ACF 2012 Presidential Election Poll

[Bocefish]

 

[Shaun__]

If you take the time to check the facts, Obama has done a lot including creating jobs with the green initiative. He said his goals were not going to be completed quickly. Quick fix=long term disaster.

We do not need to regress! I do think people have developed amnesia about the Bush period ...do we need another disaster like that?

He did such a wonderful job wasting $528 BILLION on Solyndra! http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/solyndra- ... EI9-0UoMXY

Obama made a bad decision in supporting Solyndra, but Romney outright took 10 million dollars in tax payer money. He built that by taking our money and never repaying it. Link

The federal records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal that Romney's initial rescue attempt at Bain & Company was actually a disaster – leaving the firm so financially strapped that it had "no value as a going concern." Even worse, the federal bailout ultimately engineered by Romney screwed the FDIC – the bank insurance system backed by taxpayers – out of at least $10 million. And in an added insult, Romney rewarded top executives at Bain with hefty bonuses at the very moment that he was demanding his handout from the feds.

 

[Nordling]

Solyndra did NOT cost us 528 BILLION. The word is MILLION. How could you even type something so silly? Half a trillion dollars on ONE company and you didn't even question your fake facts?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/opinion/the-phony-solyndra-scandal.html

Not to even MENTION the fact that advancing loans to Solyndra BEGAN in 2007.

Who was President in 2007?

Oh, right, we gotta stop blaming Bush.

Even when he was RESPONSIBLE. I thought conservatives were all about responsibility, or is that just more nonsense from the folks who "do as I say not as I do?"

 

[Bocefish]

taxpayers did not finance the bailout, the debt forgiven by the government was booked as a loss to the FDIC – and then recouped through higher insurance premiums from banks. And banks, of course, are notorious for finding ways to pass their costs along to customers, usually in the form of higher fees. Thanks to the nature of the market, in other words, the bailout negotiated by Romney ultimately wound up being paid by the American people.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... z25FzVMOZ8

Just like all of government screw ups, we, the tax payers end up footing the bill. It's a CEO's job to negotiate the best deals for their company. The $10 million the government lost in the deal is who's fault? Romney's? The $10 million deal is chump change compared to $582 MILLION.

 

[Shaun__]

taxpayers did not finance the bailout, the debt forgiven by the government was booked as a loss to the FDIC – and then recouped through higher insurance premiums from banks. And banks, of course, are notorious for finding ways to pass their costs along to customers, usually in the form of higher fees. Thanks to the nature of the market, in other words, the bailout negotiated by Romney ultimately wound up being paid by the American people.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... z25FzVMOZ8

Just like all of government screw ups, we, the tax payers end up footing the bill. It's a CEO's job to negotiate the best deals for their company. The $10 million the government lost in the deal is who's fault? Romney's? The $10 million deal is chump change compared to $582 MILLION.

Fine you can give up your share of that money, the rest of us want our money back. Also fucking Obama has a time machine, and has not killed Hitler yet? What an asshole.

May 2005: Just as a global silicon shortage begins driving up prices of solar photovoltaics [PV], Solyndra is founded to provide a cost-competitive alternative to silicon-based panels.

July 2005: The Bush Administration signs the Energy Policy Act of 2005 into law, creating the 1703 loan guarantee program.

February 2006 – October 2006: In February, Solyndra raises its first round of venture financing worth $10.6 million from CMEA Capital, Redpoint Ventures, and U.S. Venture Partners. In October, Argonaut Venture Capital, an investment arm of George Kaiser, invests $17 million into Solyndra. Madrone Capital Partners, an investment arm of the Walton family, invests $7 million. Those investments are part of a $78.2 million fund.

December 2006: Solyndra Applies for a Loan Guarantee under the 1703 program.

Late 2007: Loan guarantee program is funded. Solyndra was one of 16 clean-tech companies deemed ready to move forward in the due diligence process. The Bush Administration DOE moves forward to develop a conditional commitment.

October 2008: Then Solyndra CEO Chris Gronet touted reasons for building in Silicon Valley and noted that the “company’s second factory also will be built in Fremont, since a Department of Energy loan guarantee mandates a U.S. location.”

November 2008: Silicon prices remain very high on the spot market, making non-silicon based thin film technologies like Solyndra’s very attractive to investors. Solyndra also benefits from having very low installation costs. The company raises $144 million from ten different venture investors, including the Walton-family run Madrone Capital Partners. This brings total private investment to more than $450 million to date.

January 2009: In an effort to show it has done something to support renewable energy, the Bush Administration tries to take Solyndra before a DOE credit review committee before President Obama is inaugurated. The committee, consisting of career civil servants with financial expertise, remands the loan back to DOE “without prejudice” because it wasn’t ready for conditional commitment.

 

[Bocefish]

Fine you can give up your share of that money, the rest of us want our money back. Also fucking Obama has a time machine, and has not killed Hitler yet? What an asshole.

Great argument! :lol:

 

[Bocefish]

Yep, definitely Bush's fault!

 

[Shaun__]

Yep, definitely Bush's fault!

Glad you realize how wrong Bush was to create the loan program Solyndra used. Other small minded people would ignore all that and focus on the fact that Bush failed to get the loan when he tried, but the more competent Obama administration succeeded like they did in so many things. Obama's extreme competence has to be his biggest weakness.

 

[Bocefish]

Yep, definitely Bush's fault!

Glad you realize how wrong Bush was to create the loan program Solyndra used. Other small minded people would ignore all that and focus on the fact that Bush failed to get the loan when he tried, but the more competent Obama administration succeeded like they did in so many things. Obama's extreme competence has to be his biggest weakness.

Ha!

I keep hearing how Obama is more competent and has succeeded in so many more important things, but nobody seems to be able to mention what these great successes are?

Let's look at some of his signature legislative accomplishments...

Of greatest concern to Americans should be the national debt. It is, as Hillary Clinton has said, an issue of “national security.” Obama owns this. $5 trillion of our debt, and three years of $1.5 trillion deficit spending are creations of Obama and his facilitating congress. Such fiduciary ineptitude would disqualify him for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, let alone our national president. He may dismiss it as inconsequential, but he cannot run from it.

Looking at his three signature legislative accomplishments, Obamacare is favored by just 42%, of Americans. But perhaps more importantly, “72 percent of Americans believe that the law’s individual mandate to purchase health insurance is unconstitutional, including 56 percent of Democrats,” according to Rasmussen from two weeks ago. And perhaps more significantly, “65% of doctors believe healthcare will deteriorate in the next five years” because of it.

The “Stimulus” was not viewed positively just a year after its passage. “Sixty-eight percent of Americans said they think the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was a “waste,” compared to just 29 percent who think the money was well-spent,” according to an ABC Washington Post poll.

The last legislative “accomplishment” is actually seen as a positive for congress, the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory overhaul. But if people understood that it defined “too big to fail,” virtually assuring future bailouts of big banks and financial institutions, they wouldn’t be too keen on that landmark legislation either, since only 9% view the big banks and the recent bailouts positively. Only a slight majority, 51%, views the auto bailouts unfavorably.

He can’t very well run on his record for helping gas prices, for as we saw this week, as they have skyrocketed, his approval ratings took a 10% hit…in one month. Currently 61% feel he’s handling gas prices poorly.

Perception on the jobs situation has improved, but can any of his policies be traced to amelioration of that malaise? Here there seems to be a real disconnect with voters, since his approval rating improves when unemployment drops, but when pressed for what he’s done to improve job creation, those polled by Gallup recently could not identify anything specifically that he’s done for the non-farm payrolls to increase. And in a CBS poll recently only 38% of respondents thought the president had a plan for creating jobs.

Couple that with a Zogby poll a few months ago where “just one third of the public feels President Obama deserves re-election while five times more Americans think Obama has done a worse job fixing the economy than Jimmy Carter, the modern era’s Herbert Hoover.” Overall, 6 in 10 Americans disapprove of Obama’s handling of the economy according to the latest ABC Washington Post poll.

When we look at the raw polling data on the specific areas where Obama has expended most of his effort, we’re hard pressed to find anything substantive from a public sentiment standpoint that he can hang his hat on. Rather, we find mostly wide public disapprobation over what he has actually done, rather than what he claims to have accomplished.

So will he run on his record? It’s unlikely. If his record was a scorecard, it would be filled with “D”s and “F”s. Voters bought his “hope” and “change” mantra without any record to run on four years ago. Will there be a similar logical disconnect this year, with a record? Hopefully voters will be more logical, and less emotional and gullible, this time around. Only with copious spin and misrepresentation can his “record” appear viable to reasonable voters. After all, elections provide our opportunity to hire, or fire, our leaders based on actual performance; as opposed to how well they can tell us they did.

Based on his own words from 2009, his administration should be a “one-term proposition.” If he’s not part of the solution, he’s part of the problem and clearly should go.

AP award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, and is a graduate of Idaho State University with a BA in Political Science and History and former member of the Idaho State Journal Editorial Board. He can be reached at rlarsenen@cableone.net.

http://larsenfinancial.us/2012/03/18/qu ... e-elected/

 

[Shaun__]

Ha!

I keep hearing how Obama is more competent and has succeeded in so many more important things, but nobody seems to be able to mention what these great successes are?

Let's look at some of his signature legislative accomplishments...

Your author says polls are crap, but then uses them anyways to prove his points. He also blames Obama for what congress has done, and then complains about gas prices. What does the president have to do with gas prices? That is nothing but a crappy opinion piece. Just reading things you agree with is unhealthy and gives people a skewed world view.

The economy is crap, the national debt is rising, and America seems incapable of ending pointless wars overseas. These things were true before Obama, and they will be true after Obama. They are not any one person's fault. They are the result of decades of mismanagement by both parties.

This is a list of some of the things Obama is associated with if you really want to know. Obama's Achievements Center

 

[MadiSin_Moon]

Repulicans:
-tanked our economy
-gave the rich tax cuts and gave the poor more taxes
-tried to reverse progress made in abortions and women's rights
-attempted to make a national religion
-did everything they could to keep the country from getting anywhere while Obama was "in charge"
-came up with half of the ideas within the current health care act which they denounce so heavily

Yes, let's put them in charge. Then the rich can own everything and the rest of us will either have to live with it or overturn the current government.

I thanked you, but again, thanks. The taxes and healthcare stuff IS important, but it's much less of an issue to me than the other things you list. See, as a woman, a sexual minority, someone who grew up poor, and being non-religious I have personal values very different than those of most rightist nominees. These beliefs I keep very, very close to my heart, and don't think I could even begin to think about giving the Republican Party my vote. Ever. Maybe I am being small-minded but I am who I am, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it!

FYI, I don't judge others for their votes, but I don't necessarily agree with them either, if that makes sense.

P.S. Please don't hate me, Republicans!

 

[Bocefish]

The economy is crap, the national debt is rising, and America seems incapable of ending pointless wars overseas. These things were true before Obama, and they will be true after Obama. They are not any one person's fault. They are the result of decades of mismanagement by both parties.

Which brings me back to the question of why anybody would want 4 more years of Obama's status quo failures? What will positively change in the next 4 years if O' gets reelected?

This country is in the worst shape since the great depression and Obama's policy failures have done nothing but increase our debt by TRILLIONS and grow government with nothing to show for it. Banks will not loan money because of Obama's tax policies which is killing small businesses.

The economy and jobs are two of the most important issues this election and Obama's track record sucks. I've stated all of my major opinions on the upcoming election and look forward to the presidential and the VP debates. May the best candidate win. :thumbleft: :handgestures-salute:

 

[Shaun__]

Which brings me back to the question of why anybody would want 4 more years of Obama's status quo failures?

I do not know, lets ask Jan Brewer why.

​

 

[Paulie Walnuts]

This country is in the worst shape since the great depression

Both parties keep saying that, and it just proves they no fucking clue how bad the depression was.

Most people will ride out this "depression" with only a minimum of discomfort, and with a full belly. To suggest this recession now is anywhere near as bad as the great depression is just ridiculous.

It's bad, now.... but compared to the early 30's, it's a cake walk. Much of this horror show they keep harping about today is just hot air. It's not that bad.
:hand:

 

[sahi]

For me there are two big factors as far as Romney is concerned. Abortion and Gay marriage. Someone who is against those two things, which in my opinion are basic human rights, has no right to become president of the United States.

 

[Bocefish]

This country is in the worst shape since the great depression

Both parties keep saying that, and it just proves they no fucking clue how bad the depression was.

Most people will ride out this "depression" with only a minimum of discomfort, and with a full belly. To suggest this recession now is anywhere near as bad as the great depression is just ridiculous.

It's bad, now.... but compared to the early 30's, it's a cake walk. Much of this horror show they keep harping about today is just hot air. It's not that bad.
:hand:

If you look at what I and others keep saying... we're not saying we are worse off or even equal to the great depression, rather we're getting closer to it than ever before. We have a long way to go but if nothing drastically changes soon, we could be one catastrophe away.

 

[bob]

This country is in the worst shape since the great depression

Both parties keep saying that, and it just proves they no fucking clue how bad the depression was.

Most people will ride out this "depression" with only a minimum of discomfort, and with a full belly. To suggest this recession now is anywhere near as bad as the great depression is just ridiculous.

