We've Heard It All Before from Obama...

[PapaG]

[video=youtube;fZgQhnNRSuw]

 

[PapaG]

 

[PapaG]

 

[D-Rock]

Was gas really $1.85 on average on inauguration day? I swear I paid over $3 in the summer of '08.

 

[Eastoff]

Aw isn't that cute! PapaG has a Deadmau5 avatar. I bet you even say "five" too! Do you still claim to be not a republican too?

 

[Denny Crane]

The rest of the data look right to me, though gathered in March. The debt is $16T now, for example.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Who ever knows where those figures come from, but I can tell you that all the people I know that are unemployed or under employed are finding job hunting a daunting task like I never experienced. I also know that incomes are down.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Aw isn't that cute! PapaG has a Deadmau5 avatar. I bet you even say "five" too! Do you still claim to be not a republican too?

Westnob, what did you think about the chart? Do you think most of the figures are either made up or grossly distorted?

 

[Rhal]

Both candidates are really lackluster this year. I actually dislike Romney a great deal and think that he has no idea what the average American has to deal with, nor do I think he cares. Obama is most likely in the same boat as Romney in that regard too. The only saving grace of this whole election for me is that most presidents do the majority of their work in the second term because they no longer have to pander for the reelection vote.
Either way the Senate (which is the worst Senate in US history) is going to attempt to stonewall whoever gets elected if they majority are not from their party.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Both candidates are really lackluster this year. I actually dislike Romney a great deal and think that he has no idea what the average American has to deal with, nor do I think he cares. Obama is most likely in the same boat as Romney in that regard too. The only saving grace of this whole election for me is that most presidents do the majority of their work in the second term because they no longer have to pander for the reelection vote.
Either way the Senate (which is the worst Senate in US history) is going to attempt to stonewall whoever gets elected if they majority are not from their party.

Overall, I fully agree.

My general thinking is that the democrats had the opportunity, carte blanc, to do whatever they wanted and screwed up the country so bad it is questioned if it is even possible to recover. So why not let the republicans have a shot and see what they can do? They may not do any better, but they can't do any worse.

 

[Eastoff]

Westnob, what did you think about the chart? Do you think most of the figures are either made up or grossly distorted?

I'm curious why is says March 2012, when it's September now. I"m also curious what those numbers would look like say three months into Obama's term, not inauguration day. Last time I checked, you typically get a couple months of grace period. I know at my work we tend to blame someone that was fired for a couple months of the left over shit they leave behind before it starts to be the person that is new in the job's fault. PS how are these bush tax cuts for the last 10 years working out for us?

 

[RR7]

says march because it is a chart done towards the end of feb.

 

[Denny Crane]

PS how are these bush tax cuts for the last 10 years working out for us?

Think of all the millions of jobs saved by those tax cuts. If that "logic" works for Obama, it works for everyone.

 

[Eastoff]

Think of all the millions of jobs saved by those tax cuts. If that "logic" works for Obama, it works for everyone.

And elephants paint their feet pink to hide in grapefruit trees. I get your point, there is no control test.

 

[julius]

Was gas really $1.85 on average on inauguration day? I swear I paid over $3 in the summer of '08.

gas took a sudden drop late in the summer, which is why that fact is kind of hollow. It's not like gas had been cheap for a LONG time and all the sudden rose. It was expensive as fuck, then it dropped to a reasonable price, and slowly built up.

To blame, or credit the president on that, is pretty pathetic.

 

[jlprk]

My general thinking is that the democrats had the opportunity, carte blanc, to do whatever they wanted and screwed up the country so bad it is questioned if it is even possible to recover. So why not let the republicans have a shot and see what they can do? They may not do any better, but they can't do any worse.

Most Americans disagree that Obama inherited a level playing field, and blame Republicans for the bad numbers in Denny's chart.

P.S. The gas price was manipulated by investors. Look at the graph. I knew it at the time. Someone now has something similar from PapaG in his signature, predicting that gas prices will be low on election day.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

gas took a sudden drop late in the summer, which is why that fact is kind of hollow. It's not like gas had been cheap for a LONG time and all the sudden rose. It was expensive as fuck, then it dropped to a reasonable price, and slowly built up.

To blame, or credit the president on that, is pretty pathetic.

However, I recall when Bush announced he was going to use some of our oil reserves it had immediate gas price lowering results. The point is that while I agree with you in general, sometimes the US President can have some influence- either directly or indirectly.

 

[jlprk]

Westnob, 2 posts above mine, reminds us in his signature that PapaG said, "It will be $2.50/gallon by election day. Put that one on a bookmark." I bring that up so that when the board rightists ridicule my gas price assertion as conspiracist, they will have to simultaneously defend one of their own saying something similar.

 

[STOMP]

of course the we've heard it all before ad was first done a couple months back from the other side

[video=youtube;oWdZEJW1vWY]

STOMP

 

[RoyToy]

Westnob, what did you think about the chart? Do you think most of the figures are either made up or grossly distorted?

Well

Using his inauguration day numbers is misleading, yes. He inherited a shitstorm created by Bush and expecting him to bring it to a halt instantly is unrealistic, and it didn't bottom out until 9 months after his inauguration date. So yes, I think the chart distorts that a little bit.

Bringing up gas prices is just lame.

 

[MickZagger]

He became the captain of the Titanic.

 

[julius]

However, I recall when Bush announced he was going to use some of our oil reserves it had immediate gas price lowering results. The point is that while I agree with you in general, sometimes the US President can have some influence- either directly or indirectly.

I think obama did something similar, but I think it was more of a "here's the carrot....now go git it!"

 

[MARIS61]

I'm curious why is says March 2012, when it's September now. I"m also curious what those numbers would look like say three months into Obama's term, not inauguration day. Last time I checked, you typically get a couple months of grace period. I know at my work we tend to blame someone that was fired for a couple months of the left over shit they leave behind before it starts to be the person that is new in the job's fault. PS how are these bush tax cuts for the last 10 years working out for us?

Economically, a President has no chance to affect anything until his 2nd year, when his first budget takes effect. I posted a decisive rebuttal of such misleading charts as the one above in a thread last month. Starting the chart correctly, after Obama's budget was passed, completely reverses the results and Obama actually improved nearly every category from the Bush-made lows.

 

[MARIS61]

http://leftcall.com/the-republican-lie-that-obama-is-a-job-killer-in-one-chart/

The GOP talking point that ’Obama is a job killer” is debunked in just one chart. President Obama took office in January 2009 when the ‘great recession’ was at it’s deepest. Up to that point millions of jobs had already been lost to the recession and in that month alone over 800,000 jobs were lost. In the following months many millions of additional jobs were lost. Certainly there is a point where we begin to direct blame for the economy towards Obama and away from Bush but it’s foolish at best to blame Obama for the millions of jobs lost within the first few months of his presidency when millions of jobs had already been shed leading up to the oath of office.

The 2009 stimulus bill was signed into law in February of that year and you can see in the chart that job losses begin to recede quite rapidly in the following months until finally positive job growth begins a year later in March 2010. It could be argued that positive job growth really didn’t take shape until October of 2010 because much of the job growth (and then losses) from March 2010 to September 2010 was due to the temporary hiring related to the 2010 census.

Each month from October 2010 until November 2011 (and now December 2011) has seen job growth. Out of the 35 full months (including December 2011 – not shown in the chart above) Obama has been in office, 18 months (again, including December 2011 – 200,000 jobs created) have seen job growth. More important is the trend. There is no reason to believe we won’t see continued job growth through all of 2012 which will only improve Obama’s creation-to-loss ratio.

It is true that there is still a net jobs loss during Obama’s first 35 months and that the unemployment rate is still higher now compared to when he took office but as you can see from the chart that is mostly due to the first year of his presidency which could hardly be blamed on his economic policies. The naysayers apparently would like us to believe the economy should create a few million jobs in just a month or two and if it doesn’t than Obama has failed. It doesn’t work that way. If you dig a deep hole it’s going to take a while to crawl out of it.

One thing the naysayers can’t ignore is that the longer we go into Obama’s presidency the better the jobs picture looks, which serves to reinforce that his policies have had a positive effect on the economy and jobs. It also serves to further debunk the Republican talking points of the ‘stimulus failed’ and ‘Obama is a job killer’.
http://michigancitizen.com/latest-rightwing-lie-obama-made-the-economy-worse-p9949-76.htm

http://www.alternet.org/story/14942..._economy_--_we_need_obama_to_put_an_end_to_it

 

[Denny Crane]

All I can say is LOL to that drivel.

His economic policies were an immediate spending increase from $3T to $3.6T, half the TARP money, and the biggest pork barrel spending bill in history (labeled "emergency stimulus"). The October '10 job growth would have happened in June or July of '09 without all that spending. And on top of that, his policies all his agency appointees and executive orders have caused job growth to be 1/2 what it should (and needs to) be.

Here's a clue: the number of people on unemployment, welfare, disability, food stamps, etc., is increasing, not decreasing.

 

[noknobs]

The October '10 job growth would have happened in June or July of '09 without all that spending.

If anything positive actually happened in the last 4 years it was despite Obama, but anything negative in the last 8 years is directly due to Obama.
Signed,
all republicans.

 

[MARIS61]

All I can say is LOL to that drivel.

His economic policies were an immediate spending increase from $3T to $3.6T, half the TARP money, and the biggest pork barrel spending bill in history (labeled "emergency stimulus"). The October '10 job growth would have happened in June or July of '09 without all that spending. And on top of that, his policies all his agency appointees and executive orders have caused job growth to be 1/2 what it should (and needs to) be.

Here's a clue: the number of people on unemployment, welfare, disability, food stamps, etc., is increasing, not decreasing.

Your "rebuttal" is reminiscent of a recent performance given by a certain right-wing actor/director tough-guy movie idol who appeared to be deep into the later stages of mental dementia.

 

[Denny Crane]

Your "rebuttal" is reminiscent of a recent performance given by a certain right-wing actor/director tough-guy movie idol who appeared to be deep into the later stages of mental dementia.

Your post is reminiscent of the Obama campaign. No substance, the facts aren't on your side, so attack.

 

[Denny Crane]

If anything positive actually happened in the last 4 years it was despite Obama, but anything negative in the last 8 years is directly due to Obama.
Signed,
all republicans.

It isn't about republicans being right and democrats being wrong. Clinton was a democrat and I think he was more right (meaning correct) than people of either party since.

It is about history and repeating the same mistakes made. The Great Depression was deepened and lengthened by FDR's policies and had no effect over a ~10 year period. So why repeat the same policy choices? Unemployment was 16.3% in 1931 and 17.2% in 1939.

It's clear that when govt. spends 25% of GDP, GDP and employment growth is slower than at historical levels of < 20%.

Clinton cut govt. spending to ~18% of GDP and we had a boom. Even food service (e.g. McDonalds) jobs paid higher than minimum wage because unemployment was so low it was hard to attract ANY employees at all. Good for the lower middle class.

 

[noknobs]

It isn't about republicans being right and democrats being wrong.

I agree, politics isn't about right and wrong, it's about being in power. The country comes a distant second. It's pathetic. And it's not going to change regardless of who gets elected.

Not until both sides quit viewing it like a fucking sporting event and actually put the country ahead of themselves. Which will happen shortly after never.