• 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!

If President Obama were running for re-election today, could he win?

If President Obama were running for re-election today, could he win?


  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .
I don't get why people still fall for that. Actions speak louder than words, and the Republicans haven't done anything "small government", "freedomy", or even fiscally conservative, in at least over two decades.

Because people have hope that this time the Republicans will change.
 
Well at least the Republicans are smart enough not to get caught mouthing off about how stupid the electorate is.

That's actually exactly what happened when Rand Paul got caught on hot mic. He's nothing like his father, whom I respect dearly. The apple fell far from the tree on that one.
 
That's actually exactly what happened when Rand Paul got caught on hot mic. He's nothing like his father, whom I respect dearly. The apple fell far from the tree on that one.
Both Pauls are dumbasses. They are well educated doctors that love to think that because they have degrees. They know better than everyone else.
 
Personally, I think it says far more about the Democrat bench than it does about the Republican bench that so many on the left think that if Obama ran again he'd win. It's the same people who lamented that Bill Clinton couldn't run again as the Democrats paraded out two of the worst Presidential candidates ever in Al Gore and John Kerry.

This says to me that the Democrats high-profile standard barer in 2016, Hillary Clinton, is in the same class as Gore and Kerry.

But really, it's one thing to want to revisit the good economic times and the salacious gossipy times under Bill Clinton, but I can't for the life of me think of a single positive attribute that Obama has brought to the office that any sane person would want to see continue.
 
A second term? Potentially.

If today were a third term and he was constitutionally allowed to do so? No.
 
I don't get why people still fall for that. Actions speak louder than words, and the Republicans haven't done anything "small government", "freedomy", or even fiscally conservative, in at least over two decades.

I think a lot of fiscal conservatives who believe in fiscal responsibilities which I am one know the democratic party is the party of big government, tax and spend. They do not even try to hid it and hence more honest. Now the Republicans rhetoric is great when it comes to small government and the debt. But as you stated their actions do not back that up. Perhaps the most fiscal responsible president since Carter was Clinton. Eisenhower had two years in which he had a surplus and the national debt went down. No president since has accomplished that.

But I wonder if those voting republican are voting for fiscal responsibility or just voting for low taxes. There is a huge difference there and hence my first sentence.
 
I think a lot of fiscal conservatives who believe in fiscal responsibilities which I am one know the democratic party is the party of big government, tax and spend. They do not even try to hid it and hence more honest. Now the Republicans rhetoric is great when it comes to small government and the debt. But as you stated their actions do not back that up. Perhaps the most fiscal responsible president since Carter was Clinton. Eisenhower had two years in which he had a surplus and the national debt went down. No president since has accomplished that.

But I wonder if those voting republican are voting for fiscal responsibility or just voting for low taxes. There is a huge difference there and hence my first sentence.
This is an excellent post.

And yes, the Dems are known as "tax and spend", but in recent years I have taken to calling the Reps "charge and spend".
 
This is an excellent post.

And yes, the Dems are known as "tax and spend", but in recent years I have taken to calling the Reps "charge and spend".

I got a chuckle out of that. But what I mean about being fiscal responsible having incoming revenues and outgoing expenditure pretty much in balance. If they get out of whack like thay have been since 2001, a fiscal responsible individual will cut spending if that is needed or he will raise taxes if that needed or will do both.

Just keeping taxes low or cutting taxes alone has little to do with fiscal responsibility. My opinion anyway.
 
He's such a great mouthpiece and a formidable master of deception. Gotta give credit where credit is due. I voted yes, absolutely. Of course his website won't tell you about all of his secret dealings, only that he's fighting to keep the internet transparent. Great distraction to throw out there since we all love the internet. Damn, he's good.
 
If President Obama were running for re-election today, could he win?

In a literal sense, "...it depends on the opponent" is the correct answer, as all things are relative. But, this question is intended to explore the man's stature in the political world in general, and how it has fallen and/or survived.

I have seen him win two unlikely elections. I think he'd do it again if the election was held next year. He sucks at being president but he has done an A+ job at campaigning in the past. I don't think he has lost those skills.
 
Back
Top Bottom