It is so rare to see a headline these days that isn't praising or at least sympathetic to Obama.
We don't want him as our president.
“My intent was/is to have another headline ‘out-there’ that says Obama messed up......We don’t want him as our president.”
I don’t fault your intent, and I totally don’t ant to see Obama re-elected.
However, in a debate, it’s not a lack of “facts” that loses, it’s the weaker argument.
That list will not be good for helping to win any arguments, with anyone who can see the problems in the list.
The argument has to show cause behind the facts, and simply “under the Presidency of.....” shows “under the Presidency of” and not cause, because the actions alone of any one President are very often not, or not the only cause behind many “facts” that occur, “under their Presidency”.
So, if you want to talk, in a numerical list, about the things that Obama did, even suggesting the “20 worst things that Obama did”, and, in pointing out those things, you can point out the ill affects you think they have had.
But, lists of examples of things “under so-and-so’s time in office”, produce examples that are sometimes very bad examples, and not very good arguments, for any number of reasons. Stick to what a President did/does, and why you think it is/was bad.