Obama's Democratic Base Crumbles

[Gaspar]

I don't know if it was yesterday's pitiful "I want more money" speech, or a combination of events, but it seems there may be the hope of some competition on the Democratic side of the election.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/obama-poll-jobs-democratic-base-crumbling.html



While I don't actually think there will be a primary challenger, at least now there is some hope the Democrats will be offered another choice, and if we continue to see a lack of leadership, that door may open even wider.

[AquaMan]

You are so lame. Your party and your views are destroying our economy, our goodwill around the world and eroding common sense in general. And this is the best you can do? Defend Boehner for heaven's sake, if you can. Defend herr Bachmann or Perry if you have the nerve. Make sense of Tea Party hypocrisy if you even recognize it. No, you have no courage for that. Stick with the "winning".

Notice the lack of participation lately on this forum? Both in topic generation and response? Same people all the time. Its because a small group of you are out of control with your partisan, anti-Obama, anti-Dem, anti-Liberal, anti-, anti-, anti- ad infinitum. Another small group tries to defend, correct, inform and deflect. That's entertaining for a while but is wearing thin.

This organization was founded on a positive platform. The forum is a chance to build on what works in Tulsa, why we like it here, how smart we are for living here and how to build on that. It has degenerated into a more literate, but just as negative, mirror of KRMG and talk radio in general. Ugh. Ish.

I'll tell you a little secret. When checking on new remarks or topics, I note which names are associated with them. When I see the hypocritical, negative one's with little credibility and politically dishonest, I usually pass.

Anyone else do that?

[Townsend]

Anyone else do that?

Yes

Modified to add the only reason I clicked on this is because I saw you responded. 

Well said.

[Teatownclown]

You are so lame. Your party and your views are destroying our economy, our goodwill around the world and eroding common sense in general. And this is the best you can do? Defend Boehner for heaven's sake, if you can. Defend herr Bachmann or Perry if you have the nerve. Make sense of Tea Party hypocrisy if you even recognize it. No, you have no courage for that. Stick with the "winning".

Notice the lack of participation lately on this forum? Both in topic generation and response? Same people all the time. Its because a small group of you are out of control with your partisan, anti-Obama, anti-Dem, anti-Liberal, anti-, anti-, anti- ad infinitum. Another small group tries to defend, correct, inform and deflect. That's entertaining for a while but is wearing thin.

This organization was founded on a positive platform. The forum is a chance to build on what works in Tulsa, why we like it here, how smart we are for living here and how to build on that. It has degenerated into a more literate, but just as negative, mirror of KRMG and talk radio in general. Ugh. Ish.

I'll tell you a little secret. When checking on new remarks or topics, I note which names are associated with them. When I see the hypocritical, negative one's with little credibility and politically dishonest, I usually pass.

Anyone else do that?

BRAVO! Post of the week so far, AM!


The War on Obama has had many supporters and soldiers here at TNF.


Come August 2, Americans everywhere should join forces and unify with the Teabagging GOPer's and refuse to pay their personal obligations to lenders and dependents.


Way to send us into chaos, wingnuts. They're all so jealous of the educated class (what's left of us).

[RecycleMichael]

If anything, it is the republican party that is crumbling under the pressure of trying to satisfy the Tea Party demands to castrate all government by slashing spending while trying to spend more on defense and give tax breaks to the wealthy.

I firmly believe that a prominent republican will run as an independent and fracture the party enough to re-elect Obama.

[Teatownclown]

He doesn't need any help.

Perry the Pastor out of Texass?

[Teatownclown]

I don't know if it was yesterday's pitiful "I want more money" speech, or a combination of events, but it seems there may be the hope of some competition on the Democratic side of the election.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2011/07/obama-poll-jobs-democratic-base-crumbling.html



While I don't actually think there will be a primary challenger, at least now there is some hope the Democrats will be offered another choice, and if we continue to see a lack of leadership, that door may open even wider.

