Should Obama be Elected again? Or thrown out?

america is a democratic country you have every right to say whether hes elected or not and if is horrible

im canadian but i still listen to the important shit in america blah blah blah but ya obama really hasent done a bad job sure hes not the best but everyone uve had in the last 20 years was pretty trash he said hed give u healthcare people thought it was an invasion of privacy your country has debt big fucking deal so does greece and italy greece has 500 billion and italy alot more

all in all hes done a pretty good job for what he had to work with you guys just happen to remember the bad over the good.



america is a military super power if you say out with the military presence in countries everything america pretty much stands for goes down the shitter
and lets face it this may be mean but if america didnt assert its dominance over other countries by its military you'd be pretty damn useless

We need a president that is capable of fixing all this shit. This is like the gilded age 2.0

after watching his state of the union address and the republican response i absolutely believe that he will get reelected also i might have been just being paranoid but throughout his entire speech there were many subliminal hint at his reelection . aside from public opinion i don't know personally what i want to happen next. In my local government we have a very corrupt sherif who only got elected because he was a democrat, so right now I'm kinda done with all that jazz. As lilsim says osama was taken down during his term which was a great victory for the free world. i will say that between obama and romney ill vote for obama

Not going to vote basically fucked either way.

Vote Ron Paul.

In 1999, the United States government was operating at a surplus (we had no debt.) During the eight years that the Dubyah-Bush Administration was in power, we were driven $14 TRILLION into debt, because Bush wanted to be a man and fight some wars! Then when Obama came around, he was given the country in a state of turmoil, and was given little chance to fix it.

He's recalled nearly all of our troops from the Middle East. He killed bin Laden. He started the advent of public healthcare; a great thing, in my opinion. Healthcare should not be privatized to the extent that it is in the U.S. Everyone knows how it is: they have a million loopholes, they grossly overcharge, and as a result, thousands, if not millions, of Americans go without good healthcare. Obamacare isn't perfect, but it's a start.

Has he done an all-around great job? No, he could stand to do better. Are the Republican candidates any better? No. If I had to choose from the red, I'd pick Romney, although I don't think he'd do much better than Obama. Gingrich would probably be Clinton number 2, in terms of scandals. Santorum is...weird. Paul is an idiot: cut spending and cut taxes, we'll still have $14 trillion in debt.

At least Rick Perry dropped out. God knows what he would do if given the Presidency.

No. I read his policies. Don't seem any better. Actually they see to be worse.

Worse in what way?

Policies of the elimination of the department of education and the elimination of income taxes. Of course my opinions are my own so I won't push any further but personally I don't see any really worthy people in the running right now.

People seem to have this fantastically erroneous idea that the President, once in office, has the power to move mountains. That he can keep every promise he made in his campaign if he truly wanted to. That he can sit in his chair and simply do as he pleases.

If any of you were to actually sit down in one of the President's domestic or foreign policy briefings, you'd realize how foolish and downright laughable this notion is. His advisors from the various departments within the Cabinet and other sectors of the government come to him, their portfolios in hand (usually full of hundreds of papers worth of information that were skimmed over in the course of about fifteen minutes), and they sit down and discuss with him TELL him his options for the issue they plan to confront.

The President's only job is to make the final call. He has no say whatsoever in what the options are. He has to make do with what he's given, and you'll be lucky if one of the options he's given coincides with anything he mentioned in his campaign for the seat.

In respect to Congress, the President's only true power is the power to veto bills. He can push for legislation to be written, but the job ultimately falls on the two houses. And as we can see with the current Congress, they can hardly agree on anything, much less the things that Obama had campaigned in the hopes for.

BigLundi made a huge point earlier in the thread here. The fact that Obama HAS kept a lot of promises is something admirable.

I'm not trying to say that Obama is an innocent little sheep trapped in a box, though. Obama certainly has made questionable calls regarding his policies, and most of them are probably due to him just shrugging the issue off and doing whatever other people told him to do. Not a smart idea, considering that the blame will ultimately land on him because of his position, but that's the risk that comes with the job. The President has so much he's held responsible for without actually having done much to begin with.

That's the nature of the American Government as a whole. Everything is so divided and compartmentalized that when something goes wrong and we try to find someone to blame, all we find is bit and pieces everywhere, but never a whole picture. What happens then is what's expected: People demonize the President because, well, he's the most prominent figure.

That's why I'm going to say this to all the Ron Paul fanatics in the thread: I completely agree with your support for Ron Paul. I believe that Paul may actually be the best candidate out there right now. But be forewarned; what Paul stands for and promises, and the things that he can actually do as President are two completely different things.

A political scientist once said, "Where you stand is where you sit." He was referring to the fact that the position or job you hold will affect how you view things.

To a certain degree, this means that it doesn't matter who the President is. Because the person sitting in that chair has a role and a job to do. And this job, the office of the President, is a job that severely limits the amount of personal input they can actually make. Campaign promises and beliefs stay in the waiting room because the men inside the conference chamber have neither the time nor the patience to factor them in. That's simply the way it is.

TL;DR - Never expect the best. From ANY candidate. You'll always set yourself up for disappointment.

In short, what he's saying is that the President is a political puppet. If you want me to be fairer, he is the judge of the laws. But in our Congress is the Jury. We have a system where the Jury overrules the Judge. No seriously, even if President Obama vetoes a certain bill(Let's say he actually fulfilled his promise to veto the NDAA.)

It doesn't go away, it goes back to the House and Senate for a re-vote! And should the House/Senate vote 2/3rds of a majority, it doesn't matter if it's the Enabling Act or a Censorship Act, it's law.

So President Obama could say "I respect the Constitution", but if Congress doesn't, then we're fucked. Oh, and if Lindsey Graham is any indication congress does NOT respect Human Rights and the Constitution.

But what about the Supreme Court? Yeah, about our Justices...They're politically appointed by the President and by Presidents of the past. So in other words, they hold political ties. You don't think those senile old judges haven't been connected with recent political congressmen and senators?

The flaw in the Supreme Court is that it's politicized and therefore any debate construed in the courts will be construed to the favor of the Government. A perfect example are the SuperPAC'S. A Gross violation of what the Founders set out for.

The system is DEAD. There's not a Republican or Democrat that's even worth listening to. Don't count on the Supreme Court to bail you out, and don't count on a Republican or Democrat. Even Obama said himself on the campaign trail. These guys are brought and paid for by lobbyists and the irony is that he was the MOST brought and paid for!

And those "advisors" of Obama's? They're politically selected too.

The Political Position of the country, shapes the Political Position of Washington, of the House/Senate.

So if we want things to change, not just Ron Paul. Elect EVERY Third Party member that's on a ballot and if he/she isn't on a ballot, then write one in!

I'll make a new post tomorrow on the hypocrisy of the "Obama inherited horrible country luls" excuse and just how both the Liberals and NeoCons have conned this country for the last 50+ years.

He shouldn't get elected again. I still believe that everybody voted him because they wanted a black president for the first time to step into a white house.

Obama should never show his face again because he took the word "Change" so serious but his actions didn't do anything at all.

1. Captured Osama bin Laden. ( The guy was chilling in the middle of the city)
2. Got the Nobel peace prize. ( People are still killing each other)
3. He is hip and can keep up with everybody. ( Because that is his job and not him)
4. He is more open. ( About himself but not about his operations as a president)

These are NOT the reasons why he is a good president, a good president should REALLY take action and turn his country into a powerhouse again.

So if you guys wanna vote him again then do it... I have no rights to stop you.

Please vote responsibly my fellow Fakku-ers.

I acknowledge that what one says he'll do will be different from what he can do, but what I (and everyone) should care about is that he tries to do what he says he'll do; that's really the most you can ask for.

Also, the president is not under any authority. There's no council or anything that must approve his choices. He has advisers, but they aren't in authority; the president makes the final call. His results are limited by other branches of government, but his actions are not. There's no excuse for his actions, and I hold the president fully responsible for his actions (not his results).

