Wednesday, November 04, 2009
|
|
The Message
|
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
12:44 PM
|
It will be interesting to watch the 80 Democrat congressmen from the districts that McCain won last year -- just how far will they be willing to walk the plank for Obamacare, given that the president couldn't save Jon Corzine, who outspent his opponent 5:1 in a deep blue state like New Jersey?
As Politico points out, most people polled say that they weren't voting specifically for or against the President. Fair enough. But before anyone reads too much into that, consider the fact that it's still a bit "politically incorrect" to be "against" Barack Obama; that's why everyone still insists to pollsters they like him and that their vote isn't about him, even as they vote against politicians who share his agenda.
Finally, consider the magnitude of the vote shifts between last year and this. The 20-point swing in New Jersey and Bob McDonnell's comfortable victory in Virginia -- just four years after barely squeaking in -- has a lot to say about the reasons for Obama's victory last year. And they have nothing to do with a new left tilt in the US.
First, there were a lot of people who were tired of George Bush, ready for a change, and disgruntled by the war. Second, John McCain was a lackluster candidate, who didn't have the enthusiastic support of his own party's base. Third, lots of people (especially the young) were interested in "making history" -- without much consideration of Obama's ideology. And that latter factor worked perfectly for the President -- whether by design or because he simply lacked details (or both), he kept his pitch largely agenda- and ideology-free, and the press let him get away with it.
Now the pendulum is swinging the other way. Nervous Democrat congressmen must be realizing that a fuzzy fog of Obamania can't save them from their voters if they ignore the electorate's wishes. And that's as it should be.
|
|
|
Have you noticed lately that whenever (usually daily) Obama gets in front of the cameras - and teleprompters - he is only saying "We will pass healthcare" - not healthcare reform, not health insurance reform, not affordable healthcare for all.......... have to watch the word games from the WH. |
|
[NJ is interesting because most registered voters are democrats and they haven't voted for a republican in MANY years and Obama showed up in person with all his 'democratic star power'.]
Perhaps I'm different, but I don't see stars around the office of the President or the person in office. If the President is turning out to shill for someone that I don't think understands or can run the state well, I'm not voting for the guy regardless, and chalking up the Prez's shilling as party hackery.
I mean, I live in California and I don't care if the ghost of Ronald Reagan came back to ask me to vote for Schwarzenegger, that's just not something I'm going to do, even for the Gipper. |
|
|
Divesture of GM and Chrysler and all banks currently under Federal oversight; elimination of Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security for everybody 50 years old and younger, giving them all of their money back, and phase out of the rest as the population passes on; elimination of all health care tax benefits for employers and giving it to citizens instead; elimination of all state mandates on health insurance; elimination of the EPA and HHS and Department of Education; removal of statutory authority from every single government agency (you want to change a rule, Congress has to pass it first); elimination of the income tax as it stands, either a national sales tax or back to the original rule of only 1% of everything over $250,000; and, finally, Congress cannot authorize an expenditure until it first has the money to spend. That should do for starters. |
|
|
I figured malpractice lawsuits and insurance costs for docs and hospitals cost the patients a good deal o' money. I have not done research on it, just common sense. |
|
From what I'm reading "tort" on contributes to about 1 percent of the 17 percent annual increases.
Do you have other numbers?
Also, supply and demand dictates that 13 million more people are going to require a requisite number of doctors and nurses.
Personally I'd like to hear someone in Congress mention building more medical schools and flooding the market with cheap labor to bring to down the costs.
|
|
Otherwise...What??
Exit polls filled with voters afraid to answer an anonymous question honestly? Oh come on.
"...a lot of people who were tired of George Bush"
Thats the understatement of the millenium. How about alot of Americans were devastated by effects of the Bush years?
John McCain was a lackluster candidate. No argument.
"...lots of people (especially the young) were interested in "making history" -- without much consideration of Obama's ideology."
What an arrogant statement. Just because such a description fits you and yours, it does not fit the many Obama supporters, especially the young adults..in my world.
|
|
Recollect, if you are able, Bush's "ownership society" his 2004 reelection mumbo-jumbo about
"a world in which every American family owned a house" To achieve this, Bush pushed new policies like the "zero-down-payment initiative," —a government-sponsored program that allowed people to get mortgages without a down payment. exotic mortgages followed,ones with no monthly payments for the first two years.
Others required no documentation, Then financial innovations built out of the mortgages—derivatives of other derivatives, packaged and repackaged until no one could identify what they contained and how much they were worth.
|
|
|
we say "tort reform" and get rid of the prohibition on getting health insurance across state lines. Also, we could just use some of that stimulus money and cover the 13 million uninsured instead of wasting it. The money that is not spent yet on stimulus, about 85% of it, could cover people for about 200 years. |
|
Freddie Mac and Fannie May where simply the seeds. The repacking of bad debt as good debt via the use of insurance, credit default swaps, rep rents 100 fold more money that the actual loans themselves. The credit default swap market grew from nothing to 60 trillion dollars in 15 short years and you all are spinning on Freddie Mac. Just great.
Which is the key problem today with politics.
Today's problems are extremely complex and pundits take advantage of this to position facts politically.
Conservatives have one notion of facts, liberals another. You are never going to agree on the politics if facts are not understood.
Conservatives say leave health care alone, it doesn't need fixing.
Yet medical costs are increasing at an unsustainable 17 percent per year.
You got liberals with their 100 anecdotes of people dying due to no insurance, and conservatives with 100 anecdotes about British people dying waiting in line.
Joan Fedor said in 1990, "The biggest threat to Democracy today is oversimplified solutions to complicated problems."
How prophetic she was.
Hating communist Democrats is not going to solve this country's problems. Pretending you can implement conservative policies in a vacuum of no liberals in this country, or anywhere in the world, is pure stupidity, i.e. Rush Limbaugh talk.
|
|
at least one thing, private enterprise will continue! Recollect if you will, it was Bush who attempted to rein-in Freddie & Fannie and was told by the then demoRAT-controlled Congress that everything was FINE, JUST FINE!
Private enterprise will fix the economy. You might want to do just a little reading, there are solutions out there which do NOT include the handouts demoRATS are so fond of, you know personal responsibility, personal initiative---those American ideals, not the current espousal of Pelosi, Reid, and Obumbles---gimmie, gimmie, gimmie!
tribeck, yes indeed, you make so much sense and that is why NJ has a Republican for a gov. even when Captain Obumbles came out and campaigned for Corzine! Continue on with your fantasies, hopefully 2010 won't be too much of a surprise for you!
Dread very good point; however, when the President comes out and campaigns for the candidate who espouses the same platform issues as he does, from this, one can conclude that The People have rejected BOTH the President and the candidate by electing the OTHER candidate who presented DIFFERENT platform issues. |
|
by many in NJ. My sister lives in south jersey. She is a Dem. She voted last year for Obama, she'll vote for Obama in 2012. But Corzine was a putz, and she stayed home. She didn't care who won (shortsighted because Christy is a fundamentalist nut on issues like choice, but that was her choice).
|
|
"Now the pendulum is swinging the other way."
The Republicans had their clocks cleaned in 06 and 08. It's only natural that they would win back some congressional seats and governors offices this year. Too soon to tell if it's a pendulum swing or one more diagonal line on a chart. |
|
do you believe that black people can handle criticism or not? do you believe it is racist to poke fun at LIBERALS who happen to be black the SAME way that we poke fun at say, the kennedys? Otherwise shut up about race baiting which is the PURVIEW of dem/libs or didn't you know that?
You must be a youngin' cause you don't know that the 1994 Freshman Congress class of Repubs made Rush Limbaugh an honorary member. If Rush is the problem, why did your hero, the delicate Michael Steel rush to apologize to Rush?
Rush has been banging on the Left for 21 years, why would you worry about it now?
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson declared Obama "black enough" and "down with the scruggle afterall" in the spring of 2008 and that's all it took to push the black vote over for Barack. What is so hard to figure out about that?
I'd say it was cons who rejected McCain without regard to what Rush said. I know I voted for the first time for a 3rd party rather another Dem/lite RINO pos.
Dede dropped out of the race because the RNC pulled the plug on her. Is that too complicated for you? The CON beat her 46% to 5%. Can you do math? |
|
CNN reported about NJ, 60% said no impact and 40% said they would vote to support or oppose the president.
I suppose some people do that, but MOST FAIR MINDED AMERICANS don't. However, if a president shows up in person and wins or loses then it is a reflection/indication of his influence on the voters.
NJ is interesting because most registered voters are democrats and they haven't voted for a republican in MANY years and Obama showed up in person with all his 'democratic star power'.
Biden did better in NY23 using Palin and the Energy issue more effectively than Obama did in NJ still blaming Bush one year into his presidency,. I think people are beginning to view him as a 'blame bush only' type of president.
Time for a new strategy in the WH - time for blaming Bush is over. |
|
Explain Dede's votes. Stop changing the subject. I gave you evidence.
