List of Obama failures:
1.Failure to go after the fraud on Wall Street. Not one Banker has ever been prosecuted.
2.Appointing DOJ, Holder, an abysmal failure IMHO for his lack of prosecutions with Fast and Furious and also Wall Street crime.
3.Appointing Treasury Secretary, Geithner, an unmitigated disaster, a completely failure and responsible for overseeing the malfeasance on Wall Street while he was head of NY Fed.
So, with all this anger directed at Wall Street, what do the Republicans do? They nominate Romney, a man of Wall Street himself. I just don't see how Romney wins in November! Huntsman would have been a better choice IMHO!
you don't go from being a community organizer to President of the United States in less than a decade without being an extraordinary campaigner.
Two current examples show why he has had success in his campaign despite his lack of experience in 2008 and his poor record heading into 2012.
One, with the news of dreadful jobs numbers about to come out, he and his staff pick up the pace and increase their public push to get Gov. Romney to release his tax returns from recent years. Distraction tactic No. 1.
Two, he goes out on a stump speech and makes the much-talked-about comments about how small business owners owe their success to the government. President Obama knew that this speech on its own would not get him any new voters. It would merely piss off the opposition, draw an incredible amount of news coverage and further fire up his current fan base.
The result of these two moves. The talk on the political stage today is all about Romney's tax returns and how entrepreneurs owe their success to roads, hospitals, schools, etc.
No one-- well at least not in the mainstream media -- is talking about the lack of jobs, the high unemployment rate, the skyrocketing debt.
The man is clearly one of the finest campaigners that Washington has seen in many a decade.
Face it, he has a deplorable record. By all accounts, he should be defeated soundly due to the state of the nation's economy. Yet, he is building up steam and a bigger lead because he has convinced America that the most important mission in our country right now is to find out just how rich Mitt Romney truly is and in what foreign accounts Romney has stashed his money.
List of Obama failures:
1.Failure to go after the fraud on Wall Street. Not one Banker has ever been prosecuted.
2.Appointing DOJ, Holder, an abysmal failure IMHO for his lack of prosecutions with Fast and Furious and also Wall Street crime.
3.Appointing Treasury Secretary, Geithner, an unmitigated disaster, a completely failure and responsible for overseeing the malfeasance on Wall Street while he was head of NY Fed.
So, with all this anger directed at Wall Street, what do the Republicans do? They nominate Romney, a man of Wall Street himself. I just don't see how Romney wins in November! Huntsman would have been a better choice IMHO!
When Mr. Obama took office in January 2009, the United States was in a recession as defined by economists –two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. The stock market was in freefall with the S & P in the mid 900s in March of 2009. GM, Chrysler, and AIG were effectively bankrupt. The housing market crashed. We were at war in Iraq; we were fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. Millions of citizens lacked heath insurance, some lacked basic medical care, and those with pre-existing conditions and no insurance were as good as dead. Osama Bin Laden was at large planning new attacks. AlQuada had a pipeline of bad guys who were the operational execs. The deficit was sky rocketing.
You seem to forget, Pitching Wedge, that the recession ended in July of 2009, on Mr. Obama’s watch. The housing market is in recovery. GM, Chrysler, and AIG are no longer at death’s door. The S & P has soared to 1350 or so – a monkey could have made money in the market if he invested in 2009.
Osama is dead and the Al queda pipeline pretty much wiped out by drone attacks. We now have national health care, no preexisting conditions can exclude you from getting insurance. We are out of Iraq and getting out of Afghanistan. The deficit is still a huge problem but what are the two primary big ticket items – um, the Bush tax cuts and entitlements, not Mr. Obama’s discretionary spending.
Does Mr. Obama deserve credit for all the things I just listed? Well, the answer is that he deserves as much credit as he does blame for the things you listed.
Now, tell me Pitching Wedge- is that really a “deplorable” record?
promising a certain level of unemployment if Congress passed his outlandish and insulting stimulus plan. He did not deliver on that promise.
He also promised transparency in his administration. None of that has occurred.
His national health care plan is nothing near what he wanted to implement. It has only survived due to Chief Justice Roberts re-defining the word used to describe what it actually is.
In addition, much of what you claim as a success -- no pre-existing conditions, etc., -- won't happen for at least a couple of years. Much too early to take credit for that.
If he were to apply his own comments from last week about how successful people only were successful because of the help they received to his own list of so-called accomplishments--then we would see that he really hasn't done anything himself. The Navy Seals carried out the mission against Bin Laden. President Bush started the aid to GM and Chrysler. President Bush laid forth the plan to remove troops from Iraq.
The President's record is far from a good one. Maybe not as deplorable as his opponents are apt to say, but still a very weak effort over the past three-plus years.
My feelings on the President were set in his first months of office. After he and his cronies pushed through that abominable stimulus plan, I knew that I could never vote for him in 2012.
Marikod has multiple posts claiming he is voting for Romney. Most, if not all those posts, are directly related to Obama's tax plans. So I guess that means marikod is a single issue guy (taxes). I should say taxes that benefit him.
He said the S&P was in a free-fall in the mid-900s in March 2009. It was actually 673, a big pretty big difference. He said a monkey could have made money in this market. Does that include buy and hold monkeys?
He sometimes argues for the sake of arguing. But considering the whack jobs on the left we have to deal with on this board, marikod is a breath of fresh air, and can sometimes be a bit reasonable.
Now you are talking, Pitching Wedge. Both characterizations are reasonable ones. But has there ever been a president that you could not say that about? Check out the recession and unemployment rate in the Reagan presidency.
Suppose John "I will never surrender" and the "economy is fine" McCain had won the election? WE'd still have armies in Iraq and he would be surging in Afghan. Probably still be in recession. And Sarah Palin a heartbeat a way from the presidency? Or would she quit the VP too so she could make money giving speeches and get Bristol on reality shows?
You should thank your stars every day that Mr. Obama won. So while I do plan to vote for Mr. Romney bc I fear Mr. Obama's tax proposals - a completely different question - I see no reasonable basis for saying his performance overall has been deplorable. He has as good a record on which to seek reelection as any president in recent memory.
He also promised transparency in his administration. None of that has occurred.
His national health care plan is nothing near what he wanted to implement. It has only survived due to Chief Justice Roberts re-defining the word used to describe what it actually is.
In addition, much of what you claim as a success -- no pre-existing conditions, etc., -- won't happen for at least a couple of years. Much too early to take credit for that.
If he were to apply his own comments from last week about how successful people only were successful because of the help they received to his own list of so-called accomplishments--then we would see that he really hasn't done anything himself. The Navy Seals carried out the mission against Bin Laden. President Bush started the aid to GM and Chrysler. President Bush laid forth the plan to remove troops from Iraq.
The President's record is far from a good one. Maybe not as deplorable as his opponents are apt to say, but still a very weak effort over the past three-plus years.
My feelings on the President were set in his first months of office. After he and his cronies pushed through that abominable stimulus plan, I knew that I could never vote for him in 2012.
In fact, I never blame any President for those things and never give a President a big pat on the back for a good economy. Those things are out of the President's control.
What I blame President Obama for is opening his mouth and promising something he could not control -- a big drop in unemployment back in 2009 -- if Congress would pass his ridiculous stimulus package. He knew that he could not control that and was just hoping for the best. Yet, he looked America in the eye and made that promise.
He also promised transparency in his administration. America is still waiting for that.
And prior to his election, he railed against President Bush for 43's use of "executive" orders. Less than four years later, he was doing the same thing himself.
That's the part of his record that I was referring to as "deplorable." Maybe my working was a bit strong but, nevertheless, it is that type of behavior that will make me vote for the Republican candidate in 2012 and that just happens to be Gov. Romney. I kinda wish it was someone else but Romney is still a far better choice than the incumbent.
as deplorable. But here's my list - accepting the Nobel Peace prize at the same time he was upping the drone warfare strikes - which some say kill 9 innocents for every bad guy; doing nothing to deal with immigration problems until very recently; doing nothing to strengthen gun control laws.
He is deplorable in all of those areas.
Is Romney a better choice? For me personally he would be if for no other reason than his tax policy. For the country as a whole I'm less sure.
If Obama and you were totally align with all issues except for taxes, you would still not vote for him? I'm guessing this one issue of taxes trumps anything else.
Inicky46 was the same, but on the abortion issue. I asked him the same question, and if a candidate and inicky46 were totally align, but the candidate was pro-life, inicky46 would not vote for him/her.
But then as I think about it look at the gay community, or feminists, or evangelicals. Each has an issue that trumps everything else.
You know only about the losers in my portfolio bc those are the ones I post about. But I have bigger positions in Excelon and Teco as well as the TR Price Equity Income Fund. Raise the tax on dividends and that 5% yield on Excelon doesn't look so good. Plus the run up to such a tax increase would mean everyone would dump the stocks, the price would crash, and I 'd end up with BOA all over again in 2 different issues.
So I'm voting GOP for sure.
as if he was plucked from another country and dropped into the white house via parachute.
"the fact" is, the foundation for much of what you credit HIM solely, were, as PW has pointed out, put in place by bush. It's all here.
http://timeline.stlouisfed.org/index.cfm?p=timeline#
As you point, the recession ended July 09,/S&P 900... exactly which measures were Obama's which caused that turnaround that were NOT put already put in place by Bush? HAMP? Are you fucking kidding? HAMP is an abject failure!!!!!
Damned near EVERYTHING Obama spend money on, had been already appropriated BY BUSH.
Obama is an abject failure because of how he spent the money he was given AND because instaed of getting after the issue of debt and passing some small measure of health care reforms, he shot the moon and crammed thru his "signature legislation" which IMPEDED progress.
Obama alternatively claims credit for pulling troops from Iraq, but hides behind Bush's PRE established agreement with Iraq. OBL was found in a jackshack in Bonefuck Pockiston, Bush put him there.
for the listed accomplishments as he does blame for the fallings pointed out by Pitching Wedge.
If you fault him for the high unemployment rate, then you have to credit him for ending the recession.
So your statement that I "credit him solely" is just pure indignation on your part rather than what I actually said.
Did it ever occur to you, Mr.Notrouble, what a fix we would be in if that recession was still active? You would be begging for an 8% unemployment rate and a sluggish economy.
And of course he inherited these problems from Bush. Take away the Bush tax cuts and that deficit would be a manageble number, just as he inherited the positive steps Mr. Paulson (Bush himself was clueless) took to get us out of the economic mess.
Having said that, I agree with you on couple of key points. First, cramming in the health care law when we did not really need it as a much of priority was the first big strategic mistake. Deciding that we had to "win the war" in Afghanistan was the second. As you say, he should focused more on our economic problems.
But I don't agree with your conclusion - he certainly is not an "abject failure." And we will have proof of that when he win reelection.
""If you fault him for the high unemployment rate, then you have to credit him for ending the recession.""
As I explained, the measures (which we'll both stipulate for the sake of not getting TOO FAR into the weeds) ended the recession in 09 were largely put in place by Bush.
The CURRENT unemplyment picture today in 12' is entirely in his lap.
Go back and look at what you listed as "his accomplishments". Then go look at what PW described as his failing. To try to do a like for like comparision is ridiculous.
You ask me to "imagine" if the recession had'nt ended. I'll ask you to imagine that Obama had lived up to even part of what he promised.
He claimed he'd reach across the aisle and work with Reps. Sure, they were'nt eager to work with him, if you wanna call them hostile, go ahead. But isn't that the job of a stateman? I'll tel you one thing, if he had lived up to his "POST RACIAL" POTUS promise, we'd have a hell of a lot less comity which would made it all the harder to not work with POTUS. Instaed, race demogaugery has been a hallmark of his presidency. Tea Bagging Oreos???? REALLY???? Because they want to reign in government spending?
If Obama has'nt been able to work with Congess then that's HIS failing.
We got downgraded because spening cuts got demogauged and higher taxes were a red herring solution.
You suggest "taking away" Bush's tax cuts. Can we also then take away the revenue growth that followed? Can we take away the GDP growth that followed? Remember, in 00, 01' we were saddled with the clinton bubble popping AND 9/11.
look, i don't like obama and his snotty, arrogant, racebaiting, swaggering crew. I've been largley self emplyed since my ealy 20's. my views are conservative, fiscally at least. am i "objective"? I try to be at least in regards to considering what works and what doesn't and alternative P'sOV but i'm sick of obama's smug face and his professorial, arrogant temprement. I cant even stand to hear him speak.LOL!
or not done so that the current unemployment rate is "entirely in his lap?
He could have pulled the plug on GM, Chrysler, AIG and not forced the big banks to take TARP money. That would have resulted in a loss of jobs but in fact he saved the bulk of those jobs.
The only true cause and effect on jobs that I can trace to Mr. Obama is the arguable freeze on hiring that some claim resulted until Obamacare was finally upheld.
But I am curious - tell me specifically what he should have done or not done
that you can connect to say 2% of the current unemployment rate.
has been a major contributor to lagging economic activity. by putting teeth into HAMP, increasing incentives to servicers to actually negotiate in good faith. instead we have extend and pretend..i don't have to tell you how many people get pay checks, PRIVATE $$ paychecks, when a transaction takes place...instead
if he were not hostile to domestic energy we could have good paying jobs in mines, oil and gas fields and the money would be private..intead we have solar/wind/cowfart bullshit.
if he showed even a modicum of cutting government costs going forward, instead he's propped up government unions at every turn...the dead wood has to be trimmed for new forset to grow.
now if you'll excuse me, i gotta go to the fucking southbay...maybe i'll dip my wick in MDR while i'm out there..lol!
That one we can translate into jobs but do you want more jobs at the expense of risk to the environment so soon after BP?
No I don't agree with you on the housing/ foreclosure crisis. That is private contracts between lenders and borrowers and the last thing I want is the government telling banks to ease up on mortgage payments bc someone bought more house than they could afford. The market will deal with the problem in due time.
I wish he would kick the unions in the ass but they are big supporters of Mr. Obama. Don't like it either but that does not translate into a loss of jobs.
dude, the government propped up share prices via the FED, keeping these entreprises in business. If they had been left to the market many would'nt even be here..but once the meddling began, make the mewddling effctive. their "propping up" of these institutions interfered with consumers bargaining power.
the ONLY ONE that did'nt get "assistance" was the mortgage payers...the banks "promised" to participate to get the cash, then it was "fuck you"
.there is FAR morte to it than people "buying more house than they could" TONS of fraud on the orgination end, tons of fraud in the secondary market sales, lastly, people could afford the payments till they lost their jobs
If you are going to split hairs, I guess the answer is yes. As a manager, did Obama do an effective job without ANY lasting consequences of ending the recession?
$800B stimulus, $5T in additional debt, Federal budget went from $2.8T in 2008 to $3.8T in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Obama used a bazooka approach, but the intent of any stimulus spending is to have both a short term and long term impact. Three years after the official end of the recession, and all we got is 1% to 1.5% GDP growth. So did Obama end the recession? Yes, but at what cost? It was just not an efficient and effective use of a shit load of money. He failed as a manager.
I equate Obama to a really bad NBA owner. His team (United States) was losing just about every game. So he goes out and spends a shit load of money on players like Jermaine O'Neal, Rashard Lewis, Antawn Jamison. He spends money way over the cap. Now is the team better? I guess marginally. Get my point?
If he had not taken those steps, wouldn't the recession have continued?
There is no exact science for ending a recession. The economy is a battleship, not a speed boat, so it is hard to turn around.
So yes he used a bazooka approach (or, another way you could put it, he used all his tools). And yes there was a significant cost and in hind sight not the best possible managerial approach.
But just as NBA owners overspend on past stars and make the team only marginally better (hey, you didn't mean to leave Steve Nash out of that list did you?), the alternative is - you are the Charlotte Hornets. Is there anyone on that team you want? They will be bad for the next three years at a minimum.
End the recession for me and I'll take the out-of-pocket costs and the lost opportunity costs.
But if that recession was still going on, we would be in a world of hurt.
And amazing doesn't really cover it. In a very real way, he revolutionized the way Presidential campaigns are done.
I agree his record hasn't been perfect, he hasn't done nearly as well on the economy as I'd hoped, but I think his record is over all, very good. He's been nearly scandal free to boot.
But I don't think we should give him too much credit on either his campaigning abilities or his record.
A lot of Americans clearly remember what a nightmare the last Republican President was, and the Republican party has yet to define themselves in a post-Bush era. While I have no doubt that Romney would probably be a more capable President than Bush was, and surely they are different people with different approaches, I think public sentiment about Wall Street, which Romney clearly represents, is a big factor in all this.
Face it, banks, Wall Street, and the finanical sector generally, aren't that popular right now. So long as the economy is lousy, incredibly wealthy people will have a hard time winning popularity contests.
sucking the life out of it.
Financial service industry and government.
unlike so many on this board, just because I think his ideology is totally wrong, I do not make the mistake of calling him stupid. He is intelligent, articulate and a good campaigner. ANYONE who denies that just does not know what they are talking about.
His only real weakness as a campaigner is when he has to react quickly off the cuff and his events are not planned and scripted.