Congrats obama

[LBJefferies]

Bingo. I think you'll be able to find a lot of similar articles asking the GOP to get with the times but will be interesting to see if they follow or refocus to grow the cancer larger like in 2009 and since.

Instead of drawing in the base with the TP movement, they pushed a lot of people away - disenfranchised and towards Gary Johnson and others.

In other news, congrats Maine, Maryland, Washington, and Minnesota.

You know, the GOP would do itself and America a favor if it started looking more like the Libertarian Party.

[e30slidewayz]

Yes, congrats to Obama. I'm excited to see the changes coming to the health care sector. The way things are going, health care is getting more and more expensive (new tech is good but costly). Also, in an economic downturn, more people qualify for medicaid and don't have to pay insurance premiums. So, we get less and less people paying for healthcare but healthcare costs continue to rise. The healthcare reform systems put forth in the '30s-50's no longer apply to this country. The new mobs of elderly people are sucking us dry. This is causing our nation to go into debt.

The new health care changes proposed address these issues. It looks like we're taking some of the best policies from the UK, Japan, and Germany and making our own out of them. Health insurance will be mandatory... awesome. Penalties for those that don't. Any companies with 50 or more employees will have to provide health benefits or pay a tax. Insurance premiums will go down for the most part. Everyone will be putting into health care system. Good stuff is to come. Don't knock "obama care".

[tjts1]

You know, the GOP would do itself and America a favor if it started looking more like the Libertarian Party.

I doubt it. Considering where they stand now, this would only serve to push even more people away. At this point the best thing they can do is look a lot more like the Democrats if they want any hope of winning future elections. The majority they hold in Congress now is only due to extreme gerrymandering which is only going to last a couple of more election cycles before demographics take over. Their current politics or even libertarianism have a very limited shelf life. It doesn't appeal to a lot of people, certainly not any majority.

[HerbReal]

Don't get so excited. Like I said several times before, I'm no Romney fan. It's about what Obama wants vs what he can actually get implemented. And as much as you and the rest of the libs might joke, McCarthy was correct.



Romney never said leaches did he...lol.

But yet Obama wanted people to vote for revenge.




No but the government internally can be run just like a business. It has a budget, it has employees, it has bills and it has most everything else a normal business has.

10.5 trillion was on the books before Obama took office. Obama raised that to 16 trillion in just four years. And you're an idiot if you think what Obama was handed was all Bush's fault.

So the collapse of many businesses and bank bailouts before Obama came in the office isn't the Bush's administration's fault? Did you think the 10 trillion beforehand was gonna automatically pay for itself with a ROI agenda? Are you historically declined or you're still hoping that Mormon who loves to invest somewhere else than the U.S. will save the day?

Too bad, everyone's just gonna have to wait for another candidate for 4 years, period.

[z31maniac]

I doubt it. Considering where they stand now, this would only serve to push even more people away. At this point the best thing they can do is look a lot more like the Democrats if they want any hope of winning future elections. The majority they hold in Congress now is only due to extreme gerrymandering which is only going to last a couple of more election cycles before demographics take over. Their current politics or even libertarianism have a very limited shelf life. It doesn't appeal to a lot of people, certainly not any majority.

I think a lot of people agree with anti-war, social liberalism combined with fiscal conservatism..........but not the type of fiscal policies some of Extreme right has been spouting.

But being reasonable seems beyond both parties at this point.

[ksjdan]

You know, the GOP would do itself and America a favor if it started looking more like the Libertarian Party.

Right but that'll take a lot of republicans votes. Many republicans were already complaining how indecisive Romney was.

[rwh11385]

You know, the GOP would do itself and America a favor if it started looking more like the Libertarian Party.

Agreed. Just watch out for smooth commenting that you therefore want to invalidate the Constitution.


I think the challenge will be how to differentiate between the parties if the social conservatism is lost. The 3rd debate had a lot of agreeing and they aren't as dissimilar as the GOP wanted to sell. But would it be such a bad thing if they both were better aligned with what most people want, instead of the extremes? Compete to find the best means to accomplish goals rather than these separate directions. Find ways to improve effectiveness of social programs and getting people to be self-sufficient and successful, towards the American dream instead of labeling them as the enemy. Find ways to improve healthcare results and reduce costs without having care itself be seen as the enemy. Have sustainable energy be a cost effective advantage instead of hippie stuff. Openmindedness is key. It can still be private focused and aim for individual growth.

The biggest obstacle is black and white thinking.

edit: On the plus side, even the Democratic party seems to have accepted that lower tax rates across the board can maintain a pretty consistent tax revenue as % of the GDP - even if they want to talk about class warfare and what's "fair". The Laffer Curve in general seems to be understood even if the "trickle down" part is doubted. And Obama supports lower corporate rates to be competitive, who would have seen that coming? They seem to understand that if small business wins, we all win. Hopefully they will help with regulations on them and tax complications. They know mandatory spending is an issue, even if they of course want to protect them and their goals, services. Regardless of party, both know these costs are rising and the senior population proportion is not going to subside. Finding ways to solve the problems should be the focus, not directing blame.

[z31maniac]

Agreed. Just watch out for smooth commenting that you therefore want to invalidate the Constitution.


I think the challenge will be how to differentiate between the parties if the social conservatism is lost. The 3rd debate had a lot of agreeing and they aren't as dissimilar as the GOP wanted to sell. But would it be such a bad thing if they both were better aligned with what most people want, instead of the extremes? Compete to find the best means to accomplish goals rather than these separate directions. Find ways to improve effectiveness of social programs and getting people to be self-sufficient and successful, towards the American dream instead of labeling them as the enemy. Find ways to improve healthcare results and reduce costs without having care itself be seen as the enemy. Have sustainable energy be a cost effective advantage instead of hippie stuff. Openmindedness is key. It can still be private focused and aim for individual growth.

The biggest obstacle is black and white thinking.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

[slaterd]

like a g. I mean c'mon guise. Look at dat line-up/fade.
dude's got swag out the yang

I'll put money down if they make a biography of Obama it will be played by the guy who played Gustavo in Breaking Bad.
Similar?

[mrbobian]

I think too many people are forgetting that the government in the USA was set up to PROTECT FREEDOM! Not provide for people, not enable people, not serve people. There is a very small portion of the country that can, does, and gets help from the government, and these systems need to be broadened. But, I want to make my own choices, and not have my hard earned money in the hands of the bureaucratic scumbag political leaders. I can't think of a federal government program that works well actually. That said, I'm disappointed that the country has once again chosen to move AWAY from our freedoms. Please, look at other socialized programs and nations, if you want that lifestyle and burden to government, go there. Leave the Home of the Free to those that want to be a part of the United States of America.

[slaterd]

I think too many people are forgetting that the government in the USA was set up to PROTECT FREEDOM! Not provide for people, not enable people, not serve people. There is a very small portion of the country that can, does, and gets help from the government, and these systems need to be broadened. But, I want to make my own choices, and not have my hard earned money in the hands of the bureaucratic scumbag political leaders. I can't think of a federal government program that works well actually. That said, I'm disappointed that the country has once again chosen to move AWAY from our freedoms. Please, look at other socialized programs and nations, if you want that lifestyle and burden to government, go there. Leave the Home of the Free to those that want to be a part of the United States of America.

Imagine an America where the government couldn't "control" the people or any government for that matter. If you could do whatever the fuck you wanted, the country would've been ripped apart a long time ago. Freedom isn't free and get over it. You give up your freedom for security and knowing that, because the government is in total control, you have less of a chance of someone walking up to you in the middle of the street and blowing your head off because you looked at them wrong, because they wanted to rape your girlfriend/wife, or because they wanted the $10 in your pocket. I'm fine giving up some freedoms to insure that it is a much safer country to live in than if everyone was allowed to do whatever they pleased whenever they felt like it.

Hell a perfect example is the Walking Dead in the recent episode. The people in the community get along and the community thrives because the "government/mayor" and his thugs are in total control and everyone knows it. Governments need to be in control for the sake of the populous/community. If the community is safe and thriving, then the people are safe and thriving.

I pretty much said that like 5 minutes ago in another thread. I really wish people would understand tha tyou have to give up some freedoms to ensure your safety and freedom.

[joshh]

So the collapse of many businesses and bank bailouts before Obama came in the office isn't the Bush's administration's fault? Did you think the 10 trillion beforehand was gonna automatically pay for itself with a ROI agenda? Are you historically declined or you're still hoping that Mormon who loves to invest somewhere else than the U.S. will save the day?

Too bad, everyone's just gonna have to wait for another candidate for 4 years, period.

If Obama leaves office with a debt of 20 trillion dollars do you blame him for all of that debt? What if the people before him helped create the problem in the first place? Welcome to the Bush years.

Romney just likes to invest period. But since your on a "somewhere else" agenda, why don't you look up GE, Jeffrey Immelt and Obama and get back to me about sending jobs over seas....lol.

[FunfGan]

congrats to all the freeloaders

[Wiglaf]

Best part about this, 4 straight years of trying to railroad Obama out of office by the GOP and Fox news has just failed. Face on you guys! That whole bullshit parade didn't pay off at all.
Games are over, let's get shit done.

[mrsleeve]

On the note that this has taken form my sig space

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. -Alexis de Tocqueville