• 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!

Has Obama been a "Great" US President? (in your personal opinion)?

Has Obama been a "Great" US President? (in your personal opinion)?


  • Total voters
    80
That's just dumb. Terrorism is on the rise. I get that you love Obama, but the idea that terrorists fear him is just silly.

They do fear him. Obama finds and kills terrorists no matter where they live will violate a country's sovereignty just like he did with pakistan to do it. Bush on the other hand will let the terrorist live and use it as an excuse to attack another country just like he did with bin laden. Obama kills terrorists no matter the nationality just like he did with anwar al-awlaki.
 
They do fear him. Obama finds and kills terrorists no matter where they live will violate a country's sovereignty just like he did with pakistan to do it. Bush on the other hand will let the terrorist live and use it as an excuse to attack another country just like he did with bin laden. Obama kills terrorists no matter the nationality just like he did with anwar al-awlaki.

Right. No terrorists died while Bush was president. Put your pom-poms away and enter the real world.
 
He has been generally lousy.

But GWB was worse...he was terrible.
 
He has been generally lousy.

But GWB was worse...he was terrible.

Our standards have dropped dramatically if either man could be considered "great." Compare Obama to any truly great president in American history and he is inconsequential.
 
Bush let his guard down and let 9-11 happen and failed to catch the guy responsible. At least obama has kept us safe. More than you can say about bush. His reckless policies led to thousands of americans dying.

We got sucker punched is what happened. There were no specific threats made against anyone. A general threat against our transportation system. That's it. Our transportation system? Do you realize how large it is? Millions of miles of interstate highway, millions of miles of train track, millions of airplanes coming and going, not to mention ships in and out of our ports, tourist ships in large cities like NYC and SF. Ferries in various coastal states, bus lines going all over the country, I mean its just huge. There was no real way of knowing that our airlines were under attack. What about if we had focused on the airlines but then every ferry in the Washington State Ferry system was blown up while all of the ships were sailing in Puget Sound? Think about it. What about if we worried about the boats but buses in several states crashed, or exploded? Get it now?
 
Or how everyone who warned the country about birdbrain was right in the end

Oh c'mon, his foriegn policy has been great. Think of the mone he's saved lifting these embargoes.
 
Right. That is your hope Im sure. And that is because you cant look around now and see any good that has come from his policies.

I have no agenda to that end. I think right now it's easy to focus on the race baiting, but in years to come he will be known for his foriegn policies.
 
I have no agenda to that end. I think right now it's easy to focus on the race baiting, but in years to come he will be known for his foriegn policies.

What on Earth has he done right in foreign policy?
 
What on Earth has he done right in foreign policy?

He's stopped that silly nonsense with cuba.

commies got you from within. It was never necessary to oppress Cuba.
 
Historically, rotten tomatoes were thrown at performers to get them off the stage. GWB invaded a nation that wasn't involved in 911, in response to 911, costing thousands of American soldiers' lives -- and hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians -- put the multi-trillion dollar bill on the national credit card, and basically destabilized the entire Middle East (empowering Iran, creating ISIS, etc.). So you placing GWB above Obama and Carter is deserving of a proverbial tomato or two.

Generally, with few exceptions, it's not wise to rate the success or failure of a presidential administration until enough time has passed in order to record the long-term results of their policies. My old college professor used to say, "Give it at least 10 years."
 
Most if not virtually all US Presidents have been simply average -- meaning competent but not great.

For example, George Washington was simply average, whereas his greatness lies in the work he did during the American Revolution. Washington's greatest blunder was urging the USA to stay out of foreign affairs, and this was taken seriously for several generations afterwards, until it led to the conflagration known as WW2. Isolationism is not the answer for a superpower, yet lots of people hung onto Washington's words like they were the Gospel.

Ike was the same as Washington in that way -- an average President but one who had distinguished himself by defeating Nazi Germany. Ike's greatest blunder was not seeing Viet Nam coming as a failure for the US -- because of the situation it was unwinnable -- too far away and too corrupt internally. Ike had grown to fear communism in Russia and China, and therefore he though the USA could muscle their way in Southeast Asia as well, even AFTER FRANCE proved success there was impossible for a Western nation.

There were some incompetent Presidents who completely failed to deal with the issues of their times, and two come to mind -- Buchanan and Hoover.

Buchanan did very little in response to South Carolina's rebellion, leaving that all to Lincoln later.

Hoover did nothing to stem the poverty from the Great Depression, leaving that all to FDR later.

There were some extremely corrupt Presidents, of which Nixon comes to mind, and Ford also.

As far as who was a truly great president, as was said earlier by PASCHENDALE, it takes extraordinary circumstances to allow any President to show greatness.

No doubt Lincoln was a great President.

No doubt FDR was a great President, even though the far right fringe bad-mouth him to this day.

Both Lincoln and FDR died in office, Lincoln from an assassin's bullet, and FDR from total exhaustion and a debilitation disease. They both gave it their all.

Kennedy was an above average President who had one moment of glory during the Cuban Missile Crisis, but then he botched things with the Bay Of Pigs. Kennedy died in office too from an assassin's bullet, but this time the assassin was merely a wacko. Kennedy did not do anything particularly extraordinary to deserve to be killed -- as far as we know. Oswald was simply unstable.

LBJ did great things for civil rights, but botched Viet Nam. However he inherited Viet Nam from Ike.

I remember back in 1980 everyone thought Carter was an idiot -- now they mostly consider him to be godlike.

I remember back in 1980 everyone thought Reagan was godlike -- now they mostly consider him to have been an idiot.

The Reaganesque policies of tax cuts for the rich followed by GW Bush as well were idiotic for the US Treasury, and none of these two ever achieved any government cost cutting nor any deficit reduction as promised. They each used Keynesian policies (normally considered to be "liberal") to stimulate the US economy in order to make everybody happy -- in each case with military spending.

Other than that I would not criticize GW Bush -- I think he was just average with a little bit of Reagan dumbo for giving more tax cuts to the rich. Maybe below average in intelligence, but definitely average as a President.

GHW Bush hiked taxes on everybody, which mostly hit the middle class. He also focused his energies on Iraq, for which he thought in his own head he would be heralded as a hero, however Clinton was able to politically paint him as distracted by foreign affairs and that cost GHW his re-election. So GHW blundered, but overall his was merely a 3rd Reagan term.

Clinton was also a good speaker, and at a time when GWH was vulnerable, Clinton snatched victory away from him. Then the internet boom and the dot com boom propelled Clinton to prosperity. At the height of it all Willy whipped out his Willy and it went downhill from there with Monica. Monica lives in the UK now and is afraid to show her face in the USA. Clinton was competent but frat-boy foolish.

So now, on to BHO -- the main topic of this thread.

He looks good, he has a beautiful family, he gives great speeches, he administers the CIA effectively, he has been more lethal than GW Bush against Al Qaeda, he re-raised taxes on the rich and that's why they hate him for it, and he kept his promise to bring the troops home, which unfortunately unleashed firestorms in Iraq and A-stan.

I would definitely call BHO competent, although I don't personally agree with his gun views. BHO has been like a more competent version of Carter -- pacifist Presidents who were weary and leery of warfare.

So that's my answer for BHO: Competent yes. Great no.

If we were still in high school, competent would mean a B+.

Great would be an A+ and there are only a couple of those in all of our history.

And the failures would get D's and F's -- Buchanan, Hoover, Nixon and Ford.

Chew on that, then rebuttal me.

:)
 
Last edited:
Jackson was good. It's weird how nationalists do really good stuff. He was nasty to the indians, however, he did "break the bank" and survived an assasination attempt to do it. Edward the 1st was a similar nationalist success( the English King in Braveheart).
 
We got sucker punched is what happened. There were no specific threats made against anyone. A general threat against our transportation system. That's it. Our transportation system? Do you realize how large it is? Millions of miles of interstate highway, millions of miles of train track, millions of airplanes coming and going, not to mention ships in and out of our ports, tourist ships in large cities like NYC and SF. Ferries in various coastal states, bus lines going all over the country, I mean its just huge. There was no real way of knowing that our airlines were under attack. What about if we had focused on the airlines but then every ferry in the Washington State Ferry system was blown up while all of the ships were sailing in Puget Sound? Think about it. What about if we worried about the boats but buses in several states crashed, or exploded? Get it now?

Bush knew ahead of time that we were vulnerable for an attack and yet did nothing. Bush is the definition of a failed president.
 
Who, among us, is really qualified to judge this man ?
I voted "great", but , then, I am biased .
 
Gaygodking-471x640.jpg
 
Obama as great President?
That reminds me, someone should start a comedy thread.

Obama has been a great president for arms retailers and gun makers

he has caused millions upon millions to be sold to people who normally wouldn't have bought any or as many but for Obama
 
NY post is a biased source.

Do you deny the facts? Do you deny the different agencies and their data collection? Do you deny that information will be available online? Do you deny the quotes from the agencies as to why they are collecting the data?

Or do you contend all those facts are irrelevant because the NY Post talked about the issue?
 
Do you deny the facts? Do you deny the different agencies and their data collection? Do you deny that information will be available online? Do you deny the quotes from the agencies as to why they are collecting the data?

Or do you contend all those facts are irrelevant because the NY Post talked about the issue?

They aren't facts because it was in the NY post. If you get a non biased source with the same news then it would be a fact. But you wont because it doesn't exist. This is a made up story.
 
He was a pretty good president, and may have been a great one, with just a little more self-assurance, and less flack from the academically marginal and the politically rabid.

He at least made a good attempt at creating a civilized medical system in the US, one sorely needed, wound down two foolish wars, ended the nonsense with Cuba, headed off nuclear weapons in Iran, and only went down on one knee to Israel (instead of the usual two).
 
They aren't facts because it was in the NY post. If you get a non biased source with the same news then it would be a fact. But you wont because it doesn't exist. This is a made up story.

Partisan blindness is a sad thing to see...and I am sad to see it on display from you.

Does it occur to you that even a biased news and opinion organization could be referencing verifiable facts? I'm not so sure, since you seem to dismiss the facts in that NY Post article because, in your opinion, they are biased. In any case, I'm here to present these same facts from sources that you MIGHT not consider biased.

CFPB data-mining of credit card transactions. It seems this has been the subject of an actual House Financial Services Committee hearing.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau officials are seeking to monitor four out of every five U.S. consumer credit card transactions this year — up to 42 billion transactions – through a controversial data-mining program, according to documents obtained by the Washington Examiner.

A CFPB strategic planning document for fiscal years 2013-17 describes the “markets monitoring” program through which officials aim to monitor 80 percent of all credit card transactions in 2013.

The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 1.16 billion consumer credit cards were in use in 2012 for an estimated 52.6 billion transactions. If CFPB officials reach their stated "performance goal," they would collect data on 42 billion transactions made with 933 million credit cards used by American consumers.

In addition, CFPB officials hope to monitor up to 95 percent of all mortgage transactions, according to the planning document.

CFPB's data-mining on consumer credit cards challenged in heated House hearing | Washington Examiner

Of course, you probably think the Washington Examiner to be a biased organization and, therefore, deny any of the facts in their article.


Maybe you'll be more inclined to believe the National Mortgage Database when they talk about their own data-mining actions.

In 2012, FHFA began a major initiative to build a national mortgage database on first-lien single-family mortgages in existence any time from January 1998 forward.

This project is being jointly funded and managed by FHFA and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The information will primarily be used to support the agencies' policy making and research efforts and help regulators better understand emerging mortgage and housing market trends in this evolving and changing finance market.

National Mortgage Database | Federal Housing Finance Agency


Or, maybe, you won't accept the words spoken by President Obama, himself. Maybe he's biased? Check out his words at the 2:00 mark.

 
Partisan blindness is a sad thing to see...and I am sad to see it on display from you.

Does it occur to you that even a biased news and opinion organization could be referencing verifiable facts? I'm not so sure, since you seem to dismiss the facts in that NY Post article because, in your opinion, they are biased. In any case, I'm here to present these same facts from sources that you MIGHT not consider biased.

CFPB data-mining of credit card transactions. It seems this has been the subject of an actual House Financial Services Committee hearing.



Of course, you probably think the Washington Examiner to be a biased organization and, therefore, deny any of the facts in their article.


Maybe you'll be more inclined to believe the National Mortgage Database when they talk about their own data-mining actions.




Or, maybe, you won't accept the words spoken by President Obama, himself. Maybe he's biased? Check out his words at the 2:00 mark.



So like a typical radical you think information and education are dangerous. Perhaps you would like to start burning books next. There is nothing sinister about a nation finding out how their people are spending money. Believing the drivel written by a radical racist from the Hoover institution will get you nowhere but the nuthouse.
 
Back
Top Bottom