other presidents but they are there. People are not asking for magic solutions that fix everything now. < that's actually exactly what they're complaining about

All right, I am not asking for magic solutions and you are addressing me at this point. If you want to make it about another poster, specify and I might agree with you. There are several here that you are painting with that broad brush though that are not doing what you are saying.

They are looking for PROGRESS. That is all. Something that shows his plans have helped the economy. Progress in getting better healthcare. Progress in government corruption. We are not seeing progress, we are seeing stagnation all the while our debt increases. < again, this assumes progress is a possibility in this current economy. by complaining about the end products, you're still making a poor argument.

my comments in red.

I do not accept that progress is not possible and if that is what you think then you should buy a bunker complete with a tin foil hat immediately.

Progress is ALWAYS possible, even if you need to take a step back before taking two forward.


And before you make another comment about cancer, we are talking about a nation NOT a disease.

You keep pointing out how you never mentioned Obama. This is evading the overall point. If you think that he has made good decisions then point out what and your measure for that. If you think the opposite, then point out that as well. Stop deflecting. The president will be judged and he should be judged. If you think that he has been judged unfairly because of the measure then give us you measure.

I have given you a smart measure. People generally aren't very good at understanding it because they only want to see results regardless of the playing field. This is immature reasoning. I am not deflecting anything regarding Obama. My point has little to do with him. My point continues to be in regards to how people evaluate a politician. Again, people are so rabid about the people they hate, they are almost incapable of understanding political science concepts.

No, actually you have not. You have been careful not to give any measure whatsoever. All I have seen is you commenting on things that are NOT measures.

Again, some people are. If you think I am then you need to cite something specifically. There are hacks on all sides. I am hoping we can get past the morons and actually have a constructive debate. You seem to be an intelligent person (and possible one that is liberal -- ohh so rare JK) so hopefully we can get past the hacks.

 

[manu1959]

obama is great...tax cuts to stimulate the econmy... no wait that won't work...

Obama to propose $300 billion jobs package: reports | Reuters

President Barack Obama, facing waning confidence among Americans in his economic stewardship, plans some $300 billion in tax cuts and government spending as part of a job-creating package, U.S. media reported on Tuesday.

 

[Hope_and_change]

I continue to believe that the ObaMessiah is a carefully packaged fraud. He has NO executive experience, so he is learning "on the job." Yet he seems to learn little, really. We KNOW that the unions OWN him and that he believes in

 

[boedicca]

What about Obama's Presidency and Decisions has been bad?

1. Unconstitutional requirement to buy a product from a private corporation in order to be a citizen in good standing and not face fines and other penalties. (Obamacare)
2. Failure of a Stimulus plan and the desire to do more of the same that didn't work
3. steady 9% unemployment
4. GDP growth under 1%
5. Most debt, per year, ever added by a single president by far
6. Extending the debt ceiling without guaranteeing govt spending cuts and overall govt cuts.

There is more...........

- Constant acts on entrepreneurs and businesses, chilling job creation.
- Gross and unconstitutional expansion of regulations beyond the laws passed by Congress.
- Violation of The Rule of Law via subordinating legitimate GM bondholders to the government and unions.
- Waste of taxpayer money in a futile attempt to pick winners (and create losers) in the inane Green Jobs Industry.

For a few more.

 

[abouadma]

not sure