One presumes he is improving his interaction with wait staff. 
Politically, they’ve done everything but win the White House.
Everything but govern. They excel at avoiding that.
Yes, they’ve done everything but the most significant. In the last few years, the Democrats have done everything but win the House. We’ll see what happens in 2016, but your cherrypicking things just to make the Republicans look good and Obama look bad are not convincing.
I agree with you. I also see a huge failure to govern on the other side. What governing they have done has been massively unpopular.
I doubt that the President’s SOTU proposals are going to be particularly popular either. I get what he’s trying to accomplish, but the public’s just not paying attention to him anymore. 2013 and 2014 saw the lowest ratings for the speech since 2000. Anyone care to predict how many people will actually be listening this time?
One firm prediction I’ll make. Fox viewers will be watching more than CNN or MSNBC viewers. Wouldn’t it be nice if the President’s supporters were as interested in what he had to say as his opponents? Maybe eventually he’ll realize who his actual audience is and cater to us. Barack Obama, become one of us! You know you want to!
Who is talking about whether he is popular or not? we were having a discussion about his ability to get people to vote for him, something even you couldn’t argue he is bad at.
I don’t follow what you’re trying to say here, unless you think that everyone who voted for Pryor is a progressive? If that’s what you’re saying, you don’t know what a progressive is.
I think people voted for Mark Pryor because his Father was a good Governor and US Senator. Mark is an ass, but he is a Democratic ass.
And then he steps to the right
Puts his hands on his hips
Brings in his knees real tight
But it’s the pelvic thrust . . .
No, you mean electorally. Political success is defined by getting your policies enacted, not just by getting elected.
True, but by that standard I’d argue Republicans are winning there too. Spending growth has been virtually non-existent since they took Congress. We spent $3.6 trillion in 2011 and $3.5 trillion in 2014.
In 2015, the PResident is requesting the absurd amount of $3.9 trillion. If he gets $3.6 trillion, I’d be surprised.
You can define this as Republican success and you can define it as Democratic success. Considering the history of Republican and Democratic presidents, I see no reason to believe Republicans actually support lower spending than Democrats. They might say they do, but they don’t do it – they just spend on different things.
That’s true when a Republican is President. Under Clinton and Obama, Republicans did much better. I worry about what Republicans will do if they get the White HOuse too. The past has not been encouraging. But if you like spending control, you can’t beat a Republican Congress and a Democratic President.
But you can’t call it a Democratic success when the President is requesting amounts unhinged from reality. Clinton didn’t do that. That’s unique to Obama. $400 billion in new spending is absolutely insane and he isn’t raising the revenue to even come close to covering that in his budget.
You’ll have to provide a cite for those numbers. Bush raised spending a ton. Further, what he asks for could well just be part of the negotiation. It’s what he signs (or otherwise puts into effect) that counts in the long run.
Oh, Bush definitely jacked up spending more over his Presidency.
BTW, Robert Reich just posted this on his Facebook page:
So it’s not unique to Obama, I guess. Try not to say things that you immediately have to take back.
What’s unique is asking for $400 billion more over last year in the absence of a crisis justifying such spending.
Class warfare?
Good.
About time the Middle Class returned hostile fire, I’d say.
What does any part of this thread, from OP to the ridiculous sameness every discussion on this board gets dragged to, have to do with elections?
“It’s not easy having a good time. Even smiling makes my face ache.” —Obama