• 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!

Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

Was it Ever?


  • Total voters
    28
If the GOP started at 800, in the negoiations with Obama, that would be reasonable to consider that the low ball number, and as such, a higher number in rebuttal should have been expected. As I understand it, tax increases will be revisited, so I wouldn't right them off just yet. However, the point here is about good faith in negoiation, if you approach me with a number, are you suggesting that I shuld not present a counter offer?

The GOP started at zero.
 
Clearly it was not ever possible. In a situation like this - always bet on the absolute over the top craziest person in the fight to triumph since they will do anything to win. Obama and the Dems looked like prize fighters in regulation gloves going to a street fight in an alley and ended up the same way. It is pathetic.
 
The article notes that they had already agreed to the 800 number.

I will repeat it for you again, President Obama does not have the power to say yes to any offer, he is a negotiator for the democrats, he can take a number to the dems,

It is becoming very clear that you either have reading comprehension problems or choose to just quote excerpts from an article that support your position so to help you again I will quote another part of the article

The White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

"They were willing to accept our number," the GOP aide said. The group also talked about overhauling the tax code.

"We walked out of the room thinking we were making good progress on the tax reform," the aide said.

The meeting did not become public until Monday, and even then, the proposal was not disclosed.

On Monday, Republicans said they were waiting for the White House to provide a counteroffer on ways to make sure Congress would take up tax reform.

I have bolded parts of the article to help you under stand there was no deal, they were negotiating
 
I will repeat it for you again, President Obama does not have the power to say yes to any offer, he is a negotiator for the democrats, he can take a number to the dems,

Right, he had agreed but then the Dems balked.

It is becoming very clear that you either have reading comprehension problems or choose to just quote excerpts from an article that support your position so to help you again I will quote another part of the article

You are quoting what I said.

The White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

I have bolded parts of the article to help you under stand there was no deal, they were negotiating

You bolded where they had agreed to the 800 number.
 
Right, he had agreed but then the Dems balked.



You are quoting what I said.

The White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.



You bolded where they had agreed to the 800 number.

I see no sense in trying to talk to you, you refuse to acknowledge that you are wrong, you have your talking points imbedded in your mind and can't or won't move off of your mindset
 
In black and white.

he White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

What part of that is it that you don't understand? You do realize that the "agreeable" is describing the $800 billion, right? He didn't say "I will take it to the Dems". They agreed on that number. The Dems then howled in protest so Obama came back "I know we agreed to $800 billion but I'll need $400 billion more". That was when Boehner understandably walked.
 
In black and white.

he White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

What part of that is it that you don't understand? You do realize that the "agreeable" is describing the $800 billion, right? He didn't say "I will take it to the Dems". They agreed on that number. The Dems then howled in protest so Obama came back "I know we agreed to $800 billion but I'll need $400 billion more". That was when Boehner understandably walked.

At that point it had kinda become a game of he-said she-said, but the White House's position on this is that it was simply a negotiating position, not an ultimatum. It was "alright, i'm going to ask for an additional $400 billion in tax revenue," not "give us 400 billion more OR ELSE." So, depending on who you want to believe, Boehner walking out could be reasonable or unreasonable.
 
At that point it had kinda become a game of he-said she-said, but the White House's position on this is that it was simply a negotiating position, not an ultimatum. It was "alright, i'm going to ask for an additional $400 billion in tax revenue," not "give us 400 billion more OR ELSE." So, depending on who you want to believe, Boehner walking out could be reasonable or unreasonable.

It could be "he said, she said" but I was asked to provide a link that backed up my point. I did. One is certainly free to believe the story is wrong, but there it is.
 
The GOP started at zero.

When? If they brought a proposal, as the article suggests, that is the starting point and not the political rethoric prior to the negoiations.
 
Obama has polarized the nation. It'll only get worse. By the time he's finished, the country might not even exist in its present form.
 
Obama has polarized the nation. It'll only get worse. By the time he's finished, the country might not even exist in its present form.

What drugs are you on dude? That's scary stuff. A bad trip like that? You might want to call a doctor.


:roll:
 
Obama has polarized the nation. It'll only get worse. By the time he's finished, the country might not even exist in its present form.

Hopefully you are correct and by the time President Obama is through we will have a country that is different then the one we had when he took office, When the deficit plan that was just shoved down the throats of the American people starts to impact the ability of our seniors and our military to pay their bills and more people find their selves out of work it will ensure Presidents Obama re-election and the return of both houses to the Democrats IN 2012 . 2013 the tax cuts enjoyed by the rich will run out and will not be renewed.
 
When? If they brought a proposal, as the article suggests, that is the starting point and not the political rethoric prior to the negoiations.

WHen they started negotiating. Their position had always been "zero". The comprimise was 800 which both sides had found agreeable.

I posted the sentence over and over. The two sides had agreed upon the 800 figure.

he White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.
 
What drugs are you on dude? That's scary stuff. A bad trip like that? You might want to call a doctor.


:roll:

Obama hardly created it but what would you call Biden calling those who disagree that we should be getting ourselves into further debt, "terrorists" be defined as if not polarizing and divisive?
 
