The Tuesday Night Elections

[Army of Dad]

80% of what's passed in congress is in one way or another introduced via the President's agenda. If you want to get into semantics, fine: if the tax cuts were so damn great congress wouldn't have put a 10 year limit on them, they'd be permanent.

Actually, I think it wouldn't be bad to have every law sunset after 10 years. If it is really a good idea then it can be passed again.

It sounds as though we disagree on raising taxes, but making the government reconsider every idea they have should be something we can agree on. There has to be a fair number of laws that you would like to see sunset.

[UNTflyer]

80% of what's passed in congress is in one way or another introduced via the President's agenda. If you want to get into semantics, fine: if the tax cuts were so damn great congress wouldn't have put a 10 year limit on them, they'd be permanent.

Yeah, because Congress always does the right thing? And 80%, really? Either way, Bush wanted permanent tax cuts, the Republicans in Congress have called for the tax cuts to be made permanent, but the Democrats want to take more money from Americans when they can least afford it.

I think when the top income bracket was getting taxed in the Eisenhower years they did just fine. And yeah, I don't cry a single tear for someone who can only make 50 million a year instead of 100. Wah.

During the Eisenhower years, you got taxed 20% if you made a single dollar. If you want to go back to the days of taxing the poor then I'm all for that. But if you are calling for a return to 90% tax rates then you are essentially supporting a maximum wage. Who are you or anyone else to decide how much money is enough?

And the $100 million income example is extreme. The top tax rate starts at $300,000 a year which is what a lot of small business owners and farmers earn. You want to raise taxes on small business owners and farmers?

The economy is based on 2/3's consumer spending. When we have a recession like we have for the last 2 years then where the hell do you get revenue from with a tax burden like that?

We don't have to worry about generating huge revenues if spending is kept in check. Even so, flat income tax combined with a sales tax can be balanced during good times and bad. Raise the flat tax during recessions and raise the sales tax during prosperous times. The goal would be to keep tax revenues level or slowly rising and keep spending efficient and minimal.

I'm sure I could link you a study that shows how I'm right, but you'd probably just ignore it anyways.

I seriously doubt you can come up with any credible study that shows employees BEAR the brunt of corporate income taxes rather than the people who actually own the company and pay taxes on the income.

You're right, half of all bankruptcies are a result of family illnesses. The market is working great!

And 10 years ago the leading cause was tax problems. Five years before that it was credit card debt. One Harvard study isn't just cause to throw out the free market system that works for everything else.

Health insurance is NO different than any other insurance. Instead of making ME pay for someone's health insurance, why don't you support things like tort reform, tax incentives for medical researchers, interest-free loans for medical studies, and allowing health insurance companies to sell policies across state lines?

[UNTflyer]

4)The auto companies also needed salvaging. To let them go under would probably have put about a million more on the unemployment payrolls overnight. (SUPER GOVERNMENT SPENDING OH NOES) GM (and I'm unsure about Chrysler) has already paid back their government loans in full. The stock was temporarily owned by the US government, and the treasury department set up rules for them to restructure. This was in no way a 'nationalization'.

http://www.thecarcon...sler-loses-less

If GM went under, another automaker would have taken their place. Ford, Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan... they would have pumped up production to meet the demand leftover by GM. Plants would have been sold off to the highest bidder, the Japanese would have brought their JIT production model to produce cars at peak efficiency, and GM's competitors would have been running triple shifts to meet the demand.

GM paid back $6.1 billion in loans for getting $50 billion in cash. They may have repaid the loan, but they didn't pay back the American people.

And the federal government still owns over 50% of GM. You're simply wrong about that.

I find it funny that you have no problem handing over $50 billion of taxpayer money to a failure of a company but you want to take money from those who do well, create jobs, and grow the economy.

Edited November 2, 2010 by UNTflyer

[HoustonEagle]

Has anyone here tried scrapple? We are having a scrapple discussion in the office and the stuff sounds disgusting.

[UNT90]

1) He didn't nationalize health care. Not even Canada has nationalized health care. What was passed last year was in no way close to socialize medicine.

http://en.wikipedia....ent_involvement

2) He didn't nationalize banks. TARP was a bi-partisan creation of the Congress & the Bush administration in 2008, when Obama was in the Senate & out campaigning. Not only did it save us from a 2nd great depression, it will in the end cost taxpayers about $50 billion of the original $700 billion spent.

http://www.marketwat...10-10-05-164330

3) AIG was somewhat "nationalized". Its losses were so great because of defaults that it couldn't really afford to go under, not without another Lehman brothers type of hit anyways. The government is also planning shortly the selling of much of its stock that it bought from AIG. Total cost will be close to what TARP did.

http://www.nytimes.c...s/05sorkin.html

4)The auto companies also needed salvaging. To let them go under would probably have put about a million more on the unemployment payrolls overnight. (SUPER GOVERNMENT SPENDING OH NOES) GM (and I'm unsure about Chrysler) has already paid back their government loans in full. The stock was temporarily owned by the US government, and the treasury department set up rules for them to restructure. This was in no way a 'nationalization'.

http://www.thecarcon...sler-loses-less

5)I won't get into a philosophical battle about the definition of a very vast and complex economic system. All I will say is that any credible definition you can find of socialism will in no way resemble this current administration.

Its not a socialism method for the government to spend during a recession. Its a Keynesian argument, and one that has had mixed results throughout modern economic history. It was done greatly throughout the Great Depression. What the stimulus did was not to stimulate anything, it was a desperate measure to stop the bleeding. There are even some (CAPITALIST) economists who would argue that one of the reasons it didn't stimulate was because it didn't go far enough ($875? billion in a $13 trillion economy).

I would suggest you're not being objective enough. Its ok, we all have bias. Maybe I'd be just as pissed at McCain if he were president today.

Thank you for the civil and well thought out response that is so hard to get in political policy debate these days. Several things to address:

Pres. Obama and the democrat party wanted a single payer option that would have, in effect, nationalized health care. They didn't get it (because of oppositiion from republicans and the American people). Just because he and the democrat party wer not successful in their attempt doesn't make the attempt any less egregious. Canada absolutely has national health care (and quoting a wikopedia entry defending socialized medicine really doesn't help your argument). Don't believe me, ask a Canadian.

You appear to see government as an economic answer, where I see it as a economic obstacle, and we will probably always differ on that principle. Like Flyer posted early, a free market system relies on supply and demand. If there is a demand, smart companies will line up to fill the supply. If a company isn't so smart, they won't last. Why was Lehman Bros. allowed to fail while AIG was sparedt? What kind of message does it send a GM when they know that the federal government will always be there to bail them out because they are "too big to fail?" Let the market make it's natural corrections and, while the recession may be deeper, it will be much, much, much shorter.

Socialism can absolutely be defined and is in the dictionary. From dictionary.com:

"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole."

Or the culteral definition:

An economic system in which the production and distribution of goods are controlled substantially by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which cooperation rather than competition guides economic activity. There are many varieties of socialism. Some socialists tolerate capitalism, as long as the government maintains the dominant influence over the economy; others insist on an abolition of private enterprise. All communists are socialists, but not all socialists are communists.

What Pres. Obama proposed to do with health care clearly meets these definiitions.

[UNT90]

But anyways, we're off topic.

According to Nate Silver, whose site was like my bible in the months leading up to the 2008 election, he's predicting 52 or 51 seats for the Dems, about 55-60 in the House.

I'm thinking Dems lose:

North Dakota

Arkansas

Indiana

Wisconsin

Illinois

and 2 of the following (if not all 3, but I still like Ken Buck's chances)

Colorado

Nevada

Pennsylvania

I saw an interesting interview with Dick Morris last night. He is claiming that the models that the pollsters are using are flawed due to a heavy reliance on 2008 trends. He contends that the Senate race in W. Virginia is actually led by the republican candidate along with one other that conventional polls have leaning heavily democrat. He claims that O'Donnell is neck and neck in her race (find that kinda a stretch).

It will definitely be interesting political sport watching tonight.

[FirefightnRick]

Marco Rubio for president, 2012.

Just gettin it out there now so I can claim to be the one who predicted it here on GMG.com first should it actually happen.

Rick

[THOR]

forget the two dominant parties and vote libertarian!!!

[Censored by Laurie]

Marco Rubio for president, 2012.

Just gettin it out there now so I can claim to be the one who predicted it here on GMG.com first should it actually happen.

Rick

He'd better get his birth certificate out there first...

[FirefightnRick]

He'd better get his birth certificate out there first...

His Grandmother is certain he was born in one of two hospitals in Havana Kansas.

Rick

[Green Mean]

Either way this is a very critical time for the Republicans. If they don't win majority then they just may be in a bad position the next 4 years because I anticipate the economy will steadily rise and in 2 years when the Presidential Elections come up and the economy is doing pretty well then I don't think there is a chance in hell he won't get re-elected. So I think we can all agree that the Republicans really need this tonight.

Forget the hardcore right and hardcore left. Come to the middle and be moderate. It is better for your health.

[yyz28]

Corporate taxes are unnecessary as the management and workers bare the brunt of them more than the CEOs. End the corporate taxes & raise taxes on the top 10%.

I'm so sick of the myth that the rich doesn't pay their fair share.

The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay 65.84%.

How much more do you want? ...and what makes you think that they will stop spending, and that they will get to the point where the confiscate 50% of YOUR income too?

[meangreenacct]

I saw an interesting interview with Dick Morris last night. He is claiming that the models that the pollsters are using are flawed due to a heavy reliance on 2008 trends. He contends that the Senate race in W. Virginia is actually led by the republican candidate along with one other that conventional polls have leaning heavily democrat. He claims that O'Donnell is neck and neck in her race (find that kinda a stretch).

It will definitely be interesting political sport watching tonight.

Guess Dick might have been wrong?

[Mean Green 93-98]

Guess Dick might have been wrong?

Was he?

Sounds to me like a Republican won.

[UNT90]

Guess Dick might have been wrong?

Juuuuuuuuuust a bit outside...

Edited November 3, 2010 by UNT90

[UNT90]

Either way this is a very critical time for the Republicans. If they don't win majority then they just may be in a bad position the next 4 years because I anticipate the economy will steadily rise and in 2 years when the Presidential Elections come up and the economy is doing pretty well then I don't think there is a chance in hell he won't get re-elected. So I think we can all agree that the Republicans really need this tonight.

Forget the hardcore right and hardcore left. Come to the middle and be moderate. It is better for your health.

The critical time is for Pres. Obama and Democrats, not Republicans. This is a bigger shift than occurred in 1994. After that election, Pres. Clinton made a big right turn toward the middle because he wisely realized that health care reform and a liberal agenda were way out of touch with the voting public. Will Pres. Obama do the same? I guess he could surprise me, but he seems very much more of a true liberal believer than Pres. Clinton, who for all of his faults in his personal life, at least listened to the American people once they spoke in 1994.

IF there is a sustained economic recovery, the republicans will properly note that it didn't come until AFTER they had gained control of the House of Representatives and had enough seats in the Senate to stop Pres. Obama's agenda, thus allowing the recovery to happen. They will say "If we had of won in 2008, the recession would have been over much more quickly."

It will be very interesting to see what Pres. Obama has to say about the elections tomorrow. If he comes out and is anything other than humble, look for his approval ratings to take another 5% hit. Again, his brief history being the judge, I just don't see humble as being in his makeup.

If Pres. Obama doesn't change political course, you will see another repeat of history in 2 years. You will see a Jimmy Carter-like performance in the next presidential election (assuming the Republicans can find a legitimate candidate. Rubio is looking better and better, but he is awful young).

As far as being a moderate, I'll choose to stand for something rather than to stand for nothing. Trying to be moderate is what cost republicans the last 2 election cycles. Compasionate conservatism was a freaking disaster. Figure out what your positions are and stick with your principles. I disagree with many from the liberal side on here, but I respect them for believing in their convictions (even though they are wrong ).

[HoustonEagle]

If politics is anything it is predictable. Now that the usual mid-term carnage is over I am glad we can move on to more important things.

Edited November 3, 2010 by HoustonEagle

[Mean Green 93-98]

If politics is anything it is predictable. Now that the usual mid-term carnage is over I am glad we can move on to more important things.

Nice try. Go ahead and compare the carnage of this midterm with the midterm "carnage" during GWB's first term. What has happened today is unprecedented, don't try to minimize it. The people have responded to what BHO said: "I may not be on the ballot, but my agenda is."

[UNT90]

Interesting that Tea Party candidates Angle and O'Donnell may have cost Republicans the Senate, as both of those seats could have been won by better Republican candidates.

Also interesting is the big shift in state congresses across the midwest. This will be very important as redistricting will occur for house seats before the next election, and you will see Michigan, Ohio, and Penn. pretty solid red in house elections for the next 10 years (assuming the Republicans don't screw the pooch).

Eddie Burnice Johnson gets re-elected with 75% of the vote after robbing underprivileged, overachieving minority youths of her own district of an opportunity to attend college. Her constituents get what they deserve. Stay poor, South Dallas.

[HoustonEagle]

Nice try. Go ahead and compare the carnage of this midterm with the midterm "carnage" during GWB's first term. What has happened today is unprecedented, don't try to minimize it. The people have responded to what BHO said: "I may not be on the ballot, but my agenda is."

Happy for ya. I am off to bed, my baby daughter likes to wake me at precisely 6 am.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

What has happened today is unprecedented, don't try to minimize it.

Well...unprecedented since 1948. But don't let historic facts get in the way of you and your party's celebration. Congratulations to them...now the work continues as we as a nation keep digging out of the recession.

[Censored by Laurie]

Well...unprecedented since 1948. But don't let historic facts get in the way of you and your party's celebration. Congratulations to them...now the work continues as we as a nation keep digging out of the recession.

Well, its just gonna completely turn around now!

[Green P1]

I missed all this last night because of a Billy the Exterminator marathon. Did Americas problem's get fixed?

[UNT90]

Well...unprecedented since 1948. But don't let historic facts get in the way of you and your party's celebration. Congratulations to them...now the work continues as we as a nation keep digging out of the recession.

No one should be celebrating. If anyone thinks this is a permanent shift of some sort, they are dilusional. It is a HUGE rebuke of Pres. Obama's policies in his first 2 years. If the Republicans don't reverse the overspending trend, get a repeal of the Health Care Legislation through the house (a complete repeal, not just a partial), get the Bush tax cuts extended (which I expect Pres. Obama will concede today in a false offer of good will), and change the way they operate in the House (pork gathering for their districts), they could find themselves out of a job in 2 years.

Well, its just gonna completely turn around now!

Well, hopefully the debt spending will be stopped cold and the God awful Health Care legislation will be completely repealed. If Health Care repeal gets out of the House (almost a certainty), imagine the pressure on Senate democrats, who know that the American people have given them a strong signal of displeasure, to come across the aisle and vote to repeal the legislation. Pres. Obama will lobby the democrat senators long and hard to stop the repeal in the Senate, not wanting to face the possibility of having to make a decision to veto the Health Care Repeal. If it does get to Pres. Obama's desk, and he does veto the repeal, he will have assured himself an election defeat in 2012. The American people have told him twice now that they don't want socialized medicine. The next time they tell him will be on election day, 2012.

I loved Jim Demitt's comment about tea party candidates going to Washington. He said they are going to Washington to fix what is broken, not to be a part of the club. Well, talk is cheap, and we will see in the next 2 years if Tea Party Republicans are like all other Washington politicians; just there to get re-elected.

Edited November 3, 2010 by UNT90

[Eagle-96]

Nice try. Go ahead and compare the carnage of this midterm with the midterm "carnage" during GWB's first term. What has happened today is unprecedented, don't try to minimize it. The people have responded to what BHO said: "I may not be on the ballot, but my agenda is."

I thought BTO said:

And I'll be...

Taking care of business every day

Taking care of business every way

I've been taking care of business, it's all mine

Taking care of business and working overtime

Work out