FredHayek wrote: 52%? Not a mandate especially when BHO chose to run against a do nothing Congress that was easily re-elected.
52.5% .... Which was more than Bush got in his second term, when he was standing up there talking about all of his "political capital the he was going to spend..."
How's that reading comprehension problem coming along...?
I think what he means is that 52.5% isn't much of a majority, especially when those running for re-election didn't do anything to piss off their constituents (because they, in fact, did nothing - one of the lowest bill-passage rates of any Congress this past century).
I myself don't really expect much of anything to change...we've got the same old, same old in there.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Which was more than Bush got in his second term, when he was standing up there talking about all of his "political capital the he was going to spend..."
Isn't it funny how the Bush Republicans billed their meager win as a "mandate", but 52.5% suddenly isn't one....?
Losing the presidency but keeping the House might just be a matter of nominating the wrong man for the Presidency instead of the death of the Republican party.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
The Republican Party isn't going to die, it's just going to shake itself out like the Dems did back in the 80s. It's lost its focus and connection with the people, allowed extremists to pervert its major defining ideal of fiscal conservatism. I look forward to it becoming like it once was, a champion of people's rights and a true conservation movement.
Okay so the number is some 52%. My point is that the other 48% of American voters didn't agree with where the Administration is taking the country. I would consider 48% to be statistically significant. As far as I'm concerned the President has ignored roughly half the country for four years and will do the same for four more. That's inexcusable.
Be that as it may, I don't see any "plan" on the part of the current Administration when it comes to the economy (or foreign policy for that matter) so how can we possibly expect a positive outcome. The fiscal problems faced by all of us are significant and still no plan...just hot air. We need a new plan. I don't care who writes the plan...but we need some new ideas because none of the ideas tried so far are getting it done.
The sort of plan the Administration has to forge is a tough and complicated one to craft and this President isn't about hard work OR details. He makes campaign speeches and calls them "plans". I want to see a plan to heal our national economy and get people working again. I also want a plan that somehow also curbs the debt. So far I don't see a plan that will accomplish either of those things.
Such a plan will require extraordinary leadership. I just don't see this President being up to the task so four years from now, if we are lucky, we will come out pretty much where we are right now. Or maybe we really hit the skids. If he pulls this rabbit out the hat with all the mumbo jumbo he is talking now I will GLADLY congratulate him.
It's not about one side winning and the other side losing. If these assclowns don't figure this out we are all going down in flames.
Taxing the rich to death may feel good but it won't get it done. After we tax the rich..then what? Raise taxes? On who? The middle class? Really? You have to be shitting me? More taxes?
What sacred cows can we gore? We can cut the DoD budget to zero and that won't get it done. Then what? What is the plan?
Don't bother because we both no there is no plan. All we have is a tired campaign speech.
47.5 % ... And since that number was even higher on the losing side when Bush got his second term, we KNOW how that worked out for the people that didn't vote for him...
As you guys were so found of pointing out in 2010, (and in 2004), "Elections have consequences"... If you want to think back on how you treated those wins as a "mandate" to screw the people that didn't vote for your candidate, the cries of "ignoring the will of the [47.5%]" ring a little hollow... Oh well, it's probably the 47% that are all "victims" and "takers" anyway... I guess you'll have to live with that for another 2-4 years...
Martin Ent Inc wrote: The 41 percent who said just after the Nov. 6 election that they believe the country will be worse off four years from now is more than twice the 20 percent who said that four years ago--just before Obama's inauguration
Just to be clear, the same group of inexperienced Americans that have voted all the leaders in for the history of this country feels that THEY have made bad decisions.
Gee, I wonder if we will keep doing the same thing and expect different results.
Voting does not work effectively to run a society, initially 1/2 the people loose, eventually all of them do. All you have to do is think of your nemesis on this board and my point is proven. That person and many like them are allowed to make your life decisions for you in mass, thus we all are doomed.