Tell me again why Barack Obama has been such a bad president

[code1211]

Wehner is dead off, 100%. He writes,

"Consider the mission accepted."

But Alter wrote,

"Your mission, Jim (and readers named something else), should you decide to accept it, is to identify where Obama has been a poor decision-maker. What, specifically, has he done wrong on policy? What, specifically, would you have done differently to create jobs? And what can any of the current Republican candidates offer that would be an improvement on the employment front?"

Alter asks four specific questions (counting the one implicit in the first sentence quoted). Wehner doesn't answer any of them. Instead, he (admittedly, fairly explicitly) documents ways in which the economy is bad. Wehner's statements like

"Under Obama’s stewardship, we have lost 2.2 million jobs (and 900,000 full-time jobs in the last four months alone). He is now on track to have the worst jobs record of any president in the modern era."

don't answer any of Alter's questions, which are about Obama's decisions and policies, not about his outcomes. The two are related of course, but Wehner nevertheless fails to relate them. It's remarkable how well Alter predicts Wehner's methodology, and how completely Wehner misses Alter's point. It seems almost as if Alter is responding to Wehner rather than the other way around.

He is the President of the USA. His ideas, plans and approaches don't seem to be accomplishing the goals that he has defined liked jobs as a for instance.

Like it or not, he is failing. If the people are happy, hopeful and excited about the future, the prez is successful.

If not, he's failing.

I don't know all the dance steps, but I can tell a prat fall from a ballet.

 

[Immanuel]

Your situation sucks right now. It's hard to get a job, and healthcare costs more than you desire. So do the American thing, and blame someone else. In this case, the president.

I'm having a difficult time trying to resolve how people judge a president based on the background of the country. Yall do realize these are related but completely separate issues, right? No president can scrunch up his face and make the economy listen. Why? Because YOU, average American, are the backbone of the economy. And if YOU, average American, are so hostile and resistant and foot-dragging, why on earth do you think anything or anyone else will actually change?

So how do we judge a president outside the realm of the background picture? I'd say look at his actions. What are the goals and how were they attempted? Sometimes in life, giving it all you got just isn't good enough, but it's "giving it all you got" that matters. So if I see a president is making smart moves, I'm going to stick by him and ride out the storm, rather than jump one ship and try to swim to a sinking one because they claim they have pie.

And I say all of this independent of our current president, with no reference to his actions or inactions. Just think a little bit before you're ready to jump ship. Is it the captain, or the storm?

Actually, I blame Congress (both parties) more than I blame the President.

It is not only the ACA. It is a general atmosphere of driving business out of this country.

I don't think the President can solve the problems we are facing. That being said, I don't see a single one of the Republicans that have a clue either.

I do believe that ACA is a terrible act of legislation that is hurting this country tremendously. I think with the uncertainty of the bill, we will not see real positive changes in the unemployment situation for several years and the President is responsible for that. He pushed for that legislation and he signed the bill. We definitely needed to do something about the health care situation, but there is such a thing as trying to take too big of a bite at one time.

And thank you for recognizing my situation.

You make a good point... look at his goals and actions. I see a hell of a lot of talk but zero action. I see a lot of him blaming that other guy and no solutions at all. How long are we supposed to wait for his actions?

You say you see a President who is making smart moves. What moves do you consider smart? What exactly has he done the deserves that kind of praise?

Immie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Your situation sucks right now. It's hard to get a job, and healthcare costs more than you desire. So do the American thing, and blame someone else. In this case, the president.

I'm having a difficult time trying to resolve how people judge a president based on the background of the country. Yall do realize these are related but completely separate issues, right? No president can scrunch up his face and make the economy listen. Why? Because YOU, average American, are the backbone of the economy. And if YOU, average American, are so hostile and resistant and foot-dragging, why on earth do you think anything or anyone else will actually change?

So how do we judge a president outside the realm of the background picture? I'd say look at his actions. What are the goals and how were they attempted? Sometimes in life, giving it all you got just isn't good enough, but it's "giving it all you got" that matters. So if I see a president is making smart moves, I'm going to stick by him and ride out the storm, rather than jump one ship and try to swim to a sinking one because they claim they have pie.

And I say all of this independent of our current president, with no reference to his actions or inactions. Just think a little bit before you're ready to jump ship. Is it the captain, or the storm?

You are correct that we judge presidents, often unfairly, by what things that are beyond his control. All I can say in response to that is so what?

We judged Bush by the economy, 9/11, and Katrina. In my opinion his reactions to two of those was wrong, yet he still came off looking better in the long run because he led. He staked out a position, and kept it in the face of criticism. I cannot help but respect a man who does that, even when I disagree with him.

We are judging Obama by the economy and Afghanistan. If there is another major incident in there at some point we will judge him by that also. (Sorry people, Irene is not a major incident.) Despite the fact that he is making right decisions, no one is thinking he looks better now than when he was elected. That is because he has no positions, hides from criticism, and blows in the wind. I cannot admire him for this, nor can most people. We expect better of our president.

In this case it is definitely the captain, not the storm. The storm, despite the hype, is not that bad. We have been through worse, and will again. Yet the captain is trying to convince me that this is the worst storm in history, and wants me to toss things overboard to save the ship, even though it is not in danger.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

To use your analogy? The "captain" was promoted to his position commanding an aircraft carrier despite the fact that he didn't even have experience commanding a rowboat. To make matters worse he's surrounded himself with a "crew" that hasn't ever been to sea either.

This is one "ship" that never should have left the dock.

And this is precisely the type of useless speculation that makes for horrible decision making.

Whether you think he is too young, too inexperienced, too black, too muslim, too kenyan, too goofy looking, too short, or too American doesn't mean crap. The only thing that matters is if our president is taking the best steps available at the time. Note how that has nothing to do with whether those steps succeed. And this is the inherent difference between good decision making, and the logic of the average American. The average American bases their judgments off of "what do I personally get out of it?" If the president personally got you a job and gave everyone with your last name massive tax breaks, you'd think they were the best president ever, even if the policy was horrible. This is why middle school elections are often-times decided by which candidate gives out the best candy.

It's time to grow up people. It's time you start using logic instead of greedy self serving gut reactions. Is the president using the best solutions available, regardless of whether they work or not? Or is the president retreating to a dude ranch and doing no work whatsoever? Cuz it's not the storm the scares me, so long as the captain is on deck and giving the appropriate orders, even though those orders can't possibly control the weather.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's the storm.

PSA: Look, MA! No teleprompter!

Obama 2012: 2011 Summer Organizers have lunch with President Barack Obama - YouTube

Look ma, no comprehension of history.

Change does not come through the government, it comes despite it.

 

[Immanuel]

To use your analogy? The "captain" was promoted to his position commanding an aircraft carrier despite the fact that he didn't even have experience commanding a rowboat. To make matters worse he's surrounded himself with a "crew" that hasn't ever been to sea either.

This is one "ship" that never should have left the dock.

And this is precisely the type of useless speculation that makes for horrible decision making.

Whether you think he is too young, too inexperienced, too black, too muslim, too kenyan, too goofy looking, too short, or too American doesn't mean crap. The only thing that matters is if our president is taking the best steps available at the time. Note how that has nothing to do with whether those steps succeed. And this is the inherent difference between good decision making, and the logic of the average American. The average American bases their judgments off of "what do I personally get out of it?" If the president personally got you a job and gave everyone with your last name massive tax breaks, you'd think they were the best president ever, even if the policy was horrible. This is why middle school elections are often-times decided by which candidate gives out the best candy.

It's time to grow up people. It's time you start using logic instead of greedy self serving gut reactions. Is the president using the best solutions available, regardless of whether they work or not? Or is the president retreating to a dude ranch and doing no work whatsoever? Cuz it's not the storm the scares me, so long as the captain is on deck and giving the appropriate orders, even though those orders can't possibly control the weather.

No, he is not. He saddled us with the ACA and the failed Stimulus plan. Those were not the best available solutions and therein lies the problem.

Immie

 

[SmarterThanHick]

And what were the best options?

 

[Immanuel]

And what were the best options?

Surely, the best option would be to find out and do something about why businesses are outsourcing so many jobs. That would one of the first steps. Instead he has simply ignored this all together.

Another thing is to raise taxes, mostly on the rich and corporations, and cut spending significantly in order to get our deficit under control rather than ballooning the problem as he has done. Granted this is where the Republicans bear some of the responsibility. Obviously, at this point in time, Trickle Down Economics isn't working. They need to get over it, no economic plan works under every situation. As to cutting spending we need to cut all waste and we can't only focus on entitlements or defense. It needs to be done systematically and quickly.

Then we need to look at our labor issues. The union leaders are as corrupt as politicians and lobbyists. We cannot allow the unions to continue to eat our employers alive.

We also need to look at the myriad of regulations that are driving employers out. I'm not saying eliminate them, but look at them and determine what are over burdensome and quite frankly find out why we are no longer competitive with other nations.

Those are four areas I would start looking at.

The ACA only made things worse and the Stimulus plan stimulated nothing except the pocket books of major donors while the rest of us got screwed.

Immie

 

[Kevinthedog]

President Obama has not at all be a failure.

If he were a Republican every Republican would be wildly cheering his success and pushing to name all sorts of buildings and structures after him.

Ronald Reagan was not only one of the worst presidents in the history of America..he was one of the biggest criminals. He really did commit treason. He really did violate the constitution. He really did break the law. He really did do massive damage to the economy. Yet conservatives hold this man up in the same reverence as the founders of the United States.

It's really quite shocking.

Only to you, man.

That you can't see why Reagan was awesome is just an indication of your myopia...

He brought back the economy from the mess Carter had left it and won the Cold War.

I remember in the 1970's, people were talking about whether America was over or not.

But after Reagan, we were standing tall again. Which is why nobody really cared all that much that he sold obsolete weapons (for four times their actual value) to Iran to get hostages out.

Under Obama (or Carter II) we seem to be suffering from that same old "Malaise", which is why Obama is a failure. He doesn't inspire confidence. His argument is not how we are getting better, it's "Well, things could be worse". And then they get worse.

What we need is another kick-ass Cowboy to make us great again.

(That would be your cue, Gov. Perry!)

He won the Cold War?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

To use your analogy? The "captain" was promoted to his position commanding an aircraft carrier despite the fact that he didn't even have experience commanding a rowboat. To make matters worse he's surrounded himself with a "crew" that hasn't ever been to sea either.

This is one "ship" that never should have left the dock.

And this is precisely the type of useless speculation that makes for horrible decision making.

Whether you think he is too young, too inexperienced, too black, too muslim, too kenyan, too goofy looking, too short, or too American doesn't mean crap. The only thing that matters is if our president is taking the best steps available at the time. Note how that has nothing to do with whether those steps succeed. And this is the inherent difference between good decision making, and the logic of the average American. The average American bases their judgments off of "what do I personally get out of it?" If the president personally got you a job and gave everyone with your last name massive tax breaks, you'd think they were the best president ever, even if the policy was horrible. This is why middle school elections are often-times decided by which candidate gives out the best candy.

It's time to grow up people. It's time you start using logic instead of greedy self serving gut reactions. Is the president using the best solutions available, regardless of whether they work or not? Or is the president retreating to a dude ranch and doing no work whatsoever? Cuz it's not the storm the scares me, so long as the captain is on deck and giving the appropriate orders, even though those orders can't possibly control the weather.

