• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

What grade would you give O for his first term?

Obama's first term grade

  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .
All I wanted to see was a snapshot of what the board thought that O's grade would be (without grading on the curve-"the congress stinks, pubs suck, better than romney, etc.) I should have known that it would denigrate into partisan idiocy.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
All I wanted to see was a snapshot of what the board thought that O's grade would be (without grading on the curve-"the congress stinks, pubs suck, better than romney, etc.) I should have known that it would denigrate into partisan idiocy.
Click to expand...

Funny, I nearly skipped reading or posting on the thread for that very reason. The poll is much more interesting than the arguments behind it.
 
" Dealt a bad hand and has made it worse". Do you remember where we were in the Fall of 2008!?
Your Foreign policy grade is straight out of the talking heads from Fox News and is a crock of shit!
The world's view of the US has flipped since W left and even though I would have preferred to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan earlier, we WILL be out in the next 2 years. Obama does not get my approval for his first term but I would put money on an Obama U.S over a McCain U.S and a Romney U.S for that matter.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
All I wanted to see was a snapshot of what the board thought that O's grade would be (without grading on the curve-"the congress stinks, pubs suck, better than romney, etc.) I should have known that it would denigrate into partisan idiocy.
Click to expand...

How do you divorce Obama's results from the Congress? They are totally intertwined.
 
C

Did well while he could with probably the worst Congress of my lifetime. I would like to see him a stronger leader in round 2.
 
THE DEUCE said:
" Dealt a bad hand and has made it worse". Do you remember where we were in the Fall of 2008!?
Your Foreign policy grade is straight out of the talking heads from Fox News and is a crock of shit!
The world's view of the US has flipped since W left and even though I would have preferred to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan earlier, we WILL be out in the next 2 years. Obama does not get my approval for his first term but I would put money on an Obama U.S over a McCain U.S and a Romney U.S for that matter.
Click to expand...

Fall of 2008...in the midst of a campaign and media hysteria. The banking mess was cleaned up by TARP. And the banks paid back what they owed, unlike GM, who for some reason was also bailed out by TARP.

I don't really listen to talking heads in order to shape my views. The number of hours I've watched of FOX during Obama's administration can be counted on one hand, and I wouldn't need all 5 fingers. I see 30 minutes of MSNBC and/or CNN at the gym 5 days a week.

The world's view has not flipped, unless the "world" to you consists solely of western Europeans.
 
I think Bin Laden has been strong on foreign policy. I love his tactics towards Iran, the OBL catch was fantastic, and he's a good diplomat with foreign leaders. On the flip side of that: I don't think we had any business at all going into Libya, but there have been multiple articles out about how Obama was against it too until Hillary pushed hard for it.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I think Bin Laden has been strong on foreign policy. I love his tactics towards Iran, the OBL catch was fantastic, and he's a good diplomat with foreign leaders. On the flip side of that: I don't think we had any business at all going into Libya, but there have been multiple articles out about how Obama was against it too until Hillary pushed hard for it.
Click to expand...

Oops?
 
Voted B, but I'm really just on the B- side of the B-/C+ line.
 
RJKarl said:
Just because you keep spewing the same brianwashed lies doesn't mean they will ever be true:

1. Out of the $787B (NOT $900B as you keep posting), 1/3 was TAX cuts- Thus your basis premise is FOS.
2. Many tens of billions went to keep teachers, cops, firemen and others in their jobs in EVERY state. Again your premise FOS.
3. There have been over 10,000 projects funded by the Stimulus. Only those willfully blind don't admit this.

Here is how each county in NC spent the money it got http://projects.propublica.org/recovery/locale/north-carolina

Over $14B was spent in NC, but don't let little things like facts get in the way. You never do.
Click to expand...

i looked at that link and looked at things financed in my county and i thought it was interesting that they counted SBA guarantees as projects financed. pretty creative accounting to consider that stimulus money. obviously my little county doesn't amount to anything, but makes me wonder how much of the stimulus money was truly new money that went to projects rather than money that was either taken from other parts of the budget or was truly funded by another source.
 
