How would you grade Obama?

[TaurenNinja]

He's like Bush II, just in a nicer wrapping.
So something like F.

[crawdaddy029]

Im a liberal (not by choice) and is there a grade lower then F- I can give him?

[THE Bigzoman]

He's like Bush II, just in a nicer wrapping.
So something like F.

Didn't use his expansion of Bush policies and implementation of new bush like policies in my grading because it seems as though these policies are going to be there regardless of president.

Then again, Obama did base damn near his entire campaign around bashing Bush's decisions. Something some of the more progressive people have done a good job pointing out (The Young Turks etc.) Just wish conseratives beat them to the punch on that. Seemed as though some agreed with those policies and others remained silent on that issue.

[Felya]

I didn't vote for Obama because he was black, and I'm willing to bet quite a few people voted against him because of his skin color; I hardly think he was elected because he was black. Seriously, enough about race.

Minorities have been voting democrat for decades. The difference between white democrats and the amount of African American vote Obama received was 2%. I'm sure there were voters who voted for him because he is black, just like there were who voted against him because he is black. But, according to history or actual number, there was no real difference. Democrats have won the popular vote 5 out of the last 6 elections.

To say it was the color of Obama's skin on his first term is even more absurd. No one in their right mind thought a republican would be elected after what Bush was doing. In the same month that Republicans had their presidential rally, who's mission statement did not mention the economy, 3 banks failed. Democrats could have ran a turnip and it would have won.

[mindp]

EDIT:
Also, keep in mind that he's supposed to negotiate with a faction of people who believe that impeachment is something you do when you disagree with a president's policies.

You're generalizing the extreme here. Along with your statement about "legitimate citizen". I don't think I've heard anyone in the media of late or politicians asking for impeachment. Republicans have been trying to work with Obama, but he doesn't work with them, and blames them. And the likes of MSNBC/CNN back him and love him for it. Obama is a great divider playing the race card, getting in bed with unconstitutional acts and attempting to by pass Congress. He has had five years to fulfill promises made from 08/12 campaigns, and he gets no negative commentary about it from Left. What a coincidence you mentioned something about recompense into disagreement, if you think impeaching is acceptable argument for disagreement, do you feel someone is a racist if they disagree with Obama polices? If Obama bypasses Congress and makes a strike on Syria, he'll do what Bush didn't, so before you say Republicans aren't working with Obama, think about that.

there has been nothing of particular significance passed that Republicans can credit themselves with

I don't know the context that you're using this statement for, but saying they've never(?) passed anything useful for our society is seriously biased. I'll use the 50th anniversary of MLK march on Washington as an example. MLK was REPUBLICAN, and it was the REPUBLICANS that passed the Civil Rights Act, while the Democrats got the bill dropped two times before it finally passed. Democrat leader that filibustered the Act was a Grand Master in the KKK.

[THE Bigzoman]

You're generalizing the extreme here. Along with your statement about "legitimate citizen". I don't think I've heard anyone in the media of late or politicians asking for impeachment. Republicans have been trying to work with Obama, but he doesn't work with them, and blames them. And the likes of MSNBC/CNN back him and love him for it. Obama is a great divider playing the race card, getting in bed with unconstitutional acts and attempting to by pass Congress. He has had five years to fulfill promises made from 08/12 campaigns, and he gets no negative commentary about it from Left. What a coincidence you mentioned something about recompense into disagreement, if you think impeaching is acceptable argument for disagreement, do you feel someone is a racist if they disagree with Obama polices? If Obama bypasses Congress and makes a strike on Syria, he'll do what Bush didn't, so before you say Republicans aren't working with Obama, think about that.

I disagree. Some of the more progressive liberals have been criticizing him because they feel as though his policies don't go far enough or they are upset with his expansion of Bush policies. You could say that there are more Obama defenders then there are progressive criticizers though.

[Raeph]

www.RealClearPolitics.com

RCP average of nation-wide polls:

Job approval - 44.4% approve/50.2% disapprove
Right Tract - 29.2% right track/62.6 wrong


And just for a bit of flavor:

Congressional Approval: 15.0% approve / 76.7% disapprove

I think I'll just go with that. "F" for Obama and "F" for Congress.

[Felya]

I disagree. Some of the more progressive liberals have been criticizing him because they feel as though his policies don't go far enough or they are upset with his expansion of Bush policies. You could say that there are more Obama defenders then there are progressive criticizers though.

Even Rachael Maddow has taken many stern shots at Obama. I have not watched an episode in a few years, but even then, her and Olberman were not all gun ho behind Obama. The difference is, they never called for him to be impeached, didn't question his citizenship, his religion, his socialist affiliation or see death panels in Obamacare. With Obamacare it self, the extreme left Dan Savage called it the devil, while saying it's still better than what we have now. Most liberals and democrats do not see Obamacare as a some sort of salvation, but just a step forward.

[Speaknoevil]

How much power do you think Obama really has?

[THE Bigzoman]

Even Rachael Maddow has taken many stern shots at Obama. I have not watched an episode in a few years, but even then, her and Olberman were not all gun ho behind Obama. The difference is, they never called for him to be impeached, didn't question his citizenship, his religion, his socialist affiliation or see death panels in Obamacare. With Obamacare it self, the extreme left Dan Savage called it the devil, while saying it's still better than what we have now. Most liberals and democrats do not see Obamacare as a some sort of salvation, but just a step forward.

