• 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!

Obama's Approval Rating Drops to Lowest Ever, According to Gallup

Status
Not open for further replies.
PzKfW IVe said:
It is sad, but I do believe you actually believe this.
Thank you making it abundantly clear that I need not seriously consider anything you might post, nor waste any time in responding to it.
Click to expand...
Still no answer.

Who do you think is the ultimate arbitrator of the Constitution if not the U.S. Supreme Court?
 
Conservative said:
You are in the minority and that is the fact. If you want to eliminate all the Bush tax cuts then tell me how raising taxes puts 25 million unemployed and under employed back to work or into full time jobs?
Click to expand...

How does keeping the taxes get them jobs again? We need to admit, as a country, that using the tax code to achieve social change is retarded. Taxes should = expenditures + a few percentage points for overages and unforeseen events.

Conservative said:
Spending 800 billion was supposed to solve the problem and now we find out that those so called shovel ready jobs "weren't so shovel ready" according to "your" President so where is your outrage? Yes, Obama is responsible for wasting money and increasing unemployment. He continues to do that today
Click to expand...

Blame the states for using the money to close budget short falls like TX, instead of using the money on infrastructure projects.

Conservative said:
Half of what? The labor force in this country is 153 million with the rest retired, elderly, and children. Suggest you define life's necessities, computers, cell phones, flat screen TV's, IPods? How do you know what expenses people have but you have no problem buying the liberal rhetoric. Don't you think you should find out before making statements like the one above? How much revenue could be going to the govt. if those who earned income paid nothing more than $100 a year or $2 per week? Think instead of feeling.
Click to expand...

Half of the 49% of people who don't pay federal income tax since ~20% of the population isn't employed for various reason. Don't you know how to follow a conversation?

Also, 100$/year x 153mill x .2 = ~3billion. Chump change compared to the federal budget or debt. In order to make a dent in either, you'd have to take half of the cumulated "wealth" of the working poor which = ~700billion. Or you can get the same number by taxing the rich an additional 3%.



Conservative said:
Again as liberals always do they focus on the accuracy of the numbers instead of the reality that it is millions and millions of employed people paying zero in FIT.
Click to expand...

Because of republican tax credit programs. That 45%-49% number includes unemployed, people who don't earn enough to pay taxes (poverty line or lower). That's appox half of that number. You should be bitching about the other half that works and avoids paying taxes because of programs YOUR PARTY ADVOCATED FOR such as: earned income credit, child deductions, mortgage deductions, student loan deductions, charity deductions, etc. People who are considered middle class benifit from these types of deductions than the poor. As Friedman said (I'm paraphrasing here) there exist no worse crime than taxing the poor for the benefit for the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
Conservative said:
Spending 800 billion was supposed to solve the problem and now we find out that those so called shovel ready jobs "weren't so shovel ready" according to "your" President so where is your outrage?
Click to expand...
That's a lie. The stimulus was supposed create or save 3 million jobs. It was never a panacea for all of our problems. And even you tacitly confessed that Obama's stimulus created/saved 3½, half a million more than the original expectation.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Stop quoting liars and post the numbers.

I've already given how much was applied aginst the FY2009 budget: $152B

Now you post how much was given out in FY2009.

You post how much was repain during FY2009.

If the difference is greater than $152B, then you have an argument to make. But quoting liars like Dick Morris is not making your case.

Do your homework and post the numbers.
Click to expand...

Stop defending an incompetent, empty suit. FY 2009 had TARP and Stimulus in it, Very little in 2010 and 2011. Your support of Obama says it all.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That's a lie. The stimulus was supposed create or save 3 million jobs. It was never a panacea for all of our problems. And even you tacitly confessed that Obama's stimulus created/saved 3½, half a million more than the original expectation.
Click to expand...

Yet Obama's approval rating is 38% today and we have more unemployed today than we had when he took office. His record will be on the ballot and that record shows a disaster.
 
xpiher said:
How does keeping the taxes get them jobs again? We need to admit, as a country, that using the tax code to achieve social change is retarded. Taxes should = expenditures + a few percentage points for overages and unforeseen events.



Blame the states for using the money to close budget short falls like TX, instead of using the money on infrastructure projects.



Half of the 49% of people who don't pay federal income tax since ~20% of the population isn't employed for various reason. Don't you know how to follow a conversation?

Also, 100$/year x 153mill x .2 = ~3billion. Chump change compared to the federal budget or debt. In order to make a dent in either, you'd have to take half of the cumulated "wealth" of the working poor which = ~700billion. Or you can get the same number by taxing the rich an additional 3%.





Because of republican tax credit programs. That 45%-49% number includes unemployed, people who don't earn enough to pay taxes (poverty line or lower). That's appox half of that number. You should be bitching about the other half that works and avoids paying taxes because of programs YOUR PARTY ADVOCATED FOR such as: earned income credit, child deductions, mortgage deductions, student loan deductions, charity deductions, etc. People who are considered middle class benifit from these types of deductions than the poor. As Friedman said (I'm paraphrasing here) there exist no worse crime than taxing the poor for the benefit for the rest of us.
Click to expand...

Then stop the damn spending on social engineering that never solves a problem. There is no reason for a 3.7 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and apparently nothing is going to change your mind. What is it about liberalism that creates such loyalty? If you keep more of what you earn do you really need this big of a Federal Govt?
 
Conservative said:
Stop defending an incompetent, empty suit. FY 2009 had TARP and Stimulus in it, Very little in 2010 and 2011. Your support of Obama says it all.
Click to expand...
Of the $1.9 trillion deficit, $152B was TARP and besides, Bush owns TARP. $200B was stimulus, that is Obama's. The other $1.6 trillion is Bush's.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Of the $1.9 trillion deficit, $152B was TARP and besides, Bush owns TARP. $200B was stimulus, that is Obama's. The other $1.6 trillion is Bush's.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with the Obama record today? Yes, Bush owned TARP that was passed by a Democrat Controlled Congress and supported by Obama. It was TARP that saved the economy not the stimulus and it was TARP that was a loan most of which has been repaid. Your obsession with Bush is noted but all that does is divert from the incompetent you voted for and helped put into the WH. It will be the Obama record on the ballot in 2012, not TARP or Bush
 
Conservative said:
What does that have to do with the Obama record today?
Click to expand...
That Bush passed on a $1.6 trillion shortfall in his budget, along with his Great Recession, along with losing 8 million jobs and 5% GDP during that Great Recession, along with a collpaed housing market and a frozen credit, 22 million underemployed, a crashed stock market -- has a lot to do with the current economy. Those are massive structural problems that are not fixed in 2½ years.


Conservative said:
Yes, Bush owned TARP that was passed by a Democrat Controlled Congress and supported by Obama.
Click to expand...
Funny how you refused to accept that Bush owned TARP when you thought the impact of it on the FY2009 budget was $700B; but when you learn it was really only $152B, now you admit Bush owns it.

Conservative said:
It was TARP that saved the economy not the stimulus and it was TARP that was a loan most of which has been repaid.
Click to expand...
You quoted Morris claiming all $700B were applied to the deficit. Now that you see the real number is $152B, do you realize the funds paid back in FY2009 were applied to reducing the deficit? Are you mentally prepared to part forever with that rightwing talking point?

Conservative said:
Your obsession with Bush is noted but all that does is divert from the incompetent you voted for and helped put into the WH. It will be the Obama record on the ballot in 2012, not TARP or Bush
Click to expand...
We'll see. I suspect Bush's Great Recession will play a role in next years election.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That Bush passed on a $1.6 trillion shortfall in his budget, along with his Great Recession, along with losing 8 million jobs and 5% GDP during that Great Recession, along with a collpaed housing market and a frozen credit, 22 million underemployed, a crashed stock market -- has a lot to do with the current economy. Those are massive structural problems that are not fixed in 2½ years.



Funny how you refused to accept that Bush owned TARP when you thought the impact of it on the FY2009 budget was $700B; but when you learn it was really only $152B, now you admit Bush owns it.


You quoted Morris claiming all $700B were applied to the deficit. Now that you see the real number is $152B, do you realize the funds paid back in FY2009 were applied to reducing the deficit? Are you mentally prepared to part forever with that rightwing talking point?


We'll see. I suspect Bush's Great Recession will play a role in next years election.
Click to expand...

Obama approval rating today is 38% so people aren't buying your argument because they are looking at the Obama numbers TODAY. You need to get out of the past although I can see you don't understand what it means to be a leader thus your support for Obama. Hope you make Bush the issue in 2012 to see if you can get the same brainwashed group again like you did in 2008.
 
Conservative said:
What does that have to do with the Obama record today?
Click to expand...

It has to do with you constantly assigning Obama deficits that he wasn't responsible for. If you don't want to talk about Bush, stop trying to pawn off his deficit on Obama. :shrug:
 
AdamT said:
It has to do with you constantly assigning Obama deficits that he wasn't responsible for. If you don't want to talk about Bush, stop trying to pawn off his deficit on Obama. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Deficits are yearly, NOT CUMULATIVE. Please learn basic civics and economics.
 
Conservative said:
Deficits are yearly, NOT CUMULATIVE. Please learn basic civics and economics.
Click to expand...

If you add them together, including the $3 trillion or so that Obama has amassed plus a trillion or so that Bush amassed in '09, then the result is the cumulative figure that you toss around so negligently.
 
AdamT said:
If you add them together, including the $3 trillion or so that Obama has amassed plus a trillion or so that Bush amassed in '09, then the result is the cumulative figure that you toss around so negligently.
Click to expand...

Yep, both Presidents added to the debt and Obama has added more in 3 years than any other President in modern history
 
AdamT said:
No, he hasn't.
Click to expand...

You will believe what you want to believe and I will continue to post the results. NO President in Modern History has ever added as much debt in 3 years as Obama has so you know what I meant. Obama will add more debt by the end of his first term than Bush added in 8 years. That is reality, so vote for Obama and make it happen
 
Conservative said:
You will believe what you want to believe and I will continue to post the results. NO President in Modern History has ever added as much debt in 3 years as Obama has so you know what I meant. Obama will add more debt by the end of his first term than Bush added in 8 years. That is reality, so vote for Obama and make it happen
Click to expand...

Uhmmm Bush doubled the debt
 
winston53660 said:
Uhmmm Bush doubled the debt
Click to expand...

yep, now if Obama doubles the debt it will be over 20 trillion dollars. Vote for him again and in four more years he may just get there.

Obama took office with a 10.6 debt that today is 14.6 trillion or 4 trillion in three years. By the end of next year he will exceed the Bush debt accumulated in 8 years.
 
Conservative;1059762663 said:
Yep, both Presidents added to the debt and Obama has added more in 3 years than any other President in modern history
Click to expand...
Bull****.

Bush added 2.8 trillion in 2008 and 2009 and Obama added 2.8 trillion in 2010 and 2011.
 
FDR and Truman added WAY more to the debt in real dollars than Obama has. Desperate times call for desperate measures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom