Headed for a recession

[asterism]

Yeah, sure, Clinton increasing taxes (3 new brackets and top increased to 39.6%) and cutting the deficit in half in 1993, without a single GOP vote, wasn't 'left'...

Bullshit, he did not cut the deficit in half in 1993.

The deficit didn't shrink until a Republican House provided balance. Together they both reduced the deficit.

Deficit by year:

1990 221,036
1991 269,238
1992 290,321
1993 255,051
1994 203,186
1995 163,952
1996 107,431


Historical Tables | The White House

MORE RIGHT WING GARBAGE

To Establish Fiscal Discipline, President Clinton:

Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote. Prior to 1993, the debate over fiscal policy often revolved around a false choice between public investment and deficit reduction. The 1993 deficit reduction plan showed that deficit and debt reductions could be accomplished in a progressive way by slashing the deficit in half and making important investments in our future, including education, health care, and science and technology research. The plan included more than $500 billion in deficit reduction.


"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits." — Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994



"Clinton’s 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." — Business Week, May 19, 1997


AFTER CLINTON'S FIRST BUDGET SURPLUS, THE GOP PASSED A $700+ BILLION TAX CUT HE HAD TO VETO TO GET 3 MORE!!!


President Clinton vetoed the Republicans' $792 billion tax cut bill yesterday

Washingtonpost.com: Budget Special Report


WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED ONCE BUSH/GOP GOT TOGETHER




David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy.


The “debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy. | ThinkProgress

You claimed President Clinton cut the deficit in half in 1993. The figures I cited from President Obama's White House records show otherwise. But go ahead and claim victory. I'd love to have Bill Clinton back in charge now. I might even vote for him if we repeal the 22nd Amendment.

I really didn't like his defense strategy and I didn't like his constant pandering but in retrospect it was much better than what we have now.

 

[Dad2three]

Of course it was an official government assessment. Regardless of where Roemer was when she initially wrote the report, it was used to sell the stimulus to the American people and she was appointed to serve as the head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

It was indeed an official government assessment.


You can't claim incompetence in assessing the situation while at the same time claiming that Obama and his crack team of "experts" were qualified to run things. It's an either/or situation. Either they were competent or they weren't. The results speak for themselves.

You mean it was a desire to stop the economy to head into ANOTHER GOP great depression and it worked? Though from the start, the 'left' said it was to small and to heavy on non stimulus tax cuts (40%)?

Don't blame the Republicans for the failure of the stimulus. Your side had the House, the Senate, and the Oval Office. If you think it should have been bigger, blame the folks you voted for.

CBO Director Demolishes GOP's Stimulus Myth

Under questioning from skeptical Republicans, the director of the nonpartisan (and widely respected) Congressional Budget Office was emphatic about the value of the 2009 stimulus. And, he said, the vast majority of economists agree.

In a survey conducted by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, 80 percent of economic experts agreed that, because of the stimulus, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been otherwise.

"Only 4 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told the House Budget Committee. "That," he added, "is a distinct minority."


CBO Director Demolishes GOP's Stimulus Myth

Do I have the post the chart again? These folks promised results. Those results didn't happen.

We're not even where we were told we'd be 3 years ago. It doesn't matter if big government advocates think in hindsight that the stimulus made things better. They all said it was going to work much better than it did.

You can't make promises and then try to justify failure by saying that your failure is better than nothing at all when your promise included a scenario of what you thought would happen if nothing at all was done.

Sorry you can't be honest, they NEEDED 2 votes from the GOP just to vote on it in the Senate, they got 3 BECAUSE of the giveaway's


U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote



Cantor says Obama promised the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8 percent


The council’s report cited independent studies by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:

• CBO: Between 500,000 and 2.9 million jobs saved or created.

• IHS/Global Insight: 2.4 million jobs saved or created.

• Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.6 million jobs saved or created.

• Moody’s Economy.com: 2.1 million jobs saved or created.

Our ruling

Cantor said Obama’s stimulus was passed with the "promise" of keeping the unemployment rate below 8 percent.

The majority leader says the vow was made in a January 2009 report issued by the incoming administration. But the study did not guarantee specific results from the stimulus, it offered economic projections that contained disclaimers saying the estimates had "significant margins of error" and a high degree of uncertainty due to a recession that was "unusual both in its fundamental causes and severity."

Clearly, the Obama administration can be faulted for estimating the stimulus would hold unemployment just below 8 percent. But contrary to Cantor’s claim, Obama never promised that outcome, nor did his administration.

Again, we rate the statement Mostly False.


Cantor says Obama promised the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8 percent | PolitiFact Virginia


NOW WHY DID WE NEED A STIMULUS AFTER 8 YEARS OF 'JOB CREATOR' POLICIES' AGAIN?

 

[Manonthestreet]

No they measure it against GDP......doesnt mean you dont have record rev........

 

[Dad2three]

Bullshit, he did not cut the deficit in half in 1993.

The deficit didn't shrink until a Republican House provided balance. Together they both reduced the deficit.

Deficit by year:

1990 221,036
1991 269,238
1992 290,321
1993 255,051
1994 203,186
1995 163,952
1996 107,431


Historical Tables | The White House

MORE RIGHT WING GARBAGE

To Establish Fiscal Discipline, President Clinton:

Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote. Prior to 1993, the debate over fiscal policy often revolved around a false choice between public investment and deficit reduction. The 1993 deficit reduction plan showed that deficit and debt reductions could be accomplished in a progressive way by slashing the deficit in half and making important investments in our future, including education, health care, and science and technology research. The plan included more than $500 billion in deficit reduction.


"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits." — Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994



"Clinton’s 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." — Business Week, May 19, 1997


AFTER CLINTON'S FIRST BUDGET SURPLUS, THE GOP PASSED A $700+ BILLION TAX CUT HE HAD TO VETO TO GET 3 MORE!!!


President Clinton vetoed the Republicans' $792 billion tax cut bill yesterday

Washingtonpost.com: Budget Special Report


WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED ONCE BUSH/GOP GOT TOGETHER




David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy.


The “debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy. | ThinkProgress

You claimed President Clinton cut the deficit in half in 1993. The figures I cited from President Obama's White House records show otherwise. But go ahead and claim victory. I'd love to have Bill Clinton back in charge now. I might even vote for him if we repeal the 22nd Amendment.

I really didn't like his defense strategy and I didn't like his constant pandering but in retrospect it was much better than what we have now.

I meant, and a honest person would see, cut in half over 5 years with the 1993 bill not ONE GOPer voted for


YOUR claim that it was a team effort was nonsense, as shown by their $700+ billion tax cut AFTER Bills first surplus!

 

[asterism]

Despite record revenue, the federal government still ran a deficit of $436.382 billion in the first eight months of the fiscal year, which began on Oct. 1, 2013 and will end on Sept. 30, 2014. Federal Tax Revenues Set Record Through May; Feds Still Running $436B Deficit | CNS News

ECONOMISTS MEASURE REVENUES VIA GDP, NOT record revenues, not even close

We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important. The debt has gone up $12 trillion since then.


2013 they got it back to 16.7% of GDP, predicting 17.3% this year


Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Stop trying to act like Bill Clinton is running the show. He's not, and President Obama has not followed his model - especially when dealing with a Republican House.

Median net worth is low and not recovering at all. The economy is stalled, income inequality has increased, and the future looks bleak. Your side promised prosperity and when you couldn't deliver now you want to blame it on the last guy in charge. I get that this stuff is hard, but you can't run on "I didn't cause this" for another 4 to 8 years. We don't elect people to justify their own failures, we elect people to fix what's broken. We're 6 years into this mess and nothing is fixed yet.

 

[Dad2three]

No they measure it against GDP......doesnt mean you dont have record rev........

No serious economist thinks the US has record revenues, Bush took US down to Korean war levels (no Medicare revenues) , we aren't even back to Vietnam levels yet


Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

 

[Synthaholic]

Damn Bush!!!!!

Bush has nothing to do with this.

This is all the republicans fault you guys know it!

Now you have it!

 

[Manonthestreet]

Whats going to happen to deficit once Obamacare has to start laying out real cash for claims....alrdy running deficit while collecting Ocare taxes

 

[Synthaholic]

Links for those who don't believe President Clinton was called "

MADDOW: Well, and what we ended up with is what we ended with, in my
opinion, is the two terms of the Clinton administration, which is that Bill
Clinton was—
HAYES: Yes.
MADDOW: -- probably the best Republican president the country ever
had, if you look at the policies that he passed.
Chris Hayes, Washington editor for “The Nation”—thank you very much
for your time tonight. It‘s good to see you.
HAYES: Thank you, Rachel. And happy birthday.

Wednesday, March 31st - msnbc - Rachel Maddow show | NBC News

And then Clinton responded:

Bill Clinton peeved that Rachel Maddow called him a Republican - Salon.com

2010! Wow.

 

[Dad2three]

Despite record revenue, the federal government still ran a deficit of $436.382 billion in the first eight months of the fiscal year, which began on Oct. 1, 2013 and will end on Sept. 30, 2014. Federal Tax Revenues Set Record Through May; Feds Still Running $436B Deficit | CNS News

ECONOMISTS MEASURE REVENUES VIA GDP, NOT record revenues, not even close

We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important. The debt has gone up $12 trillion since then.


2013 they got it back to 16.7% of GDP, predicting 17.3% this year


Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

Stop trying to act like Bill Clinton is running the show. He's not, and President Obama has not followed his model - especially when dealing with a Republican House.

Median net worth is low and not recovering at all. The economy is stalled, income inequality has increased, and the future looks bleak. Your side promised prosperity and when you couldn't deliver now you want to blame it on the last guy in charge. I get that this stuff is hard, but you can't run on "I didn't cause this" for another 4 to 8 years. We don't elect people to justify their own failures, we elect people to fix what's broken. We're 6 years into this mess and nothing is fixed yet.

Got it, YOU make a posit, when shown you're full of it you can't back it up and choose not to use critical thinking or honesty


Sorry, the depth and width of the hole matters, and the GOP fighting EVERYTHING Obama has wanted for 5+ years, we have more than 9+ million PRIVATE sector jobs created since hitting Bush's bottom, cut the deficit by 60% + from Dubya's last F/Y deficit, ALL while the GOP refuses to get out and help push

 

[Dad2three]

Whats going to happen to deficit once Obamacare has to start laying out real cash for claims....alrdy running deficit while collecting Ocare taxes

You mean that's 100%+ funded? Unlike ANYTHING the GOP does?


David Stockman, Ex-Reagan Budget Director: George W. Bush's Policies Bankrupt The Country


“(Reagan’s deficit policies) allowed George W. Bush to dive into the deep end, bankrupting the nation through two misbegotten and unfinanced wars, a giant expansion of Medicare and a tax-cutting spree for the wealthy that turned K Street lobbyists into the de facto office of national tax policy,” Stockman wrote.



David Stockman, Ex-Reagan Budget Director: George W. Bush's Policies Bankrupt The Country

 

[asterism]

You folks on the left need to start thinking about how much trouble you are in and how you're just making things worse. I, like many Bush voters, switched my registration to Libertarian in 2012. We've given up on the Republican party. We don't think they can do jack shit.

You loyal Obama voters who are about to become obsessive Hillary supporters (many of you will claim that she was your first choice but the results show otherwise) are going to stop scaring the shit out of us fiscal conservatives. Virtually all of us held our noses and voted for McCain in 2008, almost all of us held our noses and voted for Romney in 2012. We did this on economic policy alone. None of us want the religious right in charge, none of us want the two-faced Republican hypocrisy, most of us are cool with the gay rights dynamic, and marijuana legalization. But above all, we need this economy to get back into growth mode instead of sputtering stagnation mode.

The more you defend Obama and claim he's been a success, the more likely people like me are going to vote against your next chosen candidate. If you want to win by peeling off votes on the right, you need to wake up. Hillary might try to run on "change" but if her soon to be ardent supporters paint a picture of just a continuation of the Obama "success," you're going to lose.

If you are trying to say that another Clinton in the White House will get us back to the economic growth of the Clinton years that means you have to stop trying to make Obama look good because he has definitely not produced the same results.


Or you can try to move Hillary to the left, force her run on single payer, and we get another clueless Republican.

 

[Dad2three]

It boomed and then it went bust. Bush never was a fiscal conservative on the government spending side and he really wasn't very good with monetary policy. He was good at creating an environment for growth, it just wasn't sustainable and he didn't look out for the crash that everyone (well almost everyone actually paying attention) knew was coming.

That said, it was good for awhile and the recover was much better than this one we're in. The business cycle does have some natural peaks and valleys. Do what is needed to create the boom, but don't get out of control to foster an amazing bust. The key is to not let things get out of control. Bush failed us on on that.