WHen they started negotiating. Their position had always been "zero". The comprimise was 800 which both sides had found agreeable.

I posted the sentence over and over. The two sides had agreed upon the 800 figure.

he White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

President Obama was negotiating with Boehner let me define negotiate To confer with another or others in order to come to terms or reach an agreement: President Obama does not have the power to agree to the negotiated terms he can only negotiate and take those the terms back to his party,are you with me yet? Speaker Boehner can only negotiate, when Boehner took his plan back to the republicans he could not get it passed they wanted MORE AND MORE AND MORE AND MORE.

And they will get more then then they bargained for in 2012 our nation will have elections again and the republicans as a result of their terrorist tactics will lose not only any chance of defeating President Obama but once again will be in the minority in both houses, that means that in 2013 the Bush tax breaks, the Bush tax breaks that are responsible for creating no jobs and for causing the debt crisis will expire and will not be renewed.
 
I made this statement in 3 or 4 threads...they will have a deal the last minute. Both sides knew they would not let aug2nd pass without a deal, they had to have one.
Neither side could take the risk of being blamed by the people for not having a deal. All indications and the way the teaparty was making demands...they would have been the ones blamed, they did not negotiate anything, they were merely demanding. That is going to get very old with the american people after awhile...
 
President Obama was negotiating with Boehner let me define negotiate To confer with another or others in order to come to terms or reach an agreement: President Obama does not have the power to agree to the negotiated terms he can only negotiate and take those the terms back to his party,are you with me yet? Speaker Boehner can only negotiate, when Boehner took his plan back to the republicans he could not get it passed they wanted MORE AND MORE AND MORE AND MORE.

You continue to argue things not in dispute and things you are making up. The president and Boehner agreed to the 800 billion. That is what the article states. State that you do not believe it if you wish, but that is what it states. It was the Dems who dismissed the 800 billion and when Obama said he would have to have 400 billion more, Boehner walked. Obama ended up with nothing because the Dems demanded more.

Now the arguement that the GOP wouldn't have accepted the 800 billion figure either is one that could be made, but they never got the chance.

And they will get more then then they bargained for in 2012 our nation will have elections again and the republicans as a result of their terrorist tactics will lose not only any chance of defeating President Obama but once again will be in the minority in both houses, that means that in 2013 the Bush tax breaks, the Bush tax breaks that are responsible for creating no jobs and for causing the debt crisis will expire and will not be renewed.

Blah, blah, blah. You've stated your opinion here over and over.
 
Obama hardly created it but what would you call Biden calling those who disagree that we should be getting ourselves into further debt, "terrorists" be defined as if not polarizing and divisive?

As i said in the Matthew's thread, where he called republicans terrorist, that such hyperbole was wrong and counter productive. We need less of this type of silliness and more reasoned discussed. Elcid is spewing the worse type of hyperbolic nonsense, very much like the Bush was behind 9/11 silliness.
 
WHen they started negotiating. Their position had always been "zero". The comprimise was 800 which both sides had found agreeable.

I posted the sentence over and over. The two sides had agreed upon the 800 figure.

he White House was agreeable to parts of the deal — notably, the proposal for nearly $800 billion in added tax revenue.

From your article:

That number was negotiable, as the White House saw it. If Boehner wouldn't agree to that sum, maybe he would settle for less, and they'd make up the difference some other way.

"If you can't do that, then let's have another conversation," said a White House aide, summarizing Obama's part of the call.

I read the last sentence as an important one. If you can't do that, let's talk some more. This is not code for quit, give up, run away, but instead it is a call to continue to negoiate. You put a lot of stock in what an aide thought. And don't seem to consider that it is as likely that he was wrong as it is that Obama was wrong.
 
As i said in the Matthew's thread, where he called republicans terrorist, that such hyperbole was wrong and counter productive. We need less of this type of silliness and more reasoned discussed. Elcid is spewing the worse type of hyperbolic nonsense, very much like the Bush was behind 9/11 silliness.

"Exist in it's present form" is hyperbolic but that Obama is adding to the polarization is not.
 
I read the last sentence as an important one. If you can't do that, let's talk some more. This is not code for quit, give up, run away, but instead it is a call to continue to negoiate. You put a lot of stock in what an aide thought. And don't seem to consider that it is as likely that he was wrong as it is that Obama was wrong.

I posted an article that stated what I had claimed had happened. I do not know exactly what happened but one certainly can not make a claim as to it being the fault of only one side.
 
"Exist in it's present form" is hyperbolic but that Obama is adding to the polarization is not.

Try the entire quote:

Elcid said:
By the time he's finished, the country might not even exist in its present form.

Your a reasonable fellow, but you can't logically defend Elcid. :coffeepap
 
Try the entire quote:



Your a reasonable fellow, but you can't logically defend Elcid. :coffeepap

? I agreed that the part you quoted above was hyperbolic.
 
? I agreed that the part you quoted above was hyperbolic.

I quoted the whole thing, as it came together, but didnt think I would need to point out the hyperbolic part. :coffeepap
 
I posted an article that stated what I had claimed had happened. I do not know exactly what happened but one certainly can not make a claim as to it being the fault of only one side.

I think that is what you have been doing. I presented an alternative reading. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom