Factcheck.org: judging Obama's presidency based on FACTS not hyperbole or rhetoric

[Billy000]

What I find amusing about this string is that you started it by accusing Barack Obama's critics of using "hyperbole & rhetoric" against him and promised to use "FACTS" in an examination of his Presidency only to spend most of your time trotting out the same tired hyperbole and rhetoric that the Left has used to try and obscure how ineffective this Administration has been.

Why even bother?

What are you even talking about? You havent provided any facts at all. If you think my facts are bullshit, you need to counter with your own. Right now you sound like a 5 year old.

He has countered them with his own. You're just not listening.
Workforce participation rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years. Unemployment is almost where it was 5 years ago. The average UE rate under Bush was under 6%. The simple fact is the labor market is much worse now. And this is solely due to Democratic policies that were enacted.
Household wealth is lower than it was 5 years ago.
Household income is lower than it was 5 years ago.
These are facts. The economy is in worse shape now than 5 years ago. Obama's recovery has been worse than Bush's recession.

What so Obama should have just waved a magic wand to fix it all? Tell me douche bag. What would you do? How would you fix the economy?

Let me guess. Trickle down economics?

 

[Meister]

What are you even talking about? You havent provided any facts at all. If you think my facts are bullshit, you need to counter with your own. Right now you sound like a 5 year old.

He has countered them with his own. You're just not listening.
Workforce participation rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years. Unemployment is almost where it was 5 years ago. The average UE rate under Bush was under 6%. The simple fact is the labor market is much worse now. And this is solely due to Democratic policies that were enacted.
Household wealth is lower than it was 5 years ago.
Household income is lower than it was 5 years ago.
These are facts. The economy is in worse shape now than 5 years ago. Obama's recovery has been worse than Bush's recession.

What so Obama should have just waved a magic wand to fix it all? Tell me douche bag. What would you do? How would you fix the economy?

Let me guess. Trickle down economics?

Some good remedies have been placed on this board in the past, and taxing more was never one of them. The government knows how to bring businesses from over seas back, they just can't bring themselves to do what it takes.
Obamacare is a job killer whether anyone wants to admit that or not.
Redistribution of wealth was never a job creator.

Let me just add that Obama has never been a job creator in his life, he doesn't know how. He has a lot of "yes" men that he listens to, hell, he doesn't even have a lot of time for his own elected congressmen.

 

[Edgetho]

He has countered them with his own. You're just not listening.
Workforce participation rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years. Unemployment is almost where it was 5 years ago. The average UE rate under Bush was under 6%. The simple fact is the labor market is much worse now. And this is solely due to Democratic policies that were enacted.
Household wealth is lower than it was 5 years ago.
Household income is lower than it was 5 years ago.
These are facts. The economy is in worse shape now than 5 years ago. Obama's recovery has been worse than Bush's recession.

What so Obama should have just waved a magic wand to fix it all? Tell me douche bag. What would you do? How would you fix the economy?

Let me guess. Trickle down economics?

Some good remedies have been placed on this board in the past, and taxing more was never one of them. The government knows how to bring businesses from over seas back, they just can't bring themselves to do what it takes.
Obamacare is a job killer whether anyone wants to admit that or not.
Redistribution of wealth was never a job creator.

Let me just add that Obama has never been a job creator in his life, he doesn't know how. He has a lot of "yes" men that he listens to, hell, he doesn't even have a lot of time for his own elected congressmen.

I love how the left, when confronted with their failures, always demands what we would have done instead.

Funny stuff.

Trickle down was never a theory of Reagan's. But that's not imprtant.

Bottom line? dimocraps are clueless. Even in their own specialties (socialism), they're clueless.

obamacare? A disaster. And their major defense is, "What's the Republican alternative?"

Gee, I don't know. Let's start with "Not fucking up the entire American Health Care System."

And now we've got one screaming about how we don't know how to run an economy.

Right.

There are fewer people working now than when obama took office. There are millions more people on welfare, the labor participation rate is at 40 year lows, the Youth unemployment is near a crisis and Black unemployment is at Depression era levels.

