• 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!

Who will you blame in 2012?

If the economy does not significantly improve by 2012, who will you blame?

  • Bush

    Votes: 3 9.4%
  • Obama

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • more Bush, less Obama

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • more Obama, less Bush

    Votes: 5 15.6%
  • 50/50 Bush/Obama

    Votes: 2 6.3%
  • Neither Bush nor Obama

    Votes: 10 31.3%

  • Total voters
    32
If the economy does not significantly improve by 2012, who will you blame? And why?

The last 50 years were Bush's fault, and the next 50 years will be Bush's fault.
 
The last 50 years were Bush's fault, and the next 50 years will be Bush's fault.

But what about the 50 years after that? Since I am immortal, I'd like to know who I am supposed to blame, then.
 
Correct. But it DOES mean that saying that the recession is "Obama's fault" because he maxed out our credit cards is ridiculous, because A) he didn't, and B) that isn't even the economic problem we're currently facing.

While i agree the recession was well beyond the Obama administration's control, i cannot accept that the national debt has no part to play in the current economic climate, however small that part is. While it certainly is not the cause of the low growth and unemployment, to say it should not be addressed as a result is ludicrous.

Because Obama has failed on his pledge to decrease the funding gap and national debt, investor confident has fallen in the US and it will only make access to credit harder. If the waste is cut and instead that money is utilized into creating jobs and investment and subsidies for small businesses, the situation wouldn't be as bad. But the fed gov is cash strapped and Obama doesn't want to make the cuts where it hurts and it mean's the much needed access to credit to actually create growth and job creation is becoming more and more expensive because it is being used in all the wrong places.

In fact most of his "social policies" have just strained that deficit further.


Deficit spending is exactly what we should be doing during a recession; and the bigger the recession, the bigger the deficits should be. This is absolutely the correct path to stimulate aggregate demand and get the economy moving again.

A really good economist would cut the waste, stop creating inefficient social programs and balance out cuts at a federal level with growth at a private level. None of that is happening. While it would be ideal to expand spending in times of downturn, the fact that the US is being downgraded by creditors and the fact that US debt has hit $14+ trillion now means that such a policy just cannot be sustained.

Yeah, we kinda had a financial crisis a few months before he got elected. :roll:

$65 billion-a-year health plan
$25 billion-a-year increase in foreign aid

What part of this $90 billion dollars is increasing the wealth of US citizens?

Obama's Trillion-Dollar Spending Plan - Capital Commerce (usnews.com)

The financial power required for this pathetic health care "road map" could have been more easily diverted into immediate job creation and job security.

How about the 1 trillion dollars worth of money Obama pumped into the economy and banks that have yielded little results?

Oh bull****. The Republicans have no plan for dealing with rising health care costs except shift them from the government to individuals. The Democrats are actually interested in slowing health care inflation by copying policies that have been successful in other countries that have adopted them. And they don't just have a plan, they have an actual law in the Affordable Care Act. Health care is the biggest component of the structural deficit. One party has absolutely no plan, and one party has a reasonably good law.

If the Democrats exercised more fiscal restraint and devolved fiscal powers to state authorities it would probably be much more easier to attack rising health care costs at a grass roots level, but we know Obama has done nothing to actually balance spending with what he can afford. Talking about "passing on the taxes to the other guy", doesn't medicare require American citizens pay for access to medicare for other citizens even if they use private hospitals themselves?

Let's move to taxes. Democrats have shown willingness to compromise on the issue, and have called for some spending cuts as well as higher taxes. Republicans, however, have flatly declared that raising taxes on the wealthy is off the table as a method to balance the budget.

And it makes sense since the wealthy have a greater economic potential.

Democrats have a much more sensible plan to deal with structural deficits, and in any case structural deficits aren't the cause of the current crisis (which is the subject of this thread). But good job repeating talking points from Glenn Beck. :roll:

I dont listen to that moron but it's good to know somebody does.
 
Last edited:
By the end of FY 2012 we will have had 6 years of democrat leadership in the senate, 4 years in the house, and 4 years in the White House. If you cant man up and own the responsibilities of the jobbyu applied for then dont ask for another term.
Yes, Bush signed the budget for 8 years. Yes...democrats as well as republicans passed those budgets. No one person and no one party is responsible. Republican led congress took us from 4 to 9 trillion in 6 years. Democrat budgets in the next 4 years took us from 9 to 14.5 trillion to date and that will increase to 15.5 trillion by the end of 2011 spending. Enough already.
 
Like it's either one of them's fault. I blame you! The voting citizens for doing things like attacking fine people like Donald Trump when you should be voting for him and supporting his campaign. Is there ever going to be a time when you've had enough?

There's nothing wrong. We're good. I like Obama's smile.
 
If the economy does not significantly improve by 2012, who will you blame? And why?

i notice you didn't mention Democrats having control of the House and a super Majority in the Senate. Given the degree to which you-know-governing-isn't-my-thing-so-much-as-golf-is Obama farmed out domestic and fiscal policy to them, I would hand over responsibility first to them, and then to the President, and then to Bush, and then to the Republican congresses of the late first decade.
 
Well clearly not Obama...because Obama did everything within his power to turn this country around. He led us, schooled us, embraced our concern with open arms not resorting to partisan posturing or class warefare or fear mongering or shady politics to pass bills. No he did not. What he did do was choose to lead us and even though we may not be ready as a nation to accept it due to ignorance and racism, we need to even though we are not worthy of this administration and great visionary. So let's stop the bickering and nitpicking and playing the blame game and look forward to what this great leader can do if only we are brave enough to accept change.
 
Thats very warm and fuzzy of you. Wont warm hearts made of stone though.
 
Well clearly not Obama...because Obama did everything within his power to turn this country around. He led us, schooled us, embraced our concern with open arms not resorting to partisan posturing or class warefare or fear mongering or shady politics to pass bills. No he did not. What he did do was choose to lead us and even though we may not be ready as a nation to accept it due to ignorance and racism, we need to even though we are not worthy of this administration and great visionary. So let's stop the bickering and nitpicking and playing the blame game and look forward to what this great leader can do if only we are brave enough to accept change.

you're name? this was it.
 
To answer the question;

1. Who supports crushing regulations that hinder business?

2. Who continues to support the mindless bloodshed that is our foreign policy?

3. Who refuses to kill entitlement programs?

4. Who continues to support the government sanctioned murdering at home?

5. Who continues to uphold the authoritarian laws like the Patriot Act?

6. Who continues to support the Federal Reserve?

Answer these questions and you will find your answer.
 
If the economy does not significantly improve by 2012, who will you blame? And why?

Given that the economic policies of Bush and Obama are pretty much the same at this point, it doesn't really make sense to blame one anymore than the other.
 
Given that the economic policies of Bush and Obama are pretty much the same at this point, it doesn't really make sense to blame one anymore than the other.

eh. Bush is Hoover to Obama's FDR. We can be angry with both, but the second has done to us on steroids what the first did to us merely out of ignorance.
 
If the economy does not significantly improve by 2012, who will you blame? And why?

That would depend on the specifics of the situation in 2012, wouldn't it?
 
But what about the 50 years after that? Since I am immortal, I'd like to know who I am supposed to blame, then.

Sorry, you'll have to pick someone yourself at that point. We won't be here, nor will we care.
 
i notice you didn't mention Democrats having control of the House and a super Majority in the Senate.

That changed in 2010. Since the Republicans took control of the House, I haven't seen a major improvement.

Which means that if things don't improve, I'd blame Republicans and Democrats for playing politics instead of working together for the good of the country. It won't be Bush's fault, but since what I said wasn't an option in the poll...I picked 50/50
 
I will blame bush Obama the media and all of our lawmakers. Most Imporantly I will blame all of us.
 
That changed in 2010. Since the Republicans took control of the House, I haven't seen a major improvement.

we got a temporary tax deal, and killed a massive extension of government. but it's true; Republicans own 1/2 of one branch of government, and thus they haven't accomplished much on the 'major' scale yet... though they have passed the Ryan budget - that's fairly major. It's just not accomplished yet, and thus not an improvement.

Which means that if things don't improve, I'd blame Republicans and Democrats for playing politics instead of working together for the good of the country. It won't be Bush's fault, but since what I said wasn't an option in the poll...I picked 50/50

was it 50% Clinton's fault when we went into the recession of 2008?

The Crash isn't entirely (can't believe i'm about to say this) Governments' fault - the rating agencies, the banks, the investors, the home-buyers, the flippers, everyone who bought into the belief of something-for-nothing-housing-prices-will-always-go-up share responsibility. what is Government's responsibility is how they reacted to that recession - and that is what will set the conditions of 2012.
 
Who am I going to blame in 2012?

Well, I am going to wait till 2012, see what happens until then, and then figure that out who I will blame for whatever the main issue is at the time...
 
Who am I going to blame in 2012?

Well, I am going to wait till 2012, see what happens until then, and then figure that out who I will blame for whatever the main issue is at the time...

and if it is persistent unemployment, huge deficits, and inflation?
 
I'm not going to blame anyone at all...I'm going to vote for the guy that is willing to make reasonable tax increases while eliminating a LOT of spending.
 
I blame John Wolin.
 
I Blame Canada. =)
 
A good chunk of the Republican party and free market conservatives get the blame from me, but it takes two to tango. It's not like the Democrats are free of corporate sponsorship themselves. Many are actually fairly pro-wealthy themselves. Hell, pretty much all our congress and elected officials at the national level are of the rich elite and are going to look out for their own kind first.
 
A good chunk of the Republican party and free market conservatives get the blame from me, but it takes two to tango. It's not like the Democrats are free of corporate sponsorship themselves. Many are actually fairly pro-wealthy themselves. Hell, pretty much all our congress and elected officials at the national level are of the rich elite and are going to look out for their own kind first.

The free market did not cause the financial crisis, your current system we have is corporatism. We havent had a true free market in years.
 
Back
Top Bottom