Can you point out which decisions he has actually made that you, personally, believe were the best that could be done in the circumstances? If, that is, you actually believe that, and are not just being a Devil's advocate.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Can you point out which decisions he has actually made that you, personally, believe were the best that could be done in the circumstances? If, that is, you actually believe that, and are not just being a Devil's advocate.

I am not playing devil's advocate when I say better decision making is evaluation the quality of decisions instead of unsupported speculation on someone's personal traits. You similarly can't even judge based on the outcome unless the outcome possibilities are standardized and controlled. When we test new drugs, no one cares if the company making it is young, old, foreign, or non-profits. We don't even care if the drug works. What we care about is how well the drug works compared to our current best standard option. We don't have the luxury of comparison national outcomes to such controlled standards, so the only thing we should be evaluating is the value of the actions themselves, and this can be applied to any politician.

Note I have not once up till this point even mentioned the name Obama. My point is not to elevate our current president, but to demote the ridiculous ideas as to how such a person should be evaluated.

Surely, the best option would be to find out and do something about why businesses are outsourcing so many jobs. That would one of the first steps. Instead he has simply ignored this all together.

What makes you think this was ignored? It doesn't take a PhD in economics to determine the reason businesses outsource jobs is because people in other countries will accomplish the same labor for a cheaper price. Again, you're blaming the president for the decisions of local business owners and the entitlement of Americans.

Then we need to look at our labor issues. The union leaders are as corrupt as politicians and lobbyists. We cannot allow the unions to continue to eat our employers alive.

I can't help to see more finger pointing and wonder what you feel a president should do on the matter.

We also need to look at the myriad of regulations that are driving employers out. I'm not saying eliminate them, but look at them and determine what are over burdensome and quite frankly find out why we are no longer competitive with other nations.

Those are four areas I would start looking at.

Again you're not at all pointing out specific attempts made by the president and evaluating their inherent worth. You're just disgruntled about areas that aren't helping you. You think businesses are shutting down because of red tape?

I don't know how to put this any other way. The economy sucks. No one person, even the president, can single-handedly turn that around. Believing otherwise is foolish.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can you point out which decisions he has actually made that you, personally, believe were the best that could be done in the circumstances? If, that is, you actually believe that, and are not just being a Devil's advocate.

I am not playing devil's advocate when I say better decision making is evaluation the quality of decisions instead of unsupported speculation on someone's personal traits. You similarly can't even judge based on the outcome unless the outcome possibilities are standardized and controlled. When we test new drugs, no one cares if the company making it is young, old, foreign, or non-profits. We don't even care if the drug works. What we care about is how well the drug works compared to our current best standard option. We don't have the luxury of comparison national outcomes to such controlled standards, so the only thing we should be evaluating is the value of the actions themselves, and this can be applied to any politician.

Note I have not once up till this point even mentioned the name Obama. My point is not to elevate our current president, but to demote the ridiculous ideas as to how such a person should be evaluated.

Sorry, in the real world results are what matter. It might not be fair, but no one ever said life is fair.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Sorry, in the real world results are what matter. It might not be fair, but no one ever said life is fair.

Again, this is the self-serving crap that makes for horrible decision making. "I'm not getting what I want so therefore you are bad at your job." NO! You seem insightful enough to understand that life isn't fair, yet demand self-serving results as if it were.

The fact still remains that you have absolutely ZERO method of adequately assessing the results of the large majority of unique leadership actions because you have no standard with which to compare those results. Smart Americans understand this concept.

Let's move this discussion to a similar area that does not have 4 year terms: industry. What percentage of fortune 500 companies have outed their CEOs in the last 2 years because of hard times? The smart companies hunkered down, continued making smart decisions, and are waiting for this storm to pass. Their boards may be disgruntled that the president isn't specifically helping them become more rich just as you have your own self-serving desires, but they're not BLAMING their CEOs for the entire economy going south. Boards of directors are well aware that firing smart CEOs just because they demand even more growth would be stabbing themselves in the foot; an act you apparently don't desire to avoid, just because you're not getting your juice box when you want it.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

BS Pubs' fault. obviously:

 

[Oldstyle]

To use your analogy? The "captain" was promoted to his position commanding an aircraft carrier despite the fact that he didn't even have experience commanding a rowboat. To make matters worse he's surrounded himself with a "crew" that hasn't ever been to sea either.

