Re-Election

November 21, 2008 - 2:46pm by dwyman

My theory is that if he fixes the economy and doesn't make a huge mess in Iraq, he will get re-elected, what do you think?

Comments

Kai Flores wrote on December 22, 2008 - 11:29pm:

If he does good in his term right now, he could be re-elected. Just as long as he wouldn't abuse the people's trust on him.

Mr.S wrote on November 22, 2008 - 12:33am:

I have serious doubts that he will "fix" the economy.

kat wrote on November 21, 2008 - 7:48pm:

If he is a successful president, I don't see why he wouldn't be re-elected. Although, it does depend who he is running against as well. If he runs against another strong candidate, it could be tough. But if its against palin, and he does well this term then yes. The bad thing is that our country is doing so poorly right now that it could be fairly easy for media and others to make him look like he's not doing well.

Mr.S wrote on November 22, 2008 - 12:34am:

The media that got Obama elected are going to do everything in their power to make him look successful. Failing that, they will blame every single problem and failure he has on Bush.

dwyman wrote on November 22, 2008 - 1:52pm:

Yes we get it, the media is Obama biased, and as it turns out, the country is obama biased. George Bush's aproval ratings are BELOW 30%, the media reflect's what the people want to see, in the cases CNN and MSNBC, there are opinionated people. But don't try to tell me that FOX news isn't biased, that it's fair and balanced.

John McCain said on several occasions that economics wasn't his strong suit, and that he would need help, which isn't about to inspire confidence. But you Republicans aren't going to realize that the truth is that the economy, no matter who is going to be the one fixing it, is going to get worse before it gets better, so a year into his presidency, the economy will still be bad, and all you people will rant and rave that it was a huge mistake to elect him.

Spare me.

Mr.S wrote on November 24, 2008 - 1:45pm:

Bush's approval rating is low, that is true. But the democrat controlled congress is even lower, spending some time in never before seen SINGLE DIGITS. Yet they get a free pass?

Economics wasn't McCains strong suit, but neither is it Obamas. I am not even sure Obama has a strong suit, except maybe reading a pre-written speach off of a teleprompter. And it really shows with all the Clinton hold overs that he is putting on his staff.

But you are right, the economy will still be weak one year from now, but how long it goes on for will be up to Obama. It could become an ordeal that takes us decades to recover from. Heck, if not for WWII, we might not have ever recovered from FDR and his Raw Deal. Yet Obama wants to follow his steps and lead us down a road of economic doom.

kat wrote on November 24, 2008 - 6:21pm:

If you're such a big McCain fan, why don't you take his farewell speech to heart? We get that you loath the democrats and wish for that republican victory, but you didnt get it. So support what you have now. If we continue battling over party lines, we're going to have as big of a political failure as we've had the past 8 years.

Mr.S wrote on November 25, 2008 - 2:04pm:

Ive never been a McCain fan, in fact I cannot stand McCain. If he wants to capitulate to the democrats and Obama the way the democrats NEVER did for Bush, he is going to be on his own.

But it is nice of you to admit that the hatred from the left over the past 8 years is partly to blame for our current problems.

kat wrote on November 25, 2008 - 7:02pm:

It is true that the democrats in whole never really tried to aid bush at all, and that caused a lot of problems. I think maybe if he would have proven himself better, maybe they would have changed. But bitterness over a victory or loss will never get either side anywhere, so the democratic hostility from the past 8 years gets tiring. I'm in no way a bush fan, but I try not to start overly hostile riots either. There is a certain level of proffessionalism and respect that everyone should have when the time asks for it.

Mr.S wrote on November 26, 2008 - 11:05am:

I have exactly 0 respect for Barack H. Obama.

kat wrote on November 26, 2008 - 1:36pm:

then apparantly your one of the people in the country who would rather tear up our nation because of pride in party lines rather than cooperate for the greater good of our country and people. you dont even have valid reasoning for disliking obama. all the republican mudslinging was just that- mudslinging. they were all proven false.

Mr.S wrote on November 26, 2008 - 2:57pm:

Why should I "cooperate" with someone who will do everything that I do not want, and put this country on a course that I think is wrong? Suddenly dissent is bad? Suddenly we have to shut up and go lock step with the President? What twilight zone episode did I step into?

kat wrote on November 26, 2008 - 5:02pm:

since when are turning the economy around, getting out of a pointless war over a period of time (rather than abruptly), uniting the country, etc etc bad things? How is that wrong for our country? Would you rather us suffer horribly the way we have been? I sure wouldn't. And if you're going to turn this argument into a "dictatorship" comparison, don't complain about how everything is the democrats fault because they wouldn't cooperate if YOU are not willing to do the same.

dwyman wrote on November 25, 2008 - 10:01pm:

I have exactly 0 Respect for George W. Bush

dwyman wrote on November 24, 2008 - 3:04pm:

Yes, why don't we just start another world war? That would do wonders for our economy!!

Mr.S wrote on November 25, 2008 - 2:04pm:

Or we could not enact socialism, how about that?

dwyman wrote on November 25, 2008 - 5:37pm:

capitalism is just as idealistic as socialism, we need to have a balance

Mr.S wrote on November 26, 2008 - 12:04am:

What sense does it make balancing something that works with something that doesn't? All you are doing is dragging down capitalism with the dead weight of socialism, and that is exactly why we are in this economic crisis now.

And the thing is, capitalism IS NOT idealistic. It is not a "perfect" idea, it has its ups and downs, and not everyone is going to be at the top. Socialism on the other hand absolutely IS an ideal, which is why it will never work in this imperfect world.

kat wrote on November 22, 2008 - 11:23am:

i really dont think the media got obama elected. i think he did that himself, along with the epic failure of the republican party the past 8 years.

Mr.S wrote on November 24, 2008 - 1:47pm:

People keep repeating the idea that the past 8 years have been a "failure". Do you care to elaborate on what he failed at so miserably? 52 straight months of jobs created, historically low unemployment, victory in Iraq, no terrorist attacks on American soil. Except for the economic disaster that has set in over the past 6-12 months, which is mostly the fault of democrats in congress, the past 8 years have been good.

kat wrote on November 24, 2008 - 6:20pm:

9/11 was while bush was in office. That was a terrorist attack on American soil.

Unemployment has increased while bush has been in office, not decrease. Not really sure where you got that from.

Bush also cut educational benefits for children.

Cut healthcare benefits.

Cut veterans benefits.

The congress doesn't go over the president's head, the president is the EXECUTIVE branch and has authority as well, so you cant soley blame it on all the democrats. He is our leader. That's his job- he obviously hasn't done it well. If the past 8 years had been good, he wouldn't have a lower approval rating than even Nixon had.

Mr.S wrote on November 25, 2008 - 11:57pm:

9/11 is a given, but none after that.

Unemployment was historically low and has only risen since the democrats took office. Look here and you will see that it only began to rise after the democrats raised the minimum wage. This current crisis has obviously increased it even more.

Cut whose healthcare benefits? The republicans instituted the largest increase in federal spending for their prescription drug benefit. But I won't blame you, you were probably 10 when they did that so you probably don't remember.

cut veterans benefits? Factcheck.org says otherwise.

Things were going well until the democrats took congress, that is painfully clea. So if it is all Bush's fault, what has he done differently since then?

dwyman wrote on November 24, 2008 - 3:07pm:

Victory in Iraq? It was never our war how is it a victory?

Mr.S wrote on November 25, 2008 - 11:58pm:

How is it not our war?

dwyman wrote on November 26, 2008 - 12:03am:

its a civil war, it had nothing to do with 9-11

Mr.S wrote on November 26, 2008 - 12:08am:

1) We attacked and invaded Iraq

2) It is not a "civil war", it is a war against Iranian funded terrorists and AQ. And it is pretty much over.

 

dwyman wrote on November 26, 2008 - 12:11am:

The premise was that Sadam Hussein was a terrorist sympathetic and was going to fund terrorism and give them weapons and whatnot. As it turns out, that "evidence" was crap

Mr.S wrote on November 26, 2008 - 2:58pm:

Actually that evidence is not crap. He gave thousands, if not millions, of dollars to the families of suicide bombers that killed jews in Israel. He had training camps for terrorists in Iraq and he had 550 tons of yellow cake. Whats crap is the mantra that "Bush lied".

dwyman wrote on November 27, 2008 - 2:26pm:

he's either really supid and neglegent, or he lied

dwyman wrote on November 21, 2008 - 6:14pm:

well, that was against Kerry, doesn't really count

dwyman wrote on November 21, 2008 - 6:14pm:

well, that was against Kerry, doesn't really count

actuallyfreedom19 wrote on November 21, 2008 - 3:08pm:

If people like what they see, they want it again. But you never know...Bush was re-elected.