Conquer Club

He should have followed the good doctor's creedo: "Never let me slip, cause if I slip then I'm slippin."

----

All aboard! Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!



OK now, wipe your dry eye,



And place your bets on whether or not he'll actually have a quarter in which his approval rating goes up!



Come on Obamabots. Who's going to bet on Obama this quarter?

Your country, your economy, your way of life, have been on the road to implosion for the last three presidents that you elected.

You

Are

Fucked.

To blame it on the latest leader, just because he can't do the impossible ( which is to save you're silly asses...), accurately sounds the depths of how blind you are to the shit storm on the horizon.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Do you seriously think ANYONE could get you out of this?


Jrock

Apparently, they think the Republicans will. Pretty sad, that.

If I wast casting up the Republicans as my heroes I'd create a thread for that. However, Barrack Obama is easily the worst president we've ever had. And even if one considers that overstating it, I'll simply say he is damaging the country. He is pimping a system that is un-American and has roots in failure and inefficiencies. One can say I'm wrong, but apparently America agrees with me.

BTW, I'm not looking for an argument on Obama so much. I think we've had that debate enough recently. I want to see if anyone's going to bet on his approval going up next quarter? C'mon Obamabots. If you're going to defend him then surely you can bet on his approval rating going up to 45 percent.

Get your water tested.

notyou2 wrote:Get your water tested.

I'll do that. And you feel free to go get an MRI while I'm doing that.

ViperOverLord wrote:If I wast casting up the Republicans as my heroes I'd create a thread for that. However, Barrack Obama is easily the worst president we've ever had. And even if one considers that overstating it, I'll simply say he is damaging the country. He is pimping a system that is un-American and has roots in failure and inefficiencies. One can say I'm wrong, but apparently America agrees with me.

BTW, I'm not looking for an argument on Obama so much. I think we've had that debate enough recently. I want to see if anyone's going to bet on his approval going up next quarter? C'mon Obamabots. If you're going to defend him then surely you can bet on his approval rating going up to 45 percent.

He has an approval rating of 44.7% this is hardly "America thinks he is the worst president EvaR!" territory.

Baron Von PWN wrote:He has an approval rating of 44.7% this is hardly "America thinks he is the worst president EvaR!" territory.

He's not even the most unpopular President in the past 5 years.

ViperOverLord wrote:Come on Obamabots. Who's going to bet on Obama this quarter?

Common, no badmouthing obama guys, at least he's keeping it real.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQ-hPNrKdZI

VOL, to consider him the worst is a vast overstatement at this point. Either you don't know history very well, or you just like trolling, I don't know. 44% approval isn't all that bad, and 63% is ridiculously high, so until it dips into the twenties, I wouldn't call him the worst ever in the eyes of the American public.

notyou2 wrote:Get your water tested.

That's an odd non-sequitor.

Ya dude. Lincoln had such shitty approval ratings. He's probably the worst president EVAR!!!!

A few points:

- I would never use approval ratings as an absolute measuring stick for gauging a president's effectiveness. I apologize if anyone thought I was making that case.

- It is simply my opinion that he is the worst president ever and I think the fact that that opinion is shared by many others is reflected in his approval ratings. I would say that I am more calling him the worst president based on his 20 plus months but I'll admit the book is still out on him. In the end, I still might consider FDR to be the worst president ever. Ironically enough, FDR is one of the more popular presidents.

- AOG - There were no approval ratings during Lincoln's time. Approval Ratings were introduced by George Gallup in 1930. But I will grant you that maybe you mean to point out that many historians believe that Lincoln was an unpopular president especially during much of the Civil War. However, I think comparing his era with ours is something of a stretch. I'm not saying you can't do it, but I think comparing modern presidents would give you a better perspective.

ViperOverLord wrote:A few points:

- I would never use approval ratings as an absolute measuring stick for gauging a president's effectiveness. I apologize if anyone thought I was making that case.

- It is simply my opinion that he is the worst president ever and I think the fact that that opinion is shared by many others is reflected in his approval ratings. I would say that I am more calling him the worst president based on his 20 plus months but I'll admit the book is still out on him. In the end, I still might consider FDR to be the worst president ever. Ironically enough, FDR is one of the more popular presidents.

- AOG - There were no approval ratings during Lincoln's time. Approval Ratings were introduced by George Gallup in 1930. But I will grant you that maybe you mean to point out that many historians believe that Lincoln was an unpopular president especially during much of the Civil War. However, I think comparing his era with ours is something of a stretch. I'm not saying you can't do it, but I think comparing modern presidents would give you a better perspective.

A few points:

1. I could care less about opinion, I want facts. The FACTS do not demonstrate that Obama is the "worst president ever" unless you are so entrenched in right wing economics that you truly believe eliminating all government control, taxes is a good thing.

2. Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Bush W. all had lower ratings at some point in their presidency.. more than one point, in fact.

What is truly shown by those "popularity poles" is how effective the right wing has been at distorting the truth and getting people to focus on anything but the real truth that the economy IS improving and that more government controls will help reign in the abuses by banks and corporations that caused this mess. (and no, I don't believe Obama went far enough in his measures).

