Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Mainly to our American readers, but other nations feel free to chip in...

Why's Obama dropped so badly in the opinion polls? Aside from not winning the right to host the Olympics (which take it from us Brits, is a financial blessing) and being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for not being Bush, it's hard to see what he's doing wrong on this side of the pond. You guys do want universal free health care right?

Because all the nice plans needs $ to pay for , not dreams + nice speech.

Flashman wrote:You guys do want universal free health care right?

We can't agree, on both the basic concept and the specifics of it.

Here's the argument. I'm not making it, just saying it
-10.2% unemployment
-Trying to socialize 17% of the US economy
-A nearly $800BN stimulus plan that was nothing more than democratic dream spending and not stimulus
-10.2% unemployment
-TARP money to bail out loser automobile companies
-Obama global apology tour
-Blaming everything on Bush doesn't work after a year. Nut up or shut up.
-10.2% unemployment
-Afghanistan getting worse.
-Farting around for two months IN PUBLIC on new Afghanistan plan.
-10.2% unemployment
-Cap and ship (the jobs to China) program
-Open freaking borders still.
10.2% unemployment

Did I mention 10.2% unemployment?

The majority of the country, I believe, wants a decent health care system. The problem is that pollsters and critics get the spotlight cause they are controversial.

The polls they use to judge popularity of a president are just ridiculously inaccurate. Some are as little as 5000 people polled. And most of those are in Washington DC. This country has 300 million poeple living here, roughly half of them voting age. So a poll that asks 5000 people a question, without asking the other 149,995,000, seems pretty skewed. Also, those polling groups have political views, so that might make them prone to asking people of like mind instead of random people. Example; going to a Republican convention and getting opinions on health care reform; the response from that would ovbiously be negative, but the polling group would say this is the "countries view".

And the naysayers, pretty much anyone from Fox news, make the news because they say controversial things. The more controversial, the more people will watch. The more people, the more they can charge for advertisements. In the end, they don't care about the truth; they care only about their bottom line.

Its all really quite sad when you look at it.

Flashman wrote:You guys do want universal free health care right?

Gods no.

Then again, I might be slightly biased as my parents were both doctors(but NOT private practice and my mother works in Insurance now, not pharmacies) and I'm in a medical major.

As for why Obama's losing popularity, the romance and beginning enchantment is gone.

But you can discount my opinion, because I didn't vote(I only vote when there's a candidate or issue I actually care about or feel something about).

Thats right paulguise, its all a polling screw up (looks at tuesday's election results again).

There's a big all difference between healthcare reform and the horrorshow going through Congress.

Note pols-20% place healthcare as their primary concern. Guess which priority is number #1

Billy Clinton is just chuckling and chuckling right now.

paulguise wrote:The majority of the country, I believe, wants a decent health care system.

Everyone wants what they think is best. That's a non-issue.

This country has 300 million poeple living here, roughly half of them voting age.

Do you mean the age people commonly vote?

Frazzled wrote:Here's the argument. I'm not making it, just saying it
-10.2% unemployment
-Trying to socialize 17% of the US economy
-A nearly $800BN stimulus plan that was nothing more than democratic dream spending and not stimulus
-TARP money to bail out loser automobile companies
-Obama global apology tour
-Blaming everything on Bush doesn't work after a year. Nut up or shut up.
-Afghanistan getting worse.
-Farting around for two months IN PUBLIC on new Afghanistan plan.
-Cap and ship (the jobs to China) program
-Open freaking borders still.

Some of these are a concern still, but some of these items are not Obamas fault.

- $800 bn stimulus - started by Bush and couldnt be stopped.
- 10.2% unemployment - because of greedy real estate developers and banks. This started nearly 2 years ago and the results are just coming to a head. You can't blame him for that. And the Gov did extend emploument benefits to something like 18 months, didnt they?
- The health care reform isnt socialization, its a government run option. An option that you are more them welcome to decline.

I try not to get involved in these types of arguments because I am not a political buff so I don't know all the info. If i'm wrong about a fact (a fact, mind, not an interpretation of an opinion) please let me know.

paulguise wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Here's the argument. I'm not making it, just saying it
-10.2% unemployment
-Trying to socialize 17% of the US economy
-A nearly $800BN stimulus plan that was nothing more than democratic dream spending and not stimulus
-TARP money to bail out loser automobile companies
-Obama global apology tour
-Blaming everything on Bush doesn't work after a year. Nut up or shut up.
-Afghanistan getting worse.
-Farting around for two months IN PUBLIC on new Afghanistan plan.
-Cap and ship (the jobs to China) program
-Open freaking borders still.

Some of these are a concern still, but some of these items are not Obamas fault.

- $800 bn stimulus - started by Bush and couldnt be stopped.
- 10.2% unemployment - because of greedy real estate developers and banks. This started nearly 2 years ago and the results are just coming to a head. You can't blame him for that. And the Gov did extend emploument benefits to something like 18 months, didnt they?
- The health care reform isnt socialization, its a government run option. An option that you are more them welcome to decline.

I try not to get involved in these types of arguments because I am not a political buff so I don't know all the info. If i'm wrong about a fact (a fact, mind, not an interpretation of an opinion) please let me know.

You're wrong about both of them.

Obama "stimulus plan"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28891939/

Thats it. The recession was caused by a few people. Everyone else was innnocent. There were no other options beside the above stimulus plan that could have been chosen, right?

-Whats voluntary about a plan that requires you to have it or be fined? That mandates payment rates to doctors? Get real.
They could have done this and done serious good with two days of effort: 1. mandate portability of coverage; 2. coverage cannot fall away based due to catastrophic illness or preexisting condition. 3. elimination of state barriers on competition. 4. set up commissions to look in detail at other health systems in the world and done a detailed, ratio analysis of them to do the best for the cheapest. thats what I thought they were going to do and was going to be supportive of such, like in a big way.

This country has 300 million poeple living here, roughly half of them voting age.

Do you mean the age people commonly vote?

It's just that most of what he's done hasn't done to much for the economy (or at least none that can be seen yet) and people are starting to lose faith in the promises he had earlier in his career as president. People were hoping that Obama would be the big american band-aid for the economy and it's not quite turning out that way.

There's always two sides of every argument, and when it deals with politics they are both wrong. Someone is always going to disagree.

Frazzled wrote:
Did I mention 10.2% unemployment?

This. Everything else is really down to the political position in question, and the degree to which any given person is informed. Unemployment cuts across all demographics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

paulguise wrote: So a poll that asks 5000 people a question, without asking the other 149,995,000, seems pretty skewed. Also, those polling groups have political views, so that might make them prone to asking people of like mind instead of random people. Example; going to a Republican convention and getting opinions on health care reform; the response from that would ovbiously be negative, but the polling group would say this is the "countries view".

You have a point about sample size, but most (reputable, not network based) polls do a good job of achieving a well distributed sample.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Did I mention 10.2% unemployment?

This. Everything else is really down to the political position in question, and the degree to which any given person is informed. Unemployment cuts across all demographics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

paulguise wrote: So a poll that asks 5000 people a question, without asking the other 149,995,000, seems pretty skewed. Also, those polling groups have political views, so that might make them prone to asking people of like mind instead of random people. Example; going to a Republican convention and getting opinions on health care reform; the response from that would ovbiously be negative, but the polling group would say this is the "countries view".

You have a point about sample size, but most (reputable, not network based) polls do a good job of achieving a well distributed sample.

True that. Americans vote on their pocketbooks, and their victories. Bring us neither and you suck.
EDIT: I just realized I said I wasn't going to get into this conversation. Stepping out in case modding is necessary. ARGGHHJH!!!!

paulguise wrote:Im not sure what you mean by this, but I was just guessing that at last half of the countries population is over 18 years old. Those people (of voting age) should be asked the question as those are the people who will be voting in the next presidential election (at least I hope they do).

