Washington Post: "Opposition to Obama Grows" & New Post/ABC Poll

[pourdeac]

It's not only coincidence, it's dicta. Look to the economy on October 1, 2012, and you'll have your winner.

It's dicta? The point is a move by the Dems/Obama, one that is now viewed as unethical by most and not favored by most, caused economic problems as was feared by the critics. I don't see how they can run away from that.

Not favored by most.
Probably unconstitutional.
Unethically passed.
Hurt the economy in a major way.

That is what the Reps will run on, regardless of the candidate.

 

[TR1982]

His jobs plan is an EXCELLENT an POSITIVE step. A big majority of Americans agree with his jobs bill.

His approval rating is 300% of those who are blocking it for the express purpose of knowing that if the passes he wins re-election. The GOP would have millions of Americans suffer and Obama lose than help Americans and Obmaa win.

Wow. You seem very sure that this bill will put the country back on track. Have you actually read it? How can you be so sure of the effects it will have?

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

His jobs plan is an EXCELLENT an POSITIVE step. A big majority of Americans agree with his jobs bill.

His approval rating is 300% of those who are blocking it for the express purpose of knowing that if the passes he wins re-election. The GOP would have millions of Americans suffer and Obama lose than help Americans and Obmaa win.

He also said that his first Stimulus was excellent and a positive step, and he was shown to be a fool on that one. He doesn't get too many do-overs with that type of stuff.

 

[RJKarl]

Once again you think something must be ALL or NOTHING. This is a GOOD piece of the puzzle. It's meant to be a start not the entire fix.

I have not read the entire 199 pages, but I have read some sections.

The GOP has produced NOTHING that wil lcreate a single job. This put a lot of people to work and keeps them working.

It's a start. If you holding out for something that fixes everything or do notihng, then you are putting us on the road to a depression.

 

[RJKarl]

He also said that his first Stimulus was excellent and a positive step, and he was shown to be a fool on that one. He doesn't get too many do-overs with that type of stuff.

Only to RWers and those who are ignorant of reality.

 

[TR1982]

Once again you think something must be ALL or NOTHING. This is a GOOD piece of the puzzle. It's meant to be a start not the entire fix.

I have not read the entire 199 pages, but I have read some sections.

The GOP has produced NOTHING that wil lcreate a single job. This put a lot of people to work and keeps them working.

It's a start. If you holding out for something that fixes everything or do notihng, then you are putting us on the road to a depression.

I'm not holding out for something that will fix everything. I would really like to know how this bill is going to keep people working, though.

 

[ncsportsnut1]

His jobs plan is an EXCELLENT an POSITIVE step. A big majority of Americans agree with his jobs bill.

His approval rating is 300% of those who are blocking it for the express purpose of knowing that if the passes he wins re-election. The GOP would have millions of Americans suffer and Obama lose than help Americans and Obmaa win.

Well then I guess Harry Reid is in deep shit for blocking the jobs plan RJ. He's the one who won't schedule a debate or a vote because a bunch of Dem senators oppose Obama's jobs plan. Quit blaming the Republicans for Dems bailout out on Obama's excuse for policy.

 

[RJKarl]

The GOP leadership of the House said it is DOA. There's no sense in having a vote in the Senate.

However, Jeanne Sheheen (D-NH) says a vote may be coming soon.

The Dems are now proposing a 5% surtax on all earnings over $1M rather than the President's tax plan.

 

[DeacMan]

Running on a platform of "if only Congress would listen to me" is not a strong platform when the Senate won't even put the bill up for a vote and is controlled by your own party. Neither is threatening a veto if you don't get your way when the other side has signalled there are parts of your bill they would accept. And both of those things have happened.

What we have right now is just a lot more of the same - namely a lot of political posturing. Both sides are doing it - and the President is the offender in chief at present as he wants to get a "populist" message out to his base.

 

[ArlingtonDeac]

It's dicta? The point is a move by the Dems/Obama, one that is now viewed as unethical by most and not favored by most, caused economic problems as was feared by the critics. I don't see how they can run away from that.

Not favored by most.
Probably unconstitutional.
Unethically passed.
Hurt the economy in a major way.

That is what the Reps will run on, regardless of the candidate.

HC did not cause the current economic problems. The lingering fallout from 2008, combined with the problems in European markets, did. To equate the second period of stagnation to the passage of HC reform is to simply look at a calendar, draw a false conclusion, and use it for political advantage.

Polls differ wildly on favorability of HC reform, depending on the phrasing.
The bill is almost certainly constitutional based on precedent (ask Scalia).
it was passed using the same method used to pass legislation by the prior administration.
It didn't not hurt the economy in any appreciable way--the major provisions aren't even in effect--but it is being as cover for corporate America to avoid creating jobs they've discovered they don't need or want.

The GOP will certainly run on that idea, but it won't hold up. And it won't matter a bit if a recover starts in January and continues through October of 2012. Thus, dicta.

 

[ArlingtonDeac]

He also said that his first Stimulus was excellent and a positive step, and he was shown to be a fool on that one. He doesn't get too many do-overs with that type of stuff.

Not true. It most definitely worked, but the effects leveled off when the stimulus ended.

 

[ArlingtonDeac]

Running on a platform of "if only Congress would listen to me" is not a strong platform when the Senate won't even put the bill up for a vote and is controlled by your own party. Neither is threatening a veto if you don't get your way when the other side has signalled there are parts of your bill they would accept. And both of those things have happened.

What we have right now is just a lot more of the same - namely a lot of political posturing. Both sides are doing it - and the President is the offender in chief at present as he wants to get a "populist" message out to his base.

This would hold more weight if the GOP ever actually proposed any plans. But they'd prefer to do nothing, block Obama, and elongate the downturn so that they have a better shot at elections next fall. It's politics trumping duty.

 

[Milhouse]

hope and change, motherfuckers

 

[TR1982]

Not true. It most definitely worked, but the effects leveled off when the stimulus ended.

That chart could not be more misleading. It takes as a central premise that inaction would preserve the status quo, when we all know that is not true. The fact that the recovery began once Obama took office is coincidental. Whoever made it seems to have conveniently forgotten that one of the "Republican policies" (passed by an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature, by the way) was the February 2008 Economic Stimulus Act.

Everything you claim that chart shows can be attributed to confounding variables, and I'm pretty sure you know that. Job losses due to the recession were going to take that form regardless of who was in the White House, it's a classic V-shaped recession.

 

[RJKarl]

there was nothnig to say that things wouldn't have gotten worse and that we hadn't yet reached the bottom of the V.

 

[DeacMan]

This would hold more weight if the GOP ever actually proposed any plans. But they'd prefer to do nothing, block Obama, and elongate the downturn so that they have a better shot at elections next fall. It's politics trumping duty.

Eh. I think that's pretty much bullshit. Both sides are playing games.

It is pretty disingenuous to pin this on one side.

The Republicans thought they had a deal with the President on cuts. He yanked it. A bill still was passed without any significant help from him.

The House passed a proposed budget. The Senate hasn't managed to do that in over two years. Ryan proposed a real plan before anyone.

The fact the President has proposed a disingenuous plan he knows can't get passed - look no further than the Senate - shouldn't get him any more credit than cut, crap and balance.

The fact is both sides are not being genuine about meeting each other. And the game they are playing is about who is being less genuine. In turn it sucks for all of us.

 

[RJKarl]

Eh. I think that's pretty much bullshit. Both sides are playing games.

It is pretty disingenuous to pin this on one side.

The Republicans thought they had a deal with the President on cuts. He yanked it. A bill still was passed without any significant help from him.

Wribg! Obama went back to the plan that was proposed. Boehner said no.

The House passed a proposed budget. The Senate hasn't managed to do that in over two years. Ryan proposed a real plan before anyone.

Ryan's is not close to being a viable plan. It ends Medicare and shifts the tax burdn to the middle class and below. Saying it's a "real plan" is like saying walking into a Rolls dealership with $500 is making a real offer on a car.

The fact the President has proposed a disingenuous plan he knows can't get passed - look no further than the Senate - shouldn't get him any more credit than cut, crap and balance.

Actually it looks like Reid has come up with a tweak that will pass the Senate.

The fact is both sides are not being genuine about meeting each other. And the game they are playing is about who is being less genuine. In turn it sucks for all of us.

The original Stimulus Bill was about 40% what the GOP had asked for. When you are totally out of power to be offered that much of your plan is quite "genuine".
RE: the current jobs plan-once again most of it had been proposed by the GOP.

Just like the individual madate in the HC plan was the cornerstone of the GOP 90s HC plan. But now the same people who loved it then are saying it's unconstitutional now.

 

[DeacMan]

The original Stimulus Bill was about 40% what the GOP had asked for. When you are totally out of power to be offered that much of your plan is quite "genuine".
RE: the current jobs plan-once again most of it had been proposed by the GOP.

Just like the individual madate in the HC plan was the cornerstone of the GOP 90s HC plan. But now the same people who loved it then are saying it's unconstitutional now.

And most people think this "jobs" plan is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Yet somehow that's "sincere".

The problem with Washington, again, is that neither side is being sincere.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

The bill is almost certainly constitutional based on precedent (ask Scalia).
it was passed using the same method used to pass legislation by the prior administration.

Holy shit, again with the Scalia garbage? The dissent that you keep alluding to in no way addresses the situation at hand and could not be utilized as any sort of binding precedent.

 

[pourdeac]

HC did not cause the current economic problems. The lingering fallout from 2008, combined with the problems in European markets, did. To equate the second period of stagnation to the passage of HC reform is to simply look at a calendar, draw a false conclusion, and use it for political advantage.

Polls differ wildly on favorability of HC reform, depending on the phrasing.
The bill is almost certainly constitutional based on precedent (ask Scalia).
it was passed using the same method used to pass legislation by the prior administration.
It didn't not hurt the economy in any appreciable way--the major provisions aren't even in effect--but it is being as cover for corporate America to avoid creating jobs they've discovered they don't need or want.

The GOP will certainly run on that idea, but it won't hold up. And it won't matter a bit if a recover starts in January and continues through October of 2012. Thus, dicta.

If ObamaCare is being used as some sort of devious cover to avoid creating jobs (and more profits BTW) then how can it's passage be arbitrarily looking at a calendar and drawing a false conclusion?????? You are stating a cause and effect of ObamaCare and then claiming it had no cause and effect.

And even if you want to believe that ObamaCare is being used as a devious cover by corps to stop economic activity, shouldn't Obama have known that such a cause and effect would occur? Critics were predicting such an effect and it's still a negative consequence is it not?

The fact is, the economic recovery reversed upon its passage. Businesses have stated exactly why they changed behaviors, and it's very logical. Never before had such a major piece of legislation been passed in the manner it was passed, and with most people not favoring it or it being favored by slight majorities (at the time which have now eroded). It has gotten less favorable over time given all the stupid provisions in it.

Fatal error just north of Arlington. The 4th Turning of the New Deal moves on.