It's bad, now.... but compared to the early 30's, it's a cake walk. Much of this horror show they keep harping about today is just hot air. It's not that bad.
:hand:

If you look at what I and others keep saying... we're not saying we are worse off or even equal to the great depression, rather we're getting closer to it than ever before. We have a long way to go but if nothing drastically changes soon, we could be one catastrophe away.

just a sidebar re: the state of the state
one of the primary reasons that we as a nation are so frustrated (which is inclusive of the our devisiveness, imo) is that we REALLY don't wanna face what has happened since the 60's, when the concept of the multi-national corporation first emerged.
back then, it felt like the general attitude was "great....they're all american companies....our economic dominance continues".....and we just straightened our blinders a little and moved on

our attitude towards OPEC in the 70s was pretty much "how dare they"....because it felt for the most part like a little bump in the road.

now however, that post ww2 road is full of potholes, and it's not a matter of repairing them, it's a matter of finding another route, or risk being one of those dying towns along route 66.

this is the 21st century, and capitalism -while it will always be the child of america- is all grow'd up and has moved out of the house....sure, we are still an economic player on the global stage but growing economic parity will not pull everyone up to america's 20th century quality of life....

and it's that emerging social (as different from any one individual's) reality that we're having a hard time facing, imo....
and it gotta be somebody's fault, right?....so we look for the scapegoat :whistle:

at some point, i would like to see the leader of this country take a stance that favors it's citizens, rather than it's financial institutions.....that's the moonwalk for this part of this century, i'm thinkin :lol:

 

[EmilyConrad]

This is amazing.

 

[MrRodry]

We need a late show like this down here.

 

[Nordling]

:lol: And now, the Chair talks back!

 

[Nordling]

And for all those who think it's cute to accuse the President of using a teleprompter, a device that every President has used since it became available. Here, we see how democratically the Republicans make decisions...the entire scenario, including its outcome is all in the teleprompter. Are these corrupt individuals who you want in charge?

 

[Bocefish]

“Navy SEAL’s, Special Operations Personnel and Veteran’s across America have been outraged since Barack Obama conveniently took credit for killing Osama Bin Laden for political gain,” a statement announcing the loss of SOFA said. “The active duty military has no voice as they are forbidden to publicly engage in the political campaign process and it is career suicide for senior military leaders to speak out against the President.”

What kind of assholes that never served a day in the military use the killing of Bin Laden for political gain advertisements? Here's a hint... their initials are Obama and Clinton.

 

[Nordling]

Ha! Trivializing the accomplishments by pointing to "lack of military service?"

More Democrats have served than Republicans. Fact.

It was George W. Bush who landed on an aircraft carrier nowhere near actual combat operations wearing a goofy codpiece and military gear...and this was the President who essentially went AWOL AND NEVER SERVED. And he had the nerve to say "Mission Accomplished" when we would then witness the death of 4,000 Americans in Iraq and the additional death of up to a million Iraqi civilians...for NO PURPOSE.

Yeah, you can always find idiots who want to diss anyone if you look hard enough.

 

[Bocefish]

 

[Nordling]

Now you're pretending to be in fourth grade?

 

[Bocefish]

Ha! Trivializing the accomplishments by pointing to "lack of military service?"

You truly are an idiot if that's what you got from my post. Oh, that's right... your main concern is defending democrats regardless of what asinine things they do by saying some ridiculous shit like who served more or who's daddy is tougher... oblivious to the fact the morons are using what our elite special forces did for political gain and trying to take credit. Bravo

 

[DoctorVen]

It amazes me that any woman would want to vote for Romney considering his party's views on women's rights. (abortion, birth control, rape) Akin's party is NOT one I would like to be part of.

 

[Nordling]

Ha! Trivializing the accomplishments by pointing to "lack of military service?"

You truly are an idiot if that's what you got from my post. Oh, that's right... your main concern is defending democrats regardless of what asinine things they do by saying some ridiculous shit like who served more or who's daddy is tougher... oblivious to the fact the morons are using what our elite special forces did for political gain and trying to take credit. Bravo

Like most right-wingers, you seem to love projection. What I pointed out was that it was Bush who stood on that carrier like a little martinet with a Napoleonic complex bathing in his perceived adulation from the troops. Contrary to what you're saying, Obama has never "bragged" about the death of Osama bin Laden. He did report it and it's been explained by others what role a President plays in such an operation. If you choose to ignore reality, that's your issue, no one else's.

 

[Nordling]

It amazes me that any woman would want to vote for Romney considering his party's views on women's rights. (abortion, birth control, rape) Akin's party is NOT one I would like to be a part of.

Agree. And it amazes me that any man would either. We're all in this world together...what is bad for women is also, ultimately bad for men too. Unless one is a man who really likes the idea of returning to the 12th century and making women into chattel.

 

[Bocefish]

It amazes me that any woman would want to vote for Romney considering his party's views on women's rights. (abortion, birth control, rape) Akin's party is NOT one I would like to be part of.

Perhaps you may be amazed...