Obama. The Worst President in American History?


#1008

Well, that sucks on their parts, but there is a major difference between someone like Reagan and Trump, and then Obama and the Democrats.

Under Obama and the Democrats, a lot more people were on food stamps and welfare,
all while still doubling the national debt. The housing market was horrible, and jobs were on a decline. Only near the end of his reign in office did Obama and the Dems do something about these things, and the only reason they did them is to pump their numbers up to look good.
The problem with that is that for the most part Obama and the Democrats were showing America what Socialism would be like ultimately, or at least what direction America would be going in, under their advice/agenda. hahaha.

Other Conservative Presidents still put debt on America, and because of them doing it, America ultimately prospered because of it a lot of the time. Then again, maybe we could go back and have slick willy and the Dems screw us all on NATO again, and trade with China.

I’m pretty sure if China called in Americas debt to them this day, that they would own our country 3 times over or more. Thank you Obama, and past Presidents, including the Bush’s!!! lol. Good things Trump is putting the special tax on China.

Owe, there’s all of that, and Obama covered up everything Hillary Clinton did illegally while in his cabinet. Obama/Russian Collusion. Well, ultimately Clinton/Obama and the Dem Dems in general Collusion with Russia.


#1009

If we agree Trump is successful then we also agree that your excuse for not getting into politics is not logical.


#1010

I’m pretty sure you’re wrong. China doesn’t even hold as much of our debt as Bush 43 added. That is more than 3 times what Clinton added, maybe that the 3X you’re thinking.


#1015

Apparently Trump was paying attention to Alaska. HE opened up ANWR to drilling for them, after decades of stalling on it by others.

AGAIN, you don’t have to show up to pay attention to a state.

M


#1016

So now you are admitting they don’t need tend to campaign in small states even under the current EC. Agreed. I can go back and quote you where that was your concern. Seems your goalposts have been shifting as your original premise proves faulty.


#1017

No.

I’m telling you they send proxies, listen to voters, do ad buys, do polling - ALL without the candidate needing to show up.

What they learn from all that is what the state is interested in and needing.

But NONE of those things will be at all necesssary in a popular vote national election. You just need to worry about four or five states, promise them the moon and screw the rest.

M


#1018

And I showed you a republican strategist advising Trump to spend no money in Alaska because of the electoral college being a lock for Alaska. Your point that the EC encourages people to campaign or spend in little states is just not true.


#1019

And yet you cannot tell me how much money they DID spend in Alaska or how much attention they paid to the expressed needs of Alaskans.

What I see is Trump QUiCKLY made Alaskans a butt-load of money, after getting elected.

Face it. With a national popular vote YOU KNOW that all the candidates will concentrate all their efforts, their money and their time in the five most populous states and the rest can pound sand.

WHY NOT???

It’s a loser for all the rest of the country, which is why it doesn’t stand a chance in hell of passing.

M


#1020

Doesn’t look good for your case when campaigns spend almost all their time in 12 states.

Dude, concentrate. You are all over the place here. Telling us what happens AFTER an election in no way bolsters your argument that campaigns will pay attention to small states DURING an election. Remember that was your original premise.


#1021

And AGAIN you don’t have to go to a state to have a presence in a state.

Just HOW MANY times does this need to be explained to you? You send proxies, you do ad buys, you do polling, you listen to voters, you get out the vote…All this costs MONEY and it is money well spent in the current system.

In a national popular vote You do NONE of that in any but 5 states. That’s where you spend every dime because they ALONE will determine the election.

NOT A CHANCE that will ever be allowed to happen, if the rest of the union has anything to say about it - and they do.

M


#1022

Dude, I gave you a link that described how the vast majority of campaign efforts went to 12 states and Alaska wasn’t one of them. If you want to pretend that doesn’t contradict your premise go ahead. If you can, go ahead and show me evidence that Trump or Clinton took Alaska seriously.


#1023

NO.

You showed where 2/3rds of EVENTS were and ALSO showed that more than HALF of the states in the country got at least 1 visit by either the Presidential candidate or the Vice-Presidential candidate, and I also detailed a LOT MORE campaign efforts than just those visits.

If you thing the GOP didn’t campaign in all the states you don’t have a clue how a campaign works.

It’s CLEAR that if at least HALF the states get a visit under the EC and only 5 would under a popular vote the EC is BY FAR a better deal for the states.

The evidence that Trump took Alaska seriously is that as soon as he could he did something Alaskans have asked for for decades, but have been rebuffed on time and time again - Open up ANWR.

He CLEARLY was listening to Alaskans.

Give it up man. Even your own site PROVES that the EC is better than a popular vote would be!

M


#1024

Nobody cares about alaska…stop it.


#1025

Tell that to Borgia Dude, not me.

He’s the one who keeps bringing it up.

M


#1026

You said he was clearly listening to alaskians…

Well no…that’s just your fluffy spin on things


#1027

Marky, every state will have done campaign volunteers and workers. If you think that would disappear under a non-EC system I think that’s crazy.

The bolder seems like a guess on your part. One I disagree with although I would welcome any evidence you have other than your gut feeling.


#1028

We’re talking about campaigns. Not what happens after. You claimed presidential candidates would ignore Alaska under a popular vote system. I say they ignore it now under an EC system.

It’s ok, everyone reading knows the truth.


#1029

I have evidence.He did what they have been aslking to do for decades.

What evidence do you have that he was ignoring them?

M


#1030

You can only guage who was ignored by the RESULTS.

The results show he was listening to them.

It’s okay, We can all see the results.

M


#1031

I think tha vast majority WILL disappear. That is money that is totally unneccessary to be spent there under a Popular Vote.

Better to use every nickle where it helps - 5 states only.

M