PLAYER57832 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:A few points:

- I would never use approval ratings as an absolute measuring stick for gauging a president's effectiveness. I apologize if anyone thought I was making that case.

- It is simply my opinion that he is the worst president ever and I think the fact that that opinion is shared by many others is reflected in his approval ratings. I would say that I am more calling him the worst president based on his 20 plus months but I'll admit the book is still out on him. In the end, I still might consider FDR to be the worst president ever. Ironically enough, FDR is one of the more popular presidents.

- AOG - There were no approval ratings during Lincoln's time. Approval Ratings were introduced by George Gallup in 1930. But I will grant you that maybe you mean to point out that many historians believe that Lincoln was an unpopular president especially during much of the Civil War. However, I think comparing his era with ours is something of a stretch. I'm not saying you can't do it, but I think comparing modern presidents would give you a better perspective.

A few points:

1. I could care less about opinion, I want facts. The FACTS do not demonstrate that Obama is the "worst president ever" unless you are so entrenched in right wing economics that you truly believe eliminating all government control, taxes is a good thing.

2. Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Bush W. all had lower ratings at some point in their presidency.. more than one point, in fact.

What is truly shown by those "popularity poles" is how effective the right wing has been at distorting the truth and getting people to focus on anything but the real truth that the economy IS improving and that more government controls will help reign in the abuses by banks and corporations that caused this mess. (and no, I don't believe Obama went far enough in his measures).

1. As far as the history of American Presidents go, there's an uncountable amount of facts out there. But there is also an uncountable amount of opinions out there too. Also different factors are weighed differently by different analyzers. Worst or best president ever is always going to be a subjective argument. I can find plenty of people that think Ronald Reagan is the best president and FDR is the worst president and visa versa. And both sides will generally present facts to back-up their arguments. For myself, I can decide who has the most valid point of view, but I cannot say that either person is utterly right or wrong for a fact, but rather as a matter of opinion.

2. Yes, I believe that presidents are almost certain to suffer from low ratings, especially if they serve two terms. However, have you ever seen a president have seven straight quarters of lowering ratings? (Let alone to start his presidency?)

3. You really think that Obama's ratings are about the right wing distorting the truth? You truly see the world through ideological eyes. If the economy was booming he would still be a rock star and we all know it.

4. And as for the economy improving, there are mixed results at best lately. And the fact that the economy has more/less steadied for the time being would indicate why he did not have a (relatively) major approval slide last quarter. Besides the economy there would be a myriad of other factors that go into approval rating at that point.

5. If you are correct about the economy improving and there is more substantive improvements over the next quarter. And the generally agreement of the American populus is that the economy improved then it is my opinion that his rating will likely go up. So are you betting that his approval rating will go up next quarter? If you think the economy is improving then you should be willing to take that bet IMO. BTW, I'm not saying your wrong or right. I honestly don't know if the economy will improve or not next quarter. But being that economics is cyclical, I believe we are due to have a positive quarter. But I believe our economic baseline has been drastically altered by Obamanomics and you'll likely never see unemployment under 8 percent during his presidency (even if it does improve in the short term).

ViperOverLord wrote: 3. You really think that Obama's ratings are about the right wing distorting the truth? You truly see the world through ideological eyes. If the economy was booming he would still be a rock star and we all know it.

Yes, however he was given the worst mess since the Depression to fix. Blaming it on Obama is absolutely assinine.

ViperOverLord wrote:4. And as for the economy improving, there are mixed results at best lately. And the fact that the economy has more/less steadied for the time being would indicate why he did not have a (relatively) major approval slide last quarter. Besides the economy there would be a myriad of other factors that go into approval rating at that point.

5. If you are correct about the economy improving and there is more substantive improvements over the next quarter. And the generally agreement of the American populus is that the economy improved then it is my opinion that his rating will likely go up. So are you betting that his approval rating will go up next quarter? If you think the economy is improving then you should be willing to take that bet IMO. BTW, I'm not saying your wrong or right. I honestly don't know if the economy will improve or not next quarter. But being that economics is cyclical, I believe we are due to have a positive quarter. But I believe our economic baseline has been drastically altered by Obamanomics and you'll likely never see unemployment under 8 percent during his presidency (even if it does improve in the short term).

Been a while since you said this. It is now considered confirmed fact that the economy is improving. However, because such improvements don't show immediately, the right wing is able to call Obama's presidency a big failure. Why on earth so many people seem to think a return to the policies of most of the past 30 years is now a good idea is pretty solid proof of how little folks have bothered to verify what they have been told.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote: 3. You really think that Obama's ratings are about the right wing distorting the truth? You truly see the world through ideological eyes. If the economy was booming he would still be a rock star and we all know it.

Yes, however he was given the worst mess since the Depression to fix. Blaming it on Obama is absolutely assinine.

ViperOverLord wrote:4. And as for the economy improving, there are mixed results at best lately. And the fact that the economy has more/less steadied for the time being would indicate why he did not have a (relatively) major approval slide last quarter. Besides the economy there would be a myriad of other factors that go into approval rating at that point.

