• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Clinton Email Problem

PhDeac said:
The Republicans had impeached Clinton at this point in his presidency. Only through the lens of history did they admit he did a good job.

Wrangor, what has Obama done to be divisive?
Click to expand...

You keep being you PH. Only you would ask that question.
 
deacvision7 said:
She is LITERALLY a man?!?!
Click to expand...

HAHA. Alright, you got me. That is my wife's pet peeve, when someone says 'literally' and then makes an analogy. I would neg rep myself if I could. You are welcome to do the favor. I have earned it :). Posrep to you sir.
 
deacvision7 said:
If it is such a silly question then you should have no problem answering it instead of deflecting.
Click to expand...

Alright, he crafted an a massive, game changing piece of legislation without any significant input from Republicans. He called a meeting to obtain opinions on the healthcare act, televised it, and the summarily dismissed every opinion that the Republicans offered. ACA was then voted on without a single Republican Yes vote, and put into law. I think that was a pretty poor start to crafting a cooperative effort between the two parties.

And that has pretty much been the MO ever since. Talk about cooperation, and then instead drop the hammer.

Your turn. When has he worked with and acquiesced to Republican policy?
 
Wrangor said:
Alright, he crafted an a massive, game changing piece of legislation without any significant input from Republicans. He called a meeting to obtain opinions on the healthcare act, televised it, and the summarily dismissed every opinion that the Republicans offered. ACA was then voted on without a single Republican Yes vote, and put into law. I think that was a pretty poor start to crafting a cooperative effort between the two parties.

And that has pretty much been the MO ever since. Talk about cooperation, and then instead drop the hammer.

Your turn. When has he worked with and acquiesced to Republican policy?
Click to expand...

That's narrative. He begged for Republican cooperation to draw up bipartisan legislation. The whole bill was based on Republican ideas. Republicans stayed partisan so the Democrats had to go alone. You all can't seem to explain why it took so long to pass ACA if it was decided from the start to do it without the Republicans. Republicans never committed to working with Obama on health care reform. They did everything they could do stonewall it. They still don't have an idea.

The whole knock on Obama from the left is that Obama started negotiating by acquiescing and then Republicans pulled him over too far which made any bipartisan agreement impossible.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
so the answer to the question is: being the president
Click to expand...

Basically yes. The President worked with his party to put forth legislation like a president is supposed to do.
 
And this is why I knew it was useless to discuss this issue. You have your interpretation, I have mine. Neither of us is going to move. So I will repeat. You keep being you PH. I don't expect you to change your mind on whether Obama is partisan, and I don't see me changing mine. Being that I voted for Obama and then was confronted with the discord between his campaign rhetoric of inclusiveness and his actions as president, I tend to feel I have a pretty decent handle on the divisiveness of his policies. I crossed over and voted for a moderate candidate, and he almost immediately turned into a partisan president. Congress hasn't helped, but he has done almost nothing to to bridge the gap in a meaningful manner. Obama's motto for his president should be "It's not my fault", because that is pretty much his claim on everything. He chose to be partisan and get done what he wanted to get done when he had the power. Turns out that when you do that, and run over your political counterparts, they aren't so willing to meet in the middle when you have lost your power superiority and actually need their votes and cooperation. Crazy how that works. We are politically divided and both sides are equally to blame.
 
If someone can plausibly lay out an argument for the GOP willing to compromise beyond merely saying "we would have compromised" in hindsight after gridlock happened I will be happy to hear it. I don't think that was ever going to happen.

Obama said his number one priority was health care and when he was elected he....passed a comprehensive health care plan. GOP got mad it wasn't their plan or what they wanted so they threw a hissy fit
 
The GOP is never interested in compromise when they are the minority party.
 
DeacWatcher said:
When faced with the GOP potentially holding all 3 branches of government, I doubt they'll stay home.
Click to expand...


Exactly. Look at Kansas if anyone needs a preview of how the GOP would govern if they could. Brownback is a Koch puppet and does exactly what he's told. Mike Pence pandered to social conservatives and every 2016 GOP wannabe fell all over themselves trying to praise Pence. Not a word from any of the lap dogs after everything exploded. Bobby Jindal watched the whole sad saga and wants to one up AZ, IN, and AR while chastising corporate America to get on board. When Wal-Mart and NASCAR tell you to back down, you're nowhere near the center.

When, exactly, is a GOP presidential candidate going to stop pandering to the far right and take rational pragmatic centrist positions that appeal to the vast middle of the Amrtican electorate? Their belief is that HRC is such damaged goods that all they have to do is win the GOP primary and face a general election cakewalk. Quickest path to that goal is to move as far right as possible and ignore everyone to the left of Scott Walker.
 
Having someone moderate as a Republican just means they "compromised their values." There are too many true believers on the far right for that to catch on in 2015. I mean a large portion of the Republican party doesn't accept evolution or climate change. That's about all you need to know about the current ideological makeup of the party.
 
Wrangor said:
And this is why I knew it was useless to discuss this issue. You have your interpretation, I have mine. Neither of us is going to move. So I will repeat. You keep being you PH. I don't expect you to change your mind on whether Obama is partisan, and I don't see me changing mine. Being that I voted for Obama and then was confronted with the discord between his campaign rhetoric of inclusiveness and his actions as president, I tend to feel I have a pretty decent handle on the divisiveness of his policies. I crossed over and voted for a moderate candidate, and he almost immediately turned into a partisan president. Congress hasn't helped, but he has done almost nothing to to bridge the gap in a meaningful manner. Obama's motto for his president should be "It's not my fault", because that is pretty much his claim on everything. He chose to be partisan and get done what he wanted to get done when he had the power. Turns out that when you do that, and run over your political counterparts, they aren't so willing to meet in the middle when you have lost your power superiority and actually need their votes and cooperation. Crazy how that works. We are politically divided and both sides are equally to blame.
Click to expand...

OK.

But did Obama not get elected on a platform of bringing a reform to health care in this country? That was one of his main campaign promises on what he would do if elected President in 2007/08. Then he was elected with a pretty significant majority in both the popular vote and the electoral college, so, I would argue, he had a mandate from the American people to lead in order to get his policies passed. He had loads of political capital and he used them to get health care reformed.

The half sad/half funny thing to me is that he capitulated a bit on the health care front trying to get Republicans to sign on. His plan was based off a plan that a Republican governor did, for instance. Obama could have tried to pass a single-payer system instead of trying to reach some kind of compromise with the Republicans in the House/Senate. Personally, I wish he would have done that.

I guess I personally struggle to see how a President elected with a 53%-46% popular vote advantage (from over 130 million votes) and a 365 (68%) to 173 (32%) Electoral College advantage as not having a blessing from the electorate to get some campaign promises done. I think your argument would be stronger if Obama won it in a close race with McCain but he blew him out of the water. The American people decided they wanted Obama and his policies to be followed.
 
Wrangor said:
And this is why I knew it was useless to discuss this issue. You have your interpretation, I have mine. Neither of us is going to move. So I will repeat. You keep being you PH. I don't expect you to change your mind on whether Obama is partisan, and I don't see me changing mine. Being that I voted for Obama and then was confronted with the discord between his campaign rhetoric of inclusiveness and his actions as president, I tend to feel I have a pretty decent handle on the divisiveness of his policies. I crossed over and voted for a moderate candidate, and he almost immediately turned into a partisan president. Congress hasn't helped, but he has done almost nothing to to bridge the gap in a meaningful manner. Obama's motto for his president should be "It's not my fault", because that is pretty much his claim on everything. He chose to be partisan and get done what he wanted to get done when he had the power. Turns out that when you do that, and run over your political counterparts, they aren't so willing to meet in the middle when you have lost your power superiority and actually need their votes and cooperation. Crazy how that works. We are politically divided and both sides are equally to blame.
Click to expand...

+1
 
So Wrangor's main take is that Republicans were reasonable because they think that an opposition president that they tried to have impeached did a good job?
 
just because somebody has different ideas than you doesn't mean that person is divisive. some of you act like you're 10 years old.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top