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.
