• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Is Obama really a bad president?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

What say ye!

  • Good

  • Bad


Results are only viewable after voting.

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
Thought I'd already voted, but I guess not. I won't be voting for him, but I'll give him a thumbs up in this poll since there's no "meh" option. I don't agree with the vast majority of his policies, but he's certainly not been a bad President.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
obama has done a horrible job and he is very corrupt, he must be kicked out of the country and sent back to where he came from
 

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,148
1
76
I think he is a decent President.

But that is ALL he is.

As I mentioned in another thread, he is President, not King.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,941
126
Yes, because it is him that killed terrorists, and not a continuation of policies that have been in place for nearly a decade.
Huh?

What the hell does that have to do with him being a decent president or not?

Hatemores are out in force in this thread.
 

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,148
1
76
Yes, because it is him that killed terrorists, and not a continuation of policies that have been in place for nearly a decade.
Just like Bush's "Mission Accomplished".

Obama had a hand in a lot of things, even if he was not the hand that actually did it.

Somehow he can be blamed for anything bad (fluctuating gas prices) but cannot take credit for anything good (Killing OBL)?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
Yes, because it is him that killed terrorists, and not a continuation of policies that have been in place for nearly a decade.
Mostly it's a continuation of existing policies, but since he could have changed them, he still deserves credit. And he made a hard, politically risky call resulting in taking out Usama bin Ladin. (I think all the Pubbie candidates except Paul would have made the same call, but Obama DID make the call and deserves the credit. The one who takes the risks gets the credit.)

He did a good job with Libya I think, supporting our NATO allies. If we're to ask them to help us, we have to be ready to help them too. We may get yet another Islamic theocracy like in Egypt, but since we traded a known supporter of terrorism it's probably a wash at worst. Besides, you can help people achieve freedom a lot more easily than getting them to value it, and I personally don't want my country to pay the costs of another Iraq (which more easily embraced democracy anyway because of its tripartite religious makeup and fairly Western outlook - for an Arab nation anyway.)

He also kept our economy from collapsing by some structured bail-outs. I don't like the way he structured many of these, but I have to be honest and admit that other considerations might have driven these decisions. We seldom have all the information a President has to take into account. Again, Bush led in this, but Obama deserves credit for his part too.

He abolished the prohibition against gays actively serving in the armed forces. I would not have taken this risk in wartime because so many of the actual warriors are against it, but it seems like a relatively painless transition and a net positive, so he deserves credit for that.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,806
1,123
126
Best President since Truman and/or Eisenhower. Much of people's disappointment with him has to do with the nature of our government, and (not to a small degree) our frustration with the obstructionist actions of the Congressional GOP. Early on someone mentioned Obama hasn't closed the tax loopholes. A noble goal but one which has to be DONE by Congress-the most the President can do is jawbone them.

To me, he's been superb in foreign affairs (far better than expected), pretty much on par on the wars (can't imagine where we would be in McCain and Barbie took office), decent on the economy (greatly held back by the obstructionists) and too timid on big things like health care reform and financial regulation reform (again, thanks to the GOP mostly). I think he got foolishly sidetracked on issues like closing Gitmo, which mattered not a whit to most citizens.

Compare him to recent past Presidents: JFK-very similar, but without the truely bonehead mistakes Kennedy made (Bay of Pigs, Vietnam), LBJ-superb at dealing with Congress but gave us both inflation and Vietnam, and nearly tore the country apart in the process, Nixon-morally unfit for the office, came in as the Peace President and then spent years dragging his feet getting us out of Vietnam, Ford-good guy, never had a chance to prove himself because he did the right thing (but political suicide) by pardoning Nixon, Carter-great potential wasted because of his micromanagement, St. Reagan-history will judge him to be average at best, he caused at least as much damage to this country as he cured, revered only because he was lucky enough to be in office when the USSR finally collapsed (and then blew the chance to do a Marshall Plan to cement them as allies), George HW Bush-like Carter, great potential and also great credentials, but lousy President-he was never his own man, Clinton-surprisingly, almost as effective dealing with Congress as LBJ, GWB-rival to Nixon as the worst President in modern times-the best anyone can say about him is that on occassion he did the right thing.
 

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,148
1
76
I have said this before, and I think it needs repeating:

Obama is not King.

He can only be held responsible for what he is directly responsible FOR.

If he TRIED to do something, and nobody can really find fault in his means and methods, but was blocked by contrary political interests (from either party, BTW), he cannot be BLAMED for failing.

The biggest thing I think he can be held guilty of is promising things, like any other candidate, that he really had no guarantee to be able to deliver.

THAT is more a sign of our defective electorate system in where impossible promises are more likely to get a man elected than the truth.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY