Election Prediction

[plblark]

As an American, I can only wish the country well.

[elroy]

Just imagine the terrible situation he's inheriting THIS time! Poor guy.

There is a lot of similarities between what Obama is going through and Clinton did back in the 90s. Started off with a recession and a hostile congress. By the end, the economy was booming, the budget was balanced, yadda yadda yadda. A lot of the arguments being used today mirror what was said in 96 when he was reelected. End of the world as we know it, socialism, people dependent on the government, etc.

Obviously there are differences, but what would you rather have? A booming economy, or everything in the tank to ensure whoever the republican candidate is will win the election in 2016? Not what you think will happen. What would you rather see?

I would MUCH rather see a booming economy, but the only way that will happen is if POTUS and Congress work together. Congress has already shown that it has little interest in working with Obama, and that's not all his fault, but neither has he shown ANY interest in compromise in 4 years either. If I recall, he has not passed a single piece of legislation that was not divided cleanly down party lines.

In fact, he is arguably the most divisive president in history. I don't expect that to change, especially now that he has a "mandate". I expect he will continue to push legislation that Congress will not back and neither side will compromise.

I'd rather see a booming economy, but I expect to see disaster. You asked, and that's my .02

[Heffay]

I think he's going to say "Either raise the taxes like I want, or I'm letting the Bush tax cuts expire. And we all know 'Murica is going to blame you, House."

I don't know where the GOP is planning on getting any leverage. He doesn't have to worry about reelection anymore.

I actually think financially the country will be doing damn fine in 4 years. Especially with the split legislature.

Minnesota... the all D crew is going to cause some serious issues though.

[elroy]

I actually think financially the country will be doing damn fine in 4 years.

What have you seen in the last 4 years that would lead you to that conclusion?

All of BHO's "the best is yet to come" programs are going to take money, lots of it. Do you think in his second term he is going to all of a sudden start spending less than he takes in?

[Jayson88]

And where has the DEMS budget been? They do not even have the guts to have a a budget... you cannot even make this stuff up...

[Heffay]

I actually think financially the country will be doing damn fine in 4 years.

What have you seen in the last 4 years that would lead you to that conclusion?

All of BHO's "the best is yet to come" programs are going to take money, lots of it. Do you think in his second term he is going to all of a sudden start spending less than he takes in?

No. I think he's going to raise taxes and close loopholes.

And the economy will still thrive.

[cigartim]

Minnesota... the all D crew is going to cause some serious issues though.

I worry about that too, but remain optimistic that the Dems will see this election as a mandate against obstinance, not conservatism. I don't know why it is so hard for politicians on both sides to realize that most Americans want their leaders to solve problems, not move the country dramatically right or left.

[Heffay]

Minnesota... the all D crew is going to cause some serious issues though.

I worry about that too, but remain optimistic that the Dems will see this election as a mandate against obstinance, not conservatism. I don't know why it is so hard for politicians on both sides to realize that most Americans want their leaders to solve problems, not move the country dramatically right or left.

The results on the amendments sends a pretty strong signal about what Minnesotans think of social conservatism.

[cigartim]

Minnesota... the all D crew is going to cause some serious issues though.

I worry about that too, but remain optimistic that the Dems will see this election as a mandate against obstinance, not conservatism. I don't know why it is so hard for politicians on both sides to realize that most Americans want their leaders to solve problems, not move the country dramatically right or left.

The results on the amendments sends a pretty strong signal about what Minnesotans think of social conservatism.

True, which makes me pretty proud to be a Minnesotan today. That doesn't mean they should go off the deep end over the next two years.

[whiteox]

True, which makes me pretty proud to be a Minnesotan today. That doesn't mean they should go off the deep end over the next two years.

All of this.

[oneunder]

I don't know why it is so hard for politicians on both sides to realize that most Americans want their leaders to solve problems, not move the country dramatically right or left.

Because compromise, and a give/take environment doesn't win votes. Why do you think that topics such as abortion and gay marriage are at the to levels of the debates and talks by the water cooler? People don't have to think about them. They can be told by a book, or some politician in a navy blue suit and red tie that one is bad, or good. That is an easy distinction to make. Yes, or no. The farther left or right you get, the easier it is to make the yes or no decisions and stick to them. When you start hitting middle ground, people need to think about their stances on things WHY they stand for their beliefs and values and taht doesn not grantee votes. Creating critical thinkers doesn't earn votes. Especially if people, like me, who in the past 12 years worth of elections I have been apart of, hasn't vote a straight ticket and probably will never vote a straight ticket.

This is also why political attack ads work. Because you need to know what your guy is standing for, just that the other guy sucks. That's easy enough. Same thing with attacking a race, or religion of someone. "OHH his middle name is Hussein, he must be a terrorist"...that is easy for people to not think about and believe. The politicians in the US are not pandering to the smart. They know that the educated are going to vote their beliefs no matter how many robocalls, attack ads, and signs they see. No, they are vying for for the hoi polloi.

That is my answer as to why politicians on both sides fail to realize your statement. Because compromise wont get them re-elected.

The idea of a 'career politician' is sick to me.

[Heffay]

I don't know why it is so hard for politicians on both sides to realize that most Americans want their leaders to solve problems, not move the country dramatically right or left.

Because compromise, and a give/take environment doesn't win votes. Why do you think that topics such as abortion and gay marriage are at the to levels of the debates and talks by the water cooler?

Well, apparently failure to compromise doesn't win votes anymore either.

[Jeff Bergquist]

I've posted it before, but IMO Washington needed to do a better job picking their compromises. The standard reelection compromise is that the Dems get the social programs they want and the Reps get the tax reductions they want while keeping defense spending high, and we wind up trillions in debt.