• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama to GOP: I’m done negotiating with myself

TheNextEra said:
LOL you actually believe things would have been different with ROmney? Boy were you duped. Romney has flipped flopped so many times you can't tell which Romney was going to do what.
Click to expand...

So you went with Obama thinking what? He never flip flopped? He will balance a budget? Get spending under control? Bring peace on earth?

The clear fact is that Romney has been a success is managing economies, private and public, and is a turn around artist. You worry about "flip flopping" because as you were sipping at your Kool Aid you were told that abortion, or contraception, or Romney was a bully in high school, were the big issues.

Everything is the economy, but the Obama supporters were more interested in 'flip flops'. These are not adult issues.

I said this before the election, no matter whether Romney or Obama was president nothing was going to be much different.
Click to expand...

Well you were wrong, obviously.

The Dem/Rep Duopoly is what is hurting America because BOTH sides don't want to do what's necessary to turn this country around. BOTH sides want their sacred cows kept INTACT.
Click to expand...

No, too many voters are poorly informed schmucks who are easily led and who don't understand the importance of economics. They seem to believe that just being born American gives them the right to have free stuff, that through their birthright they are special and therefore entitled. Of course the politicians don't discourage this thinking so therefore a very hard lesson is on the way.
 
Grant said:
So you went with Obama thinking what? He never flip flopped? He will balance a budget? Get spending under control? Bring peace on earth?

The clear fact is that Romney has been a success is managing economies, private and public, and is a turn around artist. You worry about "flip flopping" because as you were sipping at your Kool Aid you were told that abortion, or contraception, or Romney was a bully in high school, were the big issues.

Everything is the economy, but the Obama supporters were more interested in 'flip flops'. These are not adult issues.
Click to expand...

Koolaid? Sorry I didn't vote for Obama or Romney, so it's YOU who is sucking the Koolaid of the duopoly system. Your own fault there bucko.


Grant said:
Well you were wrong, obviously.
Click to expand...

So says a Romneybot.


Grant said:
No, too many voters are poorly informed schmucks who are easily led and who don't understand the importance of economics. They seem to believe that just being born American gives them the right to have free stuff, that through their birthright they are special and therefore entitled. Of course the politicians don't discourage this thinking so therefore a very hard lesson is on the way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it couldn't be the fault of Romney or the GOP, it HAS to be the fault of the voters :roll:

No, until idiots start waking up to the fact that BOTH the Dems and Reps have failed us, nothing will change. Have a good day drinking the red Koolaid. :2wave:
 
QUOTE Grant

And the Eisenhower Administration was well before LBJ's 'Great Society' and the growth of 'entitlements'.
Click to expand...


Yet after “LBJ's 'Great Society' “ the debt as a % of gdp went down. go figure. :roll:


Yes, I'm familiar with the blame game but there are a sufficient number of American people who are more concerned with their entitlements and continued government spending then to do what is right for the country. Blaming others is the easiest part. The harder part is doing something about it. The political will do something about it just isn't there, neither by the politicians or the majority of the people themselves.
Click to expand...

Yet you blamed the debt(wrongly) on “LBJ's 'Great Society' “.I just showed you that the debt as a percent of gdp went down. As a matter of fact I was wrong, according to a graph that I just read.

It seems that even after LBJ's Great Society, the debt continued to go down a a percent of gdp even during Nixon's failed term a president. It didn’t take off until Ford,s term. Then President Carter stepped to save our bacon,debt wise at least. Then up stepped the gipper and off we were to the races. Here take a peek and get back to me.

National Debt Graph by President
 
Dickieboy said:
I especially like this part of the article linked in the OP:



Why would you neglect to include this in your OP assertion?...
Click to expand...

That is how negotiations with a spoiled child work. You don't try to offer them something they would go for because they won't go for anything. Instead you tell them your side and come down from there. Obama has stepped in this trap many times and it is good to see he is learning. He tries to see the reps in the middle and then they blame him for the disasterous policies they want to implement. Now they are going to have to take the blame for their own stupid policies. Obama is straying away from being a hard core republican and working for them.

You know this is a problem reps made by playing spoiled little brat games in congress. Now Boner is going to have to lead his party and do the negative things they want. The reps are going to have to compromise because they are not even close to having enough power to get their crazy destructive plans passed. Really, isn't that for the best? Both sides end up compromising so we don't give away the country to the rich spoiled brats or to the poor people looking for a handout either? Imagine if the benefit for all of this fell on the people who actually work instead of the extremes where neither side does any actual work?
 
tererun said:
...The reps are going to have to compromise because they are not even close to having enough power to get their crazy destructive plans passed. ...
Click to expand...

Confused...what's different now?
 
TheNextEra said:
Versus the GOP method od tax cuts, spend and give free stuff. I guess that's ok by you since you voted for Bush twice.
Click to expand...

I asked you twice to show me what have the liberals proposed in cuts? Really, it's an easy question.

All I see is more of the same from liberals, tax, borrow, spend an give free stuff. I really don't care about 20 yrs ago, what I do care about is today. We're 16 trillion in debt and under Obama are headed to 20+ trillion. Obama and his liberal clan don't want any cuts, period. Just tax, borrow, spend, and give free stuff, compared to the Pub's who want cuts.

Now again what is Obama promising to cut? Don't bother, answering questions is not something you do. Or is it your not able to comprehend an easy question.
 
Born Free said:
I asked you twice to show me what have the liberals proposed in cuts? Really, it's an easy question.
Click to expand...

Congress is composed of Dems and GOP. Dem does not equate to liberal. Anyone honest knows this, but we know you aren't.

Born Free said:
All I see is more of the same from liberals, tax, borrow, spend an give free stuff. I really don't care about 20 yrs ago, what I do care about is today. We're 16 trillion in debt and under Obama are headed to 20+ trillion. Obama and his liberal clan don't want any cuts, period. Just tax, borrow, spend, and give free stuff, compared to the Pub's who want cuts.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't care about things 20 years ago, you only care about Obama. Hell you voted for Bush twice, so you have NO room to talk about spending.

Born Free said:
Now again what is Obama promising to cut? Don't bother, answering questions is not something you do. Or is it your not able to comprehend an easy question.
Click to expand...

See you have this problem with reading comprehension. I'm not defending Obama. In fact I think what he and the Dems are doing is awful. The difference is I also see the GOP doing the same damn thing when they are in charge.

You want to be a sheeple. Be my guest. BOTH the Dems and GOP have ruined this country and people like you still side with the GOP. You get the government you deserve, and BOY do you deserve EVERYTHING that is happening.
 
Obama's big idea is to increase taxes by 1.6 trillion, have another stimulus, and not even touch the projected increase in the debt until 2022 and even then you have to zoom in to see the projected debt decrease.

Oh and do away with the debt ceiling.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Obama's big idea is to increase taxes by 1.6 trillion, have another stimulus, and not even touch the projected increase in the debt until 2022 and even then you have to zoom in to see the projected debt decrease.

Oh and do away with the debt ceiling.
Click to expand...


What is the big Republican plan henrin...Cut everything and anything you can from the poor the middleclass and seniors and continue subsidies to corps that just put it in their pocket and of course give the richest americans and corporations another big tax cut .
Henrin I would have hoped that the GOP would have learned that like or not they are going to have to compromise...if they dont it will only make it much worse for them in the future.
In 15-20 yrs or so the electorate is going to change dramatically...Gone and dead will be the largest white voting block in america...the babyboomers. After that white votes will not carry anything..If the gop doesnt get it in their heads that all their old talking points and rhetoric will not work anymore and neither will their agenda as it is right now, they are going to lose elections until they do change.
 
Henrin said:
Obama's big idea is to increase taxes by 1.6 trillion, have another stimulus, and not even touch the projected increase in the debt until 2022 and even then you have to zoom in to see the projected debt decrease.

Oh and do away with the debt ceiling.
Click to expand...

Hate to tell you this, but even Romney would have been forced to raise the debt ceiling.
 
Let me see if I've got this straight.

Background:
Reps want to go Southeast and the Dems want to go Southwest.

History:
Dems compromise and start their initial proposals at going S, Reps always talk them into going SSE by being united and through prodigious use of filibustering.


Elections:
Reps campaign on going Southeast, Dems on Southwest. The Dems won.

Now:
Dems say they won, so they decided not to bend over like before and start their negotiations by proposing we go SW. Reps say no and accuse the Dems of being unreasonable for not starting at S.
 
TheNextEra said:
Hate to tell you this, but even Romney would have been forced to raise the debt ceiling.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter to me what Romney would do to be honest and its hardly matters anymore at this point. My point wasn't that Obama was going to have raise the debt ceiling or not raise it, but that he wants to do away with it all together. He finds it bothersome, so instead of just going through the process in the future he proposed just doing away with all together. Add that up to his plan that was just more spending along with a tax increase and his behavior here is just completely laughable.
 
Henrin said:
It doesn't matter to me what Romney would do to be honest and its hardly matters anymore at this point. My point wasn't that Obama was going to have raise the debt ceiling or not raise it, but that he wants to do away with it all together. He finds it bothersome, so instead of just going through the process in the future he proposed just doing away with all together. Add that up to his plan that was just more spending along with a tax increase and his behavior here is just completely laughable.
Click to expand...

That's a part that isn't getting enough play. In such a scenario, all a President has to do is have one party control one House of Congress and the power of the Purse is effectively removed from the Legislature and given to the Executive - the President at that point can do anything he wants shy of getting impeached.


It would wreck incredible damage to what remains of our system of balance-of-powers.
 
"I'm done negotiating with myself."

Is that what they call it these days?
 
Henrin said:
It doesn't matter to me what Romney would do to be honest and its hardly matters anymore at this point. My point wasn't that Obama was going to have raise the debt ceiling or not raise it, but that he wants to do away with it all together. He finds it bothersome, so instead of just going through the process in the future he proposed just doing away with all together. Add that up to his plan that was just more spending along with a tax increase and his behavior here is just completely laughable.
Click to expand...


What Obama wants and what he gets are two different things. However, if you feel the need to cry "the sky is falling, the sky is falling", be my guest. It's almost as bad as though claiming that Obama is going to do away with the presidential term limits if he was elected again in 2012.

It's funny watching conservatives act like many did during the Bush era. But of course it's different now because it's Obama :roll:
 
TheNextEra said:
Hate to tell you this, but even Romney would have been forced to raise the debt ceiling.
Click to expand...

Most defiantly so, but would Romney ask for unilateral control of the debt ceiling?
 
Samhain said:
Most defiantly so, but would Romney ask for unilateral control of the debt ceiling?
Click to expand...

No, but Romney would most likely have asked for war with Iran. Is that something we would have wanted or could have afforded.

Sorry but BOTH Romney and OBama were lousy choices for different reasons. I kinda wish now that Romney would have won, only because the right have been such sore losers about the whole election and their conspiracy nonsense is growing exponentially.
 
TheNextEra said:
No, but Romney would most likely have asked for war with Iran. Is that something we would have wanted or could have afforded.
Click to expand...

For months Netanyahu has been telling Obama that it's time to take military action against Iran. Yet, Obama is still sitting on his hands doing nothing.
 
TheNextEra said:
No, but Romney would most likely have asked for war with Iran. Is that something we would have wanted or could have afforded.

Sorry but BOTH Romney and OBama were lousy choices for different reasons. I kinda wish now that Romney would have won, only because the right have been such sore losers about the whole election and their conspiracy nonsense is growing exponentially.
Click to expand...

Had Romney won, we would still be talking about sequestration because neither side wants to give anything up.

I would prefer the automatic trigger @ 11:59pm on 12/31/12 to what is most likely in the works: Kick the can.
 
johnny_rebson said:
For months Netanyahu has been telling Obama that it's time to take military action against Iran. Yet, Obama is still sitting on his hands doing nothing.
Click to expand...

Then put YOUR money where your mouth is for war then. Tired of cons complaining about spending and then calling for war in every damn region of the middle east.
 
Samhain said:
Had Romney won, we would still be talking about sequestration because neither side wants to give anything up.

I would prefer the automatic trigger @ 11:59pm on 12/31/12 to what is most likely in the works: Kick the can.
Click to expand...

Kick the can was going to happen even if Romney had won. It's amazing the koolaid some drink to think Obama and Romney were REALLY different.
 
I think a lot of the posters in this thread have misinterpreted the point of the article. Obama has set an opening offer for negotiations, and unlike in previous disputes, he is no longer going to negotiate against himself. That doesn't mean he is unwilling to compromise. Like any experienced negotiator, he has set his opening offer "high." It's now up to the other side to counter, and the process will continue until both sides have a deal that surpasses their BATNA.

The conservative expectation that Obama's initial proposal be a perfect final deal is a perfect example of the strategy of pure opposition. We've already seen what conservatives do to Democratic proposals that adopt Republican ideas and aim for the center. They waste years challenging them legally as the most authoritarian and socialist reform to hit the country in centuries. Enough. Now that conservatives control half of congress, they can no longer hide behind a simple opposition strategy. They have a stake in power in Washington, and they need to get off their asses and behave like negotiators rather than judges.
 
Krhazy said:
I think a lot of the posters in this thread have misinterpreted the point of the article. Obama has set an opening offer for negotiations, and unlike in previous disputes, he is no longer going to negotiate against himself. That doesn't mean he is unwilling to compromise. Like any experienced negotiator, he has set his opening offer "high." It's now up to the other side to counter, and the process will continue until both sides have a deal that surpasses their BATNA.

The conservative expectation that Obama's initial proposal be a perfect final deal is a perfect example of the strategy of pure opposition. We've already seen what conservatives do to Democratic proposals that adopt Republican ideas and aim for the center. They waste years challenging them legally as the most authoritarian and socialist reform to hit the country in centuries. Enough. Now that conservatives control half of congress, they can no longer hide behind a simple opposition strategy. They have a stake in power in Washington, and they need to get off their asses and behave like negotiators rather than judges.
Click to expand...

Interesting perspective. Is the President engaged with the Senate or are they already in his pocket?
 
Samhain said:
Oh, and I forgot, not only did it not guarantee any spending cuts, it also called for real increases in spending. You can't make this **** up.

White House Plan on Fiscal Crisis Draws G.O.P. Ire - NYTimes.com



Wow.
Click to expand...

Then let's hear something from Orange tan. Let's hear a Republican proposal. Not the Mittens kind, which has nothing specific in it but a real proposal, with real cuts.

Mainly what the Republicans do is say nothing and whine a lot. How about showing some guts?
 
Krhazy said:
I think a lot of the posters in this thread have misinterpreted the point of the article. Obama has set an opening offer for negotiations, and unlike in previous disputes, he is no longer going to negotiate against himself. That doesn't mean he is unwilling to compromise. Like any experienced negotiator, he has set his opening offer "high." It's now up to the other side to counter, and the process will continue until both sides have a deal that surpasses their BATNA.

The conservative expectation that Obama's initial proposal be a perfect final deal is a perfect example of the strategy of pure opposition. We've already seen what conservatives do to Democratic proposals that adopt Republican ideas and aim for the center. They waste years challenging them legally as the most authoritarian and socialist reform to hit the country in centuries. Enough. Now that conservatives control half of congress, they can no longer hide behind a simple opposition strategy. They have a stake in power in Washington, and they need to get off their asses and behave like negotiators rather than judges.
Click to expand...

That's not how the Republicans work. They are incapable or more likely unwilling to come up with any proposal of their own and would much prefer to have the President do all of the work. It's how they roll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom