Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As an independent voter who voted for a majority of Republicans this year, if they pull anything like they did in the 90's or forsee some overzealous mandate due to the rise of the tea party, you will find me checking the "vote straight Democratic ticket" in 2012.
I am already displeased with McConnel's comments about one of his priorities in getting rid of Obama.
Why wouldn't a leader of the opposing part NOT want to get rid of the leader of the majority party?
It was a very mixed result. One house one way the other the other way. It's hard to scream about a mandate with results like that.
You have toook at the totality of it all.
The turnover in the House appears to be the biggest in more than 70 years.
The repubs have taken over 500 state legislative seats nationwide.
'It was also about which seats they captured. To note just a few of the most prominent examples, grizzled Democratic incumbents such as Minnesota's Jim Oberstar, South Carolina's John Spratt, and Pennsylvania's Paul Kanjorski lost Tuesday after serving for decades in the House.'
"Republicans took control of at least 19 additional state legislative bodies."
"Alabama and North Carolina that had not seen elected Republican majorities since the Reconstruction elections of 1876 and 1870."
"Republicans won 16 of 30 races for state attorney general, taking five such offices away from Democrats."
It's not nearly that simple. Bush slashed taxes, especially for the rich, just as he gutted regulations so that Wall St and big business could do what ever they wanted so according to you we should have seen some strong job creation. Unfortunately, after 8 years of Bush the number of jobs in the US was almost identical to the number of jobs when he took office in 2000. Worse most of the jobs in 2008 actually paid slightly less then the jobs in 2000 and worst of all Bush had saddled us with $5.2 trillion in new debt.
As for spending cuts, yes, by all means cut spending but there isn't enough money in the entire discretionary budget to balance the budget via spending cuts. The discretionary budget is only $1.8 trillion including the military which gets about $900 billion of that (including funding for Iraq and Afghanistan) while the budget deficit is $1.2 trillion. So when the Republicans say they want to cut but that they won't cut the military that means there is just $900 billion in total things possible to cut according to them and that some how those cuts will amount to $1.2 trillion. That's mathematically impossible so what will happen is they will tinker with a few minor things around the edges but they won't make any serious cuts. Meanwhile, like Bush, they'll keep cutting taxes lower and lower driving the deficit higher and higher. The big problem is the debt will increase much, much, much faster then tax revenue will grow so we'll actually be falling further and further behind in our ability to pay.
I don't know if you believe it or are just repeating what you have read.
The Bush tax cuts resulted in the "rich" paying MORE than before the cut.
Tell us EXACTLY what regulations Bush gutted.
You really need to look at Bush's first 6 years then the last 2.
Because of the tax cuts America experienced one of the greatest economic times in history. The Gov't took in more revenue then it ever had before in history. Millions of jobs were created.
What happened after the first 6 years? The democrats took over control of congress.
We did see strong job creation over most of Bush's 8 years. He created about 4 million jobs between 2001 and 2007. Do not forget jobs were severly impacted by 9/11.
Just to correct you, Bush created 10,200,000 new jobs from 2003 to 2007 when his tax cuts were in effect.. thats per the BLS website.
Democrats are idiots!!! They just don't 'get it'! Pelosi... Go back to your land of "fruits and nuts". You aren't an American. Take the rest of your commie friends with you.
This is why the republicans/Tea Party needs to be careful thinking that they've recieved a mandate to implement only their ideas.
Yeah, republicans picking up a record shattering 680 seats in state legislatures, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures - equals a republican mandate
Voters sending more Republicans to Congress than at any time in the past 80 years - equals a republican mandate
For the first time in at least 60 years, the Democrats have less than 200 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives - equals a republican mandate
Just to correct you, Bush created 10,200,000 new jobs from 2003 to 2007 when his tax cuts were in effect.. thats per the BLS website.
But his tax cuts didn't expire in 2007, so you're taking that statistic out of context. They didn't prevent the job loss in the following years, even though they did not expire.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is more than "no jobs" It is the entire Obama ajenda. Get a clue, chump!
