... Gallup’s survey — and some other generic ballot polls — are still polling registered rather than likely voters, whereas its polls of likely voters are generally more reliable in midterm elections. At FiveThirtyEight, we’ve found that the gap between registered and likely voter polls this year is about 4 points in the Republicans’ favor — so a 10-point lead in a registered voter poll is the equivalent of about 14 points on a likely-voter basis.
August 31, 2010
Seriously? The GOP has a 10-point lead on the generic ballot? Actually, it's more like a 14-point lead.
After trying to minimize the 10-point lead — "probably an outlier of sorts"— Nate Silver delivers the bad news to NYT readers:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
137 comments:
I so wish Obama was running for re-election this year. Oh well, by 2012 he'll be so far behind the eight ball he probably won't even bother with a campaign.
(the Crypto-Jew)
Let me take this opportunity to tell you pay no attention to data or polls. Nancy Pelosi will remain Speaker and Harry Reid will remain Majority Floor Leader. Republicans are hated. Democrats are loved or at least less hated by the public. 2010 Democratic ascendance. 2012 Democratic ascendance. 2016 is the earliest you can expect a GOP comeback, if then.
And if my prognosis is incorrect, then you all will know the REPUBLICANS STOLE THE 2010 MID-TERMS.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
When the Demos are already conceding the House and wondering if the drapes in the Senate are going to change, it's time to ditch the talk of Recovery Summer and start worrying how they'll spin it when the Dow goes to 5 grand.
Gallup like to talk to as broad a sample as possible, Rasmussen talks to likely voters exclusively. And Rasmussen is usually right
Well, it ain't nobody's fault but our own
Still, at least we might could show the good sense
To know when we've been wrong
And it's already taken too long
So we bring it to a stop
Then we take it from the top
We let it settle on down softly
Like your gently falling snow
Or let it tumble down and topple
Like the temple long ago
Let it fall down, let it fall down
Let it all fall down
- JT
I don't understand this. Obama won on a wave of Hope and Change. Democrats overwhelmingly took over Congress because of discredited GOP policies. Look at all the legislative accomplishments. How is it that the electorate in just a few short years are willing to put the disastorous GOP back in charge?
Inquiring minds want to know.
And if my prognosis is incorrect, then you all will know the REPUBLICANS STOLE THE 2010 MID-TERMS.
they're already stealing poll results!
really, this is bad news for dems since the people with nothing better to do than talk to a pollster tend to be bigger believers in free lunch than the general public.
This means the Dems will stirring up racial strife for the next two months. Have to get their plantation slaves riled up enough to show up at the polls.
Probably another one of their campaign staffers will firebomb or stab some minority, and the MSM will blame it on the Tea Party.
With a retratction/correction a month after the election.
Make sure you take video-phones with you when you vote. Bring someone else with you with their phone filming too - for when you get beat down by SEIU Goons or Blank Panther Thugs.
On of the most laughable lib complaints about Beck's rally came from one of the talking heads on MSNBC last night. Can't remember the name of the guy offhand (I'll find it though), but his main point was something very close to, "sure, there were 300,000 there, but that doesn't translate into many votes".
First of all, every single person older than 18 that went out of their way to attend a rally like that is going to vote. They may not all vote the same way, but getting off your ass and going to a rally in DC = active citizen...at least for this crowd.
The other principle he neglects to ponder, or does and simply won't admit, is that, like a radio station, for every 1 caller, there are about ten other people that feel the same way. Usually more.
300,000 making their way to DC for a weekend rally represent a helluva lot more than a 1:1.
The likely voters pool is the prize every politician's eye is on. The Dems are waiting to enroll the illegals and then the attack of the Dems will come. I expect that the next 24 months will be inundated with subtle Hispanic Outreach strategems by Obamanoids and by Bushies.
Damnit Joe.
I walked into the comments section ready to do my best America's Politico/New impression and you were already on it.
"Nancy Pelosi will remain Speaker and Harry Reid will remain Majority Floor Leader."
In some alternate universe, perhaps.
Ordinarily the NYT will go to shameless lengths to spin any story to favor the Dems' narrative and prospects. If even the NYT is running pieces like this it's the clearest sign of impending Democratic doom.
@ edutcher
If the Republicans retake control of Congress, then the public will blame them if the economy fails to improve in 2011-2012. On the one hand, getting Pelosi and possible Reid away from the levers of power couldn't do anything but help. However, with the Bush tax cuts getting ready to expire at the end of 2010, does anyone really expect things to improve next year? This could actually be a pyrrhic victory for the Republicans in November, since it will allow Obama to claim that everything would have turned around except for those meddling, obstructing Republicans who kept him from implementing his Recovery '11 plan, sort of like his "saved or created jobs." Right now, the Dems are in bad odor because they own the economy, lock stock and barrel. If the Republicans retake the House, and perhaps the Senate, that will no longer be the case. And there's no scenario that will give them a veto-proof majority to repeal Obamacare, etc. We'll be looking at two years of deadlock, but the Republicans won't be able to roll back the most odious legislation that the Dems have passed since 2009.
(the Crypto-Jew)
@GMay, well there’s still Lonewacko or Mick…..
@ Tjl If even the NYT is running pieces like this it's the clearest sign of impending Democratic doom.
No it’s the expectations game, public opinion game…first it’s the “Republicans are finished, for a generation.”, Then It’s “Republicans, will of course make some gains in an off-year election.” Then it’s “Republicans MIGHT regain the House.” All that is to depress Republicans, bolster your side. Now it’s “Republicans can take the House.” And then, “Republicans WILL retake the House.” To “Republicans will take 50/80/100 seats.” Now, the goal is to diminish the Republican victory…IF the Republicans don’t have an 80 seat majority it wasn’t really a Democratic defeat and the Republicans don’t really have a mandate to change….It’s about trying to get in Boehner’s and YOUR heads…to make you question your victory and your “mandate.” “IF, Republicans had a true 14 point generic lead, you ought to have taken 100 seats. You didn’t so your support is FAR less then you thought. Be cautious in your approach to governance.”
Remember that urban House districts concentrate Dem voters...who win 70-30 or more all the time, whereas most solid GOP districts are more like 55-45 or 60-40. So the effect of a 10 point GOP lead is magnified because so many Dem votes are concentrated and, therefore, wasted on house races. Senate, of course, is a different story.
""sure, there were 300,000 there, but that doesn't translate into many votes"."
That is .1 percent of the US population.....in one place at one time listening to one guy -- other than a huge car race, where else does that happen? Millions more probably wanted to be there. Each person of that .1 percent will talk to at least 100 people, if not more.
Beck drew 300k?
(the Crypto-Jew)
@Clyde….great analysis. It’s why we’re the STUPID PARTY. We over-think…”let’s see the ball is on our 40 yard line. So, we need to advance the ball down to the other side’s 40, hold them to 4 and out and move on for the field goal.” Instead of, “let’s move the ball down the field and score a touchdown, this drive.” How about, instead, of thinking two years out we think about oh I don’t next year. IF the Democrats don’t lose, guess what they will have learned that the US doesn’t really mind the Progressive Agenda…so on with Cap and Trade, and on with Card Check, and on with the Public Option for Obama Care…and on and on.
And Republicans will have learned the same thing, Americans don’t mind Obama’s Agenda and that the Tea Party was a Flash-in-the-pan and that the key to electoral success is to advance Obama’s Agenda!
UNLESS you like Obama’s Agenda, we must return Congress or at least the House to Republican control….don’t worry about what Obama will do from Jan 2011 until 2012, worry more about what they’ve done and what they want to do, and what they will learn if we don’t send a message!
I’m willing to let Obama rail against Republicans, if it leads to defunding Obama Care, and the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.
Bottom-Line: “Sufficient each day’s evil thereunto.”
Sure Garage, between 87K and 330K...why did yo think only smellie hippies could get to DC, en masse?
@ Joe
Edutcher was wondering how the Dems would spin Dow 5000. That was the answer.
I'm all in favor of Pelosi and Reid losing their leadership positions. It's my own personal policy at this point not to vote for anyone with a D after their name. I don't want to send Pelosi and Reid any more friends.
@Clyde, Oh I'm sorry. I misunderstood.
I came by here because I was curious to see if Ann Althouse would report on the revealing of the Sarah Palin speaking contract.
Wow, is she ever an entitled diva! This is your typical working class Mom? Not!
Jet: Not just any private plane will suffice: “The private aircraft MUST BE a Lear 60 or larger (as defined by interior cabin space) for West Coast Events; or, a Hawker 800 or Larger,” for East Coast events. But even if organizers arrange for a private jet, if Palin “changes her mind and opts to fly via commercial flights for US events, the Customer must be prepared to cover the cost of first class round trip airfare for two, and full, unrestricted round trip coach for two.”
And she controls the media access - and public knowledge - with an iron grip:
– Questions: All audience questions must be pre-approved, and can only be asked by a moderator or “designated representative,” who must be approved by Palin’s party.
– Media: “All requests for press or media coverage” of the event must be submitted far in advance for approval. “If media coverage is approved,” Palin’s Representatives need a complete list of “media outlets expected to attend” 10 days in advance.
– Recording: The media are only permitted to record the first three minutes of Palin’s speech, and then just for B-roll (no audio, video only). Recording of any other kind is strictly prohibited, unless authorized by Palin, and all personal recording devices, including cell phones, have to be turned off “at all events in which Speaker is present.” Only a campus photographer is permitted document to entire speech, and then only approved photos can be published.
Palin is a fraud!
Joe, want to bet? A nice friendly wager?
Trey
Hoosier Daddy: "I don't understand this. Obama won on a wave of Hope and Change. Democrats overwhelmingly took over Congress because of discredited GOP policies. Look at all the legislative accomplishments."
You don't understand it because you see them as legislative "accomplishments." Most voters seem them as transgressions, and they will express their view very clearly on November 2.
"Beck drew 300k?"
Easy.
But God drew them, Beck just delivered the invitation.
Trey
I disagree with Crypto. There is a timing in life. The GOP needs to take the opening the point guard from Wasilla sees and take it before it closes. The Dems will soon wish they had elected an American as President that Americans believed told them the truth about the economic crisis instead of using it as a three card monte game to rape and pillage the country.
@TMink...Satire, irony dead or not?
But to play along, sure I'll bet. I'll bet the 100K I'm getting from my Glenn Beck Sex tape.
Can you afford to run with the Big Dawgs, wingnut? Or do you have an insight into how the Re-Thug-likkkans are going steal this election?
I trust the GOP to screw up the country less, to sell out conservative principles, to compromise their compromises so they can get a good table at Martha's Vineyard.
I'd rather just let the whole thing crash and start over from scratch.
(the Crypto-Jew)
I trust the GOP to screw up the country less, to sell out conservative principles, to compromise their compromises so they can get a good table at Martha's Vineyard.
I'd rather just let the whole thing crash and start over from scratch.
This IS satire, right? No one is this silly…well that having been said we have Mick, Jeremy and Lonewacko, so let me re-phrase, YOU’RE not that silly are you?
Well Joe, I've been in politics all my life. At the state and national level. If you only knew how the sausage was made...
(the Crypto-Jew)
@Fen
1) I do understand, having been involved both in making sausage AND law; and
2) I understand you are:
a. Condemning my Life Partner to a slow death from lack of medication;
b. Betting that what takes the place of the status quo won’t be worse;
Needless to say I reject your Apocalyptic Prescription.
garage asked: "Beck drew 300k?"
It's like liberals' memories have a 12 hour half-life.
Yes, thats it, I'm condemning your life partner to a slow death from lack of medication. I really hate that guy....
America has gangrene. The corruption is systemic.
If you think a GOP sweep of the House and Senate is going to change anything, you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment.
(the Crypto-Jew)
If you think a GOP sweep of the House and Senate is going to change anything, you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment.,
And your alternative? Let everything collapse…*WOW* that’s great thanks there Vladimir/Adolf…”The worse the better.”, eh?
This sort of thinking is so D@mn foolish. Analogously, it’s like being married, but “knowing” your spouse is going to cheat. You expect it, you look forward to it, soon you’ll see all the “signs”, because you “know” they’re going to cheat….
You’re going to be disappointed, really? Define your expected disappointment…that ObamaCare is not derailed and all Obama policies, and Bush policies with which you disagreed, are over-turned? Well then, yes, I guess you WILL BE disappointed. OTOH, if ObamaCare is defunded, tax policies sustained, and a coherent 2012 Republican message is set…I won’t be disappointed.
