The Politics Thread

[Max]

Former Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey, who again is running as the Democratic candidate for Senator in that state, slams Obama and points out the flaws in ObamaCare:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120907/NEWS/709079931

[GoldenDogs]

Kerrey is desparate. He's double-digits behind his oppenent and thinks slamming Obama will pull him through. Politics and idealogy aside, Kerrey is rotten for throwing his president under the bus while attempting to politically position himself.

No wonder the dude is losing... Dems can't possibly respect a guy so publicly bucking his own party and its agenda for polticial expediency. Repubs can't trust a guy who will so willingly sacrafice his own for himself.

Rotten, I tell ya!

Yeah, yeah... not the first politician to eat their own... but I think it's rotten to the core!!

But then there is a flip side... one could say, "Well, he's sticking to his beliefs and bucking his party... doing what's right, you see..."

Blah, blah, blah.

Edited September 9, 2012 by GoldenDogs

[Max]

Even though Kerrey is desperate, you don't honestly disagree with his assessment of ObamaCare, do you?

When Charlie Crist was desperate in his run against Marco Rubio and praised Obama, he was hailed as a hero by liberals.

Edited September 9, 2012 by Max

[Wales2004]

I am not really sure why it is a big deal that it doesn't matter to me if we disagree but I certainly don't expect you to feel the same way. So you care and I don't and everything is a-okay with that.

I saw part of an interview on CNN where Ehud Barak seemed to be pleased with Barack Obama's support. Now considering semantics and perception, I don't know whether that means he isn't uncomfortable or not and there was a reference to a poll in which Israelis gave Barack Obama a favorable rating. Now I'm not big on polls but in this instance I would say that they ought to know better than I what they like.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/30/cnns-gut-check-for-july-30-2012/

Let me try this again. You referenced Germany as being uncomfortable with Barack Obama's policies.

It was pointed out to you that in general European nations are satisfied with Barack Obama.

You dismissed (unless I misinterpreted your response) those European nations based on the idea that they are fine with Barack Obama because he supports their European policies. This gave me the impression that you were discounting their support of Barack Obama.

This led me to question why it's okay for Germany's (or maybe it's just the head and not the people of the nation as a whole) opinion of Barack Obama to count but not the other European nations that are fine with him.

Basically it comes across to me as though Germany is valid because their is dissatisfaction with Barack Obama but all the other countries are invalid because they happen to like him.

I may have completely misinterpreted what you were conveying and if I have then perhaps you'll take the time to let me know.

Oh and I dont think that because the other European nations like Barack Obama that it's a question of their liking him but still being uncomfortable with him. If more nations in Europe are okay with him than those that are not then I don't see a huge problem.

http://www.nytexaminer.com/2012/06/barack-and-angelas-forty-first-dates/

[GoldenDogs]

Input from you nice posters... Help me understand why the national average shows Obama with a slight lead... yet in almost every poll taken, some 62% of those responding say the country is on the wrong track, while only 30% say we're doing fine.

??

Are these alarming numbers for Obama? Should he be comfortable with these numbers? Do people like the president but disagree with the path he has chosen?

Of course, one could take these polls with a grain of salt... very few are ever consistently right. I like to get the feedback from our more liberal friends here who are supporting Obama.

Someone raised the issue of Romney - why support him? At this point, I am voting based on policy. I'm not a liberal and I disagree with many of Obama's more liberal policies. Honestly, Republicans weren't given much to choose from in the primaries... As one who leans right, I recognize how unelectable more conservatives candidates were. I also recognize the danger of a more moderate candidate like Romney for folks like me who lean more right.

Because I so disagree with Obama's politics, I have no place else to go but Romney. McCain was a bitter pill to swallow... sort of hold your nose and vote for him (no offense against the guy, he just wasn't a good candidate). I resented that the Republican establishment all but forced Romney on us... But I don't think my feelings for him are as negative as they were toward McCain as a candidate. I think Ryan was the best choice for VP, however. He calms the more conservative in the party...

Look, we registered Republicans all know what Romney is - a moderate. A moderate conservative is still better than a liberal, in my opinion... or a moderate liberal if you feel Obama isn't left-wing enough. I think Obama as president has been far more liberal than Obama as a candidate in 2008.

Anyway... those are my thoughts on why Romney over Obama question.

Thanks for your time... and best wishes from me to you.

[JaneAusten]

No program passed is going to satisfy everyone 100 percent. Obviously this is something Kerry is sensitive to. In the interest of his party he could have softened his descent I suppose but I'd rather he be honest about his concerns with his constituents than tow the company line.

But ok the biggest problem for small businesses offering health insurance I thought was the fact that due to their size they have limited opportunities to gain decent rates. Aren't small businesses being afforded not only tax credits but an insurance exchange giving them the opportunity to shop for and receive more cost effective plans? Businesses large and small have already sidestepping insurance by using contractors or 1099 personnel or only working employees a maximum of 35 hours, meaning they don't have to offer them coverage under their current plans.

Max I assume you were a corporate accountant at one point so I'm sure you're aware of tactics businesses have instituted to save them the costs of insurance.

[Wales2004]

Partisan politics seemingly causes people to run around spouting off onespeake and not ever express independent thoughts that conflict with whatever the party line is.

The whole jumping parties to get re-elected should matter more to constituents than the parties. None of them are touting virtue but the actual voters should wonder about a person so desperate to be in office that he or she would change their whole philosopy just like that to gain votes.

[juppiter]

No, you're flat out wrong because Poland was an occupied country at the time. There was a powerless Polish government-in-exile in the UK, the actual country was ruled either directly by Germany or as a German Governorate. Maybe Polish people didn't mind Jews being sent to death camp but they did not actively collaborate and no official Polish government actively collaborated (to contrast with France which did have a government that collaborated.) The Nazi plan was to Germanize Poles with attractive genetic traits. The rest would either be exterminated or kept around for slave labor.

It'd be like calling South Africa's Apartheid-era bantustans "Black-Run Bantustans."

Edited September 10, 2012 by juppiter

[juppiter]

I do think Obama has been a centrist thusfar. He has not raised anyone's taxes, his healthcare reform will increase business and profits for private insurance companies, and as for his stimulus and bailouts... we already had stimulus and bailouts under Bush! It was accepted fiscal policy until the Republican Party realized it was about to go the way of the Whigs and decided they need to oppose Obama on everything (including their own tax policy from Bush years, further tax cuts under Obama, their own health plan from the Clinton years, and their own stimulus and bailouts from the Bush years.)

I also think Mitt Romney is probably a moderate -- we do not know because he has flipped on so many issues. But I also think he doesn't care on most things and just really wants to be President. So even if he is more moderate than Obama, he will be forced to defer to the extremist conservatives in congress. We have seen extremist conservatives calling Obama a Socialist Muslim born in Kenya, implying that rape cannot lead to pregnancy, and almost leading our country to default on its debt even when Obama tried to compromise by offering them $10 in spending cuts for each $1 increase in taxes. They have refused any compromise or moderation, and I believe either man will likely be accompanied by a Republican House and Senate. Under Obama, most of their insane ideas get vetoed. Under Romney, they become the law of the land.

To me Obama has had more common sense solutions -- fix our massive debt by raising taxes on the wealthy, allow some illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. The Republican plans have been insane -- fix our massive debt by not only not ending the Bush tax cuts that created our debt in the first place but actually create more tax cuts? And then fill the hole by privatizing social security and voucherizing Medicare? Another insane plan -- deport all 20 million illegal immigrants (which will no doubt increase federal spending as it will take hiring many many ICE officers to turn the Southwest into a police state so we can track them all down and send them away and have lettuce prices skyrocket as nobody is left to pick it.) It seems to me that Obama's plan to lessen the debt -- to return tax rates for the wealthy to Clinton-era levels when the economy was booming, places less of a burden on the middle class. The Republican plan -- cut taxes to historic lows and fill the gap by cutting entitlements the middle class depends on -- helps the wealthy and penalizes the middle class. And don't forget that any attempt to touch Social Security and Medicare always fails. Bush tried and voters got pissed. So they will likely cut taxes first, ATTEMPT to reform Social Security and Medicare, feel the wrath of angry old people, and then their proposal will fail. So now we've got cut taxes and cut government revenue and no spending cuts. More debt. And as we saw with the Bush tax cuts, they do not pay for themselves, though Republicans will again insist they do.

And that is where Republicans have plans at all. I get a lot of what they say they'd do has no chance of happening -- they really do not want a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and they really do not want to reverse Roe V. Wade. But then, those are the things they are concrete about. Then there are the vague areas -- Repeal and Replace Obamacare. Replace with what? I agree Obamacare is a bad law but repeal is not the solution. It is the first step toward the true solution to our sadly broken healthcare system.

As I've said, the next Congress is almost certain to be Republican. People forget that 1994-1996 was a lot like 2010-2012. Clinton and the Republicans agreed on nothing because the Republicans were fixated on winning in 1996. After that, a lot of really great compromise legislation took place in Clinton's second term. I would much rather see Obama and the Republicans repeat that and compromise in his second term than a weak leader Romney kow-towing to wingnuts in Congress.

