*blocked therefore AIRDATE PLZ

edit: nvm, here it is Canada http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/full-episodes/#clip252086

This video has been flagged as having an embed that is Region Blocked to not function in certain geographical locations - declared blocked by calvados.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'health, care, debate, reform, politics, president, daily, show' to 'health, care, debate, reform, politics, president, daily, show, stealth care reform' - edited by calvados

*news

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by NetRunner.

So... One term for Obama? I gotta admit, he seems unable to accomplish anything substantive. I still think he's better than McBonehead would have been, though.

Yeah, it's true, Obama sadly is increasing the possibility of ending up a single-term, lame duck, president. And unfortunately it's his own fault.

In his desire to have a Bi-Partisan government, he didn't push the Supermajority, to ramrod through all of the things he promised. Doing so would have angered the right wing, big deal, the right is never going to be happy about anything the left does. But, not using their collective supremacy has disappointed the left.

Only time will tell. But should next years elections see the left's congressional majority disappear, I think we'll have a good indicator of how 2012 will go. My worry is that the RNC will run Palin against Obama, and we'll end up with someone too stupid to even be a Fox News host running this country.

... and to whom is Obama going to lose the election exactly?

Maybe one day people will figure out there is no right and left, there is only business, the arguments just create a diversion.

Maybe one day people will figure out there is no right and left, there is only business, the arguments just create a diversion.

Hm - only PARTLY correct. There is no right and left, there is only BIG GOVERNMENT. The arguments are just a diversion.

In his desire to have a Bi-Partisan government, he didn't push the Supermajority, to ramrod through all of the things he promised

Sigh. No. Just no. Obama is making the exact same mistake Bush did. He thought his popularity was so high that he could cram an UNPOPULAR agenda down everyone's throat with the co-operation of a lick-spittle Congress.

After 9/11 Bush was crazy popular. The radical left still hated him, but public support was high. So Bush decided to spend his political capital on an agenda that was NOT popular - the Iraq War. No one every was convinced that Iraq was worth going to war over. It wasn't popular. The political left saw this and jumped on the bandwagon. The left didn't 'create' anti-war hate. They just took shameless advantage of it. Bush kept pushing, went over the heads of the people, and did whatever he wanted because he had the Congress. Having Congress doing what he wanted (against public opinion) eroded his popularity badly until he left office a lame-duck with a legacy in shambles.

Barak Obama is doing the EXACT same thing. After election he was crazy popular. The radical right hated him, but public support was high. So Obama decided to spend his political capital on an agenda that is NOT POPULAR (Health Care, Cap & Tax, etc...). Polls are sour on his crappy health care plan, his cap & tax and a bazillion other things he's done. His stimulus plans have not accomplished jack, and people are steamed because all his 'shovel ready' jobs have resulted in nothing but higher unemployement. But Obama keeps pushing, against the will of the American people, and does whatever he wants because he has Congress. And doing whatever you want in the face of public opinion is a road to losing Congress, becoming a lame-duck one-termer and leaving office with a legacy in shambles.

Obama's only hope is to ditch his radical agenda and start focusing on what the people WANT instead of what HE wants.

> ^HollywoodBob:
In his desire to have a Bi-Partisan government, he didn't push the Supermajority, to ramrod through all of the things he promised.




How would he go about getting all of those 60 democrats in the senate to agree on what he is ramming through? Did 60 dems support a public option? Would 60 dems have supported single payer?

People pretend like a "supermajority" is a magic button that can be pressed to pass any piece of legislation at will. Obama made a lot of promises, but that doesn't mean those in congress will feel comfortable putting their necks on the line to fulfill them.

Obama will not live up to every promise he made. No president will, unless perhaps they intentionally make unenforceable promises. I personally want a good healthcare bill, and I'd rather they discuss it truthfully than try to play to an audience. I'd be a bit upset if there was no way to analyze the final bill, but they're hiding the process, not the product.

As far as the "one term president" thing, it's always possible. It doesn't matter if he breaks some promises, he'll only lose if there is someone else worth voting for. Currently, I don't see any on the horizon.

he'll only lose if there is someone else worth voting for. Currently, I don't see any on the horizon.

It is true that there isn't anyone particularly compelling in the pipeline right now, but as Obama himself proved it doesn't take long if the right person comes along. All we need is SOMEONE to stand up and say they are for small government, balanced budgets, sensible fiscal responsibility, and lower taxes and Obama would have his @$$ handed to him.

But I disagree a bit on the "doesn't matter if he breaks his promises" comment. It matters very much. Obama's his own worst enemy. His poll numbers are going downhill fast. He very much could lose the election - even to a crappy Republican candidate - if he keeps doing what he's doing.

^ I was trying to say that a few promises don't matter as long as there are no serious alternatives in the election. Palin would claim to support those ideas you listed, but I can't imagine her ever getting the votes to challenge Obama.

He could certainly screw himself somehow, but I doubt it will be over CSPAN access.

The Iraq war had 70% support when it began.

Public opinion on policy is almost completely divorced from the merits of that policy. The stimulus looks like kind of a dud, but was widely perceived as necessary (outside strong conservative circles) when it passed. The TARP is universally reviled, but it probably saved us from a depression. Policies are unpopular when the opponents do a better job yelling about it than the proponents. Only 4-5 years down the line will the public be able to make an informed decision about whether it was a good or bad policy, because there will be more or fewer people getting better or worse healthcare for more or less money.

Bush did a pretty good job selling his policies, even getting reelected. Obama has not been a good salesman relative to the conservative media, but that doesn't mean his policies are bad ideas. They might be great, or they might be disastrous. We'll know in a few years.

Telling him to give people what they WANT is useless. People want less taxes, lower deficits and no cuts to big entitlements. They want less regulation but fewer corporate abuses. They probably couldn't care less about whether the conference is on CSPAN since they wouldn't watch it anyway.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by vaporlock.

*length=6:57

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 6:57 - length declared by ReverendTed.