Discussion: The Economy, Fiscal Cliff, National Debt, And Other Financial Issues III

[SV Fan]

Originally Posted by mikey1974

and it just disturbs me a bit that I know many people of color who openly say they voted again for Obama not because they agree with his policies,or the way he's running this country, or even like his personality. they voted for him because he is a man of color,and that's all.

I think many voted for Obama just because the other side is so bad in their eyes. Ironically all the bills and laws the Republicans tried to pass like voter IDs and huge negative rhetoric against Mexicans were probably rally cries for a large group of people who might not have voted at all if they didn't feel a little threatened or insulted by the Republican party. The fact that Obama was black only added to all the negative rhetoric that the extreme parts(that were largely made up of angry old white men) of the GOP tried to label as "not American"

If the GOP concentrated more on issues, instead of attacking everybody who doesn't agree with them as not somehow understanding America maybe they could have lulled a large part of people who did go out and vote for Obama asleep

[Burgundy LaRue]

There are a number of white people who voted for Romney just because they wouldn't vote for the black man. That skin color thing works both ways, obviously.

But to stay on topic, just using myself as a guide--the economy hasn't changed. My life isn't worse, but it also isn't better. I haven't had any decent raises under Bush or Obama. Who do I blame, the Dems or the GOP? I don't know. It doesn't matter. Whatever is happening has been building for years, and honestly, everyone's hands are dirty because of that. Both sides are talking, but it all sounds the same.

That sounds apathetic, and I don't intend it that way. But it is what it is, a merry-go-round. It's pretty and it's decent entertainment, but you don't go anywhere. No one, no party, no one in government does.

[wiegeabo]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

I think many voted for Obama just because the other side is so bad in their eyes. Ironically all the bills and laws the Republicans tried to pass like voter IDs and huge negative rhetoric against Mexicans were probably rally cries for a large group of people who might not have voted at all if they didn't feel a little threatened or insulted by the Republican party. The fact that Obama was black only added to all the negative rhetoric that the extreme parts(that were largely made up of angry old white men) of the GOP tried to label as "not American"

If the GOP concentrated more on issues, instead of attacking everybody who doesn't agree with them as not somehow understanding America maybe they could have lulled a large part of people who did go out and vote for Obama asleep

I have to agree that Obama got a lot of votes because the Republicans put up terrible candidates against him.

But the party wanted to kowtow to the far right who had the voice and money. They didn't really want viable candidates, just some they could control/influence.

I mean, why else go so softball during the primary debates? Because you're trying to elect someone on likability instead of policy.

[SV Fan]

Originally Posted by wiegeabo

I have to agree that Obama got a lot of votes because the Republicans put up terrible candidates against him.

I don't think Romney would have been that bad a candidate if he was allowed to be himself. The problem was he had to try juggle the extreme parts of his party while pandering to moderate swing voters at the same time and came off insincere. I think he would have been better off in a general election being Moderate Mitt from the get go(although if he could have gotten out of a primary that way it's hard to say, and if he did would the people who felt rejected propped up a 3rd party candidate)

[wiegeabo]

One of Romney's major problems was that he was so obvious with his pandering and flip-flopping that he made the other politicians look downright subtle when they did it.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

I don't think Romney would have been that bad a candidate if he was allowed to be himself. The problem was he had to try juggle the extreme parts of his party while pandering to moderate swing voters at the same time and came off insincere. I think he would have been better off in a general election being Moderate Mitt from the get go(although if he could have gotten out of a primary that way it's hard to say, and if he did would the people who felt rejected propped up a 3rd party candidate)

Well, Mitt does have the money to do a 3rd party run. All he would need is spend $50M of his money to start up...go Indie route...I imagine by election, he would had a campaign budget of low hundreds with donations and money from ''friends''.

[DACrowe]

I don't comment much on politics here anymore, but just felt I'd throw in my 2 cents on the sequester and assorted issues.

I do think Woodward said what many know: that the initial deal of the sequester was to find comparable cuts and not revenue risers, because the House GOP was being so belligerent and the White House acquiesced. However, Obama did receive some minor approval from a majority of American voters, if not a mandate, to pursue a middle of the road approach. There is no denying the GOP and its petulant "governing" in the 112th Congress was overall nationally rebuked and the general conditions were for a middle path to be forged. As such, I do believe the White House was right in pursuing revenue risers, on issues the GOP House has previously claimed to be in support of (closing tax loopholes for the rich and entitled), while still vastly favoring spending cuts.

However much we can debate whether the White House led properly on this, I can safely say the GOP did not lead at all. Rather, they took their ball and went home. I read today about how the Tea Party Caucus and Conservative Study of the House are applauding Bohener for his firm stand on this, but I can tell you that most voters and Americans are only seeing a group of politicians congratulating themselves on their fiddle playing while the capitol burns. It can only be worse when you realize they did it for tax loopholes for the very rich and affluent whose lobbying clout holds more sway over them than their constituents.

That is not leadership. That is partisan immaturity which creates massive problems that were easily avoidable. That is just pathetic but unsurprising as the GOP has been headed in this ideologically bankrupt and doomed direction since at least 2009. Now, we reap what they sowed and they are going to be as surprised as they were in 1996 in a few years.

[dnno1]

Originally Posted by wiegeabo

We're spending $3.8 trillion this year. With a $900 billion deficit.

