Albert Lea Discussion Forum » Printable Version of Topic

Forum: Current Events
Topic: Voters are Fed Up
started by: alcitizens

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 24 2011,5:27 pm

Democrats only need 24 seats to win the House back.

The math is simple: There are 61 seats President Obama won now held by Republicans – including 18 districts won by Senator Kerry in 2004.
Winning 10 of 18 Kerry-Obama seats and 15 of 43 Obama-only seats, that’s 25 seats, more than enough to win the Majority:

Our message is breaking through. Voters are fed up with Republicans playing political games with our economy and their plans to end Medicare.

The latest polls show a serious case of buyer’s remorse:

Gallup poll (August 12th): Democrats lead Republicans in the generic ballot by 7 points (51-44).

PPP poll (August 10th): Independent voters overwhelmingly disapprove of the Republican Majority in the House (68 disapprove/20 approve). If the election was today, PPP thinks Democrats would win the House.

More than the how, it’s the why we are doing this.

We’re fighting to create jobs. We’re fighting to protect the rights of women, workers, seniors, and the middle class.

Republicans are fighting to end Medicare to pay for more tax breaks for Big Oil and right-wing special interests. Simply put, the Tea Party agenda is not working for middle-class Americans.

24 seats puts us back in charge so we can create jobs, protect Medicare and Social Security, and out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world.

Posted by Glad I Left on Aug. 24 2011,5:41 pm

I've seen the same thing from Republitards. In the end it doesn't matter.
Until we get rid of this two party system and find a candidate that REALLY works FOR the people the cycle will continue.
And none of the candidates in the field thus far are that candidate IMO.

Posted by Duck Hunter on Aug. 24 2011,8:03 pm

As long as Obummer is no longer POTUS I dont care what happens. Congress messes up enough, Obama just makes everything worse.

Posted by Common Citizen on Aug. 24 2011,8:23 pm

So what do you think it would take to find and then elect a "Mr. Bill" type?

Let's be honest. Short of an armed conflict, it will never happen.

One only needs to look at how the left has smeared the tea party. The liberal elite's have done a good enough job in getting the local loons to believe the lies. Would it be any different from the RINO's?

Nuff said...

Posted by Glad I Left on Aug. 24 2011,8:30 pm

IF there were a tea party version from the left the Republicans would smear them the same way we are seeing them to do to the tea party. They are not the innocent victim here.
Truth be told, I think the average, politically unaligned person (like me) is really fed up with the whole system. Thus the birth of the tea party. Problem is the tea party has been hijacked by ideologues for the most part.
IMO, the true basis of the TEA party is fiscal conservatism, which historically has been the Repbulican platform of the past. Thus the tendency of the party to lean toward the republican side.
Problem I see is that there are a lot of people like me that are fiscally conservative, but very much a social moderate, and therefore won't vote for a tea party candidate most likely.

Posted by Liberal on Aug. 24 2011,9:59 pm

QUOTE

As long as Obummer is no longer POTUS I dont care what happens.

Would you feel better if Biden were President?

Does anyone think a liberal republican Mormon can be elected president, or a half term Alaskan, a Texan that jogs with a laser sighted pistol, or an Iowan that thinks Elvis was killed on his birthday?

Posted by Glad I Left on Aug. 24 2011,10:07 pm

[QUOTE=Glad I Left]

QUOTE

Problem I see is that there are a lot of people like me that are fiscally conservative, but very much a social moderate, and therefore won't vote for a tea party candidate most likely.

[quote=Liberal,Aug. 24 2011,9:59 pm]

QUOTE

Does anyone think a liberal republican Mormon can be elected president, or a half term Alaskan, a Texan that jogs with a laser sighted pistol, or an Iowan that thinks Elvis was killed on his birthday?

I rest my case. And :rofl:

about it too. That was funny stuff Lib!

Posted by Glad I Left on Aug. 24 2011,10:11 pm

and to be fair Lib, he wasn't killed on his bday, he died of a drug overdose. TO be killed would imply that someone else did it.
And although it is fun to bash the whack job Bachman, people do say a lot of dumb things. I mean Pelosi said that being a woman is a pre-existing condition :dunce:

Posted by Liberal on Aug. 24 2011,10:57 pm

I think you're right, but can't you be killed by a drug overdose?

