McCain takes 5-point lead over Obama

[CARLHAYDEN]

That much has been made abundantly clear, but then there's the question of Obama being any better.

There's no possible way I would consider McCain better on the economy...if Obama wasn't advocating raising taxes on the rich in the middle of an economic downturn.  We have enough trouble with investment dollars sitting on the sidelines as it is.

To be frank with the current deficit and current account deficit figures, and McCain's nearly deranged fiscal promises to cut taxes or give gazzillion dollar balances to any group I would consider Obama better even if he was promoting a 35% Capital Gains tax and I am a day trader. McCain  would be a continuation of the supply side economics that agree rapidly turning us into an economic basket case.

The markets are smarter than high schoolers, they respond to sane fiscal policies altogether more than the micro incentives if they are surrounded by nonsenical policy. That's why Clinton's tax increase in 1993 set off the largest economic expansion in history, and Bush's have driven the economy further into collapse. Clinton's showed the grown-ups were in charge, Bush's that ideological children with no sense were. McCain for his part understood that at the time. He's just "forgotten" it. If he remembered that opposition I might be able to force myself to vote for him over Obama. Now I can't understand how anyone who cares about the country or economy could.

As for investment dollars, the opposite is actually the problem. The bear stearns bailout, and controls on short selling is forcing billions into worthless financial stocks. The government has created a massive bubble and the best performing stocks of the last month all have negative equity and should not exist as companies. But because there are rules in place making it impossible for them to fail, everyone is dumping Microsoft to buy Washington Mutual. Watch, all the administration has done with its bailouts is create a much more massive bubble that is going to burst this fall. They should have taken over Bear Stearns and Fannie Mae. It would have been bad for the economy in the same sense taking over Northern Rock was for the Brits, but every major British bank is turning a profit this year because they got the message that their shareholders and execs would be ruined if a they didn't cvlean up their act. And their property collapse was worse than ours. Instead here we have given billions of dollars to the same executives that caused this mess. It would be a good thing if we cooled off buying of worthless stocks, and quite frankly McCain is just going to create more bubbles.

Ah, yes, higher taxer are better taxes as they somehow magically increase propserity.  Imagine how well off we could be if we simply doubled taxes.

Now, there are those who might suggest that we might want to contain expenditures, but that is a concept which escape liberals.  However, the truth is that the economic expansion we had in the mid though late nineties was because Congress (in a rare example of integrity) kept the growth of expenditures down.

Also, there we a number of reforms in government programs in the mid nineties (which liberals would like to forget, or at least not mention) which helped the economy.

A thoughtful fiscal policy (dealing with expenditures as well as revenues), coupled with a prudent monetary policy, and integrated with a reasonable regulatory policy can help us achieve properity.
Simply imposing tax increases, is, well, dumb.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Ah, yes, higher taxer are better taxes as they somehow magically increase propserity.  Imagine how well off we could be if we simply doubled taxes.

Now, there are those who might suggest that we might want to contain expenditures, but that is a concept which escape liberals.  However, the truth is that the economic expansion we had in the mid though late nineties was because Congress (in a rare example of integrity) kept the growth of expenditures down.

Also, there we a number of reforms in government programs in the mid nineties (which liberals would like to forget, or at least not mention) which helped the economy.

A thoughtful fiscal policy (dealing with expenditures as well as revenues), coupled with a prudent monetary policy, and integrated with a reasonable regulatory policy can help us achieve properity.
Simply imposing tax increases, is, well, dumb.
[/quote]

Yes, because "containing expenditures" worked so well during the Great Depression...

[/quote]

Er, are you contending that federal expenditures as a percentage of the GNP/GDP didn't substantially increase during the depression?

[CARLHAYDEN]

My perception of Obama is that of a positively liberal-leaning Christian Democrat, not some extremist hard-liner on the political left. Yes, he has a liberal Senate voting record but I don't buy it that Obama is the most liberal senator - and even if he was, that in my eyes would just to be testament to his opposition to the Republican policies he considers to be failing and dividing America

Furthermore, an Obama presidency will have checks and balances from within Congress in the form of the Blue Dogs. And that is more than I can say for the servile Republicans, most of whom, have given Bush a free hand

McCain will be a continuation of the same policies espoused by libertarian-leaning conservative Republican elitists - and that's exactly how its been with Bush and, Lord, look at the point to which he has taken the US economy. A bit more effective regulation might have averted the loss of confidence in the US sub-prime mortgage and the ensuring fallout. The debate shouldn't be whether big government or small government is best, it should be about whether government is effective or not

And given the choice between consensus-building pragmatism or conflict-driven ideological, it's the former every time. On that score, whoever the next president is, be it Obama or McCain, I hope to see being an improvement on the current appalling state of affairs. Divide and rule has been George W Bush to a 'T'

Dave
[/quote]

Dave,

You really have taken leave of your senses!

Obama a Christian?!?  Now, I don't mean to suggest he's a Muslim, but rather that he worships at the altar of big government.  Its interesting that you completely ignore both his Senate and his state legislative records.

You go on to get nuttier and nuttier.  You try to explain Obama's extreme left-wing record but suggesting its just an act of opposition to bush policies, which according to you are always wrong.  And of course, Obama's actions are uniting whereas Bush's are "devisive."

Then you really lose all touch with reality.  McCain a libertarian.  ROTFLMAO.  The guy hates the pharmaceutical companies, which he has publicly dubbed, "bad guys."  While there is a campaign on, he says he opposes tax increases, but, his Senate record has been one of supporting higher taxes (I prefer to look at actions rather than campaign lies for both him and Obama).  His attacks on the first amendment and the second amendment are hardly libertarian, by any rational person's definition.

Finally, you really have no idea whatsoever about what is really going on in the American campaign.  McCain is not "ideological" (he doesn't know the meaning of the word) but rater idiotlogical (i.e. he says and does a lot of very stupid things), while Obama is a left wing die-hard who merely verbally trims his sales during the campaign (if you think he is is "pragmatic" or a "consensus builder," you've been spending too much time in the meeting of the marxist-lenninist clubs).