Can Pres. Obama Win Re-Election With High Unemployment?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

:wub: Obaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!! :wub:

 

[MDC 7,590]

my point was that the 50+% of people who take more than they pay are going to be heavily attracted to our President Carnival Barker offering up free pop tarts...

 

You know why 50% (the figure is actually a little lower) pay no federal income taxes? Because so many people are un- and underemployed that they're exempt. That's it.

 

This is probably the one thing that evil genius Bomama bin Bummer didn't do.

 

That Ben Franklin quote that once people figure out how to vote themselves money, thats the end of the republic...

 

I have never heard that quote before on FFT virtually every day.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

DEBT FEARS: US Rating Could Be Placed Under Review, warns MOODY'S...

 

Gives lawmakers until mid-July to show progress in talks...

 

ECONOMIC 'HORROR' AS DATA PLUNGES...

 

JOBLESS WEAK: 422,000...

 

'WE ARE ON THE VERGE OF A GREAT, GREAT DEPRESSION...'

 

Reich: America dithering as double-dip looms...

 

More job seekers give up...

 

Ron Paul warns of 'dictatorship in Washington'...

 

Record NATO deaths in early Afghan fighting season...

 

PAPER: Why Obama may be heading for electoral disaster in 2012...

 

IT MIGHT BE MY WEINER...

 

 

 

http://www.drudgereport.com/

[Phurfur 70]

And Obummer is somehow now responsible for the fact that 50% of people pay no federal income taxes? He did this?

 

I thought he raised taxes?

 

 

Where did I say that? Show me the link!

 

Right, you are a lying dog just like your hero.

[MDC 7,590]

Where did I say that? Show me the link!

 

Right, you are a lying dog just like your hero.

 

Isn't that what Republicans have been saying for years - Bosama bin Bummer is going to raise your taxes and kill business? And all along that devious super-genius has really been cutting taxes and he's in the back pocket of Wall Street!

 

Obummer.

[Phurfur 70]

Isn't that what Republicans have been saying for years - Bosama bin Bummer is going to raise your taxes and kill business? And all along that devious super-genius has really been cutting taxes and he's in the back pocket of Wall Street!

 

Obummer.

 

 

I am not a Repoblican. HTH

 

BTW: Obama has raised taxes and there are more coming by way of Obamacare. Obama - the gift that keeps taking.

[MDC 7,590]

BTW: Obama has raised taxes

 

Tell that to the 50% of Americans who pay NO taxes thanks to Obummer!

[IGotWorms 4,060]

And according to Rassmussen, likely voters (54% to 39%) blame Bush more than Obama for the current state of the economy -> Link.

 

I think that's the key figure right there. As long as the majority of people believe that it isn't Obama's fault that the economy sucks, he'll be fine. The problem is that by next year people may be less willing to blame Bush. I mean, even if the crash was Bush's fault, at some point we need a guy in there who can *fix* the mess we're in. I'm not sure anyone else would do better than Obama has, but at the same time it's not like the Obama Administration has worked any miracles so far.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Like I said earlier, Bush is bad worked in'08 when Obama had no record to run against. 15 months of voting "present" doesn't leave much. Hope and Change fooled enough of the dumb masses to get him elected. Many will be dumb enough to vote for him again.

 

But now he has Obamacare, 9% (er, 9.1% as of today) unemployment, $1.6 Trillion dollar deficits, Libya, chaos in the ME (remember how he was gonna "talk" to all those clowns and everyone would love us?), failed 'stimulus plan', failure to pass a budget last year under complete Dem control, etc....etc....etc....

 

The economy will be huge, and it isn't looking good for your Hero. But now he has a track record, and it isn't pretty.

[Phurfur 70]

I think that's the key figure right there. As long as the majority of people believe that it isn't Obama's fault that the economy sucks, he'll be fine. The problem is that by next year people may be less willing to blame Bush. I mean, even if the crash was Bush's fault, at some point we need a guy in there who can *fix* the mess we're in. I'm not sure anyone else would do better than Obama has, but at the same time it's not like the Obama Administration has worked any miracles so far.

 

 

see Ronald Reagan 1980-1988

[IMMensaMind 462]

I think there's an interesting dynamic taking place on the left these days. The media is so completely in the bag for Dems that they get a consistently rosier picture painted for their Messiah than reality itself would support.

 

I think the White House internal polling numbers bear this out.

 

I see a whole lot of lefties a whole lot more confident in Obama's chances than they should be. I think he's in serious trouble, and I think by next year our economic situation will be far worse - and I think that Obama's core ideology is so contrary to economic prosperity that he'll be utterly clueless to make the correct moves to give the economy a kickstart, and in fact will likely do the opposite.

[Reality 3,121]

Obama has failed miserably on the economy. I find it hard to believe that come the '12 election & 4 years in that the "Blame Bush" tactic is going to work.

 

Obama told us the economy was all time horrible in '08 & his policies were going to fix it. Good luck with trying to convince the voter that 4 more years of failed Obama economic policy is what we need.