Bachman will never get the nomination, but it's sure going to be funny watching her fail.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 24 2011,11:14 pm

(Common Citizen @ Aug. 24 2011,8:23 pm)

QUOTE

Both you and GIL are really good at playing your Fantasy Politics.. :laugh:

Posted by Glad I Left on Aug. 25 2011,7:28 am

Call it what you want alci (for me anyway, I won't speak for CC), but in my eyes it is the truth. The dems and the repub's are basically the same. They just go about protecting their own different ways. Neither of them give a flying F about the common people.
As long as corporations/organizations can keep donating large sums of money to any candidate/party, that candidate/party is going to vote in their favor. Why would they cut off their gravy train?
And I will concede to you that it is party fantasy, that we will someday get a decent 3rd party candidate worth a crap, but I cannot in good conscience, vote for a POS one, that is why I did not vote for either Obama or McCain in 2008. And with the current field, I won't vote for Obama or whoever the Repubs put up in Nov of next year.
Even with the senate/house elections it is a lot of pull the cord and vote for the least crappy candidate.

Posted by grassman on Aug. 25 2011,7:54 am

Hey where did you get that pic of Bachmann sucking up to the Hispanic voters?! :rofl:

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 25 2011,5:38 pm

"Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike least."--Robert Byrne.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 26 2011,3:37 pm

Slower than projected economic growth and a new warning from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke have put renewed pressure on President Obama and Congress to provide a needed jolt in September.

That dismal report was followed by Bernanke's admonition at an annual economic conference in Jackson Hole, Wyo., that Congress should come to the rescue with fiscal policies to promote growth.

"The quality of economic policymaking in the United States will heavily influence the nation's longer-term prospects. To allow the economy to grow at its full potential, policymakers must work to promote macroeconomic and financial stability; adopt effective tax, trade, and regulatory policies; foster the development of a skilled workforce; encourage productive investment, both private and public; and provide appropriate support for research and development and for the adoption of new technologies," Bernanke said.

< http://content.usatoday.com/communi...fetcher >

The question is: Will Republicans continue to hinder what is best for our country or will they do what is best for the Republican Party? :dunno:

Posted by jimhanson on Aug. 26 2011,4:03 pm

From the USA Today article

QUOTE

To allow the economy to grow at its full potential, policymakers must work to promote macroeconomic and financial stability; adopt effective tax, trade, and regulatory policies; foster the development of a skilled workforce; encourage productive investment, both private and public; and provide appropriate support for research and development and for the adoption of new technologies," Bernanke said.

Repubs are FOR all of those things--but they would like to reverse the FAILED policies that the Donks have tried.

"Financial Stability"? How about STOP THREATENING TO RAISE TAXES on anybody that gets ahead?

"Effective tax, trade, and regulatory policies"? How about STOP ENACTING LAWS THAT DRIVE CORPORATIONS AND INVESTMENT MONEY OVERSEAS? The Donks seem to believe that they can continue their Jihad against corporations and investment capital with impunity. The result? It is easier and cheaper for corporations to put a border between themselves and the do-gooders from Washington--just as it causes corporations to leave the People's Democratic Republic of Minnesota for the welcoming arms of the Dakotas.

"Development of a skilled workforce"? How do you reconcile that, when our schools have been dumbed down by the social crisis du jour that the Donks believe in? Despite the record unemployment, the biggest lament among employers is often "The lack of QUALIFIED workers."

"Encourage Productive Investment"? Who WANTS to invest in an economy where you never know what the government is going to do to business from one month to the next? Business needs some certainty--not the anti-business attitude of the Obamunists. Business, banks, and investors are hoarding cash--do you REALLY think that they wouldn't WANT to invest it if they had some certainty?

"provide appropriate support for R&D"--see above. Even the "Job Czar" Immelt is moving GE's business offshore to China--who wants to invest in this uncertain business climate?

QUOTE

The question is: Will Republicans continue to hinder what is best for our country or what is best for the Republican Party?

The Repubs will correct the mistakes of the ineffective programs of the last 3 years. We've already seen what Obamacare, nationalized industries, sops to trade unions, vacillating national policy, and top-heavy regulation does to the economy.

Sometimes, you just have to step back and say "Well, THAT didn't work out as expected--time to try something ELSE! The Donks keep trying Keynesian economics--something that has failed every time it has been tried--but they never seem to learn.

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 26 2011,7:12 pm

(alcitizens @ Aug. 26 2011,3:37 pm)

QUOTE

Slower than projected economic growth and a new warning from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke have put renewed pressure on President Obama and Congress to provide a needed jolt in September.

Isn't Barack going to reveal his new job growth plans after Labor Day? He's been telling the country this for a couple weeks now.

My question is, if he has a plan for new job growth, why is he waiting?

Why does he make the millions of unemployed wait in the dark for his plan?

He spent three days on a bus tour (not campaigning) in mostly rural areas where unemployment isn't as high. If he wanted to reach the people to give them HOPE that CHANGE in umemployment is coming, why didn't he go to urban areas where jobless numbers are the highest?

Is he going to spend more money on public programs? Maybe extend unemployment benefits even further? (After all, unemployment creates jobs, right?) :rofl:

Continue to ask for tax increases on the people who can hire workers?

Why does he wait?

Too busy not campaigning? A long needed break from his job was needed? Does anyone else work where when they know it's going to get busy or an emergency comes up, the business puts a hold on all new employee vacations?

If he really needed this, he could have at least sent Congress a letter outlining what his proposals are so the House can hit the ground running. Or is it that he's going to have to wait to ask the Reblicnerds how to accomplish this?

He doesn't need to give another speech. We've already heard six or eight of them on jobs. (Unless he's hoping to lower his approval rating even more?)

Maybe some one here can reasonably explain what the hold up is? :dunno:

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 26 2011,10:09 pm

(jimhanson @ Aug. 26 2011,4:03 pm)

QUOTE

Sometimes, you just have to step back and say "Well, THAT didn't work out as expected--time to try something ELSE! The Donks keep trying Keynesian economics--something that has failed every time it has been tried--but they never seem to learn.

Since Bushonomics didn't work out very well for the country and Teabagonomics was even worse, I think its now time for Republicans to start working with the President to get this economy fired up so the economy will be just a smokin by November 2012..

[Maddog]

QUOTE

President Obama will be putting out his jobs plan after Labor Day when Congress gets back to work after their summer Vacation..

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 26 2011,10:42 pm

(alcitizens @ Aug. 26 2011,10:09 pm)

QUOTE

(jimhanson @ Aug. 26 2011,4:03 pm)

QUOTE

President Obama will be putting out his jobs plan after Labor Day when Congress gets back to work after their summer Vacation..

Is it suppose to be a surprise?

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 26 2011,10:44 pm

(MADDOG @ Aug. 26 2011,10:42 pm)

QUOTE

[Maddog]

QUOTE

President Obama will be putting out his jobs plan after Labor Day when Congress gets back to work after their summer Vacation..

Is it suppose to be a surprise?

Posted by Liberal on Aug. 26 2011,11:33 pm

What has the nut jobs/teabaggers/republicans done for jobs?

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,12:53 am

(MADDOG @ Aug. 26 2011,10:44 pm)

QUOTE

Is it suppose to be a surprise?

How We're Meeting the Job Creation Challenge
By JEFF IMMELT
AND KEN CHENAULT
(Mr. Immelt is the chairman and CEO of GE and chairman of the President's Jobs and Competitiveness Council. Mr. Chenault is the chairman and CEO of American Express Co.)

The President's Jobs and Competitiveness Council, comprised of 26 private-sector leaders, is developing ideas that will accelerate job growth and improve America's competitiveness..

Train workers for today's open jobs
Streamline permitting
Boost jobs in travel and tourism
Facilitate small-business loans
Put construction workers back to work

Our objective for this first set of recommendations was to identify areas where the private sector and the administration could accelerate job creation immediately without the need for major legislation from Congress or actions that would have a long runway.

But it's not enough.

Read More:
< http://online.wsj.com/article...38.html >

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 27 2011,6:52 am

So earlier this year the president asked private sector leaders to work on this problem solving issue. According the the article, they presented their approach back on June 13th.

QUOTE

We've been at work for the past 90 days to develop recommendations for a series of immediate, actionable steps to accelerate job creation.

QUOTE

No single idea, however well-conceived, will solve our nation's employment challenge. So we're taking a comprehensive approach with eight teams focused on specific areas such as skills and training, regulatory reform, and innovation. We analyzed which actions are critical to accelerating job growth in high-potential sectors, while also addressing areas of concentrated unemployment. We believe that the following "fast-action" steps can support the creation of more than one million jobs within these industries.

