- ‹ previous
- 1710 of 2798
- next ›
*Overwhelming
OVERWHELMING....Byron York reports from the trenches:
Just talked to a very clued-in Republican on the Hill. This person wouldn't predict a unanimous Republican vote against the Democratic stimulus package, but said there would be "minimal" GOP support of the bill. "I don't know if it will be unanimous, but Democrats are not going to have the kind of bipartisan support the president was trying to get," he told me. An "overwhelming" number of Republicans will vote no, he predicted.
That's pretty much what I expect too. And hey — I don't blame them, either. The job of the opposition is to oppose, and if this were some big Republican tax cut fest following a GOP victory I'd expect Democrats to oppose that overwhelmingly too.
I really don't think the opposition party owes the president any votes just because he won the election. They owe him votes if he convinces them that, on balance, one of his initiatives is a good thing for the country, or if they get some concession they want, or if they think it's political suicide to oppose him. In other words, the usual political reasons. Contrary to what our talking heads mindlessly recite after every election, honeymoons are for newlyweds, not presidents, and stuff needs to get done for four years out of four, not just for the first hundred days. It's long past time for the media to get over its preoccupation with both of these romantic notions.
Nicely put. You see, Mr. Drum, this is why I read your blog. With rare exceptions, you're one of the most reasonable left-leaning bloggers, who is simultaneously intelligent enough to be worthwhile, that's out there.
The Republican argument I find catchiest is the one that goes, "The answer to the current economic downturn is to do something that the government has essentially been doing, nonstop, for the past 60 years, but to do that much _more_ of it. What's the definition of insanity, again?" Not sure how much I agree with this, but it has some substance behind it. Hence the opposition.
If that's the case, then all the items taken out of the bill in an effort to win their support should be plugged right back in, and to hell with them.
"The answer to the current economic downturn is to do something that the government has essentially been doing, nonstop, for the past 60 years, but to do that much _more_ of it. What's the definition of insanity, again?"
Jiminy Christmas. That is so stupid, I barely know where to start.
1. In case anyone didn't notice, the past 60 years saw massive amounts of economic growth. Someone must have been doing something right.
2. The alternative is...what? Going back to the economic policies of the frickin' 1920s?!?!
It's profoundly weird to listen to conservatives talk economics right now, because they're excising the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s from the history books. To the right wing, NOTHING happened with the economy and government policy in those decades that can teach us anything at all. No, we all just need to join Mr. Peabody in the Wayback Machine and party like it's 1929.
Mike
The alternative is...what? Going back to the economic policies of the frickin' 1920s?!?!
That's what I don't get. The large numbers of people eager to wear Hoover badges on their foreheads.
I just think the Dems ought to grow a pair, and cut out states whose senators don't BOTH vote for the package.
Tell them, hey, you don't want the money? Fine.
That should get a few ReThugs, one would think.
Don't need more than two, do we?
Stupid? The 60 years before the 1940s also saw massive economic growth. The government started to intervene massively, and guess what? The economic cycle continued. The 1970s were a particularly depressing decade in that regard, but of course you can point to all sorts of extraneous factors there. You always can, though.
The current economic downturn is objectively a severe one, but it will turn around within a couple of years whether this spending bill passes or not. In the meantime, the pervasive notion that the government has to do _something_ along these lines will allow a lot of worthwhile things to get done -- alternative energy, transportation infrastructure, etc. etc. A lot of useless pork will be procured as well. Actually, probably a vast excess of the latter at the expense of the former.
For the love of all that is holy, can we please take out the tax cuts that were put in to sweeten it for the R's?
Goddamn, anyone want to give the D's a lesson on negotiation? If the other party walks away from the table before shaking hands, they don't get to keep any gains that were made. Sheesh.
What Linkmeister said, although I do think that fixing the AMT so it doesn't whack people who were never intended to have to pay it is a good idea.
Perhaps all this is a run-up to "We tried to work with you, now get stuffed."
The reason that there are tax cuts and other compromises with the republicans in the bill is not to win their votes. (For the reasons Kevin stated, that was never a likely scenario.) The whole point is to win the PR war and at the outset define the administration as "reasonable" and "willing to compromise". As they say in other fields, you never get a second chance to make a first impression. Once the frame of "Obama=reasonable and House Republicans=partisan obstructionists" is firmly established, it will be very hard for the right to reframe the ongoing debates. I think it's pretty smart politics. Yes, it means watering down this particular bill, but I think the public impression it leaves is invaluable.
