The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
The Obama Administration: Re-Elected! 332-206 (Probably)
AManFromEarth
Let's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
Let's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
So, the President is still this guy:
His approval ratings have started to rebound lately, due to a variety of factors. Women have been coming back to the President, and the continuing insanity that is the Republican nominating contest has certainly helped. But obviously the biggest factor has been the finally possibly recovering economy. We had another pretty solid jobs reports on Friday, and with previous jobs reports being revised upwards, we're actually in something resembling a decent recovery. People are even returning to the labor pool, which is why the unemployment rate stayed at 8.3% this month.
There are still of course issues. Plenty of people are still angry about the NDAA, for example. There is also the continuing debate of targeted killings of American citizens abroad who have been allegedly linked to terrorism, such as Anwar Al-Awlaki. And generally quite a lot of civil libertarians are angry. For quite a lot of updates on these kinds of issues, you can read Glenn Greenwald who will probably channel your rage every day.
If you would like to litigate the past, we can continue to argue over the size of the stimulus and the nature of the health care bill and how much Congress sucks.
There are quite a lot of positives! First of all, and most importantly, the administration has appointed two justices to SCOTUS. That's working out pretty well. You've also got the end of the Iraq War (yes, on the Bush timeline, but we didn't ignore the government we set up) and the beginnings of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, scheduled to be complete in 2014. There have been quite impressive environmental regulations like this one and this one. And obviously there have been quite a lot of advances in the realm of gay rights, like the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, various hate crimes legislation, the end of support for the Defense of Marriage Act from the Justice Department, etc. etc. etc. There are other things, most of which are catalogued here: http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
With the upcoming election, recently the White House has been moving towards a more populist message. This started with a speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, that was fairly reflective of Teddy Roosevelt. And then he gave a defense of labor generally in a very fired up, very "campaign Obama" style speech to the UAW.
In the short term media cycle news of the moment, there are two major things going on.
First, the President made sure that Rush Limbaugh's bullshit got even more attention by calling Sandra Fluke and telling her that her parents are/should be proud of her, and how he hopes his daughters are willing to speak their mind like Ms. Fluke was.
Second, gas prices are high, and that is somewhat concerning for the President's re-election chances. Not surprisingly, energy has been a recent focus, and the subject of today's weekly address was energy.
This thread is mostly about the actions of the President/White House. There's obviously some overlap with the campaign, as what they're doing right now as far as governing is inextricably linked to the election (we run this country in a very, very stupid way). But try to keep it within the context of the White House's actions, so:
Do: talk about a speech the President made, a regulatory decision, a bill he's pushing for in Congress, his golf game, etc. etc. etc.
Don't: talk about Romney/Santorum/Gingrich/Paul. There is a primary thread for that, and when the primary thread is done, there will surely be a general election thread. Also, let's try not to get off on random ass tangents, though I am not exactly innocent on that front.
@Enlightenedbum shamed me with his superior OP.
His approval ratings have started to rebound lately, due to a variety of factors. Women have been coming back to the President, and the continuing insanity that is the Republican nominating contest has certainly helped. But obviously the biggest factor has been the finally possibly recovering economy. We had another pretty solid jobs reports on Friday, and with previous jobs reports being revised upwards, we're actually in something resembling a decent recovery. People are even returning to the labor pool, which is why the unemployment rate stayed at 8.3% this month.
There are still of course issues. Plenty of people are still angry about the NDAA, for example. There is also the continuing debate of targeted killings of American citizens abroad who have been allegedly linked to terrorism, such as Anwar Al-Awlaki. And generally quite a lot of civil libertarians are angry. For quite a lot of updates on these kinds of issues, you can read Glenn Greenwald who will probably channel your rage every day.
If you would like to litigate the past, we can continue to argue over the size of the stimulus and the nature of the health care bill and how much Congress sucks.
There are quite a lot of positives! First of all, and most importantly, the administration has appointed two justices to SCOTUS. That's working out pretty well. You've also got the end of the Iraq War (yes, on the Bush timeline, but we didn't ignore the government we set up) and the beginnings of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, scheduled to be complete in 2014. There have been quite impressive environmental regulations like this one and this one. And obviously there have been quite a lot of advances in the realm of gay rights, like the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, various hate crimes legislation, the end of support for the Defense of Marriage Act from the Justice Department, etc. etc. etc. There are other things, most of which are catalogued here: http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
With the upcoming election, recently the White House has been moving towards a more populist message. This started with a speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, that was fairly reflective of Teddy Roosevelt. And then he gave a defense of labor generally in a very fired up, very "campaign Obama" style speech to the UAW.