 

I have a feeling alot of '08 Obama voters never get off the couch come Nov '12.

[Mungwater 597]

I have a feeling alot of '08 Obama voters never get off the couch come Nov '12.

 

Time will tell on that one, but you also have to account for the middle guys, given the current republican choices, I'll probably go with Obama. Even more so if it looks like the Rs are going to get the senate, can't give them the whole thing

[NorthernVike 2,087]

Time will tell on that one, but you also have to account for the middle guys, given the current republican choices, I'll probably go with Obama. Even more so if it looks like the Rs are going to get the senate, can't give them the whole thing like they did the Dems. Look how they fock it up.

 

 

Finished it for you.

[Phurfur 70]

Time will tell on that one, but you also have to account for the middle guys, given the current republican choices, I'll probably go with Obama. Even more so if it looks like the Rs are going to get the senate, can't give them the whole thing

 

Remember 2008 - No one party should ever have the whole thing again.

[Voltaire 5,363]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/business/economy/02jobs.html?_r=1&hp

 

 

ut it does seem like it will be pretty hard to overcome the current unemployment numbers (and I doubt it will improve markedly--if at all--before the election).

 

Seems to me that Obama has gotten a lot of leeway because the economic crash occurred before he came into office,

The thing about it hasn't been done since FDR, but FDR probably got the same amount of slack that Obama is getting for the same reasons.

[MDC 7,590]

Remember 2008 - No one party should ever have the whole thing again.

 

2002-2006, too.

[MDC 7,590]

I have a feeling alot of '08 Obama voters never get off the couch come Nov '12.

 

I try to vote in every election so I won't be on the couch, but I am open to voting third party or for a boring, moderate Republican if that kind of candidate wins the nomination. The thing that will get dissatisfied Dems to the polls though is if the GOP nominates a candidate who is so offensive they feel they've got no choice but to vote for Obama. If someone like Newt, Bachmann, Palin or Santorum wins the nomination the Dems won't have much problem with turnout IMO. And the GOP is going to be under a lot of pressure from the Tea Party contingent to at least get someone like that on the ticket. I wouldn't be shocked if Palin's a 2-time vice presidential nominee.

 

Bush won re-election in '04 despite being awful, almost totally on a campaign of "the other guy is worse" and he didn't have the excuse of inheriting 2 wars and a financial meltdown. I expect Obama's going to run with the same playbook. A lot can change between now and then but I'd give him about a 60% chance of re-election at this point.

[Phurfur 70]

I try to vote in every election so I won't be on the couch, but I am open to voting third party or for a boring, moderate Republican if that kind of candidate wins the nomination. The thing that will get dissatisfied Dems to the polls though is if the GOP nominates a candidate who is so offensive they feel they've got no choice but to vote for Obama. If someone like Newt, Bachmann, Palin or Santorum wins the nomination the Dems won't have much problem with turnout IMO. And the GOP is going to be under a lot of pressure from the Tea Party contingent to at least get someone like that on the ticket. I wouldn't be shocked if Palin's a 2-time vice presidential nominee.

 

Bush won re-election in '04 despite being awful, almost totally on a campaign of "the other guy is worse" and he didn't have the excuse of inheriting 2 wars and a financial meltdown. I expect Obama's going to run with the same playbook. A lot can change between now and then but I'd give him about a 60% chance of re-election at this point.

 

We are currently in three wars and TARP was all that was needed to fix the "financial meltdown". It was the stimulus that ruined the economy.

 

Obama won with lies last time and he will do it again.

[MDC 7,590]

We are currently in three wars and TARP was all that was needed to fix the "financial meltdown". It was the stimulus that ruined the economy.

 

Even for a knee-jerk Republican drone like you that bolded part is mind-numbingly stupid. Now the stimulus didn't help, it actually rooned the economy?

[Phurfur 70]

Employers add fewest jobs in 8 months; unemployment jumps to 9.1%

 

 

It looks like we need another stimulus.

[MDC 7,590]

Employers add fewest jobs in 8 months; unemployment jumps to 9.1%

 

Proof positive the economy was rolling along great until Obama's stimulus.

[Phurfur 70]

Even for a knee-jerk Republican drone like you that bolded part is mind-numbingly stupid. Now the stimulus didn't help, it actually rooned the economy?

 

That and the pending doom that Obamacare will bring. You may say I am wrong but the economy says I am right.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Proof positive the economy was rolling along great until Obama's stimulus.

 

 

Is this stimulus you speak of the same one that was going to keep unemployment under 8%?

[MDC 7,590]

[Phurfur 70]

Proof positive the economy was rolling along great until Obama's stimulus.

 

 

We've lost 2.5 million jobs since the simulus.

 

It was promised that the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8%, we have been over 9% for over 2 years now.

[Phurfur 70]

Even for a knee-jerk Republican drone like you that bolded part is mind-numbingly stupid. Now the stimulus didn't help, it actually rooned the economy?

 

 

You must have me confused with someone else because I am not a republican.

[MDC 7,590]

We've lost 2.5 million jobs since the simulus.

 

It was promised that the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8%, we have been over 9% for over 2 years now.

 

Just to make sure I'm not misreading you or anything:

 

You're not saying just that the stimulus had no effect or didn't save jobs or anything. You're actually saying that the stimulus itself wrecked the economy? Like, we'd be doing fine right now except for the stimulus?

 

This is so outlandish and retarded, I just want to make sure I'm getting you right.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

 

You're not saying just that the stimulus had no effect

 

It increased our debt by $800 Billion + and counting.

[MDC 7,590]

It increased our debt by $800 Billion + and counting.

 

So you're backing Phurfur on this one? The stimulus didn't just have no effect, it didn't just add to the debt ... it's actually responsible for the bad economy???

 

Wow. Just wow.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

So you're backing Phurfur on this one? The stimulus didn't just have no effect, it didn't just add to the debt ... it's actually responsible for the bad economy???

 

Wow. Just wow.

 

I said it added $800 Billion + and counting to the debt. How did you get the idea I think it's responsible for the bad economy out of that statement?

[MDC 7,590]

I said it added $800 Billion + and counting to the debt. How did you get the idea I think it's responsible for the bad economy out of that statement?

 

Because that's what the conversation was about, Corky.

[Phurfur 70]

Just to make sure I'm not misreading you or anything:

 

You're not saying just that the stimulus had no effect or didn't save jobs or anything. You're actually saying that the stimulus itself wrecked the economy? Like, we'd be doing fine right now except for the stimulus?

 

This is so outlandish and retarded, I just want to make sure I'm getting you right.

 

I am saying we would be better off today (but even more so in the future) if there had been no stimulus.

[MDC 7,590]

I am saying we would be better off today (but even more so in the future) if there had been no stimulus.

 

Fair enough, but what you originally said was It was the stimulus that ruined the economy. That's just ridiculous.

[DankNuggs 305]

So you're backing Phurfur on this one? The stimulus didn't just have no effect, it didn't just add to the debt ... it's actually responsible for the bad economy???

 

Wow. Just wow.

when you think about the amount of pain americans will suffer to pay back even 800billion of debt, much less 14 tril, you realize how valuable those resources are and how wasteful it was to utilize them in the ways the govt did... They shot off all their rounds into the air, and as a result we are incredibly vulnerable... what can the fed do? Rates are already so low they can't fall really any further..

 

Keynesian economics is the devil. Amazing how socialism seeps into through so many different avenues, socially, politically, economically...

[MDC 7,590]

when you think about the amount of pain americans will suffer to pay back even 800billion of debt, much less 14 tril, you realize how valuable those resources are and how wasteful it was to utilize them in the ways the govt did... They shot off all their rounds into the air, and as a result we are incredibly vulnerable... what can the fed do? Rates are already so low they can't fall really any further..

 

Keynesian economics is the devil. Amazing how socialism seeps into through so many different avenues, socially, politically, economically...

 

That may all be true ... but it has nothing to do with the monumentally stupid claim that the stimulus actually ruined the economy.

[Phurfur 70]

Fair enough, but what you originally said was It was the stimulus that ruined the economy. That's just ridiculous.

 

I should have said "made it worse", got it.

 

My premise was that Tarp was enough to fix the economy and the stimulus made it worse. BHO never gave TARP enough time to work or this was never a stimulus in the first place. The latter is what I believe.

[MDC 7,590]

I should have said "made it worse", got it. My premise was that Tarp was enough to fix it and the stimulus made it worse.

 

If you say the stimulus did nothing, fine - I won't argue. But I don't see how the stimulus made the current economy worse. About a third of the stimulus was in tax cuts, btw. You could say adding that money to the debt will make the economy worse in the long-term. I don't know how you argue that the stimulus has already had a bad effect on the economy.

 

Then again, you are the same guy who thinks tax cuts magically create tax revenue, so I'm not exactly dealing with an economist here.

 

[DankNuggs 305]

That may all be true ... but it has nothing to do with the monumentally stupid claim that the stimulus actually ruined the economy.

It becomes an opportunity cost argument... If we use the same baseline as a starting point, compare how the economies would be had that stimulus been used on for example infrastructure projects. Considering the construction industry has been among the hardest hit during this downturn you are pumping in $, jobs, and efficiency.

 

Instead projects like the Tampa-Orlando speed rail were abandoned because $$ was pissed away on junk and now govts have to scale back, and the easiest way to scale back is to push off projects and defer maintenance, which depreciates infrastructure and snowballs for the bad... To not acknowledge that we could be in a much better position except for the retahdedness of the govt is just being blind.

[DankNuggs 305]

 

Then again, you are the same guy who thinks tax cuts magically create tax revenue, so I'm not exactly dealing with an economist here.

 

they do, research Reagan tax cuts and govt tax receipts... Lowering the top income tax from 70% to 35% and they made more $$$