Oh yeah, that’s a winning strategy! Continually reminding the rest of the country of Democratic accomplishments is a sure road to Republican victory! :rolleyes:
The Republicans keep telling themselves that everyone hates HCR and is hungry to get payback on those overreaching Democrats. But the polls actually show that the country is cautiously optimistic about the new bill. I’m a Democrat and I’d love to see the Republicans spend the next six months raving about repealing health care. Obama apparently feels the same way; he gave a speech in Iowa today where he told the Republicans to “go for it” if them want to try to repeal it.
In the context of looking like the Scott Brown election, who will be most responsible is such occurs? Alternatively, why will the election not look that way?
Knock off the cheap shots and partisan blather and definitely knock off the personal comments about other posters and silly comments about the “stupidity” of whatever position you do not happen to champion.
**
[ /Moderating ]**
If the democrats lose, they’ll obviously blame some combination of the economy, the inevitable Republican nothing-but-smear campaigning, the expected mid-term bounceback, and/or some future event that we can’t possibly anticipate, such as terrorists blowing up california or the democrats all spontanously combusting.
Positing that they’ll blame high-level democrats is absurd. Seriously, ludicrous. For about sixty different reasons. How could you even speculate that they would? They wouldn’t blame their leaders even if they knew it was their leaders’ fault. Duh!
Positing that they’ll blame Bush is reasonably sound in that he WAS in large part responsible for the current deficit and negative state of the economy. However, they’re not going to blame him as a direct cause of them losing the election, as that would be pointless and absurd. Not as absurd as blaming Obama, of course, but quite absurd nonetheless.
Well, let’s consider AG Eric Holder…he is backing off his ridiculous plan to try the 9/11 terrorists in NYC-why? Because NYC Mayor Bloomburg says security will cost $270 million! Or how about Secretary Geithner-calling his Wall Street friends (so they can profit from inside information)?
Or the insane “stimulus” boondoggle-the BOSTON GLOBE reports that a Massachusetts stimulus project (a new IRS building) was a real stimulus-for a Canadian steel firm!
And as for foreign policy, Obama apologized to Venezuelan dictator and thug (Hugo Chavez)-his reward was to be vilified.
Yep, great leadership we’ve got…“Hope and Change”?
I think these are the correct answers. The Great Depression lasted almost a decade and the potential scale of the present crisis is not generally grasped. Interesting that voters stuck with the Demos throughout the Great Depression. Today’s Demos are also the best party for economic recovery, but voters seem to have poorer understanding nowadays.
It’s hard to blame Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, etc. (The frog couldn’t blame the scorpion who stung mid-river – it was his nature.) And it’s hard to blame the average voter who is, after all, … “average”! I blame the media. Many reporters, editors and even publishers are rationalists at heart, yet pollute their writings to increase their audience with more “drama,” or out of a peculiar understanding of “fairness.”
There’s a huge gulf between “not acting as I wish them to act” and “not competent.” I’m not a huge fan of either Geithner or Holder, but there’s not question of incompetence – they are promulgating the polices of an administration I don’t agree with, is all. News flash: elections have consequences. We elect a President, and he then gets to appoint the people he wants. Those people then carry out his policies.
How about we focus on the specific undesirable effects of those policies, and stop with the “incompetent” label? Unless there’s some specific instances of true inability to do the job from either of those men, some drastic fail-in-place I’m not aware of, there’s just no support for the claim of incompetence. They are competently doing stuff you don’t like – that doesn’t make them incompetent.
Ah, but you miss the point. The United States is completely infallible, has never done anything to apologize for, and any president who dares consider the possibility that America has ever been anything but the shining city on the hill must be by definition treasonous.