We've had Reaganomics and a Conservative Supreme Court for 30 years and the Middle Class is dying because of it. It's not so much that I love Obama but that I'd like to move to the next phase that I must support him and hope that he can do ANYTHING to turn that around, because Romney clearly cannot... he is comfortable with the Age of Reagan that IMO has continued through the Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II presidencies just like the Age of Roosevelt before that continued through Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson.

There are more reasons I'm probably brainfarting on to be honest... I just can't get on board with anything the Republicans have done in the past four years. The way they allowed the first black President to be shown as something "un-American" and "different" from previous presidents is just a huge turn off to me.

Also I hear you on "having no place to go." I hated Bush but I really really disliked John Kerry even before he ran the worst campaign ever. 2004 was a tough one for me. 2008 I wanted Clinton but was more than happy to vote for Obama over McCain and 2012 I've never doubted Obama over anyone from the Republican primaries.

Edited September 10, 2012 by juppiter

[Money]

The lettuce picking was unintentionally funny but there's are sector of illegal immigrants who do more than tend to produce. Romney's idea of "self deportation" has go to be one of the craziest, most inhumane goal when many of these immigrants have American children here. They have no problem ripping these immigrants away from their families, and what will become of the millions of kids who are underaged and their parents are deported? Of course Republicans don't care about that little tidbit which will be another burden on tax payers. And illegal immigration doesn't soley affect Hispanics but people from other countries inlcuding Europe but it's never adressed because those immigrants are White. I wont even get into the whole speil of protecting our boarders when anyone with half a brain realizes that jumping the fence isn't the predominant reason there are illegal immigrants in this country but those who came legitmately on a vistor's visa and simply overstayed. I applaud Obama for finally making an attempt to do right by these people.

[MichaelGL]

If theres one thing I will never understand is the belief from the right that Obama is some far left liberal, or yet has governed as one. I'm quite the liberal myself and I've got to say I've been quite disappointed in the past four years, barely any so called ar left policies have been implemented.

Edited September 10, 2012 by MichaelGL

[juppiter]

Agreed. I would like Brian to be more specific here. We all know that in England or France or Germany, the Democrats would be the conservative party.

[juppiter]

It's another thing where they have taken a position so extreme and refused to compromise -- like privatizing social security or voucherizing medicare -- that the problem won't get fixed.

If Romney wins, there's no way in hell 20 million people get deported. It's impossible. But they've promised it to the base and can't renege so it just won't get dealt with again. Obviously allowing some to become citizens so they pay taxes and can contribute to society is the only solution at this point.

[soapfan4life]

While I feel that this election for me is whether to stay with the devil I know or the devil I don't.

I don't feel that Obama has lived up to the expectations that we put on him. Is it all his fault no probably not but it still leads to the question of whether he will be able to do it this time or will we be even worse off then before. I don't quite understand the whole the republicans were against him from the beginning and didn't support him- didn't the democrats have control of House and Senate for the first 2 years? Does that mean he wasn't getting his own parties support either?

Romney- Maybe he has good ideas maybe he doesn't for the most part so far I haven't heard enough from him on what those ideas are just that he wants to change everything Obama did. If you have ideas tell me- I'm ready to hear anything you got.

As far as raising taxes\not raising taxes, medicare/medicaid reform, I think a lot of the problems with these things that as a country our social lines have blended so much. What is/should be classified as the lower, middle, and upper is different to everyone. Are there many people out there that need help absolutely unemployment is up wages are down but nothing irks me more than seeing someone in a fancy car with perfect clothes, nails and hair getting govt assistance that could go to someone who really needs it.

[juppiter]

And I know the lettuce thing sounds ridiculous but I am giving a practical example -- Republicans since 2008 have been grandstanding on broad issues and ideals, not specifics. It's so facile to say that illegal immigrants take jobs from Americans. But who wants a job picking produce that earns money not hourly but based on what is picked? Potentially $2 for an entire day's work? Not an American citizen.

Example of grandstanding--

"We need to cut spending."

"OK. Cut what?"

"Just cut everything. Cuts from every department."

OK, well that is now happening in January 2013 -- sequestration, due to Congressional Republican action. And every economist agrees it threatens us with almost certain return to recession.

Though I see your point that not every illegal immigrant is the stereotypical farm worker. We do have a skills gap compared to other developed countries and allowing educated illegals to stay should be a no-brainer.

Edited September 10, 2012 by juppiter