News Obama Strategy for 2012

  • Thread starter WhoWee
  • Start date
107
0
How is that a good thing? You want amateurs to plan the US government's economy?

Do you go to someone who's not a career stock broker for your investment advice?

Part of the rationale of a representative democracy is that you elect someone with expertise to devote all of their time to running the government instead of something like a direct democracy where you'd have to vote on these individual bills and you'd have to find the time to research all of these issues in your spare time.

Aside from that, how do you know that they're not career politicians. Every Congressman had to start somewhere with no experience. If they were good enough to get re-elected, then they became career politicians. If they weren't, they had to give up politics and go into some other career.

In other words, you don't know whether they're career politicians until they've had a chance to show how competent or incompetent they were. Non-career politician is just one that was really bad at his job.

Being a freshman Congressman is no sin. But, usually, a freshman Congressman tries to learn the ropes before deciding they're qualified to take control of Congress.
Are the freshman Congress members planning the US Government's economy - or trying to figure out how to pay the bills left over by the former Congress?

The results of the 2010 election were very clear - they were sent to Washington to cut spending. Now, they need to learn when to take a win and move on to the next battle.
 

Ivan Seeking

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,093
174
Obama Strategy for 2012

Offer the tea party $4 trillion in debt reduction over the next ten years, with as much as a 4:1 spending-cuts-to-tax-increase ratio, and wait for them to refuse. Then make it clear to everyone in 2012 that the tea party refused to cut $4 trillion in debt, much more than we will actually get now, because the Republicans refused to tax billionaires.

Swing the house back to the left, or at least the middle, allowing room for Obama to implement his long-term goals in his second term, which is when Presidents do that, with the partiers now made irrelevant.
 
107
0
Obama Strategy for 2012

Offer the tea party $4 trillion in debt reduction over the next ten years, with as much as a 4:1 spending-cuts-to-tax-increase ratio, and wait for them to refuse. Then make it clear to everyone in 2012 that the tea party refused to cut $4 trillion in debt, much more than we will actually get now, because the Republicans refused to tax billionaires.

Swing the house back to the left, or at least the middle, allowing room for Obama to implement his long-term goals in his second term, which is when Presidents do that, with the partiers now made irrelevant.
Dare to dream.:yuck:
 

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
23,240
5,582
because the Republicans refused to tax billionaires.
Please cite a Democratic proposal that taxes only billionaires, or admit that this is pure flamebait.

And, just FYI, the net worth of the US's ~500 billionaires is $1.2T. The deficit for this year is $1.6T. Even if the government confiscated everything they own - I'm talking wealth, not just income - it wouldn't close the budget gap. This is not a statement about right vs. left, liberal vs. conservative or GOP vs. Democrat. It's just arithmetic.
 

BobG

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
Please cite a Democratic proposal that taxes only billionaires, or admit that this is pure flamebait.
Yeah, that was getting to me, too. I think the idea was to increase taxes for people making as little as $250,000 a year. But Ivan's estimate only looks 3.6 times too large if you plot it on a logarithmic scale.
 
107
0
Swing the house back to the left, or at least the middle, allowing room for Obama to implement his long-term goals in his second term, which is when Presidents do that, with the partiers now made irrelevant.
The President pushed all of his programs through when he had a majority. Could it also be argued that now it's time to undo the harm he has done - which keeps the Tea Party relevant?

Actually, I think the President needs an active Tea Party to rally his base.
 

BobG

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
Actually, I think the President needs an active Tea Party to rally his base.
This is a good point. The Tea Party could even rally independents and moderates.

Certainly part of the calculations is the fact that the party of the winning candidate usually does very good. That means if the Tea Party can damage Obama's election hopes, they mitigate any damage they cause to themselves along the way.

I don't think they'll eliminate it completely. In fact, they could wind up suffering more damage from the debt ceiling debate than Obama (especially if the economy recovers and jobless rates fall). Obama leaves this with a perception that he lacks leadership, but that also makes his role in this debacle very forgettable. The Tea Party left a pretty memorable impression.
 

Char. Limit

Gold Member
1,198
12
Please cite a Democratic proposal that taxes only billionaires, or admit that this is pure flamebait.
Whether there is one or not, I'd be willing to bet that we WILL hear such rhetoric from at least one prominent Democratic candidate. So really, if Ivan is speaking in terms of potential Democratic rhetoric, he's perfectly valid.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,866
5,050
The President pushed all of his programs through when he had a majority.
No, WhoWee, I think what Ivan is trying to say is that a 1st term president, such as Obama, is motivated primarily by trying to get re-elected and therefore saves the important work for the second term. So Obama focused on the unimportant but politically hot tasks of attempting healtchare reform, attempting to fix the economy without bankrupting us, and halfheartedlly starting a new war in the Middle East in his first term. Perhaps in his second term, he'll takle the more important tasks of healthcare reform, fixing the economy without bankrupting us and starting a new war in the Middle East?

Pointed sarcasm aside, if ever a new President had an opportunity to impliment his vision of "change", Obama had it. It's gone for good now and if he squandered it then in favor of playing re-election politics as soon as he got into office, as Ivan suggests, then few presidents have ever been more deserving of being voted out than Obama.

Obama has expressed admiration for Reagan. Reagan was a leader in a time that required one and he siezed his mandate for change. Obama came into power at a similar time, under a similar mandate, and by Ivan's tacit acknowledgement, has not done so effectively.

I think as time passes, Obama's strategy options become tougher and tougher to sell and - like the one we saw above - will require selling bigger and bigger lies.
 
107
0
No, WhoWee, I think what Ivan is trying to say is that a 1st term president, such as Obama, is motivated primarily by trying to get re-elected and therefore saves the important work for the second term. So Obama focused on the unimportant but politically hot tasks of attempting healtchare reform, attempting to fix the economy without bankrupting us, and halfheartedlly starting a new war in the Middle East in his first term. Perhaps in his second term, he'll takle the more important tasks of healthcare reform, fixing the economy without bankrupting us and starting a new war in the Middle East?

Pointed sarcasm aside, if ever a new President had an opportunity to impliment his vision of "change", Obama had it. It's gone for good now and if he squandered it then in favor of playing re-election politics as soon as he got into office, as Ivan suggests, then few presidents have ever been more deserving of being voted out than Obama.

Obama has expressed admiration for Reagan. Reagan was a leader in a time that required one and he siezed his mandate for change. Obama came into power at a similar time, under a similar mandate, and by Ivan's tacit acknowledgement, has not done so effectively.

I think as time passes, Obama's strategy options become tougher and tougher to sell and - like the one we saw above - will require selling bigger and bigger lies.
IMO - Harry Reid hand picked then Senator Obama, and worked with the Left to get him elected. Once elected, Harry Reid teamed up with Nancy Pelosi and other Dem leaders and pushed through as much as they could - their agenda was more important to them than the President's re-election prospects at that time. As the dust continues to settle - Harry Reid's speech on the floor today (before the debt deal vote) tells me his "jobs" initiatives will be designed to carry the President forward and champion Harry's next attempt at stimulus. Again all of this is IMO - to summarize (whether he knew it or not) the President was expendable to the Congressional Democrat leaders at the start of his term.
 

mheslep

Gold Member
254
728
... I think the idea was to increase taxes for people making as little as $250,000 a year. ...
Which still doesn't accomplish much, as the revenue from that proposed tax increase is ~$70B/year.
 
107
0
The DOW is down about 10% in the past 10 days - down over 500 Points today 8/4/2011.
http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=INDEXDJX:DJI#

I don't think a deep market correction (a DOW of 7,500 for instance) now in 2011 will hurt President Obama - as long as it trends up into 2012 maybe back to 10,000 or better?

However, if the companies start to use their cash to buy back shares - it could be an indicator of a further slow down in growth. If the cash is used to acquire shares - it's not being re-invested in new production capacity, inventory, marketing, or R&D.

Another possible indicator (of a double dip recession) today is the drop in oil prices (about $7) - might indicate a contraction (drop in demand). This is not good news for the President - IMO.
 
107
0
The Asian markets also opened down about 3 to 4% on the heels of the 500 point drop in the DOW.
 

lisab

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,832
616
The DOW is down about 10% in the past 10 days - down over 500 Points today 8/4/2011.
http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=INDEXDJX:DJI#

I don't think a deep market correction (a DOW of 7,500 for instance) now in 2011 will hurt President Obama - as long as it trends up into 2012 maybe back to 10,000 or better?

However, if the companies start to use their cash to buy back shares - it could be an indicator of a further slow down in growth. If the cash is used to acquire shares - it's not being re-invested in new production capacity, inventory, marketing, or R&D.

Another possible indicator (of a double dip recession) today is the drop in oil prices (about $7) - might indicate a contraction (drop in demand). This is not good news for the President - IMO.
A double dip recession will not be good new for anybody. I'm quite sure the organization I work for would not survive - we're strongly tied to residential building :cry:.
 
107
0
After the credit downgrade of the United States of America - President Obama gave a speech that actually calls for additional spending to stimulate the economy. The DJI dropped a few hundred points before his speech - down over 5% and 600 points for the day.
 

BobG

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
110
80
The full impact of the final debt ceiling agreement/credit downgrade probably hasn't shown up in polls yet, but the initial indications are that this hasn't affected Obama's approval ratings at all.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm

His ratings are essentially the same as they were in mid July - the middle of the debt ceiling crisis.

His approval ratings have gone down some from the beginning of May, however. Looking at those drops, Obama's strategy for 2012 should be to swing back to the left. There's been a slight decrease in the number of people that think Obama is too liberal, but not enough of a decrease to counter the number of people that think he has become too conservative.

He should spend more time bashing Bush, too. Bush bashing never goes out of style.

http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm
44% blame Bush for the federal deficit, while Obama and Congress each get the blame from 15% of the people.
 
107
0
The full impact of the final debt ceiling agreement/credit downgrade probably hasn't shown up in polls yet, but the initial indications are that this hasn't affected Obama's approval ratings at all.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_ad.htm

His ratings are essentially the same as they were in mid July - the middle of the debt ceiling crisis.

His approval ratings have gone down some from the beginning of May, however. Looking at those drops, Obama's strategy for 2012 should be to swing back to the left. There's been a slight decrease in the number of people that think Obama is too liberal, but not enough of a decrease to counter the number of people that think he has become too conservative.

He should spend more time bashing Bush, too. Bush bashing never goes out of style.

http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm
44% blame Bush for the federal deficit, while Obama and Congress each get the blame from 15% of the people.
He clearly ran against Bush last time - but unless everyone forgot that he was elected - he'll have to own-up to his own promises from last time.
 

turbo

Gold Member
3,028
45
IMO, Obama needs to spend time on the campaign trail reminding people that he was willing to put entitlements on the table (which infuriated progressives and most liberals in his own party) but that the GOP failed to negotiate in good faith WRT letting tax cuts expire and cleaning up all the targeted tax-breaks that plague our tax code.

Plus, he should make it crystal clear that the Tea Party and the hard-right wing of the GOP manufactured this phony debt crises. Yes, the US has some long term problems with spending and revenue, but there was no need of threatening to force the US to default if Tea Party demands weren't met by August 2. Setting up short term deadlines to deal with complex long-term problems is stupid in the extreme. Political gamesmanship of this magnitude (threatening default on US debt) is dangerous behavior, and it has thrown our stock markets into turmoil, and will probably make it more expensive to service our existing debt.
 
Last edited:
107
0
IMO, Obama needs to spend time on the campaign trail reminding people that he was willing to put entitlements on the table (which infuriated progressives and most liberals in his own party) but that the GOP failed to negotiate in good faith WRT letting tax cuts expire and cleaning up all the targeted tax-breaks that plague our tax code.

Plus, he should make it crystal clear that the Tea Party and the hard-right wing of the GOP manufactured this phony debt crises. Yes, the US has some long term problems with spending and revenue, but there was no need of threatening to force the US to default if Tea Party demands weren't met by August 2. Setting up short term deadlines to deal with complex long-term problems is stupid in the extreme. Political gamesmanship of this magnitude (threatening default on US debt) is dangerous behavior, and it has thrown our stock markets into turmoil, and will probably make it more expensive to service our existing debt.
I could not agree more - that President Obama needs to talk more about his plan to address entitlement reform. The sooner he puts a specific plan on the table - Congress can address the issue - no need to wait until after the election to get started. As they say - time is money.

As for continuing to blame his failures on the TEA Party and George Bush - I agree again that he should keep on insisting it's not his fault.

I do need your help with one point turbo. Is President Obama for ending the Bush tax cuts or is he in favor of extending his extensions of the Bush tax cuts - or does he want to end his extension of the tax cuts of Bush that he didn't allow to expire?
 

turbo

Gold Member
3,028
45
As you are well aware, Obama can administrate, but he cannot legislate. Indicating his willingness to sign a debt-ceiling bill that contained reforms to SS and Medicare was about as far as he could go, leaving it up to the House and Senate to deliver such a bill.
 
Last edited:
107
0
As you are well aware, Obama can administrate, but he cannot legislate. Indicating his willingness to sign a debt-ceiling bill that contained reforms to SS and Medicare was about as far as he could go, leaving it up to the House and Senate to deliver such a bill.
There is absolutely nothing preventing him from putting a specific plan to address entitlement reform on the table right now - other than the pending election - he's had at least 5 years (since being elected to the Senate) to think about it.
 

turbo

Gold Member
3,028
45
There is absolutely nothing preventing him from putting a specific plan to address entitlement reform on the table right now - other than the pending election - he's had at least 5 years (since being elected to the Senate) to think about it.
Let's back up a bit. What specific legislative proposals did W propose? The Right seems to demand a lot of Obama, while having expected very little of W.
 
107
0
Let's back up a bit. What specific legislative proposals did W propose? The Right seems to demand a lot of Obama, while having expected very little of W.
Forget about Bush. You want President Obama to hit the campaign trail and talk about entitlement reforms - I agree and want to hear some specifics - just as everyone else will and especially during the debates.
 

russ_watters

Mentor
18,866
5,050
Let's back up a bit. What specific legislative proposals did W propose? The Right seems to demand a lot of Obama, while having expected very little of W.
I'm not sure 'But I'm better than Bush was!!!! :cry::cry::cry:' Is going to fly next year.
 

turbo

Gold Member
3,028
45
The point is that Presidents can't legislate. They can rally their troops and ask for legislation that they are willing to sign, but all the dirty work is done in committees, by Congressional staffers and aides. There is no way that Obama should have been expected to come up with a comprehensive debt-reduction bill, like some on the right are claiming. Such claims show a shocking lack of comprehension about how the US government works.
 

Related Threads for: Obama Strategy for 2012

  • Posted
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Replies
145
Views
17K
  • Posted
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Posted
Replies
8
Views
614
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Posted
8 9 10
Replies
230
Views
17K
  • Posted
2
Replies
28
Views
5K

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top