Obama Approval Hits Now Low, Voters Say He's Wrong Kind of Change

  • Thread starter Thread starter juliee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

juliee

Guest
Obama Approval Hits Now Low, Voters Say He’s Wrong Kind of Change

Washington, DC – In an election that is turning out to be focused on the liberal, pro-abortion agenda of the Obama administration, a new Gallup poll shows Americans give President Barack Obama the lowest approval ratings of his presidency.

LifeNews.com/nat6785.html
 
I did not vote for Obama becasue I thought he was woefully unprepared to lead America, and by extension, have solid positive influence in the World. He was, and continues to be, a charismatic Pied Piper. Certainly no Jack Kennedy in experience.

The World desparately wants American leadership it remembers after World War II. The unearned Noble Peace Prize expressed that strong desire.

The fact that his popularity is sliding and NOT free falling further indicates we want a President who can lead us to a better place. Come on, do better; quit blaming your predecessor.

Obama’s promise of CHANGE, as any promise of change, can result in only three conditions: A positive change, a neutral change, or a negative change. We are not seeing the positive change.

But the graph showing his slide from about 63% to 44% would be a better measure if it also contained the result for the past 5 Presidents.
 
Newbie2 said:
Is anyone surprised?
Click to expand...
Not me, either.

Never voted for him in 2008. I remember being in a funk for several days after the election-how could Americans be so stupid as to elect this guy in the first place?

😦
 
For me, it was all about Catholics voting for this very pro-abortion presidential candidate. He voted to deny a baby born ALIVE during an abortion (it does happen) any medical care! How could Catholics possibly justify voting for THAT???

I decided it was mostly based on the idea of having a black President and I chalked it up to racism, but racism that puts one skin color ahead of another just to compensate for wrongs done in the past. I guess it was the equivalent of institutional restitution. So we handed the highest position in the world to someone who has had zero experience in that kind of position, someone who was steeped in Chicago politics (well-known to be very corrupt), and a man who spent 20 years as a member of a Black Liberation Theology church, hearing the most sickening anti-America diatribe possible. “Not God bless America, God d*mn America!” shouted Jeremiah Wright from the pulpit. Everywhere he goes, he talks America down. No other President in the history of the world has held such a negative view of his own country! It’s like a PR agent who talks your product DOWN instead of promoting it!

The press didn’t help, but the information was out there if American Catholics wanted to find it. It hurt me deeply that my Church didn’t turn away from this man. No Catholic should have voted for Obama.
 
GratefulFred said:
I did not vote for Obama becasue I thought he was woefully unprepared to lead America, and by extension, have solid positive influence in the World. He was, and continues to be, a charismatic Pied Piper. Certainly no Jack Kennedy in experience.

The World desparately wants American leadership it remembers after World War II. The unearned Noble Peace Prize expressed that strong desire.

The fact that his popularity is sliding and NOT free falling further indicates we want a President who can lead us to a better place. Come on, do better; quit blaming your predecessor.

Obama’s promise of CHANGE, as any promise of change, can result in only three conditions: A positive change, a neutral change, or a negative change. We are not seeing the positive change.

But the graph showing his slide from about 63% to 44% would be a better measure if it also contained the result for the past 5 Presidents.
Click to expand...
If he had been experienced, would you have voted for him, even knowing that he is as pro-abortion as it gets?
 
TheRealJuliane said:
If he had been experienced, would you have voted for him, even knowing that he is as pro-abortion as it gets?
Click to expand...
I cannot vote for a Pro-Abortion candidate unless both are pro-abortion. Then I’d have to judge which is the least. Not to vote at all is still a vote for the candidate that would lead in a wrong direction on other issues. Defending Life does come first.

Life begins at the moment of conception. The fertilized egg has ALL the DNA and chromsomes of a SEPARATE human being that is neither the father nor the mother.

Yes, that NEW LIFE is totally dependent on the mother for 9 to 10 months and the mother should have the full support of the father, but the fertilized egg IS NEW LIFE. Killing it is wrong regardless of the timing - in or out of the womb.

We are held responsible for our personal actions in all other events affecting someone else’s life. There is way too much talk on the right to abort or not, and not enough talk on the PRUDENCE of personal responsibility. There will be much less abortions, I think, if society militantly marched to make men bear the responsibility for the pregnancies they create. Focusing on the right to kill new life is totally missing the more important aspects of sexual union.

I had determined that he lacked experience long before I learned how strongly he supports abortion. Shame on him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top