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy"

I'll be voting for him again. I dont think it would be wise to kick him out at this point. Give him another term to see how he does. I dont think hes ruined anything or destroyed the economy in a way that cant be fixed. Also the only republican candidate that would have had a chance at my vote quit running.

I will vote for him again as well... i think he needs more time to do more stuff. He had a big job to do and a lot of things to fix to expect him to do it all in just one term .. it's hard. Specially if the senate cuts off what ever you try to do.

I sure as hell am not voting for Rommney,Newt or Paul(To be fair, i agree with about %50 of Ron pauls views...it is just the other %50 seem crazy to me), so i will vote for Obama again

[font=verdana][color=green]Okay, to all of the people in here who said he has achieved nothing, please look at this list of 13 things which he has accomplished:

1. Got Osama bin Laden
2. Unemployment rate 8.5%, and going down
3. 1.6 million jobs created with no GOP help
4. 22 months of job and economic growth with no help
5. Ended war in Iraq
6. DADT repeal
7. Not one tax hike in 3 years
8. Brought out of racism in the GOP
9. Save auto industry and 1.5 million jobs
10. Assisted in ousting Gaddafi
11. Only active President to receive Nobel Peace prize while in office
12. Mortgage modification to prevent home owners from losing their home
13. Reform Affordable healthcare


So, I don't see what exactly he "hasn't done". Speaking as a British citizen, I would love to have Obama be our Prime Minister. He actually gets things done. Also, speaking as an international, it is certainly reassuring that your ally's President isn't a total whack-job, just itching for a fight. Unlike other candidates in the running, he also isn't stupid either - Christ, he used to teach Constitutional Law for crying out loud. Want someone to protect your rights? Then he is your man. I actually think he allowed a law to pass just so he can have the Supreme Court strike it down due to being non-constitutional, if someone could confirm that for me.

You'll be fools and the laughing stock of the world if you don't allow that great man to get reelected. I mean, who do Britain, Germany and France have? David Cameron, who talks way more than he acts, and Merkozy - a pair trying to control the whole of Europe and don't know the meaning of the word "compromise".

I'm going out on a limb here and assuming that by results, you mean the end product of his actions.

At what point do we equate his actions with the results, then? The only thing that we, the people, ever truly see are the results of his decisions, NOT the decisions themselves. For all we know, he may have actually been trying to keep to his campaign agenda. The choices he's given are his to make, but the actual implementation of these decisions is usually left in the hands of the various Departments. It's practically a game of telephone, where what he says at the beginning may not come close to what came out at the end. Sure, it's wrong to say that he doesn't have some responsibility in the results, but it's just as wrong to completely fault him for them.

And while the President is indeed free from any higher authority, don't let that become synonymous in your mind with being completely free to act independent of others. Sure, he doesn't have to listen to what his advisors tell him. But do you realize how many things the President actually has to deal with and act upon on a daily basis? Every day, the President has to be briefed on what's going on both in and outside of the US, and every day he has to make changes to his policies to accommodate for them, or enact completely new policies altogether to factor them in. Sure, he can sit there and do all the work by himself, but that's like asking the captain of the Titanic to not only steer the ship in the right direction and keep it on a steady course, but also maintain it in working order, from bow to stern, and on top of that also expect him to be on the lookout for any and all icebergs that might threaten the ship and react immediately to them. All by himself.

It's unrealistic, and to actually expect that of him is absurd. That's why he needs people specializing in all the different areas of the ship to tell him what he needs to do. He can't actually be everywhere at once, and that's why he's forced to rely on the options his advisors give him. He has to trust that they're doing their job right and giving him the best choices he can make in each situation. And like I said, if the shit hits the fan, then the blame always falls on him, regardless of how little an effect he had on the actual outcome of his decision.

Like I said, your job limits what you can do. And being the President, the highest office in America, you can't always tell how your decisions will affect everyone down below. You just make do with what you've been given.

So even if Paul or any of these other candidates try their best to keep their promises, the best they can actually do is gamble on the possibility that the choices they're given and the decisions they make will come out with the results they had hoped for. Some Presidents are just luckier than others.