• 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
TurtleDude said:
I am curious. You claim to be a libertarian. what libertarian policies do you think Obama advances that romney would not have?
Click to expand...

Very few to be honest. I didn't vote for either, but Obama was ultimately better than Romney.

And it's not what he would promote, it's what he wouldn't.

Obama wouldn't be trying to make marriage between a man and a woman. Obama wouldn't be trying to instigate a war with Iran. Ironically he did try to instigate a war in Syria but had Romney been in charge we'd be at war with Syria and Iran. Obama lied when he claimed he wouldn't be enforcing drug laws as harshly. Obama wouldn't be promoting legal avenues to make marriage between a man and a woman, which has neither a traditional or Constitutional basis.

And despite Obama being a Dem I think his spending is actually less than what it would be if Romney were in charge.
 
Rocketman said:
you stated the next democrat after carter, whcih was bull****, your argument stinks
Click to expand...

Everyone knows the next pres after Carter was Clinton, whom I'm sure you believed couldn't possibly be worse than Carter. Then Obama came along and wow a new worst president ever.:roll:
 
reinoe said:
Very few to be honest. I didn't vote for either, but Obama was ultimately better than Romney.

And it's not what he would promote, it's what he wouldn't.

Obama wouldn't be trying to make marriage between a man and a woman. Obama wouldn't be trying to instigate a war with Iran. Ironically he did try to instigate a war in Syria but had Romney been in charge we'd be at war with Syria and Iran. Obama lied when he claimed he wouldn't be enforcing drug laws as harshly. Obama wouldn't be promoting legal avenues to make marriage between a man and a woman, which has neither a traditional or Constitutional basis.

And despite Obama being a Dem I think his spending is actually less than what it would be if Romney were in charge.
Click to expand...

I don't rate gay marriage a real high priority for liberty.

I rate financial freedom and clearly stated constitutional rights -such as the second amendment to be much higher

and I think Obamacare is an abomination and a rape of the tenth amendment. His justices are far more anti freedom than the people we probably would have got from Romney (such as Peter keisler on the DC Court of Appeals)
 
TurtleDude said:
that makes no sense
Click to expand...

No it doesn't, and it doesn't when you make broad statements based on nothing but your knee-jerk right-wing groupspeak propaganda either. 'Just cuz I say so' works for the right so I thought I'd try it on for size.
Tell you the truth, it doesn't fit. You can have it back.
 
Perotista said:
This I think is an interesting question. I do not think, at least for me that one can't help but compare this president with other presidents. But one also must realize each presidency is unique, each faces different situations and the situations that have been with us a long time also changes. So it is both, you judge on how the current president handles events and situations that were left for him and how he faces new events and issues that arise during his term.

One also has to remember the issues that are important to me may not be to someone else and vice versa. No two people will view any one president in the same light. With me I have quite a lot of presidents to compare him to as I can remember back to Eisenhower and yet each one is unique. So this president does get compared to other presidents by me in a subtle way but more so on the job he has done so far. One also has to realize he still has 3 years left. So how I or someone sees or rates this president today may change over the next three years or not.

I am sure Democrats look at President Obama in an entirely different light than do Republicans. To a lot of these party die hards it is the R and the D that matters, not the name of the president or what he has done or is doing, whether he has been good for the country as a whole or bad for it. For me it may boil down to how this president handles the issues that are important to me and how his presidency so far has effect this country.

But I do not see how anyone could rate or determine or judge any president in a vacuum. There is just too many outside factors that have to be taken into consideration.
Click to expand...
It does boil down to how this president handles the issues that are important to "me" and how his presidency so far has effected this country. Add to that a few other factors like who the other options were and how they would have handled those situations. Then, compare that to how other presidents have done in similar circumstances.

Obama's biggest plus is riding out the "Great Recession" and doing what it took to keep it from becoming a depression. I think we were closer to disaster than the anti-Obamites here are willing to admit. Has employment rebounded quickly no. But, that is not a bad thing because too rapid of a change in employment usually triggers inflation. The recovery has been slow and steady.

Obama's biggest minus is not finding a way to deal with the underclass. People are not being lifted up, education and employability of the bottom rungs are getting worse. This is a huge problem, and Obama was perfectly positioned to create strategies to achieve some hope and change in that area.

