What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama 7 - now what?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

dropthatpuck said:
Rover can spin all he'd like :D , but roll up all the polls and this is the trend you get:

ObamaJob.GIF


Blue and red have already merged - just that nobody has acknowledged that fact yet :eek:
Click to expand...

Truly, an historic train wreck.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

geezer said:
It's about time you got on board with the Obama-bashing.
Wait... are you saying an unprecedented drop in support is a good thing? ;)
Click to expand...

LOL. So you folks are saying that because Obama dropped from 75% to 55% approval since January he'll be at 35% approval in 10 months, right?

Anybody want to put money on that? (Crickets.)
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Kepler said:
LOL. So you folks are saying that because Obama dropped from 75% to 55% approval since January he'll be at 35% approval in 10 months, right?

Anybody want to put money on that? (Crickets.)
Click to expand...

I doubt it; anyone who is still in denial at this point is probably hopeless.
BO slogan: "If you can get 6 of 10 voters to keep believing you in spite of your actions, you can still get away with it".
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Kepler said:
LOL. So you folks are saying that because Obama dropped from 75% to 55% approval since January he'll be at 35% approval in 10 months, right?

Anybody want to put money on that? (Crickets.)
Click to expand...
But if he is at 35%, then the poop hit the fan.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Messiah and WH lose again - to free press.

The Obama administration on Thursday failed in its attempt to manipulate other news networks into isolating and excluding Fox News, as Republicans on Capitol Hill stepped up their criticism of the hardball tactics employed by the White House.

The Obama administration on Thursday tried to make "pay czar" Kenneth Feinberg available for interviews to every member of the White House pool except Fox News. The pool is the five-network rotation that for decades has shared the costs and duties of daily coverage of the presidency.

But the Washington bureau chiefs of the five TV networks consulted and decided that none of their reporters would interview Feinberg unless Fox News was included.

The administration relented, making Feinberg available for all five pool members and Bloomberg TV.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Definately put this all in perspective.

Put Obama's numbers on the right timescale (say... the last five years), and the having his numbers in the low 50s is actually pretty good.

But even though the trend literally can't continue, (It would take a catastrophe to get the numbers into the mid-thirties... but hey, the neocons have dreams too, don't they? The hard rights must be salivating for a disaster right about now) the extreme righties on this board have a point in that Obama can't possibly live up the ridiculous expectations we've had of him, and he won't have a very easy time if he can't get it back up to the 60s or so.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Obama can't possibly live up the ridiculous expectations we've had of him, and he won't have a very easy time if he can't get it back up to the 60s or so.
Click to expand...

This is no place for reason. You're supposed to scream, "It's Bush's fault!"
It apparently matters more which party supports a policy, than what that policy actually is. Next thing, you'll have dems saying it's OK to censor the press, because Obama says it's OK. Wait...
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

geezer said:
This is no place for reason. You're supposed to scream, "It's Bush's fault!"
It apparently matters more which party supports a policy, than what that policy actually is. Next thing, you'll have dems saying it's OK to censor the press, because Obama says it's OK. Wait...
Click to expand...
Instead I'm screaming "Whatever, its still better than Bush!".

I'll scream louder if/when bank deregulation starts gaining steam in the eyes of republican congressmen.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
he won't have a very easy time if he can't get it back up to the 60s or so.
Click to expand...
This is true - back in February, when he didn't have to answer for anything and was still riding the hope and change wave, his approval was flirting with 70%. And he still only managed 52% of the popular vote. If his approval is down around 50% in 2012, I don't see him taking the popular vote again. Electoral college mileage may vary...
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
I'll scream louder if/when bank deregulation starts gaining steam in the eyes of republican congressmen.
Click to expand...

Start screaming, Sally ...

For example, they voted overwhelmingly to exempt automobile dealerships from any scrutiny by the new agency, a major win for dealerships that rake in high fees from auto financing.
Click to expand...
Score one for the automakers, and their financing arms.

In a nod to concerns raised by community banks, lawmakers agreed to make it harder for the agency to examine financial institutions with less than $10 billion in assets, essentially exempting all but roughly 120 of the country's 8,000 banks from compliance exams.
Click to expand...
Most of the recent bank failures involved smaller banks, rather than the monsters.

States would have the ability to write their own consumer laws that go beyond federal restrictions. Those statutes could be overridden by the federal government if they were found to "significantly interfere" with the ability of national banks to do business.
Click to expand...
The OCC loves preemption decisions.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125622338671401423.html

And that's even before the bill made it out of the first committee and some of the other things that were dropped from the O-man's original proposal, not to mention what awaits in the Senate.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

ScottM said:
Start screaming, Sally ...

Score one for the automakers, and their financing arms.

Most of the recent bank failures involved smaller banks, rather than the monsters.

The OCC loves preemption decisions.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125622338671401423.html

And that's even before the bill made it out of the first committee and some of the other things that were dropped from the O-man's original proposal, not to mention what awaits in the Senate.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. It's GOOD if dems do it, but b-a-a-a-d if repubs do (that's the sheeplike sound I imagine Exile and Kepler making). These are dem deregulations, hence good. All you need to know is the sponsoring party.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

ExileOnDaytonStreet said:
Definately put this all in perspective.

Put Obama's numbers on the right timescale (say... the last five years), and the having his numbers in the low 50s is actually pretty good.

But even though the trend literally can't continue, (It would take a catastrophe to get the numbers into the mid-thirties... but hey, the neocons have dreams too, don't they? The hard rights must be salivating for a disaster right about now) the extreme righties on this board have a point in that Obama can't possibly live up the ridiculous expectations we've had of him, and he won't have a very easy time if he can't get it back up to the 60s or so.
Click to expand...

I find this all to be terribly amusing. You have knuckledraggers extrapolating how a guy with a approval rating in the mid 50's is somehow going to lose the popular vote if it stays there.....with no consideration of who's actually running against him. :confused: :rolleyes:

But, I think we've argued enough on this subject a year before the next election. What I will say is this - righties mouthed off a bit too much before the last election, and after it was over I tortured you guys for months. When you lose again in the next two elections, what do you think I'm going to do to you out here? Suffice to say, you ain't seen nuttin' yet. :D :D :D And like last time, remember that you did it to yourselves. ;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

geezer said:
You missed the point. It's GOOD if dems do it, but b-a-a-a-d if repubs do (that's the sheeplike sound I imagine Exile and Kepler making). These are dem deregulations, hence good. All you need to know is the sponsoring party.
Click to expand...

[Simulated Jerk Off Motion]I see what you did there.[/Simulated Jerk Off Motion]

There's no such thing as good bank deregulations right now. Let them do what they please, and you will watch them walk away with the hard earned money of every American while the last two years repeats itself. Anyone in support of it (which is, more often than not, on the Republican side of the aisle), is just exposing themselves as being a lackey for the bank lobby.

And, scott, if you want to show that Dems are trying to de-regulate the banking industry, here's my advice to you: It'd be a lot smarter of you if you pointed me towards an article about a banking bill that DOESN'T have a quote from one of the big guns of the American Bankers Association complaining about it. Typically, the creation of a large agency to oversee the banking industry isn't seen as a form of deregulation, no matter how many allowances that they make. Sort of kills the point of trying to claim equivalency to people like Spencer Bachus, who actually is advocating complete deregulation.
 
Re: Obama 7 - now what?

Deregulation is bad no matter who supports it. If we let the banks go hog wild and police themselves the country will be dead in 4 years. The Banks are the financial version of the Democrats...when they get what they want they fall all over themselves to screw everything up which only puts us in a worse position.

If we lower regulations this current "Crisis" will seem like aa mini recession compared to what will come next...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top