Usa Thread

[Steve]

I do recall Pelosi's style and means to be less than ideal at the time. I also recall Republicans acting in a similar manner.

 

The bottom line is BOTH parties are like that. Its why I mention both at times when I criticize one. Because many things are done by both parties such as ursurping the constitution.

 

In the current Congress, the Republicans have voted against things they support just because Obama was for it and they didn't want him to get the credit. Things that are good for America. Its all bullshine.

[dean]

I'd agree that the Democrats did try to ram the healthcare bill through but only after Republicans did everything to try to kill it. Their public relations campaign on "Obamacare" was much more effective than the Democrats PR, particularly after Scott Brown was elected in Massachusetts and he Democrats had to go through a convoluted process in the House and Senate to finally pass it. Obama started out on healthcare to not make the same mistakes as Clinton did in giving Congress a "take it or leave it" healthcare bill. Obviously, they left it. And them 16-17 years went by without any counter proposals by the Republicans. We all know what healthcare costs did in those years. Obama's problem was in giving up too much to the AMA, insurance companies and unions, believing that, once they signed off on officially supporting the healthcare bill, hey wouldn't still try to undermine it. The control of Congress by the Lobbyists (they are now he 4th pillar of government, taking over from the Press) is the single biggest obstacle to ending the deadlock in government. I think that everyone knows that there are serious flaws in the healthcare law. Am I willing to see Romney try to do everything possible to destroy the healthcare bill (if he became President)? At least Newt Gingrich did make some proposals on healthcare. I won't vote for anyone that just states that Obamacare is a horrible idea for americans and business and it has to go, without saying what hey would do to replace Obamacare. What we have now is broken and minor changes won't help.

[Flashermac]

 

 

 

 

 

[dean]

Its a paradox when you have congressional approval ratings at a all time low and the percentage of incumbents that get re-elected at at least 95%. I wonder if here is any correlation between how much money an incumbent can shake out of corporations and lobbyists that goes to their re-election campaigns and that high rate of re-election (plus, the amount of time that a member of Congress spends courting the people that give out that money?

[Steve]

The fourth estate certainly aren't fair. Obama's approval rating is often showed and the intent is to say that he is not popular or doing a good job. However, the real truth is that Americans are upset at ALL poilticians. The fact that the Republican led Congress has the lowest approval rating since the '70s is rarely part of the discussion. If Americans are disappointing with politicians then Obama having the far higher approval rating of the two branches tells us more about his real job approval rating. It could be argued that the Congress has dragged his ratings down since they are lumped together as politicans.

 

Romney is worse than Obama in my opinion. The Republicans are not fielding their best candidate but the one who polls well. That is more than enough reason for me to either vote for Obama or a good alternative in the person of a 3rd party candidate. The GOP has no soul. They've sold it to the defense industry, oil industry, etc. The Dems have sold out as well but at least they have people who still believe in their ideals (even if I disagree with some of them). So, in a lesser of two evils proposition, the Dems are far, far the better of the two right now.

 

Their trying everything to quiet Ron Paul is added proof.

[kamui]

Romney is worse than Obama in my opinion. The Republicans are not fielding their best candidate but the one who polls well. That is more than enough reason for me to either vote for Obama or a good alternative in the person of a 3rd party candidate. The GOP has no soul.

 

Mitt Romney: 'I’m not concerned about the very poor'

Read more: http://www.politico....l#ixzz1lDBnXOEq

 

 

---

 

Obama leads GOP challengers in Ohio

By BYRON TAU |

2/1/12 12:09 PM EST

President Obama leads all four potential GOP challengers in the crucial swing state of Ohio, according to a new survey.

 

Obama leads GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney by seven points in the latest state poll by the Democratic-leaning pollster PPP, besting the former Massachusetts governor 49-42. Rick Santorum trails the president by 6 points, 48 to 42. Obama also beats Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul by by 12 and 10 points, respectively.

 

The president's approval/disapproval numbers in Ohio are an even split, at 48 percent each. Romney is viewed favorably by only 28 percent of Ohio voters. Obama is still underwater among independents, however, at 40 percent approval and 53 percent disapproval.

 

These numbers represent an marked improvement for President Obama since the last time PPP polled the Buckeye state. Obama's approval rating is up 8 points among all voters, and 13 percent among independents independents.

 

The poll comes after a week of intense focus on American manufacturing sector, income and tax code equality and the recovery of the American auto industry — all potentially salient issues in the Rust Belt state.

 

Obama carried Ohio 51-47 in 2008.

 

[kamui]

doublepost

[Hugh_Hoy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html?pagewanted=all An interesting read. It explains his mis-handling on how o get healthcare reform passed (just ramming it through).

 

Particularly interesting was the comment regarding his indifference to the "niceties" of the law.

 

I'm getting the idea from the article that he was hired to teach because of his race. I've read a commentary referring to him as the first "affirmative action" President; it appears that the Chicago University School of Law was ahead of its time. LOL

 

Thanks for the link.

 

HH

[Steve]

I am not gonna take points from Romney over the poor comment when taken in its entire concept he said there is a social safety net for the very poor. I may not think he's right in its adequacy but I won't see it as anti poor. Just my opinion, others may and I could see their point.

 

The Ohio poll is cruical for Obama. I don't think he'll win Florida. He has a fighting chance but I'm not so sure. Same with Pennsylvania. He'll lose Michigan, a swing state because Romney's dad was governor there. I've repeated this in a previous post but thought I'd share it again.

 

Obama v. Romney – Florida. Dead heat from an average of different polls. However, the poll with the 2nd widest sample has Obama winning and the biggest has a dead heat. I thought Romney would take Florida. Obama has a chance though. So, can’t write off Florida yet. If Obama takes Florida, its over ossibly.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/fl/florida_romney_vs_obama-1883.html

 

Obama v. Romney – Pennsylvania. Obama with a slight lead, about 3% points and that’s not enough to say he’ll take the state. Penna. Is a weird state. Some pollster described it as Phila and Pittsburgh democratic and Alabama in the middle. Close call.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html

[Steve]

Maybe its because I'm bored and need a life but I'd like to ask some of you what would be your platform if you were a candiate. What are your policy positons and what do you want to do if you were president?