Obama Top 50 accomplishments

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Exactly, Ziggy... The entire farce is a joke. Everything from Romney's plan to "save the country", to how "wonderful everything is due to Obama mortgaging us into fiscal collapse" is based on assumptions that neither side would believe with a straight face.

it is a farce.

as long as folks go with the two big parties, we will continue to deal with all this bs. we need to all vote C. everyone. just think what would happen if the dems and reps both were kicked to the curb! my oh my. that would be awesome.


won't happen. too many, on each side, still thinks their side is the one. wrong. both parties are owned by the same group of people. most big corporations donate similar amounts to both parties to hedge their bets.
like gore vidal said, people need to recognize there aren't two parties. there is one party, run for 4% of the people.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Exactly, Ziggy... The entire farce is a joke. Everything from Romney's plan to "save the country", to how "wonderful everything is due to Obama mortgaging us into fiscal collapse" is based on assumptions that neither side would believe with a straight face.

Really, Rude? Where has "Obama mortgaged us into fiscal collapse"?

Words have meanings, you know.

[OldDog]

Originally Posted by Danzig

as long as folks go with the two big parties, we will continue to deal with all this bs. we need to all vote C. everyone.

I wonder when she'll be on The View?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...ial/57837680/1

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Riot

Really, Rude? Where has "Obama mortgaged us into fiscal collapse"?

Words have meanings, you know.

5 trillion dollars of unanswered debt in 3 years with zero plan on how to pay it back, only maybe...just maybe if, if all of his presumptions and assumptions of the future plays out exactly according to his gilded vision, will we he be able to pay a portion of the interest on the total debt in 10 YEARS.

I dunno, I guess when you are a shill, words don't have the same meaning.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

5 trillion dollars of unanswered debt in 3 years with zero plan on how to pay it back, only maybe...just maybe if, if all of his presumptions and assumptions of the futurs plays out exactly according to his gilded vision, will we he be able to pay a portion of the interest on the total debt in 10 YEARS.

I dunno, I guess when you are a shill, words don't have the same meaning.

First, show me exactly what "5 trillion Obama has caused in three years with zero plan to pay it back" in debt you are talking about. Be specific. List the programs and the cost. What 5 trillion dollars has Obama caused us?

Because it seems to me you are repeating a long-disproven RW talking point, that is referring actually to the ongoing cost of our debt created by George Bush (and previous to him), having zero to do with whoever is president now. You are merely quoting a chart of our national debt, and falsely assuming and falsely attributing that anything after 2008 is Obama's fault. That's false.

Correct me. List Obama's debt since he's been elected, that adds up to 5 trillion.

Let's see who's a shill.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Assessments from major economists on the stimulus have been posted here in Derby Trail before, several times, in threads you have commented upon.

Sorry, I assume you read and remember the threads you have posted in?

But go ahead and post economists talking about how the stimulus has failed - please. I'll be happy to post - again, for the third time - the ones that verify it was a success.

Can you post 999 for every 1 I can find?

That is how you convert % into real numbers.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Can you post 999 for every 1 I can find?

That is how you convert % into real numbers.

Um. No. Your math is off. You've confused the mathematical conversion to percentage with an actual percentage. You're off by a decimal point. Try again But I'll be looking forward to your postings! Anxiously awaiting you to post the first study that shows the stimulus was a failure.

[Clip-Clop]

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...in-in-spending

"Nearly 100 prominent U.S. economists including former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Ohio University’s Richard Vedder, and James C. Miller, III, who headed up the White House Office of Management and Budget under Ronald Reagan, are telling President Barack Obama that his economic stimulus has failed"

There is 3, your turn.

[Rudeboyelvis]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...an-under-bush/

*National Debt has increased more under Obama in three years that the entire Bush 8 year Presidency

*The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

*Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.

The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.

So how is his plan paying down the debt again??!!

Took all of .1 seconds to find - I'm surprised you have such a difficult time with the facts.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Well rest assured that more than half that stuff - especially a lot of that "First President to" stuff is RWNJ crap proven false long ago ... check Politifact

Hell, I even remember all the dog trainers on previous retainer for various White Houses!'

It's amazing how some folks don't think there exists any way to actually fact check things.
Ah, the gullible ... a constant source of hilarity. I love how opinion and approval or disapproval is constantly conflated with "truth".

Things like that oft-repeated canard, "the stimulus was an epic fail". Nope. 99.9% of economists around the world say, not at all, it worked. Yes, suck on that, Obama-haters. You may not "believe" in stimulus. But the stimulus worked, and that's a measurable and proven economic fact, verified by virtually every single independent economist.

you do realize that is 999 out of every 1000. I know math is typically not welcome in the politics forum due to the inability for numbers to lie but that is pretty basic right there.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...an-under-bush/

*National Debt has increased more under Obama in three years that the entire Bush 8 year Presidency

*The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

Yes, Rude - but Obama didn't cause that debt, nor incur that debt - it's just the ongoing interest and debt from previous years. It would be that high if McCain were president.

Do you not understand that?

Again - Obama has not raised the national debt by starting programs that added $5 trillion to our national debt. If that were true, you would be able to show which programs those were. Can you?

Here: this is deficit spending that contributes to our debt. Obama's policies through 2017 only cost $1.44 trillion - and a lot of that is paid for, not debt.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/...in-in-spending

"Nearly 100 prominent U.S. economists including former CBO Director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Ohio University’s Richard Vedder, and James C. Miller, III, who headed up the White House Office of Management and Budget under Ronald Reagan, are telling President Barack Obama that his economic stimulus has failed"

There is 3, your turn.

Yes - can you show what actual studies and figures they are using to show that? Because you are quoting from back in early 2010 - before the stimulus was even fully in effect. Try quoting an economist from 2011 or 2012, looking back on the stimulus.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by OldDog

I wonder when she'll be on The View?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...ial/57837680/1

i can't believe that show's still on, or that people watch it.


it irritates me that they still only have two candidates in these debates. but those with the money have the say so.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes - can you show what actual studies and figures they are using to show that?

I would just like the names of 2997 that refute their opinions.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...an-under-bush/

*National Debt has increased more under Obama in three years that the entire Bush 8 year Presidency

*The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

*Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.

The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.

So how is his plan paying down the debt again??!!

Took all of .1 seconds to find - I'm surprised you have such a difficult time with the facts.

25.9 trillion. christ. and when interest goes up, all our debt payments will have to increase.
but all the pols are acting like interest will remain low forever. that's hope, not proper planning.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

I would just like the names of 2997 that refute their opinions.

Here's your baseline: the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office published a very well-covered study that says the stimulus worked.

Show one economist that says that data is wrong, and has his own data to disprove it

(Hint - I know of two, that I've put on Derby Trail twice before, lets see if you can find them)

[OldDog]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

I would just like the names of 2997 that refute their opinions.

It gonna be more than that.

"President Obama has relied on short-term “stimulus” programs, which provided little sustainable lift to the economy. His future plans are to double down on the failed policies, which will only prolong slow growth and high unemployment."
http://economistsforromney.com/
654 signatures to date. So, she needs to come up with around 654,000.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by OldDog

It gonna be more than that.

"President Obama has relied on short-term “stimulus” programs, which provided little sustainable lift to the economy. His future plans are to double down on the failed policies, which will only prolong slow growth and high unemployment."
http://economistsforromney.com/
654 signatures to date. So, she needs to come up with around 654,000.

Yes, as I posted in the other thread, "stimulus" is, by definition, short term. So your economists agree with definitions of stimulus.

Can you post anything from an economist proving the CBO data wrong? That the stimulus didn't work?

Because the above doesn't say that, in spite of your pretending it does.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, as I posted in the other thread, "stimulus" is, by definition, short term. So your economists agree with definitions of stimulus.

Can you post anything from an economist proving the CBO data wrong? That the stimulus didn't work?

Because the above doesn't say that, in spite of your pretending it does.

You are burdened with proof in this, you claimed 999 out of 1000 stand behind it working, now the argument is the CBO said so...
Please provide the names of the economists that are supporting the stimulus, and do so at the above rate.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

You are burdened with proof in this, you claimed 999 out of 1000 stand behind it working now the argument is the CBO said so...
Please provide the names of the economists that are supporting the stimulus, and do so at the above rate.

Yep - here's your proof: The CBO said the stimulus worked. Please provide one economist that says the CBO's facts about jobs and GDP are wrong.

Just one economist who disputes the CBO's numbers on jobs and GDP.

We'll wait.

In fact, I started another entire thread for you to join and discuss this and post your studies.

Here's some figures for you to reference - I've posted the link to the CBO report previously in other threads

November 2011 Politico

The economy would have been in much worse shape without the 2009 stimulus — which increased employment in the third quarter of this year by as many as 3.3 million full-time jobs, according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office.

Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates have blasted the $800 billion pumped into the economy through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as a waste of taxpayer dollars that failed to put people back to work.

The nonpartisan CBO figures offer a more nuanced picture of how government spending impacted an economy still coping with unemployment above 9 percent. It provides an alternative glimpse of an economy with even higher unemployment and drastically lower growth.

The CBO figures released Tuesday estimate that the stimulus package raised the gross domestic product this past quarter by 0.3 percent-1.9 percent.

The CBO report provided a broad range of the estimated number of full-time jobs created because of the stimulus — from a low of 500,000 to a high of 3.3 million jobs.

Previous estimates indicated that the stimulus funded more than 400,000 full-time jobs in the third quarter, but the CBO said in its report that the figure was not a “comprehensive” look at the law’s impact.

The effects of the stimulus are fading after having peaked in the first half of 2010, the report noted.

However, the CBO estimates that the stimulus will raise GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.8 percent next year and employment by 200,000 to 1.1 million jobs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz27W9GzEzC