CNN: 219 votes now in the house for a clean CR

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by oragator1, Oct 9, 2013.

  1. rpmGator
    Offline

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,594
    Likes Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    WG/Longboat Key
    Ratings Received:
    +490
    Yep, on this one. Maybe you should notice what they are saying also since it is your guys saying this.

    Are we debating health care or the shut down... even with your one sided thinking, it should be easy enough to see.

    This is killing the party, thanks...
  2. oragator1
    Offline

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,131
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,054
    Not to speak for RPM, but I think for many people including myself would agree with this general sentiment, the deficit and debt need to be fixed
    The question is around strategy...they picked a fight they could never win. And then when they predictably lost first round on the ACA, they changed the fight to something else and only looked more disorganized. Now, predictably they are out of options. All that this did was weaken their hand for when they might have more leverage, and all to codify a relatively small percentage of one party in one chamber in one branch of government.

    The NBC/WSJ poll has been posted here in a couple of places, but the numbers there should be a reality check for republicans. The Republican Party is at an all time low (24%), Ted Cruz's favorable rating is at 14%, the public blames the pubs by a margin on 53-31, and the group that is most underwater is the tea party at I think -26, while Obama is actually in plus territory now. In fact, support of the ACA has gone up 7 points since the last time they polled it. The dems are plus 8 in a generic congressional ballot as well.
    Now if they had done all of this and won that is one thing, but it was all done for nothing, and only means they have less power when the negotiations come up in the next few weeks. And if not for gerrymandering, they would be all but assured as of today of losing the house next year (as of today).

    It was just a dumb move all around, and now they have to backtrack and look like they capitulated (when it was more like seeing reality), which will only hurt them with their base too.

    Fight the fights you can win.
  3. gatorman_07732
    Offline

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    29,871
    Likes Received:
    2,132
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +3,660
    I wouldn't be so sure about that and I believe Cruz is being way underestimated. It takes someone that can articulate ideas to the American people. Poll after poll indicates people don't want the ACA and that is going to be the center point. The ACA is going to compound our debt issue significantly. We are already on a path to unsustainability with Medicare.
  4. oragator1
    Offline

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,131
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,054
    I think the ACA numbers aren't as bad as its opponents think (we can have that debate on another thread but the people who prefer single payer get included in that disapprove number, and they sure as heck aren't supporting republicans), but lets say you are 100% right and the country by and large doesn't like the ACA. The public has also made it clear in numerous polls that they don't want the government shut down to stop it. The public also strongly says the debt ceiling shouldn't be breached regardless of reason. So if the public doesn't support your actions, you have no exit strategy other than to either capitulate or breach, and it has zero percent chance of passing the senate or the president while your party ends up worse for wear, what is the purpose?
  5. philobeddoe
    Offline

    philobeddoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    5,964
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +191
    Hardly ... there'd be far less of a budget issue and likely no need to raise the debt ceiling at the present time .... IF ...... Obama had been governing/leading in an intelligent and effective fashion. By his own admission he is a leadership failure and "unpatriotic" ...... burdening this nation with $8 trillion in new debt (and counting) in the last 4-5 years. It is Obama and his minions who've caused this nation irreparable harm ... and thankfully there are some "crazies" in the House trying to do the right thing - rein in the profoundly reckless and irresponsible spending by the left and some on the right.

    The Tea Partiers are doing what their constituents and "Their constitution" asks them to do. It's too bad the vast majority on the left lack the objectivity to comprehend this very simple matter. But no .... they want top continue embracing the abhorrence of Barry, Harry, and Nancy.
  6. gatorman_07732
    Offline

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    29,871
    Likes Received:
    2,132
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +3,660
    The first think people disagree with is being mandates from the federal government to acquire a product. That idea does not fly and the President compounded that problem when he delayed the mandate on corporations.
  7. oragator1
    Offline

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,131
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,054
    Quite possibly, and I am definitely not saying Obama is blameless.
    But for the sake of my last argument, lets still say you are completely right about the ACA. If the public still doesn't support your actions, you can't win the legislative fight and you look worse when it's over, what's the purpose? They have to fight battles that move their agenda forward, not backwards.

    There will now be negotiations on the budget which could have happened any time in the last 6 months. but now republicans will be negotiating when their party is at an all time low (even lower than when they impeached Clinton and the 1995 shutdown). It's just bad strategy, they could have gotten something similar to what they are now asking for weeks ago without the political damage.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. rpmGator
    Offline

    rpmGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,594
    Likes Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    WG/Longboat Key
    Ratings Received:
    +490
    The TP is doing what "Their constitution" says...

    I see why your handle ends with DOE...

    Other Republicans just won't follow the head lemming in the TP.

    It is OUR constitution and not the sole ownership to one wing in one party.

    I have seen government debt come and debt go in my lifetime. Those that think things through have a tough time explaining how foolish some are. Is debt your highest issue, then why not pay more in. So now taxation is a higher issue...

    Maybe one day, you will settle on which crisis you want us to fear.

    The Republicans are weary of the TP who are making us all look like fools.
  9. gatorman_07732
    Offline

    gatorman_07732 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    29,871
    Likes Received:
    2,132
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    The Irish Riviera
    Ratings Received:
    +3,660
    Ora that fight has to happen and Cruz & Co. have the chance to articulate their message. You can predict that it won't work but let's see what happens. That is what this country is about, if it sells then we move in that direction.
  10. philobeddoe
    Offline

    philobeddoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    5,964
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +191
    I don't think so .... I believe they intentionally entered into this skirmish knowing they would likely lose out on the "total request of defunding the ACA" but knowing they would make some headway in moving their agenda forward. Publicity ... good or bad ... is publicity and the Tea Partiers have been able to garner 24/7 exposure of their "demands". Additionally, they've been able to push much of the blame for the "partial slowdown" onto the lefties in the Senate and the White House. They've been able to expose more weaknesses in the Obama administration and the ACA ... "his centerpiece legislation". I think the timing of the Tea Parties' decision to force Barry and Harry into partially closing the federal government was fortuitously timed to coincide with the launch of the "partially failed" ACA exchanges. Throw in the debt ceiling issue ... and we found the Tea Partiers had the administration defend on three separate but related fronts .... all dealing with the adverse consequences of horrendous spending decisions and ineffective federal programs ... that resulted in the massive $8 trillion increase in the nations debt in approx 5 years.

    Over the next few weeks we'll see how all of this shakes out ..... and will know who wins and loses from a political standpoint but more importantly, will the US come out of this with a more rational approach to managing the nations substantial debt problem and operating deficits. Hopefully, we can begin to recover from the damage wrought by Obama's "unpatriotic leadership failures" of the last 5 years.
  11. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,560
    Likes Received:
    402
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,693
    Americans want leaders who stand for something (the better to not fall for anything, it is said), and right now, the only people who stand for something are the conservatives and the radical Alinsky-ites that run the administration. Respectively, that's "rockribbed, rugged individualist, self-reliance, limited government, rule of law economic liberty" vs. "Eff all that unfair unjust noise, we want a clean sheet of paper".

    The people in the middle, howling in indignation? They stand for nothing other than politics as a way to permanently celebrate themselves, and favor the diffident, status quo lethargy, our country limping towards its end. They are exposed by profound ideological debates as being empty hats. I am still amazed that the House leadership has been whipped up to stand here, but I trust it about as much as I trusted those Scottish nobles when I was watching "Braveheart".
  12. oragator1
    Offline

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,131
    Likes Received:
    317
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,054
    Standing for something is great, but maximizing your ability to implement it is what matters in the end, otherwise you are achieving nothing. ACA support is up 7%, republican approval in multiple polls is at an all time low and they have zero bargaining power for the only portion of this that really matters, the actual budget negotiations to come
    It's one thing to stand for something, it's an entirely different proposition to make it happen legislatively. They should have learned this lesson in 2012, but apparently it is going to take a few more losses before it sinks in. I would be thrilled if they did learn, I want a same Republican Party, one that is grounded in fiscal responsibility, but more important in reality. What we get now as a result of their dysfunction is essentially a one party system. That is bad for us all.

Share This Page