American Progressives - What Are We Doing Wrong?

[Lt. Fred]

Make an argument, agree with me, or shut up. Three options. "That's so duuuuuumb!" is logically fallacious.

[Witchyjoshy]

The president can veto a bill, and his veto can get vetoed by a popular enough vote.

[m52nickerson]

Hence the 1936 recession. FDR's decision to throw caution to the wind and spend up big in 1939/40 ended the depression.

Yup, he finally got it.  Part of that was also buildup in anticipation for the war.

Obviously. However, he can veto spending cuts. Had Obama done so (and provided aid to the States so they didn't need to lay off teachers and so on) the unemployment rate would be around 5%.

Or it could be much worse as the GOP could have hardened their position and we could have had one of more government shut downs.  Even without that there was no way Obama was going to get any new spending had he vetoed every cut.

[davedan]

It's not what progressive people are doing wrong so much as it is what the people who oppose them are doing right.

Unsurprisingly those with wealth and power want to keep it-and they'll be just as conniving and cunning at holding that wealth and power as they were obtaining it in the first place!

This is pretty much why I've become a cynic.

No, seriously, I live with dogs in a trash bin and everything.

Boom, going all Diogenes on everyone. Although I thought it was a barrel.

[Lt. Fred]

The president can veto a bill, and his veto can get vetoed by a popular enough vote.

Sure. Demand that your party not overturn your veto (since you have the Senate).

Obviously. However, he can veto spending cuts. Had Obama done so (and provided aid to the States so they didn't need to lay off teachers and so on) the unemployment rate would be around 5%.

Or it could be much worse as the GOP could have hardened their position and we could have had one of more government shut downs.  Even without that there was no way Obama was going to get any new spending had he vetoed every cut.

There isn't really any need for new spending at this point. As Obama has himself been misquoted pointing out, the private sector is basically recovered. The only jobs missing from the economy are state jobs, largely state school teachers*, but also all those guys laid off through the various sequester too-bad-too-happen catastrophes that have been inflicted on you guys over the last couple of years.

Obviously this shit is mostly the Republicans' fault, no question. The outrageous irresponsibility of threatening anarchy unless you get your way is difficult to deal with. But, I'm sure, Obama probably could have stopped this if he'd kept his head: look what the Republicans are doing! This is totally irresponsible! Now he's getting blamed for it.

* This is also Obama's fault since when these cuts took place he had both House and unfillibusterable Senate. 500 billion or a trillion in aid to states and this wouldn't have happened.

[m52nickerson]

You have to remember that it is not as simple as new spending bills.  Current spending has to be renewed, and the debt ceiling has to be raised.  As much as we like to think that Obama is in a position in which a government shutdown would make the GOP blink first that remains unclear. 

As it is right now there is a group of Republicans that are very much interested in shutting down the government.  Even at the cost to their party.  They believe it will gain them support in their home districts.  To avoid this Obama has to give a bit to the rest of the GOP.

[Lt. Fred]

You have to remember that it is not as simple as new spending bills.  Current spending has to be renewed, and the debt ceiling has to be raised.

[/quote]

And the deal should have been "you raise the debt ceiling or you don't raise the debt ceiling. Upon your head be it."

[m52nickerson]

And the deal should have been "you raise the debt ceiling or you don't raise the debt ceiling. Upon your head be it."

Sounds good until a shutdown and no government spending sends the economy back into a recession.   

[Lt. Fred]

And the deal should have been "you raise the debt ceiling or you don't raise the debt ceiling. Upon your head be it."

Sounds good until a shutdown and no government spending sends the economy back into a recession.

I strongly doubt they'd actually do it.

[Witchyjoshy]

And the deal should have been "you raise the debt ceiling or you don't raise the debt ceiling. Upon your head be it."

Sounds good until a shutdown and no government spending sends the economy back into a recession.

I strongly doubt they'd actually do it.

You have a lot of faith in politicians, ya know that?

[Lt. Fred]

And the deal should have been "you raise the debt ceiling or you don't raise the debt ceiling. Upon your head be it."

Sounds good until a shutdown and no government spending sends the economy back into a recession.

I strongly doubt they'd actually do it.

You have a lot of faith in politicians, ya know that?

To ruin the credit-rating of the US government would also ruin all their donors, not to mention themselves. They'd also be lucky ever to win an election again.

[ironbite]

Once again your ignorance of the American Political Spectrum is showing.

[Lt. Fred]

Three options: make an argument, agree with me, the fuck shut up. Take one.

[ironbite]

I did make an argument.  You're the outsider looking in.

Ironbite-can't help it if you have no fucking clue how our political system works.

[Lt. Fred]

I did make an argument.  You're the outsider looking in.

Ironbite-can't help it if you have no fucking clue how our political system works.

Three options: make an argument, agree with me, the fuck shut up. Take one.