The 2011 presidential election poll

[turbo]

Where is Huntsman?

Under the radar. Unelectable in a Republican primary, anyway. Obama's ambassador to China (bad mark!) and another Mormon (bad mark!). The GOP is going to shoot themselves in the foot in 2012, IMO, and that's too bad because we have to have more than one dominant party in DC.

 

[scottbekerham]

I vote for osama ben laden

 

[ThomasT]

Our system doesn't give us the opportunity to cast a no vote unfortunately so this poll essentially will.

How does it do that? I don't see a "none of the above" alternative.

 

[russ_watters]

The way I see it is that the Republicans got us into the mess with their policies and leadership.

Clinton had a balanced budget, so, the "Tax and Spend Democrats" made it so we had a surplus and a balanced budget...

..and the "Conservative Republicans" ran us into poverty

That's pretty simplistic. Clinton didn't really do anything to get that balanced budget except fail to pass a universal healthcare plan, get bullied by Newt Gingrich into not increasing spending and watch tax revenue grow due to the internet boom and housing bubbe. Then the internet boom went bust right before he left office and the housing boom went bust in 2007.

If Obama isn't responsible for the jump in unemployment as he entered office, (and he isn't), Bush isn't responsible for the recession we were entering as he entered office.

Bush really didn't do all that much on the domestic front except reduce taxes and create the TSA, both of which I'm fine with. He's mainly hated by the left for starting an unpopular war. But economically, there is a lot of blame to go around, includint to the American people who ran up credit card debt and got bad mortgages in the '90s and Wall street, which got rich by betting on betting.

I'm not really sure what that last line means, since Obama made some conscious decisions to run up debt. Some of the current run-up is directly due to the recession, but much is directly due to Obama's decisions when he and the dems had full control over the government.

 

[Tea Jay]

That's pretty simplistic. Clinton didn't really do anything to get that balanced budget except fail to pass a universal healthcare plan, get bullied by Newt Gingrich into not increasing spending and watch tax revenue grow due to the internet boom and housing bubbe. Then the internet boom went bust right before he left office and the housing boom went bust in 2007.

If Obama isn't responsible for the jump in unemployment as he entered office, (and he isn't), Bush isn't responsible for the recession we were entering as he entered office.

Bush really didn't do all that much on the domestic front except reduce taxes and create the TSA, both of which I'm fine with. He's mainly hated by the left for starting an unpopular war. But economically, there is a lot of blame to go around, includint to the American people who ran up credit card debt and got bad mortgages in the '90s and Wall street, which got rich by betting on betting.

I'm not really sure what that last line means, since Obama made some conscious decisions to run up debt. Some of the current run-up is directly due to the recession, but much is directly due to Obama's decisions when he and the dems had full control over the government.

LOL - The point is the same as you're making, hence my use of quotation marks. It seems to be how the two sides are interpreting the events unfolding and unfolded based upon their "side".

Its also why I pointed out that in the end, it didn't matter who was president either way, and it didn't matter who was president during Obama's term.

I'll add that as the economy will probably recover enough for people to feel like the plane is done crashing, etc...within the next 2-5 yrs anyway, whomever is president NEXT will get the credit for it.

 

[russ_watters]

LOL - The point is the same as you're making, hence my use of quotation marks. It seems to be how the two sides are interpreting the events unfolding...

Thats fine as long as you don't confuse interpretation with fact and some of yours seem to do that.

...also, you misinterpreted the poll results: since there were a lot of republicans to choose from, their vote got split.

 

[yungman]

The way I see it is that the Republicans got us into the mess with their policies and leadership.

Clinton had a balanced budget, so, the "Tax and Spend Democrats" made it so we had a surplus and a balanced budget...

..and the "Conservative Republicans" ran us into poverty, and destroyed our reputation abroad, creating a lot of hatred towards America...and accelerating terrorism, plus an international smirk at us from the countries who liked seeing Big 'Ol Arrogant USA get some comeuppance, with a nice fat target to hate.

So, Obama inherits this mess, has one term to fix everything it took more than a term to destroy...and is expected to fix everything in a year or so because he's "President".If he can't fix the Republican's mess in one term, they step in and essentially say "WE can fix this, the Democrats Failed!"

And, of COURSE, the international monetary crises was NOT a "Republican Plot", it was collateral damage from a LOT of other issues...which whacked us upside the head at the same time as our housing and mortgaged backed derivatives went belly-up.In reality, even if the democrats had been in the presidency for the terms the Republicans had...and had done the same damage...Obama, or Bush, would NOT have been able to "fix it" in one term anyway.

The president can't "fix" an international monetary crises.So, no matter who had "won" the last election was destined to be blamed for WHY he got elected in the first place...the mess.Smarter people seem to be voting for Obama, as a group. They seem to recognize that he's the lesser of the evils.

Less astute people who seem to need to dislike him for whatever reason, often linked to Fox New Propaganda, etc...want anyone BUT Obama.

The poor whites in the Bible Belts are against Obama, and the average Fox News viewer polled thinks he's a Muslim/Manchurian candidate born in Africa with a fake birth certificate.

The poll here so far shows mostly Obama support as well...

So, I don't think he's special, just not as bad as the other choices...and it looks like other educated, thoughtful people agree, he doesn't suck as bad as the others.

:DThe Presidency is a joke...its a part the politician plays if elected. Regan was a professional actor, and, one of the better loved presidents, and so forth.

Clinton ride of the strong country the Reagan and old Bush handed down. Internet boom that create a lots of jobs that has nothing to do with Clinton. Country was so strong right after the war on Iraq no body dare to touch us except the terrorist bombing in 2003. So don't give that much credit to Clinton. He was not a bad president, he never got tested.

Bush was a bad president, he was given with a bad hand where stock market collapsed right after he took over in 2001, then 9/11 that was more due to nonattendance of Clinton after 2003. Yes then Bush made it worst by invading Iraq and now leave Iran as the lone power house in that part of the region.

Loan crisis was started by Dodd and Frank back in the 90s because he pushed for affordable housing and force the banks to lower requirement for home loans. After stock market failed in 2001, people parked their money in real estate, banks were forced to lower requirements to compete. Bush did not cause the melt down in 2008. He is stupid enough to stare at the problem and let it go by without doing anything. He is sure one of the worst president in the last 100 years.

Then people out of desperation voted for an extreme liberal obama in. Three years and five trillions wasted, we are worst off today than the day he took office. We become the laughing stalk of the world, money wasted to only benefit the unions, create a hostile environment for private companied so they stop hiring. He want to follow the Europeans' footstep that is failing in front of us. You want to be the next Greece, Portugal, Spain, England etc. That have years of cradle to grave government handout and bankrupting the country? Want to follow their foot prints that become a third world country and let country like China take over? How does more unions, more regulations help us in competing with China, S Korea, Indea where people are willing to work for penny to a dollar?

And then obama promote more racial divide, racial tension of the country become so much higher than 3 years ago. I thought people should be judge by their ability, not by the color of their skin...And I am speaking as a Chinese...a minority. This racial issue is getting way over board, now if you don't support obama, you are racist. Where does this come from? As a minority that saw discrimination, I believe everyone is responsible to their destiny. You work for what you get and don't blame others if you don't get what you want.

We went from Bush to obama like jumping from frying pan into the fire. It's time to stop blaming Bush and start looking at obama as he is. Let's just say Carter, Bush II and obama can compete for the worst president of the country.

Now because of Bush and obama, we have ron paul becoming relevant. That is the scariest thought. If he become the nominee against obama, I might stay home and not vote or consider moving back to Hong Kong. Sad part is people born here and raise up in the strongest country in the world. It is so easy for them to think this way and take for granted we'll be strong forever. Freedom is not free. I was from the other side of the world, I learn my former country China became too conceded 150 years ago, thinking that they were strong and nobody could touch her. They closed the door like ron paul want to pull troops out from the rest of the world in the name of "non interventionism". China ended up being invaded, cut up and occupied by the countries in the rest of the world. Took them over 100 years to come back.

In my book, everyone except ron paul will be much better than obama. Put it in another way, can't get any worst. After Bush and obama, my expectation is very low. far as I concern, Bush spaced out for 8 years and obama been playing golf for the last 3 years. Sadly Carter might get off the worst president and even become the third worst president in the history.

 

[Tea Jay]

I'm not sure what qualifies a president as better or worse...as they don't really do that much, its mostly the administration in power, etc.

Reagan was a better actor than most of the Presidents, and everyone loved him, so we should probably elect actors as presidents. They have more training at lying with a striaght face, etc. Obama didn't have much to work with, or time to do it, so its hard to say what HE could have done differently. The bunch of OTHER politicians in Washington probably had more to do with how things went than Obama did.

I think Obama tried to work with both sides politically, and he was punished for it, as the Republican side for the most part stymied any attempts at getting anything done.

A grid lock because continuing a tax break for millionaires while the middle and lower class were broke and angry was a Republican PRIORITY.

When a tax break for the middle and lower class was on the table, FIGHTING it was a priority for the Republicans.

If the Republican party continues to fight for what it APPEARS to believe in, based on the actual fights, they will continue to be fractured, as no one group can actually want ALL of the things they fight for.

 

[Evo]

A first term President is either dealing with the previous president's mess or their success, depending on if they unseated a bad or good president. One term is not long enough to make significant changes.

 

[rootX]

A first term President is either dealing with the previous president's mess or their success, depending on if they unseated a bad or good president. One term is not long enough to make significant changes.

Putin might be an interesting example to look at, ignoring 2010-2012.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

A first term President is either dealing with the previous president's mess or their success, depending on if they unseated a bad or good president. One term is not long enough to make significant changes.

Poor Grover Cleveland.

 

[jim hardy]

anybody else think Dems will throw Obama under the bus and run Hillary?

 

[Evo]

anybody else think Dems will throw Obama under the bus and run Hillary?

No..

 

[mathwonk]

i think it interesting that over 10% of the votes went to bachmann and palin, on a scientific site.

 

[russ_watters]

i think it interesting that over 10% of the votes went to bachmann and palin, on a scientific site.

Er, want to take a second look at that? People got to vote for more than one candidate, so the total is much more than 100%. So while 6-10% of people voted for one, the other or both, they got far less than 10% of the vote.

 

[moejoe15]

Why is he denigrating reptiles so? They're spam. Sliced, processed alien meat.

Now you're insulting Spam.

 

[moejoe15]

...also, you misinterpreted the poll results: since there were a lot of republicans to choose from, their vote got split.

How do you figure the vote got split when you can choose as many as you want?

 

[Evo]

Should I update the poll to those that are actually running?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Should I update the poll to those that are actually running?

You might want to add Santorum while you're at it.

 

[Evo]

You might want to add Santorum while you're at it.

That was my thought.

 

[Astronuc]

Replace Bachmann with Santorum.

Get ready to drop Perry.

Delete Gore and H Clinton.

 

[Evo]

The latest NH poll shows Huntsman at 13%, so I threw him in.

 

[moejoe15]

We can't vote again? So this is messed up. How about clearing the votes and let everyone vote again.

 

[Evo]

We can't vote again? So this is messed up. How about clearing the votes and let everyone vote again.

That wouldn't allow you to vote again, it will still register that you've voted. The only changes are the addition of Santorm and Huntsman, so unless you want to change your vote to them, it doesn't matter.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The latest NH poll shows Huntsman at 13%, so I threw him in.

I like him. Intelligent diplomat. Not sure about his domestic savvy though.

Boston Globe just endorsed him
http://bostonglobe.com/opinion/edit...gop-nominee/NlIwB6agpoZwnnAqHNa6TO/story.html

 

[mathwonk]

let me be less precise russ, i find it interesting that > 0 votes were cast for palin and bachmann on a scientific site.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

let me be less precise russ, i find it surprising that > 0 votes were cast for palin and bachmann on a scientific site.

I don't see either as being choices

 

[mathwonk]

yes, they seem to have been removed. shouldn't we have write ins?

 

[tooth]

Huntsman doesn't get enough credit for his experience.

 

[moejoe15]

That wouldn't allow you to vote again, it will still register that you've voted. The only changes are the addition of Santorm and Huntsman, so unless you want to change your vote to them, it doesn't matter.

That's what I mean, no one who already voted can add a vote for either of them so what good is adding their names. While I wouldn't give Santorum a job at Mickey D's, I wouldn't be heading for the hills if it was Huntsman. I would probably give him a vote.

 

[Evo]

That's what I mean, no one who already voted can add a vote for either of them so what good is adding their names. While I wouldn't give Santorum a job at Mickey D's, I wouldn't be heading for the hills if it was Huntsman. I would probably give him a vote.

It won't let me reset it, so why not start a new thread Poll 2?

 

[russ_watters]

How do you figure the vote got split when you can choose as many as you want?

Because there were multiple Republicans to choose from, not everyone who chose republican chose all republicans. That doesn't necessarily mean they wouldn't prefer one republican they didn't choose over Obama who they also didn't choose.

 

[russ_watters]

Er...so now the poll says I voted for Paul, which I certainly did not.

 

[Evo]

Er...so now the poll says I voted for Paul, which I certainly did not.

It says I voted for Romney. The vote count is correct because I moved the count to match the candidate, but as you move names, the poll still shows the original *position* the person you voted for was in. The poll software is sucky.

 

[Astronuc]

I'd vote for Alan Simpson, but he's not running.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/06/watch-gps-gop-military-iran-and-china/
The actual interview is longer. I generally agree with Simpson.

(Unfortunately there is an ad with that video).