1. McCain was up in the polls after the RNC and Palin's speech. Obama ran ads. linkin McCain to Limbaugh and even though Limbaugh hated McCain, voters made sure to reject McCain. His numbers could not be saved, even by Palin's Star Power.
2. Hillary was getting the black vote and beating Obama, until Rush decided to publicly engage in the primary. Americans reject Rush's hate and voted for Barak.
3. Dede dropped out of the race, endorsed Owens and Hoffman's numbers went up as americans figured out "Dede was scum'. Rush insulted Dede and she got 6000+ votes.
Instead of changing the subject from Rush the moron to me, why not explain why 6000+ voters would show up to vote for Dede when she was no longer in the running? |
|
|
Tribek, like most liberals, you don't understand language. When Rush makes fun of Jesse Jackson - it is not racist. If he makes fun of Al Sharpton - not racist. Obama - not racist. What IS racist is people like you who treat black people DIFFERENTLY than they treat whites. Think about it. |
|
and be honest, have you ever cast a vote for a governor to send a message to the President?
Or do you vote for a governor because you think that person is the best person to lead your state and address it's problems?
Just wondering. |
|
At some point, Carol will realize, like all race baiters that trying to attack Obama is UNPRODUCTIVE.
Rush, Carol, Medved and all the race baiting 'conservatives' need to learn that 60% of the NJ voters said Obama's campaign did NOT IMPACT their decision. 20% said they voted against the president and 19% said they were voting to support the president.
Overall, only 40% of americans think of Obama's personality/campaign speeches as influential to their decision when picking a leader. 60% of Americans consider it to HAVE NO IMPACT.
Yet, Carol, Rush, Medved and all the race baiters keep attacking Obama at a personal level which is POINTLESS AND UNPRODUCTIVE.
Focus on the policies behind HEALTH CARE REFORM and ARGUE not against 'Obamacare' a conservative racist slung for Obama will kill white people - but AGAINST deficits and the jobs it will cost americans and also the impact on quality of care for americans and the UNCONSTITUTIONAL requirement to purchase a specific health care product manufactured by govt.
GIVE AMERICANS A REASON TO VOTE AGAINST THE POLICIES NOT TO 'BREAK OBAMA'.
Remember 60% of fair minded americans DON'T CARE for your divisive race baiting tactics like 'Obamacare'. Didn't pelosi develop this bill? Why is it not the Pelosi Bill? Oh, that would not serve well in scaring the white people because we need to make it about the half-black president killing white people.
Do you not know this rheteric does not work anymore? |
|
- if you throw in the mix the economic problems and admit that the Dems were the
1) cowards who refused to accept custody of Osama Bin Laden, when he was offered to Clinton not once but three times;
2) that the housing bubble was caused by de-regulation but not by the republicans but by Franken, Fannie, Freddie Mae, Countrywide and the sweetheart deals.
3) that nothing moved once the dems got control of house and senate making Pres. Bush pretty much a lame duck for the last few years.
4) that this, lead to the country being fed up and made them eat vomit rather than vote for a republican or follow conservative values
now, America wants back, it wants its freedom and no socialized anything. step away from the curve, jump into incoming traffic and that's what you liberals are facing...mass suicide.
be willing to admit that things needed to ge |
|
Hey Exeye, please enlighten us all as to what "conservatives" as you allude too have in mind that Americans will vote for?
I'm just curious. Actually, I'm really curious.
What? Undo everything Obama is doing? And then what? What's the conservative solution for fixing the economy?
|
|
|
are conservatives. They're starting to take over the party. Soon, we'll actually have the best party and, you know what, Vamp? You can kiss your Obamacare, your stimulus packages, your takeover of the US economy, and your fascism goodbye. |
|
|
We are left HOPING (there's that mealy mouthed word again) that the Repubs will be only slightly less anti-American than the dem/libs. We can do better, nyet? |
|
Let's assume the "best", Republicans are on their way back in. Let's be really rosy and assume the Republicans recapture the entire government: House, Senate and Presidency.
Were you happy with the 6 years Republicans ran the show from 2000-2006?
Obamacare gets reversed and we go back to health care we have today?
Humph.
More deregulation will fix the Banking industry? The housing bubble?
Seriously, what solutions do Republicans bring to the table today other than "we are not Democrats". Because that's pretty much what Democrats ran on last year "We are not Republicans."
Welcome to politics in the 21st century: our party doesn't suck as bad as yours, nanner, nanner nanner.
Pathetic. |
|
|
furthermore, I think those people who wanted to "make history" are now in the throes of disenchantment with the President. They expected moderation and bipartisanship and instead are treated to socialism and partisanship. |
|
|
|