Poll: Who wins in 2012?

[pbrower2a]

Maybe not the President, but certainly the political culture. During the 1920s, productivity rose faster than wages. Such itself creates increasing economic inequality, and in the end the super-rich who get the gains can't spend enough to prevent the decline of the economy.  Much the same happened in this decade; in the 1920s the cause of productivity outstripping wages was  the electrification of factories; in this decade it was the use of computers that  made business able to do more work with fewer employees. As a symptom of the trend the Gini coefficient (a measure of economic inequality) for income in the US rose to the high 40s, the highest that it had been since... 1929!

The blame for the initial stock market crash lies squarely upon the Federal Reserve. Coolidge is only guilty insofar as he failed to abolish the Fed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hmm, is this Jeopardy? Who is Roosevelt? Or is it Lincoln?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They were also both fascistic totalitarian megalomaniacs who started wars that killed lots of people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, really. Thanks for the Wikipedia link making it apparent you don't think for yourself.

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history? What is my alternative -- to rely upon my own authority? I have no such authority.

Does anyone have a problem with the idea that Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower were two of our better peacetime Presidents and that Calvin Coolidge was not one of the best? I well know that there is some controversy, but nobody is going to claim that Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan are among the greatest Presidents.  

[Mechaman]

Maybe not the President, but certainly the political culture. During the 1920s, productivity rose faster than wages. Such itself creates increasing economic inequality, and in the end the super-rich who get the gains can't spend enough to prevent the decline of the economy.  Much the same happened in this decade; in the 1920s the cause of productivity outstripping wages was  the electrification of factories; in this decade it was the use of computers that  made business able to do more work with fewer employees. As a symptom of the trend the Gini coefficient (a measure of economic inequality) for income in the US rose to the high 40s, the highest that it had been since... 1929!

The blame for the initial stock market crash lies squarely upon the Federal Reserve. Coolidge is only guilty insofar as he failed to abolish the Fed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hmm, is this Jeopardy? Who is Roosevelt? Or is it Lincoln?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They were also both fascistic totalitarian megalomaniacs who started wars that killed lots of people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, really. Thanks for the Wikipedia link making it apparent you don't think for yourself.

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history? What is my alternative -- to rely upon my own authority? I have no such authority.

Does anyone have a problem with the idea that Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower were two of our better peacetime Presidents and that Calvin Coolidge was not one of the best? I well know that there is some controversy, but nobody is going to claim that Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan are among the greatest Presidents.  

Yet this list also has Woodrow Wilson in the top ten...........

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history?

Because an article on Wikipedia about a survey is not an "objective treatment of history".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least you are aware of your own ignorance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I do. Dwight Eisenhower was mediocre and Theodore Roosevelt sucked big-time. Calvin Coolidge was better than either of them.

[Mechaman]

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history?

Because an article on Wikipedia about a survey is not an "objective treatment of history".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least you are aware of your own ignorance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I do. Dwight Eisenhower was mediocre and Theodore Roosevelt sucked big-time. Calvin Coolidge was better than either of them.

I love how pbrower conveniently leaves out the fact that Eisenhower and Roosevelt had hardons for military interventionism in other nations. Roosevelt got aroused by the thought of sending our navy around the world just to get all the other bitch nations wet for our seacocks of death. And Eisenhower, don't even get me started on how "peaceful" a president he was.

[Alexander Hamilton]

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history?

Because an article on Wikipedia about a survey is not an "objective treatment of history".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least you are aware of your own ignorance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I do. Dwight Eisenhower was mediocre and Theodore Roosevelt sucked big-time. Calvin Coolidge was better than either of them.

I love how pbrower conveniently leaves out the fact that Eisenhower and Roosevelt had hardons for military interventionism in other nations. Roosevelt got aroused by the thought of sending our navy around the world just to get all the other bitch nations wet for our seacocks of death. And Eisenhower, don't even get me started on how "peaceful" a president he was.

Sending the navy around was a poor example of Roosevelt's interventionism. In fact, that was more an act of Roosevelt that showed he did not want war, and therefore, persuaded other nations against it.

What we should focus on is the Roosevelt Corollary.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

What's wrong with relying upon Wikipedia for objective treatment of history?

Because an article on Wikipedia about a survey is not an "objective treatment of history".

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least you are aware of your own ignorance.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, I do. Dwight Eisenhower was mediocre and Theodore Roosevelt sucked big-time. Calvin Coolidge was better than either of them.

I love how pbrower conveniently leaves out the fact that Eisenhower and Roosevelt had hardons for military interventionism in other nations. Roosevelt got aroused by the thought of sending our navy around the world just to get all the other bitch nations wet for our seacocks of death. And Eisenhower, don't even get me started on how "peaceful" a president he was.

Yeah, T. Roosevelt definitely had some psychiatric issues that made him genuinely love war. And his domestic policies were no better.

Eisenhower was quite the hypocrite considering he allowed the growth of the military-industrial complex all through his presidency.

[President Mitt]

Coolidge is miles ahead of Eisenhower and Teddy.

[liberalkid]

obama loses. me (okay, i can't vote, thus the next sentance) and a good chunk of people on the left are less than pleased with him. Nader won't run, so it can be someone who has less bagage.
unless, of course, the Republicans nominate Palin, or to a lesser extent Huckabee. THEN, it might get more interesting

[cannonia]

Obama will win. The economic cycle by then will have improved such, even though his economic policies may or may not have any influence on that, he can still take credit for the better economy, justified or not.

[Sewer]

And his domestic policies were no better.

The Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act are so evils!!!11!!!!111!

[Oakvale]

obama loses. me (okay, i can't vote, thus the next sentance) and a good chunk of people on the left are less than pleased with him. Nader won't run, so it can be someone who has less bagage.
unless, of course, the Republicans nominate Palin, or to a lesser extent Huckabee. THEN, it might get more interesting

With all due respect, I find it hard to take a 14-year-old kid's political predictions very seriously.

[pbrower2a]

If it takes some saber-rattling to stop a war, then by all means mobilize troops and show the fleet. Pure pacifism has never stopped a war.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

And his domestic policies were no better.

The Pure Food and Drug Act and the Meat Inspection Act are so evils!!!11!!!!111!

As part of TR's overall campaign to assault domestic freedom, yes, they were.

[JSojourner]

Lean Obama.

Right now, the lack of anyone even remote resembling a competent leader is the biggest problem with the Republican field.

I suppose if John Thune (not very bright) or Mike Pence (too bright by half) are able to sand away some of their rougher (extremist) edges between the primary and the general, then they could be poised for a win.

I suppose, though, that Romney is the most adept at changing his image as the circumstances warrant.  To win the primary, he can be the ultra-conservative, government-hating Mormon who made his fortune because of tax cuts, trickle down and Ronald Reagan.  And to win the general, he can be the socially moderate, fiscal conservative Governor of Massachusetts, who realizes that sometimes, government has to play a role in solving peoples' problems.

Since he's well-familiar with both sides of the coin...and since he has a limitless fortune to spend...my money's on him to win the primary at least.

[cardboard59]

Worst case scenario: Huckabee wins primary, but is defeated by Obama in a close election in which Virginia, Indiana, North Carolina, Colorado and possibly Florida all flip back to Republican, while Arizona goes Democratic.