• Amy Laskowski

    Senior Writer Twitter Profile

    Photo of Amy Laskowski. A white woman with long brown hair pulled into a half up, half down style and wearing a burgundy top, smiles and poses in front of a dark grey backdrop.

    Amy Laskowski is a senior writer at Boston University. She is always hunting for interesting, quirky stories around BU and helps manage and edit the work of BU Today’s interns. She did her undergrad at Syracuse University and earned a master’s in journalism at the College of Communication in 2015. Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

There are 14 comments on Has Obama Earned a Second Term?

    1. Your opinion, Kyle. And there are plenty with opposing opinions = healthy intellectual debate.

      There has not been enough political debate and discussion during this election.

  1. No way. The Democrats controlled both houses of congress during the last two years of Bush’s presidency and the first two years of Obama’s tenure as president. Yet the democrats have blamed Bush for the recession and have failed to turn the economy around!! This I am a victim blame game that is the democrat SOP is just more evidence of their incompetence. I cannot believe Americans are gullible enough to trade bread and circuses for their votes again but then history has shown that mankind is inclined to suffer so long as the injustices it is subjected to are tolerable so it could happen. That said, the US cannot tolerate 4 more years of failed democrat/Obama policies no matter how many gifts from the seemingly government trough we are promised in exchange for our votes.

    1. The world – not only the US, but the ENTIRE world – cannot afford another Bush. The damages that those 8 years of Bush did to the US and the world could not be fixed in only four years. The Bush administration created the worst economic crisis, since 1929. What Obama did was to save the US from experiencing the same Great Depression it did experience in 1929. HE did so by injecting a lot of government money into the economy, which is what FDR did to help the US emerge from the Great Depression. If the Reps had been in power in the last 4 years, the situation would have been more horrible. Sarah Palin as vice President?!? Are you kidding? Obama is FAR from perfect, but Romney+Ryan will be even worse. Much worse.

    2. When referring to the Democratic majority during the first two years, it would be disingenuous not to recognize the fact that the majority in the senate was not filibuster proof (no super majority) and the current rules allow any senator to filibuster – without actually holding the floor. They can declare a filibuster and go home…

    3. To note: I will not be voting for either Obama or Romney this year.

      4 years of Democratic control of Congress is still less than the 6 years of Republican control supporting the failed GOP/Bush policies, unnecessary war in Iraq, and unnecessarily long war in Afghanistan, that got us into this recession (and they absolutely DID get us into it, never mind the Wall Street swindlers and their toxic financial products that made the whole thing worse).

      You say the country can’t tolerate 4 more years of failed Democrat/Obama policy? 4 years of Romney’s exaggerated form of the failed GOP/Bush policies that got us here would be back-breaking.

      That’s not to say Obama hasn’t failed in some respects. He has. And I believe those failures have prevented the country from being in much better shape than it is.

      When America wakes up and stops voting for two parties that have done nothing but damage the country over the past 12 years, THEN we’ll see some candidates and elected officials that bring about real change.

      1. Unnecessarily long war in Afghanistan?!?!?! So what would you have done? Gone there for a year and pulled out? We did what we needed to do and we still aren’t done… Open your eyes.

        1. The Afghan War is a prime example of trying to apply a conventional solution to an unconventional threat. Terrorists are not states. You don’t beat a terrorist group by invading a country. You beat it through targeted police actions and public diplomacy. You discredit their cause while removing them quietly. That’s the only strategy that has yielded any positive results at all.

    1. Sorry, but you just whiffed with that analogy.

      If you a critical look at recent Republican records on social as well as economic policy, you’d probably have to conclude that President Obama has been bringing the team back after a Bobby Valentine-like performance from GW Bush. Except it’s harder, because he had 8 seasons of mismanagement.

      Let’s take a quick look at the president most Republicans hold up as their shining example of brilliance: Ronald Reagan. Under Reagan, the size of Federal government, it’s number of public employees and its deficits mushroomed. For instance, the National debt nearly tripled during 8 years of Reagan. As a percentage of GDP, government spending was higher in 1983 under President Ronald Reagan than it will be this fiscal year according to data by the Tax Policy Center. And with that kind of spending, you’d think the economy and employment would have soared, but the average unemployment rate during his 8 years was 7.4%.

      Now we are looking at a Mitt Romney plan that follows the same flawed thinking that Republicans have been pursuing for 30 years, only he wants to put it on steroids. Trickle down tax cuts skewed to the top, and excessive, (obscene in this case) defense spending have been shown to be a poor strategy for growth, and have deeply harmed the middle class’ ability to thrive and prosper.

