It never fails that approval polls for Congress or Obama pops up here in the FA threads. Personally, I don’t put much stock in them myself. The notion that asking 1000 or so people in a nation of over 300,000,000 strikes me as a narrow sampling at best.
But even more baffling are why those that place such faith in polls – perhaps to give themselves a needed confidence boost to justify their own opinions via the “herd” mentality – don’t bother to explain the glaring contradiction in the very polls they love to quote.
And that is… why do these poll responders supposedly overwhelmingly approve of Obama, when they so overwhelmingly *disapprove* of Congressional spending as per the Obama agenda?
Let’s take, for example, the Stimulus… known as it’s official name, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
For professional consistency in the processes, let’s take a single reputable pollster, Rasmussen Reports, and their Feb 16th analysis of the ARRA.
Thirty-eight percent (38%) of voters nationwide believe the $787-billion stimulus plan passed by Congress will help the economy. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 29% believe the plan will hurt and 24% believe it will have little impact.
When Rasmussen breaks down their numbers, the class of America Obama claims to advocate *for*… middle-income America – are more likely to believe the bill will cause more harm than good. Those that hold the most optimism are household incomes below $40K, or above $100K.
It’s also not surprising… since the stimulus grows more government than the private sector… that 49% of government employees are dancing in the streets with joy. That’s because 50% of the responders believe the bill consists primarily of new government spending… and they are correct.
The private sector is split evenly, and investors are the skeptics vs non-investors.
Needless to say, those celebrating “victory” on the talking head circuits for it’s passage were not middle America, but Congress, their official mouthpieces and WH policy wonks. Public opinion didn’t matter to Congress. Just as the bailout passed last fall, despite a majority of unfavorable public sentiment, Congress and a then candidate Barack Obama took a my-way-or-the-highway attitude. Obama was on record saying “Democrats and Republicans in Washington have agreed on an emergency rescue plan that is our best and only way to prevent an economic catastrophe.”
Well, *some* Republicans anyway. And so much for the “catastrophe” that he, to this day, still holds over the nation’s head.
Now we’re facing Obama’s next spending debacle – HASP… his Homeowners Affordability and Stabilization Act. Again, in the now predictable Obama’esque fashion, the PR rolls out strong *far* in advance of the details. And if it’s anything like the stimulus, Congress considers reading the details in the bill optional.
As I pointed out in my Feb 19th analysis of this proposal, it’s an attempt by Congress and the Obama admin to reinflate the housing bubble by preventing housing prices from falling lower. It’s a financial “affirmative action” plan guaranteed not to cure the problem, but postpone it… and at quite an expense to the public and banking industry.
Since one of our largest problems is over valued assets in default, the taxpayers and banking industry funding massive loan rate buy downs to accommodate for loan modifications does nothing to cure the over valued asset problem. And, in fact, since these buy down are akin to a five year “government ARM”, they still lock distressed homeowners into an overvalued mortgage… preventing any kind of a sale other than a short sale down line. To boot, they force a situation where the interest rates cannot be used to control housing and inflation.
Is the public catching on to this latest spending misstep? With the press that Rick Santelli’s public protest is receiving, as well as the increasing bipartisan outcry of “foul” gaining speed, I’d have to say yes. This despite the WH’s attempt to use the bully pulpit via Press Sec’y Gibbs in denouncing Santelli as one who “doesn’t know what he’s talking about”.
Back to a Rasmussen Reports Feb 23rd report on HASP…
Fifty-five percent (55%) of American adults say the federal government would be rewarding bad behavior by providing mortgage subsidies to financially troubled homeowners. Among investors, 65% hold that view.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that, among all adults, just 32% disagree.
Will this negative public opinion stop Obama and an unstoppable Congress? Unlikely. As they’ve already demonstrated, they believe we… the peons of the nation… don’t know what we are talking about. Despite their rhetoric, they don’t give a flying fart about what we think.
But, back to the original subject at hand… the utter insanity of these polls. On one hand, we are constantly reminded of Obama’s popularity in the polls by the faithful. On the other, we have polls with strong disapproval of Congress, this spending… all of which is doing Obama’s bidding PLUS tagging on their own spending wishes to boot.
How can this be reconciled? That’s like saying you hate Ford pickup trucks, but then brag incessantly about your black, shiny F-150 with the flame paint job.
I suggest it’s an electorate, extremely reluctant to give up the “hope” and euphoria of their dreams. But, as many other authors here have pointed out multiple times, they might be catching on… albeit slowly.
This is indicated in the movement in the Obama approval rating. From Rasmussen’s site, a graph of the Presidential Approval Index since the Inauguration. The “strongly approve” is in green, the “strongly disapprove” is the red.
Note that the “hope” and euphoria reigned supreme on that historic day… with 40% “strongly” approving, and only about 12% “strongly” disapproving.
Also note Obama’s approval for that first week has never been higher…
Instead, there is a jagged “strongly” approval rating, but ever slowly working it’s way down the longer he occupies the Oval Office.
Also notice those that “strongly” disapprove is on a steady increase.
A particularly interesting observation… sometime between Feb 16th and 18th, the “approve” was near or at it’s lowest, and the “disapprove” was near or at it’s highest. Coincidently, that was the time the ARRA – aka the “stimulus” – was passed in both Congressional chambers, and waiting for Obama’s road show to sign the bill against the Denver back drop. (BTW, did anyone ever figure out the carbon footprint for that PR stunt??)
These approval polls, when viewed in snapshots, provide a lot of political BS fodder. Yet when you view the true extremes in reality… i.e. disapproval of this composite omnipotent government spending vs love and adoration for the guy heading up the spending spree … they don’t make sense.
Well, they don’t make sense until you see the increasing disapproval on the rise, and the euphoric approval on the decline.
The American public may be a little slow. Afterall, it’s hard to admit you got snookered, and the man of your dreams is turning out to be a political toad. But at least they are *starting* to notice the warts appearing.
It’s been stated by admirers that Obama is a “skillful politician”. I’ll add to that, he is masterfully staged at every public event. As a past worker in the film/TV biz, this glitz stuff doesn’t carry much weight with me. But apparently, there is only so much time that the more easily influenced public can be blinded by Hollywood political flash.
Eventually they figure out that, no matter how good a Ferrari kit car looks, it’s still a Volkswagon engine under the hood.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Polls were spot on for the last election of course it is always better to take an average of poll results rather tha cherry picking one poll simply because you like those results. And actually the VWs engine is in the back.
I see John Ryan’s shown up for his bi-monthly hit and run.
I guess, since you believe in polls, you’ll be happy to believe in his dropping approval rating, which is confirmed among them all.
Also, as a past owner of three Volkswagons in the 60s, I’m well aware of engine positioning in a Karmin Ghia or bug. However you can, bozo, mount an engine in different places. A combustion engine is, after all, just a combustion engine. And if you are putting one in a Ferrari kit car, it will go under the hood.
Another poll that makes absolutely no sense is the one I just found at HotAir before coming here: Heart-ache: 64% support stimulus, Obama’s mortgage plan
But really, who cares about these polls? The support for Obama and Congress could be 0% and you know what? It doesn’t matter. We had our chance Nov 4th 2008 to express our opinions. America voted en masse for socialism, Marxism and racism, electing Obama and huge majorities in both Houses. For people to whine in these polls now, well tough luck, it’s too damn late. We warned all these ignorant tools that this would happen and they didn’t listen. This is the result of those bad choices. Now we are all going to pay, no matter what some stupid poll says.
Like I said, Michael… I’m not much of a poll fan in any way. But were I to place more emphasis on particular polls over another, I would be more inclined to take non-media organizations such as Zogby, Gallup and Rasmussen. I tend to believe that WaPo, ABC and Fox polls are dominated by those who patronize their readership/viewership.
@John ryan: Hey buddy, check out ALL the latest polls and Obama’s approval is dropping by stastically significant margins while the public’s disapproval of him is growing.
The only cherry picking going on here is your attempt to deflect that reality.
Exactly the point, Mr. Mike… oh resident poll expert. LOL I’m less interested in actual percentages than I am the overview trends of up or down. That’s both in the view of spending, and the view of Obama. Numbers aside, support for spending decreases, as well as approval ratings. At some point, they will meet in the middle.
Pres Obama like all presidents will be judged by the results not polls. Time will tell if his philosophy wins the day and if that means more time in the president’s chair. I for one am totally distressed by the huge deficits and hope tonight he addresses that topic.
blast, surely you aren’t looking for details from “Mr. Vague…. I’ll tell you the details later (when my advisors figure them out and let me know…)”
Some excerpts from tonights highly anticipated “reaganesque” speech… more lofty drivel that says nothing.
@MataHarley:
I really have never understood the purpose of polls. Why do they matter? Aren’t the only polls that matter the elections. And then, after that, the only thing that should matter to our elected officials are when their constituents call them up and approve of/complain about what they are doing/plan to do. Polls, in my opinion, are meaningless as far as government working is concerned. I think the purpose of polls, however, is to sway public opinion, into the herd mentality as you say.
But really, as far as how our government works, polling is meaningless. If people want to affect government in our representative republic, the way to go about it is through voting and writing/calling/e-mailing/going to see their elected representatives. Other than that, if the majority of Americans don’t care enough to do any of that, especially get off their lazy butts and vote on election day, then we deserve what we get.
For people to cry now about what B.O. and the Democrats are doing falls on deaf ears to me. What percentage of eligible voters bothered to vote in November? 50-55%? For the sake of argument, let’s say it was 50%. Of that 50%, 53% voted for Obama, and 47% for McCain. 53% of 50% is 26.5% while 47% of 50% is 23.5%. For any Democrat or B.O. or any mass media tool to proclaim that “the American people want X” when only 26.5% of America bothered to vote for socialism/Marxism/communism, while 73.5% voted against it, is ludicrous.
But that is why it so aggravates me to have people not show up to vote. I endorse people voting 3rd party or write-in over not voting, any day. The votes for Ross Perot in 1992 were a message sent to Washington that America did not want liberalism or big government. Had there been a bigger movement like that to utterly reject the crappy GOP candidate this year as we rejected the crappy Bush 41 in 1992, then Americans would have some credibility when they whined about what is going on with our government. But instead of sending a message to Washington and the nation by together voting for some 3rd Party candidate, people either chose to stay home or vote McCain as a vote against Obama (for the record, I chose the latter option and hate myself for it). But that accomplished nothing. Because now we have a bunch of fools who think that a moderate, more leftist GOP is the way to go, instead of the other way around.
It’s an utter disaster.
You know, it’s ironic that it was B.O. who made fun of the GOP with the “lipstick on a pig” remark. Because that is exactly what B.O. is. He’s a big ole communist, socialist, Marxist racist pig, who puts lipstick on all his speeches and crappy policies and then smiles as he watches our American Idol society just fall for it all hook, line and sinker.
No arguments from me, Michael. In fact, you sound eerily like myself thruout the campaign… LOL
My only reason to address polls as an issue is because they are used as a media tool to “herd” public opinion. And I find this appalling. So, on occasion, I like to trot them out as a “huh???” kinda thing. i.e the analogy that people hate Fords, but love their F-150. The wording of polls and specifics of the responder composition of a particular poll are rarely provided in articles that encapsulate their results. Yet it makes all the difference.
But, when you factor all those flaws in over a span of time… especially when these polls are usually weighted to advantage one over another… and still see a downward trend, you actually might have something.
Hummm… I guess I’m not alone in noticing the vast chasm between reality and polls. From, of all places, the NYTs today, a David Sanger column.
This is an article about the monumental task facing Obama tonight to convince a nation that big government is good. But a few paragraphs really caught my eye.
I rest my case….
Polls are a result of what the pollster wants to hear.
Polls showing approval of spending from D.C. should have at least 30% deducted from the approval rate to account for those (welfare riders) who see more dollars coming to their pockets. That’s the only effect they know or approve of in the multi-trillion dollar pork bill. The joke they call a housing bill (for 5 states) is the biggest sham of a vote buying bill to ever be approved.
@MataHarley:
Well, FFS, how on earth does this make *any* sense *whatsoever*?!!?
Can someone explain to me why anyone has *any* reason *whatsoever* to trust B.O. to make the right decisions on anything? Based on his entire political history of *failure*? Based on his entire political history of Marxism, socialism and racism? Based on his entire political history of getting favors everywhere he went, from William Ayers to Tony Rezko to that guy in the IL Legislature who put B.O.’s name on all existing legislation to the mass media in Chicago who released Senator Ryan’s divorce records? Based on his entire campaign wrought with illegal activities from accepting illegal donations to A.C.O.R.N.’s illegal thug activities to illegal voter registration and illegal voter fraud? Or how about his Administration, fraught with lobbyists (broken promise), tax cheats (broken promise), not having an open and transparent government with legislation or his EOs (broken promises)?
Forgive me for being a logical person, but there is no way in earth, heaven or hell that anyone can see this POS’s entire background and history and then “think he will make the right economic decisions”, let alone 76 freaking percent of Americans? Are you freaking kidding me?
Oh wait, I remember now. “My President is Black”, so I guess that’s why it makes sense to trust him. *rolling my eyes*
Either America has lost its freaking mind or these polls are complete and utter BS. I have a feeling that it is a combination of both.
* I should add that I am also at a complete and utter loss with regards to the “we need to give him a chance” crowd. This is like watching a man who has cheated on women his entire social life and has mentally abused every one of the women he was with his entire social life and then you see your sister get engaged to him… and you still say “well, we need to give him a chance”, as if *now* after he is married, he will turn into a swell guy and suitable husband for your sister.
Yet this is the mentality of the “give B.O. a chance” crowd. In my opinion, those people — on both the Left and the Right, but especially the Right — are delusional. This POS has proven what kind of person he is for the past 2+ decades in addition to his 2 years on the campaign trail. He is scum and there is absolutely *no* logical reason to “give him a chance”. The guy is not going to spend his entire political career being a racist, socialist, communist, Marxist and then change into a post-racial, post-partisan, moderate pragmatist only after he gains the most powerful position in the world. I still am simply flabbergasted with all the people on the Right who seem to think this way though and are urging us to “give him a chance”. Yeah, eff that. He’s been in office 1 freaking month and is already destroying this nation. That’s what giving him a chance gets us. Brilliant.
BINGO, Michael. Thus the reason the entire post is called “the insanity of approval polls”.
How do people disapprove of the spending policies of Obama/Congress (Ford) but still approve of the spender, Obama (their F-150).
Makes no sense except if you consider they are only now starting to see the warts on their political toad.
@MataHarley:
Oh I know. I hope you knew I was not taking issue with *you* and your addressing of the polls. I was taking issue with the general idea of why people put stock in any of these polls. Because they are meaningless. BUT, I do know their purpose, and it is exactly what you stated earlier: propaganda to elicit a herd mentality among the weak sheep. To get people to go “Hmmm, my opinion on this is X, but it says here that 60% of Americans feel Y about this. Well, if 60% of Americans feel Y, then me feeling X must be wrong. I’ll feel Y about this now too.”
What is frustrating to me is that I realize these propaganda tactics of the Left and the Democrats and the mass media can only work as well as they do, because a good majority of the American people are ignorant, apathetic, willing sheep. The Left has done a great job of dumbing down this society to make the Left’s tactics feasible. And the Right simply keeps on thinking that we can work with the Left and maybe we need to be nicer and things will get better.
Sorry, Rush finally stated something today that I have thought for a few years now: this is political war. And we are losing this country from within, because the Right refuses to realize that we are in a war with the Left/mass media/Democrats. They are not interested in intellectual debate, discussing ideas for a better future or working with us to make the best choices in government. No, they are interested in destroying us completely to wipe out their competition so they can transform this nation into what they want unopposed.
Until the Right realizes this, we are screwed.
Don’t you think that is a bit strident? Like the Democrats want to ruin the country? Isn’t this just about different political philosophizes? Don’t you think the Republicans did the same thing when they were in power?
“Loosing the country from within?” What the heck does that mean! Did the election of Pres Obama suddenly create all the problems we have today?
@blast:
Oh, freaking spare me. “Different political philosophies”? Are you that dense and naive? Have you not been paying attention to the lies the Democrats have been telling about the war effort, lies they have been telling about the economy under President Bush, lies they have been telling about their participation in the mortgage crisis, lies they told about Fannie and Freddie, deliberate breaking of campaign finance laws and campaign voter registration laws, Obama teaching ACORN and encouraging ACORN all these years to do their thug tactics. That’s just off the top of my head. You are going to honestly sit there and tell me that that has to do with “different political philosophies”?!? Demonizing our military, lying about our military, lying about the war effort in Iraq, declaring it lost, calling the top General “Betrayus”, supporting groups like CODE PINK, bringing groups like the lying frauds of IVAW to Congress to tell their lies. That is deliberate undermining of this country.
And yes, I look at that and see the deliberate desire to destroy this country from within, in order to make Americans dependant on government, so that Democrats can have their power and control, just like their hero Chavez in Venezuela. Don’t think for one second the Democrats care about representative republican government. They want complete power for a long as they can lie, cheat and steal their way to keeping that power, and they will do whatever it takes — and have done whatever it takes over the past 8 years of their lies and borderline treason.
“Different political philosophies”. Don’t make me laugh. You can’t honestly think we are that stupid. Different political philosophies is when people are honest about the facts and debate the merits of how to deal with those facts. That is *not* what the Left, the Democrats and the mass media has been doing the last 8 years. Not in the least.
blast… for example… Hugo Chavez has a “different political philosopy”. That philosophy will destroy the US, as it currently exists.
Right now the ideological battles between right and left have stepped up to a new notch including the prime issues of nationalization, socializing the country, and massive debt with spending controlled by one political faction of the nation.
Therefore don’t over simplify the intensity that exists today that did not exist before. “Strident” language is tame for the reality.
Well dang, Aye Chi… depending on who’s post came first, either Andrew… or me… is stealing each other’s thunder!
I posted at 2:04. The first comment to Andrew’s post is 2:14. I’ll take the number one slot on that… heh heh
Scary to think someone at the LA Times is thinking along the same lines as me….
I thought you might like that.
Mata, comparing Pres Obama with Chavez is ridiculous. Keep in mind Pres Bush was responsible for the largest nationalization in our country’s history. What comes next who knows, but honestly, lets not just blame Democrats and somehow call them socialists while Pres Bush actually implemented these policies.
For the latter, “keep in mind” that it was a Dem Congress and primarily Dems on the side of Bush, who constructed the bill, and who got it passed over a vast amount of Republican objection. Do not be giving them a pass, blast. This is not a “Bush” act, but a combination of Bush AND THE DEM CONGRESS!
As to the former… LOL! I’m not sure what you consider the last 30 days of Obama policies to be but any exception increased nationalization of the private sector.
I guess Pres Bush’s doubling the national debt, uncontrolled trade with China and fiscal management was exemplary, just like finding WMD’s in Iraq. Both parties suck if you ask me, but you choose to only look at lies where you feel your political philosophy is somehow enhanced.
@blast:
The national debt doubled? Really?
Both parties are bad, yes, but only one party was deliberately working – with the aid of their propaganda machine and the Left (Kos, Huffington Post, Moveon, Media Matters, etc) to deliberately lie about everything from the economy (which they cried about being the worst since the Great Depression and being in a recession since around 2003, when that was clearly not the case) to the war effort in Iraq (too many lies and smears and borderline treasonous actions to list here) for the past 8 years. So we basically are left with a Party of dopes (GOP) or a Party of power-hungry, corrupt, despicable liars who will lie, steal, cheat, smear, undermine anyone and everyone, with the help of their propaganda arm of the mass media in order to gain and keep power.
I choose to look at reality. The reality I see is that the GOP-voters throw GOPers out of office when they undermine their elected office, while Democrats keep their office no matter what lies, smears, corruption or laws they break over and over and over again. Wide stance in a bathroom, the GOP is labeled a “culture of corruption”; 2 decades of corruption, racism, communism, socialism, working with anti-American terrorists to corrupt the Chicago school system, working with ACORN to create the housing crisis and incite racial divisions.. that earns Democrats praise, bigger majorities in Congress and their leader is called Lincoln, Reagan, JFK or the messiah himself.
Yes, the GOP has problems, but the magnitude of corruption, lies and anti-America activity among the two parties is like comparing an ant to a brontosaurus. And the fact that the mass media, the Left and the Democrats have brainwashed a majority of willingly ignorant flock of sheep of Americans into believing the GOP is bad and the Democrats are the saviors of the nation and the world led by the 2nd coming of the messiah, B.O., pisses me off beyond belief.
Michael in MI: from your link:
Oh, I see, we have to “redefine” what doubling means with double speak. You and I both know the national debt doubled under Bush, why even spin a lie from a partisan rag? Either way you wish to describe it… Bush either made the debt go up 72% or as I think reality is, 100%. Next you will use the argument that gold weighs less now since the Earth is slowing and so that has an impact on the deficit. So as you go spend “nominal dollars” in your nominally valued home… good luck with all that.
I don’t think of my Democratic and Republican neighbors in those terms. Both are loyal Americans and good neighbors.
Of course, Bush didn’t really double the national debt.
WMD’s were found in Iraq.
But who’s really interested in the truth nowadays?
@blast:
Yes, William Ayers and those of his ilk are truly loyal Americans and good neighbors. ACORN and their ilk are truly loyal Americans and good neighbors. CODE PINK and their ilk are truly loyal Americans and good neighbors. Moveon and IVAW and their ilk are truly loyal Americans and good neighbors. Daily Kos and Huffington Post and DU are truly loyal Americans and good neighbors. Please.
It is because of naivety like this, thinking the best of politicians and politically active groups, that has gotten us into this mess. Come live in Detroit and deal with the utter filth that resides in the government of this city and hear the racist, class-warfare reasoning and utter hatred and ignorance coming from the people who vote these a-hole elected officials into office.
@Aye Chihuahua:
Not the mass media, not the Democrats, not the Left and apparently not ‘blast’ either.
Lets not rewrite history. Tres. Sec Paulson was on his knees begging the dems to adopt the Bush administration plan. Fanny and Freddy and AIG (80+%) were nationalized under Pres. George Bush. What national companies have been nationalized by Obama, Mata?
Be back after speech, blast. In the meantime, wait for the “more accomplishments in 30 days” bragging rights… either by the POTUS himself, or his fawning media.
In the meantime, so you can ponder. Play the “the meaning of “is”…. is”” game and clarify. Do you consider control over a company’s production and funds nationalization? Or must they also be vested in ownership title for you to consider government control… well, government control of a private business?
Michael in MI, maybe you live next to Bill Ayres and code pink, I don’t. You act like Republicans are the answer to everything. Wrong. Look at the mess we are in with having 6 years of Republican domination in Congress and 8 of the Presidency. I considered myself more Republican leaning for a long time, except the Republican party became something other than advertised… now it is too late for them to bitch.
Hey Dudley….
Fannie and Freddie were nationalized when they were created. They became quasi-public under Johnson.
Nice try though.
@blast:
Care to also remember President Bush and the GOP warning multiples times about Freddie and Fannie, from the first year that he was in office in 2001, and calling for regulation of these instituions, yet the Democrats said the GOP was fearmongering and were just racist? Funny how that gets left out of the blame-Bush rant. Bush and the GOP tried to fix things before they got bad and the Democrats blocked every last freaking effort. Then, when things had gotten beyond bad, Bush made the decision to try to fix it as he saw was best. He took the Democrats’ way of doing things, against GOP opposition and fixed a problem he tried to prevent years ago when Democrats stood against him.
Let’s keep everything in context shall we. Blame Bush where it is called for but people better damn well put the blame for the problems on the Democrats and the Left where it is called for as well. This is exactly what pisses me the f*** off about people such as yourself who refuse to put the blame in the proper place. For 8 freaking years, every last gawddamned thing was the fault of Bush and the GOP, never once was *anything* the fault of Democrats. I’ve f***ing had it with that BS, lies and smear tactics. This is exactly why these problems never get solved and end up getting worse and then we get President B.O. and his merry Marxists pushing through this BS legislation, instead of fixing the core of the problem that we tried to fix years ago.
Hey Blast,
Obama and Chavez are as different as Castro and his brother Raul.
If you do not have the insight to witness this county’s decay from within then you will have the most to lose while you did the least to prevent its downfall.
Gallup reported …
Bush had a 62% approve/21% disapprove (net +41) for February 19-21, 2001.
Obama has a 63% approve/24% disapprove (net +39) for February 19-21, 2009.
About the same .. given the margin of error.
But wait till those 401(k) statements come in April showing that Dow 1300-1400 point drop since the beginning of the year.
@blast:
Huh? Where have I stated the Republicans are the answer to everything. I can argue that Democrats are 100Xs worse than Republicans without saying Republicans are good. I am a fiscal conservative, not a Republican-voter. I left the party for good when they nominated McCain and I have no intention of going back until they get their pathetic act together and show me people of principle, not just words, rhetoric and pandering. But the solution to not wanting to eat horrible food is not to start eating horse manure. And that is exactly what the American people did. Instead of just sticking with horrible food and trying to work with that or choosing a 3rd option of better food, they chose to go the way of eating horse manure. Just brilliant.
And what ‘mess’ are we in? You act like this ‘mess’ is the cause of Republicans and President Bush. For 7 of his 8 years in office, the economy under President Bush was good. It wasn’t until the GOP lost their backbone and started enacting stupid liberal Democrat policies (ethanol subsidies for one) when things started going sour and then came to a head in Sept 2008. But I clearly recall Democrat bitching and whining and fearmongering and lying about the economy being bad for pretty much every year of Bush’s Administration when the facts clearly showed otherwise. But eventually, if you tell a lie long enough, people will start believing it is the truth. And then sure enough, people started freaking out about the economy and the Democrats’ talk of having to raise taxes and nationalize everything and things getting worse and worse and worse and investors and companies lost confidence and decided to take preventative measures with their investments and businesses and layoffs happened, which made things worse, etc etc.
I don’t have a problem discussing this ‘mess’ with someone who points out *all* the culprits who caused this, from the Democrats to the Republicans to ACORN to lenders, etc. But I have absolutely no patience for anyone who sits here and says Bush and the GOP were to blame for everything, Period.
This was brutal:
Somehow I don’t think Mr. Kneale will be getting any State Dinner invitations.
I predict the markets plunge tomorrow.
My guess is +/- 200 points.
By the way, Obie doesn’t know who invented the automobile.
Heh.
I bet Mrs Lincoln loved the first part of the play they were watching too… The country was being whittled empty by debt and lack of oversight. We had a FALSE economy based upon smoke and mirrors and if you don’t see that then you are blind. Yep, dems had their fault, but heaven forbid we place more blame on the man and party in charge at the time.
@blast:
Re-read the link I posted before. We had years of continuous job growth and economic growth and the spending was on par with the previous administrations. That was the good, that it was pretty much status quo. The bad was that conservatives expected the GOP to CUT, not to continue spending at the same levels as previous administrations.
And just think how things would have been different had the President and the GOP not been blocked by the Democrats in their efforts to do something about Fannie/Freddie in 2001 and again I believe in 2006. Also, how things would have been different if the Democrats didn’t block every GOP effort at Social Security reform.
The fact is, while the President and GOP did not CUT spending as we fiscal conservatives wanted, the President and the GOP did not spend any more than any previous administrations. And the Democrats didn’t have any issues with the spending and, in fact, complained that they wanted even more. So, one could actually argue that while the GOP spent more than conservatives wanted, it would have been even worse had the Democrats been in charge. Who knows. What I do know is that the President and GOP did not spend any worse than Administrations and Democrat-controlled Congresses previously had.
So while I am right there with fiscal conservatives who have been upset with spending amounts the last 8 years, I am not one to go overboard and say President Bush and the GOP were the worst spenders in the history of the nation or delude myself into thinking that the Democrats would have been better or were a better choice for “change”. As we can already see, the Democrats spending in one month alone is going to make the last 8 years seem like nothing. But, hey, people wanted “change”, they’re going to get it. So bravo for all the ignorant morons voting for “change”. I hope they realize that “change” is all they are going to have once the Democrats are done taking and spending all our money over the next few years on their pork projects and leftist causes.
Ummm… yeah, so they started as Federally Charted GSE’s and went private (under a democrat) and became nationalized (under a republican commie) on our dime again… it still does not remove the fact they were part of a grand nationalization scheme by Pres Bush when he flushed $750 Billion for banks and picked up TRILLIONS in liability from Fannie and Freddie and AIG. So when you bitch about Obama, just remember your Lord Bush blew up the economy and nationalized TONS.
Dude, that was all based upon a false economy. No real wealth was being created. It was all in speculation and basically a pyramid scheme. All that construction of homes not needed, all those appliances not needed for homes that were not needed etc. Credit default swaps, derivatives and other financial instruments that created money or false money out of thin air, all evaporating when the music stopped. Add to that the raping of our industry by the low Chinese Yuan and our feckless response to Chinese aggression on our economy… We became crack addicts, China supplied the crack and lent us the money. Then add the total disregard to spending (during these “good times”) and we double the national debt (ok, you think we only increased it by 75%… big deal). It is a witched brew of crap and the lase fare attitude of the Republican Party and President Bush in particular has brought us to near ruin. Getting all blustery about Obama being a commie or socialist when Bush socialized so much more is disingenuous.
Good luck in Michigan, maybe we can sell that state to the Chinese to pay off the debt, after all we don’t really need Michigan any more (being sarcastic).
Polls are overrated statistical number games generally designed to prove preconceived results. I don’t care who spouts them, they should always be viewed with a grain of salt and some skepticism if not suspicion. Even aside from the unavoidable and inherent inaccuracy in sampling a small portion of public opinion, and transposing the numbers to the public as a whole. There are far too many ways that bias (deliberate or not,) can be skew the results.
1. How the questions are asked.
2. How the answers are “scored” (Yes/no, one-to-ten, strongly agree/strongly disagree, etc..)
3. Where the questions are asked
4. To whom the questions are asked
5. When the questions are asked.
6. What the person asked “thinks” they are being asked.
7. How the results are assembled.
8. How the results are represented.
When you think of all the things that can affect a poll, It’s really hard to buy any poll as being “scientific” or accurate, and when you get to political polls….
At least part of a poll mentioned above gives answers that seem to be schizophrenic or at least contradictory to common sense.
“76 percent of Americans say they think he will make the right economic decisions — also found that Americans dislike many of the choices he has made thus far”
Makes you wonder; what asylum’s inmates did they poll for that one?
@blast:
Listen Dudley.
