Worst Inauguration Day Selloff In History

[southwind]

Give it about a year, when most of the Democrats that voted for him, are still not having their mortgages paid for them!

Then we'll check on Obamas ratings !

 

[tech2101]

He took an obviously bad situation and made it worse, much worse. And people are obviously outraged.

What? Garfield already schooled you there.
Is that is why he has a 72% approval rating.

Or are you just waiting for your entitlement checks to come to pay for your mortgage and fill up your gas tank?

Nice reach to left field... :blink:

How much longer are you "hoping for change"?

Until you get your guy/girl elected?

Are you just waiting for your entitlement checks to come to pay for your mortgage and fill up your gas tank?

Is that a talking point for you now?

 

[dapoes]

Currently, Obama is very popular among Americans, scoring the highest "very positive" responses to date. With that said, however, Republican support (what little he had to start with) is shrinking. I think that has been readily apparent in the past couple weeks. So by "people"... it is mostly republicans. Take that for whatever you think it is worth.

Are you kidding me? Your quoting a poll done by the "obama-gives-me-a-tingle-up-my-leg" MSM??? :blink:

Try a more unbiased resource next time.

OBAMA APPROVAL PLUNGES 74% per Rasmussen Poll Shows Drop from 30% to 8%
Approval Index History Link
Daily Tracking Poll Link

And most importantly: BY THE NUMBERS

 

[dapoes]

dapoes,

Do you have to consult with the Republican National Committee before you post here?

Grow a pair and think for yourself.

You actually buy all this Republicrat BS while you wages are confiscated weekly?

Awww look another "Obama makes my leg all tingly" chearleader. Here's your complementary bumper sticker.

 

[dapoes]

Even more to feel all warm and tingly over Obamas economic recovery disaster nightmare.

Obama Admits Cap & Trade Will Cause Electricity Rates to Skyrocket
Video Link

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Businesses would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that cost onto consumers."

Senator Barack Obama
Speaking on his energy policies
San Francisco Chronicle
January 17, 2008

** Cap and trade will likely cost $700 to $1,400 dollars per family per year.

And that wonderful whopping tax cut everyone gets? Now White House Budget Director Peter Orszag says that it would no longer be considered a net tax, cut but aid to offset higher utilities. WTF?

Great. You'd think that Team 'O" would have thought of this before they announced their program.

Obama admitted in an interview with The San Francisco Chronicle during the campaign that cap and trade energy policy would "cause electricity prices to skyrocket."

White House Budget Director Peter Orszag also admitted this week that the cost of cap and trade on consumers would be enormous.

Boy, this sounds like an excellent program to introduce during a recession. Brilliant!

 

[dapoes]

Did you answer my question? NO, you didn't.

Which incoherent question was it again?

When you have an open mind you read, watch & listen to ALL points of view and then blend them into YOUR OWN Viewpoint based on YOUR personal Morals, Values & Ethics!

You should take a dose of that yourself. :blink:

You come across as some mindless Neo-Facist Conservative robot, verbally goosestepping across cyberspace.

Actually im very passionate about my principles, ethics and liberty. I believe that elected officials are there to serve the public, not the other way around. You remember that "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" thing?

I'm still waiting for you to produce a causal link between Obama's actions and the decline in the stock market.

Already have, multiple times, you just choose to blindly follow your idol leader (off a cliff) it appears.

Obama apparently blundered today stating the "I don't watch the market". That is one of the dumbest comments I've ever heard assuming it was said.

Umm yeah no sh!t, peoples retirements and savings are being decimated and that's the best flippant response he can come up with?

I'll come after Obama with a Flame Thrower when I think it warranted and I'll do likewise with the Neo Fascist Conservatives that bleet like sheep "Obama Bad, Republicans Good, Obama Bad, Republicans Good, Obama Bad, Republicans Good" which is bull excrement pure and simple. Likewise the same with Neo Fascist Liberals for whom Obama can do no wrong.

Well then what more are you waiting for?
When your taxes are thru the roof?
When your utilities and gas costs are double of what they are now? Triple?
When you lose your job?
When you lose your house?
When you lost whatever s left of your prosperity/retirement accounts/savings?

Just how much is too much?

 

[dapoes]

Look yet another financial industry fed up already...

Yesterday: Jim Cramer Blasts Obama Administration for making our economic woes worst. Video Link

Today: Cramer: 'This is the Greatest Wealth Destruction by a President'

Although an admitted Barack Obama supporter during last year's campaign, CNBC's Jim Cramer has certainly changed his view concerning our 44th president.

It took only 14 trading sessions for the Dow to fall from 8,000 to less than 7,000 and a third of people polled recently say they feel this market will go below 6,000 in the not-too-distant future.

CRAMER: We have an agenda in this country now that I would regard as being a radical agenda. I think that we had a budget that came out that basically put a level of fear in this country that I have not seen ever in my life, and I think that that changed everything.

LAUER: So, the policies are not shareholder-friendly?

CRAMER: Shareholder-friendly? This is the most, greatest wealth destruction I've seen by a president.

CRAMER: The stock market is the country right now. This is where people's weath is. This is their pension plans, their 401(k)s, their IRAs.

And how does obama respond?

Gibbs press conference today:

"Let me build on what the president said and that is, without understanding the basis for what Mr. Cramer said. I'm not entirely sure what he's pointing to, to make some of the statements that he's made and you can go back and look at any number of statements that he's made in the past about the economy and wonder where some of the backup for those are too."

Costello followed up by asking Gibbs if perhaps it wasn't those who work on Wall Street that were losing confidence in the market, but instead those investors that live on Main Street, that were causing the market to fall.

"I'm going to get in a lot of trouble if I continue," Gibbs said. "The president - again, if you turn on certain program, it's geared to a very small audience - no offense to my good friends, or friend at CNBC. But the president has to look out for the broader economy and for the broader population - many of whom are investors, but not exclusively investors."

Just lovely, peoples pension plans, 401(k)s, IRA's and financial prosperity are getting wiped out and Obama could really care less. :down:

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Are you kidding me? Your quoting a poll done by the "obama-gives-me-a-tingle-up-my-leg" MSM???

Try a more unbiased resource next time.
:blink:

Sorry for posting a poll done, in part, by the WSJ... with the same owner as FOX NEWS. Sorry, I will post a more liberal leaning poll next time.

 

[dapoes]

He's finding out the same thing that George McGovern found out when he left the senate and opened his own business.

It was YEARS ago that McGovern opened a small hotel only to find massive cost over runs in getting his place open due to various and sundry laws, many of which he wrote, sponsored or voted for.

Obama is finding out the same thing on a grander scale. You can not spend your way out of debt or other financial crisis's anymore than an airline can shrink to profitability.

Liberalism is a failed concept that has been demonstrated as such since Woodrow Wilson.

I agree 100%. Theres also a consensus that this is exactly what Obama and the Dem majority wants. The argument is that if they can fulfill the implementation of mass entitlement programs to get the populous dependent on such programs, then that will only insure the dem party will remain in power. Every four years the dem party will instill the threat of such programs being lost without them being in power.

 

[dapoes]

Sorry for posting a poll done, in part, by the WSJ... with the same owner as FOX NEWS. Sorry, I will post a more liberal leaning poll next time.

So that's the best response you can come with regarding the Rasmussen reports? :blink:

As you can see in that report, people are losing that "leg tingling" they once had with Obama at record speed.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

So that's the best response you can come with regarding the Rasmussen reports? :blink:

As you can see in that report, people are losing that "leg tingling" they once had with Obama at record speed.

Why would I have responded to your Ramussen reports??? I don't have a problem with them, as they do not refute my point. According to your source, Obama is seeing nearly the same "strongly approve" response as he did on the first day of office (42% to 44% respectively). While the Ramussen reports point out that the "disapprove" columns are growing, it doesn't refute the WSJ/NBC polls' assertion that it is the republicans who are adding to the "disapprove" percentages. Therefore, I stand by my statement that: "With that said, however, Republican support (what little he had to start with) is shrinking."

 

[dapoes]

Why would I have responded to your Ramussen reports??? I don't have a problem with them, as they do not refute my point.

Sure does, your obviously biased MSM report had him at 72% approval rating. Obviously it is not.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Sure does, your obviously biased MSM report had him at 72% approval rating. Obviously it is not.

Dapoes, while I know you have a tendency to twist facts to make a point, I didn't see you as someone who would straight out LIE to make a point! My report has the approval rating at 60%! Which, interestingly, is the same as the Ramussen Reports' "total approval" rating. Go figure. So, if my report is "obviously biased"... but, yet, it has the same number as "your" report, then what does that say about your report (or your credibility for that matter).

 

[dapoes]

While I know you have a tendency to twist facts to make a point, I didn't see you as someone who would straight out LIE to make a point! My report has the approval rating at 60%! Which, interestingly, is the same as the Ramussen Reports' "total approval" rating. Go figure. So, if my report is "obviously biased"... but, yet, it has the same number as "your" report, then what does that say about your report (or your credibility for that matter).

Nice twist you are trying to purpose, but your conveniently missing the fact that his perception is at 42% not 72% like you are trying to lie tell everyone. What does that say about your credibility for that matter?

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Nice twist you are trying to purpose, but your conveniently missing the fact that his perception is at 42% not 72% like you are trying to lie tell everyone. What does that say about your credibility for that matter?

Now your credibility has sank to an all time low. I will quote both sources for you:

WSJ/NBC: APPROVE 60%

RAMMUSSEN: TOTAL APPROVAL 60%

And when have I ever mentioned 72% in this discussion (I actually want you to show me!!!)... another lie from you, bud.