• 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!

Where is President Obama's greatest weakness?

Where is President Obama's greatest weakness?

  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .
Juanita said:
If you want lies, spin and propaganda, watch Fox News....
Click to expand...

:roll:

.........or MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, ...................
 
I disagree that Obama is not intellegent, he has plenty of education and fully understands what is going on. What Obama lacks, as you also noted, is executive experience (if that is what you meant by being competent) - the ability to organize the efforts of others to meet a simply stated goal. Using PPACA as an example, even though it is often called ObamaCare, it is not at all what Obama would like; other than adding much more gov't control over the existing mess it does not replace anything (not even any existing gov't programs like Medicare, Medicaid or the VA medical system).


Edit: This is a reply to post #10, I meant to use reply with quote.
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
I disagree that Obama is not intellegent, he has plenty of education and fully understands what is going on. What Obama lacks, as you also noted, is executive experience (if that is what you meant by being competent) - the ability to organize the efforts of others to meet a simply stated goal. Using PPACA as an example, even though it is often called ObamaCare, it is not at all what Obama would like; other than adding much more gov't control over the existing mess it does not replace anything (not even any existing gov't programs like Medicare, Medicaid or the VA medical system).

Edit: This is a reply to post #10, I meant to use reply with quote.
Click to expand...

Firstly, being well educated is not necessarily a sign of intelligence - it is a sign of being able to master the art of performing for academics in the manner in which they wish to be stroked.

Secondly, I would challenge greatly that Obama fully understands what's going on. He is clueless on the economy, clueless on foreign affairs, and clueless on the art of the possible in politics. The man has such an over inflated opinion of himself that he is incapable of listening to those who might actually know something that could help him govern.

Thirdly, not only does he lack executive experience, he more importantly lacks executive expertise. It's like turning over a company you worked to create and build all you life to your spoiled only child - he's entitled, but he hasn't the foggiest idea how to actually run the place and in no time it falls off a cliff. You might have had more success electing one of the Kardashians - equally as high profile, yet experienced in running a successful business and making things happen. And to think, the man is in his early 50s and your country is going to be paying through the nose the better part of another 50 years to keep him safe and cater to him because he's sure to demand his perks.

Finally, most importantly by competence, I meant he's not a leader. He moves no one to his goals or policy positions. On the foreign relations files, can anyone name even one success the man has lead from start to finish with accomplishment? At home, what domestic policy successes does he have? You can say Obamacare, but in truth that is the brainchild of the Democrat Congress, with precious little help or leadership from Obama but he rushed in at the end when the deal was done to claim ownership.

You just have to look at the two main issues that arose at the start of his second term - gun control and immigration reform - there was a push in the country, a grassroots push, to perhaps do something significant about access to guns and the types of guns and ammunition available, however, Obama's involvement cratered the support because he doesn't know how to work a compromise, to lead by the power of his convictions, to convince people of the rightness of his goals. Likewise, with immigration reform - the Senate was working behind the scenes on a reform package and having bipartisan success and were about to announce their outline of a plan and Obama, ever the roadblock, had to have a White House announcement on the subject the day before the Senate announcement, and that set the process back months and likely killed it.

The man holds the highest office in America, and for that matter the world, and that office is to be respected. But the man holding that position is a disgrace to that office, in my view, and it does no good to brush off his failures - they are serious and they have set back your country's recovery and prosperity by many years if not decades.
 
His endrorcine system most likely.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Firstly, being well educated is not necessarily a sign of intelligence - it is a sign of being able to master the art of performing for academics in the manner in which they wish to be stroked.

Secondly, I would challenge greatly that Obama fully understands what's going on. He is clueless on the economy, clueless on foreign affairs, and clueless on the art of the possible in politics. The man has such an over inflated opinion of himself that he is incapable of listening to those who might actually know something that could help him govern.

Thirdly, not only does he lack executive experience, he more importantly lacks executive expertise. It's like turning over a company you worked to create and build all you life to your spoiled only child - he's entitled, but he hasn't the foggiest idea how to actually run the place and in no time it falls off a cliff. You might have had more success electing one of the Kardashians - equally as high profile, yet experienced in running a successful business and making things happen. And to think, the man is in his early 50s and your country is going to be paying through the nose the better part of another 50 years to keep him safe and cater to him because he's sure to demand his perks.

Finally, most importantly by competence, I meant he's not a leader. He moves no one to his goals or policy positions. On the foreign relations files, can anyone name even one success the man has lead from start to finish with accomplishment? At home, what domestic policy successes does he have? You can say Obamacare, but in truth that is the brainchild of the Democrat Congress, with precious little help or leadership from Obama but he rushed in at the end when the deal was done to claim ownership.

You just have to look at the two main issues that arose at the start of his second term - gun control and immigration reform - there was a push in the country, a grassroots push, to perhaps do something significant about access to guns and the types of guns and ammunition available, however, Obama's involvement cratered the support because he doesn't know how to work a compromise, to lead by the power of his convictions, to convince people of the rightness of his goals. Likewise, with immigration reform - the Senate was working behind the scenes on a reform package and having bipartisan success and were about to announce their outline of a plan and Obama, ever the roadblock, had to have a White House announcement on the subject the day before the Senate announcement, and that set the process back months and likely killed it.

The man holds the highest office in America, and for that matter the world, and that office is to be respected. But the man holding that position is a disgrace to that office, in my view, and it does no good to brush off his failures - they are serious and they have set back your country's recovery and prosperity by many years if not decades.
Click to expand...

I wholey agree that Obama is a poor leader, simply a good speaker that plays up (panders to?) enough folks to get elected. Obama basically identifies his oppostiion as "enemies", declares himself a savior and then turns his attention to slay the next dragon (that he creates). Obama is a big gov't liberal that firmly believes in income redistribution (social justice?) yet lacks any means of making that happen - congress critters, of both parties, depend heavily on campaign cash and will never cease to pander to those that provide it. As long as the regulated are needed to fund the regulators, real change will not occur in DC no matter who resides in the White House.

Where we disagree is that Obama does not grasp that reality. Obama knows, fully well, that his desired "big changes" are not possible without single party rule, thus his real mission is to try to make that happen. Obama is quite content to make promises, knowing full well that he can't deliver on them, but then tries to present the the cause (reason?), for that failure to deliver, because the "bad guys" (the opposition party members) are stopping him. Obama is, indeed, forever in campaign mode, but that is not indicitive of a lack of intellegence - just the lack of any clue of how to be an effective executive.
 
He's devious and he has abused the trust of the american people.
 
iacardsfan said:
Sound a little bitter there... No president EVER has gotten away with ANYTHING
Click to expand...

I'm not bitter at all. Heck, I got over that when Clinton won the second time.
 
Juanita said:
If you want lies, spin and propaganda, watch Fox News....
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah...problem is, my dear, Fox News isn't the President and Fox News isn't Obama.

You DO know this thread is about President Obama...right?
 
In the bedroom.

Oh you mean with Politics?
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I didn't find one for me up there. I almost voted Ethical/Moral/Family decline, but it seems you're talking more about "family values" stuff, which isn't what I have in mind.

My answer would be he has no respect for personal rights or for the service nature of his position.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was talking about the "family values" stuff. The boring stuff that enablers and shepherds of poverty can't stand.
 
Dooble said:
Yeah, I was talking about the "family values" stuff. The boring stuff that enablers and shepherds of poverty can't stand.
Click to expand...

How in the hell does the POTUS effect family values to the point that you think that's his greatest weakness????? I'm just baffled beyond belief.

I'd never ever ever look to the POTUS for that kind of guidance.

Besides, as far as I can tell, Obama has been a decent father and husband and in no way presents himself as NOT being family oriented.
 
Dragonfly said:
How in the hell does the POTUS effect family values to the point that you think that's his greatest weakness????? I'm just baffled beyond belief.
Click to expand...
Don't be. Family values is at the very heart of the Right. With Obama's flip-flop on the gay marriage issue, that tells me his family is more of a prop than it is anything else. If having a complete family ever became politically unacceptable for that office, you can bet he'd drop Michelle like a bad habit.

Dragonfly said:
I'd never ever ever look to the POTUS for that kind of guidance.
Click to expand...
I don't believe you.

Dragonfly said:
Besides, as far as I can tell, Obama has been a decent father and husband and in no way presents himself as NOT being family oriented.
Click to expand...
Of course he's a decent father as far as you can tell. He's a decent father as far as anyone can tell, because he has a bazillion resources to ensure that he maintains that image. The truth is, you don't know Barack Obama from Adam, so we really don't know what kind of father he is. We do know that he's a flip-flopper on the gay marriage issue, though. ;)
 
His political independence and integrity.
 
Dooble said:
Don't be. Family values is at the very heart of the Right. With Obama's flip-flop on the gay marriage issue, that tells me his family is more of a prop than it is anything else. If having a complete family ever became politically unacceptable for that office, you can bet he'd drop Michelle like a bad habit.

I don't believe you.

Of course he's a decent father as far as you can tell. He's a decent father as far as anyone can tell, because he has a bazillion resources to ensure that he maintains that image. The truth is, you don't know Barack Obama from Adam, so we really don't know what kind of father he is. We do know that he's a flip-flopper on the gay marriage issue, though. ;)
Click to expand...

Everything you've stated above deserves to be labeled 100% conspiracy theorist propaganda.

Supporting gay rights does not equal being anti-family in any way, shape, or form.

All the rest is such a gigantic load of unsupported feces it doesn't deserve a response.
 
Obama ran for president of the wrong country. Had he picked Zimbabwe, he'd fit right in.
 
MaggieD said:
Frankly, I think he's pretty much bullet-proof right now.
Click to expand...

He's sill got his right-hand girl calling the plays ...

obama - jarrett - frame 1.jpg
obama - jarrett - frame2.jpg
obama - jarrett - frame 3.jpg
obama - jarrett - frame 4.jpg
 
CanadaJohn said:
No disingenuousness on my part - I truly believe he's not a smart man.

He's what in my younger days used to be referred to as "book smart, life stupid". You don't have to agree with me, but that doesn't mean I'm any more disingenuous in my views than you are in yours.

Take care and have a good day.
Click to expand...

Compared to Bush he is a genius.

 
Last edited:
Dooble said:
Liberals are encouraged to reply ;)
Click to expand...

His greatest weakness was his belief that compromise with Republicans was plausible and desirable. Wasn't plausible because Republicans derived no political advantages from cooperating with him, but derived great advantages from opposing him. If he had agreed to do exactly what they wanted, then broken and humbled himself begging for their participation in a clear and public manner, then maybe Republicans would have gotten enough of a political advantage to justify "cooperating" with him. Short of that, it was the one thing they were determined not to do.

Wasn't desirable because that party has no meaningful contributions to make to the future of the country. Anything they are capable of is obstructive and harmful.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom