political propaganda works

[Phillip Allen]

see... http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/a...143913248.html

(especially on the simple minded)

[Paul Pless]

so have you formed an opinion yet?

[Norman Bernstein]

So, it appears that Americans are of mixed opinion:

One segment blames Bush for shoveling the economy into a s#$thole.....

...and another segment blames Obama for not being able to climb out of the s#$thole quickly.

Did I get that right?

[Uncle Duke]

If you read the Gallup poll which is the focus of that article, not much has changed:

The relative amount of blame Americans give to Obama and to Bush has largely stabilized over the last two years. It remains to be seen whether Americans are open to further discussion of those issues in the months remaining before the Nov. 6 election, or whether their minds are made up.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/155177/Am...d-Economy.aspx

[Osborne Russell]

so, it appears that americans are of mixed opinion:

One segment blames bush for shoveling the economy into a s#$thole.....

...and another segment blames obama for not being able to climb out of the s#$thole quickly.

Did i get that right?

b i n g o


Course since the question is about the current situation, other things being equal, the current President is more likely to be responsible, if that's not too subtle a point.

[ljb5]

If you read the Gallup poll which is the focus of that article, not much has changed:


http://www.gallup.com/poll/155177/Am...d-Economy.aspx

Wow, it's crazy to think that 32% of the people blamed Obama in mid 2009.

They should have taken a polll in Mid 2008.

I bet, even then, 25% of the people were gearing up to blame a Democrat --- any Democrat. If McCain had won, they would have blamed Pelosi. If Pelosi were no longer in office, they would have blamed Reid.

[Phillip Allen]

is your guess colored by political bigotry? I mean, it IS only your factless guess isn't it? the only fact I can make out about your guess is the fact that you would support your guess against all odds... that part remains FACT

[ljb5]

is your guess colored by political bigotry?

It's based on long experience talking to people like you.

Who did you blame for the state of the economy in 2008? Obama?

[Absinthe_of_malice]

Are the democrats finally admitting Obama is completely helpless in changing what President George Bush and Dick Cheney did to the economy???

[ljb5]

Are the democrats finally admitting Obama is completely helpless in changing what President George Bush and Dick Cheney did to the economy???

In the last two years, the economy has added about three million jobs, the unemployment rate has dropped nearly two points, and the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points.

That's definite improvement.

It's likely we would have seen more improvement if Boehner and McConnell weren't doing everything possible to ensure that we continue Bush policies forever.

It's funny, but sad, that one of the arguments Mitt Romeny is putting forth is that, as a Republican, he would have more success pushing Obama's programs, simply because his party wouldn't obstruct him as much.

[Glen Longino]

is your guess colored by political bigotry? I mean, it IS only your factless guess isn't it? the only fact I can make out about your guess is the fact that you would support your guess against all odds... that part remains FACT

Careful, Phillip, your political bigotry is showing...along with your self-righteous outrage and neurotic fascination with El Jay!
Keep it up....it's fun watching!

[Glen Longino]

In the last two years, the economy has added about three million jobs, the unemployment rate has dropped nearly two points, and the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points.

That's definite improvement.

It's likely we would have seen more improvement if Boehner and McConnell weren't doing everything possible to ensure that we continue Bush policies forever.

It's funny, but sad, that one of the arguments Mitt Romeny is putting forth is that, as a Republican, he would have more success pushing Obama's programs, simply because his party wouldn't obstruct him as much.

Read this post of El Jay's, Phillip!
Can you understand it once and for all?
Can you believe it, or are you simply too bone-headed and iron-arsed to admit it?

[Phillip Allen]

In the last two years, the economy has added about three million jobs, the unemployment rate has dropped nearly two points, and the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points.

That's definite improvement.

It's likely we would have seen more improvement if Boehner and McConnell weren't doing everything possible to ensure that we continue Bush policies forever.


It's funny, but sad, that one of the arguments Mitt Romeny is putting forth is that, as a Republican, he would have more success pushing Obama's programs, simply because his party wouldn't obstruct him as much.

our current admin is certainly continuing Bush's policies... Patriot act, Homeland security, that other stuff... doesn't look like anything other that bipartisan conspiricy to me

[ccmanuals]

Are the democrats finally admitting Obama is completely helpless in changing what President George Bush and Dick Cheney did to the economy???

Let's just say he is getting zero help from the congressional GOP obstructionists. Remember what their number one goal is.

[Phillip Allen]

Read this post of El Jay's, Phillip!
Can you understand it once and for all?
Can you believe it, or are you simply too bone-headed and iron-arsed to admit it?

Okay, let's do that Glen...
here is lj's quote as 'I' read it

In the last two years, the economy has added about three million jobs (less than projected), the unemployment rate has dropped less than two points, and the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points since the drop caused since an unexperienced president who has now has begun to learn his job at public expense.

That's definite spin.

.

[LeeG]

what good is propaganda if it doesn't work?

[Phillip Allen]

what good is propaganda if it doesn't work?

well... I guess even a blind hog finds an acorn every once in a while

[ljb5]

Okay, let's do that Glen...
here is lj's quote as 'I' read it...

...since the drop caused since an unexperienced president who has now has begun to learn his job at public expense.

How did Obama cause the stock market to drop 5,784 points between October 2007 and January 20, 2009?

Do you have even the faintest grasp on reality? Do you not know how to use a calendar?

[Phillip Allen]

How did Obama cause the stock market to drop 5,784 points between October 2007 and January 20, 2009?

Oh, I'm no good with figures... I leave that to scientists with fictitious degrees

I'll bet it feels good to get back to numbers instead of having to guess, don't it?

[ljb5]

Oh, I'm no good with figures... I leave that to scientists with fictitious degrees

I'll bet it feels good to get back to numbers instead of having to guess, don't it?

Wiggle, wiggle, worm. Squirm and spin. That's all you're good for and you're not even good for that.

You said the stock market drop was "caused since an unexperienced president."

Which president were you talking about?

What drop in the stock market were you referring to?

[LeeG]

Oh, I'm no good with figures... I leave that to scientists with fictitious degrees

I'll bet it feels good to get back to numbers instead of having to guess, don't it?

oh you are goofy

[Phillip Allen]

listen, guys... I gotta shut up, I really don't want to get lj kicked off again... I didn't mean to the last time

[Glen Longino]

Okay, let's do that Glen...
here is lj's quote as 'I' read it

..."the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points since the drop caused since an unexperienced president who has now has begun to learn his job at public expense."

If that's what you read into El Jay's post, you're much worse off than I imagined.
I suggest you continue to expect and to hope for the worse possible scenario so you can maintain your comfortable zone of cynical pissing and moaning.

[Phillip Allen]

..."the stock market has gone up about 6,000 points since the drop caused since an unexperienced president who has now has begun to learn his job at public expense."

If that's what you read into El Jay's post, you're much worse off than I imagined.
I suggest you continue to expect and to hope for the worse possible scenario so you can maintain your comfortable zone of cynical pissing and moaning.

I confess to being cynical

[John of Phoenix]

Allen, he's kicked your ass again.

[Glen Longino]

I confess to being cynical

It's high time you found an acorn!

[ljb5]

listen, guys... I gotta shut up, I really don't want to get lj kicked off again... I didn't mean to the last time

Oh, don't worry about me. You didn't get me kicked off last time, or the time before that.

Let's just see if you can answer the question.

You said the drop was caused by an inexperienced president who has begun to learn his job at public expense.

I asked you to explain which president caused the stock market to drop nearly 6,000 points between October 2007 and January 2009.

It seems like a simple question. We only have one president at a time, so it shouldn't be hard to figure who was president at the time.

Let's see if you can do it.

[Absinthe_of_malice]

What good is gaining 3 million jobs, if most if not all are in the public sector (the net tax takers of society). We need jobs in the private sector, the area where wealth is actually created. If I remember right, the Dow Jones was over 14,000 before Obama was elected. Nearly all of the plunging of the markets happened after Obama was elected.

[John of Phoenix]

I would also point out that the market began a stellar reovery in March 2009, two months after Obama took office

[Glen Longino]

Oh, I'm no good with figures... I leave that to scientists with fictitious degrees
I'll bet it feels good to get back to numbers instead of having to guess, don't it?

..."I leave that to scientists with fictitious degrees"...

What are you suggesting here, Phillip?
Let me guess...you're suggesting that El Jay has no legitimate credentials, and is in fact a liar and imposter, and that somehow elevates you beyond cynical, remorseful, resentful, disappointed, argumentative Arky?

[ljb5]

What good is gaining 3 million jobs, if most if not all are in the public sector (the net tax takers of society).

Actually, we have lost abotu 600,000 public sector jobs since Obama was elected. All of the job growth has been in the private sector.

We need jobs in the private sector, the area where wealth is actually created. If I remember right, the Dow Jones was over 14,000 before Obama was elected. Nearly all of the plunging of the markets happened after Obama was elected.

Again, you are wrong. The last time the DOW was over 14,000 was Oct, 2007 --- more than a year before Obama was elected and fifteen months before he was sworn in.

As I pointed out twice already, the DOW dropped nearly 6,000 points between Oct 2007 and January 2009.

You can look this up, if you like. You probably should have done it before you posted, because it's pretty obvious that you're way wrong.

[LeeG]

What good is gaining 3 million jobs, if most if not all are in the public sector (the net tax takers of society). We need jobs in the private sector, the area where wealth is actually created. If I remember right, the Dow Jones was over 14,000 before Obama was elected. Nearly all of the plunging of the markets happened after Obama was elected.

yeah, especially all those jobs connected to the DOD, what a bunch of takers. BTW, regardless of the president our civilization cannot grow this century like it did in the last. There are physical limits to growth as defined by expanding consumption/production of goods.

[Glen Longino]

What good is gaining 3 million jobs, if most if not all are in the public sector (the net tax takers of society). We need jobs in the private sector, the area where wealth is actually created. If I remember right, the Dow Jones was over 14,000 before Obama was elected. Nearly all of the plunging of the markets happened after Obama was elected.

You better look at your numbers and dates again.

[John of Phoenix]

You better look at your numbers and dates again.

Going easy on the newbie, that's real humanitarian of you.

[hokiefan]

What good is gaining 3 million jobs, if most if not all are in the public sector (the net tax takers of society). We need jobs in the private sector, the area where wealth is actually created. If I remember right, the Dow Jones was over 14,000 before Obama was elected. Nearly all of the plunging of the markets happened after Obama was elected.

Where to start?

There are fewer public sector jobs today than when Obama was elected. All of the job growth has been private sector.

The peak of the S&P500 was ~1560 in Oct 2007. On election day Nov 2008, it was ~930, a loss of 40% of its value. The bottom was 683 in early March, 2009, another 16% of the peak value. It is 1329 today, down 15% from the peak. So since Obama has become POTUS the stock market has recovered the 16% lost after his election, and 25% of the 40% lost during Bush's time in office.

Cheers,

Bobby

[Glen Longino]

Going easy on the newbie, that's real humanitarian of you.

I'm trying to maintain some sensitivity.
It ain't easy after reading Phillip Allen clap-trap for an hour!

[Absinthe_of_malice]

Oh, I forgot about Solyndra, but I think those jobs are gone now anyway. The public sector has grown the entire time Obama has been in office. Don't forget the countless czars he installed and the associated bureaucracies that go with it. TSA has grown by leaps and bounds, in fact, there are now so many police agencies nobody as a decent count of exactly how many there are.

You forget that in excess of 14 million citizen have lost their jobs and I don't feel like a 600,000 chinese fire drill within the government bureaucracies doesn't amount to a drop in the bucket.

Only God knows how many foreclosures have happened since Obama was sworn in. Can you explain that in our thriving economy?

The Dow took it's most cataclysmic drop between 2008 and 2009, when Obama was "driving us back out of the ditch."

[hokiefan]

Oh, I forgot about Solyndra, but I think those jobs are gone now anyway. The public sector has grown the entire time Obama has been in office. Don't forget the countless czars he installed and the associated bureaucracies that go with it. TSA has grown by leaps and bounds, in fact, there are now so many police agencies nobody as a decent count of exactly how many there are.

You forget that in excess of 14 million citizen have lost their jobs and I don't feel like a 600,000 chinese fire drill within the government bureaucracies doesn't amount to a drop in the bucket.

Only God knows how many foreclosures have happened since Obama was sworn in. Can you explain that in our thriving economy?

The Dow took it's most cataclysmic drop between 2008 and 2009, when Obama was "driving us back out of the ditch."

This chart says you're wrong. The biggest drop was before the election.

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%...urce=undefined;

Bobby

[Absinthe_of_malice]

Here's something else, Americans, under Obama, have lost on average 40% of their wealth. Obama has literally marched us backwards to 1992 levels of wealth. Am I better off than four years ago, hell, I'm not sure if I'm better off than 20 years ago now. Thanks Barack!

Oh, the public sector has done fine, they still enjoy lavish raises, endless benefits, and golden parachute retirements on the backs of the working man. Well, the few still lucky enough to have jobs.

[ljb5]

The public sector has grown the entire time Obama has been in office.

Wrong.

Don't forget the countless czars he installed and the associated bureaucracies that go with it.

Name them.

You forget that in excess of 14 million citizen have lost their jobs

Wrong. About 5 Million lost their jobs in the last two years of the Bush administration.

In the last two years of Obama, we have gained about three million.

The Dow took it's most cataclysmic drop between 2008 and 2009, when Obama was "driving us back out of the ditch."

Wrong again.

Between January 20th, 2009 (When Obama was sworn in) and December 31st, 2009, the DOW gained 2146 points, (more than 25%. It was one of the best years ever in the stock market.)

Americans, under Obama, have lost on average 40% of their wealth.

Again, that's not true. That figure referes to the time period of 2007 to 2010. Obama was not in office for the majority of that time.

Have you ever considered looking at any facts before you post?

You're really not very good at this.

[Tom Montgomery]

This thread makes no sense to me.

The thread title states a conclusion (political propaganda works) modified in the body of the post (especially on the simple minded) while offering a link to a news story that states:

"More than two-thirds of Americans—including half of Republicans—still blame former President George W. Bush for the country's economic ills, according to a new Gallup poll released on Thursday...."


I don't get it. Is Phillip Allen claiming that more than two-thirds of Americans and half of Republicans have been duped by political propaganda?


I'll make two observations: 1) Such a sweeping claim really should be backed up by evidence; 2) Such a claim strikes me as utterly cynical; 3) Such a post strikes me as extremely lazy.

[John of Phoenix]

Dude, you're not even a good troll.

[Absinthe_of_malice]

Biggest drop on the S & P, which generally follows the Dow is between Sept 15, 2009 and March 2009. I think Obama was the President.

[Phillip Allen]

a little c&p I just ran across:

http://www.4029tv.com/news/money/Rai...z/-/index.html

Raising a child just got $8,000 more expensive


Middle-income families with a child born in 2011 can expect to spend $235,000 over 17 years, according to a new report by the United States Department of Agriculture. That cost factors in food, shelter and other necessities to raise a child, and does not account for inflation.

Read more: http://www.4029tv.com/news/money/Rai...#ixzz1xnz26nfX

[John of Phoenix]

OMG!

[ljb5]

Biggest drop on the S & P, which generally follows the Dow is between Sept 15, 2009 and March 2009. I think Obama was the President.

You are aware, aren't you that March comes before September, right?

Between March 2009 and Sept 2009, the S&P went up 37%.

[Absinthe_of_malice]

Sept 2008 and March 2009. Sorry, I admit that you guys are better trolls than I am.

[hokiefan]

Biggest drop on the S & P, which generally follows the Dow is between Sept 15, 2009 and March 2009. I think Obama was the President.

When Obama was sworn in (late Jan 2009) the S&P500 was ~830, the bottom was 683 in Mar 2009.

Who was POTUS from Sept 15, 2008 to late Jan, 2009? I'm assuming you meant Sept 15, 2008 because otherwise it makes no sense.

Bobby

[John of Phoenix]

And you think Obama was president in Sep 2008? No wonder you're so pissed at him. This takes, "We create our own reality" to a new level.

[Tom Montgomery]

Phillip Allen and his fellow right-wingnut know-nothing's can take heart: far fewer than two-thirds of Americans bother to vote.