patrick.net

I get all my news from virtual,conservative fish wrappers.

The Quinnipiac University poll:
Did they only let sewer slime vote?
Did they only have one name on the ballot,Obama?
Why didn't they include G.W.Bush?
I only make life or death decisions after reading polls.

Stick with me & one's trolling will see great improvement.

Worse that W? Unbelievable!

Blurtman says

Worse that W? Unbelievable!

.
LOL-my thoughts exactly. Only reason, I voted for this idjit, the first time-was because of W.

Back then I was mostly leaning dem, but would vote an occasional R. Now I am the other way around. This election may be my 1st straight ticket ever- R of course.

I think we are close to the edge and need soemone practical and wean off the welfare culture. The left has jumped off the deep end and want to drag the rest of us down with them-at our expense of course. Once we descend into 3rd world status-it will be very difficult to get back.

You mean World's wose "Leader" since WWII.

There has never been a US President THIS bad.

Are a lot of these the same people that think a crude, obnoxious, reality show star, hate and violence inciting, nationalist, narcissist, real estate investor should be President?

I just don't see what Obama has done that's so evil.

At least he didn't start any wars.

I think people dislike him only because of what he represents, namely a liberal elite that does not have their interests in mind.

rando says

I just don't see what Obama has done that's so evil.

Then you ain't looking.

Obama care will leave a legacy of reduced healthcare and increased healthcare expense.

Dodd Frank is like Sarbanes Oxley on steroids and best of all will do nothing about what it was supposed to fix.

He endorsed common core which also will have a legacy of even more incompetent children.

If he has his way TPP will be passed which is more monopoly than even NAFTA

Then there is regulation:

PCGyver says

And I'm pretty sure W's approved rating was much lower by his last year in office

Nobody had any expectations for W. He was from an elite family-was a failure at business and rode his daddy's coattails. He sounded and acted like a dumb twit.

Obama on the other hand is a constitutional scholar-who has used the Espionage act more than all presidents combined. He is trying to ram through the TPP-after negotiating it secretly. Then this whole Muslim thing is just ridiculous-and calling Hillary the most qualified candidate evah????

It is just if I wanted a republican-I will vote for a repub. Our politics is so crazy, we have a billioanre beingt he champion of the common man. methinks Obozo is doing what he is doing, so he can model Hilalry's foundation and earn 100s of millions of dollars through the foundation/charity.

I would much rather have a president who is a crook than one who is an ideologue.

My expectations for the Donald are only that he never apologizes for any political incorrectness.

The moment he apologizes, I will hate him.

rando says

My expectations for the Donald are only that he never apologizes for any political incorrectness.

And that beats the shit out of the alternative.

lostand confused says

LOL-my thoughts exactly

Recency bias.

I don't get it.

Is not politically correct always good ?

Blurtman says

Recency bias

Nah Bush is stupid and a nutjob. But Obozo is devious, cunning and a wolf in sheep's clothing.

indigenous says

I would much rather have a president who is a crook than one who is an ideologue.

At least you have the self-awareness to know you shouldn't be president.

I'd say that GWB was worse by a decent margin.

indigenous says

Then there is regulation:

That list is so scary, until you consider the cost of the Paul Ryan debt-ceiling tantrums, which cost the taxpayers more than all that put together.

So cute when both-sides-are-the-same libertarian ideologues repeat straight Republican propaganda!

rando says

At least he didn't start any wars.

I think people dislike him only because of what he represents, namely a liberal elite that does not have their interests in mind.

Obama is ten times more sneaky than Bush.
Bush went to Congress and the UN and NATO for every single action he took, he never unilaterally took military actions.

If you believe that, then you either believe Obama THINKS he is helping the (Good Guys), when he drops 50 tons of USA grade tactical assault hardware in a war zone controlled by the most violent ruthless cutthroats since the Barbary Coast Pirates, to three people. And you then also have to believe that Obama believed that those three Billy Bad Asses would have been able to fend off an Army of 50,000 ISIS militia or more. An army so strong they were able to topple the sitting President and make him flee. You would then have to believe that even after Putin bombing the shit out of the whole region just days after that air Drop. Even though ISIS spread and threat to neighboring countries dropped over 70%, Obama claimed Putin bombed civilians and was protecting Bashar al-Assad sympathizers. If you do believe that then you don't understand that Obama's freedom fighters against al-Assad, and ISIS is, was the same group of people. The same group of people that started in Libya that got support from Hillary to off Qaddafi.

