1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Spinning the bad news on the economy is the new strategy to elect Obama!!

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by XCALIDEM, Oct 7, 2008.

  1. XCALIDEM

    XCALIDEM Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It appears that as long as the economy remains the big issue in everybodys minds, Obama will continue to improve in the polls. It just seems fishy that we're having to deal with the market crashing in the last month prior to elections.

    As you may know, much of trading is done based on speculation....

    It wouldn't surprise me that alot of this mess in the stock market was created by the media... : :mad:

    Watch Jim Cramer giving this "dooms day" advice to our country:

     
  2. neilsimon

    neilsimon New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Know what? An economy, regardless of country, goes crazy when there's an election. I wouldn't blow off the theory that the media has blown up several issues just in the tune of "economy: fail"
     
  3. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gee.....I guess it must be a Right-Wing Conspiracy.

    [​IMG]

    Everone say, THANKS, GEORGE!!!!!!!
     
  4. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm sure you can show everyone an election that had the same type of economy. :rolleyes:

    Sounds more like Porky Limbaugh's horsesh!t.
     
  5. XCALIDEM

    XCALIDEM Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    We've already discuss the issue that it was Barney Frank and his buddies from congress the ones who said that there were no problems with our loan systems...
     
  6. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    !

    Or Aliens or Psychic Palin Witches!:D

    George Bush and his Republican allies (like you) just can't hide anymore. You're on your way out because you did just one hell of a bad job... case closed!;)


    Economist Magazine Survey: Economists Overwhelmingly Prefer Obama
    __________________________________________________

    AS THE financial crisis pushes the economy back to the top of voters’ concerns, Barack Obama is starting to open up a clear lead over John McCain in the opinion polls. But among those who study economics for a living, Mr Obama’s lead is much more commanding. A survey of academic economists by The Economist finds the majority—at times by overwhelming margins—believe Mr Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp of economics and will appoint better economic advisers.

    Does their opinion matter? Economics is just one of the many things the next president will have to worry about. And even on the economy, economists may not have the same priorities as the population at large. Arguably, what a president says about economics on the campaign trail is less important than how he responds to the unexpected challenges that inevitably arise once he is in office.

    Yet economists’ opinions should count for something because irrespective of any party affiliation, most of them approach policy decisions with the same basic tool kit. Their assessment of the candidates’ economic credentials and plans represents an informed judgment on how well they will handle difficult trade-offs between efficiency, equity, growth and consensus-building.

    Regardless of party affiliation, our respondents generally agree the economy is in bad shape, that the election is important to the course of economic policy and that the housing and financial crisis is the most critical economic issue facing America.

    The detailed responses are bad news for Mr McCain (the full data are available here). Eighty per cent of respondents and no fewer than 71% of those who do not cleave to either main party say Mr Obama has a better grasp of economics. Even among Republicans Mr Obama has the edge: 46% versus 23% say Mr Obama has the better grasp of the subject. “I take McCain’s word on this one,” comments James Harrigan at the University of Virginia, a reference to Mr McCain’s infamous confession that he does not know as much about economics as he should. In fairness, Mr McCain’s lower grade may in part reflect greater candour about his weaknesses. Mr Obama’s more tightly managed image leaves fewer opportunities for such unvarnished introspection.

    A candidate’s economic expertise may matter rather less if he surrounds himself with clever advisers. Unfortunately for Mr McCain, 81% of all respondents reckon Mr Obama is more likely to do that; among unaffiliated respondents, 71% say so. That is despite praise across party lines for the excellent Doug Holtz-Eakin, Mr McCain’s most prominent economic adviser and a former head of the Congressional Budget Office. “Although I have tended to vote Republican,” one reply says, “the Democrats have a deep pool of talented, moderate economists.”

    There is an apparent contradiction between most economists’ support for free trade, low taxes and less intervention in the market and the low marks many give to Mr McCain, who is generally more supportive of those things than Mr Obama. It probably reflects a perception that the Republican Party under George Bush has subverted many of those ideals for ideology and political gain. Indeed, the majority of respondents rate Mr Bush’s economic record as very bad, and Republican respondents are only slightly less critical.

    “John McCain has professed disdain for ‘so-called economists’, and for some the feeling has become mutual,” says Erik Brynjolfsson, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School of Management. “Obama’s team is mainstream and non-ideological but extremely talented.”

    On our one-to-five scale, economists on average give Mr Obama’s economic programme a 3.3 and Mr McCain’s a 2.2. Mr Obama, says Jonathan Parker, a non-aligned professor at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management, “is a pragmatist not an ideologue. I expect Clintonian economic policies.” If, that is, crushing federal debt does not derail his taxing and spending plans.

    On his plans to fix the financial crisis, Mr Obama averages 3.1, a point higher than Mr McCain. Still, some said they didn’t quite know what they were rating—reasonably enough, since neither candidate has produced clear plans of his own.

    Where the candidates’ positions are more clearly articulated, Mr Obama scores better on nearly every issue: promoting fiscal discipline, energy policy, reducing the number of people without health insurance, controlling health-care costs, reforming financial regulation and boosting long-run economic growth. Twice as many economists think Mr McCain’s plan would be bad or very bad for long-run growth as Mr Obama’s. Given how much focus Mr McCain has put on his plan’s benefits for growth, this last is quite a repudiation.

    The economists also prefer Mr Obama’s tax plans. Republicans and respondents who do not identify with either political party see Mr McCain’s tax policies as more efficient but less equitable. But the former prefer Mr McCain’s plans—43% of Republicans say they are good or very good—and the latter Mr Obama’s. Of non-affiliated respondents, 31% say Mr Obama’s are good or very good.

    Either way, according to the economists, it would be difficult to do much worse than George Bush. The respondents give Mr Bush a dismal average of 1.7 on our five-point scale for his economic management. Eighty-two per cent thought Mr Bush’s record was bad or very bad; only 1% thought it was very good.

    The Democrats were overwhelmingly negative, but nearly every respondent viewed Mr Bush’s record unfavourably. Half of Republican respondents thought Mr Bush deserves only a 2. “The minimum rating of one severely overestimates the quality of Bush’s economic policies,” says one non-aligned economist.
     
  7. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    How convenient that most of the discussions (here), are filled with "conservative"-rhetoric.....devoid of any (and ALL) facts. :rolleyes:

    I hope there weren't too-many big words, here, for your discussion-group. :rolleyes:

    Lets hear it for ALLOWING THE MARKETPLACE TO REGULATE ITSELF!!! :rolleyes:
     
  8. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Re: !

    Most people (here) are much-too-young to recognize the present-situation as a RERUN!


    [​IMG]
     
  9. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah....that's a great-way to get Sarah Quayle's lynch-mobs fired-up....but, ends-up being one more simple-answer to further enable a BUSHCO/gambler-economy. :rolleyes:

    The is what The Idiot Son's MBA got us. :rolleyes:

    GREAT OVERSIGHT, THERE, SHERIFF GEORGIE!!!!!

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Frolicking Dinosaurs

    Frolicking Dinosaurs New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You don't have to spin this story - the problem is not just in the US - it is global.

    I have a sign for those who see a MSM conspiracy in this:
    [​IMG]
     
  11. XCALIDEM

    XCALIDEM Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It is funny that others feel the same as I do. I did not know that Kramer was a big dem contributor... This guy should be banned from TV. He is a terrible commentator and advisor and he mustn't let his personal political views affect the race and most of all, people's pockets. He's an idiot!

    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/2100980/posts?page=8
     
Loading...

Share This Page