• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

America's Fed Up: Obama Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low, Poll Shows [W:256]

Considering the number of delusions your'e already burdened with, No, I wouldn't suggest you add more.

Truth is never a burden. Just FYI if you ever grow out of accepting platitudes and warmed over manufactured narratives as the Gods honest truth.

So enlightening.
 
Should I buy into the delusions of the Right?

You seem to buy into delusion of the left and ignore the numbers. Suggest you do some research of non partisan sites, bea.gov, bls.gov, U.S. Treasury data. I could post that data for you and have many times in this forum. It just doesn't do any good because liberals ignore the data as it destroys their beliefs and the liberal narrative.
 
I'm not sure that's true, or if some are just overly sensitive. I'm also not sure how to objectively find out. And no, there are some measurables that we can look at if we wanted to.

So you're not sure that's true, hmmmmm....Well then, that should settle it...Since all reality is the same to you, then it should be enough for you to just hold a press conference and inform America that all of the charges of racism for opposing Obama, is just all in everyone's head. Do you know how ridiculous you sound twisting into knots excusing deplorable behavior from demo's? :roll:
 
Not only is the economy a mess with high unemployment, low economic growth, and massive debt, the world isn't any better. Thanks to all you liberals, American Idol voters who bought the rhetoric and ignored the resume giving us an incompetent. Is it any wonder why his Job Approval Rating is in the tank as it should be. I can tell the 40% that still support him, rather sad, this is what you get

ISIS, Islamist militants vow to blow up embassies after Obama launches airstrikes | Mail Online
 
Not only is the economy a mess with high unemployment, low economic growth, and massive debt, the world isn't any better. Thanks to all you liberals, American Idol voters who bought the rhetoric and ignored the resume giving us an incompetent. Is it any wonder why his Job Approval Rating is in the tank as it should be. I can tell the 40% that still support him, rather sad, this is what you get

ISIS, Islamist militants vow to blow up embassies after Obama launches airstrikes | Mail Online

But what were the leftists to do??

When the Romney family went on vacation they put their penned dog on the roof of the car! And, besides, Romney was successful in business and not cool like Obama, the dope-smoking Community Organizer.

They had no choice but to vote the way they did.
 
I did cite facts ... see post #323.
I also mentioned Obama's attack on coal through his EPA regulations in #327.
Oh ... and I love that on the one hand you say Obama has expanded oil exploration and on the other you say it makes no difference that he had nothing to do with it.
That one's a classic.


Nope ... you can believe that if you like ... it's tempting to ... but I'm afraid they're stroking you.
Just remember their names.
You'll probably see them again.
While you claim there is an "attack" on coal, that's just a way of saying you don't like coal regulations, which in the case of coal, are sensible. Coal emissions are not only the worst greenhouse emissions but are highly carcinogenic. But, in any case, the biggest enemy of coal is the free market. Coal is finding it just can't compete with other fuels.
Study: Most Coal-Fired Power Plants Can't Compete Against Natural Gas | WFPL
 
Last edited:
Not only is the economy a mess with high unemployment, low economic growth, and massive debt, the world isn't any better. Thanks to all you liberals, American Idol voters who bought the rhetoric and ignored the resume giving us an incompetent. Is it any wonder why his Job Approval Rating is in the tank as it should be. I can tell the 40% that still support him, rather sad, this is what you get

ISIS, Islamist militants vow to blow up embassies after Obama launches airstrikes | Mail Online
I guess you can close your eyes and pretend that everything is worse, because you hate Obama and can't admit that the economy and jobs are better now than when Obama was inaugurated. The numbers are there to prove it -- oh, I forgot, conservatives declare statistics they don't like as "cooked."

I don't know what that ISIS article is supposed to mean in our context. Are you suggesting the United States should bow to ISIS threats?
 
But what were the leftists to do??

When the Romney family went on vacation they put their penned dog on the roof of the car! And, besides, Romney was successful in business and not cool like Obama, the dope-smoking Community Organizer.

They had no choice but to vote the way they did.
Romney is an entitled rich guy whose business "success" was chopping up companies and selling them off for profit, while laying off lots of workers. When he ran for president he displayed no particular acumen for solving America's economic issues besides tax cuts for the rich, slashing programs for the poor and cutting regulations -- the things Republicans always champion. He was easily defeated by Obama because the voters saw who Romney really was.

To boot, he personally insulted 47% of the voters by calling them moochers.
 
I guess you can close your eyes and pretend that everything is worse, because you hate Obama and can't admit that the economy and jobs are better now than when Obama was inaugurated. The numbers are there to prove it -- oh, I forgot, conservatives declare statistics they don't like as "cooked."

I don't know what that ISIS article is supposed to mean in our context. Are you suggesting the United States should bow to ISIS threats?

You have run from every post I have made giving you data which makes you a waste of time. I don't hate Obama, I hate Obama's incompetence. Actual data doesn't matter to you at all, data like Obama not having one economic number better than Bush's but that doesn't matter, Obama is cool, Obama smokes pot, Obama was a community agitator and that is all that matters to you.

By the way, where did ISIS come from? one of these days the lightbulb is going to go off in your head and you are going to realize what a fool he made out of you
 
You have run from every post I have made giving you data which makes you a waste of time. I don't hate Obama, I hate Obama's incompetence. Actual data doesn't matter to you at all, data like Obama not having one economic number better than Bush's but that doesn't matter, Obama is cool, Obama smokes pot, Obama was a community agitator and that is all that matters to you.

By the way, where did ISIS come from? one of these days the lightbulb is going to go off in your head and you are going to realize what a fool he made out of you

I don't recall any data that you present. Conservatives live in a fantasy world based on an Ayn Rand novel. Most economic indicators are better than Bush's. Let's recap, shall we?

Under Pres. Obama, job gains were 4.538 million jobs as of July. George Bush's were 1.116 million. GDP is 2.5 trillion higher; the Dow Jones Industrial Average is ~double from where Bush left it.
 
I don't recall any data that you present. Conservatives live in a fantasy world based on an Ayn Rand novel. Most economic indicators are better than Bush's. Let's recap, shall we?

Under Pres. Obama, job gains were 4.538 million jobs as of July. George Bush's were 1.116 million. GDP is 2.5 trillion higher; the Dow Jones Industrial Average is ~double from where Bush left it.

When the recession began there were 146 million working Americans, and that is the number today so that isn't 4.5 million jobs. When Obama took office the debt was 10.6 trillion, it is 17.6 trillion today. Obama GDP growth is 350 billion a year, Bush's was 485 billion per year. Bush never had a trillion dollar deficit, Obama had 4 straight. Prior to the Democrats taking office Bush economy generated over 9 million jobs and he had 52 straight months of job growth. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

When Bush left office the War in Iraq had been won, today Obama has lost the peace. When Bush left office the Muslim Brotherhood was basically an unknown and now they basically control the Middle East. The only thing Obama did better than Bush was lower his golf handicap and take expensive vacations.

You really don't understand leadership at all.
 
Last edited:
When the recession began there were 146 million working Americans, and that is the number today so that isn't 4.5 million jobs. When Obama took office the debt was 10.6 trillion, it is 17.6 trillion today. Obama GDP growth is 350 billion a year, Bush's was 485 billion per year. Bush never had a trillion dollar deficit, Obama had 4 straight. Prior to the Democrats taking office Bush economy generated over 9 million jobs and he had 52 straight months of job growth. Again, you have no idea what you are talking about.

When Bush left office the War in Iraq had been won, today Obama has lost the peace. When Bush left office the Muslim Brotherhood was basically an unknown and now they basically control the Middle East. The only thing Obama did better than Bush was lower his golf handicap and take expensive vacations.

You really don't understand leadership at all.

When G.W. Bush left office there were 133,631,000 employed, not 146 million. As of July, there were 139,004,000 employed. The difference is 5.4 million job gains.

fredgraph.png
 
When G.W. Bush left office there were 133,631,000 employed, not 146 million. As of July, there were 139,004,000 employed. The difference is 5.4 million job gains.

fredgraph.png

Here are the employment numbers from BLS

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 1980 to 2014

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

2007 146028 146057 146320 145586 145903 146063 145905 145682 146244 145946 146595 146273
2008 146378 146156 146086 146132 145908 145737 145532 145203 145076 144802 144100 143369
2009 142152 141640 140707 140656 140248 140009 139901 139492 138818 138432 138659 138013
2010 138451 138599 138752 139309 139247 139148 139179 139427 139393 139111 139030 139266
2011 139287 139422 139655 139622 139653 139409 139524 139904 140154 140335 140747 140836
2012 141677 141943 142079 141963 142257 142432 142272 142204 142947 143369 143233 143212
2013 143384 143464 143393 143676 143919 144075 144285 144179 144270 143485 144443 144586
2014 145224 145266 145742 145669 145814 146221 146352

So stop making a fool of yourself.
 
Here are the employment numbers from BLS



So stop making a fool of yourself.
Actually, it is you who are making a fool of yourself because you are displaying to all that you don't know the difference between all the different measures. What you are measuring is "Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over" which includes people, including family members, working on farms. What is typically used is the nonfarm employment figures, which is what I used.

Comparing the current number to 2007, before Obama became president, is not the comparison usually made if one wants to honestly measure the success of any administration. One looks at the jobs created during their term -- not starting midway in the previous president's term.
 
Actually, it is you who are making a fool of yourself because you are displaying to all that you don't know the difference between all the different measures. What you are measuring is "Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over" which includes people, including family members, working on farms. What is typically used is the nonfarm employment figures, which is what I used.

Comparing the current number to 2007, before Obama became president, is not the comparison usually made if one wants to honestly measure the success of any administration. One looks at the jobs created during their term -- not starting midway in the previous president's term.

Of course it makes no sense to you because you are a liberal and it doesn't show the true performance of Obama. Why does it make sense to a liberal that we have the same number of people working today that we had when the recession began and it only cost us 7 trillion to get there? You don't seem able to comprehend reality. We had population growth, we had millions of Americans turning 16, we have 7.5 million full time part time workers today that wanted full time jobs. We have averaged over a million discouraged workers a month since Obama took office more than double anything Bush had.

As for the employment, Obama has nothing whatsoever to do with state employment although his economy has required states to cut their payrolls but that hasn't affected the Federal Govt. whose employment has grown. You simply want to buy the rhetoric which therefore makes it true. Sorry but to register the actual numbers employed in this country you have to look at all people. Now I understand that you prefer selected numbers because you are desperate to justify your support. There is nothing you can post that would justify that support today. You bought the rhetoric, you gave it a shot, you lost

If you want to truly be honest, why did you vote for Obama if not to recover from the recession and grow employment back past pre recession numbers? He said he had the answers, you bought the rhetoric and now the results don't support that vote yet you still cannot admit you were wrong.
 
While you claim there is an "attack" on coal, that's just a way of saying you don't like coal regulations
, which in the case of coal, are sensible. Coal emissions are not only the worst greenhouse emissions but are highly carcinogenic. But, in any case,
the biggest enemy of coal is the free market. Coal is finding it just can't compete with other fuels.
Study: Most Coal-Fired Power Plants Can't Compete Against Natural Gas | WFPL

How many coal-fired energy plants had to close because of Obama's regulations?

Obama's regulations were in no way concerned for the free-market, and the coal industry's demise is intentional.

Furthermore, the free-market has no connection whatsoever to Obama's solar/wind enchantment and it's costing us, not him ... so far.
 
How many coal-fired energy plants had to close because of Obama's regulations?

Obama's regulations were in no way concerned for the free-market, and the coal industry's demise is intentional.

Furthermore, the free-market has no connection whatsoever to Obama's solar/wind enchantment and it's costing us, not him ... so far.

Last I checked West Virginia was an Obama state, doesn't look to be the case. Wonder where the disconnect is between MTAtech and the people of W. Va.

Hawaiians, D.C. Residents Most Approving of Obama in 2013
 
How many coal-fired energy plants had to close because of Obama's regulations?
Sorry, I am not your research assistant. If you are asserting that regulations added by the Obama Administration was causal to closing of coal-fired electric plants, the onus is upon you, not me, to prove it.

Obama's regulations were in no way concerned for the free-market, and the coal industry's demise is intentional.
That is your opinion, based solely on, um, your opinion. However, the articles that I linked said otherwise, namely, that competition from natural gas is causing a free-market decision against coal.

Furthermore, the free-market has no connection whatsoever to Obama's solar/wind enchantment and it's costing us, not him ... so far.
Don't you get tired of being proven wrong?

From the Wall Street Journal:
The U.S. is on pace to install as much solar power this year [2012] as it did in this century's entire first decade: at least 2,500 megawatts, the equivalent of more than two nuclear-power plants. The U.S. added about 742 megawatts of solar capacity in the second quarter, or enough to power about 150,000 homes, the Solar Energy Industries Association said in a report...

The price gap with traditional power sources is shrinking fast. When President Jimmy Carter installed a solar-powered water-heating system at the White House in the late 1970s, solar panels cost about $15 per watt of electricity generated, or about $50 in current dollars, according to GTM Research, a consulting firm that co-wrote the new report. Now they average about 84 cents a watt. The decline suggests that solar power could play a significant role in U.S. power generation...

MK-BX059_solar__NS_20120909175707.jpg
I really have to shake my head at the distorted mind-set that paints solar as bad and coal as good.
 
Sorry, I am not your research assistant. If you are asserting that regulations added by the Obama Administration was causal to closing of coal-fired electric plants, the onus is upon you, not me, to prove it.

That is your opinion, based solely on, um, your opinion. However, the articles that I linked said otherwise, namely, that competition from natural gas is causing a free-market decision against coal.


Don't you get tired of being proven wrong?

From the Wall Street Journal:

I really have to shake my head at the distorted mind-set that paints solar as bad and coal as good.

How is our investment in Solyndra working out for you? How many billions has been wasted by the Federal Govt. trying to create what the private sector doesn't want? Why do you think the JAR for Obama is 25% in West Virginia?
 
Last I checked West Virginia was an Obama state, doesn't look to be the case. Wonder where the disconnect is between MTAtech and the people of W. Va.

Hawaiians, D.C. Residents Most Approving of Obama in 2013

Well, I guess you should check again. West Virginia went for Romney. But what you are really saying is that policy for the entire nation should be dictated by which states will vote for a particular political party. Sorry, that's not sensible governance. It is in both the national and world's best interest to reduce emissions that coal produces more than any other fuel.
 
Last I checked West Virginia was an Obama state, doesn't look to be the case. Wonder where
the disconnect is between MTAtech and the people of W. Va.
Hawaiians, D.C. Residents Most Approving of Obama in 2013
That's too limiting a disconnect.
There's something disturbing about the willingness to post the garbage he's been trying to pass off as fact.
Folks like that are either too deep in the tank to care about the truth or too deep in the tank that they believe it.
The one yesterday about giving Obama credit for oil exploration despite his efforts to kill it spoke volumes.

I think I'm done with him upstairs.
 
Well, I guess you should check again. West Virginia went for Romney. But what you are really saying is that policy for the entire nation should be dictated by which states will vote for a particular political party. Sorry, that's not sensible governance. It is in both the national and world's best interest to reduce emissions that coal produces more than any other fuel.

West Va. have been a blue state which Obama lost because of his attacks on the coal industry. West Virginia is a large coal producing state. Guess that reality escapes you. The policy of this country should be based upon what is in the best interest of the country and a policy that creates actual full time private sector jobs. nothing Obama has implemented promotes private sector full time jobs. Hope you are getting paid well by the Obama Administration because much of the country isn't
 
Sorry, I am not your research assistant. If you are asserting that regulations added by the Obama Administration was causal to closing of coal-fired electric plants, the onus is upon you, not me, to prove it.

That is your opinion, based solely on, um, your opinion. However, the articles that I linked said otherwise, namely, that competition from natural gas is causing a free-market decision against coal.


Don't you get tired of being proven wrong?

From the Wall Street Journal:

I really have to shake my head at the distorted mind-set that paints solar as bad and coal as good.


obama lightsquared solyndra fast frame 1.jpg
obama lightsquared solyndra fast frame 2.jpg
obama lightsquared solyndra fast frame 3.jpg
 
West Va. have been a blue state which Obama lost because of his attacks on the coal industry. West Virginia is a large coal producing state. Guess that reality escapes you. The policy of this country should be based upon what is in the best interest of the country and a policy that creates actual full time private sector jobs. nothing Obama has implemented promotes private sector full time jobs. Hope you are getting paid well by the Obama Administration because much of the country isn't
Either you just make this stuff up as you go along or reality escapes YOU. Where do you get the notion that West Virginia is a blue state? West Virgina was won by Romney in 2012; McCain in 2008; Bush won it in 2004 and 2000. One has to go back to 1996 to see a Democratic win it in a presidential election. In other words, no Democratic Presidential candidate won West Virginia in 16 years. To assert that Obama lost it in 2012 due to "his attacks on the coal industry," is mere projection.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom