Why is President Obama's approval rating steadily going down?
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$5 Answers
It is widely accepted that the collapse of the housing market is what sent Wall Street Firms (such as Lehman) tumbling. But what is really behind the housing collapse?
In 1993, under Democratic President Clinton, the Glass-Steagall Act enacted in 1933 to specifically curtail speculation by banks, was repealed when Clinton signed into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Gramm, Leach and Bliley were all Republicans. The Glass-Steagall Act was the successful response to the economic collapse in 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. It specifically separated banks from investment firms and created a risk-aversion culture for banks. With its repeal under President Clinton, Wall Street and Banks were essentially allowed to own each other. The D.C. dream of paving the way for millions of Americans who could not afford to own a home was now a reality because “the potential to make enormous profits trading mortgage-backed securities with artificially high ratings encouraged banks to take on otherwise intolerable risk in the form of bad loans.” Berating the Raters, By Paul Krugman – see link below.
It took about 15 years for the full force of this folly to collapse Wall Street, US and Global Banking, and millions of American households. When Bush took office unemployment was about 5% and mortgage defaults were about 5%. This was an essentially healthy economy where the vast majority of people lived within their means. When banks capitalized on Wall Street’s lust for ever more mortgage-backed securities, they loaned millions of people mortgages that they couldn’t afford. These were often creative loans that were adjustable or interest only because that’s all many applicants could qualify for. Little thought was given to how the loan would really be repaid. Anything to get that mortgage so they could sell it on the secondary market. Of course, Realtors didn’t want to miss out on the action and they fueled the profit seeking frenzy with seminars on “How To Get Rich In Real Estate,” “How To Buy A House With No Money Down,” “Flip and Get Rich,” etc.
Every professional group (not all professional individuals, but every professional group) was complicit in submitting paperwork that met loan criteria regardless of whether it was truth or fraud, to keep this cash cow flowing (such as stated income vs documented income, or investment properties being represented as 2nd homes to get the lower home-owner vs higher investor interest rate). Houses were “flipped” 4, 5 even 6 times in one year from one investor to the next until finally a real family bought the home to live in it; all by the same Real Estate Agent making commission on every sale. Of course the final homeowner paid a much higher price as the 6th buyer of that home in that year, but everyone was happy because real estate was always a safe investment in the US, even if there were occasional problem periods (such as the 80’s high interest or the early 90’s recession) and it just kept increasing in value even though salaries were not keeping pace. Real Estate had been a safe investment because common sense oversight had been in place – the Glass-Steagall Act, only now it’s not there anymore to keep profiteering in check.
This was all made possible by the collective efforts of Republicans and Democrats alike in the mid to late 90’s; long before Bush was on the scene.
It was Bush’s misfortune to be misled by intell on Iraq, most likely an intentional ploy by Cheney and Halliburton, or other powers-that-be, who wanted to get their hands on Iraqi oil, but none-the-less a perfect scenario following 9-11 that played on Bush’s personal issue dating back to his Father and Kuwait, leading him to put military emphasis on the wrong war. A long war that became very unpopular. Unlike our politicians such as Hillary Clinton who was declaring just today that “we are advancing America’s interests,” most Americans want to live in peace with the world. We want to live in and run our country our way, and leave everyone else alone. Every-day-Americans don’t want to support the world. They will however, not tolerate terrorism or any attack on their soil. 9-11 they will never forget, and they still want Osama, dead or alive. Preferably alive so he can be publicly held accountable for his unthinkable crimes in the name of God. Hence, a war and it’s necessary expense is okay at this time, as long as it’s the right war.
President Obama’s rating is steadily going downhill because he doesn’t understand what is really going on in this nation at the people level, or if he does he is ignoring it. His rating is going down because he is Bush-Bashing and blaming Bush for things that aren’t really his doing. Most Americans might not understand how the nation got to this Great Recession, but they instinctively know that Bush didn’t make the cost of housing skyrocket, and they instinctively know that Bush didn’t cause 15% of homeowners to go into foreclosure (those people who couldn’t afford a home but got to buy one anyway when the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed).
Americans know that the USA is in trouble because of both Democrats and Republicans. Or, to be equal, because of both Republicans and Democrats. President Obama’s rating is going down because he is not embracing the problem and taking the Democrats fair share of the responsibility, he is Bush Bashing. He is not addressing the historically high national debt and budget deficit, but doubling it yet again. He is not using tax dollars wisely to reduce debt or generate more jobs, he is squandering those dollars on entitlements.
This entire nation, generation after generation is founded on hard work and perseverance. Anyone worth their salt can be a success and become rich. President Obama’s core philosophy is to level the playing field by redistributing wealth from those who worked for it, to those who couldn’t be bothered. (And the 100, 1,000 or even 10,000 decadent Wall Street Celebrities who are held up to be the demons that justify Obama’s actions are inconsequential compared to the paradigm shift Obama is trying to force on all hard working Americans.) In truth, it is wrong to steal from the rich to give to the poor. It might be romantic in novels, but in real life stealing is just wrong, no matter how you word it in a Bill. President Obama’s rating is going down because Americans are fundamentally good and fair, and they see the lie of this.
President Obama’s rating is not going down because American’s are impatient. President Obama’s rating is going down because he encourages layer upon layer of more bureaucracy. Example: instead of reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act that worked so well for 3/4 of a century, he encouraged the Senate to adopt an entire new set of financial oversight requiring entourages of accountants and attorneys to manage. Wasted dollar after wasted dollar both public and private. It is predicted that because of the complexity of recent legislation, we will need an additional 21% more accountants by 2018 – see link below. And Americans know it is utterly unthinkable that 30%, 35%, even 40% of your hard earned income is going to pay for massive government entitlements, bureaucracy and waste.
President Obama’s rating has continued to go down because Americans are not stupid or ignorant. They are very good at recognizing a run-away government. They wanted hope and change, but *their* hope and change, *ethical* hope and change; not an elected official who decided he knows what’s best and refuses to listen to 56% of the population that wants the Healthcare Bill repealed vs 38% who do not – see Rasmussen link below; not an elected official who runs around blaming the other guy to boost his own initiatives.
President Obama’s rating continues to go down because of President Obama – who he is, and his actions.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$President Obama could have insisted on a better stimulus, but he decided (as did President Jimmy Carter) that it would be too politically inconvenient.
Note to future Dem Presidents. Study Clinton, mot Carter or Obama. Like or hate him, Clinton had the political savy to effectively run the country, usually with Republican support.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$I read these all views of member. All just a little bit concerned with the questions correctly answered . I just want to say that , Obama is one of the good president of USA. And I felt his work for America till now.Leanspa
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$It's a bit too much to expect people to start reading and understanding the full and unbiased news.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Thank you for the comment. By "they" I was referring to the people contributing to the President's diminished rating. There are many niches of citizens in this country, but there is also truth in grouping them in large categories, for instance American citizens are male or female. The generalized statements as presented above do not make the answer untrue.
This is not a bad answer, but I don't agree with your conclusions about the President. The main problem with your answer is that you lump too many people into "they." This is always a mistake. In a nation this size, there are too many niches for your answer to be true.