This is one "ship" that never should have left the dock.

And this is precisely the type of useless speculation that makes for horrible decision making.

Whether you think he is too young, too inexperienced, too black, too muslim, too kenyan, too goofy looking, too short, or too American doesn't mean crap. The only thing that matters is if our president is taking the best steps available at the time. Note how that has nothing to do with whether those steps succeed. And this is the inherent difference between good decision making, and the logic of the average American. The average American bases their judgments off of "what do I personally get out of it?" If the president personally got you a job and gave everyone with your last name massive tax breaks, you'd think they were the best president ever, even if the policy was horrible. This is why middle school elections are often-times decided by which candidate gives out the best candy.

It's time to grow up people. It's time you start using logic instead of greedy self serving gut reactions. Is the president using the best solutions available, regardless of whether they work or not? Or is the president retreating to a dude ranch and doing no work whatsoever? Cuz it's not the storm the scares me, so long as the captain is on deck and giving the appropriate orders, even though those orders can't possibly control the weather.

Why on earth do you portray opposition to the policies of this President as "greedy self serving gut reactions"? I oppose Barack Obama because his "solutions" haven't worked and he's too rigidly entrenched in his progressive ideology to try something else. He ran for President because he said he had a plan to fix the problems he was inheriting. Ever since he GOT to the Oval Office however, he's spent most of his time blaming W., the Republicans or bad luck for his failings. At some point (and we're coming up on THREE YEARS!!!) it's not the fault of everyone else...it's Barack Obama's for not having a plan that worked.

 

[Oldstyle]

Sorry, in the real world results are what matter. It might not be fair, but no one ever said life is fair.

Again, this is the self-serving crap that makes for horrible decision making. "I'm not getting what I want so therefore you are bad at your job." NO! You seem insightful enough to understand that life isn't fair, yet demand self-serving results as if it were.

The fact still remains that you have absolutely ZERO method of adequately assessing the results of the large majority of unique leadership actions because you have no standard with which to compare those results. Smart Americans understand this concept.

Let's move this discussion to a similar area that does not have 4 year terms: industry. What percentage of fortune 500 companies have outed their CEOs in the last 2 years because of hard times? The smart companies hunkered down, continued making smart decisions, and are waiting for this storm to pass. Their boards may be disgruntled that the president isn't specifically helping them become more rich just as you have your own self-serving desires, but they're not BLAMING their CEOs for the entire economy going south. Boards of directors are well aware that firing smart CEOs just because they demand even more growth would be stabbing themselves in the foot; an act you apparently don't desire to avoid, just because you're not getting your juice box when you want it.

Let me tell you...if Barack Obama had been hired as a CEO by a Board of Directors and had performed the way he has since taking office he would be SO fired by now. You can't take a job assuring those that hired you that you have the answers to the companies problems and then spend the next two and a half years accomplishing next to nothing, while blaming your shortcomings on everyone but yourself and NOT get fired. The things Obama was hired to fix were the economy, unemployment, lowering health care costs and dealing with terrorism. He told the Board that he needed a huge sum of money to get the job done but if he GOT that money he would guarantee that things would get fixed. When you do THAT in the corporate world and don't deliver you are history.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Your situation sucks right now. It's hard to get a job, and healthcare costs more than you desire. So do the American thing, and blame someone else. In this case, the president.

I'm having a difficult time trying to resolve how people judge a president based on the background of the country. Yall do realize these are related but completely separate issues, right? No president can scrunch up his face and make the economy listen. Why? Because YOU, average American, are the backbone of the economy. And if YOU, average American, are so hostile and resistant and foot-dragging, why on earth do you think anything or anyone else will actually change?

So how do we judge a president outside the realm of the background picture? I'd say look at his actions. What are the goals and how were they attempted? Sometimes in life, giving it all you got just isn't good enough, but it's "giving it all you got" that matters. So if I see a president is making smart moves, I'm going to stick by him and ride out the storm, rather than jump one ship and try to swim to a sinking one because they claim they have pie.

And I say all of this independent of our current president, with no reference to his actions or inactions. Just think a little bit before you're ready to jump ship. Is it the captain, or the storm?

Give examples of Obama's "smart moves"...
This ought to be good.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Your situation sucks right now. It's hard to get a job, and healthcare costs more than you desire. So do the American thing, and blame someone else. In this case, the president.

I'm having a difficult time trying to resolve how people judge a president based on the background of the country. Yall do realize these are related but completely separate issues, right? No president can scrunch up his face and make the economy listen. Why? Because YOU, average American, are the backbone of the economy. And if YOU, average American, are so hostile and resistant and foot-dragging, why on earth do you think anything or anyone else will actually change?

So how do we judge a president outside the realm of the background picture? I'd say look at his actions. What are the goals and how were they attempted? Sometimes in life, giving it all you got just isn't good enough, but it's "giving it all you got" that matters. So if I see a president is making smart moves, I'm going to stick by him and ride out the storm, rather than jump one ship and try to swim to a sinking one because they claim they have pie.

And I say all of this independent of our current president, with no reference to his actions or inactions. Just think a little bit before you're ready to jump ship. Is it the captain, or the storm?

Give examples of Obama's "smart moves"...
This ought to be good.

Show me anywhere in that quote I mentioned the name Obama.
This ought to be good.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Why on earth do you portray opposition to the policies of this President as "greedy self serving gut reactions"?

People judge a president based on greedy self-serving gut reactions. Name the top 3 things people dislike about this president, or would have wanted him to fix. Regardless of who is asked, the response is almost always self-serving.

My point continues to be that there must be an established method of evaluating a president's actions. Unfortunately, many Americans are incapable of that goal. People get rabid when discussing this topic, focusing on non-specific insinuations and desires that are not goal-oriented, both of which you just produced. Citing failure because his solutions haven't worked is short sighted for the simple reason that there existed the strong probability that NO SOLUTION would have worked. For anyone.

Let's parallel this with a topic most people aren't so rabid about. Imagine for a moment you needed to evaluate the efficacy of local school systems in educating children. How would you start such a process? Do you listen to the lunatic in the back row screaming "I don't like how the basketball coach makes decision!" and base your evaluation off that? No. You come up with verifiable standardized methods of evaluating schools. Practically, this is done with standardized tests compared across the country. Note how this does not take into account which colleges are attended by high school seniors, or what professions are eventually attained. No, these end results are actually completely ignored, while the effort and extent of the potential, being the knowledge itself, is what's evaluated.

So my point has continued to be: create a specific standard with which to evaluate the president. The lunatic screaming about a bad economy being blamed on the president is similarly a poor method of evaluation. Again, smart Americans will look at the value of the attempt being made, not the outcome.

 

[Wicked Jester]

LMAO!

How anybody up here could even remotely try and defend Obama's ineptness is friggin' comical.

When history is wriiten 100 years from now, his legacy will be, he was economically illiterate, a failure at leadership, a failure at reaching across the aisle to get things done, polarizing and divisive, had to have a former President take the podium to do his talking for him, was publically schooled by a true leader named Benjamin Netanyahu, chronic 10% unemployment, chronic Wall Street waffling, aided in turning over a country (Libya) to Jihadi's, Passed an albatross of a healthcare bill that was eventually repealed, the first and only DOWNGRADED President in US history.

Yep, that will no doubt be the legacy of the one term failure.