18 is the legal age to vote in the US. However, only 68% of people of voting age in America are even registered to vote according to the last census. In your average election, only 22% of registered voters between 18-24 vote, as opposed to 63% of registered voters aged 55+. That's not taking into account that 30-40% of registered voters don't vote every election or felons, who lose their right to vote depending on the state.

The Median age of voters in America in the 2008 election was 44 years old. 2008 also had the largest voter turnout in recent years with 61.7%.

Just because someone is of the legal age, doesn't mean they've registered or care enough to find a voting location. And some of us actively abstain for various reasons(such as my "I'm not going to vote for someone I could care less about just for the sake of voting").

For us, Afghanistan has become about how badly our troops are being treated by the current government both whilst they're out there and when they come back. I don't think anybody expects the war itself to be sorted out in the near future, but whether we should be there at all is starting to become an issue.

Thanks for the responses so far. I'm learning stuff, so keep them coming

Maybe because people are starting to realize that treating politics and politicians as a cult worship-worthy object is very silly? That following the words of self-righteous media pundits on supposed pulpits of compassion in proportion to their ratings is downright absurd? Maybe.... just maybe we are all starting to realize the world doesn't run on hopes and dreams and stunningly short sighted rhetoric and nostalgia and that it does in fact run on lobbies, behind the scenes handshaking, reach arounds, and shakedowns?

Maybe... no, no not a chance.

The red and blue kool-aids look very different, but are amazingly similar in taste.

Frazzled wrote:
Obama "stimulus plan"

Yes, Obama passed a stimulus bill, and it functioned exactly as stimulus is intended to. The fact that the majority of projects were based on Democratic predisposition is simply a function of the party in charge.

You can claim that it could have been spent more efficiently (though I really doubt it, and not because the bill was particularly efficient), or that stimulus isn't effective in the long run (it isn't meant to be), but claiming that what was done was not stimulus is just wrong.

Frazzled wrote:
Thats it. The recession was caused by a few people. Everyone else was innnocent. There were no other options beside the above stimulus plan that could have been chosen, right?

Are you operating under the notion that the stimulus plan was the cause of, and not the reaction to, the recession?

Frazzled wrote:
3. elimination of state barriers on competition.

You do realize how much havoc that would play with state's rights? There are plenty of national insurance companies, the state barriers are the result of regional statistics, and variation in legal code. That one change (more like many, small changes) would effectively lead to nationalized healthcare anyway as the only regulatory body with any authority would be the federal government. That, or all insurance companies would be forced to comply with the regulations as established by whatever state happened to be the strictest.

paulguise wrote:Im not sure what you mean by this, but I was just guessing that at last half of the countries population is over 18 years old. Those people (of voting age) should be asked the question as those are the people who will be voting in the next presidential election (at least I hope they do).

Ah, okay. It's more like 3/4 of the population that's of voting age, so I guess the estimate threw me off a little. Nevermind, I get what you're saying.

Flashman, the answer is that something like 48% of the population didn't vote for him in the first place. He won by a relative landslide in the electoral college, not necessarily the popular vote. Obama was more wildly popular overseas than in the U.S. to begin with. And as Frazz said, the shine comes off anyone when faced with 10% unemployment. And that pretty much sums it up.

paulguise wrote:Some of these are a concern still, but some of these items are not Obamas fault.

- $800 bn stimulus - started by Bush and couldnt be stopped.
- 10.2% unemployment - because of greedy real estate developers and banks. This started nearly 2 years ago and the results are just coming to a head. You can't blame him for that. And the Gov did extend emploument benefits to something like 18 months, didnt they?
- The health care reform isnt socialization, its a government run option. An option that you are more them welcome to decline.

I try not to get involved in these types of arguments because I am not a political buff so I don't know all the info. If i'm wrong about a fact (a fact, mind, not an interpretation of an opinion) please let me know.

That's the trick. He's the man in the office, he gets the blame. It sucks, but there it is.

The onset of increasing unemployment cannot have possibly been Obama's fault - it can only be a consequence of the background financial climate. Unemployment is even slower to change than the economy - the current situation is a result of what happened 12 months ago. Whether or not more could be done to slow this increase, it would be beyond any president to have turned it around by now. And he only steers the boat - the senate has just as much say in what actually happens. You'd have to be a pretty smug cappy to say otherwise.

However, I can see how increasing disillusion and despair would affect BO's popularity at the moment. It's not like he had any serious opponents in his presidency campaign, and now that the 'black magic' has worn off, we can actually look at this guy sensibly.

Obama is the Jimmy Carter of the 21st century.

Jimmy Carter was voted in because America was still pissed off at the Republicans (i.e. Nixon) but never got the chance to kick him out.
He waffled around and did alot of window dressing and great ideals speeches.
He then got kicked out after 1 term because the US realised he was pretty innefectual.

The reason I don't think you will see Obama voted out...
The media (except Fox) still see him as the dream child of the modern era who with great dreams and great ideals will lead all Americans to a utopian future. And they just won't attack him.
The republicans will have to find a doozy of a candidate. Palin = no, 40 year old governor/senator/congressman with nice family who is in fact currently having an affair with a campaign advisor/doing ice/corrupt = no. Which doesn't leave many left.

For me Juliani, if the republicans sucked it up and accepted him would be just the right candidate, great with independents, great with liberals, proven record in governance.

What about RON PAUL?

Must resist temptation to post why Obama is unpopular. Must avoid pissing people off and risking a warning. Must.....resist.....temptation.

Whew. Close one. I almost gave in.

Because people are seeing the real him,not the campaign him. Everyone thought during the campaign h was for gay marriage surprise he is not.

Orkeosaurus wrote:What about RON PAUL?

*facepalm*
Ive been saying that for ALMOST a year now lol. The man really IS a great politician and really does care for this country. Hopefully he gets seen for this by the next election, and he becomes the next president.

Also the reason I think most people dont like Obama as much now, is they ARE realizing that yes he IS the first "black" president, but uh.... what else has he done? That and everytime I hear him speak, he annoys me, his voice literally gets on my nerves lol

Ron Paul has also visited Alex Jones... I mean really though, that is about all I need to know. People change and whatnot, but Ron Paul, is simply not presidential material.

Americans are (in general) selfish and impatient. We've no tolerance for actually having to invest time and effort.

10% unemployment is a joke. Its much higher - but the people who aren't drawing unemployment or stopped looking for jobs in the last 90 days don't count to that number.

Having not really accepted that part of Obama's speech

President Barack Obama wrote:
...the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time.

Nobody really *wants* to man up and take the time to get this fixed.

We were voraciously greedy for decades and our favored children (born and raised in these fat times) are running our country grasping at every moment of power as they fail to comprehend that they are themselves the cause of our failure. America is a geriocracy by default with the *average* age of our leaders pushing 60 (56 in the House, 61.7 in the Senate) - the oldest being 97. Perhaps this is part of our difficulty in adapting to changes we can see we need, yet have no desire to give up our current comforts to pay for them.

If we don't invest the patience we won't yield results.

Oldgrue wrote:Americans are (in general) selfish and impatient. We've no tolerance for actually having to invest time and effort.

Hyperbole.

10% unemployment is a joke. Its much higher - but the people who aren't drawing unemployment or stopped looking for jobs in the last 90 days don't count to that number.

Given various factors, I would call it out at 12% flat, with a possibility of 15%. But... I do live in California...

Having not really accepted that part of Obama's speech

President Barack Obama wrote:
...the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time.

Nobody really *wants* to man up and take the time to get this fixed.

We were voraciously greedy for decades and our favored children (born and raised in these fat times) are running our country grasping at every moment of power as they fail to comprehend that they are themselves the cause of our failure. America is a geriocracy by default with the *average* age of our leaders pushing 60 (56 in the House, 61.7 in the Senate) - the oldest being 97. Perhaps this is part of our difficulty in adapting to changes we can see we need, yet have no desire to give up our current comforts to pay for them.

If we don't invest the patience we won't yield results.