Disappointment in Obama...

[EricHill78]

Washington (CNN) -- All politicians disappoint their supporters. It is a relentless truth in D.C.

They make pledges they can't keep, say things they don't mean, and encounter stiff headwinds in office that were just distant breezes on the campaign trail. The bigger their failed promises, the bigger the disappointment.

And just a few hours north of Washington, in the battleground state of Pennsylvania, it is easy to see that President Obama has a lot of disappointment standing between him and re-election.

"I believed in him 100%," says Andy Heller in Scranton. "I thought it was going to be a big turnaround from President Bush. But now you have to wonder."

Heller, 56, is a registered Democrat who runs Steamtown Blueprint and Copy Center, a small construction-related firm. In 2008, he placed yard signs for Obama, attended fundraisers and eagerly awaited a first term that he thought would bring more cooperation, more innovation, or at least a better economy. Since then, business has grown worse, the atmosphere in Washington has become more toxic and his faith in Barack Obama has steadily dwindled. "I'm not sure it was entirely his fault, but he made promises he couldn't keep."

Across town, Mark Dennebaum Jr., 31, is one of those young voters who created the wave Obama rode into office. At his place, 25/8 Productions, a video production shop, business is good, but the feeling among his friends about Obama is much the same as it is elsewhere. "When he spoke it was truly inspiring. I loved him in 2008, and right now if this were in a relationship, I'd be talking to a divorce attorney. When you mention Obama, there is a giant, collective sigh."

The depth of the turnaround is massive. Three years ago this month, 77% of voters polled told CNN they believed Obama would unite the country, 68% said they were either "thrilled" or "happy" he'd been elected, 79% thought he'd do a good job and 74% were confident he would improve the economy.

Today his approval rating wallows in the mid 40% range; disapproval is over 50%. And a dismal 35% of the voters like the way he is handling the economy.

Read more http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/13/politi...html?hpt=hp_c1

Vegan bro, you voted for him didn't you? Haha

[Ainkor]

I always wonder if anyone could have done a better job. In reality I don't feel like there have been that many missteps that wouldn't have happened if we have a red president instead of a blue one. They are all pretty much the same at the end of the day IMO.

Just to add..... Ys, the president can really mess things up but to REALLY F-things up, that takes congress . both sides are dirty as hell and bought and paid for by big businesses.

[sgreger1]

Yah honestly I think it has turned out better than it would have under Mccain, and I voted for Mccain. In retrospect I realize Mccain is probbaly one of my least favorite politicians now and I won't be voting for any republicans any time soon. They have become lost in the fringe issues and spend too much time pimping for the rich or bashing gay soldiers, meanwhile the country slowly burns.

The democrats are 100% as corrupt as the republicans, but they are much less smart and poorly organized. The republicans all get in a room together before any given vote and whoever is in charge gives the orders on whether they will all vote yay/nay on any given issue, then when voting time comes they vote as a solid block, with little if any dissent. With this tactic, they have managed to retain controll of both the house and the senate, despite not being in the majority (in the senate at least). With clever twisting of fillabuster rules and this "we all vote the same" mentality, they are unstoppable, and get what they want most of the time, even in a government with a dem president and a dem controlled house/senate. The democrats on the other hand are always bickering amongst each other and can't even get it together to all vote the same way, so even with a majority their will is easily unraveled by the GOP. Look at the healthcare debate, and so many others, the dems all say they want x,y,z, but they all disagree on the specifics so they fall short of having the votes necessary to enforce their general stanc eon any given issue, and the republicans end up winning and getting their way.


So the dems are just as corrupt, but they are less organized and therefore the damage happens at a slower pace. Obama is a tool and any critique of him is irrelevent because he does nothing but read the speeches they write for him and follow the talking points. He's a puppet at best. The real problem is congress, as the president doesn't have much power anyways. Right now we have a GOP that's trying to tank the economy so they can blame big government, and who is immensely tied up in stopping "the gays" from serving in the army or getting married (as well as repealing the last 100 years of science for some reason), and we have a Dem party that is really just doing republican things like helping wall street/big corporations, mixed in with a smug sense of do-gooderness that makes them think they are somehow better than the republicans. They all make me sick, and they are all the same in my view.

Please vote for Ron Paul and/or your 3rd party candidate of choice. Your vote is already lost in this election, Obama will win no matter what, so use this as an oppertunity to vote for who you really want this time, not just "the lesser of two evils", because it is becoming harder and harder these days to distinguish which is the least evil of two extremely evil sides.

[Crow]

The democrats are 100% as corrupt as the republicans, but they are much less smart and poorly organized

...and we have a Dem party that is really just doing republican things like helping wall street/big corporations, mixed in with a smug sense of do-gooderness that makes them think they are somehow better than the republicans. They all make me sick, and they are all the same in my view.

Now you're just breaking my heart...

I kid, I kid... I know a lot of you (Americans) on the board lean conservatively. I still love you all despite your bad decisions (again, a joke!)

[sgreger1]

Now you're just breaking my heart...

I kid, I kid... I know a lot of you (Americans) on the board lean conservatively. I still love you all despite your bad decisions (again, a joke!)

Technically I am liberal on most issues, I am pro gay marriage, decriminalization etc, but I am that way because of my right-of-center libertarian thinking. I believe the government has no business in stopping two american consenting adults (gay or not) from doing whatever they want and calling it whatever they want etc.

I am more of a classic liberal. But I am also pro-gun rights, and pro small government, two things that the left violently opposes. Like most Americans, and like many people on this forum, there is no one group that describes my political views. Generally I think government is necessary but that too much government only leads to things like what we see now.

[truthwolf1]

I think I posted that Obama deception video right from the start. It has taken some people a long time to accept they have been fleeced.

Where is SAGE? the biggest Kool-Aid drinker of them all!

[Crow]

But I am also pro-gun rights, and pro small government, two things that the left violently opposes.

No opposition from me when it comes to the Second Amendment.

[Kaplan]

Technically I am liberal on most issues, I am pro gay marriage, decriminalization etc, but I am that way because of my right-of-center libertarian thinking. I believe the government has no business in stopping two american consenting adults (gay or not) from doing whatever they want and calling it whatever they want etc.

I am more of a classic liberal. But I am also pro-gun rights, and pro small government, two things that the left violently opposes. Like most Americans, and like many people on this forum, there is no one group that describes my political views. Generally I think government is necessary but that too much government only leads to things like what we see now.

That basically sums up my views...except I'm very pro-environment. At some point in time, we (meaning the human race in general and America specially) are going to have to face the fact that all of our issues are meaningless when we destroy the only home we have. And it's happening right in front of us. 7 billion people and growing... And for that reason, I do believe in controls on businesses and the need for the government to lead the way to securing the future, as far as the environment and natural resources go. I suppose that contradicts the small government idea, but I'm not advocating stifling capitalism, only for making companies responsible for something other than raping all of us for their own greed. I'm all for maximum personal liberty, including gun rights, gay marriage, legalization of drugs, etc.

And I wouldn't vote for Ron Paul. No way, no how. He might have a few radical ideas, for being a Republican, but he's cut from the same cloth. (From everything I've seen of him.)

[lxskllr]

[sgreger1]

No opposition from me when it comes to the Second Amendment.

And many democrat voters are pro 2nd amendment, however your party officials are completely against the 2nd amendment so voting dem means generally restrictive gun laws.

[Crow]

And many democrat voters are pro 2nd amendment, however your party officials are completely against the 2nd amendment so voting dem means generally restrictive gun laws.

Yes, there are certain factions within the party that go a little overboard with gun control (e.g. proposing legislation to ban handguns or "assault rifles").

The people have the right to bear arms; but its a matter of figuring out where to draw the line. You need controls put in place to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals and criminal gangs (drug cartels).

[Darwin]

No one, period, can keep weapons out of the hands of the drug cartels. The cartels are rich enough that, if they really had to, they could manufacture whatever they thought they needed. One could pass laws until doomsday and not affect the ability of rich criminal gangs to obtain whatever weaponry they think they need. The U.S. could enact the most draconian anti-gun laws imaginable and would only inconvenience the cartels very slightly if even that.

[Crow]

No one, period, can keep weapons out of the hands of the drug cartels. The cartels are rich enough that, if they really had to, they could manufacture whatever they thought they needed. One could pass laws until doomsday and not affect the ability of rich criminal gangs to obtain whatever weaponry they think they need. The U.S. could enact the most draconian anti-gun laws imaginable and would only inconvenience the cartels very slightly if even that.

I was only using the cartels as an example, and of course no regulation can completely stem the issue. But, it puts a hindrance on their access. That still leaves dangerous non-organised individuals (that are clearly not competent to possess a firearm). Regulation is surely needed to help keep guns out of their hands. I don't favor a "wild west" mentality (that's just asking for trouble).