Greetings from Hawaii,

Michelle, the kids and I are having a wonderful time over here where we are so far away from you we can't hear all your bitching and screaming.  Nancy is over on the Big Island staying in her $10k per night suite she stays in on a regular basis.  We feel your pain, just as much as I feel the sunburn from the tropical sunshine.

OBTW, we are broke again, please tell Congress to raise the debt ceiling another $1.2T.  It seems that the $2T y'all gave me last August that was supposed to last until 2013 is gone already.  I guess I know as much about economix as I do shovels.  P'shaw.  I kinda spent it already.  You know how it is when you don't pass a real budget for 2 years now going on 3.  Harry over in the Senate simply refuses to bring it up for a vote.  You'd think as President I could do something about that an all, but I can't do that and keep getting all those primo Tee times on all these fabulous golf courses.  Do you have any idea how hard it is to get that 8 o'clock start ?  I mean really, between all the fundraising and golf and basketball and baby kissing, I don't have much time left over.

And just as I am getting a rest, I've got to spend all the coming time working on my college hoops predictions for the NCAA's in March.  Where does all the time go ?  Oh, and what about all the butterflies we use to make ink for the money I keep printing.  What are we going to do if they go extinct ?  Wait, I know !  We can implant chips in everyone and stop using cash !!!!!  I bet if we order enough the Chinese will give us a deal ...

Mahalo and Mele Kalikimaka from Oahu !

Yer bud and 99% er,

Barry

Obama has been the greatest goal post mover of any recent POTUS.

Latest is he wanted 12 months on the payroll tax and then he doesn't.

That's real leadership and crisis management.

Clear message and vision, yeah, uh huh ...

 Beaker wrote: 
I thought I covered that, but here it is with more clarity:  ALL: Beaker did not type the words I put in quotes. I put those there to express my view of his sentiments which I thought were pretty obvious. Apologies to any/all who were misled.
 Beaker wrote: 
Fine, then you won't mind if I continue to be your huckleberry.

 Beaker wrote: 
Where have I been evasive? You're the one who won't post your own words and the hides behind "not my words, take it up with them". 

Yes, I have open contempt for your posting style. Mostly because I think a) you can do better, and b) I think it would be a lot nicer if you did.  I gladly admit to prodding you a bit because I'd like to see change. It's probably futile, but your political posts are becoming pretty redundant lately. 

 Beaker wrote:

That's why I said sentiment. I would never bother trying to quote you on something so large. Your much to evasive for that.  But your sentiment on the subject is evident to all, so I'm pretty comfortable making statements about it.

 

 

 Beaker wrote:

And what exactly is it for you?  Run away along now and go find some more hot air to re-post.

 hippiechick wrote: 
 

 Beaker wrote: 

But you keep posting them with the sentiments of "worst president ever" and "cant possibly stand up to republican X in the general".... Even you seem to realize the holes in your underlying presumptions, because you aren't willing to put down anything beyond a cut and paste of someone else's thoughts. 

At least I'm willing to try to draw the (thinly veiled) conclusion that you want. What you've posted so far just doesn't support it.  And it's fun watching you keep trying.

 Isabeau wrote: 


So nice to see you!

 islander wrote: 

But that is his content. Is there any other?

 Beaker wrote: 
But you have posted several charts/polls comparing him (I'm assuming unfavorably) to past presidents based on his numbers. But if anything the data shows that most presidents get re-elected despite the numbers. 50% isn't a magic threshold, and all of the presidents are within a pretty slim range. Bush 1 and Clinton were both at 51% on the decline from November and one got re-elected and the other didn't. Carter was at 53%, why didn't he get re-elected? How about Bush 1 at 51%? (all numbers from your posts). I think your analysis need more analysis, your causality links don't seem to be holding up.

You also said: "Obama won't be seeing an uptick in December", and yet here we are, he's seen an uptick in December. Honestly, I don't think it means much. I just think it's humorous to point out the flaws in your analysis. Your normally much more solid than this, your desire to bash Barry has diminished the quality of your content.  

Well, the last minute brinkmanship high chair banging by Cantor and Boehner will be remembered. Even the Republicans are aware that the unemployed suddenly pay very close attention to politics. And the hypocrisy over insisting the Pay Roll tax cut be paid for, yet not so for the Debt-Busting Bush Tax Cuts is beginning to resonate.
Its time these guys linger in the dirty di@pers they make.

 hippiechick wrote: 
That can't be. Someone said that wouldn't happen:  http://www4.radioparadise.com/content.php?name=Forums&file=showtopic&p=3325909 

So for presidents that have had an uptick in polls between November and December of year three, he's in the same boat as Nixon, Reagan, Carter, and GWB. I'd say that is 3 to 1 for re-election assuming I'm reading Beaker's numbers correctly.

 

According to Gallup's latest poll, Obamas approval rating is up to 47%, disapproval rating 45%.

 Beaker wrote: 
You can stop now. I've already decided against voting Republican.

 winter wrote: 
Yeah, that makes sense. Oops!

 kurtster wrote: 



And types every tweet for every one of his re-election committees personally, no doubt. It's an amusing error by some low-level staffer somewhere. I guarantee you could find similar ones from any of the other candidates' campaigns.

 Umberdog wrote: 
And he went to Harvard and Columbia ...

 Beaker wrote: 



Could be they meant $40 a paycheck, which (assuming biweekly paychecks) puts them in the ballpark. An embarrassing error for a low-level staffer somewhere.

 Beaker wrote: 
This is pretty pathetic. It shows how terrible American education has become.

 islander wrote: 
i'm not a political "strategerist"

but i'd say paul ryan may get the gop nod next time around