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
![]()
@Baff, you're not talking about US politics. US politics was set up from the start so that the country could not be run without a lot of compromise. Gridlock in cases of serious disagreement is designed-in. It's called the U.S. Constitution.
If you want a 'winner-takes-all' system you need a First-Past-The-Post parliamentary democracy. In which you would, even now, be telling the Republicans 'You lost, suckers! That means all you get to do for the next four years is complain!'
But your system doesn't work like that.
It ain't over 'till the ring hits the lava.In the end, people who are worth up to a million dollars a year will have their taxes cut because, all do the plan talks about income higher than 450 000 because of the marginal income thingy, which means they will get tax a part of what they earned tax at the lower rate.
But compromise wasnt necessary. The only thing that made it necessary its because Republicans play a game of dare and the democrats never dare.
And this is why I talk about indocrtination.
Because the media have shower the public with all this talk about "compromise" (which is a doctrine that many people beleive, just in the same way Coca Cola sells us soda trough adds) and how we should come "together" But if you poll people and asked them on an issue per issue basis then the democrat plan would have overwhealming support. The narrative would not be "compromise" but, "fufill the american public expectations".
edited 1st Jan '13 11:55:29 AM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.George Washington thought parties were dangerous. I don't think they expected things to turn out quite like they did.
Blind Final Fantasy 6 Let's Play
Democrats introduce a bill letting the bush tax cuts expire above 250 000 and leaving everything else pretty much as it was before the fiscal cliff.
Chances are, overwhealming that it would have passed because voting against it would have been to vote FOR TAX INCREASES on everyone. If that failed then youd just let the country panic until the republicans backed away, or if you are less extremist as I am, compromise at that point.
But the thing, we are technically without a deal yet. The House hasnt voted. We ran out of the fiscal cliff, and guess what? The world hasnt ended.
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.
Because if Republicans didnt vote to cut taxes, and then we compromised, in that order, then in the elections democrats woul dhave had the consolation prize of saying:
"Said Republican voted to raise taxes on all families earning less than 250000 dollars a year to save money to his millionaire friends".
But that would imply that the democrats would have won, which runs against their prime directive, that is, which seems to be "loose at all costs", so they didnt.
And about letting the country panic, no it would not be a good idea, but you have to draw a line in the sand some time or another.
edited 1st Jan '13 12:04:04 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.![]()
And Panic almost equals Anarchy. I'd almost welcome it (with how angry I am at my nation and would love to see some real action against what ails it) - too bad more innocent people who don't want this would be hurt and would little where else to go unless they can afford to escape the chaos. America's in bad enough shape. The math is right there in big bald capital letters...
edited 1st Jan '13 12:03:39 PM by LostAnarchist
This is where I, the Vampire Mistress, proudly reside: http://liberal.nationstates.net/nation=nova_nacio
This. No other complaints from me - I'm just sick of all the talk and lack of action, and not just from the gov't, either.
edited 1st Jan '13 12:07:21 PM by LostAnarchist
This is where I, the Vampire Mistress, proudly reside: http://liberal.nationstates.net/nation=nova_nacio![]()
Point is, there would not have been anarchy because republicans would have had no choice other than to vote for the democratic plan. Its obvious.
Because, amongst other things, they would be violating their pledge not to raise taxes if they voted against it.
edited 1st Jan '13 12:07:27 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.![]()
Then at that point democrats compromise. See? I am not against compromise. I am against one sided capitulation, I also find it supecious. A bunch of rich guys pretend to care about equality but in the end decide not to raise taxes on themselves? *I am shocked*.
Also what is the message we are sending to Republicans? "Please be more extreme next time Mr. Republican, oh! please be more hard line! We will don anything you ask us to do, and well call it a compromise!"
edited 1st Jan '13 12:10:46 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.
The "score" can be seen in legistalation. the "score" is the end result. Lower taxes for the rich than for the poor, subsidies to huge industries. Corporate capitalism. Destruction of civil rights. Persecussion of drug offenders and terrorists, like the OWS movment. Invasions, war crimes. Pollution. Corruption.
That is the score.
Also the elections are a form of score, and I dont see why on earth shouldnt the democrats take a chance to improve their "scores" in both ways, except if they actually didnt care about what they claim they care about, which they dont.
And republicans are winning. Oh, and did I mention they have lost 5 of the last 6 elections?
edited 1st Jan '13 12:21:25 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Good Lord, Baff. You're so obnoxiously illogical I honestly wish I was a Republican, just so I could laugh at you. You see nothing but Republican victories. Trust me, though, I know actual Republicans. None of them think they won.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.@Joesolo You are missconstructing my arguments. Democrats had a chance to force republicans to vote for tax hikes and they didnt, and I wonder, why the hell? Scoring political points when you can is important because it helps you in elections. I would beleive that polititians would try to do this. When they dont I ask myself, why didnt they do it? There are 2 solutions here. One. They did it for the good of the country. Two. They did it beacuase they didnt care that much, after all they are rich and succeding could imply higher taxes for them personally and for some of their donors.
@Ultrayellow.
The reason why republicans beleive they got nothing is because they listen and beleive the same narrative that you liste to. They beleive this was a compromise. If you where to see the issue from outside the frame that has been handed to you by the media then maybe you would see some logic in my statements even if you didnt agree with them.
Also I am not the only one who holds this position. Other notoriously obnoxious people including Krugmann, Slate, etc.
Its not like I invented this argument. I just happen to beleive it.
edited 1st Jan '13 1:37:35 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.

Repubs let taxes rise on the rich for income and capital gains (4%/5% respectively). But it's now defined as starting at 400,000 annual salary instead of 250,000. Estate Tax now exempts something like the first 5~10 million dollars.
Meanwhile, Democrats keep a lot of the nice tax breaks for the poor from the Bush Tax Cuts plus a lot of the nifty tax credits and deductions they got in. Unemployment insurance lasts another year. Farm Bill gets extended. Business Tax Breaks for everyone remain extended. Cuts to Doctors under medicare get kicked out for another year.
The Sequester is being kicked down two months from now. We also lose the Payroll Tax Cuts for the working class.
It's a lot of compromise on both ends, and the Republicans and Democrats didn't touch the Social Programs at all.