Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
U.S. Voters don't blame Obama for the Economy.
Sabiancym
Member UncommonPosts: 3,150
Since it doesn't seem likely that the same 3-4 people will stop posting random articles demonizing everything obama whether legit or not. I figured the forum could use some balance.
U.S. Voters don't blame Obama for the Economy.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama benefits from a broadly held perception that others bear the bulk of responsibility for state of the U.S. economy, according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll published on Tuesday.
Asked who was responsible for the economic meltdown, 80 percent in the poll blamed banks, financial institutions and corporations. Some 70 percent also blamed consumers for taking on too much debt and the former Bush administration for lax regulation. Only 26 percent said the Obama administration was not doing enough to turn the situation around.
Two-thirds of respondents approve of the way Obama is handling the presidency, and 60 percent approve of the way he is handling the economy.
Sixty-four percent said were confident Obama's policies will improve the economy, down from 72 percent just before he took office in January.
Forty two percent said the country was now heading in the right direction, a five-year high. Late last year, when then-President George W. Bush was in its final months, as many as nine in 10 American said the country was heading in the wrong direction.
The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Thursday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
(Reporting by Alan Elsner, editing by Alan Elsner)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090331/pl_nm/us_obama_poll_economy
Comments
I don;t think anyone BLAMED Obama for the economic meltdown. I don;t think I have ever heard once that it was Obamas fault this happened... nope, but he is responsible for his actions now. He will be held accountable for overspending when we do not have the money to pay for it, and the fall of the dollar that will take place once the huge amount of debt hits us. HE is accountable only for his actions nothing more. The worlds top economists say his budget is an economic disaster and with good reason.. because it is. Obama must wake up and see how devestating this will be to the economy and to our people. If HE does not want this catastrophe of a budget to be what he is remembered for, he should greatly reconsider his stance.
www.newsweek.com/id/191393
Most people do not believe something is going to happen until it does ... that doesn;t make them intelligent. Just look at all the people building nonearthquake resistant homes on the new madrid faultline ... that should give you a good idea how well people listen to reason.
People voted for Obama because they wanted someone different than Bush, well they didn;t get that, when they find out that his plan is not a continueation of the Bush and Paulson plan , no instead it is an accelration of the Bush and Paulson plan.. how content do you think they will be? His plan is the Bush plan on steroids.. yes, lets make a bigger mess alot faster .... wait till impact to do a poll ....
No need for a wall of text just post a link and say all politicians suck!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
I can't resist...the amount of...warrants it. http://www.kentlaw.edu/academics/lrw/grinker/LwtaEllipses.htm
Anyway, Obama is going to take all the blame for the bailout fiasco and later problems that will ensue. I don't remember anyone blaming the meltdown on him, this looks like an excuse to post more propoganda to me. I think most people blame it on Bush/Clinton/Jesus/OJ Simpson/Violent Video Games.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Look back and look at the political topics posted on this board the last couple weeks and report back with who has a flare for posting propaganda.
I imagine a few of the people on these boards have various news websites on constant refresh waiting for a new article about how obama sucks so they can use it as an excuse to post here.
The Official God FAQ
I don't disagree with the claim that there are a ridiculous amount of doom/blame obama threads. I just see your thread as another one of them, more of the same political no-win threads.
Yes, there are 3 or 4 people with little better to do than hit F5 on their favorite conspiracy theory/apocalype sites.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Sorry, but your posted article can be labeled as the same propaganda. I see no information regarding the number of participants, geographical location, method of polling, time of polling or even a margin or error. This poll could easily be skewed. I'm not saying that it is, or it isn't, but it's just as much bullshit as the posts you are clamoring against.
Obama isnt being blamed for the economy. He's being blamed for his absolutel shitty job of handling it.
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Sorry, but your posted article can be labeled as the same propaganda. I see no information regarding the number of participants, geographical location, method of polling, time of polling or even a margin or error. This poll could easily be skewed. I'm not saying that it is, or it isn't, but it's just as much bullshit as the posts you are clamoring against.
"The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Thursday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points."
Reading is fun.
The Official God FAQ
A thousand adults from San Franciso......
I guaranteed if they polled 1,000 business owners it would be VASTLY different.
People who have to create conspiracy and hate threads to further a cause lacks in intellectual comprehension of diversity.
Sorry, but your posted article can be labeled as the same propaganda. I see no information regarding the number of participants, geographical location, method of polling, time of polling or even a margin or error. This poll could easily be skewed. I'm not saying that it is, or it isn't, but it's just as much bullshit as the posts you are clamoring against.
"The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Thursday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points."
Reading is fun.
It's within the article, not the actual summary of the poll. I've moved away from believing any statistical data written within an article, regardless of the source, unless I can see the actual source of data.
And, only 1,000? That is a piss-poor sampling size when attempting to represent the views of the entire country - especially if that sample was pulled strictly from the west coastal region.
The article would be more truthful if it stated "West Coast Voters Do Not Blame Obama for the Economy".
It's poor journalism. They might as well have Michael Glass as the reporter.
noone even knows how the Goverment in the USA works anyways I mean the President is like the face of the USA but I'm sure theres thousands of other people making decisions. Anyways the economy was in the shitter before Obama and it is in the shitter because of Credit Cards.
It would ahve been a better poll if it was taken from groups from different areas of America rather than just from one city.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
Sorry, but your posted article can be labeled as the same propaganda. I see no information regarding the number of participants, geographical location, method of polling, time of polling or even a margin or error. This poll could easily be skewed. I'm not saying that it is, or it isn't, but it's just as much bullshit as the posts you are clamoring against.
"The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Thursday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points."
Reading is fun.
It's within the article, not the actual summary of the poll. I've moved away from believing any statistical data written within an article, regardless of the source, unless I can see the actual source of data.
And, only 1,000? That is a piss-poor sampling size when attempting to represent the views of the entire country - especially if that sample was pulled strictly from the west coastal region.
The article would be more truthful if it stated "West Coast Voters Do Not Blame Obama for the Economy".
It's poor journalism. They might as well have Michael Glass as the reporter.
with all due respect, you would call it piss - poor sampling even if they asked 10 million people.
well obama isn't the original ciminal of the economic crisis, but as the president of usa, he has the compelling obligation to relieve the depression and keep ppl's life stable, not be hurt so much.
we could just have a spending freeze instead of a bailout, that would of solved all our economy's problems (sarcasm)
we could have just watched it go to hell and did nothing - because that's what our founding fathers did right? and everything they did is 100% relevent in our industrialized multi-faceted nation.
or we could have listened to the economists who almost all suggested a bailout. paul krugman, nobel prize winning economist, thinks we should have spent more money. but hey, what do they know compared to people yelling at the tv screen?
sure it would have been nice if the bailout paid off home mortgages instead of banks.. but then it would have been really uneven. all the poor people with morgages would be the ones getting lucky by government's upperhand
It's within the article, not the actual summary of the poll. I've moved away from believing any statistical data written within an article, regardless of the source, unless I can see the actual source of data.
And, only 1,000? That is a piss-poor sampling size when attempting to represent the views of the entire country - especially if that sample was pulled strictly from the west coastal region.
The article would be more truthful if it stated "West Coast Voters Do Not Blame Obama for the Economy".
It's poor journalism. They might as well have Michael Glass as the reporter.
with all due respect, you would call it piss - poor sampling even if they asked 10 million people.
With all due respect, it seems fitting you would attack the person and not the issue.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Last I checked the economy crashed while Bush was in office?
Was there honestly any point in that comment? I'm showing disregard for the way a poll was conducted - i'm not even noting anything regarding the politics behind the issue. And yes, I would call 10,000,000 piss-poor sampling if it was done in California alone. If you want a good representation of a population, you need to make the sample size a bit more broad. All I was getting at was this article was based upon bias, poor journalism, and a poorly executed poll.
It's not just Obama, it's also the Democratic controlled Congress starring Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and Harry Reid.
Sorry, but your posted article can be labeled as the same propaganda. I see no information regarding the number of participants, geographical location, method of polling, time of polling or even a margin or error. This poll could easily be skewed. I'm not saying that it is, or it isn't, but it's just as much bullshit as the posts you are clamoring against.
"The poll of 1,000 adults was conducted Thursday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points."
Reading is fun.
It's within the article, not the actual summary of the poll. I've moved away from believing any statistical data written within an article, regardless of the source, unless I can see the actual source of data.
And, only 1,000? That is a piss-poor sampling size when attempting to represent the views of the entire country - especially if that sample was pulled strictly from the west coastal region.
The article would be more truthful if it stated "West Coast Voters Do Not Blame Obama for the Economy".
It's poor journalism. They might as well have Michael Glass as the reporter.
with all due respect, you would call it piss - poor sampling even if they asked 10 million people.
How do you figure? So you're saying that a thousand people from one city is a valid sample source for something like this? You're attempting to point out an inconsistency in belief without any real basis for it...and 10 million is certainly a hyperbole...how could anyone argue with a sample size of 10 million unless they were 10 million specifically selected people for the purpose of a study?
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Mr Jefferson we miss you more than you know.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
LOL @ the OP. What a brown-noser. As if kissing Obamas ass here is going to help his pathetic life somehow. lolz
"If you can't out wit them, report them till they're banned!"- PopinJ'
Brent Bozell had a good column on this poll. I said it before, polls are BS. You can make them say whatever you want to, no matter your politics.
http://townhall.com/columnists/BrentBozell/2009/04/01/washington_polling_games
You mean that "HOPE" and "change we can believe in" is not gonna fix it?
Sorry, but I am getting a bit tired of hearing the ObamaBorgs spout the same old talking points and sound bites.
i don't think it really matters anymore now that the great collapse is taking place
law of the jungle time people