The Obama Re-Election Economic Fallout

[Smallc]

Aint that the thing. Sharkman refuses to accept the REPUBLICAN congress has a role to play.

It's completely outrageous that they just ignored his offer today. He didn't want anything in return, he just wanted them to extend tax cuts for 98% of people, but nope.

[cybercoma]

Completely outrageous is right. The GOP are going to destroy the economy again and blame it on Obama.

[bush_cheney2004]

President Obama can raise taxes on the rich by doing absolutely nothing. Tax cuts will turn into pumpkins on New Years' Day.

[dre]

It's completely outrageous that they just ignored his offer today. He didn't want anything in return, he just wanted them to extend tax cuts for 98% of people, but nope.

He needs to do a heavy media blitz and make sure those 98% of Americans know that the GOP is trying to raise their taxes.

[bush_cheney2004]

That's OK...taxes need to be raised. The party is over.

[Pliny]

Shady,

There are only two measures now: The US CPI and the US dollar exchange rate.

-----

Unfortunately, the US CPI will likely remain flat.

The exchange rate may change. (If you're a Canadian planning to buy a condo in Arizona or Florida, wait. The US dollar may soon fall.)

If you're American, who cares... does it matter?

How does the US dollar fall and the CPI remain flat? Unless it is based on food stamps.

[sharkman]

The DOW dropped about 240 points on Tuesday Wednesday, and so far today it's down 62 points. I know that both sides have a part to play on this, but the buck does stop with the president. He should have known when he punted the expiry of the tax cuts to Jan 1, that he was making a dubious gamble, hoping the majority in Congress would change hands. It didn't, and now he has a lame duck Congress, a looming deadline, and a sinking DOW. Way to go Obama.

[Smallc]

The DOW dropped about 240 points on Tuesday Wednesday, and so far today it's down 62 points. I know that both sides have a part to play on this, but the buck does stop with the president.

No actually, it doesn't, because he's already proposed at least a partial solution, and the Republican response was to ignore it.

He should have known when he punted the expiry of the tax cuts to Jan 1, that he was making a dubious gamble, hoping the majority in Congress would change hands. It didn't, and now he has a lame duck Congress, a looming deadline, and a sinking DOW. Way to go Obama.

Except that the fiscal cliff was never supposed to happen. He and Boener had a deal. It isn't Obama's fault that Boener couldn't deliver the crazies in his party. It isn't Obama's fault that everyone on the right signed on to the retarded Norquist pledge. Obama is trying to solve the problem. The Republicans are doing nothing but putting up road blocks. Did you know that by total vote, the Democrats actually won the House, and that only gerrymandering saved the Republicans? The Republican house doesn't have a mandate to do anything. The Republicans lost, and they should be willing to compromise. The President is willing to meet them more than half way, and they aren't even willing to extend the tax cuts for 98% of Americans.

[bush_cheney2004]

The Republicans did not lose the House. Just in case one needs a reminder, the U.S. Constitution still applies, even for President Obama.

[Smallc]

The Republicans should have lost the house. Only the fact that they controlled the state legislatures kept it for them.

[TimG]

Did you know that by total vote, the Democrats actually won the House, and that only gerrymandering saved the Republicans?

Complete BS. As general rule, you cannot gerrymander a riding to give a republican a seat without giving another to a democrat. The main reason for differences in national vote is the larger states and larger cities are under-represented - just like in Canada and ever other democracy in a geographically large country.

[bush_cheney2004]

The Republicans should have lost the house. Only the fact that they controlled the state legislatures kept it for them.

...and just why would they control more states? Maybe because the voters said so? Just a thought....

[sharkman]

No actually, it doesn't, because he's already proposed at least a partial solution, and the Republican response was to ignore it.

Except that the fiscal cliff was never supposed to happen. He and Boener had a deal. It isn't Obama's fault that Boener couldn't deliver the crazies in his party. It isn't Obama's fault that everyone on the right signed on to the retarded Norquist pledge. Obama is trying to solve the problem. The Republicans are doing nothing but putting up road blocks. Did you know that by total vote, the Democrats actually won the House, and that only gerrymandering saved the Republicans? The Republican house doesn't have a mandate to do anything. The Republicans lost, and they should be willing to compromise. The President is willing to meet them more than half way, and they aren't even willing to extend the tax cuts for 98% of Americans.

Well you've got your Dem talking points down pat, good job by the way. But let me ask you this, what should Obama do now?

Edited November 15, 2012 by sharkman

[Smallc]

Complete BS. As general rule, you cannot gerrymander a riding to give a republican a seat without giving another to a democrat.

Actually, that isn't true. You can definitely influence the way that the seats are distributed, and to say otherwise is the complete BS. The house seat totals would have been much closer without gerrymandering. The fact that the only part of the legislative branch that the Republicans won was won with less vote than the Democrats got in that branch should at least give the Republicans in the House pause. They lost the Presidential election. They lost seats in the Senate. They lost the popular vote in the house. They lost, and if they don't change they're attitude, they're going to lose even bigger next time.

[Smallc]

Well you've got your Dem talking points down pat, good job by the way. But let me ask you this, what should Obama do now?

Obama's already offered an initial solution. Now it's up to those on the other side to either accept it or reject, instead of just outright ignoring it.

This by the way is information from media reports. I don't care what the talking points are.

[bush_cheney2004]

Tax the rich people....everybody else gets SNAP benefits (food stamps) !

[Smallc]

But I see someone has their talking points in line.

[sharkman]

So Obama should just do nothing until those dastardly Reps get back to him?

In another post I mentioned that Obama is no good at horse trading, or the political game. So far he's proving me right.

[TimG]

Actually, that isn't true. You can definitely influence the way that the seats are distributed

All you can do is create safe seats - some for democrat and some for republican. If you are lucky you might be get an extras seat or two in entire state. In any case, gerrymandering is practiced by both parties in the US so the net effect on congress is not necessarily going to favour one party. Edited November 15, 2012 by TimG

[Shady]

Obama's already offered an initial solution. Now it's up to those on the other side to either accept it or reject, instead of just outright ignoring it.

This by the way is information from media reports. I don't care what the talking points are.

He's offered nothing substantial. Raising the top rate back to what it was gets you $70 billion dollars. The annual Obama deficit is over a trillion. Do the math Einstein.

[Smallc]

All you can do is create safe seats - one for democrat and one for republican. You have downgraded your claim from 'lost the house' to 'results will be closer'. I suspect your claim is sour grapes on the part of democrats rather than a factual statement.

It's something that I've heard more than once since that night, and you're still wrong. You can configure the districts in such that there are more places where Republicans can win. The seats that were safe Democrats before become even more safe.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Smallc

[Smallc]

He's offered nothing substantial. Raising the top rate back to what it was gets you $70 billion dollars. The annual Obama deficit is over a trillion. Do the math Einstein.

We're not talking about eliminating the deficit here, we're talking about avoiding the worst part of the fiscal cliff...do try to keep up.

So Obama should just do nothing until those dastardly Reps get back to him?

He can't do anything without them. If they're going to ignore his offer and not even bother to respond, what's he to do?

In another post I mentioned that Obama is no good at horse trading, or the political game. So far he's proving me right.

Obama's problem is that he's far too accommodating to the other side that won't work with him anyway.

[dre]

He's offered nothing substantial. Raising the top rate back to what it was gets you $70 billion dollars. The annual Obama deficit is over a trillion. Do the math Einstein.

Hes offering 4 trillion dollars over 10 years, 1.6 trillion in new revenue from tax hikes on the top 2%, and from raising tax on capital gains and dividends from 15% to 20%. The other 2.4 trillion will come from spending cuts.

Its actually a pretty moderate and sensible proposal.

At this point the economy probably cannot bear any defecit reduction plan more aggressive than that.

Edited November 15, 2012 by dre

[dre]

We're not talking about eliminating the deficit here, we're talking about avoiding the worst part of the fiscal cliff...do try to keep up.

I sorta liked Warren buffets take on that. Let the fiscal cliff happen, and then address the consequences in the months following that. Look... the reality is that the only way anything is going to get passed right now, is if its EXACTLY what the republicans want. If theres even a single provision in a proposal that they dont like, they will simply block it.

Obama should frame his latest proposal as take it or leave it, and then let America watch republican obstruction result in across the board tax hikes and spending cuts.

[Smallc]

Hes offering 4 trillion dollars over 10 years, 1.6 trillion in new revenue from tax hikes on the top 2%, and from raising tax on capital gains and dividends from 15% to 20%. The other 2.4 trillion will come from spending cuts.

Don't bring facts into this argument...ha

Its actually a pretty moderate and sensible proposal.

At this point the economy probably cannot bear any defecit reduction plan more aggressive than that.

That's right. But it's far easier to stick your fingers in your ears and yell about how Obama isn't doing anything, and that he has no proposal to avoid the fiscal cliff.

I mean, when the Republican leadership can come out, and pretend that Obama didn't just offered to extend tax cuts for 98% of Americans while asking for nothing else....