Would you rather have Clinton back as president?

[bradleybadly]

The press conference where Clinton basically took over today demonstrated to me that Clinton was more suited to be president. He is excited to engage the press on current issues and has a good command of the art of persuasion. Although I don't agree with his positions, I'd feel more comfortable having him back in the White House over Obama.

I think this is also a good example of why governors are generally better presidents than senators or house reps.

[DangerBoy]

Relative to what's going on right now in the White House, I would be happy to have him back. He did show that he was able to bend to the will of the people when necessary.

[zebraman]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

[greenoaks]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Clinton turned the budget around - he would have done well now too

[Aradhus]

Obama and Clinton were progressives? Wheely?

[notyou2]

Currently your country is far more polarized by party than it was in Clinton's day. Back then the parties worked together more often. I honestly think race has a part in it as well as the George W years and what that administration did while in power. End result, paralyzing polarization at the worst possible moment for the world.

[Metsfanmax]

Clinton was an amazing president, but I don't think he wants to be back, and I don't want him to be either. He can do a lot of good with his initiative; I hope he continues to do it.

[muy_thaiguy]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Clinton turned the budget around - he would have done well now too

That was the "dot com" boom. The only thing he did, was that he didn't touch it.

[Metsfanmax]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Clinton turned the budget around - he would have done well now too

That was the "dot com" boom. The only thing he did, was that he didn't touch it.

Which is more than can be said for his successor.

[greenoaks]

the governments on either side of him spent everything they could

he saved

that is a big deal in my book

[oVo]

I kind of like Bill but wouldn't want him back in office
and you'd have to go back many terms to find a Prez
that could actually be considered amazing.

Clinton had his muck ups too.

Obama has been in office nearly two years and I think
there is already some grey hair on his noggin.
It's a tough job.

You also have to go back many years to find a time where
the difference between the two parties was easy to see.

[jefjef]

Clinton was an amazing president, but I don't think he wants to be back, and I don't want him to be either. He can do a lot of good with his initiative; I hope he continues to do it.

The only thing amazing about his presidency was that he was elected and then re-elected.

[notyou2]

So, jefjef are you upset with him for cutting back on daycare spending, or stopping the diaper subsidy cause you must have been like 3 when he was first elected.

[Phatscotty]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Obama did that? All by himself? Is he a dictator?

awesome that your number one love for Obama is something that can't be proven. You'd be better off going the saved/created route.

There was not going to be a depression. Jesus.....you really think there was gonna be a depression?

[Phatscotty]

Currently your country is far more polarized by party than it was in Clinton's day. Back then the parties worked together more often. I honestly think race has a part in it as well as the George W years and what that administration did while in power. End result, paralyzing polarization at the worst possible moment for the world.

nah. they only worked together because the people forced them too (stacking congress with republicans but re-electing a democrat president.

that all went bye bye when Clinton got his duck sick. the election of 2000 and the aftermath also polarized. Iraq too (except many conservatives were also pissed, so....) Race? where?

We are not as polarized as we used to be. The Tea Party shows that principles can come first and politics second.

Try watching MSNBC once. It's not hard for polarization to grow when that all certain media channels do.

[zebraman]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Obama did that? All by himself? Is he a dictator?

awesome that your number one love for Obama is something that can't be proven. You'd be better off going the saved/created route.

There was not going to be a depression. Jesus.....you really think there was gonna be a depression?

Didn't Bill Clinton try to get a nationalized health care system in place during his presidency and failed? No, Obama didn't singlehandedly get it passed during his first 2 years. He had help from Pelosi and Reid. But Obama was able to get them to get it through despite objections, which is something that this country has needed for a long time. No more turning people away to die because they have a pre-existing condition.

How do you figure I can't prove that? It was in the news for all of 2009 - early 2010!!!! He got it done. Clinton didn't get it done.

OK, maybe it wasn't going to be a depression but it was headed to being a horrible situation. If you want to use the phrase extreme recession be my guest. Whatever you want to use to label it is fine with me, but Obama was able to prevent the economy from becoming much worse. The recession began under George Bush.

[Phatscotty]

Everybody wishes for the good old days because they forget that the good old days weren't really that good. This is just a cheap way for bradley to try to divide progressives by choosing one over the other. Obama prevented a recession from becoming a depression. Clinton never had to face such an economic mess and nobody knows how he would have responded. I'm thankful that we have Obama in the White House and think he's done a great job getting health care passed. People getting denied basic health care because of preconditions sucks and those days are now over. Clinton was never able to get that through the Congress during his first 2 years.

Obama did that? All by himself? Is he a dictator?

awesome that your number one love for Obama is something that can't be proven. You'd be better off going the saved/created route.

There was not going to be a depression. Jesus.....you really think there was gonna be a depression?

How do you figure I can't prove that? It was in the news for all of 2009 - early 2010!!!! He got it done. Clinton didn't get it done.

OK, maybe it wasn't going to be a depression but it was headed to being a horrible situation. If you want to use the phrase extreme recession be my guest. Whatever you want to use to label it is fine with me, but Obama was able to prevent the economy from becoming much worse. The recession began under George Bush.

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

[zebraman]

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

The recession ended in June 2009. Here's the story from a right wing news source to prove it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 ... 08528.html

What other proof do you need to show that Obama was successful in cleaning up the mess that Bush left behind? I would say that nothing I post would convince you that Obama isn't the devil himself. Job growth always lags behind economic recovery. You're also getting away from the question of this subject, which is whether Clinton was a better president than Obama is now. Bradley is trying to put a wedge in there to make progressives argue with each other. I guess it's working a little. Clinton never had to face the kind of financial crisis that Obama has. Obama cleaned it up within 6 months so that's pretty impressive.

[spurgistan]

No.

[Phatscotty]

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

The recession ended in June 2009. Here's the story from a right wing news source to prove it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 ... 08528.html

What other proof do you need to show that Obama was successful in cleaning up the mess that Bush left behind? I would say that nothing I post would convince you that Obama isn't the devil himself. Job growth always lags behind economic recovery. You're also getting away from the question of this subject, which is whether Clinton was a better president than Obama is now. Bradley is trying to put a wedge in there to make progressives argue with each other. I guess it's working a little. Clinton never had to face the kind of financial crisis that Obama has. Obama cleaned it up within 6 months so that's pretty impressive.

Pointing out that Obama missed 8%, and badly, is in no way calling him the devil. Just stating facts.

you call the current economy "cleaned up"? The mess that we have has not been corrected, not even 1%. and if you could get past politics and see I am just talking plain old economics, you would understand better. Don't worry about who was president then and now or whos fault it was. nothing to do with solving the problems.

None of the debt wrung up for the boom has been liquidated. real estate hasn't bottomed. The dollar is dropping lower still, in effect making our oil and gas cost more. The dollar is dropping because our deficit is beyond the moon. If the gov't could just spend what it takes in, I would easily bet that gas would be 1$/gallon. That is about the best thing we could do for our economy.

Sorry man, you can have your opinion, but I state the economy is more messy than it ever was. until it starts getting better, we are in the worst part of the recession, right now. unemployment is 9.8%. Oil is almost 100$/barrel. And we just need to borrow more and more, and now we can barely even make the interest payments on our debt. Gold is freaking 1500/ounce. It really has never been as bad as it is today

[Aradhus]

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

The recession ended in June 2009. Here's the story from a right wing news source to prove it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 ... 08528.html

So if a right wing news source says something that agrees with your position, it must be true, but when it disagrees, they're propagandists, right?

What other proof do you need to show that Obama was successful in cleaning up the mess that Bush left behind? I would say that nothing I post would convince you that Obama isn't the devil himself. Job growth always lags behind economic recovery. You're also getting away from the question of this subject, which is whether Clinton was a better president than Obama is now. Bradley is trying to put a wedge in there to make progressives argue with each other. I guess it's working a little. Clinton never had to face the kind of financial crisis that Obama has. Obama cleaned it up within 6 months so that's pretty impressive.

