This is one of the consequences of placing a man in the most powerful position in the world who does not even have enough experience to run a mid size corporation.
But how many times did you hear from the media that Obama never had any executive experience and only held a job as a US Senator for two years before he started running for President, never mind his incredibly liberal voting record.
I expect his ratings to flounder eventually. Even an Obama worshipping media won’t be able to hide the train wreck that will be our economy.
Then there are his numerous foreign policy blunders.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Great link. It disappoints me when I learn that some Democrats voted what I think is the right way on something, but I don’t see their names and thus have no one to give credit to.
For those not clicking on the link, this excerpt gives the meat of it:
12 Democrats and 1 Independent defied Party leadership and voted with all 40 Republicans to:
permanently authorize E-Verify, so the pro-amnesty forces can’t constantly threaten to kill it if they don’t get their way
require all federal contractors to use E-Verify so returning veterans and other unemployed Americans will get jobs created with federal tax money.
7 SENATORS WHO SWITCHED TO THE GOOD SIDE TODAY
E-Verify won today because these Senators – who voted to kill the E-Verify mandate in March – switched today and voted for using E-Verify to keep illegal aliens out of federal contractor jobs.
Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)
Bryan Dorgan (D-N.D.)
Mary Landrieu (D-La.)
Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)
Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.)
Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)
John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)
6 OTHER DEMOCRATS WHO VOTED TO HIRE AMERICANS
We have to give special thanks to the Democrats who stood with us and unemployed Americans today, because they had to defy their Party leadership to do it.
These Democrats voted for mandating E-Verify both today and back in March:
Max Baucus (D-Mont.)
Kay Hagan (D-N.C.)
Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.)
Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)
John Tester (D-Mont.)
If 10 of these 13 Senators continue to put American workers first in their voting, they spell absolute doom for plans to legalize 12-20 million illegal aliens with an amnesty.
Democrat Kent Conrad (on the above list of those who voted to make E-Verify permanent) noted yesterday that the proposal to tax employee health benefits, the primary source of funds for ObamaCare, looks dead. Blanche Lincoln (D. Ark.) and many other Democrats (most of whom are also on the above list) are dead-set against the Public Option in ObamaCare. Mary Landrieu (D. La.) looks like a no on the National Energy Tax.[/quote]
Nice to see some people are wising up (at least with respect to the illegal alien aspect)
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
We need immigration reform so badly it hurts… the economy that is.
The biggest thing we need is penalties on employers who hire illegals. What’s happening on that front?
The agencies who enforce this are hog tied, and when they do a raid…it’s demonized. The immigrants are the future of the democratice ticket vote.[/quote]
I am not so sure about that. Senator Reid and many other Democrats have strongly supported crackdowns on employers. Many Republicans who oppose amnesty do not actually support measures against employers (in my view, the biggest problem and most essential to resolving illegal immigration issues).
Anyhow, BOTH parties better wake up because nearly 70% of democratic voters support such measures. 77% of Republicans do.
Yeah sir, we are kind of in tough times in case you hadn’t noticed. There isn’t a president in our nations history who’s had a good approval rating during times of strife. Still TWICE as high as president Bush’s approval rating for the majority of his presidency. Shit comments like this are so useless…
LOL, like the average American is educated enough to make an unbiased analysis of the presidents job anyway!
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
We need immigration reform so badly it hurts… the economy that is.
The biggest thing we need is penalties on employers who hire illegals. What’s happening on that front?[/quote]
That’s a good step, but we need a hell of a lot more than that. We need to make sure high skilled immigrants can come as they please, and we need to have some form of temporary work visas for the low skilled. And yeah, we need to crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants too. And we need to fucking do something to get those 10 or however many millions out of the shadows of our society/economy too.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
We need immigration reform so badly it hurts… the economy that is.
The biggest thing we need is penalties on employers who hire illegals. What’s happening on that front?
That’s a good step, but we need a hell of a lot more than that. We need to make sure high skilled immigrants can come as they please, and we need to have some form of temporary work visas for the low skilled. And yeah, we need to crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants too. And we need to fucking do something to get those 10 or however many millions out of the shadows of our society/economy too. [/quote]
Once you have recipients used to getting that money – whether individuals, corporations, or state or local governments – they fight like the devil against having their increase “taken away.”
[/quote]
Yeah I saw that. Some of this is how it always goes, but I’m beginning to think the trend may keep up pretty steady. What’s just killin me is people who voted for this guy and are now aghast at all this exploding government. I’m running into people a coupla few times a week now who are like “what the hell does he think he’s doing?”.
You’re kiddin right? He’s doing precisely what anybody with their head out of the hype knew he was going to do. What did people think was going to happen with the house of Pelosi, Majority leader Senator Reid and an underage warmed over short haired hippie in the Whitehouse? Well gaaaaahleee.
Yeah I saw that. Some of this is how it always goes, but I’m beginning to think the trend may keep up pretty steady. What’s just killin me is people who voted for this guy and are now aghast at all this exploding government. I’m running into people a coupla few times a week now who are like “what the hell does he think he’s doing?”.
You’re kiddin right? He’s doing precisely what anybody with their head out of the hype knew he was going to do. What did people think was going to happen with the house of Pelosi, Majority leader Senator Reid and an underage warmed over short haired hippie in the Whitehouse? Well gaaaaahleee.
Well, while there are Democrat voters who are fully into the Moveon.org, Democratic Underground, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid view of government, these are of course not the ones appalled at the growth in spending.
I expect you’ll find that most of those Democrat voters who are, are the sort of Democrat voter who base their vote on “Democrats are for the working man and Republicans are for big corporations and the ‘rich.’ So of course I’m going to vote Democrat.”
There are many who really do not worry about anything beyond that little – they think – truism. It’s all they need to know to pull the lever for the straight ticket.
(For those who have poor reading comprehension, let me point out that there is nothing in there discussing whether there are or are not are Republican knee-jerk voters. So save the breath insisting that contrary to my post such also exist. Of course they do. I have to add this because of experiencing showing that if I don’t, there will be replies acting as if I had said only Democrat dimwits exist.)
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
<<< There are many who really do not worry about anything beyond that little – they think – truism. It’s all they need to know to pull the lever for the straight ticket. >>>[/quote]
I guess I can see that. That and the muddy middle consisting largely of political illiterates who just knew he wasn’t a Republican after all the crimes against humanity they were routinely committing according to the media.
Back to the main topic, I now think my previous statement that the approval ratings didn’t matter insofar as what he can get pushed through was probably accurate at the moment written, but if the slide continues, it won’t remain accurate.
The -11 figure being thrown about is a Rasmussen statistic – percent who are very approving minus percent very much disapproving – that personally I think is a very sound way to look at things, is I think not the way the media and other politicians look at the things. Or most of the public.
There, it’s simply the approve (whether just barely or very much) vs disapprove (again, to any degree.)
Here, Obama is at 49% favorable or something like that. Which is a pretty severe slide but still not a horrific position.
At some point, a sufficiently low rating makes media figures feel that they win popularity with viewers or readers by knocking the President, and similarly even fellow party members start thinking much moreso that they may have political advantages for themselves for voting against what the President wants, regardless that there will be punishment for it.
But that may well not be till the percent approving is down in the 30s. I don’t know what point in approval ratings, historically, the media has turned against Democrats. They certainly did with Carter at some point, but I don’t know exactly when that was, either by date or percent approval rating.
