Can Democrats Govern?

[Missourian]

Bring back Bush, I say. At least he destroyed the country and was damn thorough about it!

Nothing has been better for the Bush legacy than Obama.

Obama's ineptitude has independents reminiscing about Bush years with longing and fondness.

 

[Avatar4321]

Oh, and I volunteer to be the Benign Dictator.
First thing, we kill all the lawyers.

I object. And if you succeed, Im changing my profession.

 

[Avatar4321]

In reference to the OP, I think the conclusion is fairly accurate concerning the current crop of Democrats. But the idea that the "stimulus" wasnt enough is ludicrous. The problem with the stimulus that it's not a stimulus and never was. It's basically a slush fund to reward everyone who donated to the President's campaign and at no point did it ever address any measure that would actually stimulate the economy.

The best way to govern is to understand how reality works.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Can Democrats Govern?

I think the answer is quite clearly no, not with the ass hats currently running their party.

 

[Toronado3800]

Found this on another forum.

Ezra Klein - Can Democrats govern?

It's worth taking a step back from health-care reform for a second. What Democrats are doing isn't just abandoning a particular policy issue. They're proving themselves unable to govern.

Democrats spent most of 2009 with 60 votes in the Senate and about 256 in the House. They had a popular new president who was following a disastrous Republican administration and a financial crisis. The opposition party was polling somewhere between foot fungus and spoiled meat. You don't get opportunities like this very often. The Senate majority, in fact, was larger than either party had enjoyed since the 1970s. And what have Democrats accomplished?

Well, not much. You can see a list here. A stimulus that was too small. Ted Kennedy's Serve America Act. Credit card regulations that were largely an acceleration of rules the Federal Reserve was going to impose anyway. I guess they almost passed a compromised health-care bill, but you don't go down in history for almosts.

If Democrats abandon health-care reform in the aftermath of Brown's victory, the lesson will be that they can't govern. No majority within the realm of reason will give them the votes to move their agenda swiftly and confidently. Even the prospect of the most significant legislative achievement in 40 years, an achievement that will save hundreds of thousands of lives, will not keep them from collapsing into chaos when they face adversity.

At that point, what's the pitch for voting for Democrats? That they agree with you? A plumber and I both agree that my toilet should work. But if he can't make it work, I'm not going to pay him any money or invite him into my home. Governance isn't just about ideology. It's also about competence and will. That's where Democrats are flagging.

I really have nothing to add except he's hit the nail on the head.

The Democrats seem to be a more diversified party than the Republicans. Maybe the secret handshake is easier to learn, maybe they're not as exclusive, who knows.

That diversity makes me feel a little better about a lack of group think or follow the leader mentality in their ranks.

Also means they're more prone to argue amongst themselves about healthcare.

Good, bad, indifferent, I don't know. In their defense this healthcare thing is a pretty big deal so I'm thrilled we didn't rush into a bill.

 

[Vel]

I cannot believe the Democrats squandered the wave of popularity of Obama's election and a super majority.

Obama's inexperience was the number one factor in his inability to succeed in passing his agenda.

Also, in order to secure their majorities in the House and Senate, the Dems fielded a plethora of moderate candidates...that decision has come back to bite them in the rear, making them look unable to govern.

Lastly, Harry and Nancy are not strong leaders. They may have been the most popular, or it may have been deemed "their turn" to assume leadership, but the Dems suffered when they faltered.

There is definitely a lesson in this for Republicans.

I think the number one factor in Obama's ability to pass his agenda was that the majority of the American people don't want what he was trying to sell. Most people ( exception of rdean noted ) aren't interested in giving up their liberty to live in a nanny state. We are happy to provide a safety net for all of our people, but we expect those that can contribute to their own welfare to do so. We want to continue to be free to pursue whatever version of the American dream we choose. We don't want the federal government to function as our parent. ( exception of rdean noted )

 

[Emma]

Bring back Bush, I say. At least he destroyed the country and was damn thorough about it!

Nothing has been better for the Bush legacy than Obama.

Obama's ineptitude has independents reminiscing about Bush years with longing and fondness.

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but they sure as hell screwed up.

 

[jillian]

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but they sure as hell screwed up.

yeah, but not for the reason that the rightwingnuts think. he screwed up by not punching the losers in the face.

baby bush, while his policies were freaking incompetent, managed to act like he had a mandate with less popular vote than his opponent, a presidency he was appointed to by the supreme court and a 1 vote senate majority. this current group went in with a mandate and acts like it has stockholm syndrome.

ooooohhh.. nooooo... the repubs will be mad at us and won't sing kumbaya...

*wahhhhhh*

 

[Meister]

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but they sure as hell screwed up.

yeah, but not for the reason that the rightwingnuts think. he screwed up by not punching the losers in the face.

baby bush, while his policies were freaking incompetent, managed to act like he had a mandate with less popular vote than his opponent, a presidency he was appointed to by the supreme court and a 1 vote senate majority. this current group went in with a mandate and acts like it has stockholm syndrome.

ooooohhh.. nooooo... the repubs will be mad at us and won't sing kumbaya...

*wahhhhhh*

I don't think it was the republicans that they were worried about. I do believe it is the independents who were the deciding factor in the 2008 election.

 

[WillowTree]

no, democrats cannot govern. cause even tho they have the wh, the house, and the senate they are stupid enough to blame Republicans for "obstructing" them... they need to take a laxative and get the hell over it. they look like fools. well make that had.. they had.. that's all over now..

 

[jillian]

I don't think it was the republicans that they were worried about. I do believe it was the independents who were the deciding factor in the 2008 election.

personally? i think independents would rather see someone go medieval on their butts than someone sitting there saying "mother, may i?"

 

[geauxtohell]

With the Cowardly Lion and the Wicked Witch running the Democrats in Congress, jack and shit is going to get done. And jack left town a long time ago.

Their first step is to grow a spine. And to get their balls back from the mantle wherever the GOP is currently keeping them.

Reid's got to go.

 

[jillian]

no, democrats cannot govern. cause even tho they have the wh, the house, and the senate they are stupid enough to blame Republicans for "obstructing" them... they need to take a laxative and get the hell over it. they look like fools. well make that had.. they had.. that's all over now..

inartfully said... but you know what? there's a truth in there under all that rant... they shouldn't have allowed themselves to be "obstructed". they should have told them to piss off, same as repubs did to the dems for six years.

for six years the repubs didn't care if their bills had a single dem vote.

and any dem initiative put on the floor had to have a certain minimum number of repub co-sponsers before they'd even look at it.

when dems complained, they said "stop whining".

but this admin thought it would be "bi-partisan". you can't be bi-partisan with the "ihopehefails" losers. you have to stomp their faces. that's what schoolyard bullies deserve.

 

[WillowTree]

I'm still trying to figure out with a 60/40 split how a Republican could obstruct, and why the democrat would need to tell the Republican to "piss off"

 

[Meister]

I don't think it was the republicans that they were worried about. I do believe it was the independents who were the deciding factor in the 2008 election.

personally? i think independents would rather see someone go medieval on their butts than someone sitting there saying "mother, may i?"

, You may be on to something there, because the last thing that I would want to say is, "Momma....can I have a...?"

 

[jillian]

I don't think it was the republicans that they were worried about. I do believe it was the independents who were the deciding factor in the 2008 election.

personally? i think independents would rather see someone go medieval on their butts than someone sitting there saying "mother, may i?"

, You may be on to something there, because the last thing that I would want to say is, "Momma....can I have a...?"

see what i mean.

 

[jillian]

I'm still trying to figure out with a 60/40 split how a Republican could obstruct, and why the democrat would need to tell the Republican to "piss off"

you can obstruct with filibusters.

you can obstruct by making huge amounts of noise.

either way, they should have been shown to a little room in the basement with the mics turned off...

same as they did to the dems.

really simple.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Democrats can govern - BADLY.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm still trying to figure out with a 60/40 split how a Republican could obstruct, and why the democrat would need to tell the Republican to "piss off"

you can obstruct with filibusters.

you can obstruct by making huge amounts of noise.

either way, they should have been shown to a little room in the basement with the mics turned off...

same as they did to the dems.

really simple.

Honey, you need to put the pipe down.
When were the Dums ever silenced? How many judicial nominees did they manage to block? Who wrote "No Child Left Behind" (that was a piece of legislation, not a romance novel if you didnt know)?
If you think the Dums have done anything but shut the GOP out of the process then you are even dumber and more ill informed than I gave you credit for. The Dums have controlled Congress for 3 years and held a fillibuster proof majority for one. If they can't get their idiotic programs passed under those conditions then there are no conditions they can get them passed under, save total dictatorship.

 

[Missourian]

Bring back Bush, I say. At least he destroyed the country and was damn thorough about it!

Nothing has been better for the Bush legacy than Obama.

Obama's ineptitude has independents reminiscing about Bush years with longing and fondness.

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but they sure as hell screwed up.

When Massachusetts Independents elect a Republican Senator for the first time in my lifetime within one year of Bush's last day as President, I'd say there was at least a little fondness and longing.