I pit Obama

He’s 25% through his term. How long do you have to go before it’s ok to evaluate job performance? If next year people are complaining are you going to say “woaaah, stupid assholes. He’s just getting warmed up! He might turn it around in the second half!”

And they do that in response to how the Dems acted when the 'Pubs were in power…which was a direct response to how the 'Pubs acted when Clinton was in power…which was…

And on and on. Somewhere along the way, both parties stopped being about what’s best for the country and instead focused on what’s best for the Party. That said, I think a lot of folks on this board fail to realize that, right or wrong, the majority of the 'Pubs DO think what they are doing is what’s best for the country. Just like folks like my dad fail to realize that the Dems are doing what THEY think is best as well.

(ETA: Post in response to Sinaptics)

-XT

The opposition party’s job is to offer opposing ideas, some of which will hopefully be implemented into the legislation that’s passed. It’s not to be an anchor of no votes doing everything they can to stop progress in America. Anyone who thinks the opposition party’s job is to offer no votes, no ideas, and no solutions until people are stupid enough to vote them back into power is an idiot.

Palin wasn’t worthless, but it didn’t matter. McCain could have had Jesus Christ on the ticket with him and he would have lost because of all the whackjobs voting against George Bush by voting Democrat.

I’d say we could reasonably evaluate his job performance when he’s up for re-election. He’s a bit over a year into his FIRST TERM, for the gods sake. And he came in with 2 wars, an economic crisis and myriad other problems, including the fact that many of his supporters are idiots like the OP and expect him to work miracles. Simply put, NO ONE could have worked the mess he inherited into anything like real solutions in a bit over a year. It’s. Not. Possible.

So, I give the man some slack at this point and will wait and see.

-XT

Palin was worthless, but this is essentially so - the election had already been lost by the time America met Sarah Palin and mostly recoiled in horror.

I’ll note that I intentionally included the word mostly. But, when it arises, I feel it necessary to point out that “the Chosen One”, “The Messiah”, and other overblown tags were/are due to Obama’s critics. If someone doesn’t, there’s an implicit acceptance of the framing that is just flat-out incorrect.

Exactly. I was gonna make use of the “turn a battleship” metaphor above, but opted for brevity.

I don’t know - the first year anniversary seems a good enough time for at least a first-pass assessment.

I imagine consensus is that his priorities were going to be [ul][li]the economy []global warming []HCR.[/ul]The economy is in the shitter, and looks likely to remain there. We are, I think, technically not in recession any more. The deficit is thru the fucking roof, and, unlike the TARP payouts, are not likely to be paid back to any degree. [/li]
He has achieved diddly-squat in Copenhagen about AGW. Nobody could, but BHO has not done better than nobody.

The health care bill is not very similar to what he and we expected. It will be very expensive, and will add to the deficit (since none of the cuts will actually be enacted). It doesn’t really address any of the causes of health care inflation, so at the very best it will cost a lot and do nothing. (And, of course, Obama blew off his promiseto put the deliberations on C-SPAN. Shades of Hilarycare.)

I feel a little sorry for him, but only a little. He started awful high, but that just means he has that much further to fall. Wonder how deep his bottom is going to be. I doubt very much he has the political wherewithal to deal with a larger GOP in Congress, given his marked lack of success with the veto-proof margin he now “enjoys”. I am beginning to cherish hopes that 2010 will resemble 1998 in relevant part. :smiley:

The ones I really feel sorry for are the worshippers. Poor bastards.

Obama inherited some big problems, for sure. It takes a big man to deal with big problems. Big talk doesn’t cut it.

Regards,
Shodan

This is another item that I feel always needs to be pointed out. As I understand it, of the $1.8 trillion deficit attributed to the Obama administration, $1.2 trillion was “inherited” from the Bush administration.

So, while you are absolutely correct that it’s “thru the fucking roof”, it’s mere existence is mostly due to Bush. How it goes in the future will be, of course, laid at Obama’s feet. (Although aren’t you reliably one of those who says the President has very little control of/effect on the economy?)

The economy was in the shitter before Obama got there. He stopped it from getting any worse, and it was not something that anybody ex[pected him to be able to solve in a year.

AGW was not a chief priority. Getting out of Iraq was more important. He has basically succeeded in ending that occupaton.

He has succeeded with HCR.

There have never been any “worshippers.”

I think that 2012 will be a big disappointment to you. Despite the right’s most ferevent attempts to convince itself that there is some kind of grass roots movement against Obama, it’s really just the same minority rump of dittoheads and teabaggers that got their asses kicked a year ago. It’s a shrinking block of voters, not a growing one.

Aren’t we all supposed to die in 2012? I’ll certainly be disappointed if that happens…

-XT

Once again, we disagree on politics. Over 69,000,000 people voted for Obama; you can’t just dismiss them as a whackjob fringe. The American people had experienced eight years of Bush politics (and twenty years of conservative politics prior to that) and decided they wanted something different.

McCain could have offered something different and maybe won the election. But by picking Palin, he showed that he was prepared to stay the course for another four years. So Palin, while a negative in her own right (as I expect she will demonstrate in 2012) didn’t lose the election for McCain. He lost it himself by choosing her. The people didn’t want to elect a President who would choose Sarah Palin to be Vice-President.

I’m pretty sure we executed a drone attack on an al-Qaeda suspect in Yemen during Bush’s 2nd term, but I don’t know whether or not we had approval from their government. Currently, we are offering aid and military training, but haven’t made any actual strikes ourselves.

I really don’t understand this bizarre notion that we can only evaluate our leaders on election day otherwise it’s improper or unreasonable. The evaluation can be reasonable or unreasonable entirely independent of when it’s formed. The only reason the timing should matter at all is if the evaluation is unreasonable because of the timing.

It’s possible and in fact in actuality people are judging Obama unfairly when there’s no way he could have met their expectations in the year he’s had, but that doesn’t preclude people from making reasonable judgement about his performance.

You could wait until the day before the election in 2012, pull your head out of the sand and find Orly Taitz.com and decide to vote against him because he’s Kenyan and it would be every bit as batshit insane as to disapprove today. You might also have watched him closely over the past year and felt he didn’t offer very steady leadership and been disappointed with what he’s done.

I think this idea that we should only evaluate job performance on election day is actually really disastrous and similar to what the pundits, the media, and the politicians believe. Mr Obama is coming into 2010 with only 50% approval, one of the lowest of any first term president entering his 2nd year. So you have people like William Daley arguing the only way to survive the next election is to move to the middle and abandon all the things that people voted for in 2008 but haven’t been accomplished yet.

50% approval is phenomenal during a recession.

That was much of the point of my mention of the TARP vs. stimulus. TARP has some chance of being repaid. The stimulus (and the increase caused by the increased health care spending which will not be offset by significant spending cuts) much less so.

Yes, I am, and you are correct to point out the major role Congress plays in all this. Much more than the President does, certainly. Which is another reason to hope that Republicans take over at least one house of Congress come November.

I find your fiction entertaining.

Not the part about the economy being in the shitter - that’s true enough. But pretty much every other word you posted and I quoted above is wrong, even “and” and “the”. Obama has not stopped the economy from getting worse, AGW is a chief priority, there are currently about 110,000 US forces in Iraq and will be about 50,000 after all the combat troops are out. Besides, weren’t you the one who said that McCain’s statement about keeping troops in Iraq meant that he was going to continue the war? By that “logic”, Obama is not ending any occupation - he is waging war against Iraq. That monster!

You have had your nose rubbed in Obama-worship too often for it to be amusing to do so again.

And of course, a health care bill that costs a lot, doesn’t cover all the uninsured, does nothing to address the root causes of health care inflation, and will add significantly to the deficit as well as raise taxes is a sterling example of a ringing success. Before any bill is passed. :slight_smile:

But I am sure it will not be a disappointment to you. No matter what happens, you will simply deny that it is real. You remind me rather of the Iraqi information minister. The GOP could take over unanimously, and you would be spouting the same horseshit.

Perhaps I shouldn’t laugh at you, but I think I will anyway.

Heavens, yes! Obama is doing swell! He will sweep the infidel down to inglorious defeat! A fifteen point spread between Strongly Approve and Strongly Disapprove means nothing! Long live the Blessed One!

Regards,
Shodan

Yeah, it’s something that can be forestalled by 60 votes, something known as cloture. Yes, I believe I’ve heard of it. How many Senators are there in the Democratic caucus, again?

Who’s undermining who, now? That’s right, it’s the fault of those pesky 40 Republicans that just won’t go with the flow. If not for them those 60 Democrats could have things going swimmingly. Except they already can, and don’t.

Please explain why should I pay any attention to you when you can’t even be bothered to spell “through” correctly?

Fuck’s sake, every other world is unabbreviated, so why the particularly illiterate construction “thru”? Seriously, what the fuck?

You don’t text much, ehe Michael Ellis? :stuck_out_tongue:

-XT

Like that.