Jump to content

We've recently updated our software. Please report any issues you may experience.

vmax

lol!

Recommended Posts

As an outside observer to the US political system, could someone explain to me why Obama and the democrats got beat so bad in the mid-terms? Everything I have read about his policies seems to suggest that in 2 years he has already delivered, or is in the process of delivering on a lot of his campaign promises.

 

So what gives?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an outside observer to the US political system, could someone explain to me why Obama and the democrats got beat so bad in the mid-terms? Everything I have read about his policies seems to suggest that in 2 years he has already delivered, or is in the process of delivering on a lot of his campaign promises.

 

So what gives?

Americans saw how socialist his administration had become, how he refuses to protect the border, and said by voting "that'll be enough of that shit!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, can I get an explanation on how his administration has been deemed socialist?

Their Universal Health Care program is nothing more than socialized medicine, hence the name "Obamacare". He and other liberals love nothing more than big government which creates an unhealthy burden on the taxpayers. Nothing is free. It all comes at a cost, and the one his administration presents comes at too great a price.

 

I'm not saying health care for all is a bad idea, just the plan they presented doesn't suit me in the least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an outside observer to the US political system, could someone explain to me why Obama and the democrats got beat so bad in the mid-terms? Everything I have read about his policies seems to suggest that in 2 years he has already delivered, or is in the process of delivering on a lot of his campaign promises.

 

So what gives?

 

 

What gives indeed. People forget what Obama inherited. TARP has been repaid with interest. The GDP is up 2%. Auto sales are up 21%. Consumer spending is rising faster than any time in the last four years. The Democrats successfully steered the country away from a depression all while dealing with a republican party whose entire strategy the past two years was to block and stall every piece of legislation that came through congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GDP is up 2%. Auto sales are up 21%. Consumer spending is rising faster than any time in the last four years. The Democrats successfully steered the country away from a depression.

All of which are things that originally were at their worst under him, or not at all attributable to him.

 

The GDP is up 2%, but was at its lowest growth rate in almost 30 years just 18 months ago. Auto sales are up almost entirely because of Chrysler's sales turnaround, which is due to the exploding Grand Cherokee sales, which is due to Fiat's influence along with Mercedes.

 

I'm not one to say the guy hasn't done anything, because I actually want him to do well and want nothing to complain about. But I don't believe in attributing or blaming folks for things they had no hand in. Clinton certainly had nothing to do with the tech and internet boom of the 90s, yet he'd have been a pretty resoundingly awful president in retrospect without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate getting involved in these things, but I read an interesting piece by Thomas Friendman of the New York Times a few weeks ago (and sure, you can think what you like of Friedman, I don't exactly love him).

 

While Obama has hardly delivered on anything... He's also has had little chance. He's also had an uphill battle.

 

What is frightening to me (and what Friedman's article was about), was that after just 18 months of letting Obama try to fix things, people are already reverting back to supporting policies that got us into this mess in the first place. The "take your hands off" approach is part of what created the housing crisis and the recession. And while no one wants government to run every last little detail, it's quite scary that people seem to forget that the recession is not all Obama's fault... it never was. And that there's no way to prove that things would be better under different policies.

 

I have a student (many actually, because I'm in a fairly well-off school) that like to make standard crude jokes about Obama spending too much money. So this week, when one kept bringing it up at the most ridiculous times, I asked him what money Obama had spent. Of course they all said healthcare, which is fine and perhaps true. But beyond that? As pointed out, TARP was in fact a Bush initiative. As were several earlier "stimulus" packages. And if we want to talk about expenditures, it's always funny how people leave out obvious things like two massive wars. But aside from the healthcare plan, which hasn't cost any money yet, I can't think off too many instances in which Obama has "spent" us into anything.

 

I simply become confused when I look at the American populace.

 

Meanwhile, RavenMad, the easiest answer to your question is that like everywhere else... things look different from the outside than the inside, and voters are ill-informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it is curious indeed dc. We are already experiencing rumblings of discontent in the UK over our coalition government and their policies of public spending cuts yet they were voted in because of the mess the Labour government made of things.

 

There just seems to be very obvious parallels between the 2 situations.

 

The guys that are in there now trying to fix things and get everything going again are the ones facing all the abuse and people seem to be quick to want those that got them into the trouble in the first place to get back into power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guys that are in there now trying to fix things and get everything going again are the ones facing all the abuse and people seem to be quick to want those that got them into the trouble in the first place to get back into power.

 

Pretty much. It's like blaming Buck Showalter for the O's not making the playoffs last year and replacing him with Dave Trembley. Sorry if you don't follow the O's. :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...