Obama shows takes a stand, showing some serious spine

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This is good for him... it show's he willing to compromise even if it makes his party a little pissed at him... he'll win reelection.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

This is good for him... it show's he willing to compromise even if it makes his party a little pissed at him... he'll win reelection.

They were a little pissed many capitulations ago. This is the final straw for many people.

Many capitulations ago?  What else has he caved/compromised on?  Health care?  That's one thing.

Point is, they may be pissed now, but when it's Obama vs. Huckabee/Romney/Pawlenty/Barbour/whoever the heck it is come November 2012, they'll be voting for Obama.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Point is, they may be pissed now, but when it's Obama vs. Huckabee/Romney/Pawlenty/Barbour/whoever the heck it is come November 2012, they'll be voting for Obama.

Obama is at risk of suffering a significant intraparty challenge as Carter did in 1980 from Ted Kennedy.  The question is who might be able to pull such a challenge off.  Hillary might have had she remained in the Senate, tho I don't think she would have tried.  Edwards could have had he not proven to be a sleazeball.

Comparing Carter to Obama is laughable... he won't face a SERIOUS challenge... maybe some nutter like with Bush, but nothing serious.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Comparing Carter to Obama is laughable... he won't face a SERIOUS challenge... maybe some nutter like with Bush, but nothing serious.

Obama's problems have not been entirely of his own making, but then neither were Carter's.

Hard to say if there will be a push for a serious challenge.  A lot can happen in the next year.  But if things go as poorly for Obama in 2011 as they have the past two years, then the only reason he won't face a serious challenge is that there doesn't appear to be anyone on the Democratic side who could make a serious challenge to an incumbent, not because no one will want to.

He'd be pushed into not running before somebody challenges him.  A challenger would kill the Democratic party.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

He'd be pushed into not running before somebody challenges him.  A challenger would kill the Democratic party.

That's an 'excessive hyperbole' worthy statement right there.  A challenger might cost the Democrats any chance of regaining the House or keeping the Senate and the White House in 2012, but under the political climate that would induce a serious challenge, controlling either house of Congress in the 113th wouldn't be happening anyway.

It's not an excessive hyperbole worthy statement.  If you had a serious challenge against an African American President, and the challenger wasn't an African American, I think you'd see a large amount of alienation from the African American part of the party.  If there's a serious 2012 challenger, I don't think the Democrats would win the White House back before 2028.

EDIT: and if you truly thought what I said was excessive hyperbole, you would have reported it.  So let's not go around throwing baseless accusations at me just trying to score a quick point against me.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

He'd be pushed into not running before somebody challenges him.  A challenger would kill the Democratic party.

That's an 'excessive hyperbole' worthy statement right there.  A challenger might cost the Democrats any chance of regaining the House or keeping the Senate and the White House in 2012, but under the political climate that would induce a serious challenge, controlling either house of Congress in the 113th wouldn't be happening anyway.

It's not an excessive hyperbole worthy statement.  If you had a serious challenge against an African American President, and the challenger wasn't an African American, I think you'd see a large amount of alienation from the African American part of the party.  If there's a serious 2012 challenger, I don't think the Democrats would win the White House back before 2028.

EDIT: and if you truly thought what I said was excessive hyperbole, you would have reported it.  So let's not go around throwing baseless accusations at me just trying to score a quick point against me.

That's OK, if Obama continues to represent the Democratic party, there won't be a Democratic party in 2028.

And what has he done that would kill the party until 2028?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Do hardcore liberals not get that middle class taxes would go up without this deal? That alone would make economic recovery difficult, because that's where a lot of buying power is.  Holding out would not have resulted in a more favorable deal, the opposition is looking for a fight and will not waver.

Giving the Republicans everything they want without a fight means that either you are completely retarded, or you are a Republican.

Well, since the Republicans didn't get everything they wanted, then I guess he's neither?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Do hardcore liberals not get that middle class taxes would go up without this deal? That alone would make economic recovery difficult, because that's where a lot of buying power is.  Holding out would not have resulted in a more favorable deal, the opposition is looking for a fight and will not waver.

Giving the Republicans everything they want without a fight means that either you are completely retarded, or you are a Republican.

Well, since the Republicans didn't get everything they wanted, then I guess he's neither?

The Democrats still have a majority and the President, and this is one of the most one-sided deals ever. Especially since he basically told Congressional Democrats to go screw themselves.

The tax cuts aren't permanent... for those making over $250,000, this make the Dems happy, and it's something the Republicans wanted permanent.

The Republicans also didn't want an extension of unemployment benefits, but Dems did.

That doesn't exactly seem very one-sided.  It seems like some fair compromises.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Do hardcore liberals not get that middle class taxes would go up without this deal? That alone would make economic recovery difficult, because that's where a lot of buying power is.  Holding out would not have resulted in a more favorable deal, the opposition is looking for a fight and will not waver.

Giving the Republicans everything they want without a fight means that either you are completely retarded, or you are a Republican.

Well, since the Republicans didn't get everything they wanted, then I guess he's neither?

The Democrats still have a majority and the President, and this is one of the most one-sided deals ever. Especially since he basically told Congressional Democrats to go screw themselves.

The tax cuts aren't permanent... for those making over $250,000, this make the Dems happy, and it's something the Republicans wanted permanent.

The Republicans also didn't want an extension of unemployment benefits, but Dems did.

That doesn't exactly seem very one-sided.  It seems like some fair compromises.

Of course you think it's fair. You're a Republican.. But I imagine that no matter how much of a Republican Obama is, you aren't going to vote for him. So who cares what you think? Obama is wasting his time trying to appeal to Republicans like you who have a 9.61 economic score. Now, those of us who are well to the left of a 9.61 economic score realize that this is a horrid deal.

I think it's fair.  It's certainly not what I wanted.  In my history on this forum, I like to think that I haven't been a right wing hack.  Throught my involvement in politics, I've tried to call it as I see it.  I don't tow the party line (as evidence through my support of Chuck Hagel, my calls for DADT to be repealed for years, my support of the legalization of marijuana, my admiration for Russ Feingold, etc.), but I honestly don't see this deal as being one-sided.  I think it's about as close to the middle as you're going to get.  It gives both sides what they want temporarily.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Do hardcore liberals not get that middle class taxes would go up without this deal? That alone would make economic recovery difficult, because that's where a lot of buying power is.  Holding out would not have resulted in a more favorable deal, the opposition is looking for a fight and will not waver.

Giving the Republicans everything they want without a fight means that either you are completely retarded, or you are a Republican.

Well, since the Republicans didn't get everything they wanted, then I guess he's neither?

The Democrats still have a majority and the President, and this is one of the most one-sided deals ever. Especially since he basically told Congressional Democrats to go screw themselves.

The tax cuts aren't permanent... for those making over $250,000, this make the Dems happy, and it's something the Republicans wanted permanent.

The Republicans also didn't want an extension of unemployment benefits, but Dems did.

That doesn't exactly seem very one-sided.  It seems like some fair compromises.

Of course you think it's fair. You're a Republican.. But I imagine that no matter how much of a Republican Obama is, you aren't going to vote for him. So who cares what you think? Obama is wasting his time trying to appeal to Republicans like you who have a 9.61 economic score. Now, those of us who are well to the left of a 9.61 economic score realize that this is a horrid deal.

I think it's fair.  It's certainly not what I wanted.  In my history on this forum, I like to think that I haven't been a right wing hack.  Throught my involvement in politics, I've tried to call it as I see it.  I don't tow the party line (as evidence through my support of Chuck Hagel, my calls for DADT to be repealed for years, my support of the legalization of marijuana, my admiration for Russ Feingold, etc.), but I honestly don't see this deal as being one-sided.  I think it's about as close to the middle as you're going to get.  It gives both sides what they want temporarily.

Nope, not what I wanted. Not at all. DADT and pot are are not economic issues, and liking Hagel doesn't make you not right wing. The fact remains that Obama is wasting his time catering to people with a 9.61 economic score, while failing to get anything decent for the Democrats, and in fact not even having Democrats be part of the compromise.

Obama is certainly not catering to me... I am not thrilled with this deal at all.  I think it's doable... I'd like it to be different, but under a Democratic President and Congress, I'll take it.

I will admit that he should've included Democratic leaders in his talks before announcing the deal... that was a big blunder on his part.

But, what exactly would you like to see in a deal that would be acceptable to you?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

OK, jfern, instead of just saying, "Well if you like it, it must be bad!" what would you actually be OK with Obama proposing?

Give me something solid and tangible instead of just complaining about my economic PM score.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

jfern, you still aren't answering my question.  Instead of saying what you don't want, what do you want?  Give me some tangible starting point for what you would like to see President Obama propose...

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Maybe I shouldn't have used the word "kill," but I think it'd ruin them for decades.  And we'd certainly see the current form of the Democratic Party be killed.  The "Democratic Party" would probably carry on in name, but it wouldn't be the same party it is now.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

jfern, you still aren't answering my question.  Instead of saying what you don't want, what do you want?  Give me some tangible starting point for what you would like to see President Obama propose...

Nothing is better than this crap. But OK. Estate tax effect on the economy? Zero. So leave any estate tax cut out. Maybe a phase in capital gains tax. Have a deal consisting of the Bush income tax plus that payroll holiday for unemployment. Try to get more than 99 weeks for unemployment. Try to get a 2nd year of unemployment, although perhaps at only 79 weeks. Try to get a mini-stimulus as opposed to a deal that is entirely tax cuts besides the unemployment.

To my knowledge, Democrats were never pushing for more than 99 weeks unemployment.

The Republicans agreed to not push for permanent Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy... that was something they budged on.  They budged on extending unemployment.

They got what they wanted in estate taxes and capital gains taxes, although even Clinton lowered capital gains taxes and that helped the economy, so I'm not really sure that I'd mark that one as a "win" in the Republicans' column.

Look, I think the fact that President Clinton came in and appeared at the press conference today shows how good of a deal for both parties this is... and probably best of all for Obama.  If Obama follows in the steps of Clinton, he'll end up winning reelection.