This is, what, $85 billion in cuts? Which is only 2.2% of the budget, and less than 10% of the deficit.

The people and agencies will adapt. This isn't a mega-crisis like the media and politicians hype it up to be. This is a bunch of events agencies will adapt to that range from inconvenient to challenging. But, in all honesty, it's a drop in the bucket.

Just to set the record straight, good $85,000,000,000 is just for FY 2013. The amount of cuts will total $1. 2 dollars over the next 10 years.

[wiegeabo]

I cant remember what site I was at today, but the numbers I saw were that Obama's approval rating was hovering just above 50%, while Congress was at 15%.

Whether or not Obama is doing a good job, Congress is taking the blame. And they're not really doing anything to change that.

Weather they agree to it or not, the people believe it and don't want to hear anymore fingerpointing, so they need to suck it up and own it.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by wiegeabo

I cant remember what site I was at today, but the numbers I saw were that Obama's approval rating was hovering just above 50%, while Congress was at 15%.

Whether or not Obama is doing a good job, Congress is taking the blame. And they're not really doing anything to change that.

Weather they agree to it or not, the people believe it and don't want to hear anymore fingerpointing, so they need to suck it up and own it.

They always do, that isn't surprising, nor is it new. People love their Congress person, but hate the Congress as a whole. What proves to me that that is all drivel in those percentages, is the fact that people keep re-electing these dimwits...

[enterthemadness]

Well....guess Robocop said no robo.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/01/news...roit-takeover/


Mich. takes over Det city govt.

lulz.

[wiegeabo]

Originally Posted by Kelly

They always do, that isn't surprising, nor is it new. People love their Congress person, but hate the Congress as a whole. What proves to me that that is all drivel in those percentages, is the fact that people keep re-electing these dimwits...

It's more like "It's not my guy, it's gotta be the other guys!"

So they keep reelecting the same guy, because there's no way THEY can be part of the problem. Which means Congress doesn't change, and this keeps happening.

So the percentages can be right. And I bet if the poll asked what they thought about their particular Congressperson, it would probably be well above 50%.

[Webfoot Hero]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

Well....guess Robocop said no robo.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/01/news...roit-takeover/


Mich. takes over Det city govt.

lulz.

Figured it would happen sooner or later. While getting better, Detroit still tries to do the same things that got them in their situation, thinking it'll get them out of it.

[souvlaki]

Originally Posted by Webfoot Hero

Back when Bush was President, you were being patriotic for criticizing him. Under Obama, criticizing him means you're racist and unpatriotic. Funny how that is.

That was definitely not true. I got in several arguments with many lifelong Democrats for criticizing Bush in the lead up to the Iraq war back in 2003. Obama's critics have it easy compared to Bush's critics post 9/11 pre no WMDs in Iraq days. At least for the most part they have the support of their own party, most of Bush's critics couldn't even get a lot of Democrats on their side.

[SV Fan]

Originally Posted by wiegeabo

It's more like "It's not my guy, it's gotta be the other guys!"

So they keep reelecting the same guy, because there's no way THEY can be part of the problem. Which means Congress doesn't change, and this keeps happening.

The problem is the way districts are made. If you had a non partisan group making districts to where you basically get roughly a 50/50 divide of dems and republicans in each district I think you would get more moderate candidates who would actually be productive trying to do things.

Instead we get hyper partisan people who won't budge on many things in the bulk of districts. of coarse having a non partisan group make districts would never happen because all house members like the job security of an easy district to win

[enterthemadness]

When does the new unemployment rate come out? It's a day and a half late, dammit.

[SV Fan]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

When does the new unemployment rate come out? It's a day and a half late, dammit.

I think the first jobs to get cute due tot eh sequester are the people who hand out jobs reports. lol

All that being said it won't come out over the weekend

[Marx]

The stock market closed today at its highest point in history.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Marx

The stock market closed today at its highest point in history.

That's nice, but does it really matter much? In terms of our debt, weak dollar, and job market? That's wall street, not main street aka us.

[Handsome Rob]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

That's nice, but does it really matter much? In terms of our debt, weak dollar, and job market? That's wall street, not main street aka us.

That Fed pumping sure is tasty, ain't it? But like the article says, the longer it goes on, the more distorted things get, and the harder it'll be when the Fed inevitably (and it is inevitable) has to pull back.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Handsome Rob

That Fed pumping sure is tasty, ain't it? But like the article says, the longer it goes on, the more distorted things get, and the harder it'll be when the Fed inevitably (and it is inevitable) has to pull back.

Well.......think I may eat a big ball of Halloween cereal. Boo Berry and likes.

[floreairfoot]

Originally Posted by SV Fan

I think the first jobs to get cute due tot eh sequester are the people who hand out jobs reports. lol

All that being said it won't come out over the weekend

Is this like the White House tours being canceled?

You know, the ones given by volunteers.

[dnno1]

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[floreairfoot]

Your video taught me that we should somehow take money from the rich and give it to the poor, because it's not fair that some people have more than others.

Socialism is the answer, but socialism isn't the answer.

If I missed something, let me know.

[Destructus86]

Originally Posted by Webfoot Hero

Back when Bush was President, you were being patriotic for criticizing him. Under Obama, criticizing him means you're racist and unpatriotic. Funny how that is.

Of course that's how it works. That's how you force people to be in agreement with you. We don't use this method just in politics either...in many social issues we use the same method to force others into believing what we believe.