Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Forgetting those in the middle

June 2, 2013

Can the ultra-conservative-financed Republican Party survive on the national political stage? Can the tea party-led GOP continue to fail at the national level or is it time for it to present a more......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(62)

denver

Jun-02-13 7:44 AM

It's pretty bad, when the leader of the republican party says "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president" Remember that was their main goal, not unemployment the economy or the good of America. And you wonder why nothing has been accomplished.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

grinandbearit

Jun-02-13 8:54 AM

Mr.Smith,It's called "drawing a line in the sand"and sticking to principals.If the liberals put forth an idea such as universal health care.any compromise then would incrementally advance the liberal agenda.When is the last instance of liberals seeking a compromise of any conservative proposal? They don't do it.They label the proposal as extreme and demand compromise on their agenda.There is not room on this forum to cite specific examples but I am sure it could be done.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jun-02-13 11:45 AM

As Obama said," I won, you(Republicans) can come along for the ride, but you will have to sit in the back of the bus." Sounds like someone willing to compromise.I don't think it does. When anything doesn't go Obama's way he throws a tantrum and calls upon his minions to punish those that do not agree with him. For someone whose political career was based on releasing sealed court records of his opponents, it is a shame his sealed records have not made it to the light of day. We should know more about his past and not the dribble of information made available by his "Chicago" handlers. When will the press do its job?

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 12:06 PM

"RANDOM21" when did President Obama say that?

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jun-02-13 12:34 PM

October 25, 2010 WOONSOCKET, R.I.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 12:41 PM

Didn't take long for the the lying to start, now did it!

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RANDOM21

Jun-02-13 1:11 PM

While campaigning for the 2010 mid-term elections, Obama used the phrase more than once. I may have condensed his first twenty minutes into the "I won" part but he said it and he helped lead his party to one of the worst defeats in House history. People didn't approve of his agenda and it showed on election day. Digging the hole of debt deeper to pay off political allies was not a "shovel ready" spending plan although close to a trillion dollars was spent with each full time job costing between $540,000 and $4.1million each. New plan : Buy more shovels. Eric may have to use them to dig up the bodies. It's the Chicago Way.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jun-02-13 2:51 PM

…continued from above

The real obstacle is the Constitution itself that states for a candidate to win the Electoral College; they must win an “absolute majority” of the electoral votes and not just a majority the votes. As such, a candidate has to gain 270 Electoral Votes, which can prove difficult with 2 candidates. If there were 3, it would prove nearly impossible. Ross Perot proved that just the presence of a candidate can change the outcome of an election and he won no electoral votes.

The only way we can see a viable 3rd party is if there are changes made to the Constitution. First and foremost, the term “absolute” would have to be removed. That would make a 3rd party workable but we won’t see a drastic change to the partisanship that’s become American politics until that happens. And the simple truth is, neither Republicans nor Democrats have a vested interest in seeing that happen as the current divide indicates.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jun-02-13 2:52 PM

…continued from above… It is clear America needs a viable 3rd party as no one faction has a majority of Americans. 40 % identify as conservatives, 35% identify as moderates and only 21% identify as liberals. That explains why conservatives win local and state elections. It also explains why the last 4 Presidential elections have been as close as they were. Republicans won in 2000 and 04 for the same reason the Democrats did in 08 and 12; the winning party was able to get more of their base out then their opposition.

A lot of people have complained about how money keeps a viable 3rd party from emerging but that’s not entirely true. Yes, the money has historically been directed at keeping a 3rd party out the equation but President Obama and his Chicago political machine has proven that a candidate can raise enough money on his own to win an election. Obama purchased 2 elections so it can be done.

…continued below

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jun-02-13 2:54 PM

“when did President Obama say that?”

He specifically stated it during the health care summit in Washington on Feb 25, 2010 as anyone with a working knowledge of Google can find.

But that’s not the point of this article. The point is that the extreme of both parties are what has evolved into running each party. Ultra liberals now control the Democratic Party and that’s why you no longer see a relevant blue dog contingent in that party. Up until 2004, the Christian coalition controlled the Republican Party but you’ve seen a fracture in that party since. It began in 2006 when Democrats gained control of Congress and continued in 2008 when the far right stayed home, handing the election to Obama.

In 2010, the fracture became public with the emergence of the TEA Party. The problem with that is once the emergence began, too many interjected religion into that faction and have since hijacked the movement began by Ron Paul.

..continued below

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 3:40 PM

President Obama said "Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch and then stood by and criticized while Democrats pulled it out. Now that progress has been made, he said, “we can’t have special interests "sitting shotgun." "We gotta have middle class families up in front". We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.” There was no mention of a bus. He was clearly referring to the economy, and who should steer it: the middle class, not the republicans and their special interest masters. This is the danger of taking something out of context, not to mention miss quoting it.

Google Obama said," I won, you(Republicans) can come along for the ride, but you will have to sit in the back of the bus.

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ithink

Jun-02-13 4:04 PM

Obama plainly stated his objectives when he was campaigning.So it is not at all bad that anyone who understood his goals would want him to be a one term president.

Getting rid of him through the electoral process would certainly have been for the good of the country.

We can look at his second term's effects and our country, right now, and cry.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 4:19 PM

I still think It's pretty bad, when the leader of the republican party says "The single most important thing we want to "achieve" is for President Obama to be a one-term president" not unemployment, the economy, healthcare, closing tax loopholes. taking care of our veterans, ending the war in Afghanistan. No their "single most important thing" was to make President Obama be a one-term president!

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 4:19 PM

Google:When did McConnell say he wanted to make Obama a ‘one-term president’?

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 4:33 PM

"Consumer confidence surged to a five-year high in May, fueled by increased optimism about an improving job market. The Consumer Confidence Index, which gauges how consumers feel about the economy each month, rose to 76.2 in May -- its highest reading since February 2008, according to research firm The Conference Board."

That sounds like a good second term effect on our country to me.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ithink

Jun-02-13 4:35 PM

None of those problems could be fixed with Obama as president. And they haven't been.

Don't start on Congress. Obama had full control for 2 years, and nothing good was achieved, at all. He WANTED high gas prices and said so. He wanted the coal mines shut down, and said so. He wants high taxes. Look at the jobs lost because of his pipeline obstruction.

How much bad stuff can you democrats witness, and still build up that incompetent and uncaring man?

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jun-02-13 4:36 PM

From the stand point of the Republican Party making Obama a 1 term President would have been the best outcome for unemployment, the economy, healthcare and closing tax loopholes. The President's work on all proves that statement correct as the President and his policies have done nothing but extend our economic woes.

As for ending the war in Afghanistan, he failed on that promise and instead entangled us in at least 3 other nation building campaigns.

He also campaigned on working across the aisle but he's failed on that as well. Apologist like Denver blame Republicans but the President set the tone in January, 2009 when he allowed Pelosi and Reid to shut out Republicans on the Health Care debate while he embarked on his world apology tour. Perhaps had he conducted the Health Care summit in 2009 instead of 2010, things might be different. As it is, Obama has no one but himself to blame for the partisanship that cripples Washington.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ithink

Jun-02-13 4:38 PM

I can't eat feelings.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 5:04 PM

Foreclosure sales fall to lowest level since 2008,

Sales of bank-owned properties last quarter hit their lowest level since early 2008, according to a new report. There were 101,371 distressed sales during the first quarter of 2013, RealtyTrac said Thursday. That accounted for 21% of the total market, down from 25% a year earlier

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 5:13 PM

The great American housing market is back. The Case-Shiller housing index, using data from 20 cities through March 2013, showed the largest annual increase in prices in seven years. That's one sign of the essential dynamism of the American economy. Despite dysfunction in Washington, despite the sequester, the American economy has once again shown its core character: flexibility and resilience. Time Magazine

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 5:23 PM

Sounds to me like somebody is doing something right, despite the republicans

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Jun-02-13 8:43 PM

Is this the same great housings market where banks made loans to people that had no business acquiring the mortgages, to the tune of billions in profits, so much so that they had to bundle the mortgages and sell them as secured deritives, making billions more, selling them just prior to the recession led to massive foreclosures allowing those same banks to acquire both the competition AND the foreclosed houses for pennies on the $ while utilizing government bailouts to operate while they sat on those houses? And now you're telling us that THAT housing market is back because housing prices saw the largest price increase in 7 years meaning those banks are now making billions more on houses they've basically sold twice already?

I have 1 more question. How many $ do those banks contribute to Washingyon annually?

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 8:49 PM

I see where republican congresswoman Marsha Blackburn said on Meet The Press today that women "don't want" equal pay laws.

Former White House advisor David Axelrod asked Blackburn if she would support a law promoting workplace gender equality.

Blackburn said, ”I think that {more important than that} is making certain that women are recognized by those companies. You know, I’ve always said that I didn’t want to be given a job because I was a female, I wanted it because I was the most well-qualified person for the job. And making certain that companies are going to move forward in that vein, that is what women want. They don’t want the decisions made in Washington. They want to be able to have the power and the control and the ability to make those decisions for themselves. She voted against the 2009 Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a landmark bill for women’s rights in the workplace, a measure making it easier for women to file wage discrimination suits against employers.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 9:18 PM

As for your question there "little buddy" you will have to ask Time Magazine their the ones reporting it. And I think the housings market your talking about happened when the republicans were in the white house.

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Jun-02-13 9:38 PM

"Little buddy" what specifically did president Obama say about sitting in the back of the bus, at the health care summit in Washington on Feb 25, 2010? Since you have a working knowledge of Google

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 62 comments Show More Comments
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web