People really are narrow, aren't they? 2008, the crisis hit: lost 750k jobs in one month --2.0-3.0% GDP loss,record claims for unemployment benefits, consecutive job losses with unemployment going UP.
3 years later: 20 consecutive months of job creation. lowest level of unemployment claims since mid 2009, 2.0-3.0% GDP growth, recession ended as of 2010, unemployment while high, isn't subject to loss 750k jobs in one month and is going DOWN.
I am 100% sure... Obama will be defeated by a landslide by a GOP nominee. That's 100% sure. One hundred percent! Obama's donors will just waste their money by donating to his campaign.
@GIONELLIO It depends on who that nominee is. Harry Reid would have lost in a landslide in Nevada last year with a candidate that didn't manage to get even higher negatives than he had - and his were very high.
@GIONELLIO I doubt it will be a landslide, but Obama is definitely the underdog with his approval rating dropping every day. All these polls saying "Obama would win today" is the biggest bullshit story of all time, you cannot have that type of a poll unless the GOP finds the right candidate... Ron Paul 2012
@CoolBlue71 If Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich win it will be a victory for the Republicans no doubt, Ron Paul it will be a landslide. Why I say this? Because NO Republican will vote bingo bango (Obama), not only that but Ron Paul is more libertarian then republican, I'm not kidding when I say he will win over 85% of the Independent vote in this country. Even some Democrats like him. By the way, not knowing that the Democrats had control of congress in 2007 proves you have no say in this issue.
@GOllumboy101 The reason why you say that "If Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich win [the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, the general election] will be a victory for the Republicans [no doubt]" is because it's wishful thinking. But I won't deny you your right to fantasize.
"By the way" -- I thank you for informing me that you require at least one emoticon to enable you to understand my earlier response to Observer2The. That is so ... : ( ... for you!
@CoolBlue71 You don't understand... I'm not wishfully thinking when I say no one should be suprised if Ron Paul wins over 70% of the Popular vote... if he was nominated he would get all the Republicans, almost all of the Independents (due to his past support of many moderates) and even some Democrats. Kid there's a movement going on in the Democratic party to switch Republican for a little bit so they can help Ron Paul win the nomination. It IS no doubt.
@a1cjlock New Health Care: Failure. Insurance companies are already but not to the fullest extent (not until 2014 when it takes full effect) are being destroyed, and Health Care costs EVEN MORE! Not to mention it's not free, it FORCES Americans WITHOUT Health Care to pay for it. Lowering Unemployment: Not really, 7.5% when Bush left (Bush was terrible to), now over 8%, the only reason it's dropping slightly now is because of the holiday season, wait till Feb and March.
@a1cjlock This is my 2nd comment: Getting out of Iraq: And then installing almost half of the troops in Iraq to Afghanistan after the Holidays. This not only didn't stop the war, but the spending didn't lower either on the war. How do I know this? My brother is a Navy Nuke on the Enterprise (Aircraft Carrier). Republican Congress: First off, it's a DIVIDED congress, the Repubs control the House, while the Dems control the Senate. The Dems have not passed a budget bill in over 900 days.
@a1cjlock This is my 3rd comment: Not to mention, but he hasn't showed LEADERSHIP as the president for trying to get the divided congress to work. Killing Bin Laden: Navy Seal Team 6 did this, so yeah I'll give you credit there... but on a test he scored 1/5. 20% = an F. No, he did NOT earn another four years. Until you actually stop watching news networks like MSNBC, CNN, and FOX then you can say you're a smart political person. Until then, you sound like you have an IQ below 75. Good day
If the Democrats picked someone other than John Kerry, who is a Democratic equivilant to Mitt Romney, Bush probablly would have lost in 2004. His aprorval ratings in 2004 were below 50% and he remains the only president, at least in modern times, to be re elected with an aproval below 50%. The country was worse off in 2004 than it was in 2000. The economy was worse, we had reocrd debts again, less people had health care, the list goes on and on.
@mr19932001 No. Bush was a wartime president. He wasn't going to lose. Amazing thing, though, is that he won by only 2.46% and 286 electoral votes. Very weak for an incumbent to whom the country was entrusting with the war in Iraq. His job approvals leading up Election 2004 were high enough to suggest a confidence in him. It was his final two years in office it fell apart. That eliminated the feasible possibilty of the Republican Party holding the White House with the results of Election 2008.
@CoolBlue71 He had poor aprroval ratings throughout his whole second term. Usually lower aprroval in a second term is normal for a two term presdint, Clinton and maybe Eisenhower were the only two to have high approval in a second term, but with Bush he had record low approval ratings and while his apporval rating on election day 2004 wasn't much lower than 50% (48%), it was still below 50% and according to Gallup, Bush was the only president to be re elceted with poll #'s below 50%.
@mr19932001 W. was 54% in approval one year from re-election. Last week prior to election, yes, he was at 48%. In weeks leading up to election, he varied: upper-40s and lower-50s percentile. Bush hit below 45% in mid- to late-July 2005, one month before Hurricane Katrina. He went down in August 2005 to 40%. In mid-October 2005, he dipped below 40% with 39%. In early-October 2006, he fell to 37%. (Prior months: some 30s%.) Never hit 40% again during remainder of presidency. (Source: Gallup.com.)
i dont think obama has a chance in 2012 because no other president since HOOVER has been reelected twice with an unemployment rate higher than 7.2 percent-------OBAMA IS ON EXTREMELY THIN ICE
@Mr01271976 Only problem with what you're saying: This unemployment rate happened on the watch of Obama's Republican predecessor. Look back at Election 1936, connect this decade of the 2010s to the 1930s, and I think you'll be proven wrong. The one gets hanged on to the GOP and Bush.
@CoolBlue71 The unemployment rate surged on Obama's watch. The American people can't feel any economic recovery---it's in poll after poll. Obama's is GONE 2012!
@bcoop201 If Obama is gone after 2012, bcoop201, the Republicans would have a worthy cast of electables. As I mentioned, this happened on the watch of Obama's GOP predecessor, W.
@CoolBlue71 "This unemployment rate happened on the watch of Obama's Republican predecessor" That is simply not accurate. The unemployment rate was 4.8% before the Democrats began their ascendancy to power in January 2007. It was all downhill from there as far as the economy and the deficit, and accelerated when they took the White House on top of it.
@CoolBlue71 No genius, he is saying the Democratic party controlled the government... you know, like the Congress? The same one that the Democrats took controll of in 2007... of course no one blamed the "obstructionist" Congress from a different party like this President does now.
@NObama95 Thank you for referring to me as a "genius." But there is no need for you to kiss up to me. What you should do is find yourself an original name. :)
@CoolBlue71 ...no, I didn't say anything of the sort. I was asking you to compare what the economy was like and the unemployment rate prior to the Democrats beginning their ascendancy to power in 2007 and what happened after they took power (and continued to increase their power) in the years to come. It was all downhill from there. Went from 4.8% unemployment to as high as 10%. That's not a good record.
43 Presidents (official number is 44 because Cleveland was elected to non-consecutive terms). 4 were VPs who took office after death of predecessor but never ran for full term. 5 were not elected by popular vote (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe). So, out of 34 Presidents where does George W Bush's Presidential election performance rank historically? 31st out of 34 (Ford was 32nd and he got more of popular vote in 1976 than Bush did in 2000). At bottom of barrel, how appropriate.
The funny thing is that this is exactly what will happen in 2012. The enthusiasm that surrounded Obama is no longer there and the approval ratings have sunk (which is not at all unusual). My point being that a strong Republican can probably win, but with no leadership in the GOP the candidate will be their version of John Kerry and Obama will probably get a second term.
@BrownsGuy815 I disagree. If you notice, Obama's approval ratings have not dropped below 40 in his term so far. Even Reagan never got below 35 when he had EVERYTHING going against him in the winter of '82-'83. George H.W. Bush had broad, but not deep support in 1988. He really did not have a base. Obama does. I still think he will win in a landslide in 2012.
You're only 18 so I'll just say you're ignorant; and instead of bashing me and left-wing folks do a little research (and live a few more years) -- about election 2004 and politics in general! And Spector was old & should have retired; Dems rightfully challeneged his party switch.
What's unfortunate about the 2004 Presidential Election is that the Bush campaign used the tragedy of 9/11 as a scare tactic to get their ticket re-elected by claiming that only their ticket could stop more major attacks, and electing the Kerry ticket would be the cause of any similar tragedies in the future. The McCain ticket did the same thing in 2008, but not to the same extent though Palin tried to get them to do so.
2004 goes down as another disgusting, scandalous election in US history; on par with 2000. The fascist Bush junta successfully stole Ohio and jiggered the vote totals in other states to pad his popular vote (to squelch any questions as to his "legitmacy"). Any doubters can check out the Rep. Conyers report or read "Fooled Again" by Mark Crispin Miller. Their IT tech also died in a "mysterious plane crash" just as he appeared ready to spill all the beans
@marcostar57 left-wingers like your self are pretty cruel. People like you, and people like Glenn Beck on the right, they're the ones holding our country back. The reason moderates like Specter or Bob Bennett are being forced out.
This is so funny in retrospect. I used to look at Bush and believe he was a total idiot. Now I look at him in his speeches and interviews and compared to Obama, Bush looks like a genius. I would do ANYTHING to have Bush as the president again. Obama is the worst president we have ever had IMO.
Nixon and Reagan each won 49 of 50 states.. .THAT is Unity... the opposite of Obama's divisive rule... and in 2000 Bush won every recount (as well as ABC News recount a year later)... Gore couldn't even win his own Tennesse... haha... the only stealing done in country was when JFK stole the election from Nixon in 1960 thru fraud votes in Chicago...and you know how that ended up...
@zach4pussies I just love how Palin gets under the skin of you people. Check the Jimma Carter concession speech from 1980. If your messiah doesn't pull it out soon on the employment front, that will be your boy Barry.
im guessing Obama will have Democratic challengers during his running for reelection. It's gona be hilarious when he loses to someone just as insane as him xD
Even as the Republicans celebrated their victory, little did they know that one victory in Illinois would put the nation's fate at risk. But that will change in 2010 and 2012.
Please...Mike Huckabee isn't that strong of a Conservative to challenge Obama. We need a real CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN not a liberal leaning republican like McCain, who came a little late with his Conservative attitude. Huckabee himself is a little liberal too. I think the best chance we got is Chris Christie, or Sarah Palin. Then again libs are afraid of having a female president, that's why they turned on Hillary Clinton. Wow I thought libs backed women with tooth and nail.
@Mage13246 The media has destroyed Palin, and you can't get more far right then Huckabee without loosing general public support and Christie won't run for president in the near election IMO
Huckabee isn't even on the right wing of the republican party man. He thinks that we should all calm down about Obama, and see things aren't as bad as they we see them. That's in my eyes, is a weak Conservative kissing the ass of his opponent. Huckabee isn't what you call a straight forward Conservative. I personally believe that the most Conservative of them all other than Ron Paul was Fred Thomson. I just can't trust Huckabee to run against charisma, using his softy tactics.
I donts think the Republicans will win! Unless they nominate Paul or Scott Brown, I will NOT vote for them! Plain and Gingrich can't win. They won't attract Independents.
Gingrich and Palin are tea party favorites and so is Steve Poizner. Tea party goers are made up of independents, democrats, republicans, libertarians, conservatives, liberals, etc. If you've noticed, Republicans right now have the independent vote, one of the Republicans with the most is Sarah Palin. Another is Poizner.
lol well atleast whenever you feel like ridding the country of a lot of stupid people you'll know where to go, obama steered you clear of the great depression 2, things aint great but they are the best you could hope for.
Great....another Dem regurgitating the latest talking points from the White House.
How exactly did Obama "save" us from a second Great Depression? it wasn't because of the "stimulus;" Obama said the "stimulus needs to be passed NOW or unemployment will go above 8%. It was passed after no Dems read it & the UE rate is hovering around 10% a year later. And now Obama says we're going to have "elevated" UE rates for some time now.
@Anheuser75 10 percent is relatively minor if you think about it, you complain because under obama its 10 percent, but what would it have been if mccain had got in? if you look at the unemployment stats over the years, every time a repub got in there was a huge spike.
If you think that 10% is a relatively low unemployment rate, then there's no way that I or anyone who actually knows the basics of American economic history can have a constructive discussion with you.
When the so-called "stimulus" bill was rushed through in February 2009, Pres. Obama said that if this bill was passed, unemployment would NOT rise over 8%. Oops!
Lately the Obama administration says that we are going to have "elevated" unemployment levels for some time now.
your in a recession, what do you expect, you can hate obama and whine on and on but i bet if mccain had got in you'd be whining about a higher unemployement rate, look at what the situation could have been and then look at what it is, history will vindicate obama.
Ah yes, if I criticize the infallible Obama I must be "hating" on him. Please!
Obama's "stimulus" was a massive failure. The private sector isn't creating any jobs b/c the "stimulus" doesn't give them any incentive to. McCain would have eased restrictions & taxes on small businesses, thus motivating them to expand & hire people. W/ the recent health care debacle, businesses will be less-motivated to hire.
History will not vindicate Obama, regardless of unquestioning support of him.
@Anheuser75 and then conversely if i support obama im some sort of cultist brainwashed communist slave... who told you that, limbaugh? im a free market capitalist, its just the USA has been a corporist country for nearly a century, if its going to be a controlled market it may aswell work to the advantage of the people. i think its you who's unquestioning, you see me, siding with obama on something, and assume that i'm an "unquestioning" supporter, that, in itself is unquestioning.
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz I never called you a "brainwashed, communist slave." And why do left-wingers always cite Limbaugh (whom they never listen to) to try to bolster their weak arguments?
Your "unquestioned" support is shown by your pathetic claim that 10% unemployment is low. You're so desperate to support Obama that you would make such an ignorant comment.
BTW, all Obama voters aren't "unquestioning;" many independents have left Obama in droves.
@Anheuser75 did you read what i said "im a free market capitalist", assuming you recognise that "left and "right" are entirely economic terms, capitalism being far right communism far left, how do you figure im a lefty, i didnt cite rush limbaugh, i poked fun at him. and notice when i said "low" i also said relatively - you could have had the great depression 2, which im fairly sure maxed at around 25% UE in the usa, but you didnt, you have 10, consider yourself lucky.
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz Once again there is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that the "stimulus" bill rammed through Congress "saved" us from another depression. That's just an unfounded, irresponsible talking point sent out by the White House & repeated in an "unquestioning" manner by lemmings. It completely lacks any intellectual merit whatsoever.
BTW, do you give Bush's TARP program any credit for helping the economy?
@Anheuser75 well the fact your not sitting with 25% unemployment speaks for itself, just because i agree with the white house on some points, dont think me a lemming, anyway i think TARP probably helped in the short term though, being a capitalist, i think its just delaying the inevitable, rewarding failure and such. anyways cant be fucked with these silly youtube debates, you missed most of my points and i daresay you'd say the same so theres no point in this really.
"the fact your not sitting with 25% unemployment speaks for itself" - Once again, your complete FAILURE to prove your assertion that any of Obama's policies avoided a Great Depression is glaring. Why can't you prove it if you know it's true? Your inability to do so SPEAKS VOLUMES!
""anyways cant be fucked with these silly youtube debates, you missed most of my points " - I didn't miss any of your points. In fact, many of the things that I said were passed over by you. I just don't reply to everything you typed simply b/c of time & YouTube's restrictions on characters doesn't allow me to completely dismantle your arguments.
"just because i agree with the white house on some points, dont think me a lemming" - whenever someone repeats a ridiculous White House talking point verbatim with such passion, that qualifies them as a"lemming" on that issue. I know that you claim there are certain things about Obama that you don't support, but I doubt that assertion...you had your chance to prove it multiple times but failed to do so.
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz BTW, "left" & "right" are NOT economic terms! They are purely political terms. On the Economic Systems spectrum, free market capitalism usu. is on the left side, whereas command economies (socialism) is on the right. These positions have no similarity to the political designations of "left" & "right." Where do you get your information from?
I seriously doubt you're a free market capitalist.
"you might think they arent, but i understand them to be economic management terms for a country, try the political compass" - I'm familiar w/ the "political compass;" however, it's the creation of a single website and NOT an official designation of what is politically or economically "left" & "right." It's merely an interesting hybrid model, not an established methodology used by economists, pol. scientists & historians.
@Anheuser75 whatever man i got better things to be doing than sitting on youtube argueing with a person who's on a totally different wavelength. we aint going to agree, theres no point having a battle when we cant agree on the battlefield so lets just skip this crap.
"we aint going to agree, theres no point having a battle when we cant agree on the battlefield so lets just skip this crap." - Please remember how this all started: your assertion that Obama saved the US from a 2nd Great Depression. I asked you to prove it & instead you go off on several unrelated tangents. I responded to some of those tangents but still asked for you to prove your original assertion. It's too bad that you couldn't.
@Anheuser75 lol knew you couldnt just leave it, i dont know if he did or not, nobody does, you cant "prove" very much in politics because its so subjective, i personally, having looked at the recession as a whole, what it could have been, and what it was, i think we have come out pretty well from it in all, now fuck sake, go do something fun instead of typing out like 5 comments on about "the tangents of your assertion are astronomical"
If you claim that "you can't prove very much in politics," then how in the world could you claim that Obama saved the US from a 2nd GD? You have no clue what the recession "could have been;" you just regurgitated propaganda from the Obama White House, and then you get all offended when someone actually challenges you.
In the real world, one needs to back up such bold assertions with actual facts.
2. This quote: "the USA has been a corporist country for nearly a century, if its going to be a controlled market it may aswell work to the advantage of the people"
Who do you think owns corporations? Normal people who buy shares of stock do! Corps hire millions of people & make goods the people want. They already work to the "advantage of the people."
@Anheuser75 yeah corps do do that, but they wont really need to bother with appeasement of shareholders if they have a monopoly, which is what you get with corporatism, the govt favours the big guy, dems or repubs here, read any economic libertarian philosophy and you'll soon find corporatism coming up.
"yeah corps do do that, but they wont really need to bother with appeasement of shareholders if they have a monopoly, which is what you get with corporatism, the govt favours the big guy, dems or repubs here, read any economic libertarian philosophy and you'll soon find corporatism coming up" - Wow, what a bunch of mindless, directionless babble!
Also, free market supporters do not use the terms "corporist country" or "advantage of the people." Those are terms that a Marxist or any supporter of socialism would use! Don't believe me? Read "The Communist Manifesto" & replace "bourgeoisie" w/ "corporation" and "proletariat" w/ "people."
@Anheuser75 no, a republican wouldnt say corporist country, because they basically live to defend corps, i simply want no government favouritism towards business, for the little man to be able to come up the ladder too, but i realise that people arent likely to vote that in, theres a choice between a party which has some members who intervene to help people, and then a party which intervenes to help out their rich buddies, or to enforce their own morality, i'd chose the half assed helpers.
"a republican wouldnt say corporist country, because they basically live to defend corps" - Democrat talking point - Obama moved to save GM & other corps.
"i simply want no government favouritism towards business" - Dems don't favour certain businesses? Are you kidding me? How about all the pol. favors to labor unions.
"a party (GOP) which intervenes to help out their rich buddies" - another Dem talking point. It's good to know that the Dems don't have "rich buddies"
don't thank god too long...looks like Obama is a one term guy...next President will be Rep again, but as it turns out with Obama...what's the difference?
The Republicans would never choose Powell. he is pro choice. He also backed Obama in 08 - right at the end. And Romney has no base. Obama is safe unless he reallty screws up in a big way. He'll lose control of Congress, but he'll keep the white house.
@rossmcl177 Romney does have a base. He was governor of MA and he was a former presidential candidate. He is also very likeable and knows how to handle a "broken" economy.
@rossmcl177 Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Many winners of past Presidential elections were unheard of in the prior election. Obama may have been elected to the Senate in 04 but I still had never heard of him until 2007. There very well could be someone out there we haven't heard about who could blow in in 2012 and beat Obama, but I think anyone will be able to beat Obama in 2012, the man is not fit for the Presidency at all.
@rossmcl177 By the way, you are in England. So you don't know as much about this country and our politics as you think you do. Your opinion is just that, your opinion.
@rossmcl177 That's true, also they keep making Obama's approval rating out to be an early 2012 indicator, when in reality Reagan's was actually lower than Obama's at the same point in his presidency and he won by a landslide in the 1984 election.
@redsoxfan426 LOL so you think only a wishy washy moderate could beat Obama? How did McCain the moderate fair against Obama? If the Republican Party nominates a strong conservative, we will re take the white house in 2012 I have no doubt.
@DIZZZZY1975 Buddy, in politics six months is a long time. For you to say that Obama is a one term president with three years in his term is the epitome of "living in the moment." Polls are just a snapshot in time.
@Jacoby515 Ronald Reagan had a 35 percent Approval Rating in 1983 about the same time in his term as Obama currently is in now. Who would have guessed that he would win 49 states in November 1984? I'm just saying people shouldn't live in the moment. When Obama won in 2008, I had a feeling that the Democrats may lose the House. In fact, the Republicans winning the House is one reason why I think he will win.
@MIKESOWELL predictions are one thing but you have to look at what the president is doing now like healthcare and spending. those are issues the american people dislike as a majorityin this country and so far obama shows no signs of changing his mind on what put him in the position of disapproval. clinton in 94 lost congress but afterwards he changed his place on the opinions of the people that kept him in office in 96. obama isnt doing that and hasnt tried to at least.
