Bush cost rMoney the election

JC29856

Many americans blame Bush for the economy, arguably the worst president in history, ironic that he was called "W"

JC29856

Obama benefited from more voters blaming Bush (53 percent) than him (38 percent) for current economic conditions.

National

Blame For Current

Economic Problems

Obama 38%

Bush 53%

cincybearcat

JC29856 wrote:

Obama benefited from more voters blaming Bush (53 percent) than him (38 percent) for current economic conditions.

National

Blame For Current

Economic Problems

Obama 38%

Bush 53%

Interesting, where did you get these #'s?

Cosmo

JC29856 wrote:

Obama benefited from more voters blaming Bush (53 percent) than him (38 percent) for current economic conditions.

National Blame For Current Economic Problems
Obama 38%
Bush 53%

...
If you look at the market... it did not begin its downaward plunge on January, 21, 2009. It strated falling apart in 2007. Remember when then President Bush tried to tell us we weren't in a 'Recession'? Yeah, it was spiralling down and he was still the president back then. Bear Sterns was the beginning.. and when Lehmann Brothers went over the cliff in 2008... well, all people need to do is look up who was the president of the United States in 2008 and they will find the answer they seek. They may not agree with it... but, I'm willing to bet that the President was G.W.Bush, not Obama. I know a lot of the Tea Partiers would like to think all of America's economic woes began when President Obama was inagurated in 2009... but, they would not be the truth. The truth... something too many people just don't want to hear.

Dirtie_Frank

Cosmo wrote:

JC29856 wrote:

Obama benefited from more voters blaming Bush (53 percent) than him (38 percent) for current economic conditions.

National Blame For Current Economic Problems
Obama 38%
Bush 53%

...
If you look at the market... it did not begin its downaward plunge on January, 21, 2009. It strated falling apart in 2007. Remember when then President Bush tried to tell us we weren't in a 'Recession'? Yeah, it was spiralling down and he was still the president back then. Bear Sterns was the beginning.. and when Lehmann Brothers went over the cliff in 2008... well, all people need to do is look up who was the president of the United States in 2008 and they will find the answer they seek. They may not agree with it... but, I'm willing to bet that the President was G.W.Bush, not Obama. I know a lot of the Tea Partiers would like to think all of America's economic woes began when President Obama was inagurated in 2009... but, they would not be the truth. The truth... something too many people just don't want to hear.

Or it really started with the sub prime mortgage during the Clinton era, Maybe that is the begining?

Bronx Bombers

JC29856 wrote:

Many americans blame Bush for the economy, arguably the worst president in history, ironic that he was called "W"

If you're looking to pass blame for the financial crisis you need to start with Clinton. He repealed the bank holding act creating massive financial institutions, he did nothing to regulate derivatives there were 94 trillion outstanding contracts in June 2000 while the global GDP was 41 trillion. To promote affordable housing Clinton allowed Fannie and Freddie leverage ratios far exceeding limits on ordinary lenders which ultimately resulted in the housing market collapse.

jimed14

Folks ... they ALL have a share of the blame for the financial crisis.

The key is fixing it ... which, I fear ... I don't think we've completely done.

dimitrispearljam

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

EdsonNascimento

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract a man were pretty evenly split.

Zoso

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract a man were pretty evenly split.

hmmm.. this is on the edge my friend.

dimitrispearljam

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract a man were pretty evenly split.

single women and single moms are ALOT out there...

markin ball

Repubs gotta come back to the middle a bit more, lose the wacky. I'd say all those contraversial things some of those repub candidates said about abortion recently scared off a lot of women against all repubs, including Mitt.

Jason P

markin ball wrote:

Repubs gotta come back to the middle a bit more, lose the wacky. I'd say all those contraversial things some of those repub candidates said about abortion recently scared off a lot of women against all repubs, including Mitt.

There is no way in hell Richard Mourdock was going to lose in Indiana before shot himself in the foot with unwise choice of wording.

The Tea Party did what the Democrats could have never done. They got a Democrat elected to Richard Lugar's seat.

:fp:

At least he didn't try to make up new medical theories like Akin.

dignin

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract a man were pretty evenly split.

You are living in the past

http://i.imgur.com/14hyr.jpg

dimitrispearljam

dignin wrote:

http://i.imgur.com/14hyr.jpg

fuckin great foto...!!!!! :thumbup:

EdsonNascimento

dignin wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract a man were pretty evenly split.

You are living in the past

http://i.imgur.com/14hyr.jpg

I'm pro choice, so I have no clue what you are talking about. There was nowhere in the National platform about abolishing abortion. It's drilling for fear by the libs. Akin, et. al are idiots and should lose and lose badly. But, there was nowhere in Romney's platform that he planned to do anything with abortion.

So, turn off MSNBC and actually listen to what your opposition says.

EdsonNascimento

dimitrispearljam wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

imo women and immigrants cost him the elections cos his political views dont show them the respect they deserve

Single women.

Women that can actually attract AND KEEP a man were pretty evenly split.

single women and single moms are ALOT out there...

Good point. I fixed my quote above. Agitating libs is easy.

(Though the statistical reference to single women vs. married women is valid. I just wanted to put it in a funny way that would get libs' panties in a bunch.)

Cosmo

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

JC29856 wrote:

Obama benefited from more voters blaming Bush (53 percent) than him (38 percent) for current economic conditions.

National Blame For Current Economic Problems
Obama 38%
Bush 53%

...
If you look at the market... it did not begin its downaward plunge on January, 21, 2009. It strated falling apart in 2007. Remember when then President Bush tried to tell us we weren't in a 'Recession'? Yeah, it was spiralling down and he was still the president back then. Bear Sterns was the beginning.. and when Lehmann Brothers went over the cliff in 2008... well, all people need to do is look up who was the president of the United States in 2008 and they will find the answer they seek. They may not agree with it... but, I'm willing to bet that the President was G.W.Bush, not Obama. I know a lot of the Tea Partiers would like to think all of America's economic woes began when President Obama was inagurated in 2009... but, they would not be the truth. The truth... something too many people just don't want to hear.

Or it really started with the sub prime mortgage during the Clinton era, Maybe that is the begining?

...
I sort of remember the market being pretty good prior to 2007. It took a bit of a downturn after the September 11, 2001 attacks... but, I really don't recall a period where we lost so many jobs and so much wealth in such a short period.
Can you direct me to that place in the timeline?
Thanx.

Jason P

Jason P

F5

cincybearcat

So nice I'll post it twice!

dimitrispearljam

Jason P wrote:

F5

dignin

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Single women.

Women that can actually attract AND KEEP a man were pretty evenly split.

single women and single moms are ALOT out there...

Good point. I fixed my quote above. Agitating libs is easy.

(Though the statistical reference to single women vs. married women is valid. I just wanted to put it in a funny way that would get libs' panties in a bunch.)

You were baiting, that has no place here.

dimitrispearljam

EdsonNascimento wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

single women and single moms are ALOT out there...

Good point. I fixed my quote above. Agitating libs is easy.

(Though the statistical reference to single women vs. married women is valid. I just wanted to put it in a funny way that would get libs' panties in a bunch.)

got you...imo women is number 1 power on the planet..men need to realise it already....
and especially when comes to their choices and about the whole become mother thing,we ,men ,dont have a clue of their reaction..
Rmoney sould know better..you cant win elections if you dont have women support