| RotoGuru Politics Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread | Self-edit this thread |
|
| 0 |
Subject: The Next Massachusetts Posted by: Boldwin - [26451820] Wed, Feb 03, 2010, 13:54  Mark Kirk who won the Illinois republican nomination to run for 'Obama's senate seat' actually voted for 'Cap-N-Trade'. But such as he is, he has a very good chance to become the next Senator from Illinois. His opponent is as slick as owl poop but this isn't the year for slick Dem party machine politicians who formerly directed a failing mob bank. | |||||||
| 82 | boldwin ID: 481371112 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 10:13 | The take on this at the communist 'The Nation'". | ||||||
| 83 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 10:47 |
#78: Actually, Indiana is a lot more conservative, as a state, than Illinois. Indianapolis (while more liberal) simply doesn't have the hold that Chicago does in Illinois. Bayh was doing well against Coats, but was not polling well against Mike Pence before Pence pulled out. It'll be interesting to see if Pence goes back into the race--I'd think he would be the odds on favorite. BTW the deadline for the Dems to field a candidate with the requisite signatures is NOON today That's not exactly the case. Noon today is the deadline for a Dem to enter the primary (I understand one candidate might make that deadline) If no candidates enter, the Party will choose a candidate to run in November. The timing is just screwy, however. Last week it was full speed ahead for Bayh, and it seems his entire staff was completely out of the loop on his decision. | ||||||
| 84 | boldwin ID: 481371112 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 11:01 | Well Indianapolis wasn't what I was talking about. It's Gary. It's greater Chicago. Back when steel was going great for all appearances Chicago just slid all the way around far into Indiana and the blue politics followed. Don't look at the area, look at the population density. | ||||||
| 85 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 11:36 | That's a good point. My understanding is that Gary is actually losing population, however. I don't think it's got much hold onto statewide races anymore, but your closer to the scene than I am. | ||||||
| 86 | Tree ID: 23143812 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 11:38 |
Walk Told'ya so. told him what? that you and your fellow Tea-Partiers are highly uninformed? that *is* what he said. | ||||||
| 87 | boldwin ID: 481371112 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 11:51 | Those people took their MSM blinders off, looked at the evidence and found out what I have been pointing out for a decade or two. | ||||||
| 88 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Tue, Feb 16, 2010, 12:57 |
Re #77: I don't know about that--there are actually three Tea Party candidates running against Ron Paul. No one is safe... | ||||||
| 89 | Tree ID: 248472317 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 07:25 |
Bayh says a lot and shows courage with his retirement ...Bayh had apparently become increasingly frustrated in the Senate. In this morning's interview he noted that just two weeks ago, Republicans who had co-sponsored a bill with him to rein in the deficit turned around and voted against it for purely political reasons. He also stated repeatedly that members of his own party should be more willing to settle for a compromise rather than holding out for perfection. "Sometimes half a loaf is better than none," Bayh insisted. | ||||||
| 90 | Frick ID: 54152814 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 08:24 |
I can't remember where I read it yesterday, but in one of the Bayh articles it said that Democrats have voted straight down the party line 91% of the time this session. The Republicans have attempted 100 Filibusters, up from the prior record of 61. Both sides are to blame in my opinion. The upside side is that fewer new laws are being passed. | ||||||
| 91 | biliruben ID: 16105237 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 08:33 | When our country is in the biggest crisis since the 30s, the corporate carrion are in desperate need of regulation as they gnaw the bones of our once great country, and we are in double digit unemployment, the last thing we need is any leadership. | ||||||
| 92 | Mith ID: 58136177 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 08:37 | Whats the average percentage at which members of the congressional majority vote with their own party? | ||||||
| 93 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 11:30 | We need a dictator! | ||||||
| 94 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 11:33 |
Liberals and conservatives both are happy to keep score of how often members vote their way. See Conservative Union. And Liberals do the same thing. | ||||||
| 95 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 11:35 |
The upside side is that fewer new laws are being passed. - Frick They say that the only time your wallet is safe is when congress is in recess, but gridlock is even better!. | ||||||
| 96 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 11:44 |
Liberals and conservatives both are happy to keep score of how often members vote their way. This seems a little self-evident, yes? They say that the only time your wallet is safe is when congress is in recess, but gridlock is even better Let's keep in mind that when Republicans voted in lockstep for gridlock when the Stimulus Bill came up, they were voting against billions of dollars in tax cuts, a program which helped keep our economy from completely tanking, and keeping millions of people employed who otherwise would have lost their jobs. Yeah, "gridlock" is better. | ||||||
| 97 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 12:04 |
I am sure there is an audience for your point, PD, but keep in mind that the choir to which you preach is a very tiny one."six percent of Americans believe Obama's Stimulus plan created jobs". | ||||||
| 98 | Tree ID: 23143812 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 15:46 |
six percent of Americans believe Obama's Stimulus plan created jobs what someone believes to be true, as opposed to what is true, are entirely different things, however. | ||||||
| 99 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 15:46 |
That doesn't mean it isn't true, Boldwin. And it is, of course. Your point is very similar to the George Packer column I linked to a few days ago: The reduction of politics from one involving the debating of fact to one involving the debating of perceptions. I care a lot less about the latter when I know I have the former on my side of this argument. And I think, as usual, you feel the opposite. | ||||||
| 100 | walk Dude ID: 32928238 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 15:59 |
That's an education/marketing thing, Boldwin. The stim program is pretty widely regarded as a successful endeavor that avoided further economic ruin. Many jobs were created, but net-net, we still lost jobs during that time. We just woulda lost more jobs had we not done the stim (and perhaps gone into a depression). Obama Starts Stimulus Campaign Even after Obama's campaign, I still think that most Americans will think the stimulus bill did not work, and that it was literally the bank bailout. We have a pretty ignorant mass of folk who don't take the time to read anything more than the scroll at the bottom of Fox News or the headlines in the paper. I have friends who think just this: That the stimulus bill was done by Obama to bail out the banks. Of course, Bush bailed out the banks, and Obama did the stimulus bill, which should have been 2x-3x larger than it was. It's funny to see the Maddow video calling out like 20 different republican congressfolks who bashed the stim bill and then posed with stim bill checks boasting about local programs and services for their districts or states as a result of stim funds, complete with quotes indicating how many jobs and savings the stim $ is creating. Obama is about the only recent pol who has the guts to say: "We cannot get out of the recession without having some pain" (e.g. spending or tax increases). Even governing republicans know this, but they will never say it publicly...only the one's who are not in office say it. They are playing the waiting game cos they know the ignorant populist view is that we should all have everything we want without having to pay for it (e.g. teabaggers), and that the governing party in bad times will invariably get voted out. So, when the republicans take over, they will then have to make the hard decisions and face the consequences...so stupid. Sooner or later our country is going to have to raise taxes and/or mess with sacred programs. The Dems will not attack the republicans on any of this stuff cos they either don't have the guts or don't know how, or both. The libertarians can try and seize the day and take advantage of teabagger sentiments, but they have no answers other than radical changes to the government that are not practically feasible given our sheer size and involvement in international and various domestic initiatives. | ||||||
| 101 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 16:32 |
The stim program is pretty widely regarded as a successful endeavor that avoided further economic ruin. really? I must have missed that widely reguared memo. We just woulda lost more jobs had we not done the stim (and perhaps gone into a depression). really? evidence, at least global warming has evidence. | ||||||
| 102 | Razor ID: 57854118 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 16:40 |
really? I must have missed that widely reguared memo. Kind of the problem here. You didn't really look. You're just guessing. Give it a look and there is a consensus on this, and you're on the other side of it. | ||||||
| 103 | Pancho Villa ID: 29118157 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 16:43 |
really? evidence Allow me to borrow from Walk's #100: 20 different republican congressfolks who bashed the stim bill and then posed with stim bill checks boasting about local programs and services for their districts or states as a result of stim funds, complete with quotes indicating how many jobs and savings the stim $ is creating Maybe that's not exactly evidence, but it's pretty good indication as to why there are so many who are quick to believe what they hear, not what they see. | ||||||
| 104 | Biliruben movin ID: 358252515 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 16:58 | What evidence would be sufficient? | ||||||
| 105 | boikin ID: 532592112 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 17:27 |
Re: 103 everyone likes to stand in front of checks not sure what that says. Kind of the problem here. You didn't really look. You're just guessing. Give it a look and there is a consensus on this, and you're on the other side of it. consensus on what that stimulus saved us or it created jobs or what? What evidence would be sufficient? good question since we can not rerun the past 2 years without the stimulus, evidence is hard to come by. So really all we have is speculation that this would have happened or that would have happened with out the stimulus. I guess the answer would be any evidence that is not based on speculation. show me examples of other economies in similar situation that did not have stimulus, how did they fair? Or show me models that that say had the X number of jobs created by stimulus not happened then Y would have resulted. My problem with the stimulus is that it does not address the basic problem with the US economy and that is that it is based on service industry jobs catering the consumption of products made in other countries. It does not address a population that needs to do with less not more. | ||||||
| 106 | biliruben ID: 461142511 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 17:38 |
I don't know if the CBO's models qualify as sufficient for you, but here they are anyway. See: USA, 1937 for what happens to an economy that has stimulus taken away prematurely. And see: USA, WW2 for the effect of massive stimulus and it's effect on employment and GDP. | ||||||
| 107 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 18:32 |
The conservative American Enterprise Institute is hardly a fan of Obama, and yet states that their analysis is that the Stimulus package boosted the US economy by 4%. Yeah, we can't turn the clock back. But we aren't without some good educated guesses. My problem with the stimulus is that it does not address the basic problem with the US economy I think your perception on the economy is dead on. But the stimulus isn't intended to address the long term economic problems. It was intended as a short term stimulation to keep the economy from tanking, coupled with long-term tax cuts for the middle class to put a little more money into the pockets of people. A jobs bill would be a better long-term strategy. | ||||||
| 108 | Mith ID: 58136177 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 19:40 | 106 is an exceptional post. | ||||||
| 109 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 21:08 |
Does anyone here actually know someone who acquired a private sector job attributable to the stimulous bill. [or porkulous bill as Rush calls it] My impression is that it was purely everyone in a new class of congress with their hand out for pork, with the perfect cover story as to why they were overspending this time. I'm sincere when I say, show me some real private sector jobs that were created. Where are all the construction workers busy completing all those advertised 'shovel ready projects'? Yes Razor, it's a perception thing, but it's each person's network of friends getting or not getting jobs that builds that perception as much as it is the MSM, healthy media or politicians. | ||||||
| 110 | biliruben ID: 16105237 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 21:55 |
Does anyone here actually know someone who acquired a private sector job attributable to the stimulous bill. Several, not that anecdotes mean danky. Gotta send your boys out here where the expansive-minded are building transit, alt. energy, ferries, bike paths, windmills etc... Get em' out of small-minded small-town bumblefuk Conservativeville, Il, and out where people live and think for the future and prosper. | ||||||
| 111 | Seattle Zen Leader ID: 055343019 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 22:39 |
Does anyone here actually know someone who acquired a private sector job attributable to the stimulous bill. What is the way Republicans believe that jobs are best created? Perhaps by cutting taxes so private industry can hire some good ol' Americans! YES! Oh, yeah, one third of the stimulus bill was tax cuts. So, either cutting taxes does not lead to private industry creating new jobs or perhaps a bunch of new jobs HAVE been created by those tax cuts and if the Republicans had their way, we would have more tax cuts and even MORE JOBS! So, did the tax cut create new jobs (just not as many as have been lost) or should we raise taxes since lower taxes don't do anything for job creation? | ||||||
| 112 | Seattle Zen Leader ID: 055343019 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 22:47 |
As for Sen. Bayh, I can't really say that America will be missing much. From Baldy's link: He won office not because of his positions on the issues but because he is a affable campaigner with a magic name — his far more liberal father, Birch Bayh, was one of the great senators of the 20th century and remains an iconic figure among Indiana Democrats. Is there really any difference between Sen. Bayh and Patrick Kennedy? Neither did very much while in office and were well known because of their father. | ||||||
| 113 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 23:29 |
Get em' out of small-minded small-town bumblefuk Conservativeville, Il, Um, they live in Minneapolis. | ||||||
| 114 | Boldwin ID: 2155174 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 23:35 | The town I live in was involved in some of the earliest coal miners' union activism in this country. We have a real card carrying communist in the house district to the west, boundary a mile from Peru. Debbie Halvorson in my district is about to lose her seat for voting for the healthcare bill tho. Not too many reliably conservative districts in B....k, Illinois. | ||||||
| 115 | biliruben ID: 16105237 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 23:47 |
No offense meant, B. Hopefully that was obviously tongue-in-cheek. I do think we need to look to the future and attempt to anticipate what's going to be driving our economy and the world economy 10, 20, 50 years from now. The dudes I am friends with who are getting stimulus money are pretty old-school economy dudes. Laying concrete, Heavy machinery operators building public works... that sort of thing. Not doing great, but they are pretty nimble and taking what work they can get. Bidding projects pretty close to the bone. Went down and spent a weekend down in rural Clark County down near St. Helens a couple weeks ago, close to where Zen had been plying his trade. Now that is a depressed land. Spent some time in the bars around there. Sons of lumberjacks who enjoyed the boom times contracting until the bubble burst. Smart, proud dudes, but with little work, just functional alcoholics losing their self-confidence and veering towards non-functional. Plenty of guys, boozing, fighting, getting the guns out, looking for an early grave. That area sorely needs stimulus. Massive unemployment. It's really hard on a man being unemployed for 15-18 months. | ||||||
| 116 | Tree ID: 248472317 Wed, Feb 17, 2010, 23:55 |
It's really hard on a man being unemployed for 15-18 months. amen. i was out of work 14 months before getting a job a few weeks back. i had 13 weeks of unemployment left. i was already wondering what i would do when that unemployment ran out. i can't imagine the mental drain of being out of work for even longer than i was. it's a cliche that money doesn't buy happiness, but when you have a good work ethic and you're not working, it is difficult in so many ways. so anything that creates jobs, i'm all for. | ||||||
| 117 | biliruben ID: 16105237 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 00:01 |
No doubt, Tree. No doubt. Just the first whiff of downsizing at my last gig scared me enough to jump ship to a safer job. | ||||||
| 118 | biliruben ID: 16105237 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 00:02 | Looking for work is 10 times easier when you are still employed. | ||||||
| 119 | Tree ID: 248472317 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 07:21 | amen. the difference between wanting another job and needing another job, is vast. | ||||||
| 120 | sarge33rd ID: 280311620 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 08:15 |
the difference between wanting another job and needing A Indeed it is Tree. | ||||||
| 121 | Frick ID: 54152814 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 08:35 |
Re: 112 I wouldn't disagree SZ. That is one of the reasons that I disagreed with Baldwin that Bayh wasn't going to be seriously challenged in the election. I do disagree that America won't be missing much. So, because Bayh was a Blue-dog Democrat, he won't be missed? I applaud a Senator that follows his constituents. Bayh not have been as liberal as his father, but I think that is a matter relativity. I'll admit that I don't a great deal about Birch Bayh, but my impression is that they were fairly similar in their stances. How many7 Senators do "much" while they are in office? | ||||||
| 122 | bibA ID: 01116297 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 08:47 |
We have a real card carrying communist in the house district to the west Only one in the area? Holy moly, that must be one hell of an extreme right wing bastion, considering that a majority of those in national office seem to fit your definition of communist. | ||||||
| 123 | boikin ID: 532592112 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 10:31 |
I don't know if the CBO's models qualify as sufficient for you, but here they are anyway. I stand corrected it worked, but lets actually run some numbers here, predicted increase in GDP 1.1 to 3.0% using the 270 billion as the amount spent and GDP of 14.2 trillion then the expected increase in GDP would be 1.9 trillion. so on the high side the stimulus had rate of return of 59% not bad, but on the low side you get rate of return of -42%. So, I stand corrected it worked, it boosted the economy. It still does not say that the economy was saved from a depression by stimulus. See: USA, 1937 for what happens to an economy that has stimulus taken away prematurely. I never said take the stimulus away I said they never should have had it in the first place. Of course you can expect bad things when you take away a stimulus. Ask a drug addict how with drawls feel. the point is never get addicted in the first place. And see: USA, WW2 for the effect of massive stimulus and it's effect on employment and GDP. I guess the fact that the US was pretty much the only industrial nation that had the capacity to produce goods at the end of the world had nothing do do with that. I think when you are given a monopoly on production capacity your economy better grow. | ||||||
| 124 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 10:45 |
To be technical, boikin, we are in a depression. The government changed the name after the Great Depression so that smaller economic downturns wouldn't bring back memories of the Great Depression--now the smaller downturns are "recessions" even though the exact same activity pre-1929 was called a "depression. As to your point, a contracting economy vs one growing at 3% means fewer jobs, less economic demand, shrinking savings, and even more stress in the labor market. Virtually everything would be worse. Would it be disastrous? Probably not (unless it was your job that was lost). But it would be much, much worse, and make recovery that much more difficult to take root. | ||||||
| 125 | Razor ID: 57854118 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 10:53 | The stimulus was just one tactic in a strategy that needed to be employed to save the economy. The bank bailout was another. An upcoming jobs bill is yet another. Looking at just the stimulus and trying to determine if it, in and of itself, helped stave off the second Great Depression is an incomplete analysis. You need to look at all the government intervention that took place. Once you do, the picture is pretty clear. We were headed for a recession much worse than this one and the massive spending, as objectionable as it seemed at the time, saved us from that. | ||||||
| 126 | Perm Dude ID: 5510572522 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:16 |
Exactly. I've got some buddies of mine here, proud teabaggers to a man, who are loudly complaining about the size of the deficit and posting articles about how we're setting records and the government is out of control and so on. I liken it to when you lose your job and have to charge groceries on your credit card. It is a good thing? No. Do you want to do it long-term (or even medium term)? No way. But you do what you have to do to survive first. Some of these tea baggers want us to pay off the debt with food money. | ||||||
| 127 | DWetzel at work ID: 49962710 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:28 | After raiding our fridge, of course. | ||||||
| 128 | boikin ID: 532592112 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:34 |
PD to be technical there is no official definition for a depression. so yes we could be in depression right now and technically we are not in recession as it ended months ago. PD have you ever considered that maybe things would be better if they were worse now? which would be better long term stagnation or bad now and good later. I understand that human mind has problems correctly discounting future values by over weighing present value, never mind. thanks Razor for your opinion but that is not evidence that economy was going to fail with out government intervention. I mean had I not put my lucky socks on this morning I would have been hit by a car. The point still is all you have conjecture and opinion on what would have happened. That is all anyone has, so do not treat things as facts, when they are not. | ||||||
| 129 | Tree ID: 23143812 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:42 |
proud teabaggers to a man eh, i'd rather be a proud teabagger to a woman, but to each his own. I liken it to when you lose your job and have to charge groceries on your credit card. It is a good thing? No. Do you want to do it long-term (or even medium term)? No way. But you do what you have to do to survive first. this was absolutely the worst part about being out of work for so long. I screwed my credit up in my 20s and my early 30s. i spent a long time slowly but surely whittling that credit card debt down to where i actually saw the end in sight, projecting my credit cards to all be zeroed out within the next 14 to 18 months. then i lost my job, and most of my cards are right back there, higher than they ever were before. | ||||||
| 130 | Pancho Villa ID: 29118157 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:56 |
Some of these tea baggers want us to pay off the debt with food money. Tea baggers are only concerned with the debt because Obama and the Democrats hold sway over the government. Otherwise they'd be applauding Obama's efforts in this area. Determined to have a deficit commission with or without Congress' backing, President Barack Obama plans to announce on Thursday that he is establishing a panel similar to — although weaker than — the one lawmakers rejected. Former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles and former Republican Senate Whip Alan Simpson would lead the panel, a senior administration official said Tuesday. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because the president's executive order creating the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform had not been announced. Obama's version of the commission is a weak substitute for what he really wanted: a panel created by Congress that could force lawmakers to consider unpopular remedies to reduce the debt, including curbing politically sensitive entitlements like Social Security and Medicare. As rejected, the bipartisan 18-member panel would have worked for much of the year and, if 14 members agree, report a deficit reduction blueprint after the November elections that would be voted on before the new Congress convenes next year. The 14 would have to include at least half of the panel's Republicans. That idea crashed in the Senate, defeated by equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans — some of whom initially supported the idea. Of course one of the main principles of tea baggers is to not support Obama on anything, regardless of whether it makes sense for the country or not. And these people have the gall to paint themselves as patriotic. They're simply ultra-partisans whose real leaders are Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, cult of personality pundits whose main goal is to make as much money as possible before their 15 minutes of fame is up. | ||||||
| 131 | Tree ID: 23143812 Thu, Feb 18, 2010, 11:57 | one thing i think is getting missed in all this discussion - by the media, and by the rest of us - is that there are actually more retiring Republicans than Democrats in the House, and more retiring Republicans than Democrats in the Senate as well. | ||||||
| If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Post a reply to this message: | ||||||||