5. If you are correct about the economy improving and there is more substantive improvements over the next quarter. And the generally agreement of the American populus is that the economy improved then it is my opinion that his rating will likely go up. So are you betting that his approval rating will go up next quarter? If you think the economy is improving then you should be willing to take that bet IMO. BTW, I'm not saying your wrong or right. I honestly don't know if the economy will improve or not next quarter. But being that economics is cyclical, I believe we are due to have a positive quarter. But I believe our economic baseline has been drastically altered by Obamanomics and you'll likely never see unemployment under 8 percent during his presidency (even if it does improve in the short term).

Been a while since you said this. It is now considered confirmed fact that the economy is improving. However, because such improvements don't show immediately, the right wing is able to call Obama's presidency a big failure. Why on earth so many people seem to think a return to the policies of most of the past 30 years is now a good idea is pretty solid proof of how little folks have bothered to verify what they have been told.

1. The beautiful thing about economics is that it is that you can take some of the right/left aspect out of it. You don't have to be a 'right winger' to think that the economy has went bad under Obama. The truth is that the right wing can't stop Obama from being president and you exaggerate their influence. Their influence is no more than the left's influence. In fact being that the left controls most of the visual media I don't think that the right is ever going to surpass the left in terms of media influence. Talk radio is only a limited counter balance.

2. BTW - I apologize for the poorly written point 5 lol. The small unending box I have to write in drives me buggy and I don't enjoy proofreading on this site.

3. That whole economy being the worst since the Great Depression is just a talking point. I personally believe that the economy was much worse during the Carter years. Also the Great Depression lasted as long as it did because of policies like the ones that Obama is implementing. So why would you think that the economy will improve under him?

4. "Why on earth so many people seem to think a return to the policies of most of the past 30 years is now a good idea is pretty solid proof of how little folks have bothered to verify what they have been told." - I don't know - A little thing like remembering when unemployment was under 4 percent in my lifetime and remembering when 6 percent was considered quite bad might be one reason.

ViperOverLord wrote:1. The beautiful thing about economics is that it is that you can take some of the right/left aspect out of it. You don't have to be a 'right winger' to think that the economy has went bad under Obama.

You do have to be right wing to believe it was due to anything Obama did.

ViperOverLord wrote: 3. That whole economy being the worst since the Great Depression is just a talking point. I personally believe that the economy was much worse during the Carter years. Also the Great Depression lasted as long as it did because of policies like the ones that Obama is implementing. So why would you think that the economy will improve under him?

Because that is not the case.

ViperOverLord wrote:4. "Why on earth so many people seem to think a return to the policies of most of the past 30 years is now a good idea is pretty solid proof of how little folks have bothered to verify what they have been told." - I don't know - A little thing like remembering when unemployment was under 4 percent in my lifetime and remembering when 6 percent was considered quite bad might be one reason.

And since you apparently know a tad about economic policy, you also know that economics reflect previous year's policies, not those of an administration only in office 2 years.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:1. The beautiful thing about economics is that it is that you can take some of the right/left aspect out of it. You don't have to be a 'right winger' to think that the economy has went bad under Obama.

You do have to be right wing to believe it was due to anything Obama did.

Wow! It baffles my mind that someone can claim such levels of education that you claim and yet exhibit zero critical thought and consequently be so dense and diluted. There are plenty of socially left economists that would argue against Obamanomics just so you know.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote: 3. That whole economy being the worst since the Great Depression is just a talking point. I personally believe that the economy was much worse during the Carter years. Also the Great Depression lasted as long as it did because of policies like the ones that Obama is implementing. So why would you think that the economy will improve under him?

Because that is not the case.

That's an amazing argument. I'm going to have write in my diary about how you showed beyond a doubt how the recent economy was not worse than the Carter economy. Thank you for such profound insight!

PLAYER57832 wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:4. "Why on earth so many people seem to think a return to the policies of most of the past 30 years is now a good idea is pretty solid proof of how little folks have bothered to verify what they have been told." - I don't know - A little thing like remembering when unemployment was under 4 percent in my lifetime and remembering when 6 percent was considered quite bad might be one reason.

And since you apparently know a tad about economic policy, you also know that economics reflect previous year's policies, not those of an administration only in office 2 years.

I know that both parties have used this excuse and it is a total smoke screen when either party does it. While I'll admit that an administration's decisions do have far reaching consequences (positive or negative); I also know that the basic machinery of the American economy is in place for each president and the immediate and intermediate economic success or failure is the primary responsibility of that President/Congress. We know enough about the cyclical nature of economics that this point has been proven time and time again. The long reaching effects that you refer to are what is known as economic shifts and speaking of economic shifts, Obama has economically shifted our employment rate lower and as I said you will never see unemployment under eight percent during his presidency because of it.

Have I mentioned how much I love condescending twats, lately?

Oh, they are soooooooo delicious. Yumm

Oh I so know! Right? I mean yea.