|
chris68
|
 |
« on: January 29, 2002, 04:53:58 pm » |
|
I know the President is scheduled to have his speech tonight at 9:00 EST, just wondered your thoughts of his performance so far and what you think he will be discussing tonight? I think his approval rating speaks for itself, he's at a record high approval rating which peaked at 90 something percent and is back down to 80 something percent (how's that for accurate, I know.) Also as far as tongights speach, I think homeland security will be a big issue and I presuem Enron will be a hot topic of discussion and the possibilities of his administrations involvment. What do you think? Chris68
Deskdemon Forum Board Staff  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
spitfire78
|
|
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2002, 05:14:13 pm » |
|
I disagree on the Enron issue. I think he will touch on it only in generalities. My guess is that with the ongoing investigations, he is going to want to stay far away from that until we see where the chips fall. I guess we'll find out tonight!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
radaro
|
|
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2002, 06:12:40 pm » |
|
Do you think that Bush's approval rating would be so high if it hadn't been for Sept 11? I don't think so. I mean if everyone thought he was so great, why did it take so long to determine if he was the president or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
countrigal
|
|
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2002, 06:12:46 pm » |
|
Another big topic that everyone is predicting he will speak on (besides national security) is the economy and the feeling/thoughts of the government that it is rebounding/improving.
CountriGal
Deskdemon Editorial Board Member
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
superninjaadmin
|
|
« Reply #4 on: January 29, 2002, 06:43:24 pm » |
|
The reason it took so long to figure out that Bush was elected President is because the Democrats were crying and upset that they lost the election fair and square, so they resorted to desperate measures and put up a fight and tried to smear the election by counting illegal ballots in only their selected and highly democratic counties in Florida. That's why!
If the Democrats didn't snivel and whine about Gore losing the legitimate election, the whole drama would have never been drawn out in the Florida court and ultimately the Supreme Court. I am glad to know that in the end, only legal legitmate ballots were counted. That's the way it should be and always be.
(just my $.02)
SNA
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
spitfire78
|
|
« Reply #5 on: January 29, 2002, 06:45:26 pm » |
|
No radar - I don't think his approval rating would be so high if it weren't for Sept. 11. To be honest, I never wanted him to win the election. Never really cared for Gore either - it was sort of a "lesser of two evils" kind of a thing with me. However, I did mostly approve of the way he handled the attack, the aftermath, and the "war" on terrorism.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
superninjaadmin
|
|
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2002, 06:47:17 pm » |
|
Plus I wanted to add one more thing:
The reason Bush's approval rating is so high right now is because his true colors are shining through and everyone is liking what they are seeing. It has little to do with Sept. 11. He is just taking this to prove he can do the job well. I think he is a great President and I know he is returning dignity and respect back to the White House.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mlm668
|
|
« Reply #7 on: January 29, 2002, 07:24:06 pm » |
|
I'm not usually politically minded. I don't care for the way the last election was handled by either side (to many people putting their noses in the process). But I do want to make an observation. Has anyone else noticed that it wasn't long after Bush was declared the winner of the last election that all of these large companies started crying that they weren't making any money? A lot of them are blaming 9/11 but the majority started reporting declining profits a year ago. Many would say it was the fault of the Clinton administration and to a point may be right. However, it makes you wonder how many of them decided that since they had a Republican in office, they were going to see just how much they could get away with to keep us smaller folks from getting ahead. That said and my personal feelings for Bush aside, I must agree that he handled that disaster as well as any person in his position could have. I am grateful that he didn't just go out with guns blazing without investigating first. He and his advisors were careful in not placing the blame without sufficient evidence. It is unfortunate that we had to go to war, but at least it was one that was carefully thought out before he sent our troops into hostile territory. Michelle  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
superninjaadmin
|
|
« Reply #8 on: January 29, 2002, 09:49:44 pm » |
|
I don't like it (and I don't think it's right) when people point fingers and blame the economy on the current administration or the previous administration (or the next administration for that matter). The economy is a delicate balancing act. I personally think it's inflated anyway (has been for nearly 10 years), so an adjustment is expected. We're going through a minor adjustment. My employer is going through a realignment (reorg) (adjustment) right now. I'm used to it. This company goes through them every few years or so. I was ready for it (we were due for one) I think we all need to be prepared for adjustments in our daily lives, whether it be our family, our jobs, or our economy. I'm not too worried about my job. I think I'll be one of the survivors. Either way, I'll survive whatever life throws at me. I can't blame anyone or anything. That's just how life is. OK -- this is getting WAAAY to serious... So, I'm gonna shut up now.  SNA |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
disallusioned
Newbie
Posts: 24
|
|
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2002, 03:57:05 pm » |
|
But if you look back through history, most of the stumbles in the economy come on election years. This is a fact. Most companies hold off on making new changes or anything until they see who will be in the driver's seat - both Presidential and in control of the Congress, since the 2 interact with each other. After election results, companies then resume what they were doing, and follow what ever plan was in place for either a Dem or Rep Pres and appropriate Congress. Why? Because of the differences in fiscal policies, which can affect companies either for the pos or the neg. Investors also take a step back and watch what the election will bring. This past year it was more noticeable because of the fiasco of the election and ballot counting, so the normally short slow down dragged out to a longer one, so the affects were more noticeable. Add in the natural correction that has been over-due, and you get the economic situation that we're experiencing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
daisylee
|
|
« Reply #11 on: January 31, 2002, 04:53:02 pm » |
|
The economics of our country has a lot to do with who is seated in government. But there are just way to many factors besides that make things happen the way they do. I think the incumbent government just tends to determine the rate at which it happens, and to what specific ends. And as you go back through history, you will see there are always cycles of economic growth, then slow down. It's natural. Kind of like a snake has to shed it's skin to grow again. You can't have one without the other. We've been through worse, remember a thing call the depression? And for those of us who were old enough in the '70's to TRY to find a job...well, it appears we've come full circle. Who I wanted for President has no bearing on what's what now. I know that if I don't think it's good, I can try to change that in a couple more years. Good government is the responsiblity of us all! And to answer the question, I think the President said all the right things, and focused on what Americans wanted to know. Now, if these changes come to fruition, it would be wonderful! We shall see!
Daisylee (and I want to say thanks to disillusioned for summing it up so well!)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
