Advertisement

Previous   Next

How much impact does the nation’s financial trouble have on your presidential vote?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on September 17, 2008

Browse the archives

Photo of Shannon Porter

“None at all. Peace is my No. 1 issue.”

Photo of Shelby White

“I would say it has at least a moderate impact. I think it could potentially sway me toward one candidate or the other.”

Photo of Debbie Little

“A lot, but health care is the No. 1 issue to me.”

Photo of Joel Hose

“It’s definitely something that will sway my vote. I think the Republican Party has an agenda for economic growth, but it’s growth for big oil and big business, which I don’t think will be good for the country.”

Related story

Comments

jonas_opines 6 years, 3 months ago

I tend to think that, although both sides gleefully take credit for good swings in the economy, and try to deflect blame for the bad, in the large the economy is pretty much out of their control, so I tend to vote using other methods to judge. To be honest, from listening to most of our politicians talk I don't get the idea that most know much of anything about economics, and their actions are crafted for other purposes that just economic growth.

canyon_wren 6 years, 3 months ago

I agree with Jonas, and also feel that certainly neither of our presidential candidates will have the actual power to do very much, regardless of their promises. The real power lies in Congress and all we can do is try to make some difference in our individual home states as far as who we send to Congress, but, even then, a lot of it is beyond the average person's control.

bombshell 6 years, 3 months ago

BABBOY (Anonymous) says: Off topic, but me and a Ron Paul guy just had a little Road Rage incident driving through Topeka. He had the reform sticker and everything. Little jerk was driving 65 miles and hour in the passing lane and would speed up to stop people from getting around him in the downtown I-70 area past the construction. Oh, I got around him and he acted like he did not know I was there as I expressed myself to him. Only a blind man would have missed me in the way imy expression was presented to him.Typical republican.-----------------------------------------------------That's funny. I actually just had a similar experience driving to work today... I was driving down I-435 and trying to get over to the right lane, right blinker on - a guy waves me in front of him, then the moment I get in front of him and am about to wave a thank you - the guy flips me off! I wasn't driving erratically and it was an easy merge, so the only thing I could think of was that he flipped me off because of my Obama sticker in the back window of my Subaru. Typical. I wish the sign language for "You wish." was widely known - cuz thats what I wanted to say to him when I saw his finger pointed at me.

Flap Doodle 6 years, 3 months ago

We'll all be better off when Ron Paul is back on the boat catching fish sticks. That's my story & I'm sticking to it.

sgtwolverine 6 years, 3 months ago

It could have plenty of impact ... if I can't afford to drive to the voting facility.

repaste 6 years, 3 months ago

Obama might be the same - but he is the best shot we have.

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 6 years, 3 months ago

Azure ( ... merrill... autie ): "... 'the economy is just cyclical.' That's B S...."The one thing which has proven to be cyclical seals that quote, above,AND our fates if the white-haired gentleman and his red-clad mistresstake the day.

Grundoon Luna 6 years, 3 months ago

I was already worried about the economy and yes it did impact my vote.Don't buy in to, "the economy is just cyclical." That's B S put forth by those who want to continue to go unregulated . . . among other things.

janeyb 6 years, 3 months ago

Zero impact. A president has little impact on the economy other than appointing the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. The economy is cyclic. Housing is cyclic. The stock market is cyclic. You win and you lose. We are a nation of whiners. I would prefer the next president just leave the economy to the Federal Reserve. McCain is actually right-- the fundalmentals are there and the president and congress should just let the appointed people do their jobs. This year's stimulus package did nothing for the economy and Obama's stimulus proposal will just run up the deficit. Whenever Republicans want to get Democrats they yell Carter, Carter, Carter. I finally researched Carter and found out there was little he could have done for the economy coming off the Vietnam War--his one good move was appointing Paul Volcker chairman of the Fed. It took all of Volcker's term plus part of Greenspan's to recover from Vietnam--economists figure from 1964-1992 for the economy to recover. My guess is that President Sasha Obama has a better chance of taking credit for a flourishing economy than Barrack does.

BuffyloGal 6 years, 3 months ago

That is the worry isn't it? Obama will inherit Bush's mess and it will take longer than 4 years to fix, just like Carter inherited the mess of Nixon. Why people didn't have more faith in Hillary shows how little they remember of the mess Ronnie Raygun and Bush the First left Clinton. That he was able to turn the economy around and so well speaks volumes. My concern is that Obama will win and not have time to fix the mess, leaving us with another 12 years of Reaganomics to create new problems. When did the Republicans get the reputation for fiscal responsibility?

Richard Heckler 6 years, 3 months ago

Absolutely vote Obama 2008 YES!Bogus pre-emptive trillion dollar wars are reckless and fiscally irresponsibleAnother nightmare on Wall Street: Dow down 450By ELLEN SIMON, AP Business Writer 4 minutes agoNEW YORK - The stock market took another nosedive Wednesday as the American banking system appeared even shakier and investors worried that the financial crisis is spinning so far out of control that even government rescues can't stop it. About $700 billion in investments vanished.CRIME: Who has history with financial institutions going south such as the savings and loan scandal? Republicans!Neil, George Jr., George Sr., and Jeb BushThe Savings and Loan industry had been experiencing major problems through the late 60s and 70s due to rising inflation and rising interest rates. Because of this there was a move in the 1970s to replace the role of S&L institutions with banks.In the early 1980s, under Reagan, regulatory changes took place that gave the S&L industry new powers and for the first time in history measures were taken to increase the profitability of S&Ls at the expense of promoting home ownership.A history of the S&L situation can be found here: http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/s&l/What is important to note about the S&L scandal is that it was the largest theft in the history of the world and US tax payers are who was robbed.The problems occurred in the Savings and Loan industry as they relate to theft because the industry was deregulated under the Reagan/Bush administration and restrictions were eased on the industry so much that abuse and misuse of funds became easy, rampant, and went unchecked. Additional facts on the Savings and Loan Scandal can be found here:http://www.inthe80s.com/sandl.shtmlThere are several ways in which the Bush family plays into the Savings and Loan scandal, which involves not only many members of the Bush family but also many other politicians that are still in office and still part of the Bush Jr. administration today. Jeb Bush, George Bush Sr., and his son Neil Bush have all been implicated in the Savings and Loan Scandal, which cost American tax payers over $1.4 TRILLION dollars (note that this is about one quarter of our national debt).Between 1981 and 1989, when George Bush finally announced that there was a Savings and Loan Crisis to the world, the Reagan/Bush administration worked to cover up the Savings and Loan problems This information was kept from the media until after Bush had won the 1988 elections.http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/war/bush_family_and_the_s.htmMcCain-the-most-reprehensible-of-the-keating-fivehttp://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1989-11-29/news/mccain-the-most-reprehensible-of-the-keating-five/1

dandelion 6 years, 3 months ago

RetIrr says"So the candidate that is less likely to follow a path towards One World Government is the choice."So you agree that companies should not get breaks for taking their manufacturing out of the country? Do you agree that we need to stop these wars so we aren't in debt to other countries? Then you'd better vote for Obama, because McCain has stated that we just need more education for our citizens so they can find jobs other than manufacturing, so these companies can continue killing our middle class. Of course, McCain would like it that way. It's probably easier to find good maids and grounds keepers to care for all his houses when people can't get jobs in manufacturing. When the US produced real goods instead of over paid CEO's, it was hard to find good domestic help. Actually, since McCain wants more wars, then a poor economy will mean more people looking to join the military to get ahead. And he could bring back the draft for all those jobless people. Better domestic help and more soldiers. McCain's dream.

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 6 years, 3 months ago

"How much impact does the nation's financial trouble have on your presidential vote?"As a member of the voting public,I find that question has too manywords. Don't you have anyquestions with half asmany words... and"Sarah Palin"in themix?

repaste 6 years, 3 months ago

Give unto Caeser, let em have it -- stock up on ammo. we will take care of ours. Let us declare a new country here in Lawrence..

repaste 6 years, 3 months ago

Merril might be a little nutty sometimes, but he is dead on here folks. it cast us some 20 billion a year know, Texas oilmen like brother neil got rich - this very much the same

Commenting has been disabled for this item.