Fannie and Freddie were gov’t owned entirely when they were created.
Johnson, in an effort to reduce the national debt to free up money for his war, made F&F quasi-public, (GSEs) meaning that they became a blend of Gov’t and Public.
Under the criminal leadership of folks like Raines, Emanuel, Gorelick, Johnson, and others F&F committed a massive fraud on the American people. When F&F began to collapse under the load of that fraud Congress had no choice but to pump federal money into them because the gov’t had guaranteed every investment into F&F for all of those years. Think of it as a payoff on an insurance policy.
F&F remain GSE’s just as they were since Johnson. Nothing has changed.
You really need to lay off the Bush blaming and try to get a grasp of the facts and reality of the situation.
@Neo:
Hey, by April some will be getting that extra $13.00 in their paychecks, all will be forgiven. (snort)
@blast:
Details, details, per Randall Hoven:
Who passed Obama’s pork ridden stimulus? House: 244-D, 0-R. Senate: 57-D, 3R 99% of the support for this monstrosity was democrats..
Who jumped on board to bail out banks during the end of the Bush term? House: 172-D, 91-R. Senate 41-D, 33-R 63% of the support for this boondoggle came from the democrats. Not only that, as you have been told, Bush only released $267 billion to stop the hemorrhaging. Obama and team control the rest.
Dems enjoy 80% of the credit for increasing our debt by a half in less than 5 months. They will also be responsible for the porked up Omnibus that will pass soon. Over $400 billion to fund the next 7 months.
BTW, who wrote the post for that “partisan rag?” Believe I will take his word and sources before blast’s.
Missy, I can pull a few Nobel Prize winning economists to support my arguments, you have to live and breathe over a mathematician who used to make weapons for the DoD.
On that you miss PRESIDENT GEORGE W BUSH who initiated the bailout and sent his Treasury Secretary to beg on his knees. Yep, Dems followed the Republican President in a time of crisis and the Republicans now all of a sudden are afraid of spending… after their budget busting pork and overspending the past 8 years! Hypocrisy!
You gotta be kidding. Bush created this problem and will always be remembered that way.
@blast:
What budget busting pork and overspending? The spending was not any more budget busting than any previous administration. It was basically status quo spending. Which was not good, since conservatives expected the GOP to *cut*, not keep the status quo, *but* the GOP didn’t spend any more differently than any previous Congress.
And once again, President Bush authorized $350 Billion, PEBHO then authorized the other half, then B.O. and the Democrats shoved through $1+ Trillion in pork and non-stimulus and are set to push through $400 Billion more in pork. $350 Billion vs $1.7 Trillion. Yet President Bush is to blame and B.O. and his merry Marxists get off scott free of any blame. Oh yeah, and the GOP which tried to stop all this nonsense is also to blame.
This density is tiring. It’s obvious now that you’re not a fiscal conservative — or at least not discussing this in good faith — and just want to blame all this on the GOP and Bush instead of spreading the blame around to all guilty parties. If you want to spread the propaganda that this is all the fault of Bush and the GOP to make yourself feel better, that’s fine, but it won’t solve jack squat, because the other major parties at fault here (ACORN, Democrats, Senator Obama, PEBHO and B.O.) will continue to get away with their corruption.
If you truly cared about fixing this problem, you would discuss this in good faith instead of just harping on President Bush and the GOP. Fiscal Conservatives such as myself have been placing the blame on this non-fiscal conservative spending by President Bush and the GOP for years, in addition to placing blame on the Democrats blocking GOP and President Bush reforms for years, as well as on ACORN, Senator Obama, PEBHO and the Democrat Congress of 2006-current. AllI have seen from you is Bush, Bush Bush, GOP GOP GOP. It’s getting old.
Coincidentally, some have stated that the recession started in Dec 2007. I find that interesting, since the Democrats took control of both Houses of Congress in January 2007 and won based on the promise that they would fix the economy and end the war, etc etc. Yet, all that happened under their control of Congress was to change a successful economy under 6 years of GOP rule into a recession after only 10 months of Democrat rule. Yet, everything’s the fault of President Bush and the GOP. Uh huh.
@blast:
Actually, we can live and breathe over many more. B.O. can continue spouting the lie that “there is no disagreement” all he wants, does not make it true in the least.
@Michael in MI:
Michael, that’s all he’s got.
Well, that, and half-truths conveniently twisted to fit his arguments.
We figured out from earlier thread discussions that Dudley only has one song in his jukebox.
He hates Bush.
And brown people.
Did you know that people who want to be free shouldn’t be helped? They should “work for it” themselves while their necks are being crushed under the boot of their particular brutal dictator.
I never would have guessed that if Dudley hadn’t told me.
@blast:
I blame President Bush for his part in this mess, I also fault him for nominating Paulson in the first place. He needed an easy confirmation that would be attractive to the democrats, that’s why we got him.
You may squawk about Malkin, I don’t always like her either, but she did have the information pertaining to Paulson that I was looking for and then some.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/22/why-henry-paulson-must-be-contained/
Bush sending Paulson begging is garbage from the left and you, don’t see a difference. Paulson engineered this fiasco of a plan with no “Plan B,” betraying the Republicans and the President. Dem leadership padded it with another $150 billion of “sweeteners” to get it passed, the rest of the story has been accurately posted causing much fits and spits I see.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100303849.html?sid=ST2008100303976&s_pos=
Michael, another good post, as usual, thanks.
blast, you are the one so rewriting history here. Either that, or you have no pre-2001 memory.
The dynamite was in place with a long fuse… planted in the financial dam before Bush became POTUS. The fuse ran out in the Bush admin. But the Dems were just plain overjoyed to do this spending. It was not the Dems who needed cajoling… as you suggest. It was the GOP.
I will agree that I will be forever pissed at Bush for choosing both Bernanke and Paulson, who talked him into the first bailout. I will then continue my disdain for our corrupt Congress, who … with Dems enthusiastically leading the charge… wrote up not only the first monstrosities last year, but remain busy doing so at a frenetic pace now. And I will also be forever PO’d that Bush did not veto this crap when he had the power. I sure as heck know Obama won’t be exercising that veto pen any time soon.
However if you insist that because the dam blew when Bush was POTUS, it’s all *his* fault, then you must now concede that Obama owns the debt, the economy, and his mistakes free and clear by his planting of yet another IED at the dam’s base of debris.
Now… INRE “nationalization” under Bush, and “nationalization” under Obama. Two different worlds. And remember that when money went to Fannie/Freddie, AIG and sundry others plus the bailout, it was a Dem Congress who was in control of writing just how that was going to work, and how the oversight was to be managed. You may also remember that this was October. Bush knew very well that he and Paulson would not be the ones spending that cash, or overseeing the results.
But that dang speech last night so creeped me out that I plain didn’t have the heart to even blog. Must pinch myself to make sure I haven’t been beamed either into a future Brave New World, or back in the past standing with adoring crowds chanting for despots. I have to wonder what people have for brains when they choose to ignore the words. I swear there is prozac in the nation’s drinking water lately…
i.e. from the speech:
This phrase just so creeps me out I don’t know where to begin. If Obama/Pelosi/Reid aren’t planning on taking title to banks, that’s the only thing separating them from Chavez. And BTW, the only reason the market rallied yesterday with 236 points is because Bernanke assured them that nationalization of banks wasn’t in the cards.
Guess that’s out the window with the above phrasing….
Then, of course, there’s the fate of the auto industry, who’s product line will be decided by Obama’s auto czar… which is now expanded to a “inter-agency task force”… meaning multiple auto czars with the same power. Again, the soaring words that chill my bones, because I know what he means…
He’ll bail out the auto manufacturers, but the price will be handing the reins of control over to the feds. It is they who will decide what will “compete and win”… not the company, the feds.
The hold up on the auto bailout is because he hasn’t picked those auto czars yet. The production mix of vehicles made and that ratio will be decided by the feds… not the free market. Or as the NYTs gave us a taste of the language and power in their Dec 9th story about the auto bailout (as written by the Dem Congress) and czar..
Same power, but they decided not one man had enough credentials to do it all… so they have a full agency lined up now.
Again, with the control over decision making and production by telling them what they cannot do. Does it matter who is the owner on record? This is still nationalization. And yes, Bush signed that bill, but it was created by a Dem Congress with an eye on the future. You cannot separate Congress from Bush. He doesn’t write bills… just says yes or no. The details are up to the elected idiots there, busy spending our cash and limiting our freedoms every day. They see that as their job.
Then, of course, there’s the notion of windfall taxes… a genuine favorite of the Dems and Obama. As they become more desperate for money, since they are unable to cut their spending habits, it will come down to the feds deciding how much these, or other private sector businesses will be allowed to make as profit before the rest is seized by the government.
blast, Bush did alot of domestic stuff and spending I am livid with. But this oppressive hand of the feds is not only growing in hidden legislative language, Obama is now bold enough to flaunt it to our faces… most of whom seem flushed with soma or something. It’s like they hear the sound of his words, but don’t comprehend what he is saying.
Since Obama’s been in office 30 days, I say we’ll find out how much he’s nationalized, and with how much oppression, when we start seeing just how the stimulus is administered. But if even States – desperate for a cash handout themselves – are rejecting the strings attached to some of this money, you can bet there’s a lot of control as a price that we don’t know about yet…. thanks, of course, to our idiot media.
The Libs and the Media may have been sucked in by President Training-Pants, but the markets weren’t fooled by the flowery words and the toothy smiles:
I seem to remember someone predicting that reaction from the market.
Oh yeah, that was me. 🙂
Mata, so you are saying that the Bush Administration watched the fuse tick of EIGHT YEARS without doing anything to stop it? Given they controlled Congress for much of that time they had plenty of time to stomp out that fuse, instead… they were gluttons. I am not about Democratic talking points, and have never mentioned this is our arguments before, but keep in mind Pres Clinton (*pukes*) did have a balanced budget and surplus. Yes, yes, I know you will say that was a Republican Congress, but Bush had even more power with his Republican Congress… so what gives?
The fact is the nationalization took place under Bushes watch. We woke up one day and by magic AIG was 80%++ owned by the taxpayers, the same with Fannie/Freddie. The $750 Billion Bailout was passed with both parties… yeah, more support from Dems than Republicans, but even John McCain voted for it, just like President Obama. Bush Administration PUSHED hard for this bailout and originally gave the congress a three page law which was expanded. Lots of “trust me” from the Bush Administration and then they failed ONCE again by not putting strings on the cash. Typical.
The markets are unstable and probably even you Mata could cause the market to change. 🙂 (and if memory serves me correctly the markets dropped The fact is the WH came out against what Sen Dodd said, but honestly, some of those banks are so weak they probably will end up being taken over by the FDIC, as is normal when a bank is TOTALLY insolvent. Allowing these banks get so big that they “cannot be allowed to fail” is part of our problem. No business entity should ever have that amount of power over the American people or economy. President Teddy Roosevelt was lionized by his own party for breaking up the trusts and businesses like that. He protected us then and hopefully some of these big behemoths will be chopped up so they no longer threaten our economic security. Our modern Republican party is stale and simplistic. More interested in issues like “Intelligent Design” than intelligent fiscal management. It is not as though we are coming off 8 years of a Democrat Administration.
I guess you missed the failed attempts by Bush and *some* Republicans to correct them from 2003-2005. That they did not succeed is because *all* the Dems refused to correct it, and too many of the so-called conservatives in Congress helped the Dems thwart it. But they did attempt to fix it. It requires Congressional action… you expected Bush to do what exactly?
AIG bailout terms were designed and written by a Dem controlled Congress. That’s why the Treasury Dept is the benefiary of a trust, with 79.9% equity interest… collateral for using the taxpayer’s dough, and rightly so… plus the right to veto the payment of dividends to common and preferred shareholders.
Again, this came into being with a Dem Congress writing the rules and specifics, *all* Dems voting for it, and only *some* Republicans standing with the Dems. But enuf to get it passed.
However it did NOT include additional operational/managerial power. Neither did Fannie/Freddie include additional operational power that is coming into play with the latest stimulus. We’re hard pressed to get the Dem Congress to exercise what oversight they *do* have, fer heavens sake.
Now the special auto bailout? Ugly ugly. Obama’s task-force czars will exercise tremendous day to day operational decisions. Notice, of course one czar wasn’t enough… he’s creating “more jobs” in the government, ya know. Already got a cabinet almost twice the size of previous admins.