The Great Recession? Yeah, that happened under Bush. But so did a lot of things he had no control over. That recession was no more Bush's fault than Typhoon Haiyan is obama's. But LIV's bought into the propaganda that it was. Now they're staring incompetence, REAL incompetence, in the face.

And all they can do is ask, "What would you do?"

You can't stop 'shit' from happening all the time. But what makes one leader different from the other is how he responds to it.

Instead of trying to fix the American economy, he acted like a necrophiliac and used his meme of 'never let a crisis go to waste' to fuck the American People with obamacare.

obama is a failure. He will go down in history as the worst president -- EVER.

 

[healthmyths]

This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.

This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.

America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.

These are among the findings in our latest update of “Obama’s Numbers.”

This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our “Obama’s Numbers” article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of what’s changed — for better or worse — since Obama first took office in January 2009.
Jobs and Unemployment
The number of jobs gained since President Obama first took office has now climbed to just over 2.5 million as of August, which is the most recent period for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported its seasonally adjusted figures for total nonfarm employment.
Any additional gains during September have yet to be reported, because BLS was forced to postpone the report it had scheduled for Oct. 4 due to the partial shutdown of the federal government that began Oct. 1. A private report issued by the ADP Research Institute estimated that an additional 166,000 jobs were added during September in the private sector. But we’ll have to wait until after the shutdown is over to see what the BLS reports for total employment, which often differs slightly from the ADP’s estimate of private employment, and which also includes gains and losses in government jobs.
The official BLS estimate for August is still 1,923,000 jobs short of the peak reached in January 2008. Even so, the number of jobs added under Obama is nearly two-and-a-half times the number added during George W. Bush’s entire eight years in office, which were plagued by two economic recessions.
Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for August was 7.3 percent, which is 0.3 percentage points lower than the rate in our last report, and half a percentage point lower than it was the month Obama first took office. While the rate is improving, it is still far higher than the average monthly rate of just over 5.3 percent under George W. Bush, or the average of less than 5.2 percent under Bill Clinton.
Stock Market
As of the market close on Tuesday, Oct. 8, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was down a few points from where it was as of our last update in July — but still 106 percent higher than when Obama first took office. So U.S. stockholders and pension funds remain far wealthier, at least on paper, than they were when the president entered the White House in the midst of a market plunge caused by the economic crisis of 2007-2009.
Other market indicators show similar gains. The Dow Jones Industrial Average has gained 86 percent since Jan. 20, 2009, the day of Obama’s first inauguration. During the same period, the NASDAQ Composite index has gained 156 percent.
What our next update will show is anyone’s guess. So far markets have mostly shrugged off the economic effects of the week-old shutdown, and the looming financial calamity that many experts predict will result if Congress fails to raise the legal ceiling on federal debt and the federal government reneges on paying what it owes to lenders, contractors or both.

Federal Debt

The federal debt has resumed rising since our last report, when it had ticked down temporarily due to a seasonal surge in revenue as persons and corporations paid their 2012 income taxes. As of Oct. 4, the amount the Treasury owed to the public was just under $11.94 trillion, an increase of 89.3 percent since the day Obama first became president. That’s still slightly below the 90 percent rise we reported in our April report.
However, the Obama administration recently projected an annual deficit of $750 billion in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1, and $626 billion the year after. At that rate, the debt owed to the public will more than double during the Obama presidency.
Critics of federal debt levels often cite another, larger figure for total federal debt, which includes money the federal government owes to itself through such devices as the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. That total debt figure stood at just under $16.75 trillion on Oct. 4. That’s an increase of 57.6 percent since Obama was first sworn in.
Prices
Inflation has remained quite moderate by historical standards. As of August, the most recent figure available, the seasonally adjusted Consumer Price Index stood just 10.2 percent higher than it did when Obama first took office.
Even the highly volatile — and visible — price of gasoline at the pump has moderated recently. The national average price of regular gasoline went down to $3.37 in the week ending Oct. 7. (For some reason, the U.S. Energy Information Administration has continued to post fresh figures while other federal statistical agencies have turned out the lights during the shutdown.) That’s well below the $3.64 average as of our last report three months earlier, and down even more from the $3.80 level it reached a year ago at the time of our first “Obama’s Numbers” report, when Republicans were making the high price of gasoline an election issue.
The average price for gasoline has zoomed up and down several times under Obama, but it never reached the record $4.11 set in July 2008, under Bush. The highest price posted under Obama was $3.97 in the week ending May 9, 2011. The most recent price is, however, still 82 percent higher than the unusually low average of $1.85 for the week just before Obama first took office, when a worldwide recession was pushing down demand. And it’s 2 percent higher than it was when Obama began his second term in January.

