democrats set to let bush era tax breaks expire?

[DraftBoy]

What is Obama's view of the middle class?

Well they got him elected so he's probably relatively happy with them.

[denverboz]

Obama got killed in 2010 because he had a few incredibly important bills passed in his first two years that had no bipartisan support.
.

Obama didn't get killed in 2010, he wasn't even running.

The Dems got killed by an economy that had nearly went over the cliff two years earlier and the republicans with their promises and constant mantra about how they were going to create jobs. Yet they didn't introduce one jobs bill and blocked anything Obama was trying to do.

This election was really close.

332-206

Again, if a republican had those numbers they'd be calling it a mandate!

btw Romney has already conceded FL.

[DraftBoy]

Obama said today that he wants Congress to keep the tax cuts for the middle class, at least:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...684_story.html

It's good that they're talking about it, but I don't see any way the Republicans let this happen. It's going to be all or nothing. If the Republicans can't talk the Democrats into reinstating all the Bush tax cuts, then it's going to have to be a new deal early next year with the new Congress as previously discussed in the thread.

Good, go with nothing and remove the breaks entirely.

[mysticsoto]

Except in today's political culture that is a pretty solid win and the results were never really in doubt, save for people like Dick Morris who seem to think math and stats are games that he understands better than the experts (a notion I tried to explain to some right wingers on FB one time only for them to try and "educate" me on polling and stats)

What does give him a mandate is a second term. As well as a gain in the Senate, when the Dems, in theory, should have lost seats. What gives him a mandates is the resounding beating that current Republican "values" took in states like Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and now Washington and Colorado too. What adds to it is the defeat of men like Allen West.

Throw in that this happened in light of a Senate that set records for the use of the filibuster and a House that passed a sure dead end repeal of Obamacare not once or twice or even three times, but over 30 times and you have a President that has much more and can now govern from a place of strength. No longer can people like McConnell and Bachmann say that the # 1 goal is not to create jobs, or get our of debt or lower unemployment or fix health care or fix social security or end wars but rather to make sure the President only serves one term. You can also factor in that all indicators seem to be showing that going forward it will only get harder for the GOP with more minorities voting and the fact that the younger generation is much more liberal.

All of that considered, Obama does have much more power and can finally try to push these people into working with him instead of having a Congress that want to stonewall until the next election when they thought their guy would be in power. They gambled, using our resources, that they would win. They were wrong. Now they can face the consequences.

If they don’t like it, too bad. They created the situation. Now they can let an adult fix it.

Lecter is right in everything he said. :)

[DraftBoy]

Obama didn't get killed in 2010, he wasn't even running.

The Dems got killed by an economy that had nearly went over the cliff two years earlier and the republicans with their promises and constant mantra about how they were going to create jobs. Yet they didn't introduce one jobs bill and blocked anything Obama was trying to do.




332-206

Again, if a republican had those numbers they'd be calling it a mandate!

btw Romney has already conceded FL.

He means that the 2010 mid-terms was an absolute disaster for the Democrats and since the President is the face of the party...

[mysticsoto]

He means that the 2010 mid-terms was an absolute disaster for the Democrats and since the President is the face of the party...

If that's the rationalization, then the elections this year were an absolute disaster for the Republicans. This bullcrap idea that b'cse the Republicans held the House, there is no mandate is just that - bullcrap. Redistricting is what helped them hold on to their seats in the House or the "shellacking" would have been alot worse!!!

[denverboz]

He means that the 2010 mid-terms was an absolute disaster for the Democrats and since the President is the face of the party...

I know what he meant, but ya know what, I think even if Obama had been running in 2010 he would have won. The majority of Americans weren't blaming the economy on Obama, poll after poll showed they were placing the blame on Bush.

[Dr. Lecter]

If that's the rationalization, then the elections this year were an absolute disaster for the Republicans. This bullcrap idea that b'cse the Republicans held the House, there is no mandate is just that - bullcrap. Redistricting is what helped them hold on to their seats in the House or the "shellacking" would have been alot worse!!!

The only thing they really won were Governorships. They did do well there.

[DraftBoy]

If that's the rationalization, then the elections this year were an absolute disaster for the Republicans. This bullcrap idea that b'cse the Republicans held the House, there is no mandate is just that - bullcrap. Redistricting is what helped them hold on to their seats in the House or the "shellacking" would have been alot worse!!!

Yea it wasn't close to the level of devastation the Dems faced in 2010.

Dems lost 6 Senate seats and 63 house seats. This wasn't close to that. Midterms are a completely different animal to begin with.

- - - Updated - - -

I know what he meant, but ya know what, I think even if Obama had been running in 2010 he would have won. The majority of Americans weren't blaming the economy on Obama, poll after poll showed they were placing the blame on Bush.

We'll never know but the tide two years ago was far different than it was a few days ago.

[mysticsoto]

Yea it wasn't close to the level of devastation the Dems faced in 2010.

Dems lost 6 Senate seats and 63 house seats. This wasn't close to that. Midterms are a completely different animal to begin with.

Dems don't get riled up much to vote in midterms - which is why Republicans tend to win big in them. Same thing happened to Clinton when he lost the House. Yeah, the Dems won in 2006, but only b'cse people were getting so tired of Bush that they reacted then and resoundingly in 2008. Nevertheless, anyone that's been paying attention knows that their crafty redistricting saved their asses!!!

_________________________
Redistricting Helped Limit GOP’s House Losses

House Republicans and Democrats both found reasons to celebrate Tuesday night, knowing this much about the 2012 elections: It could have been worse.

House Republicans, who executed a smart and carefully crafted strategy to hold the chamber by shoring up incumbents in redistricting and making strong plays against Democratic Members, kept control of the House by a wide margin. They looked poised to lose about seven seats in net by the end of Wednesday. But given President Barack Obama’s re-election, the comfortable Democratic victories in the Senate and Republican losses, House Republicans were victorious in avoiding what could have been a much more painful fate.
.
.
.
For example, Democrats picked up four seats in Illinois, a state where there was a partisan gerrymander in their favor. Republicans picked up at least three seats in North Carolina, a state where the GOP had the power of the pen.

But because Republicans controlled more levers of power in more states and, thus, the redraw of more districts, they had a considerable edge going into 2012 — and will have an edge in future cycles.

The National Republican Congressional Committee said in a memo that GOP strength in redistricting had made 17 “endangered” Republican-held seats safer. Democrats dispute that, and the long-term number is probably less, but state redraws were undoubtably a boon to the GOP this cycle.

Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.), the NRCC’s vice chairman for redistricting, surveyed the landscape in a short interview with Roll Call.
He noted that almost all of the Republican Members helped by redistricting survived. And Westmoreland, known as crafty strategist, said he liked what he saw for Republicans over the next four cycles, having counseled state legislators to draw maps with an eye toward changing demographics over the decade.


http://www.rollcall.com/issues/58_35...-218887-1.html

[sukie]

I know what he meant, but ya know what, I think even if Obama had been running in 2010 he would have won. The majority of Americans weren't blaming the economy on Obama, poll after poll showed they were placing the blame on Bush.

I am interested in seeing what Obama gets blamed for by the public once Biden runs. (Last part was a joke)

[sukie]

Well they got him elected so he's probably relatively happy with them.

Sorry I meant to ask "Whom does Obama view as the middle class by way of income?"

[ICRockets]

Sorry I meant to ask "Whom does Obama view as the middle class by way of income?"

In that respect, I believe he has gone on record with the same criteria as Romney. Anybody making less than $250k a year.