I forsee a stagnant economy, and massive indictments against cabinet officers:
-Eric Holder (AG)-for his role in “Fast and Furious” (where the governemnt gave 1400+ guns to Mexican criminals-these were used in murders and other crimes)
Sombody has to answer for the Solyndra, Fiskards, and assorted “Green” technology scandals-billions goiven to businesses that failed
I also see major lawsuits against Obamacare, and the TSA.
Conclusion: lots of work for special prosecutors, not much for unemployed Americans.
The majority of Americans are disenchanted with free trade. Do you suppose Obama’s second term will see him seeking to dismantle NAFTA and similar agreements? Oligarchy is also unpopular. Do you suppose there will be significant efforts during the next Obama term to reduce corporate influence in Washington? I certainly don’t. Elites tend to be less socially conservative because they are more cosmopolitan. There are places where mass opinon is to the right of elite opinion. But again, would Obama move to curb legal and illegal immigration in a second term? No. In Washington what matters is the elite consensus, not what us rubes out in the rest of the country want. Conventional politicians don’t upset the applecart. And this very much includes President Obama.
Dow Jones industrial average 3 days after Obama took office on January 20, 2009 = 8,077
Dow Jones industrial average as of closing time last friday = 12,218
The lowest point of the Dow in recent history was in march 2009, two months after his inauguration and before any of Obama’s economic policies could have realistically affected the economy. That point was 6,600-something. In less than 3 years, Obama has overseen a near-doubling of the dow.
Of course a lot of the difference between the alignment of the politicians versus the populace is difficult to quantify. But in one demonstrable way it’s true: the Senate’s disproportionate share of rural voters. This means that the Senate represents the right to a much larger degree than it would have if the non-rural population were not severely under-represented.
Is Solyndra that big a deal, still? So the U.S. Federal Government made a bunch of loans (which always carries a risk) and a bad one got through. Big whoop.
Hardly. There’s nothing in the healthcare plan that compels parents to keep their kids on their insurance that long, it just gives them the option to. There will be millions of parents who won’t.
Pretend that I don’t work in this field professionally and haven’t posted about this before, and explain to me in detail which power plant emissions standards Obama’s administration is solely responsible for that you are referring to here.
He didn’t say Obama was solely responsible for them, only that he wouldn’t overturn them in a theoretical second term. But I imagine he’s referring to the new mercury emission standards.
They actually have been in development since the Clinton Administration, if not before (see the initial ICR). And Bush, if he had chosen to, could have essentially destroyed development of them during the 8 years he was in charge, but didn’t. Sure there were delays, but then this isn’t exactly easy stuff (and even Obama took the easy route of allowing proxy measures for other heavy metals, instead of direct OCM). If that is in question I can copy a few paragraphs to explain why.
And FWIW we need to differentiate between cement kiln mercury rules (2010), power plant rules (MATS, formerly “Utility MACT”, Dec. 21 2011), as well as Boiler MACT (2011) - those are very different rules which all impact mercury but in very different ways, all finalized, but not formulated entirely, under Obama.
Thanks for explaining. I was afraid you had missed the boat. There is a lot of inertia in these things, to be sure, and much more complex than I made it out to be.
It will help bury the rather cold turn Indo-American relations took during the Cold War and it will ally us with a potentially massive power militarily and economically. It is after all the only power that rivals China in population terms and is ideologically and strategically far more acceptable to us. It isn’t too different from when a hundred years ago before World War I the British wanted to ally with America against Germany
“President McCain” gave us only one decision, and that was “Vice President Palin”. Obama gave us Joe Biden on the same point. As much of a foot in mouth politician as Biden sometimes is, he was a much, much, much better choice than McCain made with Palin.
I am truly displeased with Obama and have been throughout his term. While he has accomplished many things quietly, he cannot win the big one for liberals, because he refuses to fight. As far as his respect for the constitution go, he just signed another “lock 'em up forever without a trial bill”, and I find it even more repulsive than when the Bush team asserted that kind of power because Obama and his team should know better.
I probably won’t be able to vote for Romney, but I could leave the presidential boxes empty come November. Huntsman might be voteable, but I don’t see that the Republicans have any chance of nominating him.
Well, what ideally would be a terms of an Indo-American alliance? Would they involve different trade relations than now? Relaxed immigration rules? Military commitments?