Come on Bricker, you’re smarter than this. It’s clearly possible to interpret current law to be unconstitutional and it’s clearly possible for those laws to involve women’s rights.
Oh as to the OP, I think he will probably move slightly left. Not as much as many would hope, but there is no incentive for him not to do so.
There, there. There, there.
On a less patronizing note, I was referring to her career as a lawyer. Obviously she doesn’t push women’s rights in cases that don’t involve it.
This. Even mainstream Republicans have demonized him as a hardcore liberal for the last four years. If he’s going to get guff for it, he may as well earn it.
If we learned anything from the first term (if not our civics textbooks), it should have been that what comes out of Congress will be determined by the 60th vote in the Senate and the 218th vote in the House.
Even if there’s filibuster reform (which ain’t gonna happen in earnest, I promise), John Boehner is not going to do anything differently than he did the last two years.
So there might be some legislation, but it’s not gonna be any further left or right than where it’s been all along.
Maybe you’ll see slightly more left regulations out of the White House implementing Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and Mass v. EPA. But I doubt it. Agencies need money from the House, and all of these regulations will become political footballs, with the House insisting on shutting the government down over each of them.
What we can hope for, I think, is that the Democrats take the House back in 2014 after the country watches 2 more years of intransigence.
Not necessarily. Some justices stay on past the time that they should retire.
The GOP has control of the House of Representatives which is were all budget bills must originate. That makes it the most powerful branch of government. What the president has is the ability to use the bully pulpit and his personal popularity to influence votes. He also has his strategic acumen in negotiations. Given that he has proven inept at influencing public opinion and he received about five million fewer votes than last time, his influence will be much reduced this term. So unless he has suddenly grown competent at negotiations there will likely be a drift to the right because his position is slightly weaker.
Another reason that he is in a weaker position is that he spent all the discretionary money in the first term. Thus he will have to spend the second term trying to raise taxes to pay for all the money he gave away in the first term. That should lower his popularity and constrain his position in negotiations.
I think your instinct are right. I like your example of the Keystone pipeline. he was pandering to the ecofreaks. I suspect that it will get approvved by the middle of next year. I also suspect that Obama will move slightly to the right if that is where a deal can be had with a Republican congress and a slim majority in the senate.
If on the other hand, the Republicans continue to be obstructionist, he will move to the center of the left and try to get a more favorable congress in 2014.
It creates more room for a deal but the Republicans aren’t going to cave, I suspect that Obama will have to move to the right a little bit from his current position to get a deal done.
Please name the jurisdiction where 9th month abortions are legal where the life of the mohter is not in jeopardy? Read Roe, V Wade, it doesn’t say that reproductive rights are absolute against all other interests.
If you just feel like ranting against things that don’t exist then please feel free but you might as well rant against the gold standard. Just because some people think its a good idea doesn’t mean that there is a real possibility of it actually happening.
The question is what should be covered by insurance in teh beswt interests of our society not what you individually want covered by insurance.
BTW, this is not your twitter account.
If he does that, they’ll just be even more likely to keep doing what they have been doing, refuse any deal and demand that Obama and the Democrats give the Republicans everything they want in return for nothing.
Beautiful! (Not true in all cases, of course, but true enough for some important decisions that your post is both funny and sad.)
What a mandate and opportunity for the President now and for, presumably, Hillary in 2016.
Almost everything edged back towards the centre, didn’t it - healthcare validated, Gay rights, environment, drug decriminalisation …
No idea what the GOP will look like in 4 years but my guess is it will only have partially been rebuilt - complete disarray, infighting, blood-letting, navel-gazing … hell of a process to go though. Reminiscent of the UK Conservative Party after 1997.
My top tip for this term is a largely unspoked ‘realignment’ of the insane War on Drugs.
I think he’ll continue to be where he thinks is the practical place to be to get things done. Sometimes those will be called more right and sometimes more left - they’ll even out.
Immigration reform. Is that right or left? It will be something that the GOP can sign on to (and they are incentivized to do so.)
Energy policy. Of course Keystone will go through. Otherwise he’ll keep with with Steven Chu’s vision to the degree he thinks he can accomplish it. Try to get some price on carbon somehow. Some speculate that a carbon tax may be part of a deal to dodge the fiscal cliff.
Tax reform. He’s staked out his position but of course he will compromise on it.
Supreme Court. When given the chance he’ll choose someone who won’t get filibustered.
He’s a centrist maybe slightly to the progressive side for America but very pragmatic. Why would he change?
As a foreigner (British / Canadian) what amazes me if that the left leaning people in America seem to have let the right leaning side define where the centre is, to such a point that there really is no left actually left in the USA. When Americans say liberal, or progressive, they seem to mean not raving mad libertarians, at least at this point in history.
I expect Obama to continue pretty much as he is now, being pragmatic and trying to get both sides to talk to each other. While doing what he can to keep the loonies from taking control of anything.
So the Democrats should start obstructing themselves?
She’s asking what the difference is between abortion at 4 months and 9 months, ie., if any abortion is legal they all must be, therefore abortion should be illegal. I wouldn’t bother responding, though; she ain’t coming back.
He’s already said what he’s gonna do:
-Give up pieces of Medicaid and Medicare in his “Grand Bargain” with the Repubicans.
-Cut taxes on corporations while closing loopholes they use to avoid taxes (said loopholes will be rewritten into the tax code later, it’s not in Obama’s plan, but it’s what will happen).
-Generally do whatever Wall Street wants.
Basically, not far from what Romney would have done if elected. Obama is center right, people. On social issues, things are better: he won’t reinstitute torture, he won’t appoint while male Catholics to the Supreme Court, he won’t try to reinstitute anti-porn censorship.
However, he will continue the War on Drugs, he’ll continue to expand the drone program, and he’ll continue to expand Presidential power. He is much less likely to get into a war with Iran, but might get dragged into one.
This is mostly based on things Obama has said he will do.
Obama will also generally do whatever Main Street wants, and generally do whatever 21 Jump Street wants, and generally do whatever Sesame Street wants. It’s easy to make such claims with such a wonderful word as “generally” and such a vague construction as “Wall Street.”
Speaking specifically and of the real world, the main thing Obama will do to Wall Street is something it doesn’t want: implement Dodd-Frank.
I’ve been saying for the past few days that a big part of the Republican party’s problem is its fundamental inability to understand women’s issues, and this thread is a perfect demonstration. Women are not an interest group that “wants stuff” from the government. Women are half the population of the country, and their needs are as basic to the welfare of the nation as the needs of men. Understanding that supporting women’s rights means seeing women’s concerns and opinions as 100% equal to those of men, rather than a subset that can conveniently be compromised or ignored is crucial to the future of the Republican party.
For the OP, I think that while there probably will not be a huge amount of movement on major issues, because of the divisiveness in Washington, where there is a change from the President’s first term, it will be to the left. I think the change in the President’s position on gay marriage during the campaign is an indication that he will feel more free to move to the left at least on social issues during his second term.
See? Women want stuff. It’s all “I want to be taken seriously” and “I want the same pay as men” and “I want to get out of this binder” and “I want, I want, I want”.
Bless their little cotton socks.
They are significantly more than half of the vote in presidential elections. They were 52 percent of the presidential electorate in 2000, 54 percent in 2004, 53 percent in 2008, and I think 54 percent in 2012. I assume that reflects the fact that women live longer than men and older people are more likely to vote.