Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    The world but more importantly the US have seen that Obama isn't all he was hyped up to be. Thing's could always change, but having seen how weak he is at getting bipartisanship(practically begging in some cases), how weak he's been on Israel and their settlements in East Jerusalem, how weak he's been on the banks(especially AIG), the list goes on. Over all, he's a very weak president, although I hated George W. Bush, he was and still is a far better politician than Obama will ever be.
    So far Obama has wasted an entire year on this horror of a healthcare bill. Bush knew when to cut his losses and when and how to get things done. Obama is great at delivering a good speech, but he couldn't lead a fart out of an ********.

    (Original post by Stalin)
    Anyway, I don't see the point in even debating this, Palin will more than likely be the Republican nominee :facepalm2:
    I would be willing to bet money that it won't be palin. She has been using her fame to become a bigger celebrity, rather than a more policy-oriented, serious public figure. It won't happen.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    I would be willing to bet money that it won't be palin. She has been using her fame to become a bigger celebrity, rather than a more policy-oriented, serious public figure. It won't happen.
    It was quite encouraging to see Ron Paul win the straw poll at CPAC this year, as that would be a better direction for the GOP, however I can't see him being a serious candidate given his age and the influence of the neo-con's on the party.
    I think there could be a swtich back to the neo-con right with the GOP for 2012 as American conservatives go into overdrive on ridding the country of this little dabble into a welfare state, and could effectively propagate a switch away from the perceived differences of Obama.
    But who knows,maybe Palin could run a successful campaign with a slogan like 'howz that hopey changey thing going for ya?':eek:
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    How does believing we are decended from monkeys have anything to do with being a good president?
    I'd still vote for him, chill out - but I just find it incredibly weird. The UK is far more atheist than the USA, as an atheist myself I see creationism as being pretty ridicilous. It shows he might not look at all the facts available which is concerning.

    (Original post by Stalin)
    I don't exactly know as I'm uncertain on whether to let the banks go bankrupt or bail them out issue, which would, ultimately, settle this once and for all.
    I see the banks as being like the war in Iraq/Afghanistan. The problem is that ideally, under libertarian government, it just wouldn't have happened to begin with. Once it did happen I agree it's a bit tough to decide what should be done about it. I'm reluctant to say withdraw, and I'm reluctant to let banks fail - but overall I would withdraw and I wouldn't bailout.

    The real issue though is that libertarians saw this coming, and the Fed was pumping in credit whilst lowering interest rates to encourage this consumerism, and the community reinvestment act forced US banks to expand lending to marginal barrowers to expand home ownership - with the knowledge that if they failed they'd be bailed out. So like I say, a libertarian could have done things just as differently as Iraq, if they had made the calls from the start.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well, Paul + a young(!), but good second candidate would have some chances. And it would definitly be the better team, compared to Romney/Palin/Huckabee ...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CandyFlipper)
    I'd still vote for him, chill out - but I just find it incredibly weird. The UK is far more atheist than the USA, as an atheist myself I see creationism as being pretty ridicilous. It shows he might not look at all the facts available which is concerning.
    You still haven't had an openly atheist leader, and I am pretty sure Blair buys the whole fairytale. Regarding US & UK differences on the subject....well there is no difference. There are more or less just as many Brits who don't believe in evolution as there are Americans.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...evolution.html
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rogerenden)
    Well, Paul + a young(!), but good second candidate would have some chances. And it would definitly be the better team, compared to Romney/Palin/Huckabee ...
    Huckabee and Palin have no chance. Palin wants to be a celebrity and the Tea Party Movement is very Libertarian, I doubt a social conservative leader like Huckabee is what the country is hungry for. Romney I think has the best chances of getting the nomination of the current crop. He is a polished, successful businessman who understands economics. I think he'd be a lot better than Obama. Romney just wrote a book entitled "No Apology," which is in defense of the traditional values and principles that this country was founded upon. He is also taking a shot at Obama, who apologizes for the USA in every foreign speech, which makes our blood boil! :mad:
    I guess those continental euros like that kind of thing, but most americans can't stand it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    So far Obama has wasted an entire year on this horror of a healthcare bill. Bush knew when to cut his losses and when and how to get things done. Obama is great at delivering a good speech, but he couldn't lead a fart out of an ********.
    Couldn't lead a fart out of an *********, I laughed pretty hard at that.

    I agree with the rest though, Bush was by far the better politician. Obama should really sit back, take notes and learn from Bush when it comes to bipartisanship

    I would be willing to bet money that it won't be palin. She has been using her fame to become a bigger celebrity, rather than a more policy-oriented, serious public figure. It won't happen.
    Who do you think it'll be?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    take notes and learn from Bush when it comes to bipartisanship
    :eyeball:
    You're kidding right?

    Bush was probably the most partisan post-war president
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    :eyeball:
    You're kidding right?

    Bush was probably the most partisan post-war president
    When Bush needed bipartisanship he forced every democrat to sign whatever bill it was he wanted to be passed, it's called being a politician. Is Obama doing this - no, he prefers to sit and tell the world: 'See, I told you they'd never want my healthcare bill, what am I supposed to do now?'. Would Bush have done the same about Afghanistan or Iraq? Of course not, because the democrats feared him and bent over backwards at any of his requests in fear of losing their jobs.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    When Bush needed bipartisanship he forced every democrat to sign whatever bill it was he wanted to be passed, it's called being a politician.
    :eyeball:
    Bush had Republican control of both houses for the first 6 years and may have had some support from the Dixiecrats but he was by no means bipartisan. Care to offer any examples of Bush's Bipartisan bills?
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Would Bush have done the same about Afghanistan or Iraq? Of course not, because the democrats feared him and bent over backwards at any of his requests in fear of losing their jobs.
    :wtf:
    Bush wasn't in charge of the democrat jobs - that's the voters job.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    :eyeball:
    Bush had Republican control of both houses for the first 6 years and may have had some support from the Dixiecrats but he was by no means bipartisan. Care to offer any examples of Bush's Bipartisan bills?
    The 2001 tax cuts;
    the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001-2
    the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority
    the 2003 medicare law
    the 2005 energy law focused on electricity
    the 2006 pension reform law
    the 2007 energy law focused on fuel
    the 2008 stimulus law
    the 2008 housing reform law
    the 2008 TARP law

    :wtf:
    Bush wasn't in charge of the democrat jobs - that's the voters job.
    :rofl:

    It's not as pristine as you make it out to be.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    Huckabee and Palin have no chance. Palin wants to be a celebrity and the Tea Party Movement is very Libertarian, I doubt a social conservative leader like Huckabee is what the country is hungry for. Romney I think has the best chances of getting the nomination of the current crop. He is a polished, successful businessman who understands economics. I think he'd be a lot better than Obama. Romney just wrote a book entitled "No Apology," which is in defense of the traditional values and principles that this country was founded upon. He is also taking a shot at Obama, who apologizes for the USA in every foreign speech, which makes our blood boil! :mad:
    I guess those continental euros like that kind of thing, but most americans can't stand it.
    How is Romney on social issues, and would he rack up the deficit like Bush did?

    On the creationism point btw, I'm genuinely suprised that so many in the UK question evolution! :eek:
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    The 2001 tax cuts; Not bipartisan
    the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001-2 Passed because it was sorely needed, although in hindsight was incredibly botched
    the 2002 extension of Trade Promotion Authority Can't find anything about this. Doesn't sound particularly controversial.
    the 2003 medicare law Definitely not bipartisan
    the 2005 energy law focused on electricity Not bipartisan
    the 2006 pension reform law Passed but not really controversial
    the 2007 energy law focused on fuel partisan and actually proposed by democrats..
    the 2008 stimulus law
    the 2008 housing reform law
    the 2008 TARP law These last three were kinda bipartisan, but they were kinda passed under special circumstances
    So at best you've found a handful of bipartisan acts.

    I still can't see how you're arguing that Bush was Bipartisan - he was one of the most partisan Republicans this century. I mean look at both McCain and Obama's promises to be more bipartisan were a reaction to this.
    (Original post by Stalin)
    :rofl:

    It's not as pristine as you make it out to be.
    So are you saying Bush could fire democrat senators?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    So at best you've found a handful of bipartisan acts.

    I still can't see how you're arguing that Bush was Bipartisan - he was one of the most partisan Republicans this century. I mean look at both McCain and Obama's promises to be more bipartisan were a reaction to this.
    I think you've misunderstood me.

    Any bill Bush has conjured up has more or less been passed. Obama isn't able to do that, his healthcare bill has been watered down to the bare minimum and still it isn't being passed. Bush was a better politician and when he needed something done, he got it done.

    So are you saying Bush could fire democrat senators?
    Not fire, but replace.

    Don't you think that the Bush administration threatened a few democrats into siding with them?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    I think you've misunderstood me.

    Any bill Bush has conjured up has more or less been passed. Obama isn't able to do that, his healthcare bill has been watered down to the bare minimum and still it isn't being passed. Bush was a better politician and when he needed something done, he got it done.
    The republican party is generally more united than the democrats. Even though the democrats have a majority but are much more fragmented with some dixicrats having more right wing views than some republicans. For 6 years in office, George Bush had control of both houses. In the last two he did very little.

    Also, more to the point, Bush didn't have an astroturf organisation created by the opposition to publically denounce and feverishly demonstrate everything he did from day 1.
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Not fire, but replace.

    Don't you think that the Bush administration threatened a few democrats into siding with them?
    I'm pretty sure you can't replace a senator at a whim
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CandyFlipper)
    How is Romney on social issues, and would he rack up the deficit like Bush did?

    On the creationism point btw, I'm genuinely suprised that so many in the UK question evolution! :eek:
    Since Obama is on course to spend more than all presidents combined, from George Washington to George W Bush, I don't see why people make so much of Bush's spending. He looks like a fiscal conservative compared to Obama.
    The US is very close to losing it's credit rating and becoming a failed state with the idiotic administration in the driver's seat.

    As for Romney, he is one of the more left leaning republicans on the social issues. When he was governor in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney supported abortion, gay rights, gun control, minimum wages, and socialized healthcare. The Romney universal health plan for Massachusetts residents has been a budget breaking disaster.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    Also, more to the point, Bush didn't have an astroturf organisation created by the opposition to publically denounce and feverishly demonstrate everything he did from day 1.
    Astroturf? Are you implying the nationwide Tea Party movement is being orchestrated from Republican headquarters?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harris)
    Haha Brown won! Filibuster gone!
    You ain't seen nothing yet. In November the jackass party is going to get its clock cleaned.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Made in the USA)
    You ain't seen nothing yet. In November the jackass party is going to get its clock cleaned.
    I read above and it appears that you are a Romney fan too? Awesome! I've become more Libertarian lately but am a little turned off by the Tea-Party just because its too easy for the media to focus on the dumbest people there. I'm also no where near Ron Paul, just a little enlightened courtesy of Ayn Rand.

    What do you think of Guliani by the way? I mean he's no Romney but I like him a ton too.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    So at best you've found a handful of bipartisan acts.

    I still can't see how you're arguing that Bush was Bipartisan - he was one of the most partisan Republicans this century. I mean look at both McCain and Obama's promises to be more bipartisan were a reaction to this.

    So are you saying Bush could fire democrat senators?
    Don't be fooled by those "bipartisan acts" when you look closely at how they were enacted. For example, to pass children's health insurance - funding for the war was included. Democrats were vilified if they didn't pass certain bills because they could be labeled as "unpatriotic" or "not supporting the troops."
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.