In the short term media cycle news of the moment, there are two major things going on.
First, the President made sure that Rush Limbaugh's bullshit got even more attention by calling Sandra Fluke and telling her that her parents are/should be proud of her, and how he hopes his daughters are willing to speak their mind like Ms. Fluke was.
Second, gas prices are high, and that is somewhat concerning for the President's re-election chances. Not surprisingly, energy has been a recent focus, and the subject of today's weekly address was energy.
This thread is mostly about the actions of the President/White House. There's obviously some overlap with the campaign, as what they're doing right now as far as governing is inextricably linked to the election (we run this country in a very, very stupid way). But try to keep it within the context of the White House's actions, so:
Do: talk about a speech the President made, a regulatory decision, a bill he's pushing for in Congress, his golf game, etc. etc. etc.
Don't: talk about Romney/Santorum/Gingrich/Paul. There is a primary thread for that, and when the primary thread is done, there will surely be a general election thread. Also, let's try not to get off on random ass tangents, though I am not exactly innocent on that front.
@Enlightenedbum shamed me with his superior OP.
AManFromEarth on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Why? Vetoing the bill would have done nothing. They had a veto-proof majority.
https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
Seriously?
It was veto-proof. And had the president Vetoed the bill, it woudl have vetoed quite a lot of funding for defense. Maybe all of it. And would have gained him, and the country for that matter, absolutely nothing in return but MORE of a headache.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/410085/march-06-2012/the-word---due-or-die
It deals with the problems I have with this whole Assassination thing. An enemy Soldier can be American and they shouldn't have extra protection but we need to sit down and define what a "war" is and what the rules are. 'cause the old rules don't cover this.
Was Libya a war? Some people say it is but we didn't put a single soldier on the ground. We didn't really engage in combat in any true sense. What makes it different from the other bombings we've done? Or are we now at war with all those other places?
We need to define war.
https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
Seriously!
http://thehill.com/video/campaign/215745-sarah-palin-challenges-obama-to-debate-anywhere-anytime
No, it's not April 1st.
This is... I honestly do not know what to say.
Her ego. It can be seen from space.
We don't need to define it, we need to stop letting Republicans lie about what war has always been.
You know what would make my day? Obama accepting the challenge.
:whistle:
No. that would be terrible.
The only good news I get from Palin is when I realize she hasn't been in the headlines for a few months.
https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
Yup. What is the extent to which our Military can act outside of war?
https://gofund.me/fa5990a5
ronya, interpret for us? Is this the Fed actually doing something to help their dual mandate or more inflation hawkery?
There are no words.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
If you believe the statement, the FOMC is committing not to engage in contractionary policy until "late 2014" - so, not prior to the election, however much pundits shriek about gas prices. There were some accusations a while ago that the Fed engaged in contractionary policy prior to elections with Democrat incumbents and expansionary policy vice-versa, especially when the FOMC statement released on, coincidentally, the same day the 2010 elections closed was the one that announced QE2.
Certain Congresspeople certainly want it to, though.
They're not wars, they're political bullshit. You can't go to war on an abstract concept.
No, but you can against a non-state organisation.
And yet they never call it the War on Al Quaida or War on [x] cartel/gang/syndicate.
Which doesn't change the fact that the AUMF is a declaration of war in all but name.
I got to #32 before I realized that this is crime by association.
Yes, the people who did those things work for the federal or state government.
Yes, they are on the payroll of the government and use government funds.
No, the President did not endorse or specifically order the majority of those actions.
Also, not all of those things are bad.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
But, it's such a reasoned argument!
In all seriousness, there are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with the president. But politics is an exercise in pragmatism. Call it lesser of two evils if you will, but the US could do much, much worse than having four more years of Obama.
Also, this writer hates Biden, which means I no longer wish to hear anything he has to say.
I'm torn on that. Obama is clearly the best choice, but if Santorum will speed the decline of this nation it may be for the better. It's going down either way, we can either rip the band-aid off quickly or let it linger.
Can't tell if you're joking. You know it's still open right?
I mean, it is a pretty good reason to tap into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
Wait, are you implying that you want America to fail?
Can't tell if you're joking. You know that it is still open because the house/senate stopped Obama from closing it, right?
It already has. The next few decades will be nothing but death pangs.
You know he doesn't need congressional approval to close it right?
Can I interest you in Ron Paul? His policies would get what you seem to want dome pretty quickly if followed through on. Whole western world, really.