To be fair though, the whole birther BS originated from Hilary Clinton supporters. Some nutjob attention wanting republicans just took off with it.

[NYC17]

You're generalizing the extreme here. Along with your statement about "legitimate citizen". I don't think I've heard anyone in the media of late or politicians asking for impeachment. Republicans have been trying to work with Obama, but he doesn't work with them, and blames them. And the likes of MSNBC/CNN back him and love him for it. Obama is a great divider playing the race card, getting in bed with unconstitutional acts and attempting to by pass Congress. He has had five years to fulfill promises made from 08/12 campaigns, and he gets no negative commentary about it from Left. What a coincidence you mentioned something about recompense into disagreement, if you think impeaching is acceptable argument for disagreement, do you feel someone is a racist if they disagree with Obama polices? If Obama bypasses Congress and makes a strike on Syria, he'll do what Bush didn't, so before you say Republicans aren't working with Obama, think about that.



I don't know the context that you're using this statement for, but saying they've never(?) passed anything useful for our society is seriously biased. I'll use the 50th anniversary of MLK march on Washington as an example. MLK was REPUBLICAN, and it was the REPUBLICANS that passed the Civil Rights Act, while the Democrats got the bill dropped two times before it finally passed. Democrat leader that filibustered the Act was a Grand Master in the KKK.

You may have been able to decipher the context of the conversation if you had followed it... The context is the current majority in the House. It's being compared with Republicans in the House under Clinton. It's not all Republicans in the history of Republicans, so your attempt at a history lesson is prettty...pretttyyy...prettttyyyy...pointless.

In fact you don't seem to understand any of the context of the discussion. We're talking about whether the circumstances are comparable. They aren't.

[Felya]

To be fair though, the whole birther BS originated from Hilary Clinton supporters. Some nutjob attention wanting republicans just took off with it.

Yeah, 4 years of regurgitating BS isn't only fair, it seems par for the course.

[Volitar]

0 f- -10 for the whole political system.

[Zervek]

F - terrible president, for obvious reasons

[THE Bigzoman]

Yeah, 4 years of regurgitating BS isn't only fair, it seems par for the course.

Hrmm?

I never saw the birther fear mongering as a unison republican attack. I viewed it in the same light as the Huma Abedin/muslim brotherhood accusations. Just a select few repugnant republicans posing in front of the camera with a hint of Donald Trump (who obviously jumped on board simply for the attention.)

[Elegiac]

As an Aussie, I'd give him an F. No serious, thinking Australian rates him; he's a buffoon who has trashed the US' reputation and international relations. On the other hand, G.W. Bush looks better and better with time. I'll admit that the GOP has put up two dog's-breakfast-candidates consecutively, but I think Obama, along with our former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, demonstrate the danger in voting symbolically - Obama got votes because he would be the first black President of the US, Gillard got votes because she would be the first female Prime Minister of Australia. Turns out both were dangerously incompetent, which is why superficial matters such as gender or skin colour should always be secondary to policy.

Though, I guess, expecting people to vote based on policy over warm fuzzies makes me as idealistic as the people who thought Obama or Gillard would actually be any good.

Gillard represents the danger of Labor letting the Liberals define the political agenda, which is why Australian politics is all about boat people and carbon taxation and real estate rather than -actual- issues.

The Australian electorate is behaving in an extremely moronic fashion and I think they would have been better off if they hadn't come out unscathed from the economic recession.

[THE Bigzoman]

Im really not sure what the deal is with "people voted for Obama purely because he is black"

Sure, there was increased enthusiasm because we were about to have the nations first black president. But the democratic party's grip on the African American vote has been tight for the last couple of decades. A Clinton, Biden, or an Edward ticket wouldn't have made much difference beyond a few african american voters staying home.

[Elegiac]

Im really not sure what the deal is with "people voted for Obama purely because he is black"

Sure, there was increased enthusiasm because we were about to have the nations first black president. But the democratic party's grip on the African American vote has been tight for the last couple of decades. A Clinton, Biden, or an Edward ticket wouldn't have made much difference beyond a few african american voters staying home.

The criticism actually stems from a misinterpretation of a real event; that is that the Democrats successfully put together a demographic coalition which is only growing in terms of size and electoral strength. Blacks are a large part of this coalition, as are Hispanics, gays, women, and young people.

[THE Bigzoman]

The criticism actually stems from a misinterpretation of a real event; that is that the Democrats successfully put together a demographic coalition which is only growing in terms of size and electoral strength. Blacks are a large part of this coalition, as are Hispanics, gays, women, and young people.

Sad but true.

[Stormspellz]

D or D-. I guess F would be a little unfair as he is not the worst possible president of all times but he is pretty terrible and if that "change" he promised is spying on our own people and getting into even bigger dept as well as silly reforms that nobody likes (obamacare), the next elections couldnt come sooner. Luckily its hes second term so a few more years and maybe we get a decent republican president this time.

You should look up where our national debt and spending actually are.....and btw I don't like obamacare, because it doesn't do enough, universal health care is badly needed, but this system is poorly done due to political posturing