Like in your county, the money previously set aside for SBA or other things had to be used for other projects. Thus stimulus funds were used for funding efforts that lost funding.

It's not much different than using stimulus funds to pay cops or teachers.
 
just seems disingenuous to call a project stimulus money when it was financed by a bank with a partial loss guaranty from the SBA which would have been done with or without stimulus. not to mention, they claim the entire cost of the project in their numbers when the SBA part they set aside would probably be something like 10% or so of the whole project based on the limited guaranty. again, nitpicking but just interesting to me.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
Fall of 2008...in the midst of a campaign and media hysteria. The banking mess was cleaned up by TARP. And the banks paid back what they owed, unlike GM, who for some reason was also bailed out by TARP.

I don't really listen to talking heads in order to shape my views. The number of hours I've watched of FOX during Obama's administration can be counted on one hand, and I wouldn't need all 5 fingers. I see 30 minutes of MSNBC and/or CNN at the gym 5 days a week.

The world's view has not flipped, unless the "world" to you consists solely of western Europeans.
Click to expand...

yes or no....the world's view of the US is more positive since Bush left office?
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Lol yeah was thinking OBL when I started typing the sentence.
Click to expand...

At least you didn't do this...look down the right side.

120829AirForceTimesError01.jpg
 
WakeandBake said:
I agree with this to a certain degree, but circumstances certainly influence outcomes. We have this image in America of the great leader, the father, who can come into the room and sway opinions and make deals and, well, lead. But they have to forge a relationship across the isle with another influential leader in the other party, at least one, who can then influence his party and get the legislation passed. Obama has not been able to do this, as of yet. John Bohner is the most logical and most able (Mitch McConnell made himself perfectly clear, he was not going to be that leader), but Bohner is hamstrung by the numbers - he has 40 or so hardliners in the party that he cannot whip towards the center on anything. His party is divided, as someone just pointed out. He can't get the votes to get anything done with Obama. Obama has cachet, he is immensely popular, and I think Boehner was genuine in his desire to solve problems, but Congress is hamstrung by the far right and we get gridlock.

I'm not sure how you strike that against Obama's leadership abilities. The GOP of 15 years ago would make Obama look like Churchill in terms of leadership qualities.
Click to expand...

so it doesn't matter who the president is because they are merely slaves to congress? bullshit.
 
DeacHawk said:
The Act specifies that 37% of the package is to be devoted to tax incentives equaling $288 billion

Tax incentivesTotal: $288 billion

[edit] Tax incentives for individualsTotal: $237 billion

$116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[26]
$70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one-year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[26]
$15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).
$14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
$6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[40]
$4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
$4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers – for families with at least three children.
$4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
$1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.
[edit] Tax incentives for companiesTotal: $51 billion

$15 billion: Allowing companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.
$13 billion: to extend tax credits for renewable energy production (until 2014).
$11 billion: Government contractors: Repeal a law that takes effect in 2012, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.
$7 billion: Repeal bank credit: Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.
$5 billion: Bonus depreciation which extends a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americ...nt_Act_of_2009#Tax_incentives_for_individuals
Click to expand...

To call a good number of those things tax cuts is absurd. AMT adjustment is not a tax cut, is the annual stopgap that occurs every year. EITC, child care credits, and housing credits are not tax cuts when the recipient was not otherwise paying taxes anyway, they are handouts. Same with foregoing "taxing" of increased unemployment benefits. Including interest earned on retention money that has to be returned to government contractors anway as a tax cut is patently absurd; and the bank credit repeal is a tax increase, not a cut.
 
Milhouse said:
so it doesn't matter who the president is because they are merely slaves to congress? bullshit.
Click to expand...

wut? I agreed with you, but noted that the greatest leaders had an ally across the aisle that greatly enhanced their ability to lead. where the fuck did you get slaves to congress?

Presidents are autocrats who operate in a vacuum? I didn't know that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top