Are you better off or worse off since Obama took office?

[Christina Ryder]

:nanner::rofl2:

 

[JacknCoke]

where is the neither option?

 

[Da Dude]

A friend of mine idolizes Obama and think he's awesome. Today, I asked him why there hasn't been much of a difference in our economy. He simply replied, "He needs time." Makes sense. He does have a point, I must admit. We are in a big financial crisis and it's going to take more than a 4 year term to fix this mess we're in.

And to be fair, I think Bush had it hard during his presidency and it's not totally his fault. He just happened to be the president during the 9-11 attack. If Clinton or any other president would've been in office during this tragic event, how would they have handled it? I'm not saying Bush was an excellent president because that's far from the truth. But what I'm saying is that Bush had it real hard.

 

[Hot Mega]

A friend of mine idolizes Obama and think he's awesome. Today, I asked him why there hasn't been much of a difference in our economy. He simply replied, "He needs time." Makes sense. He does have a point, I must admit. We are in a big financial crisis and it's going to take more than a 4 year term to fix this mess we're in.

And to be fair, I think Bush had it hard during his presidency and it's not totally his fault. He just happened to be the president during the 9-11 attack. If Clinton or any other president would've been in office during this tragic event, how would they have handled it? I'm not saying Bush was an excellent president because that's far from the truth. But what I'm saying is that Bush had it real hard.

Objectively I have a very tough time seeing what was hard about Bush's presidency...

He inherited and low unemployment rate..but a recession on paper. 9-11 happened and that created a financial mess for the country but the result was Bush getting a pass on just about every mistake, policy and judgment.

He got every policy he wanted against what amounted to token challenges and even the ones he went around congress to get he faced no repercussions for them. Even during one of the most unprecedented circumstances he was about to ask the country to support him on...the press was told to back off criticisms to his pre-war intel.

All the while appearing as aloof and oblivious of the realities happening around him as a newborn baby.

Sounds harsh and one-sided but if you go back and objectively chronicle this it is utterly true.

I want to believe there were days he fretted over the daunting decisions he faced but in truth, I can't even be 50 pct. sure of that. I see Bush and his policy-advisers having a domestic and foreign agenda coming into office and they played it step by step no matter the circumstances. In that case, what decisions need to be made??

 

[meesterperfect]

Obama has been a terrible president. Way too weak and unwilling to really push a true progressive agenda, but it's difficult to work with an opposition party who's strategies and beliefs are tantamount to the Nazi's in 1940's Germany. Xenophobia, racism, bigotry, and a steadfast belief in an imaginary sky diety and that tax cuts magically pay for themselves makes them IMPOSSIBLE to reason with.

The Dems are right on virtually EVERY issue, both fiscally and socially, but they're a bunch of pussies and this country is full of morons who are too susceptible to fear.

oh here we go with the Nazis again, youve been brainwashed buddy.

 

[El Perro Mayor]

I own a small machine shop here in Mexico, had fourteen employees at mid 2008, at late 2009 it was down to six full time employees. Have not been able to recover since then. Had to close shop for three months earlier this year. Opened again about month and a half ago with only three employees getting called back. All I'll say is that when Clinton left office my shop was at full steam, eighteen full time employees. Is it just me, or is it that a former presidents policy always shows up in the next presidents term?

 

[meesterperfect]

I own a small machine shop here in Mexico, had fourteen employees at mid 2008, at late 2009 it was down to six full time employees. Have not been able to recover since then. Had to close shop for three months earlier this year. Opened again about month and a half ago with only three employees getting called back. All I'll say is that when Clinton left office my shop was at full steam, eighteen full time employees. Is it just me, or is it that a former presidents policy always shows up in the next presidents term?

usually for about 2 years I'd say.
but it depends on a lot,and what it is , sometimes much more

 

[Smallville417]

Better off by far.

 

[Death-Proof-69]

honestly no different...as before if i work and people give me money in exchange for that...life goes on, not doing any better or worse as far as money goes, when things are tight i spend less and work more, i live a debt free life and live within my means so that makes it much easier

 

[georges]

I have a splinter in my finger now and I didn't have one before Obama was elected so I'd say I'm definitely worse off.

(My throat is a bit scratchy too...so I think I might be coming down with something too...)

Fucking Obama!:hairpull:

:sarcasm::funnyshit:How astonishing and surprising to see hotmega getting mad at nobama otrauma:elaugh:

 

[Rey C.]

Which term was it '00 or '04 when you voted for bush and why?

I was originally favoring McCain. But once Bush said that he didn't believe in nation building, I was comfortable with him. I didn't care for Gore, so it was either Bush or one of the third party candidates. Probably Pat Buchanan or the Libertarian (my typical default vote over the years), but I didn't care for Harry Browne either.

By the time 2004 rolled around, I learned what a "neocon" was. And it was quite clear that Bush was a nation builder... and a liar (even by the low standards set by past lying politicians). I would have voted for Daffy Duck before I cast another vote for that one... or any more of his ilk EVER again. I wasn't a Kerry fan, so I held my nose and voted for Badnarik. He was pretty kooky, but that's how desperate I was.

What is a democrat with balls?

A Democrat who will follow his/her beliefs and not change his mind whenever the wind changes direction. Leading from the rear worked for Augustus Caesar. But there is no modern politician that possess Augustus' other leadership talents. It's best that modern political leaders actually lead from the front, IMO. For whatever reason, Republicans seem to be able to do that better than Democrats. They might lead you in the wrong direction (and refuse to change course), but by golly, they will jump out front.

You want to know what a Republican with brains is too?

Look up Jack Kemp and enjoy reading about that fine fellow. Pity that the GOP now seems to be refusing entry to people like him.

 

[jaden]

I'm worse off, I think most are worse off since my business deals with the average homeowner.
I won't blame the president, just the 800 billion he gave to the banks and other stimulus that didn't do sh@t!

The only way it seems you can make a living with a retirement is being in some sort of job that you are paid with tax money.

Soon we will have another S in our abbreviation The United Social States of America!

The scary thing is doesn't matter who the president is, the government itself is all corrupt and bad!

Limit to 4 years for every government elected Job, No careers!! Then you will find people who truly want to help run our country that's gone to the sh@tter!

 

[Ulysses31]

I'm better worse

 

[Hot Mega]

I'm worse off, I think most are worse off since my business deals with the average homeowner.
I won't blame the president, just the 800 billion he gave to the banks and other stimulus that didn't do sh@t!

Do you think the u/e rate would be higher than it is now or lower if the banks were liquidated, GM and Chrysler were liquidated and there were no tax incentives and g'ment contracts awarded from the stimulus?

It's 9.1 now ...consider Depression era u/e was in the 20s and when Reagan was trying to recover the country it was at one point above 10 pct. for 10 straight months.

Point, why do you think it should be better when most reasonable indications suggest it would have been worse?

The only way it seems you can make a living with a retirement is being in some sort of job that you are paid with tax money.

Soon we will have another S in our abbreviation The United Social States of America!

The scary thing is doesn't matter who the president is, the government itself is all corrupt and bad!

Limit to 4 years for every government elected Job, No careers!! Then you will find people who truly want to help run our country that's gone to the sh@tter!

If we keep electing people who's idea of running the country is let things blow up while they stand by harping some disproved rhetoric...then I agree..we're in the shits.

 

[MikeyK]

My premium had remained the same for 3 years before it was mandated that everyone has to own it. Of course that's a reason for the crooked insurers to raise their rates. The Government gave them the green flag.

I have a plan from BC/BS that provides for my little one as well as me and is the best available around here with the lowest co-pays. It provides Routine, Emergency care, Dental as well as Eye. I have to have full coverage with a child and I am not interested in no name insurance that is just declined or has ridiculous co-pays.

The whole point according to our President was this new "Affordable Healthcare" plan of his was it was supposed to make it affordable for Middle Class and the poor (even though the poor already got free care). I'm middle class and it only raised my premiums, not sure how his affordable healthcare plan was supposed to help anyone but Politicians and Government. I'm also not really sure how adding an additional tax to Tanning Salon visits in his Healthcare bill was supposed to make my insurance cheaper? The reality is it's just another way to overtax the already overtaxed middle class. The healthcare insurers have been in bed with the Government for years and now the President has forced everyone to climb in there with them. I have never liked healthcare insurers and I know they're crooks, but now it's even worse.

You really need to shop around for a new insurance provider. You are being ripped off big time. Assuming you don't have any pre-existing conditions there is no reason your insurance rates should be that high AND require a co-pay. I have insurance from one of the big providers that includes dental and eye care with cheap co-pays. It only costs me $150/month.

 

[Hot Mega]

You really need to shop around for a new insurance provider. You are being ripped off big time. Assuming you don't have any pre-existing conditions there is no reason your insurance rates should be that high AND require a co-pay. I have insurance from one of the big providers that includes dental and eye care with cheap co-pays. It only costs me $150/month.

Her rates do seem unreasonably high but I know when you go beyond individual coverage it can get high.

Having said that, 2 things;

1.) Shopping around would seem to be golden advice.

2.) If her rates were one way before Obama then assuming his policies had something to do with her individual case they are now worse....then whether she shops around or not, her situation is worse now.

 

[titsrock]

I voted Not Sure but by Not Sure I mean No Change. That's the truth. There hasn't been any single meaningful change on anything since Obama took office. I am no better but no worse off. The country is no better and slightly worse off overall, in my view.

I have no problem holding him to a high standard. On paper, he is my perfect president with all the credentials I look for in a president.

I am honestly wondering if Hillary would've have made a better president atleast in 2010 onward during the embarrassing sham that was the healthcare "debate"

Hillary has been around and seen Bill make the Wackoes his bitches before. She may have the ironclad stomach to deal with the latest version of the Wackoes (the Tea Baggers).

But, it's not all Obama's fault. He can't control the Dems in Congress, and it's really Congress that has fucked everything up. The Dems from 2006 on have been the spineless Party. They didn't do shit to stop Dubya and make him a lameduck. They didn't do shit to end the wars. They didn't do shit to make Boner's life miserable as new Speaker the way the Wackoes made Pelosi's life miserable.

I think Harry Reid is an embarrassment as Senate Majority Leader. The Senate Dems need a new leader.

Right now, I think there will be massive incumbent turnover in Congress in 2012 if things don't change dramatically. All Wackoes, Tea Baggers and Spineless Dems are on notice. I can't say that voters will simply hand over the House back to the Dems, but there will certainly be a shrinking of the GOP majority there.

Obama will coast to reelection because he faces no real threat. All the current GOP candidates are laughingstocks who will get destroyed in a debate and at the polls. Mitt Romney is the only GOP Prez candidate who makes sense but he feels a bit "stale" and "leftovers" whiff about him. If Mitt Romney couldn't beat McCain, why is he all of a sudden the smart choice now? :dunno: If he runs on a Business/Economy/Jobs only platform -- he could do well. If he kisses up to Social/Evangelicals...and beats the war drum...he will get routed again. :dunno:

I think overall -- our system of Gov't is a mess. We need MAJOR OVERHAUL to our democratic system. There is no need for a Senate anymore. The Supreme Court is too political and there MUST BE term limits there. The House members should serve 4 year terms. This Super Congress idea is a really bad idea. It goes on and on and on....

 

[sallyfields]

Is there any truth in the story due to the state of our Economy Mrs BO Is going to start taking in laundry and Hilary Cunton is going on the game, or was she already on it?