Income and Poverty

Income and wages have stagnated under Obama, and poverty has worsened.
As of 2012, according to the most recent figures reported by the Census Bureau, median (midpoint) income for all U.S. households was $51,017, which was 4.9 percent lower (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than it was in 2008, the year before Obama took office. It was also slightly less — $83 to be exact — than the median for the previous year. As of last year, the effects of the economic recovery had simply not boosted the income of most households enough to keep pace with even the modest price inflation being measured during the period.
The same story applies to family income, which includes many families with two earners. (The “household” figure includes single persons living alone, as well as families.) Median family income in 2012 was $62,241, or 5.1 percent below the inflation-adjusted 2008 level.
The number of persons living in poverty also worsened again in 2012, according to the most recent Census figures. As of last year, 46,496,000 persons lived in households with income below the official poverty line, an increase of nearly 6.7 million since 2008 and 249,000 since 2011. The total poverty rate remained unchanged in 2012 at 15 percent of the total U.S. population. So for the second straight year, the poverty rate was 1.8 points higher than it was in 2008.
Census income and poverty figures are reported only once a year, but even the more up-to-date figures on inflation-adjusted wage income reported by the BLS show no improvement. As of August, the figure for real (inflation-adjusted) weekly earnings for all wage and salary workers stood exactly where it did in January 2009, when Obama first took office.

Food Stamps

The number of people receiving food stamps continues at near-record levels. Recipients of what is now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program numbered 47,760,285 in June, the most recent figure reported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture before its website went dark due to the partial federal shutdown. That’s an increase of more than 200,000 since our July update, which was based on figures current as of April. (USDA normally posts monthly figures with about a three-month lag.) The highest monthly total recorded to date was 47,792,056 in December 2012.
The latest figures represent an increase of 49.3 percent since Obama first took office — about 3 percentage points higher than our first report a year ago.
As we’ve noted previously, the increase under Obama is due mainly to the economic downturn that began in late 2007, but also partly to Obama’s signing legislation to increase benefit levels and to allow able-bodied single persons to receive food stamps. The nearly 15.8 million people who have been added under Obama now exceed the 14.7 million who were added under Bush. And the total has remained historically high even as the economy has improved, and as the unemployment rate has declined substantially. As of June, just over 15 percent of the entire U.S. population remained on food stamps.

Energy Indicators

The remarkable boom in U.S. oil production has continued apace under Obama.
In the July-September quarter of 2013, domestic oil production was running 51 percent higher than in the last quarter of 2008, according to the EIA. At the same time, U.S. oil imports were down by 43 percent. Both those figures are several percentage points higher than we reported just three months ago, showing how remarkably rapid this energy transformation has become. Another indicator: The Wall Street Journal reported Oct. 2 that the U.S. is about to become the largest producer of oil and gas on the planet, overtaking Russia.
As oil production has gone up and oil imports have declined, U.S. dependency on foreign oil has declined sharply. In the first eight months of 2013, the EIA says the U.S. imported just 35.3 percent of the oil it consumed, down from 57 percent for all of 2008 and from the peak of 60.3 percent in 2005, when the current trend began.
Meanwhile, the trend to producing more electricity from wind and solar sources has also continued under Obama. During the most recent 12 months on record (ending in July) wind- and solar-generated electricity was 192 percent higher than in 2008, according to the EIA. Wind and solar power also increased sharply during Bush’s last term — rising by 282 percent — but from a smaller base.
Viewed another way, wind and solar accounted for 4 percent of all U.S. electricity generation during the most recent 12 months on record, up from 3.8 percent in our last report and nearly triple the 1.4 percent share in the year before Obama took office. Coal-fired plants still supply the largest portion — just over 39 percent. But that’s down from 48 percent in 2008. Natural gas supplied 28 percent and nuclear plants supplied 19 percent in the most recent 12 months.

