Obama, Democrats unified now but face tough tests

@SuperLib Look at it this way, given the GOPs disorganization you can't say they are always voting in lockstep anymore. That's a good thing right?

"To be honest, I hope runs up the debt until the whole house of cards comes crashing down in a magnificent collapse that takes every fiat currency with it down the toilet. Not until then will the leeches on society be shrugged off. A total reset will be necessary. The "scorched Earth" will be entirely the Keynesians' doing."

That was honest. You sound like a barrel of laughs. So, do you not use fiat currency in your daily transactions? Do you mine gold yourself to avoid being one of the leeches?

One solid step we can take towards growth would be to eliminate the potential collapse of the economy every few months. Obviously no rational business owner went out and bought equipment or hired workers in the last 30 days. We were all unsure if the Tea Party would vote to default on the debt as their first step in solving it. I hope the embarrassment of last week will stick with them so they won't put everyone in that position again.

Next will be the negotiations, but what the US needs is a unified message from Republicans and that won't be easy for them. They all hate each other and people are defecting from the party to become "independents" on a daily basis. They filibuster their own agenda. Their backers mount campaigns against others in their own party. It's a complete mess and I'm not sure how they will be able to have just one person sit at the table and say he represents the party as a whole. The US will be much better off when the GOP can get some kind of unification.

To be honest, I hope runs up the debt until the whole house of cards comes crashing down in a magnificent collapse that takes every fiat currency with it down the toilet. Not until then will the leeches on society be shrugged off. A total reset will be necessary. The "scorched Earth" will be entirely the Keynesians' doing.

@wolfpack

The only sensible, rational, and logical voice in this room.

The US debt is a bipartisan disgrace. It is the reason I am polictically unaffilliated now. Because Bush ran up $5 trillion in eight years fighting two bipartisanly agreed upon wars is no excuse for Obama to commit to $8 trillion in debt in a completely partisan manner during the last five years. Over the course of two presidencies America has lurched towards fiscal insolvency. Bush gets no pass on this either. But Obama is president now; and his no growth, pro- debt policies have pushed America to the brink. He cares only about his European socialist agenda. Fiscal resposibility and the American tradition of individual freedom is irrelevent to him.

@madverts

I repeat, it has been explained to you, alas you chose not to listen. Not only did your man skyrocket the deficit, he handed Obama a broken economy. And as a die-hard Bush supporter, you have not one ounce of genuine credibility when complaining about the deficit.

He did inherit a bad economy that's true, but he was elected to fix it, that's it, being a president the highest job in the land is a performance based job, and this president so far, has NOT performed well, bottom line! You can spin and twist it like a pretzel if you want, but those are the final results. So it's safe to say, liberals not only don't have a leg to stand on, but denying the facts makes you guys look like......

@super

The debt would have increased under any President due to the dynamics of the recession. The Republican lie is that they had some magic wand to cure that had they been in power.

Hogwash! No one, conservative or liberal expected the economy to fixed within a year, but on the other hand, no one expected the deficit to go up the way it did, again, the way it did! This economy is under the presidents watch, therefore, it's his economy, he owns, runs it, the fault Lies with him, pure and simple.

The question was weather we were going to default or not. Republicans supported it, everyone else didn't.

No one else is controlling the purse, so....

Had they not been stopped we'd be waking up this morning to see that we still had $17 trillion in debt while watching our economy implode around us. Oh, and they'd be talking about the "Obama meltdown" right about now....

You mean the $17 Trillion that Obama ran up and never, ever wants to talk about thg meltdown HE WILL create within the next 3 years without a doubt. If he and the liberals would listen and learn how an economy works, Dems still would've kept the HOUSE.

"Not only did your man skyrocket the deficit"

Yeah, but only by about $5 billion in 8 years, and that included liberating two countries. Obama has skyrocketed the deficit another $7 trillion in less than 5 years.

"The debt would have increased under any president"

So Obama is off the hook! Since the economy is most likely going to continue to suck for awhile, the next president will be off the hook too, I guess, lol...

The debt would have increased under any President due to the dynamics of the recession. The Republican lie is that they had some magic wand to cure that had they been in power.

The question was weather we were going to default or not. Republicans supported it, everyone else didn't. Had they not been stopped we'd be waking up this morning to see that we still had $17 trillion in debt while watching our economy implode around us. Oh, and they'd be talking about the "Obama meltdown" right about now....

I repeat, it has been explained to you, alas you chose not to listen. Not only did your man skyrocket the deficit, he handed Obama a broken economy. And as a die-hard Bush supporter, you have not one ounce of genuine credibility when complaining about the deficit.

Complex problems cannot be solved with simple answers. I suggest you just tune into Fox if you want those answers and to have your prejudices confirmed, it soothes the pain of the head/wall combination.

Next.

In other words, Adverts, Obama's additional $7 trillion contribution to the national deficit doesn't matter, or isn't his fault, is it?

The answer to the question you keep posting ad nauseam has been answered many times by others.

I understand the war on arithmetic being waged by the Republicans isn't helping your condition, but I didn't realize it extended to listening and reading skills.

Seriously this is the kind of radicalism that leads to book burning....

Obama is a free spender. The national debt has gone exponentially up during his 5 years in office. With the debt ceiling raised again, we're looking to more prolific spending. The stupid Obamacare thing should be killed. The Medicare/Medicaid fiasco is already half of the US budget. Now add Obamacare. The economy will collapse. Then only a world war will save it, like the last two times. May be that's plan.

"You mean the massive debt run up since Clinton balanced the budget in his last years? "

The national debt increased during the Clinton years from about $4.4 trillion to about $5.8 trillion. So much for the "surplus," eh, zurc?

"The annual debt is decreasing at unprecedented rates under Obama and Democratic leadership"

Really! Only one problem with that statement, zurc - the national debt has increased from around $10 trillion when Obama took office to around $17 trillion now. I know that fact is painful for you, but hey, it's painful for all of us.

Serrano: The Democtats' toughest test will be trying to do something about the $17,000,000,000,000 ( $17 trillion ) national debt.

You mean the massive debt run up since Clinton balanced the budget in his last years? You mean the republcan mountain of debt for unneeded tax cuts for the rich and unfunded failed wars? 90% of the debt increase under Obama has come from Bush policies and failed wars. 90%. Serrano and others said nothing about the debt as it was being dramatically increased under bush after Clinton gave him the gift of a balanced budget. In fact at the time economist were worried the US would pay down its debt too fast. Bush and the budget train wreck republicans made sure that was not going to happen. But now that the first black President is in office, debt becomes important to the tea party types. Now why would that be, I just cannot put my finger on it . . .

The annual debt is decreasing at unprecedented rates under Obama and Democratic leadership. The Democrats always have to clean up for the disasters the republicans leave behind. Failed wars, huge debt, near depression conditions, lowest global standing ever, eroding infrastructure and on and on and on. Republicans have proven, especially recently by shutting down the government for nothing, they have no idea what they are doing. No ideal at all. Just to wreck things and say no to progress.

In January the republicans will be in deep trouble. While Americans still support cuts in spending, with just above 50% in favor of cuts, they don't support any of the methods used to coerce the remaining portion of government. Overwhelmingly, above 75% according to some polls, Americans are disgusted by the strong arm tactics used by the tea party. However the tea part has extremely strong support in their discreet areas. Also the tea party has scattered support all around the country as the extremist conservatives have concentrated areas but then are scattered scantly throughout the rest of the country. That is where danger now lies for the republicans. In January the republican dilemma will be whether to face increasing tough primary elections with a tough stance or to realize that in a general election the majority of Americans can't stand the tea party and its extremist views.

The budget issues and debt limit issues will not be far apart again beginning mid January. If they try to pass a reasonable bill quietly the hostile tea party will say things that damage some of the party's candidates in the primary elections. That is what the tea party does. Then many of the winners of the primary can't get elected in the general election because of their extremist views. I would also note that many of the tea party individuals know nothing about Economics yet boast of their fool proof methods of steering our economy. Many are being exposed for their neophyte and pseudo pollyannish statements.

If on the other hand the non tea party individuals pander to the conservative extremists many of them will not stand a chance in the general election. Now some folks on JT will attempt to tell you what I am saying but mischaracterize my synopsis. They will use the example of safe tea party seats. I fully accept that many tea party seats are safe. However bastions like the south, Idaho, some western states & your Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas type states are not representative of the entire country. The republicans need the seats scattered among the more moderate areas of America or they will lose any advantage they hold (In the house with a simple majority and in the senate to maintain cloture when they're screwing America). Often candidates can subsequently redeem themselves by voting quickly to resolve an issue where they previously lost face with the American people. Now, however, there are consequences either way unless you have a tea party safe seat. In other words the tea party is tearing apart the republican party. The tea party refused to abide by Regan's policy of never speaking badly of another republican. The tea party constituency would love nothing more than to stand up and fight in January. The tea party constituency, in fact, would like to see an even stronger stance. We have seen ignorant individuals who believe we can some how not raise the debt limit, which simply equates to refusing to pay one's bill.

I say go for it. I would love to see the tea party exposed for their zero knowledge of economics. I believe we cannot move forward in this country until the tea party is defeated. I do acknowledge that it is possible for their influence to dwindle from the inside out but it would take a lot more time. In other words if the tea party, their operatives or the less adamant individuals pass the spending bills and debt limit bills in a responsible manner then Americans would not see the true ignorant intentions and will soften their disdain for the tea party over time. But then of course the rest of the republican party will strengthen its position in, what in reality would be opposing the extremist agenda. Thus the influence would dwindle. I also firmly believe that the tea party must exercise its strength now. They have to use whatever power they can garnish presently or lose it when our economy recovers. It will recover. On a side note, funny thing how the stimulus worked in China. Maybe the tea party Economist experts can explain it as a "new paradigm" only applicable to China.

I believe an example is necessary to see the dilemma the republicans face. I believe the power the above article implies Democrats recently gained can only be maintained if they remain unified. Diverse but unified. The following paragraph best illustrates the tea party's undue influence in primaries that can cause failure in ;the republican party's prospects. I think the article touches on the dynamic of the tea party and the Democratic possible gains but I am simply offering the means of such gains. Without the following other posters can make many unfounded claims as to the improbability of my claims.

In Indiana where Richard Mourdock beat long term Senator Lugar. The tea party thrashed Lugar for any manner in which he was responsible and dedicated towards a modest approach of representing his entire state instead of just the tea party. Mourdock lost the general election by close to 6% It may not seem like a lot but Indiana is becoming a much more conservative state. The fact is that Lugar won the general election in his previous bid for the Senate with 87% of the vote. Mourdock was endorsed by several conservative interest groups, including the Americans for prosperity, Club for Growth, FreedomWorks, Citizens United and the Tea Party Express, the National Rifle Association and Indiana Right to life. They brought huge sums of money in to support Mourdock but he still could not win.

The Democtats' toughest test will be trying to do something about the $17,000,000,000,000 ( $17 trillion ) national debt.