How MANY of you believe that the reelection of President Obama was a

1. 82

   gmwilliamsposted 11 years ago

   harbinger of bad things to come?  Do you believe that the economy will become worse as a result of President Obama's reelection?  If you are a Democrat, do YOU regret voting for President Obama?

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I believe we can expect more of what we saw in his first term.  We'll see very modest economic gains in many areas, large government-purchased gains in the stock market, and a bigger government.  We'll see massive, crushing debt; it will be necessary to pay for short-term economic gains, bigger government, and probably Obamacare.  We'll see a continuation of our job crisis.
      
      I hope I'm wrong.  I have no desire to be right when it comes to the future of our country.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I expect we will see what we saw in his first term, massive deficit reduction (half a trillion dollars per year thus far), decent economic growth, slightly reduced spending and the ending of more of the ridiculous backwards laws that plague our country i.e. "Don't ask don't tell".

      replyreport
      1. 55

         Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Josak,
         
         Do you know who started the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy?  That would be a democrat, Clinton.

         replyreport
         1. 67

            Cody Hodge5posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Which was actually a step forward from the outright ban that gay service members faced before that

            replyreport
            1. 55

               Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I agree, but Josak called it one of the "ridiculous backwards laws that plague our country."  Josak was speaking for the POTUS and presumably against his opposition.  I find it interesting that in one breath, Josak could support the POTUS and trash one of his supporters, Bill Clinton.  I find it more likely that Josak blamed conservatives for something a liberal enacted.

               replyreport
      2. 0

         SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Josak,
         
         You forgot: massive tax hikes, stagnant job growth, massive increase in citizens on food stamps.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            How dare people living in poverty get some aid to help them survive?!
            
            HOW DARE THEY?!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               lol
               Yeah because that's exactly what I meant. smh
               
               Would they need it if the President actually did anything for jobs & the economy? I mean, it's been 5 years now.

               replyreport
            2. 55

               Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Many are living in poverty because they can't find jobs.  Many who do find jobs now end up working at something way below their ability; they're underemployed.  Consequently, they need assistance.  Helping people means helping them out of their current economic crisis.  Giving food to people is a temporary fix at best.  It is compassionate and right to help these people, but we're not really helping them unless we promote good job creation.  That hasn't happened under the POTUS.

               replyreport
   3. 0

      Lybrahposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I read somewhere that Obama is "paving the way" for the antichrist.  Not sure what that means, but I still voted for him.  The other guy, I was not sure about.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Going by the adage of "the devil you know"  is better than the unknown, eh?

         replyreport
   4. 71

      rhamsonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Given the choices we had it is hard to determine who would have served "us" better. Obama seems to cater to the poor and minorities with pulling on the heart strings of the wealthy liberals. The Latino vote served him well.
      On the other hand Romney catered to so many different groups with his quotes of the day that it is hard to figure out who would have benefitted most from his actions. Day one would have been historic with all the executive orders he would have rescinded and enacted as per his promises. I still wonder how he would have rescinded a law......
      
      Term limits, publicly financed campaigns and lobby reform will be the only way to reverse this debacle of a democracy.

      replyreport
   5. 66

      innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The re-election of Obama indicates continued support for statism, which is dis-concerting, but Romney would have been just as bad.

      replyreport
   6. 71

      rhamsonposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I am an Independent voter and I regret the choices the two parties put before us. One was a liberal autocrat who continues to test the limits of the economy with a complicit Federal Reserve with empty valued cash thrusts and expanded immigration and minority programs.
      
      The other one was a two faced corporate sell out who would have sold our whole work force out to India and China all the while pocketing the vast proceeds in offshore accounts. He admitted that he would support one segment of society all the while spreading his lies of representing all the peoples best interest.
      
      Shame on these horrible choices and the sheeple who continue to support them.
      
      Term Limits, publicly financed campaigns and lobby reform is the only hope for our country.

      replyreport
2. 61

   Zelkiiroposted 11 years ago

   No matter what Obama does--it doesn't even matter if he eats babies and kicks puppies--he will always and forever be better than Romney would have been.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      really?
      I don't think he eats babies, but he has no qualms about recommending their deaths if they're unwanted.
      So if you wanna be proud to follow someone like that, then that's your choice.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Cody Hodge5posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Sucks when freedom of choice cuts both ways, huh?

         replyreport
   2. 66

      innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      As an argument for voting for Obama, this fails massively. A choice between a known facilitator of terrorism and genocide and a probable one indicates a very dire situation. Does it really matter then whether Obama supports gay rights or not?

      replyreport
      1. 61

         Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I am pretty sure it does matter, it should particularly matter to a libertarian such as yourself I imagine.
         
         As for last election I think most people believe it was pretty dire, the turn out certainly backs that, both were pretty bad.

         replyreport
         1. 66

            innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            When it's been established that both Obama and Romney are pretty similar economically, on foreign policy and on civil liberties, it's only social issues such as gay rights that tip it. I was making the point that Obama's personal views on this particular issue do not tip the balance in his favour a great deal. This is even more significant from a libertarian point of view, seeing as we don't believe government should be involved in marriage at all - no politician's personal views (or anyone else's for that matter) on marriage should dictate who should be allowed to get married. I also don't support the state military, so the whole 'don't ask don't tell' issue is a non-sequiter.

            replyreport
            1. 55

               Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Romney wasn't a conservative, but to claim that he and the POTUS were even remotely similar, when it comes to the economy, is nothing short of shocking.  They weren’t quite polar opposites, but they had significantly different plans to get the economy back on track.  Now, if you said you didn't agree with Romney's economic plan, I'd understand where you are coming from on this issue.  To say they were similar is bewildering. . .to me.  Maybe it's just me.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  They are both in favour of large government spending, monetary stimulus and inflationary policy - basically everything important.

                  replyreport
            2. 61

               Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I don't see how you can't grasp the realities of modern politics however, you may not agree with government sanctioned marriages or the state military but they exist none the less and given they do surely a policy that gives people more freedom within those systems is better than one which does not.

               replyreport
               1. 66

                  innersmiffposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  This is true, but as an abolitionist I cannot say it makes a big enough difference to warrant the endorsement of Obama. I want the candidate that abolishes slavery, not the candidate that wants to give the slaves a longer lunch break.

                  replyreport
   3. 71

      stanwshuraposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Amen!

      replyreport
      1. 55

         Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         To be fair, we really didn't know how the POTUS would be as president until he was elected.  It's not like he had a lot of experience in politics.  After one term, we found out how he was.  We really don't know how Romney would have been, because he didn't have a lot of experience in politics either.  To say that Obama is/was better no matter what, to me, is wrong.  I guess we'll probably never know.

         replyreport
         1. 71

            stanwshuraposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I'm from Massachusetts.  Trust me, as a voracious political consumer and participatory citizen, I can tell you that Romney is an incurable, rich narcissist who would lie to God's face if it would advantage him politically.  The man is selfish, pompous and ruthless.  He listens to no one without considering what's in it for him, including one voter.  His "positions" blow with the wind and America would be a rudderless ship under his put-on of leadership.

            replyreport
            1. 55

               Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               See, I would say the same of the POTUS, other than being fickle.  Our president has always been very clear on his liberal agenda.

               replyreport
3. 80

   Wayne Brownposted 11 years ago

   Only one mistake exceeds that of electing Obama to the presidency....that of re-electing him for another term.  The same stupid action with expectation of a different outcome....the definition of stupidity. ~WB

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I wouldn't have minded McCain too terribly much, but he was chained to that idiot Sarah Palin, so there's no way anyone with a conscience would let them anywhere near the White House.
      