      The 5 million plus jobs that have been created since President Obama took office are in the private sector. In fact, we had fewer public jobs added during the last four years than any time in recent history—this is largely due to Congressional obstruction of the Jobs bill that would have saved teacher’s jobs and created infrastructure construction jobs (a much more efficient way to boost the overall economy than either tax cuts or defense spending).

      If state, local, and federal employment followed the same trend from 2008 through today as it did from 2005-2008, the unemployment rate would be 6.1% instead of 7.8%. See, the way this works is that when a Democrat is in office, the highest Republican priority always seems to be shrinking government. Especially now that we’re in a deep recession. But when a Republican is in office, the opposite happens.

      I think what you really meant to say is let’s not vote for Mitt Romney, who’s just another Republican incarnation of Bobby Valentine.

  2. Here we go again with democrats claiming to always be a victim of the failed policy of someone else. It’s all the other guys fault, we need more time, its not fair, we need a second chance blah blah blah. I have been listening to this nonsense from the left for years and yet despite all the extra chances and extra time and blame assigning the left never seems to be able to rise to the occasion.

    On the other hand Obama was very quick to take full credit for tracking down Osama Bin Ladin. So if I understand this correctly the administration is saying that it responsible for all its successes and Bush is to blame for all its failures?

    Mitt Romney is among the most centrist republicans. His record in MA demonstrates that he is as likely to disappoint the republicans and he is to please the democrats. This is unfortunate for the far right as they will not be getting what they want out of a Romney administration but it could be very good for the entire country which has only been further divided by the ideological madness perpetrated during the first 2 years of the Obama administration.

    Mitt will modify Obama care and return the mandatory insurance issue back to the states with a government carrot for conformance thereby allowing the red states to not require insurance and vice versa for the blue states per the 10th amendment. There will be no further need to over interpret the commerce clause and the nation with breath a huge collective sigh of relief. I could go on and on but unless someone here can explain to me how the majority forcing the minority to do what it does not want is consistent with the republican form of government guaranteed by the constitution and with the 10 amendment there is nothing really left to debate.

    I agree that Romney will likely augment rather than curtail Obama’s spendings policies during the first year or two because frankly at this stage of the game with stagflation on the horizon increasing the velocity of money which could help to pay off old middle class debt seems more prudent than the contrary. But unlike Obama Romney will also keep taxes low on business to foster confidence, drive reinvestment and spur growth which will create more jobs making the pie bigger. AS anyone who understands economics knows if the US governments needs x amount of new revenue it can get this money by raising taxes or by keeping the tax rate the same and taking a smaller piece of bigger pie. The latter is the most economical sustainable remedy. Why this phenomenon is never lost on the venture capitalists who risk their money to start new businesses but seemingly always lost on the not for profit US government defies logic but I digress.

    1. Yes Mitt Romney can pretend to be one of the most centrist Republicans. He’s also severely conservative, in his own words. In fact, he’s whatever you want him to be, depending on the occasion.

      But if he gets elected, he’s got a lot of debts to pay off to his tea party backers, so I wouldn’t be too sure about him playing the moderate role. But then, how can you be sure about anything he says? His beliefs seemingly change on a weekly basis.

      When it comes to the budget, the Supreme Court, women’s right to choose, and their medical care, the environment, FEMA, the FDA, the SEC, the EPA, energy policy, and who’ll get the big tax breaks, there’s not much question where his obligations lie.

      President Obama needs to apologize for nothing. He’s been the responsible adult in this whole mess, and he’s gotten our economy as well as our foreign policy back on track. Now we just need a few responsible adults in Congress as well, and things will improve more rapidly. Why at this point would we ever choose to go back to the failed policies that Mitt is recycling?

      1. The way I look at it, Obama is a known quantity. I hear people complain that Romney is GW Bush 2.0. Give me specific examples. It’s an aura that the Obama campaign has been pushing and people have been soaking up without question.

        1. Here are four specific examples:

          1.Same disproved trickle-down economic plan that claims to create good jobs through tax cuts skewed toward the wealthy—only Romney’s plan is a more extreme version

          2.Largely identical group of neocon foreign policy advisers as Bush, along with the same sabre-rattling rhetoric that alienated the rest of the world

          3.Like Bush, he’s an opportunist who courts religious extremists and radical right ideologues, yet pretends he’s going to be a compassionate conservative

          4.If he wins Presidency, he’ll be entering with a conservative majority in the Supreme Court, with the ability to appoint more ideologues like Scalia. Also would have a majority in Congress, and potentially in the Senate with an anti-women, anti-science agenda.

Post a comment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *