Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's record.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:14 PM
Original message
Obama's record.
Since there has been a lot of rhetoric here pertaining to Obama's "broken promises", I would like to refer DU to Politifact's analysis. This is only a summary, and in some cases Politifacts' rating can be questioned as they explain, themselves in their individual ratings. For instance, they list Closing GITMO as a "promise broken" (although they do admit that it was an extremely difficult promise to keep). Since his efforts were blocked by Congress, I would argue that it should be listed as "Stalled" as opposed to "Broken". If you want a truly accurate picture, I would suggest that you read their individual entries on each promise. They make it easy by breaking them down into various categories.

The Obameter Scorecard

* Promise Kept 139

* Compromise 41

* Promise Broken 42

* Stalled 69

* In the Works 215

* Not yet rated 2

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

139 promises kept vs 42 promises broken. That's a pretty good record for any politician.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. All it takes is on broken promise and someone is done
He broke this promise for Johnie and that one for Jane.

The point is, you can't please everyone even some of the time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. I never knew there were so many one issue voters, until I came to DU. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks.
K & R :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. Doubly so when most of those are the result of congressional interference.
Gitmo is a perfect example, where he kept his promise, but was blocked by Congress--including a bunch of Dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
22. No, he didn't and to say he did is a lie.
He attempted to relocate Gitmo to Illinois rather than close it. He could have closed it any damn time he wanted to till his dumbass signed his own handcuffs into law about five months to the day after he took office.

He wanted to thread the needle and have his cake and eat it too so he invited Congress into the mess and fucked it all up. He could have closed that prison day fucking one or anytime up until he signed the unconstitutional law that declared indefinite detention the law of the land.

I can't believe a one of you would drag this dead dog out again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. Uh, no. You might want to check your facts.
He signed an executive order to shut down the facility, move any viable cases to trial, and organize to repatriate the rest. It was literally one of the first things he did. Then the Congress passed a resolution banning the use of any funds to move detainees, or to shut down the prison, by overwhelming majorities. Do you not remember either of those things?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. I remember that he decided to have his cake and eat it too by opening a new prison in Illinois
instead of just getting trials set and/or releasing those that could not be charged.

I remember that there was not a solitary obstacle to doing exactly that until about the 20th of May, 2009 when he signed his own handcuffs into law.

I remember that at worst he could have sat on that very bill for a week and did as I prescribed.

I also remember that he had no intention of releasing or putting on trial some of the detainees.

You guys need to stop conflating his little scheme with not being able to proceed with trials or releases just like the previous pResident.

He was more afraid of blow back than of violating the constitution.

I also remember that he signed the bill restricting himself in a counter-constitutional manner.

I remember Bush needed no special allocations for trials or to relocate detainees.

I remember blowing this same tired argument away like a month ago and the only links provided to refute my prescriptions were the bill he signed five months after assuming the Presidency and some whining but non-binding bill from Indiana and that there is absolutely no way to refute that nothing could stop him from handling this just as I stated until he cuffed himself with the help of Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-04-11 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. You're remembering wrong. Setting trials and releases was the entire point.
Which Congress then blocked funding of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-05-11 06:58 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. When was that legislation passed? There was no such law in this land when he assumed office.
I remember all too well.

He didn't need any special or specific allocation. I'd actually like to be wrong on this and misjudged but never does anyone prove me wrong.

He had five months to act as I have repeatedly stated and nothing could have stopped him, just as nothing stopped shrub from transfers, civilian trials, and outright releases...NOTHING.

There was no handcuff whatsoever. He had a scheme to thread the needle and it failed and his dumbass signed the very bill which buts the entire government in a directly counter-constitutional footing by withholding trials and engaging in indefinite detention.

It is wrong and it is a direct assault on our core values and best ideals and if he wanted that gulag closed he had full authority to do so until he signed a bullshit law into effect, his damn self restricting rightful action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ineeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. With the obstruction he's had to endure
it's remarkable that he's gotten anything accomplished. I'm a proud supporter, not a sycophant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slowfoot Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
13.  well done
Obama has done an exceptional job considering his opposition..the tea people, haters, racists, etc. Mean people do suck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ineeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Wow! First post. Welcome to DU.
Hold onto your hat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snoutport Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. welcome!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Welcome to DU :)
:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. Rec'd for those who think he's Bush III
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbonds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's not the number of promises, its the effect the broken ones had.
And there are some duzies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Could you elaborate, please? It seems to me that his "kept"
promises have much more impact. For instance, the repeal of DADT, Universal Health Care (even without a Public Option, the elimination of "pre-existing conditions" and lifetime caps alone are HUGE), the Lilly Ledbetter Act, the CARD Act, and many many more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbonds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Universal health care was a not universal health care, not even close.
Need to learn the correct monikers there. What we got was a big insurance giveaway, with one or two good side programs that could have been done individually without the clusterfuck.

DADT, isn't there yet. But moving closer, but not because Obama moved it.

But the Debt Deal has far reaching bad consequences, that will be felt much more than those (or the other broken promises, or the other broken promises like not getting us out of Iraq). The country took a hard turn to the right. He put SS, and medicare on the table - no republican would dare ever do that. It will be hard to recover from this without someone pushing a reset button somewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. I think you have a few things skewed.
But as decreasing the cost of health care and getting it to as many people as possibly. Secondly, the idea was to get it universal with the public option. But that was obstructed by both Democrats in Congress and the bloody 3-4 Republican votes Obama would need to pass the bill (this is including Lieberman). So it was faced with an empass. And it's not a big insurance giveaway. There are tons and tons and tons of good sides to the program. Now the LGBT community is included in this, insurance must cover birth control pills, 26 year olds are protected.

As for DADT. It is over. And yeah, it was pushed in the government by Obama. To discredit Obama of this is absolutely stupid. It's over. Yes, people have fought, people have died fighting for this to happen from the LGBT community, those who are deeply connected to the community, those who believe in human rights, and those in the military. However, to get this far---when it was ignored for 8 years by Bush and Obama made this one of his priorities. He should be given the credit for this, and history will give him credit for it. As they will for DOMA. Additionally, it is over---so this "isn't there yet" comment is a bit lacking. It's been signed by Obama and the leaders of the military so all that's left is the 60 day follow up which ends at the end of September and it's over.

As far as the debt deal...read this: http://www.editedforclarity.com/2011/08/01/debt-ceiling... /

As for Iraq...that's not a broken promise, he's taken out another 10,000-20,000 of the 50,000 that were left---and they'll be coming out this year. So by 2012---all of Iraq troops should be out. So I don't know what you're talking about. That's not broken, but in the works.

He never put medicare and SS on the table to be destroyed. He used the avenue to make reformation changes and I think that can be seen. No one has found cuts in SS or medicare. So your statements are unfounded and weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbonds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Sorry, but I see all what you said as spinning a bad situation to make it seem good.
I don't think our realities intersect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. Rec'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. Learn what a broken promise on Politifact.com can mean before judging Obama - see below
Excerpt:

Promise Broken – There are several ways a promise could earn this rating. Congress might reject the proposal outright through votes in the House or Senate. It's also possible that the proposal could be determined to be dead before an actual vote. It might be referred to a committee but never get a vote, or congressional leaders might announce that the proposal won't be considered.

http://www.politifact.com/about/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Thanks! That's a very important point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
9. Not all promises are created equal
And not all aspects of a political leader's performance can be enumerated as promises "kept" or "broken."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. that's interesting, since so much of the criticism I see here is about
"broken promises".

But I agree with you, and I appreciate Obama's "adult" leadership even if I don't always agree with him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. Also, keep in mind that ....
there are many things that President Obama has accomplished that aren't on Politifact's Obameter.
Their Obameter ONLY tracks the 2008 Campaign Promises.

So, to get a FULL idea of ALL that President Obama has done one must also look all the things that he has done that weren't included in the 2008 promises :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
20. It's PROPAGANDA!! Blue links!! No REAL liberal would support him!!
It's all fake and it doesn't matter anyway because we will all soon be very dead!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
23. is a fucking debacle
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-03-11 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
25. Unrecommend His biggest broken promise was
Mainstreet not Wall street. He's been nothing but worshipful of Wall-street and peed on Mainstreet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC