The Obama Re-Election Economic Fallout

[BubberMiley]

It does give me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside that the reason the Republcans lost the election was precisely because their reality was confined to the conservative media bubble. They believed their own deluded polling. They based their convention on a misrepresentation of Obama's words. They decided Benghazi was not an attack on America; it was a scandal by Americans. And the best of all--the clincher that caused Romney to lose--was Mitt stammering about an incorrect factoid he heard on FoxNews and being facepalmed with "Please proceed, Governor."

Fortunately, every indication since the election suggests they've learned absolutely nothing and will continue with this very losing strategy.

[dre]

What spending cuts? And I'm just telling you the facts. Raising the top rate back to what it was gets you $70 billion dollars per year. Obama's deficits are over a trillion.

Thats not all thats being proposed though, its only part of it.

[Smallc]

....

Edited November 17, 2012 by Smallc

[BubberMiley]

But now that John McCain has gone over the edge, I can't help thinking how things went remarkably right when Obama was elected in 2008. I don't want to imagine what a demented, delusional President McCain with Vice President Palin in the wings would have been like.

[WIP]

I just want to point out that Politico is still keeping a running tally of the vote count....because it's not over yet! There are still results trickling in from some of the holdouts....likely the Republican-dominated states like Florida and Wisconsin, where they've been busy trying to dump and disqualify ballots in Democratic-leaning districts. This is why clowns like Rove, Dick Morris and some of the other Dicks with inside connections thought that Romney was going to squeak by with a win....they thought they had this one fixed! And it should also be noted that if you count the vote totals on that page linked above (current as of yesterday) Obama's vote total is almost 3% higher than Romney's...not 1% or 2%, or whatever Foxnoise is reporting lately. And, of course, that's not including whatever votes the Repubs managed to disqualify.

And before I forget -- the constant, driving meme on right wing media...which has filtered through on most of the MSM is that Obama doesn't have a CLEAR mandate to govern, and needs a bipartisan budget deal. But, of course, there was no such talk back when Dubya became President after losing the popular vote and even with vote-rigging in Ohio in 2004, only managed to win by 3% over John Kerry. Translation in English: Obama needs to sell out the Democratic base and cut Medicare and Social Security, so that taxes can be kept low for the rich, and there will be lots of money for the bankers and military contractors to play with! The sad thing is that the Obama Administration is making all the right noises to indicate that will agree to such a "Grand Bargain," as long as they are provided a figleaf, like allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire on millionaires and billionaires. There have been a number of independent polls in the last two years indicating that the majority of Americans are to the left of BOTH parties on economic issues; but unfortunately 99% of the media just regurgitates the talking points that the billionaires want them to present to the public! If the U.S. had a true democratic system, there would be lots of third parties coming up and challenging the two majors....rather than living on the margins, shut out from the process.

And just like the last election and the one before that, the top-heavy Democratic Party takes little or no interest in combating vote stealing and voter machine rigging after the election, as long as they've won the important offices! The Democrats should have a grassroots organization to match the Republicans -- and they would, if they weren't so busy trying to shut them down after each election. The only reason Obama won, and they increased their lead in the Senate (getting rid of some blue dogs and bringing in true progressives) is because of certain minorities who were outraged by increasingly blatant and publicly acknowledged Republican vote-stealing attempts, that they went that extra mile to get their votes counted.

But, the Democratic backlash failed to make much of a dent on the Lower House because Republicans dominate the local politics in so many states across the U.S. They gerrymandered more districts in 2010 to protect seats they feared losing in a close election. One of them was Paul Ryan's seat! An analyst on Wisconsin Public Radio declared last week that if Paul Ryan was still running in the boundaries of his district prior to 2010, he would have lost his seat in the House! And that's what Democrats could have accomplished if they were a real progressive political party, and not just one that talks left and carries out big business interests once they are safely back in office!

Edited November 17, 2012 by WIP