War and World Opinion

Although Obama pulled U.S. troops out of Iraq at the end of 2011, the war in Afghanistan still grinds on. According to year-by-year compilations by icasualties.org of official casualty figures, the U.S. has suffered 264 military fatalities in Iraq since 2008, and 1,655 in Afghanistan (including 111 so far this year).
Meanwhile, world opinion of the United States has slipped since we last reported on it a year ago, but is still much better than it was before Obama entered office.
The Pew Global Attitudes Project conducts annual polling in many foreign nations, and reports that overall opinion remained generally favorable in 2013. Pew reported most recently that in 28 of 38 nations where it had polled, half or more of those surveyed expressed a favorable opinion of the U.S. in 2013. That’s an about-face from Pew’s results in 2008, when only nine of 23 nations polled reported half or more with a favorable opinion of the U.S.
The gains, and also the recent slippage, can be seen for example in Japan, where 69 percent of those polled in 2013 said they had a favorable opinion of the U.S. That’s down 3 percentage points from 2012, but still 19 points higher than in 2008.
A similar result can be seen in France, where 64 percent reported a favorable opinion in 2013. That’s down 5 percentage points from the previous year, but still 22 points higher than in 2008. And in Britain, 58 percent said they approved of the U.S., down 2 percentage points from the previous year but still 5 points higher than in the last year of the Bush administration.
However, approval of the U.S. in key Muslim nations remains abysmal, despite the president’s early efforts to make a “new beginning” with Muslims around the world. In Pakistan only 11 percent reported a favorable opinion of the U.S., down 1 percentage point from a year earlier and 8 points lower than in 2008. In Egypt, 16 percent said they approved of the U.S., down 3 percentage points from 2012 and 6 points lower than in 2008. And in Turkey — where favorable opinion of the U.S. improved by 6 percentage points in 2013 and by 9 points since 2008 — it still stood at only 21 percent this year.
– by Brooks Jackson

Obama?s Numbers, October Update

To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.

My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

Obama and Bush create no jobs other then maybe military or government. Bush's unemployment rate was barely ever over 5 percent if that. It took the take over of congress by the democrats to destroy the economy. The facts are, that before the democrats Bush's economy was doing well. After they took over and started ignoring Bush things went to crap. That is just undeniable fact. The debt that Obama has racked up is a rooster waiting to come home to roost. Not saying Bush was better but Obama isn't either.

Did these catastrophic events happen Bush's fault?
1) Recession started in 2000 officially 3/2001 ended 11/2001.
2) Dot com bust cost $5 trillion market losses 300,000+ jobs lost
3) Did 9/11 occur? Cost $2 trillion real/market losses Wall street closed 10 days! 18,000 business loss, 400,000 jobs.
4) Worst hurricane SEASONS!! in History.. again trillions in losses, 3,000 lives, 300,000 jobs lost..

YET during Bush..in spite of:
400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita
145,000 jobs in NYC alone due to 9/11
300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts.

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.

When Bush started 131,785,000 people employed.
At the end of 2008 136,790,000 people employed or

5,000,000 more employed then when he took office.

So AGAIN.. this bull shit comments about "Not saying Bush was better but Obama isn't either." IS JUST totally CRAP Unsupported by the facts!
NO president has ever had such events occur and historians will rate Bush GREAT because in SPITE of a totally biased MSM and in spite of the events... The country survived better then when Bush started!

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

So this morning there is yet ANOTHER scandal brewing in Washington which ...GASP... involves Barry and his incredibly slimey pals. I don't have the details yet, but will post later when it becomes available.

Apparently, one of the people who are supposed to put together the job numbers have come forward and advised that they were told to make up the numbers in the summer of 2012 so that they showed an improvement in the jobless rate. The jobless numbers at the time dropped from 8.2% to around 7.8%. This person advised that it was his supervisor that told him to make up the information to show a definitive improvement. Again, I have no definitive details yet, but am looking.

IF this is true, then I will have to begin practicing my shocked face... You know, like the one on that commercial where the baby talks about investments.

 

[Billy000]

What so Obama should have just waved a magic wand to fix it all? Tell me douche bag. What would you do? How would you fix the economy?

Let me guess. Trickle down economics?

Some good remedies have been placed on this board in the past, and taxing more was never one of them. The government knows how to bring businesses from over seas back, they just can't bring themselves to do what it takes.
Obamacare is a job killer whether anyone wants to admit that or not.
Redistribution of wealth was never a job creator.

Let me just add that Obama has never been a job creator in his life, he doesn't know how. He has a lot of "yes" men that he listens to, hell, he doesn't even have a lot of time for his own elected congressmen.

I love how the left, when confronted with their failures, always demands what we would have done instead.

Funny stuff.

Trickle down was never a theory of Reagan's. But that's not imprtant.

Bottom line? dimocraps are clueless. Even in their own specialties (socialism), they're clueless.

obamacare? A disaster. And their major defense is, "What's the Republican alternative?"

Gee, I don't know. Let's start with "Not fucking up the entire American Health Care System."

And now we've got one screaming about how we don't know how to run an economy.

Right.

There are fewer people working now than when obama took office. There are millions more people on welfare, the labor participation rate is at 40 year lows, the Youth unemployment is near a crisis and Black unemployment is at Depression era levels.

The Great Recession? Yeah, that happened under Bush. But so did a lot of things he had no control over. That recession was no more Bush's fault than Typhoon Haiyan is obama's. But LIV's bought into the propaganda that it was. Now they're staring incompetence, REAL incompetence, in the face.

And all they can do is ask, "What would you do?"

You can't stop 'shit' from happening all the time. But what makes one leader different from the other is how he responds to it.

Instead of trying to fix the American economy, he acted like a necrophiliac and used his meme of 'never let a crisis go to waste' to fuck the American People with obamacare.

obama is a failure. He will go down in history as the worst president -- EVER.

You are in serious denial. I lay out the facts and you just ignore them. It's quite sad.

 

[Oldstyle]

Some good remedies have been placed on this board in the past, and taxing more was never one of them. The government knows how to bring businesses from over seas back, they just can't bring themselves to do what it takes.
Obamacare is a job killer whether anyone wants to admit that or not.
Redistribution of wealth was never a job creator.

Let me just add that Obama has never been a job creator in his life, he doesn't know how. He has a lot of "yes" men that he listens to, hell, he doesn't even have a lot of time for his own elected congressmen.

I love how the left, when confronted with their failures, always demands what we would have done instead.

Funny stuff.

Trickle down was never a theory of Reagan's. But that's not imprtant.

Bottom line? dimocraps are clueless. Even in their own specialties (socialism), they're clueless.

obamacare? A disaster. And their major defense is, "What's the Republican alternative?"

Gee, I don't know. Let's start with "Not fucking up the entire American Health Care System."

And now we've got one screaming about how we don't know how to run an economy.

Right.

There are fewer people working now than when obama took office. There are millions more people on welfare, the labor participation rate is at 40 year lows, the Youth unemployment is near a crisis and Black unemployment is at Depression era levels.

The Great Recession? Yeah, that happened under Bush. But so did a lot of things he had no control over. That recession was no more Bush's fault than Typhoon Haiyan is obama's. But LIV's bought into the propaganda that it was. Now they're staring incompetence, REAL incompetence, in the face.

And all they can do is ask, "What would you do?"

You can't stop 'shit' from happening all the time. But what makes one leader different from the other is how he responds to it.

Instead of trying to fix the American economy, he acted like a necrophiliac and used his meme of 'never let a crisis go to waste' to fuck the American People with obamacare.

obama is a failure. He will go down in history as the worst president -- EVER.

You are in serious denial. I lay out the facts and you just ignore them. It's quite sad.

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one sided your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

 

[Billy000]

I love how the left, when confronted with their failures, always demands what we would have done instead.