      And the only thing on this planet worse than Sarah Palin is harlequin ichthyosis...which is in a close tie with Mitt Romney.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think they expected a different outcome!   I think they agree with his policies.   Most of them anyway,  the ones who took time to actually see what he's like;  the others just were ignorant of the facts.
      That says a lot about his voters;  they don't expect him to change.   They seem to want to follow the fool.

      replyreport
4. 60

   Chip Shirleyposted 11 years ago

   Concerning Obama and SS...
   I have a pretty unique perspective on the young Liberal crowd because (despite my 57 years) I work at UGA in ALL BLUE Athens GA. I speak with students and young staffers everyday-and I can tell you FOR A FACT that these kids (who worship Noam Chomsky) only agree with the 'Right' on one issue-and that issue is that they think (rightly or wrongly) that SS is going bankrupt and they will never see a penny of what they paid into it.
   I don't think that and I tell them it's not true, but they don't buy it. The most intellectual and activist folks of this crowd actually want Prez-O to make moves to make this retirement program more solvent. I am with you in that I want Prez-O to raise the level of salary on which the rich have to pay into SS and to 'means test it' so that those who don't need it don't get it, but they should still pay in, because we are a nation, not a monarchy.
   But I am convinced that he -PBO- has to do something to keep these young folks from buying into the idea that 'We're not going to get SS, so stop deducting it from our paychecks'. That is important in order to keep them on our side and not let a 'pro-Pot' candidate like Rand Paul win them over by saying 'It's bankrupt, so I'll take less money out of your paycheck by ending or privatizing it'.
   This is a 'for real' factor in this conversation....

   replyreport
5. 0

   Deb Welchposted 11 years ago

   I voted for him on a whim the first time - actually I went to vote for John McCain.  This time I did not vote for him and thought we would have had a greater change for the better with Romney. 
   Let's see what the next crisis will be? JOBS - Benghazi,Default,Mayan Calendar,Fiscal Cliff,Meteors,Debt Ceiling,Climate Change,Gas Prices,New Pope,Gov't Shut Down,Guns,Health Care,Sequester (Source: a cartoon of the week www.upfrontmagazine.com)  the list goes on and on...my answer would lean towards the negative.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Zelkiiroposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The President influences meteors?
      
      Dayum.

      replyreport
6. 59

   Soozie Crumcakesposted 11 years ago

   Ha ha ha! Obama is closer to normal than anyone on Fox News.

   replyreport
7. 58

   Dale Hydeposted 11 years ago

   Irregardless, the majority gave him a second term.  Expectations can be based on his first term which seemed to satisfy the majority.

   replyreport
8. 76

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   Is the reelection of Obama in and of itself a harbinger of bad things to come?
   No.
   Will bad things happen during Obama's second term?
   Yes.
   Some of which would happen regardless of who is president.
   Some of which will no doubt be perceived as "bad things"only by those who think
   everything Obama is or does is bad.

   replyreport
9. 0

   aumolcposted 11 years ago

   President Obama is by far the best president ever because he has tried to dig the country out of the big hole that his predecessor dug and hugely profited from . He has brought home the troops by winding down the war and will do so in Afghanistan next year. He has saved the auto,banking and the housing sector and made the universal health care a law for the first time in the history of that country.
   He could have done more had it not been for the republicans who can not accept that a non white person is the leader of their country even if he is a lot smarter and more educated than the previous presidents. The Bible thumpers hate his middle name Hussain and call him moslem but that does not change the fact that he has done what no other leader has been able to accomplish in short 4 years.
   If he can make election reforms that stop big corporations and rich people (PACs) contribute unlimited amount of money to corrupt the election process and push their own agenda , he will seal his legacy and his face will be carved someday in Mt. Rushmore.

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Education Answerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Comical is an understatement. Sad might be more accurate.  I'm just not a fan of historical fiction. 
      
      I guess Lincoln, Jefferson, and Washington better look out.  According to your assessment, we'll be removing them from our currency in place of the "best president."  Gag, I think I just threw up a little.
      
      Worst president since Carter. . .no since before Carter. 
      
      Here's a little secret.  President Obama's rich too.  Do you hate him now?

      replyreport