• 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!

America's Fed Up: Obama Approval Rating Hits All-Time Low, Poll Shows [W:256]

I deal in facts sir:

President Bush signed the massive spending bill under which the government was operating when Obama took office. That was Sept. 30, 2008. As The Associated Press noted, it combined “a record Pentagon budget with aid for automakers and natural disaster victims, and increased health care funding for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Bush also signed, on Oct. 3, 2008, a bank bailout bill that authorized another $700 billion to avert a looming financial collapse (though not all of that would end up being spent in fiscal 2009, and Obama later signed a measure reducing total authorized bailout spending to $475 billion).

Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?

Now that we have figures for the full four years of Obama’s first term, a surprising fact emerges: The economy added more jobs during four years under Obama than it did in the entire eight years under Bush.

Obama’s Numbers (Quarterly Update)


So you deal in facts? Do you know what a CR is and for how long they are in effect? Do you understand that the fiscal year of the U.S. runs from October to September and that Bush was in office only 3 plus months of fiscal year 2009?

do you further understand that TARP Was a loan and the 700 billion was part of the CBO Projected deficit for 2009? How much of TARP was actually spent and how much was paid back? Where did that payback go?

I really am willing to learn but so far your education process is lacking and a disappointment.

As for jobs added, you seem to ignore that we have the same number of people working today as we had in December 2007 so I guess as a liberal you will take whatever point in time you want to show what you want to show. Fact, Obama has added over 7 trillion to the debt and we still have the same number working as we had when the recession began. Noticed how that fact escapes you.

You want badly to believe in liberalism but liberalism is a complete and total failure. Results are what people feel not what actually happened. Try again. Obama signed the 2009 budget in March 2009 thus it was his budget and his results. Guess those shovel ready jobs are still in route?
 
#2 The question about Obama you left out:



These numbers go along with his approval rating which is about what Bush's around this time. Nice try, but hardly the worst President this country has ever had. I will say he is a bad president but not the worst president.

Nice try on cherry picking there.

I know this is old but ... I just couldn't help but point out that your defense of Obama's approval rating is that it was the same for Bush around this time.... Not you best comeback ever...
 
I know this is old but ... I just couldn't help but point out that your defense of Obama's approval rating is that it was the same for Bush around this time.... Not you best comeback ever...

Yes, this thread is old however you obviously took my one quote and made an entire assumption that it was defending Obama. It wasn't. If you see my following quotes after the one you quoted, you'll see where I pointed out that it is silly to be arguing which one is worse (Obama or Bush) when both sucked.
 
I know this is old but ... I just couldn't help but point out that your defense of Obama's approval rating is that it was the same for Bush around this time.... Not you best comeback ever...

Obama's approval rating reflects that 6 in 10 Americans are dissatisfied with his job performance. Bush ended up at 22%, which reflects that near 8 in 10 Americans were dissatisfied with his job performance. It doesn't defend anything. It just shows that sometimes Americans become disenchanted with the CIC's job performance, and sometimes more so then at other times.
 
Understand all of that. But you should know that budgets are made ahead of time and thus what goes on in any given year is from the year before. This too has been explained to you, and documented. The recession happened under Bush polices, with the Bush tax cuts in place. To be educated you have to actually listen.


Budgets are struck the day they are signed into law. What Obama signed, Obama owns.

End. Of. Story.
 
Obama's approval rating reflects that 6 in 10 Americans are dissatisfied with his job performance. Bush ended up at 22%, which reflects that near 8 in 10 Americans were dissatisfied with his job performance. It doesn't defend anything. It just shows that sometimes Americans become disenchanted with the CIC's job performance, and sometimes more so then at other times.

The key words in that sentence is "ended up". We really don't know how low Obama can go, now do we?
 
So you deal in facts? Do you know what a CR is and for how long they are in effect? Do you understand that the fiscal year of the U.S. runs from October to September and that Bush was in office only 3 plus months of fiscal year 2009?

do you further understand that TARP Was a loan and the 700 billion was part of the CBO Projected deficit for 2009? How much of TARP was actually spent and how much was paid back? Where did that payback go?

I really am willing to learn but so far your education process is lacking and a disappointment.

As for jobs added, you seem to ignore that we have the same number of people working today as we had in December 2007 so I guess as a liberal you will take whatever point in time you want to show what you want to show. Fact, Obama has added over 7 trillion to the debt and we still have the same number working as we had when the recession began. Noticed how that fact escapes you.

