Republicans should be grateful for Obama

[Javier h]

I knew this would attract attention but here's the deal and I want the above to be proven wrong.

All projections showed that Mccain would have added significantly more to the national debt. I remember CNN? showed a graph where Obama had the national debt to 17 trillion and Mccain would have had it @ 18 trillion etc.

I also remember listening to Obama, I believe it was during one of the debates, where he said something to the effect:

"Sure I will added about 10 trillion to the national debt but at least we get healthcare out of it. My opponent will do the same but you wont get anything in return"

It was something very close to that.

Here's a question. Would Mccain have really done more spending? This after the constant criticism that he is running this nation into the ground. And if so, would the republicans have called Mccain out on all this spending today?

I want to hear from hardcore Mccain supporters because all of this might have been taken out of context. All the sites and links I have found all show trillions more from the Mccain side. If spending is really bad, then we got the worser of two evils.

[CorvallisBMW]

What's the point? It's all purely speculation about events that never happened and presidents that never existed...

[z31maniac]

^Exactly, all it would it be is conjecture and shit slinging.

And for the record, again, just because people didn't like Obama, doesn't mean they supported McCain!

[Javier h]

Point?

It's better to have a democratic president when it comes to spending?

Even on what appears to be "obscene" spending by the Obama administration?

We'll never really know although the inferred correlation below is amusing.

[mrsleeve]

What's the point? It's all purely speculation about events that never happened and presidents that never existed...

this



as to your graph.

Carter (we had just recently come off the Gold standard internationally so the idea of inflating the money supply with debts was still a touchy subject) Cater also had the interest rates very very high (think 12-18% on mortgage loans) Personal Income tax rates were very very high top rate was 50% and you were in that bracket if you were over about 75k IIRC. All this did was depress the economy and keep things very very stagnate. Look up the early 80's Regan may have been in office but the cause was the policy of Jimmy the Peanut farmer.

Reagan- Cut taxes and the economy took off, problem the DEMOCRATS controlled the houses of congress and they are the ones that make the budget and spend the money. THEY REFUSED to cut the spending and even increased it during this time. This is a case party wars...............no more no less

Slick Willy- just that slick and getting credit for the policies of those that came before, while I cant argue with his balanced budget, its not entirely his own doing, the policy of the Regan/bush 1, era were PAYING OFF IN SPADES with economic growth, and thus we were producing more stuff and selling more shit, Economy was a huge boom time and ever expanding tax rolls. this is why Willy was able to balance the budget with some ludicrously small spending cuts.

Bush 2, well the economy came crashing down with the .com bubble, 9/11, housing bubble, High gas prices, NAFTA, among many other things, that were products of Slick Willys policies, and not to mention the natural boom and bust cycles of a healthy economy.

Congress is the true culprit here, and this is what you really need to remember.

[trent]

McCain isn't a republican. That is why he didn't win.

[Vedubin01]

McCain isn't a republican. That is why he didn't win.

this....

[joshh]

McCain isn't a republican. That is why he didn't win.

What he is is even tougher to define. I can't stand McCain.




This imo would end in a bad way no matter who you picked. Just like the Gore vs Bush election.

[mrsleeve]

McCain isn't a republican. That is why he didn't win.

LOL yeah there is that too :)

[Javier h]

You know I have heard that comment about congress controlling things. As relevant as that is, it's moot. Focus more on the President as he can veto any shit he wants.

Obama actually disproves the premise of graph, but again, had Mccain become President, it would have promoted the same assumptions; it would have been just as worse. I was really look for someone to suggest otherwise, but its clear in my book that both parties are equally trigger happy.

[z31maniac]

but its clear in my book that both parties are equally trigger happy.

You just started paying attention, didn't you?

[PattonD]

Congress is the true culprit here, and this is what you really need to remember.

The problem with congress is voters often like their representatives, but blame the others

[gwb72tii]

trying to defend obama by saying macain would have been just as bad is FAIL
this pretend president and his co-conspirators in congress are the reason the debt has exploded. obama and the democrats will have doubled the national debt in 4 years - deficit spent as much in four years as all other administrations in the history of the USA combined
mccain never proposed any sort of deficit as you imagine. this is total BS
obama has been a dismal failure as the leader of the free world and as pres of the USA

and at least we get healthcare? WTF? this is good?
we continue to pay for this partisan hack president gambling he could get the holy grail of the democrat party, health care, passed and that the economy would recover as it has in all past recessions. Obama had bad advisors, still does, did nothing to promote business, and as a result the economy is now growing at a mind blowing 2%.
this economy needs to add 150k net new jobs a month to handle legal immigrants, and its adding 200k.
the only upside to all this is that obama will be a one term wonder

but.................you are correct in saying the republicans should be grateful for obama
he's done more to unite them behind their core conservative beliefs than anyone since dukakis

[Wiglaf]

eh. If I could go back in time.. still would have not have voted McCain/Palin into power. I think Hillary would have been better than Obama. The Clintons didn't get the trade pacts quite right but overall I think they did pretty well, and she did want to try and improve that.

[Eric]

this



as to your graph.

Carter (we had just recently come off the Gold standard internationally so the idea of inflating the money supply with debts was still a touchy subject) Cater also had the interest rates very very high (think 12-18% on mortgage loans) Personal Income tax rates were very very high top rate was 50% and you were in that bracket if you were over about 75k IIRC. All this did was depress the economy and keep things very very stagnate. Look up the early 80's Regan may have been in office but the cause was the policy of Jimmy the Peanut farmer.

Reagan- Cut taxes and the economy took off, problem the DEMOCRATS controlled the houses of congress and they are the ones that make the budget and spend the money. THEY REFUSED to cut the spending and even increased it during this time. This is a case party wars...............no more no less

Slick Willy- just that slick and getting credit for the policies of those that came before, while I cant argue with his balanced budget, its not entirely his own doing, the policy of the Regan/bush 1, era were PAYING OFF IN SPADES with economic growth, and thus we were producing more stuff and selling more shit, Economy was a huge boom time and ever expanding tax rolls. this is why Willy was able to balance the budget with some ludicrously small spending cuts.

Bush 2, well the economy came crashing down with the .com bubble, 9/11, housing bubble, High gas prices, NAFTA, among many other things, that were products of Slick Willys policies, and not to mention the natural boom and bust cycles of a healthy economy.

Congress is the true culprit here, and this is what you really need to remember.

I agree with everything your saying, I just have to wonder how much of what obama inherited was due to bush II

I don't like obama at all, and generally liked bush (his speech after 9/11 was fantastic, something i'll never forget) but how much of the O' man's blunders has really been the result of Bush?