• 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!

Is Obama a good president?[W:577]

Is Obama a good president?


  • Total voters
    176
Will another ideological president be able to dismantle all of BO's ideological social initiatives?
 
I think many Americans are tired of both parties.
If I may presume, tired of all the lying and ideology... IMO, ideology, mainly.
 
well, conservatives (not all republicans, not me, at least) have convinced themselves that reagan was a great president, so anything is possible with them.
fify.

And conservatives, as a group, have never been influential in national elections, even though they scream pretty loud with their radio/TV broadcasts.
 
Last edited:
If I may presume, tired of all the lying and ideology... IMO, ideology, mainly.

Yes, both of those things among others, like wasteful spending, of which both parties are guilty. I can't really say which bothers me the most.
 
You must have missed the part in the article showing that spending under Obama's budget is actually going down. Why am I not surprised? Anything that conflicts with RW poutrage gets ignored :roll:

The debt is increasing daily. If that's the case, how is spending going down? "If you exclude health care costs in ten years it will blah blah blah".
 
Reagan is another ideological president that replaced another ideological president: Jimmy Carter, who replaced another president: Tricky Dick Nixon.

The moral of this story? How the current administration performs greatly determines if the same political party stays in the White House, or is sent packing.

Ideologies are not in themselves a bad thing, if they involve the personal freedom of the individual. Gerald Ford was in that mix also.
 
I could agree with this, though for reasons I'll never understood, Reagan is seen as a god by many, despite being thoroughly mediocre.

Yes, the collapse of communism disappointed a great many people.
 
And it did. Though I don't think they believed him. Many just overlooked his record and clung to business acumen. Of course, the country isn't really a business. But few really understand that.

Romney was far right??? LOL!
 
Ideologies are not in themselves a bad thing, if they involve the personal freedom of the individual. Gerald Ford was in that mix also.

They are when they are pretty much forced upon others.
 
They are when they are pretty much forced upon others.

Right, but if the freedom of the individual comes first, within the confines of common law, then those ideologies cannot succeed. However people are easily led into these ideologies where the State took precedence over the individual and that's when the serious problems begin. The Founding Fathers in the US recognized this tendency, as have many others, but the lesson always needs to be re-learned.
 
Ideologies are not in themselves a bad thing, if they involve the personal freedom of the individual. Gerald Ford was in that mix also.
Most ideologues are not patriots (lovers of America). They are lovers of their ideology.
 
Yes, both of those things among others, like wasteful spending, of which both parties are guilty. I can't really say which bothers me the most.
Wasteful spending? Christ, (not profanity) are you a closet Libertarian - a tea partier?
 
You must have missed the part in the article showing that spending under Obama's budget is actually going down. Why am I not surprised? Anything that conflicts with RW poutrage gets ignored :roll:
What a coincidence, PPACA causes the quality of health care insurance and health care to go down, as well... Hum...
 
I could agree with this, though for reasons I'll never understood, Reagan is seen as a god by many, despite being thoroughly mediocre.

We had an amazing run of presidents beginning with WWII and immediately after with FDR, Truman, IKE and JFK, historian's rank them as 2,7,8,11 in order. LBJ probably would have made the top 10 if it were not for Vietnam. As it is he is 14. Then the next three, Nixon, Ford and Carter, 32, 26, 27. Nixon would have been up there with IKE, JFK and the rest without Watergate, think of what he did, Opened up Red China, ended Vietnam, gave us the EPA, the Endangered Species ACT, OSHA, got detente back on track, funds for education and more.

Reagan comes in at 17, so for those born after 1960 he is probably the best president they knew, him or Clinton. Bush I is number 22, Clinton 20 although I suspect he will rise a notch or two. then we have Bush II and Obama. So if one would call average 16-25 we have had average or below average presidents since LBJ and Reagan at 17 is the best average president we have had since LBJ.

It probably says something in how we choose our presidents if the best we can do is get 3 average presidents, Reagan, Clinton and Bush I with the rest being below average since LBJ. So with our track record is it any wonder some consider Reagan a god?
 
There are others who some might consider worse. Be it on things they did OR media. You hear a lot about how Jimmy Carter was a bad President. Good man, just ineffective.

As for Bill Clinton, you don't hear it a lot that he let bin Laden go and told the people who caught him that we don't want him, and to let him go - even though it was known that he tried to again attack failed targets.

Lyndon Johnson - potential conspirator behind the assassination of Kennedy - Johnson was under some kind of investigation and Kennedy was likely going to replace Johnson on the 1964 ticket - but the truth behind that has mixed answers.

Herbert Hoover - the Great Depression lasted during his entire 4 year Presidency.

And every President before Lincoln who supported slavery. Andrew Johnson supported it too, but even more-so supported the Union.

personally , Jimmy carter was a far bigger asshole than Obama. Ask any member of the 1980 Olympic team about the threats and bullying that turd engaged in towards the team members. I have met dozens of secret service agents who did presidential details. phony asshole is the most common comment about Carter. And this wasn't political. Many of these same guys detested Ron Reagan Jr and his mother. hillary Clinton, however, might have been the least popular presidential family member in recent years. BTW many of the guys who detested Carter and Hillary Clinton liked Bill
 
Yes, the collapse of communism disappointed a great many people.
Nonsense. Undue credit given to a man who had little to do with the USSR collapse.

The Collapse of the Soviet Union and Ronald Reagan
Reagan’s conviction that the Soviet Union was both a dangerous military power and a collapsing economic system derived not from any deep knowledge of the Soviet Union. Yet he proved to be the proverbial right man in the right place at the right time. By whatever means he arrived at his views regarding the Soviet Union, he drew from them policy directions that were devastatingly effective in undermining the rotten Soviet edifice. Because of the high oil prices of the 1970s the Soviet leadership avoided serious economic reforms, such as those that saved Deng Xiaoping’s China. Instead, it relied on oil revenues as a means of keeping its decrepit economy going. By the early 1980s the Soviet Union was becoming a hollow shell, with an unreformed and increasingly backward industrial base producing outmoded pre-computer armaments. Thus it was highly vulnerable to the pressures that the Reagan administration was planning.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" />

...contrary to Mr. Jones’ statement, "Reagan had much to do with it." One major thought that Mr. Jones and many others overlook is the thought that the USSR truly began to collapse with Nikita K’s famous “secret speech” which denounced Stalin back in the 50s.

Reagan caused the Soviet Union's collapse is a myth sold by the RW agenda.
 
Oh, well THAT settles it. :lamo

No, but it should make you think. Of course, it probably feels better to worship at Ronnie's feet like your handlers and propagandists want.
 
No, but it should make you think. Of course, it probably feels better to worship at Ronnie's feet like your handlers and propagandists want.

:lamo

As if I'm not extremely well-conversant with the era and subject matter. Some of us are actually educated, calamity.
 
:lamo

As if I'm not extremely well-conversant with the era and subject matter. Some of us are actually educated, calamity.

Obviously not enough to look past the "Ronnie single handily destroyed the USSR" propaganda. :roll:
 
Obviously not enough to look past the "Ronnie single handily destroyed the USSR" propaganda. :roll:

Enough to understand the strawman you offer here. Maybe someday you will, too.
 
Wasteful spending? Christ, (not profanity) are you a closet Libertarian - a tea partier?

Libertarians are the only ones concerned about wasteful spending? I think not. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom