R.I.P. to the New Deal

[DevotedDemocrat]

I for one am totally depressed. I think this election's outcome---a win for the GOP, a Mitt Romney Presidency (with Grover Norquist and Paul Ryan as De Facto Presidents), a "vindication" of the far right wing Tea Party's point of view--is inevitable thanks to Obama's poor performance n the debate. He played it and the election too safe; It will be a reverse of 1948. The Presidency of Mitt Romney, I think, will see the final death of the New Deal, and the Great Society. Romney made it clear in the debate and in his speeches that he wants to essentially do away with Social Security and Medicare for people under 54, and turn Medicaid back to the states.

For so many years it seemed the Bircher dreams of a pre-New Deal, pre-Regulation, pre-Square Deal, Gilded Age America would never come true, but now with the (what I feel is) the inevitable victory of Romney, all of the reforms made in America over the past century or so will be undone. The current Congress is probably the most Conservative in history, and Grover Norquist and the Koch Brothers are basically bankrolling most of the GOP reps and writing the party platform. Romney, to appease his base, will sign any bill the GOP Congress hands him.

It's sad to grow up as a Liberal Democrat only to know that the first election you're able to vote in will mean the end of Liberalism, and the gutting of Liberalism's triumphs.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would seriously... seriously calm down.

This election is FAR from over.

Unless people are prepared to fight and not act like this is over because of some bad news... then the New Deal deserves to die if people give up so easily.

This exact extremely defeatist attitude with more than 3 weeks to go is more likely to bring about Obama's undoing than anything Romney does.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

It's all good dude, we still got this. And in the event that Obama does lose, we will still have the senate and will probably take the House in 2014. Then in 2016 Hillary will bury Romney.

[DevotedDemocrat]

It's all good dude, we still got this. And in the event that Obama does lose, we will still have the senate and will probably take the House in 2014. Then in 2016 Hillary will bury Romney.

But by 2016, Romney will have buried the New Deal and Great Society.

[NVGonzalez]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/conservatives-liberals-and-polls/2012/10/09/ddeef47e-124c-11e2-be82-c3411b7680a9_blog.html

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

You need to fight and every Democrat needs to stop feeling sorry and sad and get motivated. The way Romney wins is bulls***ing people into thinking he's got it won.

Remember, the primary electoral strategy of the GOP this year was to depress Democratic turnout ... you decide it's over when there's 3 weeks and 2 debates left to go, then you've done what the GOP wants.

Its extremely close and enthusiasm matters more than anything else.

[Cobbler]

I for one am totally depressed. I think this election's outcome---a win for the GOP, a Mitt Romney Presidency (with Grover Norquist and Paul Ryan as De Facto Presidents), a "vindication" of the far right wing Tea Party's point of view--is inevitable thanks to Obama's poor performance n the debate. He played it and the election too safe; It will be a reverse of 1948. The Presidency of Mitt Romney, I think, will see the final death of the New Deal, and the Great Society. Romney made it clear in the debate and in his speeches that he wants to essentially do away with Social Security and Medicare for people under 54, and turn Medicaid back to the states.

For so many years it seemed the Bircher dreams of a pre-New Deal, pre-Regulation, pre-Square Deal, Gilded Age America would never come true, but now with the (what I feel is) the inevitable victory of Romney, all of the reforms made in America over the past century or so will be undone. The current Congress is probably the most Conservative in history, and Grover Norquist and the Koch Brothers are basically bankrolling most of the GOP reps and writing the party platform. Romney, to appease his base, will sign any bill the GOP Congress hands him.

It's sad to grow up as a Liberal Democrat only to know that the first election you're able to vote in will mean the end of Liberalism, and the gutting of Liberalism's triumphs.

You are way too dramatic. Contrary to what you might think, Mitt Romney is not a raving ideologue obsessed with destroying liberalism.

Democrats on this board need to calm down. Romney has been behind this whole race, and you didn't see this type of behavior from Republicans. Obama is still in the race.

[DevotedDemocrat]

I for one am totally depressed. I think this election's outcome---a win for the GOP, a Mitt Romney Presidency (with Grover Norquist and Paul Ryan as De Facto Presidents), a "vindication" of the far right wing Tea Party's point of view--is inevitable thanks to Obama's poor performance n the debate. He played it and the election too safe; It will be a reverse of 1948. The Presidency of Mitt Romney, I think, will see the final death of the New Deal, and the Great Society. Romney made it clear in the debate and in his speeches that he wants to essentially do away with Social Security and Medicare for people under 54, and turn Medicaid back to the states.

For so many years it seemed the Bircher dreams of a pre-New Deal, pre-Regulation, pre-Square Deal, Gilded Age America would never come true, but now with the (what I feel is) the inevitable victory of Romney, all of the reforms made in America over the past century or so will be undone. The current Congress is probably the most Conservative in history, and Grover Norquist and the Koch Brothers are basically bankrolling most of the GOP reps and writing the party platform. Romney, to appease his base, will sign any bill the GOP Congress hands him.

It's sad to grow up as a Liberal Democrat only to know that the first election you're able to vote in will mean the end of Liberalism, and the gutting of Liberalism's triumphs.

You are way too dramatic. Contrary to what you might think, Mitt Romney is not a raving ideologue obsessed with destroying liberalism.

Democrats on this board need to calm down. Romney has been behind this whole race, and you didn't see this type of behavior from Republicans. Obama is still in the race.

His running mate, who will likely be the power behind the throne, is a raving ideologue bent on destroying Liberalism, though. As are the Koch Brothers and Norquist, who intend to make Romney their puppet.

[Brittain33]

No offense, but your first paragraph plus the fact you've just started posting make you sound like a conservative pretending to be a Dem to play around with the Dems here. I hope that's not the case.

[J. J.]

The Great Society died in the 1980's, if not the 1970's. 

The generation familiar with the New Deal has pretty much died out.  There will be changes, but I doubt if will turn the clock back to the 1890's.

[opebo]

There will be changes, but I doubt if will turn the clock back to the 1890's.

We're already back in the 1890s, J.J.  Utter oppression, and anyone who thinks there is a 'welfare state' remaining is terribly out of touch.

[Brittain33]

The Great Society died in the 1980's, if not the 1970's. 

Medicare was a major part of the Great Society...

[cavalcade]

Yes, it's the END OF AMERICA if the other candidate wins, most important election in our lifetime, etc. etc.

[Skill and Chance]

Yes, it's the END OF AMERICA if the other candidate wins, most important election in our lifetime, etc. etc.

There's nothing that problematic with Romney. The problem is that there is (House) and will be (Senate) a congressional majority that genuinely wants the 19th century back.  And Romney knows that he will be primaried by a nut if he doesn't go along with their demands.

[pbrower2a]

I for one am totally depressed. I think this election's outcome---a win for the GOP, a Mitt Romney Presidency (with Grover Norquist and Paul Ryan as De Facto Presidents), a "vindication" of the far right wing Tea Party's point of view--is inevitable thanks to Obama's poor performance n the debate. He played it and the election too safe; It will be a reverse of 1948. The Presidency of Mitt Romney, I think, will see the final death of the New Deal, and the Great Society. Romney made it clear in the debate and in his speeches that he wants to essentially do away with Social Security and Medicare for people under 54, and turn Medicaid back to the states.

For so many years it seemed the Bircher dreams of a pre-New Deal, pre-Regulation, pre-Square Deal, Gilded Age America would never come true, but now with the (what I feel is) the inevitable victory of Romney, all of the reforms made in America over the past century or so will be undone. The current Congress is probably the most Conservative in history, and Grover Norquist and the Koch Brothers are basically bankrolling most of the GOP reps and writing the party platform. Romney, to appease his base, will sign any bill the GOP Congress hands him.

It's sad to grow up as a Liberal Democrat only to know that the first election you're able to vote in will mean the end of Liberalism, and the gutting of Liberalism's triumphs.

If I believed this I would also believe that democracy itself would die in America. Republicans would be unelectable after their failure at economic stewardship and their travesty of social justice. Core constituencies of the GOP would see themselves in deep trouble in the 2014 and especially the 2016 elections. Political power and its perquisites have roughly the addictive power of tobacco, so to keep power the 'winners' of 2010 and 2012 would be tempted to rig elections.

Paul Ryan has made clear that he wants the privatization of Social Security and Medicare so that they become defined-deduction systems on behalf of 'free-market' operators -- and, assuming the worst, corrupt profiteers who fleece  captive 'investors' either through inflated costs, gambles organized to have limited good for the common man if they go well but ruin if they don't, or even outright theft including Madoff-style Ponzi schemes. Mitt Romney made clear that he would push a national 'Right-to-Work' law that would all but abolish collective bargaining. Elected officials would be responsible more to economic interests through lobbyists than to constituents. We would end up with a unique manner of dictatorship.

That is the view that you would hold if you believed the recent R-friendly polls that show an Obama collapse. President Obama may have lost some of a solid lead after the debate performance -- as shown in such pollsters as PPP and Marist who do not lean so far right. The right-wing interests who have long found that their Orwellian ads have been ineffective in bringing about the expected landslide against a President in the way of a 'Union of Christian and Corporate States'.   Those interests have bought some polling efforts by some of the pollsters with the weakest of methodology and least transparency of analysis but a right-wing lean to show that President Obama has failed.  Of course to keep getting the windfall the suspect pollsters need to get the desired results. The good pollsters show that President Obama is still winning even though voters recognize that President Obama laid an egg in the debates.

Don't panic! A sudden collapse in the polls at this stage of an electoral season can happen only if a scandal breaks, a diplomatic or military debacle pops up, or the economy suddenly melts down. PPP polled a definitive swing state (Virginia) and found that the President still had an edge in credibility on both the economy and foreign affairs -- both of which would seem far more important than performance in one debate -- although the same poll left no doubt that President Obama performed badly in that debate.  It got similar results in Ohio, including an overwhelming number of early votes for President Obama and a weak Romney lead among those who have yet to vote.  Why should one bad performance in one debate make the difference unless the opposing candidates are indistinguishable?

Add to this, a new pollster in this cycle just polled Arizona and, with a methodology that includes the option for telephone respondents to answer questions in Spanish unlike other pollsters... President Obama has a slight lead. Sure, I would need corroboration.

Mitt Romney cannot win without Ohio. He could conceivably win without Virginia, but that would require him to win several states that Republican nominees for President have not won since 1988. If Arizona is anywhere near close, then Nevada and Colorado are in reality locks due to similar demography and political heritage much more liberal than Arizona. It could also be that the poll that shows a small lead for President Obama reflects that people scared of having Social Security and Medicare privatized -- and that would work to the benefit of the President in Florida.     

The Obama campaign has since used outtakes of the debate for negative ads against Mitt Romney for flip-flops and outright prevarications that show a devious or unsteady leader. Joe Biden debated Paul Ryan and won like the 'professional wrestler' who does a body-slam upon the loser. Ryan is expected to set the economic ideology of the Romney Administration. We have yet to see the effects of the VP debate in the polls.

Don't panic. Just do what helps Obama and House and Senate Democrats win. Volunteer at local Democratic headquarters.       

[Phony Moderate]

LBJ Revivalist?

[© tweed]

Yes, it's the END OF AMERICA if the other candidate wins, most important election in our lifetime, etc. etc.

it's the End of America even if the better guy wins.

[Penelope]

It's all good dude, we still got this. And in the event that Obama does lose, we will still have the senate and will probably take the House in 2014. Then in 2016 Hillary will bury Romney.

But by 2016, Romney will have buried the New Deal and Great Society.

Remember how Obama was going radically change everything by 2012?

Oh wait that never happened because things never change that fast in American politics. It will take upwards of 20 years to get rid of the New Deal and Great Society, between partisan gridlock, change in administrations, etc. 

[Frodo]

It's all good dude, we still got this. And in the event that Obama does lose, we will still have the senate and will probably take the House in 2014. Then in 2016 Hillary will bury Romney.

But by 2016, Romney will have buried the New Deal and Great Society.

Remember how Obama was going radically change everything by 2012?

Oh wait that never happened because things never change that fast in American politics. It will take upwards of 20 years to get rid of the New Deal and Great Society, between partisan gridlock, change in administrations, etc. 

So what you're saying is that if Mitt Romney wins this year, it won't be the end -it will merely be the beginning of the end? 

[Penelope]

It's all good dude, we still got this. And in the event that Obama does lose, we will still have the senate and will probably take the House in 2014. Then in 2016 Hillary will bury Romney.

But by 2016, Romney will have buried the New Deal and Great Society.

Remember how Obama was going radically change everything by 2012?

Oh wait that never happened because things never change that fast in American politics. It will take upwards of 20 years to get rid of the New Deal and Great Society, between partisan gridlock, change in administrations, etc. 

So what you're saying is that if Mitt Romney wins this year, it won't be the end -it will merely be the beginning of the end? 

I guess that's closer to what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that if you want to stop the New Deal and Great Society from being buried, you've got like at least 20 years to buck the trend if one gets started.

People act like this every election.

Seriously, if Obama, the young, confident, charismatic, idealistic leader of the 2008 election couldn't do more than slightly reform Healthcare in 4 years, then how on Earth do people think that an awkward 64 year old will gut three generations worth of legislation in the same amount of time?

[Stranger in a strange land]

The Great Society died in the 1980's, if not the 1970's. 

The generation familiar with the New Deal has pretty much died out.  There will be changes, but I doubt if will turn the clock back to the 1890's.

Bush couldn't get partial privatization of social security with commanding majorities in both houses of congress, and despite strong support from the Beltway Conservative Establishment, it was pretty much the first time in his presidency where he didn't get exactly what he wanted from Congress. His presidency went downhill from there. Social Security is called the Third Rail of American Politics for a reason.

[King]

People forgot about the New Deal along time ago.  That's apparent by all the olds who should be championing it yet seem to be against what clearly helped them in their youth.

[fezzyfestoon]

Obama is SUCH a champion of the New Deal after all...

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

People forgot about the New Deal along time ago.  That's apparent by all the olds who should be championing it yet seem to be against what clearly helped them in their youth.

What New Deal programs are you thinking of here?

[fezzyfestoon]

People forgot about the New Deal along time ago.  That's apparent by all the olds who should be championing it yet seem to be against what clearly helped them in their youth.

What New Deal programs are you thinking of here?

This stands out. To me at least...


The young people are predictably worse with this one. Lots and lots of "government out of medicare" posters.