Expectations for an Obama 2nd Term..

[Lumpy 1]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

 

[AmyNation]

I expect we will be looking at close to 20 trillion in debt by the end of his 2nd term.

 

[ScienceRocks]

20 trillion in debt is a reason not to vote for him...

-Expect amnesty
-More gun control
-At least one or two degrades of our credit rating
-We won't be a top 10 nation in competitiveness. We're down to 7th.
-Our growth rate through the first year will remain below 2%
-Unemployment if the cluster fuck in January isn't fixed will go back up to 8.5%
-Obama will spark more rage in the middle east through his weakness

 

[Inthemiddle]

Can't we just get another letter from the future to tell us how it's going to go? The first one was so useful four years ago.

 

[AmyNation]

Can't we just get another letter from the future to tell us how it's going to go? The first one was so useful four years ago.

Lmao!

Thats going on my facebook.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We need a business man to earn our competitiveness back and stay number one.

 

[ScienceRocks]

You don't get someone like Mitt Romney for 400k per year very fucking often. This guy makes 20 million a year and understands how to make things number one!

We need that to remain 1#!

 

[AmyNation]

Bush did suck.

However Obama is clearly unconcerned with spending money we don't have, and i don't see that changing.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I expect we will be looking at close to 20 trillion in debt by the end of his 2nd term.

The debt has grown over $5.4 trillion since Obama took office in 2009, another 4 years and my guess would be in the 22 to 23 trillion national debt range.

Interestingly, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt in eight years and Democrats think/thought he sucked..sheeeeeesh...

 

[Lumpy 1]

Bush did suck.

However Obama is clearly unconcerned with spending money we don't have, and i don't see that changing.

Well, Bush should have vetoed the overspending, he was far too liberal from my point of view.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

Not to worry. Obama is a one-term President.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

Not to worry. Obama is a one-term President.

I do find this difficult to believe...

-----------------------------

The latest Gallup seven-day tracking poll released Wednesday shows a jump in support for Mitt Romney, giving him a slightly wider lead over President Barack in the final weeks before Nov. 6.

According to the latest poll, Romney leads Obama among likely voters, 51 to 45 percent. This is Romney's biggest lead since Gallup began tracking likely voters earlier in Oct., as well as his largest lead in the survey. Romney also leads among registered voters, 48 to 46 percent.

Gallup poll shows Romney up 6; too large a gap for Obama comeback? | Deseret News

 

[tanyadoler]

Can't wait for more updates

 

[editec]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

Then by all means do not vote for Obama.

 

[Ravi]

Things are better since Obama took office. A Depression was averted, the economy is growing, unemployment is down.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

Yeah....we've heard all this, before.....​

"Flash back four years: With the American economy just emerging from a two-year recession in the Fall of 1992 and many Americans nervous about their economic prospects, Carville's one-note samba -- played over and over again throughout the campaign -- clearly helped propel Bill Clinton into the White House, forcing George Bush to retire to his beloved Texas.

Now it's Bill Clinton's turn to run for re-election. And though the economy is not moving backward (the definition of a recession), it's not setting any speed records either."

The Heritage Psychic-Friends​

.....Bill Clinton gave us
THE GREATEST ECONOMY THIS COUNTRY
EVER EXPERIENCED!!!!

 

[JoeB131]

Well, things are far worse than when he took office, so unless Republicans control both House and Senate, I would expect things to be far far worse in 4 years than they are now if Obama was (heaven forbid) re-elected...

I think it would largely depend on the ability of the GOP establishment to stand up to the TeaBaggers.

I have no illusions that Obama is going to have a great second term. None of them do. Second Terms is where they usually get into trouble. Bush had Katrina, Clinton had Monica, Reagan had Iran-Contra and Nixon had Watergate. At best, a second term is about maintaining what you did in the first.

But when Romney loses, there is going to be a real, long overdue bloodletting in the GOP. The first reaction will be those who will claim that Romney lost because he wasn't a "Real Conservative", while the establishment will claim the Tea Party scared away moderates, and both of those things will be true to some degree.

I think there's a very good chance the Dems will retain the Senate. They shouldn't have with only 10 seats in play while the Dems were defending 23 seats. But if the wind is blowing in the right direction, the Dems might even pick up a seat.

The house will remain GOP, but if we are lucky, the really noxious Teabaggers like Joe Walsh and Allen West will get their walking papers, and the caucus might be a bit saner.

 

[JoeB131]

I expect we will be looking at close to 20 trillion in debt by the end of his 2nd term.

The debt has grown over $5.4 trillion since Obama took office in 2009, another 4 years and my guess would be in the 22 to 23 trillion national debt range.

Interestingly, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt in eight years and Democrats think/thought he sucked..sheeeeeesh...

Until we tax the wealthy at an appropriate rate and get some efficiency in government spending, we are going to have debts.

The problem is, with all the whining that the right does about Obama's debts, the fact is most of those t hings- Bush's tax cuts, Bush's wars and interest on the debt - were baked into the pie before Obama got there.

I would put more faith in Obama making the hard choices to bring that down than Romney for no other reason that Romney has to get re-elected and Obama doesn't. Just like Reagan and Clinton were able to bite the bullet for deficit reduction in their second terms.

 

[The Rabbi]

I expect we will be looking at close to 20 trillion in debt by the end of his 2nd term.

The debt has grown over $5.4 trillion since Obama took office in 2009, another 4 years and my guess would be in the 22 to 23 trillion national debt range.

Interestingly, Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt in eight years and Democrats think/thought he sucked..sheeeeeesh...

Until we tax the wealthy at an appropriate rate and get some efficiency in government spending, we are going to have debts.

The problem is, with all the whining that the right does about Obama's debts, the fact is most of those t hings- Bush's tax cuts, Bush's wars and interest on the debt - were baked into the pie before Obama got there.

I would put more faith in Obama making the hard choices to bring that down than Romney for no other reason that Romney has to get re-elected and Obama doesn't. Just like Reagan and Clinton were able to bite the bullet for deficit reduction in their second terms.

Wow are you ignorant. But that's what dropping out of high school will do for you.
If you taxed "the wealthy" at 100% you still wouldn't close the deficit. You wouldnt make a dent in it.
As for "Bush's debt", when Bush left office we had a AAA credit rating. We dont now.
Now, all of this has been detailed on this site and elsewhere about a million times. So only the hyper partisan and terminally brain dead could believe otherwise.
Oh, I just described you.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Wow are you ignorant. But that's what dropping out of high school will do for you.
If you taxed "the wealthy" at 100% you still wouldn't close the deficit. You wouldnt make a dent in it.
As for "Bush's debt", when Bush left office we had a AAA credit rating. We dont now.
Now, all of this has been detailed on this site and elsewhere about a million times. So only the hyper partisan and terminally brain dead could believe otherwise.
Oh, I just described you.

The rich, the poor dears, don't have a thing.

The top 10% have more than the bottom 80%. Please don't tell me that you can't get enough out of them to close the deficit.

Bill Clinton did exactly that.