Who was the weaker Democratic President?

in my lifetime, regardless of party.

I think you'd have to go back to Hoover or Coolidge to find one as weak as Obama.

He based his do nothing approach on principle. Coolidge is probably a good equivalent.

Oh, wait. That is weakness.

Never mind.

all of the time isn't bipartisanship. It's capitulation.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Good one, oh!

Unless you are three years old, you saw the weakest president in modern times, by a MASSIVE margin ...

WTF is with people here?

:rofl:

I'm not sure what it proves, though, except there's a lot of groupthink on this forum. It doesn't translate to the outside world much.

:hi:

as "reality"

Skewed further by only offering two choices.

You're just going to meet with disagreement.

And the OP itself is totally a subjective premise. There's nothing factual about it - it's a bunch of people waving their opinions around for the umpteenth time.

are too high. I know I fell too hard for Obama in 2008 and was naive. Not now! But as my tag line shows, I will vote for him!

I'm starting to wonder why.

Ain't no fucking revolution coming down the pike,
where Liberals will miraculously rule.

Anybody with an ounce of sense, should see that folks are working hard here
for the big set up.

Fuck that!

You're seeing that in these poll results.

Keep depending on those if it makes you feel better.

All I have to do is open my eyes and look at policy.

A term of the fringe. It's why we have polls giving Sanders, Kuch and Feingold high marks as presidential contenders.

It's not "born from fantasy"

It's based on his actions. When it comes to things like the Bush tax cuts and the debt ceiling, Obama has capitulated in spectacular fashion.

The bottom 98% who didn't see their tax cuts go away disagrees. The people who didn't see their Unemployment Insurance disappear disagrees. The people who didn't who didn't want a default disagrees. Like I said, pure fantasy. It's only capitulation because we didn't crash in your game of chicken.

Got a link to backup your claim there about that 98%? You sure that 98% of Americans didn't want the Bush tax cuts to expire?

"The people who didn't want a default disagrees."

Well...a majority of Americans oppose the debt ceiling deal....http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/02/cnn-poll-three-quarters-believe-politicians-acting-like-spoiled-children/?hpt=hp_t1


Evidence to backup your claims would be nice. :hi:

Not exactly 98%, but referring to the 98% that would be affected. Is 84% a good enough number?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144989/Vast-Majority-Wants-Aspect-Bush-Tax-Cuts-Extended.aspx


Nice rewording there, but I said default, not the deal that was passed:

A clear majority of the American public now believes a failure by Congress to raise the nation’s statutory debt ceiling would be a real and serious problem, dismissing arguments by some Republicans that the coming debt ceiling deadline is no big deal, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/07/19/wsjnbc-poll-americans-take-debt-ceiling-seriously/

Apparently, repukes aren't the only ones who thought default as no big deal.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And it comes from the people who seem to complain most loudly and project it onto the POTUS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x743106

So many here WANT that ...

maybe they'll think differently when the GOP President actually ends Medicare and Social security.

Would be sad if that's what it takes for them to wake up.

But it seems that's the goal.

Naderites are still holding strong about 2000.

BIG difference.

out of step with much of their natural constituency and the viewpoint of most liberal/progressive activist. Furthermore they had the misfortune of being in that position during a period of economic downturn. Jimmy Carter was the first post-New Deal president to step away from keynesian economics toward what is commonly called "free market" or neo-liberal economics, albeit in a relative moderate form by current standards. Of course Ronald Reagan greatly accelerated this move toward economic neo-liberalism which has been embraced by all Presidents and major candidates for President of both parties since then.

Democratic candidates for President are in the precarious position of having to represent themselves as economic populist at least to some extent and therefore cannot let on to their natural supporters what their real economic philosophy actually is. Although, to be fair, President Clinton was probably more upfront about his free market beliefs than most. - But he had the advantage of coming into office at a time when market conditions were favorable toward producing another boom. Thus he could avoid a lot of the heat for his abandonment of New Deal/Great Society economic liberalism.

Both President Carter and President Obama were and are facing a period of economic downturn and are employing the neo-liberal economic policies that they very much believe it, but do not appear to be working and are extremely unpopular with most liberals and progressives and much of their natural constituency. They are not weak. They simply don't agree with us.

You know, the guy who left the country with the big bag of shiite this president has not been able to completely resolve in two years ...

Sadly, the responses to this post will be the responses you would get at freeperville splainin how tough the weakest president we have had in modern times was ...

He was a completely ineffectual leader who, unlike this president, had a COMPLETELY compliant congress for 6 years.

Bush was led by his nose. People used his oedipal complex to gin him up for Iraq, and outside of that he just went along with what the Grand Ol Party wanted, while the media allowed republicans to scream democrats were america hating terrorist lovers and democrats cowered in the corner.

Minus 9-11, he would have been a one term president.

Just because he strutted around like a 15 year old boy and acted like a fricken bully didn't mean he he "got his way." He had no clue what he was doing and had people around him who were good at managing him.

:rofl:

President Carter was a outsider to the nth degree, having never been elected to Congress. As soon as he was elected he attempted to shut down wasteful federal water projects, and was defeated by the western Democrats, Repukes, and other miscellaneous Democrats. Throughout his administration Ted Kennedy was actively working to undermine his objectives because Ted Kennedy wanted to be President in 1980. The last straw was the hostage taking in Iran. Instead of getting the hostages killed and waging war on the Iranian degenerates, he negotiated with them, demonstrating a weakness and human decency. Carter did not, unlike Obama, ever pre-emptively concede key positions, at the expense of Democratic constituents, prior to a controversy beginning.

It's like clockwork.