hypermonkey : Can you friend me hypermonkey? You seem like you are really knowledgeable person. I know this is a strange change in topic but I might as well because you seem to know what you are talking about and I respect that about you. 

MordecooLol23 : Nobody wanted inmates from Guantanomo in his or her riding. It really wasn't Obama's fault.

MordecooLol23 : No, mostly because I don't know you.
(If you want to reply, please just comment on my profile or something, this is too much of a departure from the topic)

Let's see... He kept Guantanamo opened, he kept the Patriot Act, he kept violating the constitution, he increased taxes, he kept US troops in foreign countries, he want to confiscate more and more wealth of people and keeps corporatism alive. In other words, he's a typical politician, i.e. he's absolutely terrible

Over all he has done well. He inherited a country on the brink of financial collapse, actively at war, and dealing with a pending fuel crisis. Not what I'd call the ideal term in office. At the risk of falling into the "just keep the other guy out of office" mentality, I'd have to say that I'd have voted for him if I was American.

" He inherited a country on the brink of financial collapse"

So did Harding, and the country was back on its feet within 2 years.

"and dealing with a pending fuel crisis"

which was resolved by itself thanks to shale gas.

IgorBird122 : I think the main problem is that the system is now designed to keep out those who would be making some real major changes. The world's governments are so dependant on the status quo that they have created a system that slowly breaks down a possible candidate's conviction through tools such as temptation, cynicism, justification, righteousness and misinformation. After years of moving up the hierarchy, when you reach the top levels of government you've already been formatted into what the powers that be wish to have as a figurehead.

IgorBird122 : I think Ron Paul is overall amazing and it is sad how he is shut down from the debates and media attention. His ideals in the short term I feel would cause some great economical and societal pains but in the long term it would be worth it and the US would be better off for it. I must agree with you as well on that.

spikex : Yeah, the media should of listen to Paul's idea and at least give him a chance, but instead, they pretty much pretend like he  didn't exist and focus on the others.

Just note, the one that will do the worst job, will be the one that they will elect in office.

In my book Obama is the best president you ever had.

There are ofcource lots of rich folk there who like to slander him and spread all these ridiculous lies and propaganda about him. But hey, I can understand that. They are the people with the money and they can afford it. Unlike the folk most of you are actually part of. Or I don't know how many of you people here are billionaires. Or kids of billionaires. Who don't want to pay taxes.

Only thing I found wrong with Obamacare was that you are "forced" to buy an insurance. Like what the heck. Universal health care to all, rich and poor sounds very good in my book but it should not be forced on to anyone, especially if you are forced to pay for it. I thought it was supposed to be more like what they have in Canada. Or maybe I just understood it wrong.

Also I was kinda sad he did not keep his promise on closing down Guantanamo Bay.

And as for how he is bad with economy. You should really look up numbers what kind of debt the last president left behind and on what he spend it all and talk then. It sure as heck was not spend on jobs for you mommy and daddy. Unless they work in making weapons. Besides, every single effort he tries to make are being torpedoed down by the republicans just because he is Obama so what is he supposed to do?

Oh and sorry, maybe I don't follow enough American homeland politics but after reading this, not so much of you seem to follow it that close either. Even though I sound like a clichéd know it all European. And As you know, Yurop, she is a poor country.

MordecooLol23 : I read your little quip about the attack on Benghazi and I fail to see your point. You say there's a cover up and that he needs to tell people what happened. You -know- he covered up the attack? How exactly? What proof do you have? To what end, what would it accomplish? Did you know that prior to this terrorist attack on Benghazi, the Republicans recently voted to cut security funding for U.S. Embassies overseas? They are just as responsible for what happened as Obama might be. What about Bush's terms in office where more than 50 Americans have been killed in similar terrorist attacks? Where was the outrage then? George Bush and Reagan both singlehandedly increased the national deficit more than any other presidents in recent years. As others have stated before, you -have- to compare Obama to past presidents, otherwise there is no standard to judge him against.

" They are the people with the money and they can afford it"

Obama didn't raise money for his campaigns?

"Universal health care to all, rich and poor sounds very good in my book but it should not be forced on to anyone, especially if you are forced to pay for it"

There is no other way around it. If it's from the government, it comes with handcuffs.

" You should really look up numbers what kind of debt the last president left behind and on what he spend it all and talk then"

Bush was as bad as Obama. All proportions kept, he was the biggest spender ever before 2008. Also, Obama contracted as much (nominal) debt) as ALL his predecessors. He is responsible for 39% of the actual debt, in fact (the graph says: % of the debt caused by each president, in 2012 dollars)

janus : Yeah, that is a good chart you got there.
Yeah, the sequester that's going on is the cuts going on and Obama does have money with him, and what does he spend it on, himself.

IgorBird122 : Of course he does, he only earns like $400,000 a year. What do you expect him to do, donate it to prevent spending cuts? $400,000 doesn't cover anything.

Anyone ever notice how people argue that anyone is a bad president by saying they increased taxes, then make demands on what they want done with the country? Kind of an oxymoron. Demand: better our public education. Fact: almost all money that goes into public education comes from tax money. Demand: get us away from the grip of the health insurance companies and give us universal healthcare so everyone can afford it. Fact: Universal healthcare can only be done with taxpayer money.

I find it completely laughable that someone would make ANY demand that they want for this country and then rant saying "so and so is a horrible president because they increased our taxes". Well where do you expect the money to pay for your demands to actually come from? From a magic land where profits and resources are expelled from the rears of fairies and unicorns that go down the funnel leading to our country's back pocket? If you want anything to get better, you have to be willing to contribute. 

Me being a stone hard conservative think Obama is not doing a good job at all. The debt is still rapidly increasing as well as he is wasting money. I think since most of our government is liberal and the history is liberal, why don't you elect a conservative or at least a president who knows what he is doing instead of writing a book.