So they recommended several actions to be taken up immediately. :dunno:

QUOTE

Over the next 90 days, we will turn to addressing the actions needed to make a more significant, longer-term impact.

OK, there's the actions to be addressed after Labor Day (90 days) but where is the short term immediate actions? They said the short term recommendations required no legislative action so Obama wouldn't have to wait for Congress to return. At least that's the way I read it.

Recommendations:

Train workers for today's open jobs
Streamline permitting (cut red tape)
Boost jobs in travel and tourism
Facilitate small-business loans
Put construction workers back to work

School has already started by Labor Day. Tourism begins to slow after summer, it takes time to facilitate loans through the SBA and the construction season is now nearly over in the upper half of the country by Labor Day. So why not the immediate actions they gave him? I understand that the government needs to analyze these points before implementation. They certainly can't just go by the analogies of private business.

I can foresee that putting construction workers back on the job will mean that the administration will find more public works to do (aka government jobs) Obama may have been on the right track in forming these teams, but it seems he has failed to follow through with the recommendations they made.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,11:01 am

(MADDOG @ Aug. 27 2011,6:52 am)

QUOTE

could accelerate job creation immediately without the need for major legislation from Congress or actions that would have a long runway.

Legislation is still needed, just not major legislation that would take a long time!!

Do you think Republicans will be up to the task or will they try to block any jobs legislation?

Posted by GEOKARJO on Aug. 27 2011,1:36 pm

General Electric is planning to move its 115-year-old X-ray division from Waukesha, Wis., to Beijing. In addition to moving the headquarters, the company will invest $2 billion in China and train more than 65 engineers and create six research centers. This is the same GE that made $5.1 billion in the United States last year, but paid no taxes-the same company that employs more people overseas than it does in the united States.

So let me get this straight. President Obama appointed GE Chairman Jeff Immelt to head his commission on job creation (job czar). Immelt is supposed to help create jobs.

< http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/ge.asp >

I guess the President forgot to tell him in which country he was supposed to be creating those jobs.

If this doesn't show you the total lack of leadership of this President, I don't know what does.

Posted by Stone-Magnon on Aug. 27 2011,2:29 pm

The world's a gold mine. You just have to know to see it. Your brain must be different.

If we put together farmland with Chinese investors. They could own the land and the farmer could work it for nearly free. We could put together packages with a local delegation to sell at about $8000 an acre. The people or locals farmer can cash out all equity in their land yet still retain the same lifestyle. The Chinese only own the land as an investment.

This would free up hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent by our local friends and neighbors. It would help everyone. It's what could have done in the early 80's with Japan but you were all too biased and well...kind of rascist, let's be honest.

Let's not make the same mistake twice.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,4:45 pm

(GEOKARJO @ Aug. 27 2011,1:36 pm)

QUOTE

China is a booming market that has cheap labor, its a win win situation for any company.. China will buy GE products that have been made in China at a much lower cost and higher profits..

General Motors has a plant in China.. Wal-mart is in China.. Many companies are in China.. A billion people who work cheap with no benefits and with growth rates around 9%, its a good place to produce and sell products..

I'm just glad we have a president that knows to ask companies like GE what we need to do to keep them here..

GE pays ZERO in taxes and still want to venture elsewhere.. Think about it..

Posted by Common Citizen on Aug. 27 2011,5:25 pm

Do you support what GE is doing then? It seems you are giving Obama a pass on this. Now you're sounding like a capitalist.

Oh, Lib. Done fishing.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,5:59 pm

(Common Citizen @ Aug. 27 2011,5:25 pm)

QUOTE

Do you support what GE is doing then? It seems you are giving Obama a pass on this. Now you're sounding like a capitalist.

Oh, Lib. Done fishing.

America needs more growth. The United States needs to reverse trends that developed over a long period of time, and the solutions aren't easy politically, socially or economically. The economic decisions we make now will determine American job creation and competitiveness in the years to come. Government, business and labor need to work together to get this done.

Posted by Common Citizen on Aug. 27 2011,6:19 pm

So do you think over regulating the private sector is the answer? I remember hearing that our government enacted over 600 regulations in the month of June alone.

I do agree with you though that everyone needs to work together. And that is the job of our fearless leader which he is not doing. One only needs to look at the type of health care reform he shoved down our throats that nobody wanted.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,6:52 pm

I do think we need regulations on teabaggers that throw around figures like 600 regulations in a month.. :rofl:

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 27 2011,7:37 pm

(alcitizens @ Aug. 27 2011,11:01 am)

QUOTE

Legislation is still needed, just not major legislation that would take a long time!!

Do you think Republicans will be up to the task or will they try to block any jobs legislation?

It's hard to tell because the little bit of information that is given in your < link > is vague at best.

The first calls for training workers in the jobs that need to be filled but doesn't say how this can be accomplished. Convince people to enter college or trades schools in these fields? Get companies to invest in these schools so they change their curriculum to suit the job market?

Cutting red tape to permits so construction can move forward? If I want to build a house or a new warehouse or factory, do I go to the federal government for my permits? No, I go to state and local government for that.

Boost tourism? I gues the federal government can invest in advertising to people to visit our National Park System, but outside of that, tourism is usually assisted on a state level or private sector.

We haven't been given enough information yet on how this Jobs and Competitiveness Council is going to answer these and other questions. Maybe they haven't figured it out yet or the WH isn't releasing that information.

Will the rebuplicans and Boehner agree with his upcoming plan? I guess that will depend on whether Obama wants to spend huge amounts of money on another stimulus or not. :dunno:

I question if this council (made up of private sector company leaders and CEOs) is worth the starch in their underwear. A couple blogs say that only GE Chairman Jeff Immelt and American Express chief Ken Chenault signed this draft.

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 27 2011,7:48 pm

Here's a letter to the WH from Boehner dated yesterday.

< letter to POTUS on regulations >

This does come after this article.

QUOTE

Aug 25 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama, facing sinking approval ratings amid growing fears the U.S. economy could slide into another recession, is crafting a jobs package he will unveil in a September speech. [ID:nN1E77J07P]

The economy's woes could jeopardize Obama's prospects for re-election in 2012. He has come under fire from some in his Democratic Party who would like to see him take bolder steps to reduce the 9.1 percent U.S. unemployment rate.

White House officials are considering a mix of measures they believe can clear the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and others that spell out Obama's vision for fixing the economy that his political rivals may well block, according to analysts close to the administration.

Here are some ideas the White House is reviewing:

SCHOOL BUILDING RENOVATIONS

An initiative to fund school building renovations nationwide is highly popular among Democrats. But it would likely face resistance among Republicans who have vowed to block new spending.

Advocates of the school building initiative contend it would be a highly visible way of creating jobs in the construction sector and might prove popular with middle-class families who might see it as a way of improving their communities.

Republicans argue such "Keynesian" spending initiatives have not helped the economy so far under Obama's tenure.

AID FOR TEACHER HIRING

Another idea strongly favored by Democrats would provide aid to cities and towns to help them put more teachers and possibly also police officers on their payrolls. Former President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, championed similar measures during his tenure.

Proponents say the shrinking of state and local workforces has been a big contributor to the rise in the jobless rate nationally.

Republicans say such aid to states and cities encourages budgetary profligacy.

HELP FOR THE AILING HOUSING MARKET

The moribund housing market remains an Achilles heel for the U.S. economy. Some Democrats have long urged Obama to take more aggressive action to shore up housing. Options include working through housing finance agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to grant broader loan modifications, including writedowns of principal for homeowners whose mortgages exceed the value of their homes.

TAX CREDITS TO SPUR HIRING

Tax credits to encourage the hiring of new workers could garner greater bipartisan support than spending measures. The credits could be targeted toward small businesses or made available more broadly.

EXTENDING PAYROLL TAX CUTS AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Extensions of unemployment insurance and of a reduction in worker payroll taxes that expires at the end of this year have already been proposed by Obama. The White House remains committed to these ideas and administration officials believe Republicans should be especially amenable to proposals like renewal of the payroll tax holiday, which was enacted with bipartisan support last December. (Reporting by Caren Bohan and Laura MacInnis; Editing by Eric Beech)

< www.reuters.com >

Somehow I don't see the republicans going along with all of this.

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 27 2011,8:00 pm

< pending regulations: 129 >

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 27 2011,10:28 pm

President Obama's plan to roll back costly regulations that are no longer needed could save more than $10 billion over five years, the White House announced Tuesday.

Obama announced the lookback on regulations in January.

< http://content.usatoday.com/communi...=34news >

Boehner's letter to the White House yesterday wasn't anything that hasn't already been proposed.. :sleep:

Lets get'er done.. Oh thats right, Republicans want it their way or the highway.. :frusty:

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 29 2011,9:47 am

Fed Chairman Bernanke also was critical of Congress' handling of this summer's battle over raising the debt ceiling. He said it disrupted the economy, and another episode like that could have long-term negative consequences.

Congress is focused on shrinking deficits and seems unlikely to back any new spending to try to energize the economy.

< http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id...economy >

Republicans are focused on shrinking the job market back to 2008 levels.. Anything to get rid of Obama, they are some sick mother fudders..

Posted by nedkelly on Aug. 29 2011,9:56 am

your graph shows it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :notworthy:

...ned

Posted by Duck Hunter on Aug. 29 2011,12:34 pm

You guys keep arguing over who created more jobs since 08. A better comp would be how many jobs did Bush create in his first 3 years. Better yet lets forget all of it and figure out what is holding growth so slow coming out of a recession and fix it.

Both parties suck, time for the American public to wake up and figure out our govt is screwing us from both sides before it is too late.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 29 2011,1:13 pm

Over President Bush’s entire presidency, the private sector created a net 188,000 jobs (not including January 2001 data). Surprisingly, this number includes the 3.78 million private sector jobs lost in 2008, his last year in office.

< http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.com/2011...loyment >

Posted by Santorini on Aug. 30 2011,2:25 pm

(Liberal @ Aug. 24 2011,9:59 pm)

QUOTE

As long as Obummer is no longer POTUS I dont care what happens.

So ya think we are better off with a guy that said:

*Im running for mayor of the US!!
*Ive been in 57 states, I think one left to go!!!
*On this memorial day as our Nation honors it unbroken
line of fallen heros...I see many of them in the audience
here today...
*Im here with the Girado Family here in St. Louis...
(speaking to the DNC while in Kansas City, Mo!!!!
*Navy Corpse-man Christian...(pronouncing the P!!)
(should be Navy corpsman (ps is silent!) and the
guys name was Christopher NOT Christian!!!
*youre absolutely right John McCain has not talked
about my Muslim faith...
(ABC interview with Stephanapoulos who corrected
Obama saying [your Christian faith] which Obama
quickly clarified!!!!
*
All from the mouth of the Bumbling-Prize Champion YOU
favor!!!

Posted by MADDOG on Aug. 31 2011,12:19 pm

The left leaners a running. Only 19% of polled individuals strongly approve of Obama of the way he's performing as president. Forty-four percent Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -25

Posted by jimhanson on Aug. 31 2011,2:57 pm

QUOTE

Only 19% of polled individuals strongly approve of Obama of the way he's performing as president.

Yet the lefties on this board consider THEMSELVES "mainstream"! :rofl:

Posted by Liberal on Aug. 31 2011,3:12 pm

You're not very good with numbers, or logic. The approval index is not only the liberals, there are liberals that disapprove of the job he's doing because they feel that he's moved to the right. :dunce:

Posted by Stone-Magnon on Aug. 31 2011,3:35 pm

Yep, even the GOP doesn't believe their own drug war crap. Obama made a huge error making health scare the #1 issue. It's the economy stupid. I'd rather have 3rd party type this time around and explains why Ron Paul is blowing up. Most people are fed up with both parties and that's the real truth. Ross P's giant sucking sound came true. All we have left is a government employed middle class that can't be sustained. It's over people.

Asia is where it's at now...the future shot past us as we were persecuting each other over pot.

What's even more amazing is how Nixon was exactly right and in 100 years what he said will come true and be seen as the Zenith or tipping point when we peaked.

Posted by alcitizens on Aug. 31 2011,11:08 pm

(jimhanson @ Aug. 31 2011,2:57 pm)

QUOTE

Yet the lefties on this board consider THEMSELVES "mainstream"! :rofl:

The Keys are statements that favor the re election of the incumbent party. When five or fewer statements are false, the incumbent party wins. When six or more are false, the challenging party wins.

1.Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.

2.Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.

3.Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

4.Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.

5.Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.

6.Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

7.Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.

8.Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

9.Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.

10.Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

11.Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.

12.Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.

13.Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki...e_House >

The Keys forecasted the popular-vote winners of all seven presidential elections from 1984 through 2008..

Obama has 4 that are false.. Say Hello to your two term President, Barack Hussein Obama..

