Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Cleveland was indeed a cool guy.
A lot of the 'Gilded Age' presidents were cool guys.
I'd say LBJ was more socialist than FDR.
edited 9th Dec '12 7:15:54 PM by DeviantBraeburn
Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016AGAIN, move the presidential talk to the thread already assigned to it. You're derailing now.
Actually on the fucking topic: I have a bad feeling that someone would try to block that in spite of the bad press it would gain them. But it does seem like a good way to aid those caught in the disaster, and it's not like it's permanent.
Poor O'Reilly there suffers from Name's the Same.
Bob Woodward said Wednesday morning that the fiscal cliff talks are like the movie “Groundhog Day.”
Republican Senator Corker: Obama's offer may be 'best route' for GOP
Future history textbooks may well wash out Congress's actions and focus instead all the glory and blame on the President. It's what textbooks tend to do now, ignoring the whole political process about what happens to go into decision making.
That and we have this idea that presidents can literally do anything and everything as a result of this sort of teaching.
Looks like a few Republicans are trying to get across the idea that they'll be in a worse bargaining position if they go over the cliff and don't hash this out right now.
@ "Republicans don't care about the wealthy":
—-
O'Reilly works as a corporate and political communications consultant. He works with clients on the Republican side of the aisle.
I'm not sure about LBJ. Dude was a ruthless and totally amoral opportunist who mostly thrived on giving the people with a hold on him what they wanted. Yes, he did a lot of pro-civil-rights stuff as president, but he also set back civil rights by years when he was the majority leader for the Senate, and seriously dragged his feet on dealing with Mc Carthy's witch-hunts.
You'd get populist policies from him as president, but not necessarily good ones.
edited 10th Dec '12 3:03:35 AM by Iaculus
What's precedent ever done for us?@43316: Quite frankly, my concern is that Republicans will do exactly that — concede on expiring the Bush cuts for the top 2%, then use their "compromise" as leverage to demand concessions on entitlements. Plus it's going to be nearly impossible to get the additional tax increases that are sorely needed.
The thing is that Obama is under no obligation to compromise since all he has to do to acquire those tax increases is ... nothing. It's a wonderfully bitter pill to make the GOP swallow.
edited 10th Dec '12 7:13:13 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The president has always had entitlement cuts on the table as a compromise point, hasn't he?
I don't think there's any way we can avoid it at this point even if it's not good for the economy or the general public. There's a very strong sentiment that both parties need to 'compromise' to be fair in their dealings, and the aggressive anti-debt rhetoric has too strong a foothold now.
Seems like the best we can hope for is to suck up some counterproductive entitlement cuts along with moving to saner tax rates and partial healthcare reform, and then move on from there.
Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.I used to be down against "entitlement" cuts. Now...I'm dead set against them. And I don't see how something is an entitlement since you've been paying into it for years.
Now, if the thread hasn't gotten too tired of all the questions, I have some more. Is it the general consensus here (on this thread) that you want the rich to pay more in taxes, or that they don't even pay the tax rates as they are? (My research shows the maximum tax rate is 35% off the gross, federally).
It was an honor

Best: FDR. Sure, he wasn't very good, but he was the closest to actually socialistic economics, and it's not like any were really that good on social issues, in my opinion.
Worst: Ulysses S Grant. He was corrupt and incompetent.
Favorite: Grover Cleveland. The guy was just cool guy.