Funny stuff.

Trickle down was never a theory of Reagan's. But that's not imprtant.

Bottom line? dimocraps are clueless. Even in their own specialties (socialism), they're clueless.

obamacare? A disaster. And their major defense is, "What's the Republican alternative?"

Gee, I don't know. Let's start with "Not fucking up the entire American Health Care System."

And now we've got one screaming about how we don't know how to run an economy.

Right.

There are fewer people working now than when obama took office. There are millions more people on welfare, the labor participation rate is at 40 year lows, the Youth unemployment is near a crisis and Black unemployment is at Depression era levels.

The Great Recession? Yeah, that happened under Bush. But so did a lot of things he had no control over. That recession was no more Bush's fault than Typhoon Haiyan is obama's. But LIV's bought into the propaganda that it was. Now they're staring incompetence, REAL incompetence, in the face.

And all they can do is ask, "What would you do?"

You can't stop 'shit' from happening all the time. But what makes one leader different from the other is how he responds to it.

Instead of trying to fix the American economy, he acted like a necrophiliac and used his meme of 'never let a crisis go to waste' to fuck the American People with obamacare.

obama is a failure. He will go down in history as the worst president -- EVER.

You are in serious denial. I lay out the facts and you just ignore them. It's quite sad.

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one side your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

 

[The Rabbi]

What are you even talking about? You havent provided any facts at all. If you think my facts are bullshit, you need to counter with your own. Right now you sound like a 5 year old.

He has countered them with his own. You're just not listening.
Workforce participation rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years. Unemployment is almost where it was 5 years ago. The average UE rate under Bush was under 6%. The simple fact is the labor market is much worse now. And this is solely due to Democratic policies that were enacted.
Household wealth is lower than it was 5 years ago.
Household income is lower than it was 5 years ago.
These are facts. The economy is in worse shape now than 5 years ago. Obama's recovery has been worse than Bush's recession.

What so Obama should have just waved a magic wand to fix it all? Tell me douche bag. What would you do? How would you fix the economy?

Let me guess. Trickle down economics?

So when faced with facts you deflect. Typical.

We know what works, is the funny thing. Gov't intervention doesn't work. It didnt work in the 1930s. It didnt work this time either.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are in serious denial. I lay out the facts and you just ignore them. It's quite sad.

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one side your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

You quoted sources that simply took gross job creation over all of Bush's tenure less the jobs lost in the last 6 months and then compared that to job creation during Obama's tenure.
It is a very dishonest way of cherry picking data.

 

[Oldstyle]

You are in serious denial. I lay out the facts and you just ignore them. It's quite sad.

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one side your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

"My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.[/QUOTE]"

That was your opening "salvo" in this string, Billy. Read it. It's YOUR take on how Obama has fared in the five years that he's been in office and it's so obviously biased that it's laughable that you're making THAT post while accusing others of "rhetoric".

"Things could be better?" "The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama...?" "Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe..."

And what do you come up with as the REAL reason the economy is not responding? Because of Republicans in Congress? REALLY? One could quite easily make the argument that the reason that things aren't even WORSE than they are now is that Republicans in Congress took away Barry's ability to pass far left legislation so that we didn't have Cap & Trade passed and we didn't have Card Check passed. Those were the next two items up on Barry, Harry and Nancy's progressive "wish list"...something that was halted by the GOP victories in the 2010 mid-terms. I've got news for you, Billy...if you think that the economy is bad NOW? It would be a heck of a lot worse if the Obama White House hadn't had to back off on the EPA's new greenhouse gas standards...Cap & Trade...and Card Check. Those three things would have REALLY knocked the recovery for a loop! Then there is the job creation that took place in Republican led States. THOSE jobs go in the plus column for Barry even though they were the result of local policies that he opposed in most cases! Barry's ObamaCare legislation prompted employers to turn two full time employees into three part timers so they could skirt the new law. That makes Obama's unemployment numbers look better when in fact it's devastating the American worker who lost their hours! But you don't CARE about those people! You care about making a "case" for Obama's "success".