LACK LEADERSHIP?

Boy, are we lucky your ilk weren't around during WWII.

[Breadburner]

Beach towels for all the Dims......

[JCnOwasso]

The quickest and easiest way to solve this problem is a combination cut of spending and increase of revenues.  If I want to pay off something faster or better meet my obligations, I will cut my own spending and look for ways to increase my income.  I am pretty sure that is how we all look at it.  Well not all of us, I suppose.  When you have the President, who is in the higher tax bracket stating that we should put his taxes back at the levels they were before Bush cut them, I put a little stock in that.  I could easily say that we should repeal bush tax cuts, but I do not make over 250k.

Hey, the free market is great.  Until you lose the balance between the employee and the employer.  The employer has always had a majority of the power, they are the ones that are signing the checks... but the employee had the power to dictate some of the terms of employment.  Now the employer holds about 99.5% of that power.  Companies are not highering because they can dictate that their employees work harder or risk losing their job, while they are pulling in record profits that they can just write off the tax burden on.  This is why you have companies like GE making a $5Billion profit and paying minimal to no taxes. Heck, I am willing to say that Joe Blow Janitor paid more in taxes than GE did as a company.  He probably paid more than some of the CEO's and VP's.

[Gaspar]

Feisty!

Since you choose to ignore my posts and remarks, please refrain from rebuttal.

I am not the LA Times.  I was simply posting an article and my thoughts.  I apologize if I have offended you.

[Gaspar]

The quickest and easiest way to solve this problem is a combination cut of spending and increase of revenues.  If I want to pay off something faster or better meet my obligations, I will cut my own spending and look for ways to increase my income.  I am pretty sure that is how we all look at it.  Well not all of us, I suppose.  When you have the President, who is in the higher tax bracket stating that we should put his taxes back at the levels they were before Bush cut them, I put a little stock in that.  I could easily say that we should repeal bush tax cuts, but I do not make over 250k.

Hey, the free market is great.  Until you lose the balance between the employee and the employer.  The employer has always had a majority of the power, they are the ones that are signing the checks... but the employee had the power to dictate some of the terms of employment.  Now the employer holds about 99.5% of that power.  Companies are not highering because they can dictate that their employees work harder or risk losing their job, while they are pulling in record profits that they can just write off the tax burden on.  This is why you have companies like GE making a $5Billion profit and paying minimal to no taxes. Heck, I am willing to say that Joe Blow Janitor paid more in taxes than GE did as a company.  He probably paid more than some of the CEO's and VP's.

The problem with attempting revenue increases is that you create an Ouroboros.  As the economy continues to shrink at new taxes, the revenue then falls more significantly, and you either need more cuts or more revenue increases.

[AquaMan]

The quickest and easiest way to solve this problem is a combination cut of spending and increase of revenues.  If I want to pay off something faster or better meet my obligations, I will cut my own spending and look for ways to increase my income.  I am pretty sure that is how we all look at it.  Well not all of us, I suppose.  When you have the President, who is in the higher tax bracket stating that we should put his taxes back at the levels they were before Bush cut them, I put a little stock in that.  I could easily say that we should repeal bush tax cuts, but I do not make over 250k.

Hey, the free market is great.  Until you lose the balance between the employee and the employer.  The employer has always had a majority of the power, they are the ones that are signing the checks... but the employee had the power to dictate some of the terms of employment.  Now the employer holds about 99.5% of that power.  Companies are not highering because they can dictate that their employees work harder or risk losing their job, while they are pulling in record profits that they can just write off the tax burden on.  This is why you have companies like GE making a $5Billion profit and paying minimal to no taxes. Heck, I am willing to say that Joe Blow Janitor paid more in taxes than GE did as a company.  He probably paid more than some of the CEO's and VP's.

Hey, JC, you just made my list along with the others posting replies here. Your post reflects reality, not some made up conceptual bs.

Of course, BB is on the list because he is the entertaining frat brother.

[Teatownclown]

It's the economy, stupid.
EDITORIAL
The Republican Wreckage
Published: July 25, 2011

"
House Republicans have lost sight of the country's welfare. It's hard to conclude anything else from their latest actions, including the House speaker's dismissal of President Obama's plea for compromise Monday night. They have largely succeeded in their campaign to ransom America's economy for the biggest spending cuts in a generation. They have warped an exercise in paying off current debt into an argument about future spending. Yet, when they win another concession, they walk away.

This increasingly reckless game has pushed the nation to the brink of ruinous default. The Republicans have dimmed the futures of millions of jobless Americans, whose hopes for work grow more out of reach as government job programs are cut and interest rates begin to rise. They have made the federal government a laughingstock around the globe.

In a scathing prime-time television address Monday night, President Obama stepped off the sidelines to tell Americans the House Republicans were threatening a "deep economic crisis" that could send interest rates skyrocketing and hold up Social Security and veterans' checks. By insisting on a single-minded approach and refusing to negotiate, he said, Republicans were violating the country's founding principle of compromise.

"How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries?" he said, invoking Ronald Reagan's effort to make everyone pay a fair share and pointing out that his immediate predecessors had to ask for debt-ceiling increases under rules invented by Congress. He urged viewers to demand compromise. "The entire world is watching," he said.

Mr. Obama denounced House Speaker John Boehner's proposal to make cuts only, now, and raise the debt ceiling briefly, but he embraced the proposal made over the weekend by the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, which gave Republicans virtually everything they said they wanted when they ignited this artificial crisis: $2.7 trillion from government spending over the next decade, with no revenue increases. It is, in fact, an awful plan, which cuts spending far too deeply at a time when the government should be summoning all its resources to solve the real economic problem of unemployment. It asks for absolutely no sacrifice from those who have prospered immensely as economic inequality has grown.

Mr. Reid's proposal does at least protect Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. And about half of its savings comes from the winding down of two wars, which naturally has drawn Republican opposition. (Though Republicans counted the same savings in their budgets.)

Mr. Boehner will not accept this as the last-ditch surrender that it is. The speaker, who followed Mr. Obama on TV with about five minutes of hoary talking points clearly written before the president spoke, is insisting on a plan that raises the debt ceiling until early next year and demands another vote on a balanced-budget amendment, rejected by the Senate last week. The result would be to stage this same debate over again in an election year. Never mind that this would almost certainly result in an immediate downgrade of the government's credit.

We agreed strongly when Mr. Obama said Americans should be "offended" by this display and that they "may have voted for divided government but they didn't vote for a dysfunctional government." It's hard not to conclude now that dysfunction is the Republicans' goal — even if the cost is unthinkable."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/opinion/26tue1.html?_r=2&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB


"Put Bill Clinton in charge of the treasury" Chris Mathews

[JCnOwasso]

The problem with attempting revenue increases is that you create an Ouroboros.  As the economy continues to shrink at new taxes, the revenue then falls more significantly, and you either need more cuts or more revenue increases.

When you look at it from that point of view, you have it half right.  Rather than a snake eatings its tail, you have a person with their head up their... I kid.

just blindly stating that any revenue increase would cause utter and complete chaos is scare tactics.  We had a budget surplus prior to the cuts.  During the Clinton presidency unemployment went from 7.5 to 4.0.  That is with the taxes at pre bush levels.  I understand that the tax cuts were the right thing to do at the time (9/11 was a bad time, both personally and fiscally), but at some point you need to go back to what was working.

[AquaMan]

There are some Republicans, like this real life experience former Congressmen, whose conservatism I appreciate because they are tempered with pragmatism and respect for their opposites. Joe Scarboro wrote this piece back on the 18th when 4 trillion was on the table and Boehner et al refused to even return phone calls. These are hard truths for Americans of any politics.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0711/59262.html