Kevin and lot of people here seem to think that a political "honeymoon" is a period of good feelings between the new president and the opposition party. I would argue that that is almost never the case. The "honeymoon", if there is one, is usually between the public (and, perhaps even more importantly, the press) and the new president.
If the other party walks away from the table before shaking hands, they don't get to keep any gains that were made.
So that changed somewhat, near as I can tell in the post-WWII to 1967 timeframe.
Since then, you can be a total jerk about everything, and still get to keep all the pieces you lost.
They owe him votes if he convinces them that, on balance, one of his initiatives is a good thing for the country
The issue I have with the GOP here is whether they agree with this proposition. My guess is most of them do not.
"It's long past time for the media to get over its preoccupation with both of these romantic notions."
I think it's long past time for Obama to get over his preoccupation with these romantic notions.
"Stupid? The 60 years before the 1940s also saw massive economic growth. The government started to intervene massively, and guess what? The economic cycle continued."
Uh, yeah, it is stupid to compare the economic growth in America in 1890 to the economic growth in America in 1950. Just like comparing economic growth in 21st century American to economic growth in 15th century France is stupid. You can do it, but the useful information produced by that comparison is essentially nil.
"The current economic downturn is objectively a severe one, but it will turn around within a couple of years whether this spending bill passes or not."
In the sense that some economic activity will continue no matter what happens, sure. Of course, that economic activity may have more in common with Somalia than it does with the United States.
Mike
So what do you like about the stimulus package, Kevin?
The job of each and every one of them is to represent the best interests of their constituents, not to play a role in the ugly dance of malice that we call politics. Feed the monster, if you must, but letting them off the hook because opposing is 'what they're supposed to do' replaces the more meaningful story that they are hurting all of us by merely posturing.
I just think the Dems ought to grow a pair,
The party of gay rights and feminism hasn't got any.
The job of the opposition is to oppose
That really isn't their job, but that is what they do.
He's playing them. Give them a chance and let them be, well, Republicans. Want to play politics little boys? See how this bites them in 2010, and they'll go away pretty much forever.
You probably have heard of "security theater".
This "stimulus bill" is an exercise in "economic security theater"
The politics of fear continues.
"It's long past time for the media to get over its preoccupation with both of these romantic notions."
Maybe we should get over the notion that a Honeymoon is really romantic. The original notion was a little more practical. When a couple got married, the village would brew a big batch of mead (honey wine) and give it to the bride and groom. The bride and groom were expected to go away and not return until the mead was finished. The idea was that they'd get drunk and screw, thus perpetuating the village. It's a little more "down and dirty" than "romantic."
"They owe him votes if he convinces them that, on balance, one of his initiatives is a good thing for the country, or if they get some concession they want, or if they think it's political suicide to oppose him."
My ideal scenario: Obama and the Democrats continue to give the Republicans every opportunity to work with them, despite the Republicans' position of weakness. After all, as doktorwise reminds us above, political perception is reality. Then, when the House Democrats pass the stimulus plan, despite House Republicans nearly unanimously opposing it -- a stimulus plan which surveys show over 80% of American voters supporting -- then Obama gives The Big Speech just before the Senate is to vote. The Big Speech points out that the Democrats gave the Republicans a large chunk of what they wanted... tax cuts, also pointing out that tax cuts are all Republicans EVER suggest, even though it was clear to the Democrats that few House Republicans were going to support the bill. This magnanimous gesture-in-victory/implicit threat will then draw enough moderate Senate Republicans into Obama's camp for the next year or three, ensuring a 60-vote supermajority, AND put Obama on the PR side of the angels as the public and media perceive. Oh yeah, and this will also turn the No-Votes by the House Republicans into political suicide sooner rather than later by rendering them powerless, though continuing to whine and bray and shout they will.
That's my fantasy anyway...
HOWARD:
you are far more eloquent that I, so: WHAT YOU SAID.
Not a problem-if the Republicans can't think of America first and big oil and their own little special interests second, then they will all sound like Rush Limbaugh as his contract gets terminated for lack of interest. The Republicans have not governed wisely, have led the Country into a war for profit, have petitioned for big oil at the cost of National interests and are typified by John Boehner jumping through hoops every time big oil whistles. Good riddance to them!
That's my fantasy anyway...
The reality here is very simple: Given the steepness of the downturn, republicans are simply placing a bet that a stimulus of $800 to $900 billion won't work. They're betting and hoping it will produce little effect by the time it will have clearly fizzled out. That's what all of their corporate asshole buddies are telling them.
The mistake made here INMHO was going in at around $700 to $800 billion to begin with. NO ONE who knows anything about the size of the US economy and the depth of this recession thought that was anywhere near enough. That was a POLITICAL decision not an economic decision. That was tantamount to BO negotiating with himself upfront.
BO and his team knew, or should have known, that the repug reaction was going to be the same at $1 trillion or $2 trillion. BO could have easily sold $2 trillion to voters. I mean, what's the size of the economy we're trying to turn around here.
I don't believe any of this rope-a-dope wishful thinking -- that BO is setting a trap for the repugs. A trap is being set alright. It's just not clear who the trapper and trappee will turn out to be.
One more point. We won't know if this is working for 12 to 18 months. I know the rope-a-dopers think that if it's not working BO will be able to go back to Congress for another round of stimulus -- another trillion or so.
Good luck with that.
Econobuzz,
You are right. Whether the stimulus package works or not is another fantasy altogether. I was simply describing the political phase-in of the Obama Era.
And people, people, people, do we really think President Obama is a naive chump being played by brilliant Machiavellians? Seriously? Have we ALREADY forgotten that Obama is perhaps one of the smartest and most politically astute men to assume office?
Howard is right, Barack Obama is the bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life, and certainly the smartest and most politically astute man ever to assume office.
*cough* dipshit *cough*
The Republican argument I find dumbest is the "spending" one, seeing as how Bush spend money like no other but the GOP never had problem with it while Bush was Prez.
The job of the opposition is to oppose
That really isn't their job, but that is what they do.
That's right!
Their job is to represent their voters, (not their corporate constituency exclusively, which is the only thing Republicans do anymore - exclusively.)
fake Tiffany Earrings
fake Tiffany Bracelets
fake Tiffany Cuff
fake Tiffany Earrings
UGG Classic Tall boots
UGG Coquette boots
UGG Lo Pro Button boots
UGG Nightfall boots
Glashutte watches
Glashutte watches
replica Montblanc
replica Lady Watch
replica Longines
replica Louis Vuitton
replica Maurice Lacroix
replica Montblanc
replica movado
replica omega
replica omega
replica oris
Maurice Lacroix
Maurice Lacroix replica
Montblanc replica
movado replica
omega replica
oris replica
Panerai replica
Patek Philippe replica
Piaget replica
Rado replica
Tag Heuer replica
Tudor replica
U-boat replica
Vacheron Constantin replica
Rolex replica
Rolex Air-King replica
Rolex Datejust II replica
xxx replica
Rolex Submariner replica
Yachtmaster replica
Rolex Day-Date II replica
Rolex Daytona replica
ugg boots uk
Eliminating the need for the extra trouble to wear ugg boots uk 、ugg boots sale, in the extreme sports, look for happiness in life, with Christian Louboutin and nike sb showed off your tall body, do not worry about being laughed at, dancing new style Christian Louboutin shoes、ugg boots london and ugg boots sale. The flavor of life that is colorful, there are Classic tall boots 、ugg sale、ugg london and nike dunk also used fear to creep away money from your pocket Mody ? Love beauty, you might even love Christian Louboutin Boots。
Maurice Lacroix watch for sale
Bvlgari watch for sale
Cartier watch for sale
chopard watch for sale
Concord watch for sale
croum watch for sale
DeWitt watch for sale
ebel watch for sale
Ferrari watch for sale
Franck Muller watch for sale
Glashutte watch for sale
Graham watch for sale
Hermes watch for sale
Hublot watch for sale
IWC watch for sale
Jaquet droz watch for sale
Lady Watch for sale
Longines watch for sale
Louis Vuitton watch for sale
Maurice Lacroix watch for sale
Breitling watches Burberry
Breitling watches
Burberry watches
Bvlgari watches
Cartier watches
chopard watches
Concord watches