You want badly to believe in liberalism but liberalism is a complete and total failure. Results are what people feel not what actually happened. Try again. Obama signed the 2009 budget in March 2009 thus it was his budget and his results. Guess those shovel ready jobs are still in route?

You're not catching one though. Facts:

Obama has indeed presided over the slowest growth in spending of any president using raw dollars, and it was the second-slowest if you adjust for inflation. The math simultaneously backs up Nutting’s calculations and demolishes Romney’s contention.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.

Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?

Since Obama took office, federal spending has risen much more slowly than it did under his predecessor.

http://www.factcheck.org/2014/07/obamas-numbers-july-2014-update/

I'm not the blind partisan in our conversation. :coffeepap
 
Last edited:
Budgets are struck the day they are signed into law. What Obama signed, Obama owns.

End. Of. Story.

Yes, and I agree. But he had overlap from Bush that many ignore, as Conservative does. It's a fact.
 
Yes, and I agree. But he had overlap from Bush that many ignore, as Conservative does. It's a fact.


The " overlap " you're referring to is the FY2009 Budget written by Nancy Pelosi and filled with so much new spending Bush publicly threatened to Veto most of it.

Out of the 12 Spending appropriations bills in the FY 2009 budget, Bush signed 3 and Obama signed 9.

Then there's " stimulus " and then 3 Consecutive years of 1.3 Trillion in spending.

Obama's outspent every President before him amd we're no better off for it
 
Yes, and I agree. But he had overlap from Bush that many ignore, as Conservative does. It's a fact.



Every president since Adams has dealt with "overlap", what makes Obama so special he's "thwarted" by a rogue band of "traitor" Republicans.

Look, your guy is an empty shell, a poverty pimp community organizer in the most politically corrupt city in America. The reason for all the lame, bull**** excuses is that he's an incompetent blow hard, a product of some of the slickest propaganda in history. He does not understand the system of government nor the budget process and apparently neither do you.

He signed it, he owns it, just like Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton whom no one ever heard "I inherited this mess.
 
The key words in that sentence is "ended up". We really don't know how low Obama can go, now do we?

The point being, it doesn't mean anything to the true believer. So ****ty of a job did Bush do, that he ended up with a near 80% disapproval rating, yet his failed policies, responsible for such a dismal approval rating, find support at DP, by some, routinely.
 
The " overlap " you're referring to is the FY2009 Budget written by Nancy Pelosi and filled with so much new spending Bush publicly threatened to Veto most of it.

Out of the 12 Spending appropriations bills in the FY 2009 budget, Bush signed 3 and Obama signed 9.

Then there's " stimulus " and then 3 Consecutive years of 1.3 Trillion in spending.

Obama's outspent every President before him amd we're no better off for it

Excuses. Just plain partisan excuses. If Obama's is Obama's, than Bush's is his.
 
The point being, it doesn't mean anything to the true believer. So ****ty of a job did Bush do, that he ended up with a near 80% disapproval rating, yet his failed policies, responsible for such a dismal approval rating, find support at DP, by some, routinely.

Oh but I am sure you think Obama is just doing a great job right?
 
Every president since Adams has dealt with "overlap", what makes Obama so special he's "thwarted" by a rogue band of "traitor" Republicans.

Look, your guy is an empty shell, a poverty pimp community organizer in the most politically corrupt city in America. The reason for all the lame, bull**** excuses is that he's an incompetent blow hard, a product of some of the slickest propaganda in history. He does not understand the system of government nor the budget process and apparently neither do you.

He signed it, he owns it, just like Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton whom no one ever heard "I inherited this mess.

Not special, but many use Bush's numbers in their attacks. It's important to be accurate.
 
Not special, but many use Bush's numbers in their attacks. It's important to be accurate.

Many as in who? For instance, who in this thread was the first to bring up Bush? I don't know, I am asking?
 
Oh but I am sure you think Obama is just doing a great job right?

NOT AT ALL! Dude, listen to me, start actually paying attention to what I post, or expect to be ignored going forward, period!!
 
You're not catching one though. Facts:

Obama has indeed presided over the slowest growth in spending of any president using raw dollars, and it was the second-slowest if you adjust for inflation. The math simultaneously backs up Nutting’s calculations and demolishes Romney’s contention.

Viral Facebook post says Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president | PolitiFact

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.

Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?

Since Obama took office, federal spending has risen much more slowly than it did under his predecessor.

Obama’s Numbers (July 2014 Update)

I'm not the blind partisan in our conversation. :coffeepap

Well congratulations, when you have record deficits and record spending I find it interesting that you trumpet that. If you have a high base you better have low percentage growth unless of course you build your entire argument on percentage change. By your standards the 1.7 trillion dollar debt Reagan generated was much worse than the 7 trillion Obama has added because it was a higher percentage change. Is that liberal logic?

Yes, Obama took office in January but according to you the entire deficit or most of it was due to Bush's three months in office. That is a lie and a distortion. Shame on you
 
NOT AT ALL! Dude, listen to me, start actually paying attention to what I post, or expect to be ignored going forward, period!!

Am I supposed to care if you ignore me? :shrug: You many times go out of your way to bash Bush, bash America, and largely ignore what the current administration does, while trying so hard to convince people you are a down the middle independent...Why would I care if you ignore me or not? you think it will make a difference in my life? pfft. Good riddance.
 
You're not catching one though. Facts:

Obama has indeed presided over the slowest growth in spending of any president using raw dollars, and it was the second-slowest if you adjust for inflation. The math simultaneously backs up Nutting’s calculations and demolishes Romney’s contention.

Viral Facebook post says Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president | PolitiFact

Fiscal 2009 began Oct. 1, 2008. That was before Obama was elected, and nearly four months before he took office on Jan. 20, 2009.

Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?

Since Obama took office, federal spending has risen much more slowly than it did under his predecessor.

Obama’s Numbers (July 2014 Update)

I'm not the blind partisan in our conversation. :coffeepap

To add, the last Bush budget which was never passed or signed was for 3 trillion dollars. Please name for me the budget that Obama proposed or signed for 3 trillion dollars. His last budget was for 3.9 trillion. Please explain how proposing that amount of spending shows fiscal responsibility? You don't seem to comprehend the data at all. It isn't percentage change that we pay debt service on, it is the actual debt. Obama inherited a 10.6 trillion dollar debt that is now over 17.6 trillion. Any idea what the debt service is on 7 trillion dollars?

Percentage change means nothing, actual spending does and "your" President is a fiscal disaster which of course you don't understand. Still waiting for you to teach me something other than Partisan BS
 
The point being, it doesn't mean anything to the true believer. So ****ty of a job did Bush do, that he ended up with a near 80% disapproval rating, yet his failed policies, responsible for such a dismal approval rating, find support at DP, by some, routinely.

At the end of the day, disapproval ratings a poor representation of how well a president did or not. This is especially true in the case of Bush where he was dealing with a heavily liberal media going against him.
 
At the end of the day, disapproval ratings a poor representation of how well a president did or not. This is especially true in the case of Bush where he was dealing with a heavily liberal media going against him.

Oh ok, Americans were hoodwinked by the media.
 
Excuses. Just plain partisan excuses. If Obama's is Obama's, than Bush's is his.

Huh ?

Excuses ? No, it actually happened.

Obama's signature is on 9 out of the 12 spending appropriation bills of FY 2009.
 
Am I supposed to care if you ignore me? :shrug: You many times go out of your way to bash Bush, bash America, and largely ignore what the current administration does, while trying so hard to convince people you are a down the middle independent...Why would I care if you ignore me or not? you think it will make a difference in my life? pfft. Good riddance.

Maybe if you didn't attempt to marginalize people with idiotic strawmen, they might not get so pissed at you. But that would take honesty, wouldn't it?
 
Huh ?

Excuses ? No, it actually happened.

Obama's signature is on 9 out of the 12 spending appropriation bills of FY 2009.

Please stop confusing Boo with actual facts for they don't matter. The media blames Bush, the left blames Bush, results don't matter, therefore it is all Bush's fault. I am waiting for any Obama supporter to name for me the most significant Obama economic or foreign success?
 
Please stop confusing Boo with actual facts for they don't matter. The media blames Bush, the left blames Bush, results don't matter, therefore it is all Bush's fault. I am waiting for any Obama supporter to name for me the most significant Obama economic or foreign success?

My kind advice to your is not to hold your breath while waiting. :mrgreen:
 
Back
Top Bottom