Mid-Term Elections

[HALL85]

It's funny, but two years ago the volume of threads on Life off the Ship were significant. This year during the mid-term elections, it's been so quiet, you can hear a pin drop. I'm not sure why. I took the following out of this election:
1) Public is not happy with Obama's focus. From Day 1 it should have been on the economy and jobs (real jobs). He gambled on prioritizing other initiatives (i.e. health care reform, cash for clunkers) and a stimulus that doesn't create any long term jobs), and still 10% of the workforce is jobless.
2) The public is also disgusted with Washington (Democrats and Republicans) and their partisan politics. Sure the House is a big win for the Republicans, but I sense the public will keep voting out those that don't play well together. The message is "serve the public, not your party first". I don't think the Tea Party movement is necessarily being embraced, but America's way of creating change because the people in there are not doing the job....they will turn just as fast on some of these Tea Party candidates if they show the same behavior.

I have seen very few politicians that "get it". Instead of the negative ads and the partisan politics, if I was running in the election, EVERY ad would have been about JOBS, JOBS, JOBS. Don't they get it? Either people are out of work or many have done without raises or have had hours scaled back, etc.

Finally, I'd be curious to know those who were/are Obama supporters...what do you think of his first two years? And how did we go from a country that was so passionate about a Presidential election to one that is a combination of angry and disinterested so quickly???
This post was edited on 11/3 8:28 AM by HALL85

 

[SPK145]

No mention of the Constitution? Since when is it the government's job to create jobs? Due to their un-Constitutionality, they are the great job killers. Why is the president a policy maker, that is not his job.

Yes We Can has turned into Maybe We Can't.

 

[The SHUttle]

I really did not understand how any politicians did not run on creating jobs as the primary focus of his or her platform. I don't necessarily agree that the Tea Party movement is not being embraced by the American public.

I would like to give the American public some credit that they are realizing that more often than not they agree with the conservative ideals this country was founded on. I could be completely naive though.

What I also hope this election shows is that America rejects the crackpots no matter how conservative you say you are. Please oh please, do not let Sarah Palin win the Republican nomination for President in 2012. If I were running for some sort of office, I wouldn't even let her near my campaign. What has she ever done to garner so much support? She abandoned the puclib office she was elected to in pursuit of personal profit.

You can't give the liberals anything to drive fear into the gullible among us (this would be where I stop giving the benefit of the doubt to the American public). They are very effective at distorting campaigns away from the real issues to the "Oh my God, my kids are going to be taught that Jesus rode a dinosaur" issues.

 

[Seton75]

The political dialogue in the country is poison and I stopped finding the boards fun. At one time I was very active here and on the RU OT board as well. The political talk shows have made people so partisan I run from it now.

I think the repubs will do all they can in the next two years to make Obama look bad as opposed to how Clinton and Newt et all grudgingly working together towards things that benefitted the country. The repubs do not want that to happen, imo. They would rather win the WH to the detriment of the country. I dont say the dems would do any differently if things were reversed, but I do say it is tragic.

The repubs had both houses if they didnt lose their minds in three states. They run the only person who cant beat Reid, Del fiasco and a guy losing to a write in in Alaska. I dont get it.

Our economy is fatally flawed. If we dont start making things again we are kising it all goodbye in the long run. We are gonna start a war and realize we dont have anyone to make any boots or unis or anything.

 

[shu09]

Chuck Todd made a great point last night: If this election was about Obama, why did Democrats keep the Senate? This election was about Pelosi and the Republican domination of House races demonstrates that.

I just don't get the American public. It took 8+ years to get into the mess we're in and we're only a year and a half up from the bottom (March 2009) and now they want to go back to the same policies that got us here. It's just a never ending cycle of impatience. The same thing will happen in 2012 after the Congress grinds to halt with all the gridlock. The public will elect Democrats in 2012 because they'll be mad at the Republicans. Just plain stupid.

You have to love people like Michele Bachmann. She said everyone wants to cut spending and reduce defecits, then she says cut taxes for all. That move would add BILLIONS to the defecit. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

 

[shu09]

Originally posted by SPK145:
Since when is it the government's job to create jobs?

This is interesting because I heard Rand Paul say something to the effect of "government doesn't create jobs." Yet most Republicans and Tea Partiers ran on a platform of low taxes, decreased spending and job creation. So government doesn't create jobs but elect me to lower the unemployment rate. Makes a ton of sense, right? LOL. More hypocrisy from the Tea Party.

Another thing: All I've heard is the theme "JOBS JOBS JOBS." Whether or not you think government should create jobs, how exactly does government go about creating jobs? Everyone keeps saying this theme but offers no concrete ways of going about it. How does government create jobs for people?
This post was edited on 11/3 4:14 PM by shu09

 

[The SHUttle]

The government creates jobs by creating an attractive market where companies are not afraid to use the capital they are currently sitting on. It's not a hard concept. The current administration has been very anti-business, and there's no getting around that. The "Tea Party" aka conservatives hope to spur economic growth by getting the hell out of the way. This is a referendum on the entire liberal agenda (Obama & Pelosi included). I am, frankly, shocked that Harry Reid managed to keep his job, but I'll get over it.

The productivity index is at an all-time high, which means the American worker who still has a job is being asked to do more than ever before. People can only be pushed so far before they say enough.

For 2012, this was the best outcome for the Republicans. If they controlled the House and the Senate, Obama's campaign speeches would be a cinch to write. He will still try to go the route of "The Party of 'No'," but hopefully voters are a little more discerning this time. Let's pray that the left is not successful in deifying him in the eyes of the gullible public a second time. Finally, let's pray that those who label themselves as conservatives don't end up voting for him again. That was one of the biggest jokes I have ever seen.

 

[shu09]

What specific policies of this administration are anti-business? I hear all the time that they are but I never hear any actual reasons why.

 

[HALL85]

Originally posted by Seton75:
The political dialogue in the country is poison and I stopped finding the boards fun. At one time I was very active here and on the RU OT board as well. The political talk shows have made people so partisan I run from it now.

I think the repubs will do all they can in the next two years to make Obama look bad as opposed to how Clinton and Newt et all grudgingly working together towards things that benefitted the country. The repubs do not want that to happen, imo. They would rather win the WH to the detriment of the country. I dont say the dems would do any differently if things were reversed, but I do say it is tragic.

The repubs had both houses if they didnt lose their minds in three states. They run the only person who cant beat Reid, Del fiasco and a guy losing to a write in in Alaska. I dont get it.

Our economy is fatally flawed. If we dont start making things again we are kising it all goodbye in the long run. We are gonna start a war and realize we dont have anyone to make any boots or unis or anything.

The smart politicians (and there are too few), will be the ones to show leadership and reach across the aisle to their respective counterparts to create real solutions. I don't think the country really cares about slogans like "Change" and "Take our Country Back". Partisan politics will hopefully continue to be punished. I have been equally disgusted by the Republican "party of NO" as I have by Obama's stupidity by not immediately reaching out to Republicans after his election win. Even Christie (who I didn't vote for), has a relationship and has effectively worked wnegotiated deals with Steven Sweeney.

Our economy is flawed as you say 75, and I have seen no legislation that helps or incentivizes small or big business from investing here vs. overseas.

Finally, I sat through a seminar on the expected effects of healthcare reform today and it just confirmed to me how lousy a piece of legislation it is. Although there are some good components to the plan, the vast majority of it is a joke and the amount of beaurocracy and administrative overhead it will create to manage it, will dwarf the costs that insurance companies incur. And guess what??? Our future healthcare costs as a percent of GDP will easily exceed the 16% that is is today....well done idiots.

 

[SPK145]

Originally posted by shu09:
You have to love people like Michele Bachmann. She said everyone wants to cut spending and reduce defecits, then she says cut taxes for all. That move would add BILLIONS to the defecit. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Well, if you rolled back spending to where it was just a few short years ago, end the two wars and reform military spending, reform entitlements (sorry, the sacred cow has to be reformed), everyone could get a tax cut.

We should try something that hasn't been done in the last 100 years: Get back to the Constitution.

 

[SPK145]

Originally posted by Seton75:
The political dialogue in the country is poison and I stopped finding the boards fun. At one time I was very active here and on the RU OT board as well. The political talk shows have made people so partisan I run from it now.

I think the repubs will do all they can in the next two years to make Obama look bad as opposed to how Clinton and Newt et all grudgingly working together towards things that benefitted the country. The repubs do not want that to happen, imo. They would rather win the WH to the detriment of the country. I dont say the dems would do any differently if things were reversed, but I do say it is tragic.

The repubs had both houses if they didnt lose their minds in three states. They run the only person who cant beat Reid, Del fiasco and a guy losing to a write in in Alaska. I dont get it.

Our economy is fatally flawed. If we dont start making things again we are kising it all goodbye in the long run. We are gonna start a war and realize we dont have anyone to make any boots or unis or anything.

This post is pretty much right on the money.

We know the Dems would do the same in regards to making the WH look bad, THEY JUST GOT DONE DOING THAT FROM 2006 - 2009!

 

[shu09]

Originally posted by SPK145:

Originally posted by shu09:
You have to love people like Michele Bachmann. She said everyone wants to cut spending and reduce defecits, then she says cut taxes for all. That move would add BILLIONS to the defecit. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Well, if you rolled back spending to where it was just a few short years ago, end the two wars and reform military spending, reform entitlements (sorry, the sacred cow has to be reformed), everyone could get a tax cut.

We should try something that hasn't been done in the last 100 years: Get back to the Constitution.

I'm with you on all of that. I don't think the Republican idea of rolling back to 2008 levels will do much if anything but you have to start somewhere.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

obama attempted to do a bunch of things that he campaigned on and talked about numerous times. then he let everyone around him water alot of those initiatives down, disenchanting progressives like myself. Then he pissed off gays and even more liberals by not acting swiftly over the past few months with Dont Ask Dont Tell. not everyone thinks JOBS JOBS JOBS is the only thing that matters. And most peoplw who disliked Obama or werent happy bc of the economy were gonna vote for Dems anyway. There are alot of people who care about things like the environment or that health care bill that have become annoyed with Congress bc they havent done enough. I know thats where I stand, but my votes in Jersey City certainly arent gonna do much to shake up the nat'l outlook for Dems in Congress. Those seats were gona regardless.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

It's sad, bc military spending, medicare and social security have no chance of being drastically cut, but we could end the deficit and start lowering our nat' debt really quickly if they all had the balls to do it. Maybe the Republican led house willl actually bring these initiatives forward, and Obama would be smart to sign them. There's no point in not doing so, b/c it's not like they're gonna ok any new attempts at spending he puts forht for his own initiatives.

 

[HALL85]

Originally posted by Bobbie Solo:
It's sad, bc military spending, medicare and social security have no chance of being drastically cut, but we could end the deficit and start lowering our nat' debt really quickly if they all had the balls to do it. Maybe the Republican led house willl actually bring these initiatives forward, and Obama would be smart to sign them. There's no point in not doing so, b/c it's not like they're gonna ok any new attempts at spending he puts forht for his own initiatives.

Bobbie, I actually agree with you on that one...there are tough decisions that need to be made regarding military, social security and medicare (although medicare reductions are addressed in health care reform). I think it will be interesting to see how Washington acts for the next two years. Will it be partisan politics with a stalemate or will these idiots work together to make the tough decisions that are in the best interests of the country. Unfortunately, I don't see much that would point to the former.

 

[SPK145]

Originally posted by shu09:

Originally posted by SPK145:

Originally posted by shu09:
You have to love people like Michele Bachmann. She said everyone wants to cut spending and reduce defecits, then she says cut taxes for all. That move would add BILLIONS to the defecit. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

Well, if you rolled back spending to where it was just a few short years ago, end the two wars and reform military spending, reform entitlements (sorry, the sacred cow has to be reformed), everyone could get a tax cut.

We should try something that hasn't been done in the last 100 years: Get back to the Constitution.

I'm with you on all of that. I don't think the Republican idea of rolling back to 2008 levels will do much if anything but you have to start somewhere.

Agreed. Saw that this would save $100 billion. Big f%$#ing deal, we need a ton more than that. Typical political B/S.

 

[SPK145]

Originally posted by Bobbie Solo:
It's sad, bc military spending, medicare and social security have no chance of being drastically cut, but we could end the deficit and start lowering our nat' debt really quickly if they all had the balls to do it. Maybe the Republican led house willl actually bring these initiatives forward, and Obama would be smart to sign them. There's no point in not doing so, b/c it's not like they're gonna ok any new attempts at spending he puts forht for his own initiatives.

Good post, Bobbie, and it won't happen.

 

[donnie_baseball]

Why would we want to cut military spending, at a time when Iran and North Korea are becoming threats as rogue nations, not to mention the fact that China has become a major, all-consuming superpower? Historically, these kinds of societies have craved real estate. Defending your own borders is nice, but daunting, when you consider the enormity of the physical borders; Kennedy got it with Cuba, and I think little has changed, strategy-wise, since then.

 

[SPK145]

I truly believe we could spend out military dollars MUCH, MUCH more efficiently. No reason to have bases in 130 countries. Our military should be protecting our country, not a ton of other countries. Our military budget is so far greater than any other nation, we could trim it and still have by far the strongest military. We should be protecting our borders and coast lines and not other countries' borders and coast lines.

 

[shu09]

Originally posted by SPK145:
I truly believe we could spend out military dollars MUCH, MUCH more efficiently. No reason to have bases in 130 countries. Our military should be protecting our country, not a ton of other countries. Our military budget is so far greater than any other nation, we could trim it and still have by far the strongest military. We should be protecting our borders and coast lines and not other countries' borders and coast lines.

Amen.

 

[Section112]

I think both parties have continued down a slippery slope and keep repeating history each time they gain control. It takes each party a few years to completely screw up and then they get voted out. The 2-party system is not working at all. I'll vote for smart conservatives no matter what party they are in. We are neglecting some key social issues like R&D and education and asian countries are investing heavily, many times using our universities. We need to look at creating a better environment for US citezens to prosper. Better tax policies and immigration policies.

Recognition that many of the folks making $200k or more are small business owners who employ people and not waging a war on their success. If they have better tax implications, small businesses will hire more people - its that simple. This is one of the biggest problems I have with the liberals and our current state.

Then you have lots of other hypocrisy too. You have GM getting bailed out by the government and they will probably not pay taxes for 20 years now. You have BP who covers the $20B cost of clean-up but now can take that as a deduction and won't pay taxes for many years. That means the US taxpayer is essentially paying for a lot of that clean up in the end. Just stupid policy.

And the immigration supporters who want to give illegals everything are just bugging the complete shi$ out of me. Secure our borders, get em out of the country and make folks earn it. If I have to pay $5 more for my landscaper I'm OK with that. If I have to pay a little more for produce and certain food items I'm OK with that. My brother in law got broadsided by an illegal who could not read a stop sign. They let the illegal go even though he had no ID and said they were not allowed to hold him. He has back problems for the rest of his life and his van got totaled and he lost money there. He has noone to sue as the car was somehow registered to another illegal and his attorney could not locate either one. The US citizen got screwed and the illegal got away scot free. And towns don't want to give police immigration powers to hold any illegals who commit crimes. This shit has to change. The citizen again gets the cost and the short end of the stick.

I had a ride with an arabic cabbie from Nigeria last month in Cleveland. He said he knows another cabbie who he works with who has 3 wives in the states. They are somehow on the government rolls for getting food stamps and welfare and that money increases with each additional child they have. He only reports that one is his wife. He said the guy is a radical Islamist and he is having those kids and radicalizing each one as they get older and our government is paying for it. He said in this country, we give people too many rights and too many handouts. This is from a Nigerian immigrant?? He is completely correct.

 

[SnakeTom]

Both party's are at fault & it is feuled by the internet, talk radio & partisan TV channels. There is just too much polarization and everyone wants to play politics rather than do what they are elected to do namely represent their constituants. This country is better off when ruled from the center rather than the extremes. In recent years both the Dems & the GOP have moved to the extremes & show little interest in compromize or working together for the common good. We have one party representing the rich and the other party representing the poor. And both party's give nothing more than lip service to the middle class which has always been the backbone of our nation.

As to Obama, his lack of experience in working with and controlling congress has become obvious. He inherited an economic collapse and that should have been the first and only priority from day one. He was elected to fix it. Instead he got sidtracked by a number of other issues - health care, gay rights, a mosque at ground zero etc, etc, etc. I agree with him on most of these other issues but they were not priorities. The economy and job creation were and are. Yes the government can and should have a role in this. Just too many jobs have left our shores to the detriment of our citizens.

I do not care who solves our economic malais be it the Dems or GOP. Just get it done. To the pols I say stop playing power politics & do your job for the American people. You were elected to represent your constituants not your political party.

Maybe Hall85 is right & we do need a strong third party.

Tom K

 

[SPK145]

Originally posted by SnakeTom:
We have one party representing the rich and the other party representing the poor.

I don't see that at all. What we have is political pandering and class warfare rhetoric merely to get votes and remain in power with little regard for the consequences.

The Dems don't also represent the rich? LOL.

The Dems care about the poor so much that their policies are designed to keep them poor? LOL.

The Reps care about the rich for their money and votes. Same as the Dems. Corporate welfare. LOL.

The Reps don't care about the poor? Opportunity is the greatest way to defeat poverty, not government handouts designed to keep the poor in political poverty and wards of the state. Neither party cares about that.

 

[SnakeTom]

Originally posted by SPK145:

Originally posted by SnakeTom:
We have one party representing the rich and the other party representing the poor.

I don't see that at all. What we have is political pandering and class warfare rhetoric merely to get votes and remain in power with little regard for the consequences.

The Dems don't also represent the rich? LOL.

The Dems care about the poor so much that their policies are designed to keep them poor? LOL.

The Reps care about the rich for their money and votes. Same as the Dems. Corporate welfare. LOL.

The Reps don't care about the poor? Opportunity is the greatest way to defeat poverty, not government handouts designed to keep the poor in political poverty and wards of the state. Neither party cares about that.

Well I agree with you on this. Both political party's are only concerned with obtaining and maintaining POWER for themselves and the public be damned.

Tom K