Obama: Worst president in the last 100 years

[Shadowheart328]

 

 

Do you think he would still be dead if he had simply stopped, and talked calmly with Zimmerman?

Why would Trayvon have to be the one to stop and talk calmly with Zimmerman? Seriously. Why do people use this logic? A stranger in a vehicle was stalking him while he was walking, he did what he (and let's be real most people) would have done: Tried to get the hell away from that situation. Again. Zimmerman was the one who stalked, cornered, and then approached Trayvon. Nobody in their right mind is going to approach a suspicious vehicle that's been following them, and then calmly talk with the occupants. Nobody. Secondly, we don't know anything about the actual encounter. Seeing as their were no witnesses, and the only person alive to tell the story, was the one who perpetrated it, we don't know if Trayvon did talk calmly with Zimmerman. And what we know about Zimmerman, something tells me he did not calmly get out of his car, to talk to Trayvon.

 

 

 

Yeah, Zim should have listened to what the dispatcher had to say...... but, his neighborhood, and he was part of the neighborhood watch. I don't know what the crime rate around there was like, so, I am not going to play monday morning quarterback, and second guess his actions.

Don't play this card, man. It defense of racial profiling at it's finest. So what if his neighborhood has a high crime rate, that does not mean that random black people walking down the street are most likely criminals. Everyone can second guess his actions because he was explicitly told not to follow or engage, and Trayvon wasn't caught in the "middle of some crime" so Zimmerman had no reason to follow him or get out of his car. Literally the only thing Trayvon did wrong in this situation was walk around in a hoodie while being black. Because apparently that constitutes suspicious activity, and that warrants confrontation and killing.

 

 

Now regarding the ACA, yes, there were problems with it, and Obama did double down on the statement when he shouldn't have. But that still doesn't change the fact that over 21 million Americans who weren't insured before finally got the insurance they needed. At the end of the day, I think that's what the ACA was for, uninsured Americans, but they tried to market it for everyone. The funny thing is, despite how divisive it was, it is still the best healthcare act we've had in this country for a while (telling isn't it). And it should show you something about the blowback the Trump office got when trying to repeal it. Because at the end of the day, despite it's flaws, the issues can be fixed, and only when it was going to be repealed did people actually realize how much they needed it. So I stand by my statement that it was still a success in the sense that it did what it set out to do, insure uninsured Americans. About your specific issue, I am uncertain what the issue actually is? A lot of people have pregnancy covered under their insurance, even if they aren't female. I think that it applies to stuff outside of "getting pregnant" as well. That or something went wrong somewhere and your papers indicated you were female? I don't know what to say about that, but of all the arguments I've heard against ACA that's the first time I've heard about that.

 

Yeah, he made mistakes with those countries, nobody, including Obama is denying that fact.

 

 

 

 

We would have recovered from the recession regardless of who won the whitehouse though. Would someone else have doubled our national debt to do it though? We will never know.

Maybe, but it doesn't change the fact that Obama not only got us out of the worst one in our country's history. As for doubling our debt, you do realize that we were under the worst recession in our country's history, and we were at war with Iraq. No matter what Obama did, the national debt was going to rise, and it wasn't like Bush left him in a good spot. Don't forget the first year of president's addition to the national debt is typically not set by that president, it's set by the previous president. Obama was still operating under Bush's budget for that first year, and Bush nearly doubled the national debt during his term as well. No president who was getting elected was going to avoid doing so.

 

 

 

 

All in all, politics in the US are well and truly screwed up. We 'accept' a loon for president, and he has a higher approval rating than congress. Of course, that isn't all that hard. Congress hasn't broken 30% approval in decades. For a while, it was under 10%, but, we still kept electing the same folks that we KNEW FOR A FACT were NOT doing the job we elected them to do.

I agree, but you are the one who accepted a 'loon' (among other unfavorable terms I won't say here because it would be making implications about you which isn't my intent), into office. Hillary still won the popular vote by over 3 million so it was electoral college, and not the American people who wanted a 'loon' as president. Which should showcase that you are right. We need to revamp our electoral process, because if the person who won the most votes doesn't win (Democrat, Republican, Independent, etc.), then that's a problem.

[HeyYou]

Read up on some of the background prior to the shooting. It seems that crime was indeed a problem there. And Zim was the Neighborhood watch coordinator. He saw someone in a GATED community he did not recognize, and proceeded to check him out. And so it went.

 

In the end, Zimmerman was acquitted. The justice department didn't file any further charges, due to a lack of evidence. That should have been the end of the story....... Obama made sure it wasn't.

 

 

Yep, I accepted a loon, instead of a crooked politician, that had priorities FAR different than mine, so I voted for someone that was more in line with the direction I wanted to see the country go. You know, democracy in action. Even though we aren't really a democracy........

[xrayy]

 

Nah, Trump really IS an idiot. But, he is an idiot with a lot of money, and he occasionally does things right. If we could keep him off social media, he would be a better "appearing" president. :smile:

 

Trump got elected because: 1. He isn't a politician. And 2. The dems ran Hilary. If they had ran just about anyone else, the dems would have won.

....

Sure, we have some pretty smart individuals here in the US, but, taken collectively? We got nothin' on a box of rocks. :D

 

so you really try to tell me, that it was better to elect an - as you say - idiot than hillary and you still think after his election this was the right decision ? a man, who should better be kept off from social media - as you also say - and now president of the u.s.? this man is now supreme commander of the u.s. forces and can lauch atomic missiles and you think it is a good idea to trust him more just not be govmed by a democratic politcian like hillary clinton or joe biden ? i will never understand the logic of americans like you arguing this way. it sounds to me like if i can chose between "not so good" and "egoistic and dangerous" it is better to chose "egoistic and dangerous".

[HeyYou]

 

 

Nah, Trump really IS an idiot. But, he is an idiot with a lot of money, and he occasionally does things right. If we could keep him off social media, he would be a better "appearing" president. :smile:

 

Trump got elected because: 1. He isn't a politician. And 2. The dems ran Hilary. If they had ran just about anyone else, the dems would have won.

....

Sure, we have some pretty smart individuals here in the US, but, taken collectively? We got nothin' on a box of rocks. :D

 

so you really try to tell me, that it was better to elect an - as you say - idiot than hillary and you still think after his election this was the right decision ? a man, who should better be kept off from social media - as you also say - and now president of the u.s.? this man is now supreme commander of the u.s. forces and can lauch atomic missiles and you think it is a good idea to trust him more just not be govmed by a democratic politcian like hillary clinton or joe biden ? i will never understand the logic of americans like you arguing this way. it sounds to me like if i can chose between "not so good" and "egoistic and dangerous" it is better to chose "egoistic and dangerous".

 

Hilary has issues all her own, that make her, what I consider, a MUCH worse candidate than Trump. Some of her campaign points were diametrically opposed to my beliefs as well, so, I could NOT in good conscience vote for her. Also, gotta remember, there are a LOT of checks and balances on the president, he cannot launch nukes on a whim..... He also campaigned on getting us OUT of our assorted foreign wars. (as did Obama, I might add.....) but, we are still there. At least he hasn't gotten into any more of them, as Obama did.

[xrayy]

surely, hillary has issues as all other candidates and there is this "establishment" problem. it's diifcult to believe - at least for me - that these issues are even worse than trumps and i'm sure she is much more qualified to be an acceptable u.s. leader than trump. if trump would be only half as intelligent as he thinks he is he would not behave and communicate the way he always does, i'm sure.

so let's hope and pray that trump and his administration does not destroy the last pieces of unity left.

[HeyYou]

For me, Trumps issues are the lesser of the two evils. And there is no scenario I can think of that would prompt me to want to vote for ANY democrat at this point..... I REALLY don't care for their stance on various issues.

 

IS there any unity left? It sure doesn't look that way. We have divisions by race, and by politics..... neither side is willing to compromise. Both sides think the other side is insane. Both sides think their way is the only way, and the other guys don't know what they are talking about. (and worse....) We have riots and looting, organizations that are supposedly 'peaceful' calling for attacks on police. etc. There is no common ground for us all to come together around. Nobody trusts anybody else. Unfortunately, I see things only getting worse. Not better. And the dems 'plan' to bring us all back together, won't. It will only serve to divide us further.

[jjb54]

i assume this is no fox news exclusive thread. i hope - apart from jjb54's question which is no real question - if you know the basics of communication - i would be really happy if someone could explain me with factual arguments why he claims obama as a devider and why he thinks that trump is still reelectable.