Or you are just as gullible as his thinktank said you would be.

indigenous says

Then there is regulation:

I like how these morons calculate the cost of energy saving regulation, but don't count the energy savings. If obama increases cafe standard, those idiots will birch about the cost. When they buy a new car, they will be happy about the increased fuel economy and credit innovation. Assholes.

HydroCabron says

At least you have the self-awareness to know you shouldn't be president.

I'm not a sociopath which is prerequisite. You aren't qualified either, just a smart ass.

HydroCabron says

So cute when both-sides-are-the-same libertarian ideologues repeat straight Republican propaganda!

That you aren't able to discern the difference doesn't mean there isn't any.

zzyzzx says

Unlike Ronald Reagan, who respondents determined to be the best president since World War II,

Well, that invalidates the poll. Must be a one of those polls where the pollsters cherry pick the participates.

Reagan destroyed the middle class. He may not be the worst president, but he sure as fuck isn't the best.

zzyzzx says

Yep, almost all of which was due to Bush who left the check on the table when he left. Had Obama not paid the bill you'd say that was typical of a black man.

rando says

I just don't see what Obama has done that's so evil.

1. Kept the torture center at Gitmo open and operating for 16 years.
2. Handing over prisoners of war, many non-combatant innocents, to foreign governments to torture.
3. Drone strikes on civilian populations including children.
4. Assassination of innocents including teenagers having absolutely nothing to do with terrorism or state conflicts.
5. The imprisonment and torture of Manning.
6. The attempts to imprison Snowden.
7. The campaign of terrorism against whistle blowers.
8. The creation of a massive domestic spying program which completely undermines the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments and democracy.
9. Expanding the war on drugs violating basic human and civil rights and preventing people from voting or getting jobs subjecting them and their families to poverty for at least another two generations.
10. Signing the NDAA.
11. Voting for the USA Patriot Act while senator.

An Interview With Noam Chomsky on Obama’s Human Rights Record

Obama’s policies have been approximately the same as Bush’s, though there have been some slight differences, but that’s not a great surprise. The Democrats supported Bush’s policies. There were some objections on mostly partisan grounds, but for the most part, they supported his policies and it’s not surprising that they have continued to do so. In some respects Obama has gone even beyond Bush. The NDAA, which you mentioned, was not initiated by Obama, (when it passed Congress, he said he didn’t approve of it and wouldn’t implement it) but he nevertheless did sign it into law and did not veto it. It was pushed through by hawks, including Joe Lieberman and others. In fact, there hasn’t been that much of a change. The worst part of the NDAA is that it codified – or put into law – what had already been a regular practice.

As for the killings, Obama has sharply increased the global assassination campaign. While it was initiated by Bush, it has expanded under Obama and it has included American citizens, again with bipartisan support and very little criticism other than some minor criticism because it was an American. But then again, why should you have the right to assassinate anybody? For example, suppose Iran was assassinating members of Congress who were calling for an attack on Iran. Would we think that’s fine? That would be much more justified, but of course we’d see that as an act of war. The real question is, why assassinate anyone? The government has made it very clear that the assassinations are personally approved by Obama and the criteria for assassination are very weak. If a group of men are seen somewhere by a drone who are, say, loading something into a truck, and there is some suspicion that maybe they are militants, then it’s fine to kill them and they are regarded as guilty unless, subsequently, they are shown to be innocent. That’s the wording that the United States used and it is such a gross violation of fundamental human rights that you can hardly talk about it.

rando says

At least he didn't start any wars.

True, he simply expanded the ones Bush started including the war on civilians.

rando says

I think people dislike him only because of what he represents, namely a liberal elite that does not have their interests in mind.

That's certainly why conservatives hate him. He's black, a democrat, has a foreign sounding name, has a parent from Africa. So to conservative's he's a secret Muslim and a liberal. In reality, he's neither.

Liberals hate him for the exact same reason we hate Bush. The exact same reasons.

Make no mistake, Obama is getting no love from real liberals like Noam Chomsky.

Unfortunately, I suspect Hillary will be even worse. She's going to continue every single one of the above policies I listed.

The list suggests a short memory, with almost no history. Presidents Truman and Kennedy should have rated much more highly. President Ford deserves more credit, though he had only a brief time in office.

IMO, GW Bush was by far the worst. He presided over the worst national security failure in American history, then used that as an excuse to invade a country that had nothing to do with it, and doubled the national debt. He also appointed John Roberts and Samuel Alito to SCOTUS.

President Obama has also doubled the debt and signed Obamneycare, after campaigning against it when it was called "Hillary's Plan." (To be fair, Hillary's Plan was a bullet point version of her prior ClintonCare, which was even worse.) Still, he's much better than his predecessor, and much better than either of his two Republican opponents.

The public opinion chart illustrates two of Winston Churchill's observations:

“The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.”

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…"

Considering what it takes to win an election in this country, I am impressed that we've survived this long.

HEY YOU says

Why didn't they include G.W.Bush?

They did, and Bush #2 was the second worst.

rando says

I just don't see what Obama has done that's so evil.

Obama's total incompetence should be enough.

The worst were Truman for his atrocities on Japan and getting us into the Korean War, although that may have been unavoidable.

LBJ for his great society, medicare, Vietnam and his lying to escalate it, his contribution to stagflation, i.e. he created it by forcing Fed Chairman Martin to print money to pay for his horse shit.

George W for getting us into Iraq, and for TARP and for taking away civil liberties.

Obama is tied with LBJ for the worst because of Obama Care and Dodd Frank and for Common Core and for a huge increase in regulations and for what ever headway he made with TPP.

I wasn't alive for Eisenhower's years, but from what I've gathered he was a good leader. I also wasn't alive for Carter, but I feel like he came into a bad situation and tried his best to do what was right for the US in the long term and nobody cared, they just wanted things instantly fixed.

zzyzzx says

Obama's total incompetence

You should get started on HIllary now. Claim she is incompetent and will make a terrible President, and invest as much emotion as possible in this belief, repeat it to yourself dozens of time per day, sometimes hundreds of times per day.

Whatever you do don't let the fact that you are human and that if things had been different long long ago you might have been capable of objectivity and critical thinking.

So just stick to your guns, starting now, don't even allow yourself to think too much, and then 8 years from now you can lament how you were right all along and Hillary was another terrible democrat President. Who knows, maybe if you're lucky, you can really justify that hate, and she will be even worse than Obama.

Let these be your watchwords: "If a democrat is elected President, God help us if they aren't really really terrible for the country."

"When Trump bangs a supermodel, he closes his eyes and imagines he's jerking off."

marcus says

You should get started on HIllary now. Claim she is incompetent a

I've already mentioned how someone who can't handle having 2 emails isn't qualified to be president.

Nixon tops them all with his open door china policy which lead to massive grain imports that san franned the ricearoni brand...

Nixon was one of the worst because he took the US off Bretton Woods, the rest was just BS

At least he ended Vietnam.

Tenpoundbass says

Bush went to Congress and the UN and NATO for every single action he took, he never unilaterally took military actions.

Yes, Bush went, and acted regardless of outcomes of ruling bodies. The Bush Doctrine was the most unilateral foreign policy implementation we had ever seen in America, up to that point. It justifies preemptive application of military force and doing so unilaterally.

The 2nd Gulf War invasion of Iraq was strongly opposed by NATO, and the UN believes, to this day, that there are grounds that it was illegal. The only country to lap dog support us was the UK, and that is likely the most unpopular decision of Blair's rule, and one not made by the people of the UK, but by their leadership. There was news cycle devoted to just that last week.

Our congress would have been ok invading Monaco, if the Bush admin said "the bad guys" were there. I don't think the dazed consent of a post 911 attacked population counts as being a builder of coalitions and multilateral support for military action.

To me, Bush and 911 remain the spark which touched off so many ills for our country.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/192374/americans-satisfaction-direction-remains-low.aspx

- See first graph : '01 to '09 is Bush

http://www.gallup.com/poll/193517/bush-leads-obama-blame-economic-troubles.aspx

- and a majority of American's still see the shadow of Bush in what Obama has had to face ... even now ... 8 years on

Ironman says

Everyone else knows Obama has had close to 8 years and hasn't got shit accomplished.

He got plenty accomplished all of it bad.