You don't see any of THAT because you're so bound and determined to see Barack Obama's Presidency as "successful". You started this thread because you were SO upset that a poll started by someone else showed how unfavorably this President is now viewed.

 

[longknife]

ANY thread based upon George Soros' left-wing mouthpiece isn't worth the time reading - or believing.

 

[Meister]

Under Obama poverty is much worse than Bush. Our standing in the world has declined. The number of people on public assistance has exploded. The Federal debt has exploded. Those are the main facts of the OP's story.

Those thing are measurable.

What is not measurable is much worse for Obama. The fact he lied about about almost every facet of Obamacare in order to get it passed has been a huge hit to his credibility, and will be a massive stain on his legacy. The fact he greatly escalated Bush's domestic spying program and then lied to Congress and the American people about it. The fact he made closing Gitmo a major campaign theme and hammered Bush on the issue, and then reneged on his promise.

The "fact check" posted by the OP is garbage (not the op's fault). It is something put together by an Obama apologist that tries to give the appearance of being fair....while largely ignoring the character lapses and failures of Obama that now have a majority American's actively distrusting him.

Most "fact check" things are complete bullshit...as the "fact checker" only looks at those facts they choose to, and then, only through a lens which helps make their political point. Do not be fooled.

I don't understand why you do not take into account the 2007 recession. Yes obviously quality of life is going to be worse under Obama. Shit went bad a year before he came into office. That is not Obama's fault. Since then Obama has created 2.5 more jobs than Bush ever did. You want to put the blame on someone for the increased poverty? Blame the corporations. They have had record profits with stagnant wages. Obama tried to raise the minimum wage. And yeah, because of an increase in poverty, more people are on government assistance. That's just a consequence.

You forget that Bush had only a 4-5% unemployment. In other words.....there wasnt a lot of job growth because people were fully employed who wanted a job.

Bill, why did you completely ignore my post from yesterday?

 

[S.J.]

This thread has to be one of the sorriest attempts to make Obama look like a president, rather than a not-so-bright wannabe dictator.

 

[freedombecki]

so why has the debt ceiling been raised?

Because the Obama administration keeps raising the National Debt.

It's over $17 trillion now.

U. S. National Debt to the Penny (U. S. Treasury Department) $17,189,547,404,790.46

but ned said the debt has come down under obama. Is this that liberal fuzzy math thingie?

No, it's a shell math game. The U. S. National Debt to the Penny is something you will seldom see cited on a liberal post because if the public were aware of it, the Kool Aid would soon lose its effect of obfuscating the fiscal trouble the nation really is experiencing, and people would rally with full heart behind John Boehner's obstinacy about cutting spending. Instead of cutting spending, The Democrats shoved through the highest tax in the history of the United States, bar none when they shoved through Obamacare with Nancy Pelosi's notorious order to Democrats "do not read, just pass" backed up by the threat of outing from office those who did not vote for the Affordable Care Act, which she knew was as far from Affordable as you can get before she put the pox on her fellow Democrats who were scrambling to understand what was in the bill, but it was just too long to be passed in good faith. Not everything that was dumbed down behind closed doors has stayed dumbed down, except the bleating believers think that the money would appear from nowhere and have no idea what will happen to their paycheck when Obama leaves office and the tax goes into effect, robbing everyone of a huge chunk of their pay, and it's a lot more than they have ever paid before, because out of 325,000,000 Americans, only about 95,000,000 now have full-time jobs. The others are scrambling to make ends meet or depending on the debt ceiling to go forever higher and higher until this nation is owned by other nations who have "funded" the fiscal Trojan Horse for which the Obama administration has been clamoring in order to instill a certain amount of chaos in America's presently uncertain future.

 

[Billy000]

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one side your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

"My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.

"

That was your opening "salvo" in this string, Billy. Read it. It's YOUR take on how Obama has fared in the five years that he's been in office and it's so obviously biased that it's laughable that you're making THAT post while accusing others of "rhetoric".

"Things could be better?" "The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama...?" "Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe..."