Posted by jimhanson on Sep. 02 2011,4:38 pm

ALC--

QUOTE

The Keys are statements that favor the re election of the incumbent party. When five or fewer statements are false, the incumbent party wins. When six or more are false, the challenging party wins.

1.Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.

2.Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.

3.Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.

4.THIRD PARTY: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.

5.Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.

6.Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.

7.POLICY CHANGE: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.

8.SOCIAL UNREST: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.

9SCANDAL: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.

10.Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.

11.Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.

12.INCUMBENT CHARISMA: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.

13.Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki...e_House >

The Keys forecasted the popular-vote winners of all seven presidential elections from 1984 through 2008..

Obama has 4 that are false.. Say Hello to your two term President, Barack Hussein Obama..

I would challenge your assumptions. In addition to the 4 "gimmees" that you list as false (meaning, in Obama's favor) I would add the ones I've listed in BOLD.

Here's the rationale:

4. Third Party--There IS a third party--the Tea Party--and they have been highly effective--perhaps the MOST effective in the 2010 elections. I don't think the Repubs would have done nearly so well by themselves.

7. Policy Change. While Obama did change policy, in this case, the majority of the people view him as changing it for the WORSE, not better--witness, Obamacare--where the majority of the voters want it repealed. In this case, policy change will work against him.

8. Social Unrest. There is perhaps more social unrest and division in the country than at any time since the 60s.

9. Scandal. Gunwalker is getting bigger all of the time. Obama's far left "Czars" have been an embarrassment--as have his handling of the "Cash for Clunkers"--the "Porkulus" spending, and the nationalization of the car companies. Obama's ties to ACORN and SEIU have been a big part in his plummeting poll ratings, as has his naivete in foreign affairs. Then, there's Joe Biden's gaffes.

12. Incumbent Charisma. The Obama Charisma has long since left the building, as reflected by his falling poll numbers. The defections are made even worse by the fact that the dissatisfaction is NOT coming from conservatives (they didn't vote for him anyway) but largely from independents that DID vote for him last time--and defecting Dems.

The net result? In addition to the 4 "false" premises you listed from Wiki, I'd add these 5. That's NINE strikes against him.

Barring a big war (where people tend to support the President) or a big reversal of the economy (fat chance of THAT), Obama will be a one-termer.

Posted by jimhanson on Sep. 02 2011,4:45 pm

Libbie--

QUOTE

The approval index is not only the liberals, there are liberals that disapprove of the job he's doing because they feel that he's moved to the right

Take any poll you like--Obambi is not doing well. Gallup has him at 38%--Rasmussen is more charitable at 42.

That's a lot of people that don't like the job he's doing.

In a related poll--only 19% give him positive marks on his handling of the economy. Apparently, 19% of the country is made up of die-hard liberals. Considering that blacks make up about 10-11% of the populace and voted over 90% for Obama--that leaves about 10% of the non-black population that thinks he is doing a good job. Take out the 9.1% unemployment (who have a vested interest in his "redistribution" schemes), and that leaves less than 1% that think he is doing a good job.

You are in pretty slim company, Libbie! :sarcasm:

Of course, I didn't include the normal Donk constituency--the felons and the dead! :sarcasm:

Posted by Liberal on Sep. 02 2011,4:59 pm

I'm sure he'd rather have his poll numbers than the GOP's poll numbers. :rofl:

Posted by jimhanson on Sep. 02 2011,5:18 pm

(Liberal @ Sep. 02 2011,4:59 pm)

QUOTE

I'm sure he'd rather have his poll numbers than the GOP's poll numbers. :rofl:

Careful what you hope for, Libbie!

null< My Webpage >

Perry 44%-the current occupant, 41%

It HAS to hurt--"You're President of the United States--the incumbent Leader of the Free World"--and people would rather vote for someone they've hardly MET than you!" :rofl:

And the campaign season hasn't even started yet (except for the abortive "Magical Misery Tour")

Posted by Liberal on Sep. 02 2011,5:23 pm

Scott "fox news pays my rent" Rassmussen?

Posted by alcitizens on Sep. 02 2011,5:59 pm

Never-Wrong Pundit Picks Obama to Win in 2012

“Even if I am being conservative, I don’t see how Obama can lose,” says Lichtman, the brains behind The Keys to the White House.

Lichtman’s prediction helps to explain a quirk in some polling that finds that while Americans disapprove of the president, they still think he will win re-election.

< http://www.usnews.com/news...in-2012 >