Giving cash is one thing. Giving cash in exchange for management over the company is another.
But still you say it’s only Bush…. “under Bush’s watch”, you say. You prefer to ignore the Dem Congress and agenda.
I think I’ve said many times, as well as others, this move by Bush gets the steam pouring from our ears as well. We admit his culpability. You, however, confine the culpability to Bush and conveniently give the Dem a pass. Wrong, and viciously partisan. And, and outright lie to boot.
Yet I do not see equivalent outrage for the speed of spending “under Obama’s watch”. A little consistency from you would be appreciated.
Still with the “only Bush” bit, eh? Paulson gave a DEM CONGRESS a three page POS. A DEM CONGRESS expanded it to over 600+ pages (may have been 800… can’t remember). The Dome heads specifically wrote in there that the power of this, and all decisions, lie in the hands of one Treasury POTUS appointee… they did not change it from the original three page outline. Why? Banking on their power today, I would guess.
That none of the money was accounted for is the fault of those who constructed the bill. No on else’s. Congress constructs the legislation, not a POTUS.
Bush is on the hook with pretty much all of us for not vetoing it. But he’s hardly the architect of bad legislation for wasteful spending. That’s Congress for you. They are all scum, in my book. And I am very bipartisan in my utter disdain and hatred for these career pols.
First, the mega-bank is a Bob Rubin/Bill Clinton creation by relaxed regulations, and forcing banks that did want to merge to adhere to CRA compliance standards. This in case your memory past 2001 is still somewhat foggy.
blast, the simple reality is this. The bailout is compounded by the stimulus. What was ultimately decided by Paulson’s first action was loans in exchange for preferred stock. Remember they gave full authority to that position to do what was deemed best. Paulson bought preferred stock. He did not take over operational management.
Who knows what will be done with the money under Geithner. But I assure you, it’s not likely to be loans with interest, and collateral and stock in exchange for it.
Instead, this Congress, and it’s puppet POTUS, is now moving towards nationalization with “the force of the federal government” (using Obama’s own words last night). And yet, I *still* hear no outrage from you for what is happening “under Obama’s watch” in just 30 days.
Having many private banking institutions may not be a good idea in your mind. But the ugly truth is what is “happening under Obama’s watch” will result in having *bigger* and fewer banks. Indeed, could end up as one… a bank controlled by the feds.
In fact, the feds are planning on going into management of multiple businesses to “protect” us. Heaven help us now… if there’s one entity that’s a managerial loser in the free market, it’s anything run by the federal government.
And don’t even get me started on the big three credit reporting companies… who can make or break everyone’s lives with their scoring.
Quite frankly, I wish we could elimination 95% of every institution that has been created since the New Deal. This monster called federal government grows bigger every year, more complex. It’s so convoluted, no one knows what the heck is really going on from agency to agency, department to department, and committee to committee.
Yet now we’re asked to make even larger commitments to “rescue” all this crap, trading federal control for the loan, refusing to allow toxic assets to return to real values, and adding a ton of pork spending. It is just unbelievable.
I’m glad to be an older broad. I have no desire to hang around and watch this happen thru an extended old age.
Mata, many many times here I have called for a Balanced Budget Amendment. My problem is the Bush loving can do no wrong mentality coupled with people attacking the new Administration before they even took office. We had a week or more of Pres Bush loving, how he kept us safe etc. Are we safe really? Doesn’t the near collapse of our economy mean he FAILED?
YES! The Democrats have a piece of this problem from before… but come on! I bring up the Terri Schievo example of how the Republicans could pull together something in the middle of the night and Bush fly back from Texas to sign a law. Pres Bush has the political capital to spend at that time, and if it was a lit fuse he had a HUGE RESPONSIBILITY to protect us from this calamity. Is blaming some idiot like Barny Frank really going to wash the Bush Administration’s hands of this? Get real. Frank is one in 435 House members and until Jan 07 was in the minority.
That is not totally correct. The Federal Reserve Bank, on Sept 15th stepped in and acquired 79.9% of AIG for $85 Billion, later they tapped an additional $37 Billion from the NY Fed and then the Treasury (the Bush TARP plan) ponied up an additional $40 Billion in Nov 08.
Yes, Democrats were in the majority in passing the TARP, along with many Republicans (including McCain) who voted for it and it was signed into law by Pres Bush who put in motion the plan to begin with. I focus on the Administration since they were at the controls at the time.
First, blast, what I posted on another thread, interceding between you and Aye (pun not intended…. LOL) about mortgage insurance pertains here with AIG.
AIG will continue to lose as long as there is over valued assets in the system. That is their prime job… to cover/insure the banks’ losses. This is going to be an endless cycle until the Obama’economy nuts allow the housing values to deflate naturally. This is not on their agenda.
I have no idea what your “not totally correct” bit is about. What’s your point? Congressional terms on the bailout dictated what was allowable via law for giving AIG loan bucks. That they’ve taken $150 bil to date and… as of a couple of days ago, were back for more is not surprising, as I said.
However that is all part of the original bailout that was restructured, plus some creative bookkeeping.
You seem to want to funnel every unrelated thing and lay it on Bush’s shoulders alone because it happened during the years he sat in the Oval Office. But only the bad stuff, mind you. Can’t recall anything good you ever had to say about the man. Balanced Budget my ass… like that’s going to do any good? There’s no one in Congress or the WH that is that good with numbers. It’s all estimates that are wildly off the market, because the government is so big… *no one* knows what’s going on anymore.
If you want to demand something constructive, how about decreased spending across the board, elimination of worthless projects, no luxury earmarks except for integral land development for growth and infrastructure, and a real clean up of the waste in every department and agency we have.
I’ve always jokingly suggested that we should have a law for Congress that says they can’t pass a new law without taking five off the books. It’s getting downright messy and conflicting every where you turn. But what annoys the devil out of me is that you constantly give Congress a pass on irresponsibility. ALWAYS.
Well stop it! This is not a country run by despots of ultimate power… even the hallowed Obama needs Congress to do what he wants to do.
Therefore you have to hold all those involved responsible to be genuine in your beefs. Otherwise, you’re just acting partisan. And last I remember, you were not a Dem.