And what do you come up with as the REAL reason the economy is not responding? Because of Republicans in Congress? REALLY? One could quite easily make the argument that the reason that things aren't even WORSE than they are now is that Republicans in Congress took away Barry's ability to pass far left legislation so that we didn't have Cap & Trade passed and we didn't have Card Check passed. Those were the next two items up on Barry, Harry and Nancy's progressive "wish list"...something that was halted by the GOP victories in the 2010 mid-terms. I've got news for you, Billy...if you think that the economy is bad NOW? It would be a heck of a lot worse if the Obama White House hadn't had to back off on the EPA's new greenhouse gas standards...Cap & Trade...and Card Check. Those three things would have REALLY knocked the recovery for a loop! Then there is the job creation that took place in Republican led States. THOSE jobs go in the plus column for Barry even though they were the result of local policies that he opposed in most cases! Barry's ObamaCare legislation prompted employers to turn two full time employees into three part timers so they could skirt the new law. That makes Obama's unemployment numbers look better when in fact it's devastating the American worker who lost their hours! But you don't CARE about those people! You care about making a "case" for Obama's "success".

You don't see any of THAT because you're so bound and determined to see Barack Obama's Presidency as "successful". You started this thread because you were SO upset that a poll started by someone else showed how unfavorably this President is now viewed.[/QUOTE]

You are such an idiot. My "take" was completely balanced. I acknowledged that the unemployment was still high and that Obama could possibly have done more. And no, it is not just republicans in congress that could have done more, it was also Bush. He was president for 8 years yet 2.5 times less jobs were created under his administration than Obama's 5 years.

You are the biased one you dumbshit. You won't give Obama credit for ANYTHING. You keep going on about this cap and trade, EPA standards yet they didn't even go into practice! That makes those points moot. God you are pathetic.

I started this thread because of the alarming amount of people who gave him an F. I made it clear in that thread Obama did not deserve an A. I gave him a B. Call that bias if you want, but ill say it again, you won't give him credit for ANYTHING. That is what makes you bias. You are a partisan hack who is in serious denial.

 

[Billy000]

What you did, Billy was cherry pick statistics that make a rather lackluster Presidency look "good" while steadfastly ignoring the statistics that show that it is in fact rather bad.

Your "facts" are simply propaganda. You don't want to have an "honest" discussion about Obama's Presidency...you want to present a totally biased view of that Presidency and then attack anyone who points out how one side your viewpoint is. Why even bother? Especially when you start off by declaring that this was going to be a discussion based on FACTS not hyperbole and rhetoric!

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

You quoted sources that simply took gross job creation over all of Bush's tenure less the jobs lost in the last 6 months and then compared that to job creation during Obama's tenure.
It is a very dishonest way of cherry picking data.

No, I didn't. I made it clear from the beginning that the unemployment rate is still high. See, that's the difference between me and you and the other hacks. I gave a fair and balanced assessment of Obama's record. You have not. You won't give him credit for anything. That's what makes you a biased hack

 

[The Rabbi]

Christ. What have I cherry picked? Explain it. If you are going to to make the accusation, then explain it.

You quoted sources that simply took gross job creation over all of Bush's tenure less the jobs lost in the last 6 months and then compared that to job creation during Obama's tenure.
It is a very dishonest way of cherry picking data.

No, I didn't. I made it clear from the beginning that the unemployment rate is still high. See, that's the difference between me and you and the other hacks. I gave a fair and balanced assessment of Obama's record. You have not. You won't give him credit for anything. That's what makes you a biased hack

What should I give him credit for? Booming economy? No. High job creation? No. Fostering innovation in companies? No. Free trade agreements? No. Foreign policy success? No. Obamacare? No.
He gets credit as being the worst fucking president in the history of the world. And I am including idi Amin Dada.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This thread has to be one of the sorriest attempts to make Obama look like a president, rather than a not-so-bright wannabe dictator.

It's like trying to turn a piece of crap into a gold nugget. It's still crap.

 

[S.J.]

This thread has to be one of the sorriest attempts to make Obama look like a president, rather than a not-so-bright wannabe dictator.

It's like trying to turn a piece of crap into a gold nugget. It's still crap.

Billy000 is trying to polish a turd.