Obama vs. the Economy in a Nutshell
October 5, 2011
Via Grand Rants I find an “infographic” from Ace of Spades (full-size version here) entitled “The Obama Presidency: By the Numbers”.
It presents some promises and other things President Obama and others in his administration said a few years ago, juxtaposed with various numbers (e.g., the unemployment rate) showing how things have turned out so far. It’s very succinct and easy to read.
Some of the numbers are more the president’s fault than others, but taken together, as the president himself said, “If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”
The infographic author cites his sources at the end (albeit in an artsy, difficult-to-use format), but if you doubt whether the president really said some of these things, I recommend this excellent video version by Minnesota Majority, in which you can see for yourself as he makes the bed he must lie in:
Tagged: 2012, Barack Obama, economy, government, news, politics, presidential election
Enjoyment and Contemplation 
October 5, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Republicans have blocked nearly all efforts to revitalize our economy, just so they could make a video like that. It’s treasonous and anybody who supports those traitors should be kicked out of our country.
October 5, 2011 at 1:52 PM
Strong words, sir. Among the many possible answers to your remarks, I offer this one: What do you think was holding President Obama back in 2009 and 2010, when he and his party controlled the White House and both houses of Congress?
October 5, 2011 at 3:28 PM
Senate Republicans filibustered nearly every bill and nomination put forth by Obama and the Democrats. The abuse of the filibuster is unprecedented. The Democrats held a super-majority (60 seats) for a few months in 2009, which is necessary to overcome a filibuster.
October 5, 2011 at 4:04 PM
The president got his “stimulus”, which was supposed to save the economy. The Obama administration promised that unemployment would not go above 8% if the stimulus passed; unemployment hasn’t fallen as low as 8% ever since. Obama also got Obamacare, despite in theory having lost the filibuster-proof majority by that point. Exactly which bills and nominations did Democrats support that you’re saying would have helped the economy but were prevented by Republicans’ “unprecedented” use of the filibuster?
October 5, 2011 at 5:28 PM
The Obama administration promised that unemployment would not go above 8% if the stimulus passed; unemployment hasn’t fallen as low as 8% ever since.
He didn’t “promise” anything. His administration’s forecast was that it wouldn’t go above 8%, but it was above that in Feb 2009 when it was signed into law.
Here are a few bills Republicans blocked:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/28/gop-blocks-democrats-jobs-outsourcing-bill/
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/us/politics/30cong.html
I’m not a big supporter of Obama, but if you right-wingers have to lie to criticize him, he must be doing a pretty good job.
October 6, 2011 at 10:44 AM
From your own sources:
“Republicans call it nothing more than a pre-election political ploy.
“The Democratic bill would have ended certain tax breaks for companies expanding overseas while giving new tax incentives to businesses bringing jobs home.
“. . .
“The point, Democratic strategists candidly admit, was to use the last few days of the congressional session before the election to try to highlight one of the few jobs-related issues Democrats feel they may be able to use against Republicans: outsourcing.”
“She also chastised Democrats as dillydallying on the measure, repeatedly pulling it off the floor to deal with other matters. ‘We need to create jobs in America,’ she said. ‘This bill has been on the floor for three weeks and three substitutes — 81 days.’
“The bill would create a $30 billion lending program within the Treasury Department, to be administered through local banks. It would also provide more than $12 billion in tax breaks, and would expand or enhance existing lending programs.”
So Republicans opposed two political ploys that would have expanded government and made the (already insanely complicated) tax code even more complex and manipulative. If the Democrats thought these were vital to the economy, they could have passed them in 2009 when they had their filibuster-proof majority.
If you have to resort to ascribing extremely bad motives to everyone who disagrees with you (“right-wingers have to lie”, “treasonous”, “traitors”), you must not really have an argument.
October 5, 2011 at 7:21 PM
Why havent the Bush tax cuts revitalized the economy? Isn’t that a Republican policy? Ha!
June 25, 2012 at 4:19 PM
[…] can’t run on his record, and he can’t run against the establishment again as the candidate of post-partisan […]