By the way, neither Clinton or Obama are progressives, so why would this topic cause arguing amongst progressives? The only arguing would be over which one is worse.

Obama is hopeless, he doesn't understand politics, and I'm dubious about how much he really understands the economy.

Now that Obama is pushing this compromise he made with the republicans, if the economy improves over the next 2 years, regardless of the specific reasons, republicans will scream from the rooftops that its the tax cuts that they forced Obama to side with. And for reelection D'Obama will have to argue against a position which he backed, when it will look like the position he will then be attacking will have worked. If the Economy doesn't improve, D'Obama's the President, he didn't correct the underlying economic problem. Lose-lose.

[zebraman]

So if a right wing news source says something that agrees with your position, it must be true, but when it disagrees, they're propagandists, right?

Seeing as Phatscotty wants to put down just about everything Obama does, maybe he would be more willing to listen to a source which comes from his own side. He's rather conveniently said that now we shouldn't worry about who was president when the recession began or who was in charge when it ended.

[Night Strike]

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

The recession ended in June 2009. Here's the story from a right wing news source to prove it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 ... 08528.html

Good, then we should have repealed over 2/3 of the stimulus package since it wasn't needed.

EDIT: By the way, this just proves how Obama had no experience necessary to be an effective president. He could make good speeches, but can never explain anything that had more substance than "hope and change". Him abdicating the press conference podium just shows that he has no clue what he's doing to be an effective leader. In fact, it shows that he wants the current system to fail to replace it with shadow system the radicals want.

[Phatscotty]

So if a right wing news source says something that agrees with your position, it must be true, but when it disagrees, they're propagandists, right?

Seeing as Phatscotty wants to put down just about everything Obama does, maybe he would be more willing to listen to a source which comes from his own side. He's rather conveniently said that now we shouldn't worry about who was president when the recession began or who was in charge when it ended.

Whatever. Obama has nothing to do with it. You are wrong about the sources too. The president doesn't run the economy. You can concentrate on who was prex when it started if you want, however, that is useless information unless all you care about is who to blame. I would guess almost every single president had to deal with some sort of recession. I just don't see the point in stating who was prez.

Who I blame for the recession? HOMEOWNERS WHO OVERLEVERAGED THEIR HOME. as well as LOOSE housing legislation (I must point this out for you) which was written by Barney Frank and Chriss Dodd and signed by Clinton, and continued by Bush.

[notyou2]

yes, and we are still in a horrible situation. Obama didn't save anything. If unemployment would not have went over 8%, then you would have a case. However, the rate has been over 9.5 for SIXTEEN CONSECUTIVE MONTHS!

He set out clear goals, and he even promised about the 8%. What I am saying is that the job growth Obama had planned just didn't happen. Sure some people have jobs that wouldn't have, but it is not nearly enough nor does it justify 800 billion dollars. If we would not have bailed out and tarped out and stimulused out trillions of dollars, those assets that went bust (lehman etc..) could have been liquidated by people who realized value and those assets would be performing again, probably under a different name. Not to mention the corrections that come to a business naturally when one company go bust, the new one usually does not make the same mistakes that broke the last one. Instead all those toxic assets are still there. This is some FDR shit, and if they keep doing it it will turn into a depression and last 10 years just like the 30's.

The recession ended in June 2009. Here's the story from a right wing news source to prove it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-201 ... 08528.html

Good, then we should have repealed over 2/3 of the stimulus package since it wasn't needed.

EDIT: By the way, this just proves how Obama had no experience necessary to be an effective president. He could make good speeches, but can never explain anything that had more substance than "hope and change". Him abdicating the press conference podium just shows that he has no clue what he's doing to be an effective leader. In fact, it shows that he wants the current system to fail to replace it with shadow system the radicals want.

What is this "shadow system"?? This sounds like fear and paranoia.

So George W had more experience to be a president? It's amazing the man could get a point across what with all the wordinessisary to be a public speaker.