Ah yes keep crying libs. Bush was president grow up! You got the bottle now happy? You're getting your socialized healthcare which was just denounced in Europe, and soon in to be gotten rid of in Canada. You Libs were given the bottle and are still crying over 2000/2004. LET IT GO!
Oh Im sorry I thought you Libs were "Tolerant" sorry if I broke your communist law which states that nobody is allowed to speak their minds or voice their opinions. Im sorry if I ever offended you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Public Healthcare has failed everywhere fyi.
The EU elections in may were heavily conservative and Canada has a Conservative Prime Minister. Sorry but your socialist utopia is not going to become a reality anytime soon. Keep living in your fantasies as you insult those who let their voices be heard regaurdless of what anyone might say about it. So I must say, good day.
If Kerry had won in 2004, Obama would not have been able to run 4 years later, as John Kerry would have been running for a second term against some other Republican, though it most likely would have been John McCain.
what a sore loser Keyes is. and why are still people talking about the rumor that has been debunked like a million times about obama's birth certificates. give it a rest people. the man is an American. and even if he wasn't born in America he is still a US citizen because his was an American.
i was thinking the same thing. no one knew he would become president. i don't think Obama even imagined that he would become president of the United States 4 years later.
I don't understand why Democrats don't like bush, Barack Obama is essentially bush. Same foreign policy, continuing the war, on pace to spend more than bush did in eight years, only obama will do it in 2. And for all the spending he has done, he hasn't delivered the climate or healthcare items he promised. He has increased troop presence in afghanistan, and still has predator drone strikes in pakistan. You guys elected a black president bush.
Four years of fascism that cost the US more than we could ever imagine. Two corporate stooges in the Supreme Court and countless innocent US soldiers sent to die in Iraq over a lie.
@Librarien Where the &$%# is the sound?
MrSteelerfever 1 day ago
skull and bones
GrabarzLewicy 2 days ago
rip peter jennings
Joebastwin 2 days ago
aaaahhhh peter good to see you again
SpaceObake 1 week ago
All the idiots that voted for Bush in 2004 owe me a beer !!
dopamine83 1 week ago
@dopamine83 LOL
TheEZPAXIIChannel 1 week ago
Looks like the Tea Party loons took over this post! OBAMA FOUR MORE YEARS!!
a1cjlock 1 month ago
that fox news guy is something else.
presidentbren 1 month ago
both kerry and dumbass bush are both nwo puppets
paintballforlife06 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People really are narrow, aren't they? 2008, the crisis hit: lost 750k jobs in one month --2.0-3.0% GDP loss,record claims for unemployment benefits, consecutive job losses with unemployment going UP.
3 years later: 20 consecutive months of job creation. lowest level of unemployment claims since mid 2009, 2.0-3.0% GDP growth, recession ended as of 2010, unemployment while high, isn't subject to loss 750k jobs in one month and is going DOWN.
Short term memory must hurt.
Arzgan 1 month ago
Comment removed
Arzgan 1 month ago
this was the birth of the devil. only up north.go figure.
billy1975e 1 month ago
I am 100% sure... Obama will be defeated by a landslide by a GOP nominee. That's 100% sure. One hundred percent! Obama's donors will just waste their money by donating to his campaign.
GIONELLIO 2 months ago
@GIONELLIO Doubtful
Gold21030 2 months ago
@GIONELLIO It depends on who that nominee is. Harry Reid would have lost in a landslide in Nevada last year with a candidate that didn't manage to get even higher negatives than he had - and his were very high.
Observer2The 2 months ago
@GIONELLIO I doubt it will be a landslide, but Obama is definitely the underdog with his approval rating dropping every day. All these polls saying "Obama would win today" is the biggest bullshit story of all time, you cannot have that type of a poll unless the GOP finds the right candidate... Ron Paul 2012
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
@GOllumboy101 Not a bad idea to bet on a "landslide." Against the Republican "challenger." Romney. Gingrich. Whomever.
CoolBlue71 1 month ago
@CoolBlue71 If Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich win it will be a victory for the Republicans no doubt, Ron Paul it will be a landslide. Why I say this? Because NO Republican will vote bingo bango (Obama), not only that but Ron Paul is more libertarian then republican, I'm not kidding when I say he will win over 85% of the Independent vote in this country. Even some Democrats like him. By the way, not knowing that the Democrats had control of congress in 2007 proves you have no say in this issue.
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
@GOllumboy101 The reason why you say that "If Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich win [the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, the general election] will be a victory for the Republicans [no doubt]" is because it's wishful thinking. But I won't deny you your right to fantasize.
"By the way" -- I thank you for informing me that you require at least one emoticon to enable you to understand my earlier response to Observer2The. That is so ... : ( ... for you!
; )
CoolBlue71 1 month ago
@CoolBlue71 You don't understand... I'm not wishfully thinking when I say no one should be suprised if Ron Paul wins over 70% of the Popular vote... if he was nominated he would get all the Republicans, almost all of the Independents (due to his past support of many moderates) and even some Democrats. Kid there's a movement going on in the Democratic party to switch Republican for a little bit so they can help Ron Paul win the nomination. It IS no doubt.
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
Changing the Health Care system, Check
Lowering the Unemployment, Check
Getting out of Iraq, Check
Not waying to a disfuntion Repulican congress, Check
KILLING BIN LADEN CHECK CHECK CHECK!!
Yup! He's earned another four years to improve the economy!
a1cjlock 1 month ago
@a1cjlock New Health Care: Failure. Insurance companies are already but not to the fullest extent (not until 2014 when it takes full effect) are being destroyed, and Health Care costs EVEN MORE! Not to mention it's not free, it FORCES Americans WITHOUT Health Care to pay for it. Lowering Unemployment: Not really, 7.5% when Bush left (Bush was terrible to), now over 8%, the only reason it's dropping slightly now is because of the holiday season, wait till Feb and March.
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
@a1cjlock This is my 2nd comment: Getting out of Iraq: And then installing almost half of the troops in Iraq to Afghanistan after the Holidays. This not only didn't stop the war, but the spending didn't lower either on the war. How do I know this? My brother is a Navy Nuke on the Enterprise (Aircraft Carrier). Republican Congress: First off, it's a DIVIDED congress, the Repubs control the House, while the Dems control the Senate. The Dems have not passed a budget bill in over 900 days.
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
@a1cjlock This is my 3rd comment: Not to mention, but he hasn't showed LEADERSHIP as the president for trying to get the divided congress to work. Killing Bin Laden: Navy Seal Team 6 did this, so yeah I'll give you credit there... but on a test he scored 1/5. 20% = an F. No, he did NOT earn another four years. Until you actually stop watching news networks like MSNBC, CNN, and FOX then you can say you're a smart political person. Until then, you sound like you have an IQ below 75. Good day
GOllumboy101 1 month ago
@a1cjlock
It will add Trillions to the deficit, and make care less quality.
Nope, unemployment always goes down during the holidays, when the part time workers are laid off its gonna be as high as ever
And shipping most of those troops to Afghanistan?
Obama Did Not Kill Bin Laden, The United States Military Did!
I will give him some accomplishments though
Dramatic Increase in Defecit CHECK!
Not fixing the country when the dems had both houses of Congress and hte President CHECK!
ChannelGameshow 2 weeks ago
@ChannelGameshow Unemployment data is seasonally adjusted.
krnchicken 2 weeks ago
obama and al gore yaaaa
somany5 2 months ago
this fuking nation deserve exactly wat it got wars fuking eceonomy and other bad things for heplping this fools win by a landslide
samantha34ize 3 months ago
Two niggers. One Winner!
zz4guy 3 months ago
Good that John Kerry didn't win.
Packerd01 3 months ago
@Packerd01 It's no better that that ass Bush won.
Ron Paul 2012.
IBloodSweatTears 3 months ago
haha barack. Little did he know he would become president 4 years later
dportillo25 3 months ago
Kerry? He was more pathetic than Gore.
happyLILwierdo 3 months ago
0:19 :(
michaelm0522 4 months ago
KARL ROVE GENIUS !
TheJayEffkay 4 months ago
If the Democrats picked someone other than John Kerry, who is a Democratic equivilant to Mitt Romney, Bush probablly would have lost in 2004. His aprorval ratings in 2004 were below 50% and he remains the only president, at least in modern times, to be re elected with an aproval below 50%. The country was worse off in 2004 than it was in 2000. The economy was worse, we had reocrd debts again, less people had health care, the list goes on and on.
mr19932001 4 months ago
@mr19932001 No. Bush was a wartime president. He wasn't going to lose. Amazing thing, though, is that he won by only 2.46% and 286 electoral votes. Very weak for an incumbent to whom the country was entrusting with the war in Iraq. His job approvals leading up Election 2004 were high enough to suggest a confidence in him. It was his final two years in office it fell apart. That eliminated the feasible possibilty of the Republican Party holding the White House with the results of Election 2008.
CoolBlue71 3 months ago
@CoolBlue71 He had poor aprroval ratings throughout his whole second term. Usually lower aprroval in a second term is normal for a two term presdint, Clinton and maybe Eisenhower were the only two to have high approval in a second term, but with Bush he had record low approval ratings and while his apporval rating on election day 2004 wasn't much lower than 50% (48%), it was still below 50% and according to Gallup, Bush was the only president to be re elceted with poll #'s below 50%.
mr19932001 3 months ago
@mr19932001 W. was 54% in approval one year from re-election. Last week prior to election, yes, he was at 48%. In weeks leading up to election, he varied: upper-40s and lower-50s percentile. Bush hit below 45% in mid- to late-July 2005, one month before Hurricane Katrina. He went down in August 2005 to 40%. In mid-October 2005, he dipped below 40% with 39%. In early-October 2006, he fell to 37%. (Prior months: some 30s%.) Never hit 40% again during remainder of presidency. (Source: Gallup.com.)
CoolBlue71 3 months ago
i dont think obama has a chance in 2012 because no other president since HOOVER has been reelected twice with an unemployment rate higher than 7.2 percent-------OBAMA IS ON EXTREMELY THIN ICE
Mr01271976 5 months ago
@Mr01271976 FDR...
DennisQLy 3 months ago
@Mr01271976 Only problem with what you're saying: This unemployment rate happened on the watch of Obama's Republican predecessor. Look back at Election 1936, connect this decade of the 2010s to the 1930s, and I think you'll be proven wrong. The one gets hanged on to the GOP and Bush.
CoolBlue71 3 months ago
@CoolBlue71 The unemployment rate surged on Obama's watch. The American people can't feel any economic recovery---it's in poll after poll. Obama's is GONE 2012!
bcoop201 3 months ago 2
@bcoop201 If Obama is gone after 2012, bcoop201, the Republicans would have a worthy cast of electables. As I mentioned, this happened on the watch of Obama's GOP predecessor, W.
CoolBlue71 2 months ago
@bcoop201 And he has 403 DAYS TO GO!
vccstudents 1 month ago
@bcoop201 And he has 403 DAYS TO GO!
vccstudents 1 month ago
@CoolBlue71 "This unemployment rate happened on the watch of Obama's Republican predecessor" That is simply not accurate. The unemployment rate was 4.8% before the Democrats began their ascendancy to power in January 2007. It was all downhill from there as far as the economy and the deficit, and accelerated when they took the White House on top of it.
Observer2The 2 months ago
@Observer2The So, you're saying that in 2007 it was the Democratic Party that had the presidency? That George W. Bush was a Democrat?
CoolBlue71 2 months ago
@CoolBlue71 No genius, he is saying the Democratic party controlled the government... you know, like the Congress? The same one that the Democrats took controll of in 2007... of course no one blamed the "obstructionist" Congress from a different party like this President does now.
NObama95 1 month ago
@NObama95 Thank you for referring to me as a "genius." But there is no need for you to kiss up to me. What you should do is find yourself an original name. :)
CoolBlue71 1 month ago
@CoolBlue71 ...no, I didn't say anything of the sort. I was asking you to compare what the economy was like and the unemployment rate prior to the Democrats beginning their ascendancy to power in 2007 and what happened after they took power (and continued to increase their power) in the years to come. It was all downhill from there. Went from 4.8% unemployment to as high as 10%. That's not a good record.
Observer2The 1 month ago
43 Presidents (official number is 44 because Cleveland was elected to non-consecutive terms). 4 were VPs who took office after death of predecessor but never ran for full term. 5 were not elected by popular vote (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe). So, out of 34 Presidents where does George W Bush's Presidential election performance rank historically? 31st out of 34 (Ford was 32nd and he got more of popular vote in 1976 than Bush did in 2000). At bottom of barrel, how appropriate.
industrialsun 5 months ago
yay abc 7 chicago
hammer101peeps 7 months ago
Most depressing election ever...
RavenMichaels 7 months ago
Palin is a slut and will lost to Obama next year!
SaleGuy 8 months ago
1. Learn proper grammar. "Lost" is past tense.
2. Palin will obviously NOT be the GOP nominee.
3. Obozo sucks donkey dicks.
Edgehead10075 8 months ago
@Edgehead10075 Palin only sucks and fucks for political gain just like Monica!
SaleGuy 8 months ago
The funny thing is that this is exactly what will happen in 2012. The enthusiasm that surrounded Obama is no longer there and the approval ratings have sunk (which is not at all unusual). My point being that a strong Republican can probably win, but with no leadership in the GOP the candidate will be their version of John Kerry and Obama will probably get a second term.
BrownsGuy815 11 months ago
@BrownsGuy815 I disagree. If you notice, Obama's approval ratings have not dropped below 40 in his term so far. Even Reagan never got below 35 when he had EVERYTHING going against him in the winter of '82-'83. George H.W. Bush had broad, but not deep support in 1988. He really did not have a base. Obama does. I still think he will win in a landslide in 2012.
MIKESOWELL 10 months ago
Stop the right vs. left arguments. Vote Ron Paul in 2012! the real centrist. Can't wait for the negative votes. :p
paperhandsunion 11 months ago
@paperhandsunion thats if he goes to the primaries
Jacoby515 10 months ago
You're only 18 so I'll just say you're ignorant; and instead of bashing me and left-wing folks do a little research (and live a few more years) -- about election 2004 and politics in general! And Spector was old & should have retired; Dems rightfully challeneged his party switch.
marcostar57 1 year ago
What's unfortunate about the 2004 Presidential Election is that the Bush campaign used the tragedy of 9/11 as a scare tactic to get their ticket re-elected by claiming that only their ticket could stop more major attacks, and electing the Kerry ticket would be the cause of any similar tragedies in the future. The McCain ticket did the same thing in 2008, but not to the same extent though Palin tried to get them to do so.
redsoxfan426 1 year ago
2004 goes down as another disgusting, scandalous election in US history; on par with 2000. The fascist Bush junta successfully stole Ohio and jiggered the vote totals in other states to pad his popular vote (to squelch any questions as to his "legitmacy"). Any doubters can check out the Rep. Conyers report or read "Fooled Again" by Mark Crispin Miller. Their IT tech also died in a "mysterious plane crash" just as he appeared ready to spill all the beans
marcostar57 1 year ago
@marcostar57 liberals are so funny
jsa4ever92 1 year ago
@jsa4ever92 Right-wingers are so stupid.
marcostar57 1 year ago
@marcostar57 left-wingers like your self are pretty cruel. People like you, and people like Glenn Beck on the right, they're the ones holding our country back. The reason moderates like Specter or Bob Bennett are being forced out.
jsa4ever92 1 year ago
This is so funny in retrospect. I used to look at Bush and believe he was a total idiot. Now I look at him in his speeches and interviews and compared to Obama, Bush looks like a genius. I would do ANYTHING to have Bush as the president again. Obama is the worst president we have ever had IMO.
calvinmurray 1 year ago
i voted for kerry
TheHockey1989 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nixon and Reagan each won 49 of 50 states.. .THAT is Unity... the opposite of Obama's divisive rule... and in 2000 Bush won every recount (as well as ABC News recount a year later)... Gore couldn't even win his own Tennesse... haha... the only stealing done in country was when JFK stole the election from Nixon in 1960 thru fraud votes in Chicago...and you know how that ended up...
WindAndTheLion 1 year ago
Keyes would've been a much better senator
ekoppisch 1 year ago
Keys is bitter to this day towards about Obama.
nmr20067 1 year ago
A freshman Senator is now President? Lord help us....
freakylocz14 1 year ago
Dammmmm 81% wow
vgcq02 1 year ago
most americans like george w. bush.
exbronco1980 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@exbronco1980 wrong....way wrong...what planet do you live on???
LAWSTUDENT33 1 year ago
at 5:44 he sounds heartbroken... poor guy ; ;
Excalibur1201 1 year ago
God, Alan Keyes is a piece of shit. 17%? The GOP should have come up with somebody better to face Obozo.
Edgehead10075 1 year ago
@Edgehead10075 Fuck you bitch!
zach4pussies 8 months ago
To what are you referring?
Edgehead10075 8 months ago
@zach4pussies I just love how Palin gets under the skin of you people. Check the Jimma Carter concession speech from 1980. If your messiah doesn't pull it out soon on the employment front, that will be your boy Barry.
chrisput1024 7 months ago
im guessing Obama will have Democratic challengers during his running for reelection. It's gona be hilarious when he loses to someone just as insane as him xD
Mage13246 1 year ago
Even as the Republicans celebrated their victory, little did they know that one victory in Illinois would put the nation's fate at risk. But that will change in 2010 and 2012.
ACoolDudeProduction 1 year ago
Mike Huckabee can beat Obama
MrLoganDunleavy 1 year ago
@MrLoganDunleavy
Please...Mike Huckabee isn't that strong of a Conservative to challenge Obama. We need a real CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN not a liberal leaning republican like McCain, who came a little late with his Conservative attitude. Huckabee himself is a little liberal too. I think the best chance we got is Chris Christie, or Sarah Palin. Then again libs are afraid of having a female president, that's why they turned on Hillary Clinton. Wow I thought libs backed women with tooth and nail.
Mage13246 1 year ago
@Mage13246 The media has destroyed Palin, and you can't get more far right then Huckabee without loosing general public support and Christie won't run for president in the near election IMO
MrLoganDunleavy 1 year ago
@MrLoganDunleavy
Huckabee isn't even on the right wing of the republican party man. He thinks that we should all calm down about Obama, and see things aren't as bad as they we see them. That's in my eyes, is a weak Conservative kissing the ass of his opponent. Huckabee isn't what you call a straight forward Conservative. I personally believe that the most Conservative of them all other than Ron Paul was Fred Thomson. I just can't trust Huckabee to run against charisma, using his softy tactics.
Mage13246 1 year ago
@albokiller23
I donts think the Republicans will win! Unless they nominate Paul or Scott Brown, I will NOT vote for them! Plain and Gingrich can't win. They won't attract Independents.
Empoli5 1 year ago
@Empoli5 ron paul will not get backed up by the conservative base
albokiller23 1 year ago
@Empoli5
Gingrich and Palin are tea party favorites and so is Steve Poizner. Tea party goers are made up of independents, democrats, republicans, libertarians, conservatives, liberals, etc. If you've noticed, Republicans right now have the independent vote, one of the Republicans with the most is Sarah Palin. Another is Poizner.
Mage13246 1 year ago
Palin will be the nominee!
Empoli5 1 year ago
@Empoli5 she will be the vp under newt gingrich and have a huge victory cant wait
albokiller23 1 year ago
@albokiller23=Bitch!
mr300ism 8 months ago
Hooray! For the first minute............groan for the rest of this......
bigfilmhat 1 year ago
lol well atleast whenever you feel like ridding the country of a lot of stupid people you'll know where to go, obama steered you clear of the great depression 2, things aint great but they are the best you could hope for.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
Great....another Dem regurgitating the latest talking points from the White House.
How exactly did Obama "save" us from a second Great Depression? it wasn't because of the "stimulus;" Obama said the "stimulus needs to be passed NOW or unemployment will go above 8%. It was passed after no Dems read it & the UE rate is hovering around 10% a year later. And now Obama says we're going to have "elevated" UE rates for some time now.
So what exactly did Obama do to "save" us?
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 10 percent is relatively minor if you think about it, you complain because under obama its 10 percent, but what would it have been if mccain had got in? if you look at the unemployment stats over the years, every time a repub got in there was a huge spike.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuan
If you think that 10% is a relatively low unemployment rate, then there's no way that I or anyone who actually knows the basics of American economic history can have a constructive discussion with you.
When the so-called "stimulus" bill was rushed through in February 2009, Pres. Obama said that if this bill was passed, unemployment would NOT rise over 8%. Oops!
Lately the Obama administration says that we are going to have "elevated" unemployment levels for some time now.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
your in a recession, what do you expect, you can hate obama and whine on and on but i bet if mccain had got in you'd be whining about a higher unemployement rate, look at what the situation could have been and then look at what it is, history will vindicate obama.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
Ah yes, if I criticize the infallible Obama I must be "hating" on him. Please!
Obama's "stimulus" was a massive failure. The private sector isn't creating any jobs b/c the "stimulus" doesn't give them any incentive to. McCain would have eased restrictions & taxes on small businesses, thus motivating them to expand & hire people. W/ the recent health care debacle, businesses will be less-motivated to hire.
History will not vindicate Obama, regardless of unquestioning support of him.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 and then conversely if i support obama im some sort of cultist brainwashed communist slave... who told you that, limbaugh? im a free market capitalist, its just the USA has been a corporist country for nearly a century, if its going to be a controlled market it may aswell work to the advantage of the people. i think its you who's unquestioning, you see me, siding with obama on something, and assume that i'm an "unquestioning" supporter, that, in itself is unquestioning.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz I never called you a "brainwashed, communist slave." And why do left-wingers always cite Limbaugh (whom they never listen to) to try to bolster their weak arguments?
Your "unquestioned" support is shown by your pathetic claim that 10% unemployment is low. You're so desperate to support Obama that you would make such an ignorant comment.
BTW, all Obama voters aren't "unquestioning;" many independents have left Obama in droves.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 did you read what i said "im a free market capitalist", assuming you recognise that "left and "right" are entirely economic terms, capitalism being far right communism far left, how do you figure im a lefty, i didnt cite rush limbaugh, i poked fun at him. and notice when i said "low" i also said relatively - you could have had the great depression 2, which im fairly sure maxed at around 25% UE in the usa, but you didnt, you have 10, consider yourself lucky.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz Once again there is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that the "stimulus" bill rammed through Congress "saved" us from another depression. That's just an unfounded, irresponsible talking point sent out by the White House & repeated in an "unquestioning" manner by lemmings. It completely lacks any intellectual merit whatsoever.
BTW, do you give Bush's TARP program any credit for helping the economy?
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 well the fact your not sitting with 25% unemployment speaks for itself, just because i agree with the white house on some points, dont think me a lemming, anyway i think TARP probably helped in the short term though, being a capitalist, i think its just delaying the inevitable, rewarding failure and such. anyways cant be fucked with these silly youtube debates, you missed most of my points and i daresay you'd say the same so theres no point in this really.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"the fact your not sitting with 25% unemployment speaks for itself" - Once again, your complete FAILURE to prove your assertion that any of Obama's policies avoided a Great Depression is glaring. Why can't you prove it if you know it's true? Your inability to do so SPEAKS VOLUMES!
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
""anyways cant be fucked with these silly youtube debates, you missed most of my points " - I didn't miss any of your points. In fact, many of the things that I said were passed over by you. I just don't reply to everything you typed simply b/c of time & YouTube's restrictions on characters doesn't allow me to completely dismantle your arguments.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"just because i agree with the white house on some points, dont think me a lemming" - whenever someone repeats a ridiculous White House talking point verbatim with such passion, that qualifies them as a"lemming" on that issue. I know that you claim there are certain things about Obama that you don't support, but I doubt that assertion...you had your chance to prove it multiple times but failed to do so.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz BTW, "left" & "right" are NOT economic terms! They are purely political terms. On the Economic Systems spectrum, free market capitalism usu. is on the left side, whereas command economies (socialism) is on the right. These positions have no similarity to the political designations of "left" & "right." Where do you get your information from?
I seriously doubt you're a free market capitalist.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 you might think they arent, but i understand them to be economic management terms for a country, try the political compass.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"you might think they arent, but i understand them to be economic management terms for a country, try the political compass" - I'm familiar w/ the "political compass;" however, it's the creation of a single website and NOT an official designation of what is politically or economically "left" & "right." It's merely an interesting hybrid model, not an established methodology used by economists, pol. scientists & historians.
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 whatever man i got better things to be doing than sitting on youtube argueing with a person who's on a totally different wavelength. we aint going to agree, theres no point having a battle when we cant agree on the battlefield so lets just skip this crap.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"we aint going to agree, theres no point having a battle when we cant agree on the battlefield so lets just skip this crap." - Please remember how this all started: your assertion that Obama saved the US from a 2nd Great Depression. I asked you to prove it & instead you go off on several unrelated tangents. I responded to some of those tangents but still asked for you to prove your original assertion. It's too bad that you couldn't.
Anheuser75 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@Anheuser75 lol knew you couldnt just leave it, i dont know if he did or not, nobody does, you cant "prove" very much in politics because its so subjective, i personally, having looked at the recession as a whole, what it could have been, and what it was, i think we have come out pretty well from it in all, now fuck sake, go do something fun instead of typing out like 5 comments on about "the tangents of your assertion are astronomical"
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz Speaking of not being able to "leave it" alone.
If you claim that "you can't prove very much in politics," then how in the world could you claim that Obama saved the US from a 2nd GD? You have no clue what the recession "could have been;" you just regurgitated propaganda from the Obama White House, and then you get all offended when someone actually challenges you.
In the real world, one needs to back up such bold assertions with actual facts.
Anheuser75 1 year ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@Anheuser75 good thing the allknowing anheuser is here, to melt away the propoganda and save us from our own ignorance.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz How do I know that you're not a free market capitalist?
1. You regurgitate Obama talking points.
2. This quote: "the USA has been a corporist country for nearly a century, if its going to be a controlled market it may aswell work to the advantage of the people"
Who do you think owns corporations? Normal people who buy shares of stock do! Corps hire millions of people & make goods the people want. They already work to the "advantage of the people."
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 yeah corps do do that, but they wont really need to bother with appeasement of shareholders if they have a monopoly, which is what you get with corporatism, the govt favours the big guy, dems or repubs here, read any economic libertarian philosophy and you'll soon find corporatism coming up.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
Comment removed
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"yeah corps do do that, but they wont really need to bother with appeasement of shareholders if they have a monopoly, which is what you get with corporatism, the govt favours the big guy, dems or repubs here, read any economic libertarian philosophy and you'll soon find corporatism coming up" - Wow, what a bunch of mindless, directionless babble!
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz BTW, Corps were already heavily regulated long-before Obama.
Also, free market supporters do not use the terms "corporist country" or "advantage of the people." Those are terms that a Marxist or any supporter of socialism would use! Don't believe me? Read "The Communist Manifesto" & replace "bourgeoisie" w/ "corporation" and "proletariat" w/ "people."
Anheuser75 1 year ago
@Anheuser75 no, a republican wouldnt say corporist country, because they basically live to defend corps, i simply want no government favouritism towards business, for the little man to be able to come up the ladder too, but i realise that people arent likely to vote that in, theres a choice between a party which has some members who intervene to help people, and then a party which intervenes to help out their rich buddies, or to enforce their own morality, i'd chose the half assed helpers.
ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz 1 year ago
@ImEuanAndIGotsSkeelz
"a republican wouldnt say corporist country, because they basically live to defend corps" - Democrat talking point - Obama moved to save GM & other corps.
"i simply want no government favouritism towards business" - Dems don't favour certain businesses? Are you kidding me? How about all the pol. favors to labor unions.
"a party (GOP) which intervenes to help out their rich buddies" - another Dem talking point. It's good to know that the Dems don't have "rich buddies"
Anheuser75 1 year ago
don't thank god too long...looks like Obama is a one term guy...next President will be Rep again, but as it turns out with Obama...what's the difference?
DIZZZZY1975 2 years ago 7
Unless Mitt Romney or Colin Powell runs against Obama in '12, I don't think the Republicans will get The White House back in '12.
redsoxfan426 2 years ago
The Republicans would never choose Powell. he is pro choice. He also backed Obama in 08 - right at the end. And Romney has no base. Obama is safe unless he reallty screws up in a big way. He'll lose control of Congress, but he'll keep the white house.
rossmcl177 2 years ago 14
@rossmcl177 I think Pawlenty will be the nominee
smarkowitz90 1 year ago
@smarkowitz90
Oh Governor Pawlenty? Yeah I hear he is going to run.
Mage13246 1 year ago
@rossmcl177 Romney does have a base. He was governor of MA and he was a former presidential candidate. He is also very likeable and knows how to handle a "broken" economy.
DavyCrockettFan1 1 year ago
@rossmcl177 Don't count your chickens before they hatch. Many winners of past Presidential elections were unheard of in the prior election. Obama may have been elected to the Senate in 04 but I still had never heard of him until 2007. There very well could be someone out there we haven't heard about who could blow in in 2012 and beat Obama, but I think anyone will be able to beat Obama in 2012, the man is not fit for the Presidency at all.
bjoh249 1 year ago
@rossmcl177 By the way, you are in England. So you don't know as much about this country and our politics as you think you do. Your opinion is just that, your opinion.
bjoh249 1 year ago 9
@bjoh249 Americans are soooo stupid
Michthemitch 1 year ago
@Michthemitch Then leave this country if you hate it so much.
bjoh249 1 year ago
@rossmcl177 That's true, also they keep making Obama's approval rating out to be an early 2012 indicator, when in reality Reagan's was actually lower than Obama's at the same point in his presidency and he won by a landslide in the 1984 election.
RickyMcGinnis 1 year ago
@rossmcl177 anti Obama forum at JTF.org
hevron22 1 year ago
You mean he hasn't screwed it up already?
remodrums33 8 months ago
@redsoxfan426 LOL so you think only a wishy washy moderate could beat Obama? How did McCain the moderate fair against Obama? If the Republican Party nominates a strong conservative, we will re take the white house in 2012 I have no doubt.
mustanggt12382 2 years ago
@DIZZZZY1975 ron paul2012
RonPaulIsiah 1 year ago
@DIZZZZY1975 NOBAMA CAMPAIGNED LIKE REAGAN, BUT HE GOVERNS LIKE CARTER! It will show as this election occurs in November. NOBAMA has 864 DAYS TO GO!
vccstudents 1 year ago
@DIZZZZY1975 anti Obama forum at JTF.org
TheMrbuzi 1 year ago
@DIZZZZY1975 Buddy, in politics six months is a long time. For you to say that Obama is a one term president with three years in his term is the epitome of "living in the moment." Polls are just a snapshot in time.
MIKESOWELL 11 months ago
@MIKESOWELL little over halway in. he is still losing support. especially after those midterms he must be feeling pretty uneasy now
Jacoby515 10 months ago
@Jacoby515 Ronald Reagan had a 35 percent Approval Rating in 1983 about the same time in his term as Obama currently is in now. Who would have guessed that he would win 49 states in November 1984? I'm just saying people shouldn't live in the moment. When Obama won in 2008, I had a feeling that the Democrats may lose the House. In fact, the Republicans winning the House is one reason why I think he will win.
MIKESOWELL 10 months ago
@MIKESOWELL predictions are one thing but you have to look at what the president is doing now like healthcare and spending. those are issues the american people dislike as a majorityin this country and so far obama shows no signs of changing his mind on what put him in the position of disapproval. clinton in 94 lost congress but afterwards he changed his place on the opinions of the people that kept him in office in 96. obama isnt doing that and hasnt tried to at least.
Jacoby515 10 months ago
mmm, bush is gone(thank goodness) and obama is president. a little reminder. thank god mcain/palin lost.
terrondt 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Bush is so cool.
Guard655 2 years ago
Peter Jennings was the best of the modern network anchors.
SavagePersonified90 2 years ago
Look its Obama! Who'd thought?
FeLizPC 2 years ago
Ah yes keep crying libs. Bush was president grow up! You got the bottle now happy? You're getting your socialized healthcare which was just denounced in Europe, and soon in to be gotten rid of in Canada. You Libs were given the bottle and are still crying over 2000/2004. LET IT GO!
Mage13246 2 years ago
Where do you get your news? Outside of your wasteland of delusion, the rest of the industrialized world appreciates their public health care.
ygugsa295 2 years ago
Oh Im sorry I thought you Libs were "Tolerant" sorry if I broke your communist law which states that nobody is allowed to speak their minds or voice their opinions. Im sorry if I ever offended you.
Mage13246 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Public Healthcare has failed everywhere fyi.
The EU elections in may were heavily conservative and Canada has a Conservative Prime Minister. Sorry but your socialist utopia is not going to become a reality anytime soon. Keep living in your fantasies as you insult those who let their voices be heard regaurdless of what anyone might say about it. So I must say, good day.
Mage13246 2 years ago
what states did bush stole??
TheBeatle65 2 years ago
If Kerry had won in 2004, Obama would not have been able to run 4 years later, as John Kerry would have been running for a second term against some other Republican, though it most likely would have been John McCain.
redsoxfan426 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
bUSH STOLE THIS ELECTIONS too
Michthemitch 2 years ago
what a sore loser Keyes is. and why are still people talking about the rumor that has been debunked like a million times about obama's birth certificates. give it a rest people. the man is an American. and even if he wasn't born in America he is still a US citizen because his was an American.
rania3830 2 years ago
Keyes is real sore loser. He is still bitter towards Obama till this day because of that night. lol
nmr20067 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
BUSH: the worst president EVER..
Michthemitch 2 years ago
who will say that the wining senator for illinois at 2004 was going to be president four years later
emiliotenor4life 2 years ago 3
haha. 0:15- 0:30 Little did anyone know that four years later he would be elected president.
glamrocker91 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ya who would have know obama and Rev jr would be selling off senate seats and buying them in 08
bill33john 2 years ago
i was thinking the same thing. no one knew he would become president. i don't think Obama even imagined that he would become president of the United States 4 years later.
rania3830 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
obama = democratic bush.
americanidolkid 2 years ago
I don't understand why Democrats don't like bush, Barack Obama is essentially bush. Same foreign policy, continuing the war, on pace to spend more than bush did in eight years, only obama will do it in 2. And for all the spending he has done, he hasn't delivered the climate or healthcare items he promised. He has increased troop presence in afghanistan, and still has predator drone strikes in pakistan. You guys elected a black president bush.
Monty1994 2 years ago
Four years of fascism that cost the US more than we could ever imagine. Two corporate stooges in the Supreme Court and countless innocent US soldiers sent to die in Iraq over a lie.
weezer543 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
ya now we have a nigger president from coontown who has 1.2 trillion dollar deficiet cause of bailouts
rancidmilk2go 2 years ago
A dark day in American history.
SIRMaleMan 2 years ago 3
Indeed -- who would have thought that 4 years later -- he would be President.
BluTri10 2 years ago
and to think no one even had a clue that obama would be winning the election 4 years later
davidwebb192 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
obama sux
thedecider1984 2 years ago
Why?
Willjk89 2 years ago
Did Obama intend to become Prez as soon as he became a senator?
symons3569 2 years ago
No. He initially planned to gain experience in the senate but people kept pushing him and urging im to run
Saxmaster1230 2 years ago