 

I'm going to try and explain why I asked that question:

 

Some people live in other countries and their news source about what is going on the USA is a 'tad biased' in some countries .... So that is why I asked that question. I found it pointing that you just ASSUMED that I got / get my news from Fox .... which BTW - you would be wrong ... but I also do NOT get my news from CNN or MSNBC .....

 

As I shared with people I know from other countries, what ever you are told about the USA ...

 

Try to find to different sources that have different POV's ( Points of View )

Try to find COMPLETE CONTEXT of said News item.

 

Usually you will find the truth is somewhere in the middle .....

[xrayy]

all right and thank you for explaining your your intentions. there is no 100% truth and 100% objective press but i'm old enough that i had about 40 years and more to follow political evolution worldwide. what happend within the last 40 years is that the u.s leadership changed continously but within a few years (after obama) to s/th without any comparative. it fits in my opinion more to an ignorant, illiberal and monocratic inspirated kind of leadership. but i can not associate it with the strategic driven leaderships known and being familiar before.

i don't know how ot explain. never experienced an u.s. leader like trump before and i've never expected to see this in the u.s. even supported by so many people.

things must have been gone deeply wrong in the previous 40 years before the last election that a nation do not trust its own experts anymore. but u.s economy was even growing before trump and seemed to be on a good way so trump was not elected due to economical reasons and it is diffcult for me to understand why so many people kind of hate obama and his scientenifically and ecomical expert driven style working for decades while forgiving an egoistic and ignorant trump and his inability as a leader. what is his achievement ? just to concentrate on his reelection whatever it costs ?

I'm sure that history will show that leading a very big country like the u.s. is like steering a very big ship. if it is going roughly in the right direction even a bad skipper needs time to leave the right track and may look good for a few years. but if the ship it is turned completely in the wrong direction even a better leader can not get it back on the right track within a foreseeable time. earth and climate can not be cheated or simply ignored with lies, racism and "trump first". i will wait and see how it ends.

[HeyYou]

all right and thank you for explaining your your intentions. there is no 100% truth and 100% objective press but i'm old enough that i had about 40 years and more to follow political evolution worldwide. what happend within the last 40 years is that the u.s leadership changed continously but within a few years (after obama) to s/th without any comparative. it fits in my opinion more to an ignorant, illiberal and monocratic inspirated kind of leadership. but i can not associate it with the strategic driven leaderships known and being familiar before.

i don't know how ot explain. never experienced an u.s. leader like trump before and i've never expected to see this in the u.s. even supported by so many people.

things must have been gone deeply wrong in the previous 40 years before the last election that a nation do not trust its own experts anymore. but u.s economy was even growing before trump and seemed to be on a good way so trump was not elected due to economical reasons and it is diffcult for me to understand why so many people kind of hate obama and his scientenifically and ecomical expert driven style working for decades while forgiving an egoistic and ignorant trump and his inability as a leader. what is his achievement ? just to concentrate on his reelection whatever it costs ?

I'm sure that history will show that leading a very big country like the u.s. is like steering a very big ship. if it is going roughly in the right direction even a bad skipper needs time to leave the right track and may look good for a few years. but if the ship it is turned completely in the wrong direction even a better leader can not get it back on the right track within a foreseeable time. earth and climate can not be cheated or simply ignored with lies, racism and "trump first". i will wait and see how it ends.

Put 10 experts in a room, and ask them for advice on any particular issues, and you will get 10 different opinions. Why you think Obama was doing so well, because he 'listened to experts' is beyond me. A fair few of his policies did absolutely nothing for the economy. (shovel ready jobs? Uh huh....) The ACA was a boondoggle, written by insurance companies, that fell FAR short of what it was supposed to accomplish. Sure, a bunch of folks actually had insurance, that didn't have it before, but, in reality, the 'insurance' they had cost them more than it was worth. A fair few of them only got the insurance because it was federally mandated they buy a product from a private company. (which, one could argue, in and of itself is unconstitutional.....) and they were no better off than when they didn't have insurance at all. Huge deductibles, limited coverage, requiring coverage for conditions they would NEVER have to deal with...... His foreign policy was amazingly similar to the republican administrations before him. Except he would apologize for everything under the sun.....

 

Nope. Obama wasn't that good of a president.

[Arneercool]

I'm beginning to see a pattern here