Sorry The New Deal wasn’t all that “New Dealy” was it…even under Ike, 30 years after its passage Federal share of GNP was about 5%...It’s only in Freshman History that “revolutions” or “critical elections” are so REVOLUTIONARY or Critical. So I guess if you expect a 180 degree turn-around in public policy with Boehner and McConnell, then yes, you’ll be disappointed…I just don’t expect 180 degrees, and I think it’s foolish to expect them anyway….
Your alternatives are Republican or Democrat…and nothing else for the foreseeable future. Are you SURE you want such an upheaval that something is possible? And are you willing to bet my Life Partner’s and YOUR life that the alternative that arises will be better and not Communism or Fascism or just Somali-style Chaos? For someone who claims to follow and know politics, you sure do seem awfully “idealistic” and not very realistic as to what is to be expected from politicians, in a democracy.
I reject your Apocalyptic Prescription.
Better known as the Associated Press.
Anyways....to be serious for a moment-there is a large segment of the population-Conservatives-who confuse politics with religion.
They want their politicians to be a s pure as their clergy-which if the y really knew their charlatans-er, clergy they'd stop getting their nuts bunched up in their shorts...
Wait...I got distracted.
Damn it let's hope some of these people will get a lesson in reality, and or relativity after Obama and stop conflating politics and the voting booth with some sort of purity contest.
It's like liberals' memories have a 12 hour half-life.
Wouldn't they have to? I mean, their Golden One made a series of very distinct, very quantified, and in-context promises that he then went on to completely ignore and/or purposefully break. These weren't nebulous, sweeping campaign promises that nearly every presidential politician makes. These were detailed promises he made and then willfully broke.
The quip "every thing this man says has an expiration date" has significant supporting data.
The Repubbies are generally captive to rich men and use political power to create wealth for themselves...but now the Dems have outdone them. So the GOP is being "taken over" by a new American Tea Party that will kick both out and start over. Let's pray that they find a George Washington and not a Jack Abramov as their leader.
I shorten myself-
gawd Glenn Beck is an annoying douche bag.
Wow, I wonder if a far left liberal Congress critter from Philly like Allison Schwartz could lose?
Joe said, "And if my prognosis is incorrect, then you all will know the REPUBLICANS STOLE THE 2010 MID-TERMS."
Gosh, I think you're right. They've already stolen Gallup and Rasmussen!
Plus he's a Liberal.
All that appeal to emotion-and complaining-he and a lot of other supposedly Conservative commentarist suppress the vote every day.
Oh Glenn Beck gets me! Glenn Beck will save us!
No one is good enough for my vote!
So Democrats win a lot of the time because their voters aren't that picky.
Give 'em a beer, a pack of smokes, have their union drive them there-or better yet have Ed Rendell deliver their ballot to their prison and they'll vote easy as that!
Margin of victory- a lot of the time-right there.
Philly like Allison Schwartz could lose?
Ummm, no.
See my Ed Rendell comment.
That Ed-what a peach.
When even so plodding and unblinkingly devoted a partisan as Nate Silver has finally -- reluctantly, with a soft yet audible hitch in his voice -- dropped the Team Blue pom-poms: we're talking after-the-Apocalypse level political realignment amongst the electorate, in a scant eighteen months.
It this were any more delicious, it would just have to be fattening.
wv: bless. Indeed!
If you think a GOP sweep of the House and Senate is going to change anything, you're setting yourself up for a major disappointment.
I'm not expecting much, except that divided government might put a brake on things.
So, little possibility of "major disappointment."
@madawaskan
They want their politicians to be a s pure as their clergy-which if the y really knew their charlatans-er, clergy they'd stop getting their nuts bunched up in their shorts...
I left the GOP during the 2004 presidential election because it became apparent the social right had a stranglehold on the party. Small government fiscal conservatism, my personal hot-buttons, always seemed to take a back seat to things like abortion and gay marriage.
While I'm sure that those issue are still important to a good deal of the old guard (voters, not office holders...who knows what's truly important to the office holders?) I definitely get the sense that they are putting fiscal matters first.
My hope is that this midterm will see a literal changing of the guard in respects to what core issues the GOP circles wagons around.
Well I will qualify this with the caveat of never counting one’s chickens till they come home to roost but if the polls are accurate and the GOP takes back the House (and possibly the Senate; yes a long shot), I would like to hear from our resident liberati how such a switch could be possible when the GOP made such a mess of things just a short time ago?
I’m not sure you can get much more repudiation of this administration when a mere 2 years ago he was swept into office (along with his massive Congressional majorities) by an orgasmic electorate convinced they were the ones we have been waiting for.
Beck drew 300k?
Don't be ridiculous. He barely got 30. The rest is just CGI.
I predict a substantial slimming down of all levels of govt over the next ten years.
This could lead to a great period of prosperity if we simultaneously fix immigration and borders while encouraging sufficient legal immigrants to help grow the American economy.
A growing population will also help the real estate market to rebound.
Of course the Republicans could f-up and make me a liar.
ScottM said: "My hope is that this midterm will see a literal changing of the guard in respects to what core issues the GOP circles wagons around."
As if the liberals/Dems care about something else??
Seriously, go ask the more sane ones you can find what's so "extreme" about wanting to reduce the size of government and fiscal sanity.
After enduring a Ritmo-esque barrage of red-herrings and bullshit, it's going to come down to abortion. That's what's so extreme about the "far right" to the leftist every time - abortion. "We're going to lose our inalienable right to choose if we let those racist, corporate, Wall Street fatcat, Rethuglikkan Reichwingnut crazies even vote!"
And of course it's total bullshit.
@Gmay
I'm more pointing to the very visible shift in what gets the right side base worked up. Again, I'm not minimizing the importance of the abortion debate, only pointing out that it became the freeze and anti-freeze writ large of our political debates for damned near two decades. Everything else seemed to be secondary or thirdary (lol).
The fact that a wide swath of people are worked up to the point of anger over federalism and fiscal matters gives me hope. Most of that hope is pinned on what I've always held as a progressive burp in the cosmos that was only made possible after a particularly splendid, affluent meal during the 50's.
Sanity will return and the country will get comfortable once again in the center-right skin it was born in.
Clyde said...
@ edutcher
If the Republicans retake control of Congress, then the public will blame them if the economy fails to improve in 2011-2012.
Problem is, and what Clyde is talking about is supposedly the Obama Master Plan for Re-Election (he's so smart, you know), that several Presidents have tried the same tack - and most lost.
Like it or not, the President is viewed as being in charge, and whining, "Well, they hold Congress...", doesn't cut much ice, particularly since the causes of the mess are well-known and were passed over the objections of the American people.
Scott M said..."Sanity will return and the country will get comfortable once again in the center-right skin it was born in.
Damn, I hope so. At times I am given to despair at the path inertia and sheer enormity of the task, and like Fen think we will only finally act when the nation lies in ruins from yet another socialist suicide.
But I hope not, I really do. Even for the selfish reason that I don't want my kids to live through a Cormac McCarthy novel.
I'm not going to believe in this alleged "GOP lead" until I can get a confirmation from America's Politico.
Hoosier Daddy: "if the polls are accurate and the GOP takes back the House (and possibly the Senate; yes a long shot), I would like to hear from our resident liberati how such a switch could be possible when the GOP made such a mess of things just a short time ago?"
Until the resident liberati offer their analysis, here's a preliminary analysis from a resident conservatati, with two main points:
1. The Obama-Pelosi-Reid triumvirate have made a far bigger mess of things than the GOP did.
2. Republicans are chastened by the Tea Party movement. They've gotten the memo: If you return to your ways of the Bush years, heads will roll. They've already seen this threat carried out in several primaries, and they know it is not an empty threat.
In short, the choice in November is NOT a) more of the same vs. b) back to Bush. The Tea Party is giving new meaning to the term Third Way.
Peano, Hoosier was being ironic.
Fine with me if you guys want to get smug and confident. Other polls do not show this and show the GOP brand as very tarnished.
It doesn't help that Republicans want to reinstate Bush policies. If they can't have that more and more are vowing to, once again, shut down the government. (that'll be popular).
But, you know what, Steve Benen is spot on:
whatever the rationale, it's hard to get over the fact that Obama Derangement Syndrome has become so pervasive on the right, literally most of the nation's rank-and-file Republicans appears to have gone stark raving mad.
The sad thing about all of this is that the only light at the end of the tunnel right now is a change in the congress. This isn't 1982 where people could see lower taxes, less regulation, etc.. on the horizon. Now we have the opposite. The tunnel ahead is long and dark. We have tons of regulation, lots of higher taxes, no economic growth, and neverending amounts of debt in our future. The only thing there is to hope for is a republican takeover, which is why the number of seats that switch could break records. I predict it will be in in the 65-70 area.
It doesn't help that Republicans want to reinstate Bush policies.
The number one goal of the Tea Party, which is now the number one goal of all conservatives and indepedents and now the policy of most european governments is to cut government spending. That is not a Bush era policy or is it an Obama policy. In fact, what it is is a Clinton Policy (at least starting in 1995).
It doesn't help that Republicans want to reinstate Bush policies.
As opposed to running on changing them, getting into office, then continuing them whole hog?
In the words of someone else that comments here,
Keep an open mind, please. It's very important.
Fox News employee Sarah Palin's speaking terms have now been revealed. She's quite the spoiled diva that you follow!
Turns out she is just like any other Hockey Mom who won't stand for just any Lear jet!
Jet: Not just any private plane will suffice: “The private aircraft MUST BE a Lear 60 or larger (as defined by interior cabin space) for West Coast Events; or, a Hawker 800 or Larger,” for East Coast events. But even if organizers arrange for a private jet, if Palin “changes her mind and opts to fly via commercial flights for US events, the Customer must be prepared to cover the cost of first class round trip airfare for two, and full, unrestricted round trip coach for two.”
And she controls questions from the public and media like some Politburo member:
– Questions: All audience questions must be pre-approved, and can only be asked by a moderator or “designated representative,” who must be approved by Palin’s party.
– Media: “All requests for press or media coverage” of the event must be submitted far in advance for approval. “If media coverage is approved,” Palin’s Representatives need a complete list of “media outlets expected to attend” 10 days in advance.
In fact, what it is is a Clinton Policy (at least starting in 1995).
lol...in the same sentence..."Clinton" and "is is"
Well crafted, sir, if you meant to do that.
WV - "reacres" I Own Reacres
(the Crypto-Jew)
Other polls do not show this and show the GOP brand as very tarnished.
But the poll of SanFran Transvestites for Social Justice and World Peace Poll was geographically limited, and the poll of African-American Womyn named Sasha or Melia Obama was a little low on the number side…so whilst both polls show that Barak Obama has 125% support and that Republicans are “Dooty Heads” polls at 145%, the findings are not fully translatable to the voting populace, as a whole.
Oh and the Republicans are divided between hyper-conservatives and extreme conservatives:
in a multitude of races where Tea Party candidates have faced off against establishment Republicans in a GOP primary, the losing candidate is rejecting customary practice by refusing to endorse the winner. For a party that is supposed to have a banner year, immense disunity could spell trouble for the Republican Party. Here is a list of races this cycle — most of which pitted an establishment candidate against a Tea Party candidate — where the losing candidate has refused to officially endorse
What follows, at link, is no less than 15 cases of a fractured Republican Party.
Purge, baby, purge!
DEBT DEBT DEBT.....endless debt beyond all ways to get out of it. This is what the Deomcratic party under Obama has left us and it is why Republicans now have a 14 point lead.
Many like to point out that Republicans and past adminsitrations also incurred lots of debt, but it was never to the extent that Obama has embraced debt.
Debt is a manageble policy as long as it remains under your rate of growth. You can easily sustaion a 2% deficit if your growing at 3%. If fact that may even be desirable. However you cannot sustain a Obama plan of endless debt between 7-10%, while you are only growing at 2%. The debt will very soon become so crushing that the dollar will collapse and so will the government.
Only a change in the Congress in 2010 can end this horrid policy.
Joe says:
(the Crypto-Jew)
What do you mean by this? I do not understand.
(the Crypto-Jew)
The new Alpha taling points:
1) Mention “Bush”; and
2) Mention Sarah Palin.
Invoking those two talismans of Liberal Magyk is guaranteed to flummox all opposition and raise voter support 34.789%.
Being called "smug" by AlphaLib = Paris Hilton shrilling "TROLLOP!" at you, a near-stranger's underwear perched coquettishly atop her head.
Sloan:
DEBT DEBT DEBT.....endless debt beyond all ways to get out of it.
Hard fact: Bush took a surplus and made it into a massive deficit.
It's been pretty funny hearing conservatives say in recent weeks that the debt doesn't matter as long as Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy can be extended.
But there is a glimmer of hope as they say economic recovery matters more than the deficit in the near-term, which is very correct.
Of course, their brain-dead answer for all economic problems in all cases is always "cut taxes." Like a broken record. They even put two wars on the credit card!
(the Crypto-Jew)
AlphaLiberal said...
Joe says:
(the Crypto-Jew)
If you don’t keep up with current blog affairs, that’s not my fault…less time polling Dykes on Bikes for their public policy preferences and throwing darts at your Chimpy McShrubush dart board and using Wiccan “spells” to cause Sarah Palin’s mustache to fall out and more time here….
On second thought, you just keep on with those previous suggestions and DON’T spend any more time here.
But, Joe, what does "(the Crypto-Jew)" mean?
Oh Alpha, your education is lacking...have you not heard of "Torquemenda", or the "Inquistion"? I'm mean SURE in your seminar, PS-432 "All the Evils of White European Males Revealed" you must have discussed the issue tangentially....
Joe:
I give you plenty of material to react to. But, instead, you need to make stuff up? All this stuff you attribute to me = false.
Why is that?
Because you are flailing and desperate. You can't reply on the merits. Or, you're just a pathological liar. Or both!
Really, this place didn't used to be such a sewer. It has gone downhill as Althouse has tacked hard right.
It's been pretty funny hearing conservatives say in recent weeks that the debt doesn't matter as long as Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy can be extended.
Cutting taxes in past history has proven to work better as a stimulus because it is much more quickly and more efficiently allocated to business investment and consumer demand.
So if you need a stimulus, tax cuts are much better than direct government spending which is allocated inefficiently.
Obama squandered his stiimulus on paybacks for his political allies and to so that governent employees could keep getting their paycheck increases.
The Obama stimulus was a total and complete failure. It created no long lasting growth and only left a trail of debt and more debt.
Again, running deficits is a sustainable policy if you are growing faster than the deficit.
"Really, this place didn't used to be such a sewer."
Bwa hah haaaaah!!!
Obama's long lasting legacy is the termendous debt that he has put upon the country. He spent massively with no legitimate plan to pay the money back. He passed a huge entitlement plan and then raised taxes to pay for it leaveing little capacity to pay back all the other massive debts he did not pay for.
It will take us decades to get out of the crushing debt.
The sad thing is that the so called progessive agenda will be destroyed by Obama's massive debts. The first thing that will be cut is the transfer payments that Obama campaigned for. IN the end the poor will be far worse off because of Obama and his debts than if we did nothing. A sad story.
(the Crypto-Jew)
give you plenty of material to react to. But, instead, you need to make stuff up? All this stuff you attribute to me = false.
Why is that?
Because your “points” and your “arguments” are pathetic and ill-thought out…humour is the best defense and offense against the likes of you. To argue with you, is to argue with a Charley McCarthy dummy, and it gives the dummy some, undeserved statute. So taking a page from Saul’s book I lampoon and ridicule you. It is what you deserve.
Make better cases, get more respect.
Because you are flailing and desperate. You can't reply on the merits. Or, you're just a pathological liar. Or both!
I’m flailing and desperate…h’mmmmmm which side of the aisle has to assume that 70% of the US are Islamophobes, or that 35-50% of the US are bigots, and homophobes, and RACISTS!? Who sees their opponents as “bitter clingers”? I’m flailing and desperate, dood you are looking in the mirror.
Really, this place didn't used to be such a sewer. It has gone downhill as Althouse has tacked hard right.
I’d leave never hang around in a sewer is my advice….as the song says, “How can we miss you if you won’t just leave?”
Bottom-line: this scene from Casablanca sums it up best for me:
Peter Lorre: “You despise me, don’t you Rick?”
Humphrey Bogart: “You know Ugatti, if I thought about you, I probably would.”
IF I thought you, Alpha, were anything but a poltroon I’d treat you with more respect and less humour…but mostly I try not to think about you Alpha.
Clyde - "And there's no scenario that will give them a veto-proof majority to repeal Obamacare, etc. We'll be looking at two years of deadlock, but the Republicans won't be able to roll back the most odious legislation that the Dems have passed since 2009."
Most of the odious legislation relies on annual funding appropriation votes.
Republicans strike all funding from Obamacare pending resolution of Constitutionality issues - what does Black Messiah do??
Pogo said..."Peano, Hoosier was being ironic."
The moral to draw from that is: Don't try irony if you don't know how to do it.
I would like to hear from our resident liberati how such a switch could be possible when the GOP made such a mess of things just a short time ago?
Seriously. Let's look at the Democrats' accomplishments...
1. Saved the financial industry from collapse, and the world from a second Great Depression.
2. Passed national health care that bends the cost curve and ensures near-universal coverage, while also allowing everyone to keep their current insurance plans and preferred health providers.
3. Saved the U.S. auto industry from oblivion, preserving thousands of high-paying U.S. jobs, both on the factory floor and in management.
4. Ramped up forces in Afghanistan, providing the means to secure the country and protect the population.
5. Overhauled the financial industry, making it impossible for big banks to assume too much risk.
When you look at it that way, how can you not support the Democrats?
@Lance without facial and intonation cues, ironey or sarcasm are hard to convey on the Interwebz.....
Yeah, you need to put /satire ON or something in front of a post like that, Lance.
AlphaLib imagined: "Oh and the Republicans are divided between hyper-conservatives and extreme conservatives:"
Why don't you define "extreme" AlphaLib?
What's funny is that the left tries this crap every time - disunity in the Republican ranks = CIVIL WAR! ZOMGZ!!11eleventy!
Democrats in full self-immolation = BUT REPUBLICANS ARE SO EXTREME!!!
A-L continued: "Hard fact: Bush took a surplus and made it into a massive deficit."
No, this is a hard lie. A "projected surplus" is not a "surplus".
And yet you have the gall to lecture someone else on making stuff up.
Pathetic.
@Joe
I'm not being ironic. I'm following up on Hoosier's 12:09: Given the listed accomplishments, why aren't more independents supporting the Democrats right now?
"Don't try irony if you don't know how to do it."
And be sure to unplug it when you're done.
(the Crypto-Jew)
I'm not being ironic. I'm following up on Hoosier's 12:09: Given the listed accomplishments, why aren't more independents supporting the Democrats right now?
OK then….I’ll get back to you.
@Scott M
You and Joe (and probably others) look at the list and you immediately think "irony" or "satire". But here's the thing: progressives don't see it that way. They look at that list and get mad at all the things I left out, or dismiss it because I'm not selling it well enough.
The fact is a large minority of Republicans did not like the theocratic vibe of Beck's 8/28 rally. Personally I found the whole affair repugnant.
GMay, you are blinded by partisanship:
President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/
That was not projected. It was actual. The date for the story was Sept 2000.
Here is a history of annual deficits/surpluses plus the accumulated national debt.
Year 2000, under Clinton:
$236 Billion.
Bush turns that into a deficit in 2002: -$157 Billion.
Review, also, the record during years Republicans hold the White House and you will find that Republican policies consistently result in deficits.
I believe you owe me an apology for calling me liar. That's what a
person of integrity would do.
Alex:
The fact is a large minority of Republicans did not like the theocratic vibe of Beck's 8/28 rally.
Good news. I've seen reports that Beck's Mormonism is rejected by many conservative churches.
Someone said yesterday the goal of the beck rally was to unite the Religious Right and the Tea Parties.
Someone said yesterday the goal of the beck rally was to unite the Religious Right and the Tea Parties.
Depends on what % of the TP people are religious right vs secular.
(the Crypto-Jew)
Seriously. Let's look at the Democrats' accomplishments...
1. Saved the financial industry from collapse, and the world from a second Great Depression.
We’ll accept the axiom, for now-bearing in mind that at a later date it is subject to critique-except that this occurred under PRESIDENT BUSH!
2. Passed national health care that bends the cost curve and ensures near-universal coverage, while also allowing everyone to keep their current insurance plans and preferred health providers.
a. No bending of curve down, by even Administration/CBO estimates
b. Does NOT provide near-universal, coverage
c. Drops millions of people from their existing healthcare plans, to include seniors and college students
d. In short it does NONE of this
3. Saved the U.S. auto industry from oblivion, preserving thousands of high-paying U.S. jobs, both on the factory floor and in management.
You mean it saved UAW members jobs. Let’s put it this way, it took the fork lift operator at Toyota, who averages about $13/hour, and his taxes and gave them to a GM fork lift operator who makes on the average $25/hour. Kewl, beans the POOR employees subsidized the RICH employees!
4. Ramped up forces in Afghanistan, providing the means to secure the country and protect the population.
Simultaneously providing a timeline for our withdrawal. And prompting calls, from Obama’s own party, to withdraw from the unwinnable war.
5. Overhauled the financial industry, making it impossible for big banks to assume too much risk.
Really is that what it did? Who can say in 2,000 plus page bill. Just as easy to say it provides goodies for Democratic supporters and lots of surprises for the rest of us. And who determines “too much risk”? Obama?
When you look at it that way, how can you not support the Democrats?
Pretty much anyone that isn’t on the government dole or payroll….and hence the disappointing poll numbers for Democrats.
President Clinton announced Wednesday that the federal budget surplus for fiscal year 2000 amounted to at least $230 billion, making it the largest in U.S. history and topping last year's record surplus of $122.7 billion.
If only Obama were Clinton. Obama makes Bush look like a penny pincher. Like you said, Bush spent his 8 years turning the surplus into a a trillion dollar deficit. It took Obama 3 months to get down a trillion
Here's a thought....
Why do progressives/liberals ally themselves with government unions? The unions are only in it for themselves - to enrich themselves. In the end all the government money gets reallocated to the unions and not to the causes so called progressives stand for. Its a real shame.
In california, everything is being cut just to maintain the government pensions and payrolls.
The Congress recently cut a food stamp program to send money to save more government jobs.
How sad is that?
In california, everything is being cut just to maintain the government pensions and payrolls.
The worst part about the CA exodus is those people bring their socialist voting habits with them. They're insane....
AlphaLiberal saidGMay, you are blinded by partisanship:
So my doctor said it would take 6-8weeks for my irony bone to fully heal.
I'm blinded by my blind devotion to the Constitution.
5. Overhauled the financial industry, making it impossible for big banks to assume too much risk.
or did they overhaul the financial industry to the big banks advantage? they exempted the big banks from many of the new rules
in the mortgage industry and now 5 banks control 50% of the market when it used to be 40 banks had 50% of that market. the new regulations that were billed to save the consumer $750 in closing costs have resulted in a $750 increase instead. why would the 5 big banks want more regulations? to kill their competitors. and they're succeeding, even with the right people in charge, almost as if the right people were in on it.
Good news. I've seen reports that Beck's Mormonism is rejected by many conservative churches.
This may come as a shock to Alpha but typically the various demoninations of Christianity will, as a matter of course, reject the doctrines of other denominations.
In other news, the sun is still hot.
@Joe
Can't say I disagree with anything you wrote. But I'm guessing there are others on this thread who would.
Anyone who says they support the Constitution is a closet Klan member. I know this because I listen to Air America.
Hard fact: Bush took a surplus and made it into a massive deficit.
Well, only somewhat. The big debt was at the end, under a Democratic Congress. And Clinton's somewhat "surplus" at the very end of his term was under a Republican Congress. And, of course, there is the small problem that all spending comes from Congress (and must start in the House), and that the President has the choice of either signing spending bills or vetoing them. Also, keep in mind that the issue here IS Congress, since they are the one standing for election this time.
Here's the bad news-
Even if the Republicans win the House-(which I think they will) and on top of that win the Senate-(highly unlikely)-they will not be able to undo all the damage that the Pelosi, Reid and Obama triad have created.
It might take decades if ever to undo what they have done.
That's the enormity of it.
Obstacles to the Senate-
No good candidate recruited to take on Gillebrand in NY-who was appointed by a now unpopular governor.
Crist-alienated-who ironically now may become the deciding "organizational vote".
NV-a low population density state where a primary electorate appeal is not going to translate over in the general.
IOW I think Reid pulls it out, and still remains as the majority leader.
The worst part about the CA exodus is those people bring their socialist voting habits with them. They're insane....
Except the decision to leave given the CA trajectory is actually a sane, rational decision. It's those that are staying, expecting a different result after trying the same thing year in and out, that you have to worry about.
Seriously. Let's look at the Democrats' accomplishments...
1. Saved the financial industry from collapse, and the world from a second Great Depression.
Highly debatable. But even if some of the Democrats helped here, Bush was President then, at least at the critical point, not Obama.
2. Passed national health care that bends the cost curve and ensures near-universal coverage, while also allowing everyone to keep their current insurance plans and preferred health providers.
Agreed that it will likely bend the cost curve. But likely in the wrong direction. The only evidence of bending it down is through all the hot air from the Democrats in Washington, D.C.
The reality is that while some who weren't paying for their health care before will be covered by the rest of us now, the rest of us will have our health care reduced to pay for it, as well as the costs of the massive bureaucracy created by this bill.
You are welcome to explain to us how the quantity of health care available to the populace can be increased, but at a lower cost, through the imposition of dozens of commission, boards, etc. and thousands of pages of regulations.
Obviously, the American people don't believe this, and that is probably the biggest reason that the Democrats will likely be thrown out of power this year in at least the House.
3. Saved the U.S. auto industry from oblivion, preserving thousands of high-paying U.S. jobs, both on the factory floor and in management.
Well, yes, and that put hundreds of thousands out of work elsewhere in the economy to pay for it. But what was much more important was saving all these highly paid union jobs.
4. Ramped up forces in Afghanistan, providing the means to secure the country and protect the population.
We shall see how this all works out. My guess is that the Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, have backed themselves into a corner fighting the "right" war, after the "wrong" war was won by the Republicans in general, and Bush in particular.
The reason that this should scare us is that liberals often don't do a good job at fighting wars. I am thinking in particular about how horribly LBJ screwed up in Vietnam, at the ultimate cost of over 50,000 American lives. As his opponent in 1964 pointed out, you either need to fight to win, at whatever cost, or you need to get out. Johnson did neither, and so we ultimately lost when the Democrats in Congress refused to honor our treaty obligations to (the now former) South Vietnam.
5. Overhauled the financial industry, making it impossible for big banks to assume too much risk.
You.Have.To.Be.Kidding.
The reality is just the opposite - the financial institutions that were too big to fail, are still mostly exempt from the new legislation, while the smaller ones that didn't cause the financial meltdown are now burdened by massive new regulations that are likely to drive a lot of them out of business. But, never mind. They can be bought up by the big boys who are effectively exempt from the new regulations.
What is amazing is that you can parrot these liberal talking points with a straight face here, after they have been effectively debunked, time after time here.
Of course, their brain-dead answer for all economic problems in all cases is always "cut taxes." Like a broken record. They even put two wars on the credit card!
Yeh, and that was still less than what Obama has flushed down the toilet in less than two years.
The problem is not really tax cuts right now, no matter how you try to spin the debate, but rather the massive tax increases that have either been enacted or will become effective very quickly (most at the end of the year).
And, note the typical liberal spin/mis-direction - government spending, as a percent of the GDP, was massively increased under Obama, primarily it seems to pay off his political constituencies, and now they are talking about Republicans cutting taxes. But of course, no one is talking tax cuts, except for eliminating the new taxes put into place by Obama and the Democrats in the last year and a half. Rather, what is at issue is that they think that they need massive tax increases to pay for their massive increase in spending, and the easiest way to get those tax increases is to sit on their hands and let the Bush tax cuts expire. All in the midst of a major recession.
The solution is obvious - eliminate every bit of additional spending enacted by this Congress, including pay raises to government employees, bailouts of the states (and, in particular, their own government workers), and, voila, the debt problem would mostly disappear. The problem is, as I noted above, using today's grossly increased spending levels as the base line. l
It will take centuries to determine Bush's legacy.
But we already know, now, that policies like heath care reform which hasn't taken effect yet, and the stimulus which hasn't been fully spent yet, have ruined this country.
Garage, you never answered my question yesterday. What about fascism are you against?
It will take centuries to determine Bush's legacy.
No it won't you dolt...a decade or so, yes, but not centuries. He won't be remembered in a century...
As to ObamaCare, all thru Europe Health Care is bankrupting nations, but it'll be different, THIS TIME, in the US.
And the Stimulus, it hasn't been spent...wow, that's a policy...a laser-like focus on jobs, wouldn't you say?
And the Stimulus, it hasn't been spent...wow, that's a policy...a laser-like focus on jobs, wouldn't you say?
Maybe it's a math error. Perhaps the angle of the pivot wasn't sufficient.
IOW I think Reid pulls it out, and still remains as the majority leader.
That would be unfortunate for the Country, but maybe not too bad for the President, IMO, as I think Reid is less liked than Obama. It always pays for the President to have someone in Congress act as a lightning rod for the voters' discontent.
Does anyone approve of Reid's job performance?
Lance said... "Seriously. Let's look at the Democrats' accomplishments..."
The Platters, redux ...
They asked me how I knew
Democrats were through
Oh, I of course replied
Something here inside cannot be denied
Next election day you’ll find
All who vote aren’t blind
Oh, leftists will retire
Can’t gull the middle class
And blow smoke up our ass
AlphaLib fumed: "I believe you owe me an apology for calling me liar. That's what a
person of integrity would do."
Not that you would know. I do owe you an apology for calling you a liar. You're not a liar.
You're just misinformed.
What you have to understand is that the CBO is not the Treasury. When we look at the government debt, we need to look at the Treasury's numbers, not the CBO's. (If you'll notice the +/-50 mil variance of your source, that should clue you in that it's not a good source)
If I go to treasurydirect.gov and input the date ending 12/29/00 for total public debt, I come up with $5,662,216,013,697.37, which is a far cry from the CBO's estimated $3.4 Tril in total public debt. That's because the CBO is only looking at 'Debt Held by the Public', instead of 'Total Public Debt Outstanding'.
But wait! There's more! This is where libs and their penchant for half-assed research get left behind.
If you go to the site I mentioned and input Jan 1-Dec 31 of each year, starting say 1997 and continuing through 2001, you'll find that the Total Public Debt Outstanding steadily climbs throughout the year, but gets knocked back down about every once in awhile. This is mainly due to the redemption of Treasuries (mainly T-bills) and not some newfound congressional need to suddenly pay down debt or quit increasing the size of government.
Right about now, you're ready to bleat BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DEFICIT!!! So am I. What I want you to do (if you've even read this far) is go to the Treasury's site and input the dates for each year and show me where the money is supposedly coming off the Total Public Debt Outstanding.
Hint: it's not.
You see, this is what's called the miracle of accounting and the magic of the Federal Reserve. You can shift the numbers around to fool ignorant libs like you, but the bottom line is, that debt can't be completely hidden.
An the funny thing is, Clinton was the least responsible for any of this, despite the deluded leftist imaginings that the President is the one who controls the pursestrings, or the economy.
It's the congress stupid.
Alpha,
In case the above was too difficult ya, try these links from the Treasury:
Historical Debt Outstanding 1950-1999
Historical Debt Outstanding 2001-2009
From those links:
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
Not once did those numbers walk backward, which would indicate a budget surplus. It slowed down a little in 1998, which gets into the projected surplus I mentioned upthread, but there is clearly no surplus. That is a lie you've been fed and subsequently swallowed.
No need to thank me.
lucid - so you were one of those old liberals who voted for Obama out of a sense of guilt, not lefty ideology?
Does the following tell you anything about the margin of Republicans over Democrats this year?
I am a life-long Democrat. I voted for Obama. Hell, I donated money to both Clinton and Obama.
But I am so pissed off at the left, at redistributionist rhetoric and policy, at the anti-business demagoguery, at the seizure of my health care in order to redistribute it to others, at the sneering elitism and attempts to control free markets, at Obama, at Pelosi, at Reid, at Barney Frank, at Frank Rich, Nicholas Kristof, E. J. Dionne, Joe Klein, Ezra Klein, JournoList, and Jonathan "the Adolescent" Chait that I am going to vote for every Republican on the ticket this year.
I am not going to vote for anyone who is a Democrat. I want to run the Democrats out of town until they cauterize their leftist base.
@Bruce Hayden
What is amazing is that you can parrot these liberal talking points with a straight face...
You missed the point: taking those accomplishments at face value, how can the Democrats be 10 (or 14) points behind in generic ballot polling?
I notice none of the usual suspects (Alpha, garage, Jeremy, etc.) have offered an explanation.
@Alex--
No. I was originally a Clinton supporter, mostly because of Bill probably, and his brand of centrist Democratic policy.
I never liked Obama, from the his first speech in Springfield announcing his candidacy, from the cute little sports-related tease he did before he announced. I liked him even less during the campaign. I thought he was disingenuous, shallow, unprepared by his career and lack of accomplishments. I thought he was narcissistic and full of himself. I didn't like how he cleverly played the race card during the campaign. I thought he was way too liberal based on National Journal's analysis of his voting record which pegged him as the most liberal Senator.
The only thing I liked about him was that he was black. But I didn;t feel guilty about it.
And he was a Democrat, and I was a Democrat. So, ultimately I probably voted for him because I was too unimaginative not to.
I notice none of the usual suspects (Alpha, garage, Jeremy, etc.) have offered an explanation.
NYT isn't to be trusted, and Nate Silver is probably a jounolister. See, easy.
Lance said... "You missed the point: taking those accomplishments at face value, how can the Democrats be 10 (or 14) points behind in generic ballot polling?"
No, you missed the point, Lance -- several times now. The majority of Americans don't see the things you listed as accomplishments. Especially health care. That "signature accomplishment" alone could be the Democrats' undoing.
And he was a Democrat, and I was a Democrat. So, ultimately I probably voted for him because I was too unimaginative not to.
Consider the alternative.
lucid wrote: I want to run the Democrats out of town until they cauterize their leftist base.
I agree and thanks for the lucid imagery.
lucid mobying
I found this interesting: CBO: Iraq War Was Cheaper Than the Stimulus.
But, of course, not that much of the money spent on the Iraqi war went to Democratic constituent groups such as unionized government workers, unionized auto workers, or other liberal causes such as "green" energy.
If the Republicans retake control of Congress, then the public will blame them if the economy fails to improve in 2011-2012.
Just like, after the Democrats retook control of Congress, the public blamed them for a crash, and elected McCain in 2008, right?
The only thing that can get Obama re-elected is a recovery.
And repealing health care is easy . . . if the will exists for a fight. You modify the House rules to require every single bill brought to a final vote to include a repeal of HIPAA. Absolutely nothing leaves the House without the clause in its final text, not even a reconciled bill.
Obama can then veto every single act of Congress for two years, or repeal HIPAA. Every military appropriation, every school lunch appropriation, every national parks appropriation, etc.
It's not like the American people are going to thank him for sacrificing those ends to preserve a law a vast majority of them oppose. If the law were popular, the politics would be different, and the shutdown worse for Congress than the President. But HIPAA? Obama will eventually reach the point where he'll have to cave. If the Republicans hold out.
Er, PPACA, not HIPAA. Damncronyms.
@Peano
No, you missed the point, Lance -- several times now. The majority of Americans don't see the things you listed as accomplishments. Especially health care. That "signature accomplishment" alone could be the Democrats' undoing.
Ugh. If you were any denser you'd have your own event horizon.
Democrats are out there saying ARRA, HCR, financial reform, etc., are all wonderful accomplishments. They purport to believe these are genuine achievements. And yet the Democratic party is behind by 10 points on generic ballot polling. I want Democrats to explain the discrepancy.
Please Garage, I realize I'm putting you on the spot, but I wanna know: how can Democrats have achieved so much but be so far behind in the polls?
Note this is the exact converse of the problem Bush and Republicans had in 2006: they believed that DHS, Guantanamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan were all successes, yet they got shellacked in the midterms and then again in '08.
@Lance: Ugh. If you were any denser you'd have your own event horizon.
If your writing were any denser, it would have to be in ungrammatical and misspelled Swahili. Just say this to yourself 100 times: "Clarity in writing is a virtue. Opacity in writing is a vice."
GMay,
THANK YOU for destroying the alfatard! I don't know how many Americans (both dems and repubs) do not get the budgetary games that Congress plays.
Alfatard, there are budget items and non-budget items. Clinton balanced the budget items and they all (dems and repubs) stood up and brayed what a great accomplishment it was. Of course, the non-budget items still required paying and we had to borrow to do that. You sir, are a dummy.
Peano,
"... don't try irony... "
The regulars all got it.
Lance,
"You missed the point: taking those accomplishments at face value..."
Nah, what you're missing is that only the truest of true believers actually believe any of that. When you say "Democrats are out there saying...", what you really mean is the party leadership is saying that; that elected officials are making those claims. But the average D and independent is having a hard time buying all the spin.
stevenehrbar,
No, no, HIPAA would great to get rid of!. And while you're at it, how about lets throw ADA and SarbOx on the chopping block too.
Hey, this could be fun...
Jack,
No problem. I'm a giver.
Hopefully more than a few Americans will have fire in their belly like Michael Berry in Texas!
Kirk Parker said... "The regulars all got it."
Don't try inside jokes in a worldwide forum.
Post a Comment