Inbetween, we have a lot of this plus and minus stuff going on. In my mind they wash each other out. Hence, I judge him to be average.
 
Grand Mal said:
No it doesn't, and it doesn't when you make broad statements based on nothing but your knee-jerk right-wing groupspeak propaganda either. 'Just cuz I say so' works for the right so I thought I'd try it on for size.
Tell you the truth, it doesn't fit. You can have it back.
Click to expand...

Yawn, the Obama love is strong Could you even vote in US elections? I thought you said you were Canadian. SO why so enamored with the failure in chief?
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't rate gay marriage a real high priority for liberty.

I rate financial freedom and clearly stated constitutional rights -such as the second amendment to be much higher
Click to expand...
Holding a pea shooter is a more important liberty than two people who love each other having a right to marry?

Sheesh. No wonder I left the GOP

and I think Obamacare is an abomination and a rape of the tenth amendment. His justices are far more anti freedom than the people we probably would have got from Romney (such as Peter keisler on the DC Court of Appeals)
Click to expand...
I'm surprised Roberts let it fly--not so much on tenth amendment grounds though. So, yes on the first part. But, no on the anti-freedom rant.
 
loader said:
Bin Laden's body was drowned in the sea, and two weeks later the team marins , participants in this operation, suddenly dies ... A little weird, huh?
Click to expand...
Barack's Birth Certificate looks funny too. Your point?
 
calamity said:
Holding a pea shooter is a more important liberty than two people who love each other having a right to marry?

Sheesh. No wonder I left the GOP


I'm surprised Roberts let it fly--not so much on tenth amendment grounds though. So, yes on the first part. But, no on the anti-freedom rant.
Click to expand...

like it or not gays have the same objective right as others to marry in most states. that is a state issue not a constitutional issue. Marriage is not a "right" created or recognized by the constitution. I support gay marriage but I won't support someone who wants to create that constitutional right while ignoring rights that are clearly recognized by the constitution.
 
reinoe said:
Everyone knows the next pres after Carter was Clinton, whom I'm sure you believed couldn't possibly be worse than Carter. Then Obama came along and wow a new worst president ever.:roll:
Click to expand...

Evidently you didn't think so when you made your original statement. Carter sucked and now Obama sucks even worse. I don't blame you though, if I had voted for that idiot I wouldn't want to admit it to anyone either.
 
calamity said:
It does boil down to how this president handles the issues that are important to "me" and how his presidency so far has effected this country. Add to that a few other factors like who the other options were and how they would have handled those situations. Then, compare that to how other presidents have done in similar circumstances.

Obama's biggest plus is riding out the "Great Recession" and doing what it took to keep it from becoming a depression. I think we were closer to disaster than the anti-Obamites here are willing to admit. Has employment rebounded quickly no. But, that is not a bad thing because too rapid of a change in employment usually triggers inflation. The recovery has been slow and steady.

Obama's biggest minus is not finding a way to deal with the underclass. People are not being lifted up, education and employability of the bottom rungs are getting worse. This is a huge problem, and Obama was perfectly positioned to create strategies to achieve some hope and change in that area.

Inbetween, we have a lot of this plus and minus stuff going on. In my mind they wash each other out. Hence, I judge him to be average.
Click to expand...

Average is what I voted too. But I don't play the what if game like if McCain had won or if Romney had won. They didn't and one never knows what they would have done as president or turned out to be better or worse. It is all speculation, Obama promised quite a lot of things back in 2008 that I took with a grain of salt, mainly because until the weight of the responsibility of the presidency is on your shoulders, what you say as a senator or candidate is theory and without consequences. Besides as a candidate one doesn't have the inside knowledge that the sitting president has and that knowledge can change drastically what one does when he sits in the Oval Office and not what one thought he would do.

I think if one would be able to take off their dark red or blue colored glasses, stuff cotton in their ears to block out all the rhetoric and just look at how a president governs one wouldn't see all that much difference between this current president and the president who just preceded him. I personally would rate both as a bit below Average. But that would be with an asterisk next to Obama's name as he still has three years to go to either move up or down or stay the same.

As of today if I had to rate these last two presidents with the presidents I have experienced and known, from Eisenhower on I can guarantee neither would be in my top 6.
 
TurtleDude said:
like it or not gays have the same objective right as others to marry in most states. that is a state issue not a constitutional issue. Marriage is not a "right" created or recognized by the constitution. I support gay marriage but I won't support someone who wants to create that constitutional right while ignoring rights that are clearly recognized by the constitution.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that if not for the little column in the federal tax table called "Married filing jointly"
 
Perotista said:
Average is what I voted too. But I don't play the what if game like if McCain had won or if Romney had won. They didn't and one never knows what they would have done as president or turned out to be better or worse. It is all speculation, Obama promised quite a lot of things back in 2008 that I took with a grain of salt, mainly because until the weight of the responsibility of the presidency is on your shoulders, what you say as a senator or candidate is theory and without consequences. Besides as a candidate one doesn't have the inside knowledge that the sitting president has and that knowledge can change drastically what one does when he sits in the Oval Office and not what one thought he would do.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. We really do not have any way of knowing what McCain or Romney would have done if sitting in the oval office. We (the nation) voted for Obama, and he should be judged against presidents, not candidates.

I think if one would be able to take off their dark red or blue colored glasses, stuff cotton in their ears to block out all the rhetoric and just look at how a president governs one wouldn't see all that much difference between this current president and the president who just preceded him. I personally would rate both as a bit below Average. But that would be with an asterisk next to Obama's name as he still has three years to go to either move up or down or stay the same.

As of today if I had to rate these last two presidents with the presidents I have experienced and known, from Eisenhower on I can guarantee neither would be in my top 6.
Click to expand...
We probably do not agree here. Ike was good, as was Clinton. Nixon, both Bushes and Carter were terrible. Reagan and Obama were about the same. Kennedy...:shrug: He was a bit like Obama. LBJ--like Nixon and Carter, at the bottom rung of the last 50 years.
 
TurtleDude said:
Yawn, the Obama love is strong Could you even vote in US elections? I thought you said you were Canadian. SO why so enamored with the failure in chief?
Click to expand...

There ya go again, 'just cuz I say so'. I don't have any Obama love. You just made that up. I consider him a weak President but still better than the Republican alternatives. If you're Republican you need to acknowledge your share of the blame.
Yeah, I'm Canadian and being Canadian I'd rather see a Republican administration. Democrats, historically, have always been more isolationist, more protectionist and more warlike. But honestly, if the Repubs have been putting their best forward they're damn near bankrupt.
 
calamity said:
Barack's Birth Certificate looks funny too. Your point?
Click to expand...
Barack's mother was American.
And wherever he was born and where he lived, if he has not renounced U.S. citizenship, he is American citizen. To my great regret.
 
Rocketman said:
Evidently you didn't think so when you made your original statement. Carter sucked and now Obama sucks even worse. I don't blame you though, if I had voted for that idiot I wouldn't want to admit it to anyone either.
Click to expand...

Except I never voted for Obama, who is now teh worst president ever even though his presidency isn't even over yet.

Also I'm mocking you and your ridiculous claims by saying every Dem president is teh worst president ever.
You're becoming unhinged and it's hilarious!
 
Last edited:
Damn. 62 pages and 131 No with only 19 Yes.

There is no arena in the world in which that would not be considered a landslide. An epic landslide of negative opinions of Obama. To put that in clear perspective, every eight or nine pages, no more, somebody came along and voted "Yes."

The question is Why? Obama's not going to get any better.
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
Sour Grapes is why you Conservatives think he is a bad president. He beat your candidates twice, by quite a bit, IIRC.

Not bad for an average president.

BTW: THe second term is your fault.
It took real effort to lose to Obama the second time
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...

You're clearly referring to the Administration's successful effort to serially lie about the impact of Obamacare before the election ... and that's a good point.
 
calamity said:
Fair enough. We really do not have any way of knowing what McCain or Romney would have done if sitting in the oval office. We (the nation) voted for Obama, and he should be judged against presidents, not candidates.


We probably do not agree here. Ike was good, as was Clinton. Nixon, both Bushes and Carter were terrible. Reagan and Obama were about the same. Kennedy...:shrug: He was a bit like Obama. LBJ--like Nixon and Carter, at the bottom rung of the last 50 years.
Click to expand...

No we don't agree on how we would rank them and that is okay as that is a personal thing. As I said views on issues vary and what is important to one isn't to another. IKE would be my number one if I was rating presidents from him forward. JFK has always been my number two, but I think having lived through his assassination and Camelot, that I rate him more on potential than what he actually did. I think up and until that day in Dallas, most Americans trusted their government and most Americans would have said the American dream is alive and well, we have one heck of a bright future. After Dallas all that changed.

Clinton was be number three and Reagan four. For some reason both of these guy could connect with the people and most Americans like them regardless of what scandal they were in. Both I would say both were uniters. What I didn't like about Reagan was he talked liked a fiscal conservative and then spent like there was no tomorrow. Most people believed the rhetoric and not their eyes. Reagan and the balanced budget amendment seem to me as him say, please stop me from spending more as I can't stop myself.

To me both LBJ and Nixon are ahead of Obama and Bush II. I think without Vietnam LBJ would have been ranked by historians as a near great president up there with Truman, Jefferson and Teddy Roosevelt. Nixon without Watergate, well look at what he did, He opened up Red China, I do not think any other president could have done that. He gave us the EPA, OSHA, the Endangered species Act, funds for education, revenue sharing, detente, and much more. For the life of me, this man governed like a liberal and perhaps was the most liberal president since FDR and hence, yet most people still call him a conservative. Why? Nixon was also all for Affirmative Action and did quite a lot on that scene too. Perhaps most people just can't get past the R and the D when it comes to labeling.

Both of us are pretty close to each other, but there are differences and I think that is because we place different emphasis on different things.
Just for the heck of it, here is mine from IKE to Obama and remember Obama is more of an incomplete and can rise and fall depending on what happens over the last three years of his presidency.
1. Eisenhower
2. JFK
3. Clinton
4. Reagan
5. LBJ
6. Bush I
7. Nixon
8. Bush II
9. Obama
10. Carter
11. Ford

I would say Obama and Bush II are basically tied at this point for me. I think outside Libya when Obama refused to go to congress, I really like his foreign policy so far. Domestically, for me he hasn't been that hot.
 
calamity said:
So, you got nothing to judge him by but your imagination. Nice.
Click to expand...

I judge him on his performance, which quite frankly stinks.
 
calamity said:
The race card is in your hand, Bud. You're the one who can't make it through an Obama thread without belittling his law degree by arguing that the only reason he got into Harvard is his race.
Click to expand...

If I could like this post a thousand times, I would. Turtle's obsession with Obama's AA status is both obnoxious and repulsive.
 
Ray410 said:
Damn. 62 pages and 131 No with only 19 Yes.

There is no arena in the world in which that would not be considered a landslide. An epic landslide of negative opinions of Obama. To put that in clear perspective, every eight or nine pages, no more, somebody came along and voted "Yes."

The question is Why? Obama's not going to get any better.
Click to expand...

If you think this poll is representative of anything except the feelings of a handful of DP posters, You Fail Statistics Forever.
 
Kobie said:
If I could like this post a thousand times, I would. Turtle's obsession with Obama's AA status is both obnoxious and repulsive.
Click to expand...

what is obsessive is how upset the Obama fan boys get when I point out the obvious.
 
Kobie said:
If you think this poll is representative of anything except the feelings of a handful of DP posters, You Fail Statistics Forever.
Click to expand...

Obama's been upside down in presidential approval since October '13. ( rassmussen.com ) The poll in question represents DP. Any poll however is representative of a handful of people and when polls are positive, Obama supporters are the first to use them to their benefit and when negative are the first to pan them. Reality is, and I think it's generally accepted, Obama didn't have a very good 2013.
 
Kobie said:
If I could like this post a thousand times, I would. Turtle's obsession with Obama's AA status is both obnoxious and repulsive.
Click to expand...

Why? It seems central to Obama's getting where he got today.

"He [Harry Reid] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one".

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." --Joe Biden on Barack Obama

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman of any color, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.” Geraldine Ferraro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom