Obama Celebrates 8 Percent Unemployment, Suggests Full Recovery Will Take 10 Years. Please vote me back.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 6:57 PM GMT
    3.5 years ago he predicted his plans including the stimulus would reduce the unemployment well below 8% and that if not he would be a one-term President.

    So what happened during the past 3.5 years? Why did he move the goal posts? If he was so wrong before, why would he be so right now? Pretty simple common sense question. The common sense answer is he didn't know then and he doesn't know now. He is simply flailing, throwing whatever out he can and hoping enough people are saps and believe him.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-celebrates-8-percent-unemployment-suggests-full-recovery-will-take-10-years_647244.html

    President Obama, speaking this afternoon in Cleveland, seemed to celebrate the unemployment rate of 8.1 percent, and said it "typically take[s] countries up to ten years to recover from financial crises of this magnitude."

    "Throughout history, it has typically taken countries up to ten years to recover from financial crises of this magnitude," Obama said. "Today the economy's many European countries still aren't growing and their unemployment rate averages around 11%. But here in the United States, Americans showed their grit and showed their determination. We acted fast. Our economy started growing again six months after I took office, and it has continued to grow for the last three years."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 7:02 PM GMT
    You know, you have to be fair in these sorts of arguments. Everyone with a brain knows that the economic policies of 30 years led to the trouble we continue to see today. To pretend it was just Bush and bad spending, or home buyers and greed is retarded. To expect that Obama could fix it all in 3 years is also retarded. You can argue that Obama is seriously unprepared for the job, but you can not keep playing games and say one one hand he could do more (especially with a NO congress) and he is being honest in "guessing" how long it will take to undo decades of bad economic choices and deregulation of financial rules that led to the recession of 2007-2012. We as a voting public have to be real sometimes, we allowed our elected officials to lay low on regulations and deregulation Glass Steigel and this is what we got, and cleaning it up will not be easy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 7:16 PM GMT
    Everyone knows the situation did not happen overnight, but it is clear to an increasing number of people that this recovery is the weakest, and that historically a strong recession is followed by a strong recovery.

    You can look at all Obama's excuses about the situation in 2008 being even worse than he thought and ask yourself a common sense question. Which of the following are true:

    1) Obama and team analysis of the situation in 2008 was fundamentally flawed. The rhetoric "found it was even worse than I thought" is nothing but a cheap rhetorical technique to try and deflect blame. There were no economic indicators at the time hidden from Obama and his team.

    2) The policies of Obama have not lived up to what he advertised them to be.

    3) He knew the situation better or the duration of recovery better but deliberately misrepresented.

    Whatever combination of the above are true, the fact is more people do not believe his policies have worked, that he is up to job, and that he can be trusted, or that continuing his policies will lead to different results.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Jun 14, 2012 7:21 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidEveryone knows the situation did not happen overnight, but it is clear to an increasing number of people that this recovery is the weakest, and that historically a strong recession is followed by a strong recovery.


    Let's look at the Recoveries that we have had in the past
    and what seems to be the common thread in all of these recoveries

    The commonality in past recoveries was that WE DID NOT CUT SPENDING DURING A RECESSION

    and WE DID NOT CUT PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS DURING A RECESSION AND DURING A RECOVERY

    that was true during the Reagan recession where he raised taxes spent more and hired more public sector jobs
    the same was true for Pappy Bush and Clinton

    When you have a patient who is starving you don't put him on a grapefruit diet
    But republicans don't learn from the past
    In Fact they repeat it Over and Over and Over again
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 10:33 PM GMT
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-obama-looking-one-term-proposition_647247.html

    Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney released the following statement in response to President Obama's reelection campaign speech in Ohio: “Now when [President Obama] was recently elected he went on ‘The Today Show’ and he was asked about what he’d do, how he’d measure his success, and he said: ‘Look, if I can't turn the economy around in three years, I will be looking at a one-term proposition.’ And he’s right; he is looking at a one-term proposition. He's going to be saying today that he wants four more years. He may have forgotten he talked about a one-term proposition if he couldn’t get the economy turned around in three years, but we’re going to hold him to his word.” 

    Romney's statement incorporates Obama's February 2009 comment on the Today Show. "[Y]ou know, a year from now I think people — are going to see that — we're starting to make some progress. But there's still going to be some pain out there. If I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition,” Obama said then.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 10:36 PM GMT
    Keep talking about the economy.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-analyst-one-worst-speeches-ive-ever-heard-barack-obama-make_647245.html

    MSNBC Analyst: 'I Thought This, Honestly, Was One of the Least Successful Speeches I've Seen Barack Obama Give'

  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Jun 14, 2012 10:38 PM GMT
    smartmoney saidYou know, you have to be fair in these sorts of arguments. Everyone with a brain knows that the economic policies of 30 years led to the trouble we continue to see today. To pretend it was just Bush and bad spending, or home buyers and greed is retarded. To expect that Obama could fix it all in 3 years is also retarded. You can argue that Obama is seriously unprepared for the job, but you can not keep playing games and say one one hand he could do more (especially with a NO congress) and he is being honest in "guessing" how long it will take to undo decades of bad economic choices and deregulation of financial rules that led to the recession of 2007-2012. We as a voting public have to be real sometimes, we allowed our elected officials to lay low on regulations and deregulation Glass Steigel and this is what we got, and cleaning it up will not be easy.


    That's really asking a lot of socalfitness. I'm sure you've noticed that by now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 10:45 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidEveryone knows the situation did not happen overnight, but it is clear to an increasing number of people that this recovery is the weakest, and that historically a strong recession is followed by a strong recovery.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-false-history_647249.html
    Obama’s False History

    Today, President Obama said, “It has typically taken countries up to ten years to recover from financial crises of this magnitude.” In truth, however, the historical norm has been as follows: the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery.

    For example, having inherited the Great Depression when he took office in 1933, FDR presided over what was probably the greatest year of peacetime economic growth in American history in 1936. According to the Obama administration’s own Bureau of Economic Analysis (see “Percent change from preceding period”), real (inflation-adjusted) growth in the gross domestic product was a whopping 13.1 percent in 1936. So far in 2012 (according to that same source), it has been 1.9 percent under Obama. In 2011, it was 1.7 percent.

    It’s true that, in 1938, America plunged into the second deep trough of the Great Depression. But at least under Roosevelt, we experienced a blend of peaks and troughs. Four years under Obama has been like one continuous, uninterrupted walk along the floor of a canyon.

    In his speech, Obama also asserted, “Our economy started growing again six months after I took office. And it has continued to grow for the last three years.”

    Well, according to the federal government’s own numbers (published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics), the employment rate in July 2009, six months after Obama took office, was 59.3 percent. Since then, the employment rate has actually fallen to 58.6 percent — a tally that, except under Obama, we haven’t seen in the past quarter of a century.

    In fact, 58.6 percent employment barely exceeds the tally from when President Eisenhower was running for reelection in 1956 — back before millions upon millions of American women entered the workforce.

    Site has live links for historical data.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2012 10:54 PM GMT
    smartmoney saidYou know, you have to be fair in these sorts of arguments. Everyone with a brain knows that the economic policies of 30 years led to the trouble we continue to see today. To pretend it was just Bush and bad spending, or home buyers and greed is retarded. To expect that Obama could fix it all in 3 years is also retarded. You can argue that Obama is seriously unprepared for the job, but you can not keep playing games and say one one hand he could do more (especially with a NO congress) and he is being honest in "guessing" how long it will take to undo decades of bad economic choices and deregulation of financial rules that led to the recession of 2007-2012. We as a voting public have to be real sometimes, we allowed our elected officials to lay low on regulations and deregulation Glass Steigel and this is what we got, and cleaning it up will not be easy.

    I think the subsequent comments have responded to your comment that 3 years is not enough time and despite everything he said, we should just be nice and give him the White House for 4 more years.

    As far as the "NO Congress" - That is easily debunked:

    1) First two years when Democrats led both Houses, Obama got essentially what he asked for, including that stimulus. Their primary focus was Obamacare.

    2) The 2010 election was a strong signal that the voters wanted the spending habits of the Administration in check. After admitting the election was a shellacking, Obama wanted to continue doing exactly what he had been doing before, but the Republicans, in response to what the people voted for, would not be a rubber stamp.

    3) Obama's budget proposal for the past 2 years got no votes, even from his own party.

    4) The Republican led house produced a budget proposal that the Democratic led Senate will not even consider.

    5) The Democratic led Senate has not produced a budget proposal in the past 3 years, in direct violation of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

    6) The Republican led house has produced numerous job related bills, including the Keystone Pipeline, that the Democratic led Senate will not even consider.

    So save the party of no or congress of no line for those who are too ignorant to see the facts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 15, 2012 3:02 PM GMT
    Hey, truth is, Obama is a terrible president, working with a good for nothing congress, but Romney working with the far right wing would be terrible too.
    What happened to patriots who wanted to do what was best for this country?

    I am not talking about deregulation until the water is undrinkable and every bank un bankrupt, just so the wealthy have more money than god. Or tax cuts for the same purpose, but really, what happened to working together to make this a better country? You get these middle management losers who do not really have a plan for anything and all we really get is stagnation.

    It would be nice to see some candidates who want to see less government in, say military spending, and more government in, say building a national high speed broadband network that would offer some sort of WiFi system everywhere, supporting a new internet system for everyone, from cities to the most rural community.

    Instead, you have both parties investing in old technology, wars, roads and the same old fights that have been going on for generations.
  • DalTX

    Posts: 612

    Jun 15, 2012 3:09 PM GMT
    socalfitness said3.5 years ago he predicted his plans including the stimulus would reduce the unemployment well below 8%


    Can you provide the link where he predicted below 8%?

    Thanks and have a great day!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 15, 2012 8:40 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidObama Celebrates 8 Percent Unemployment, Suggests Full Recovery Will Take 10 Years. Please vote me back.


    UnemploymentLineMichiganSnow.jpg

    OBAMA_GOLF_1467350c.jpg

    Good photos.