But Obama can't even foster an an environment to have a boom in the first place.

I'll take boom and bust over bust and slightly less terrible bust any day.



Mostly true. But it beats the shit out of what we've got now - big-government mandated stagnation.



Because while you might claim he "tried," he failed and has given up.

I've been a critic of Bush's economic policies since 2004 and was a huge critic of his Medicare Part D mess. But two wrongs don't make a right and the solution to a too-big government under Bush is not an ever bigger government under Obama.

Blame Bush all you want for fostering the bust after the boom. I blame Obama for the sustained bust after he won telling us that he was the change we were looking for.

Got it, Bush having households double their debt in 7 years and crashing the economy will magically be solved with Gov't policy *shaking head*



Sorry, there is a reason economy's as larges as the US have problems getting restarted after bad GOP policy


DECEMBER 2007


The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.


The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush | Vanity Fair





Economic Downturn and Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Projected Deficits


The goal of reining in long-term deficits and debt would be much easier to achieve if it were not for the policies set in motion during the Bush years. That era’s tax cuts — most of which policymakers extended in this year’s American Taxpayer Relief Act, with President Obama’s support — and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the debt that we will owe, under current policies, by 2019.

By contrast, the economic recovery measures and financial rescues will account for just over 10 percent of the debt at that time

Well then maybe our President should have read Vanity Fair before making his predictions on how much better things were going to be if we elected him.

The point isn't that Bush sucked, I've conceded that. He SUCKED!

Obama isn't any better, and he's actually worse.

Without the economic downturn and the fiscal policies of the previous Administration, the budget would be roughly in balance in this decade. Even if we regard the economic downturn as unavoidable, we would have entered it with a much smaller debt — allowing us to absorb the recession’s damage to the budget and the cost of economic recovery measures, while keeping debt comfortably below 50 percent of GDP, as Figure 2 suggests. That would have put the nation on a much sounder footing to address the demographic challenges and the cost pressures in health care that darken the long-run fiscal outlook.

Economic Downturn and Legacy of Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Deficits ? Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Don't move the goalposts. We're talking about the economy and how it pertains to those outside of the 1%, not the budget. As to the "what if" scenario being presented, without the downturn in the economy Obama wouldn't have gotten elected in the first place.

Got it, it doesn't really matter the depth of width of the hole, it's just Obama made promises that you don't think he kept *shaking head*


TRY to get honest, the reason the US is in the hole still, is because of 8 years of 'job creator' policies, AND the GOP has tried to force down Obama's throat the past 5-1/2 years!

GOP/CONSERVATIVE POLICY NEVER WORKS

 

[Manonthestreet]

100% funded.....LLMMAOOOOOOO CBO doesnt even buy that.................. CBO Quietly Drops Forecast That Obamacare Will Cut the Deficit | The Fiscal Times CYA time

 

[Manonthestreet]

BTW dont forget you controlled Congress his first 2 yrs

 

[asterism]

You mean it was a desire to stop the economy to head into ANOTHER GOP great depression and it worked? Though from the start, the 'left' said it was to small and to heavy on non stimulus tax cuts (40%)?

Don't blame the Republicans for the failure of the stimulus. Your side had the House, the Senate, and the Oval Office. If you think it should have been bigger, blame the folks you voted for.

CBO Director Demolishes GOP's Stimulus Myth

Under questioning from skeptical Republicans, the director of the nonpartisan (and widely respected) Congressional Budget Office was emphatic about the value of the 2009 stimulus. And, he said, the vast majority of economists agree.

In a survey conducted by the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, 80 percent of economic experts agreed that, because of the stimulus, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been otherwise.

"Only 4 percent disagreed or strongly disagreed," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told the House Budget Committee. "That," he added, "is a distinct minority."


CBO Director Demolishes GOP's Stimulus Myth

Do I have the post the chart again? These folks promised results. Those results didn't happen.

We're not even where we were told we'd be 3 years ago. It doesn't matter if big government advocates think in hindsight that the stimulus made things better. They all said it was going to work much better than it did.

You can't make promises and then try to justify failure by saying that your failure is better than nothing at all when your promise included a scenario of what you thought would happen if nothing at all was done.

Sorry you can't be honest, they NEEDED 2 votes from the GOP just to vote on it in the Senate, they got 3 BECAUSE of the giveaway's


U.S. Senate: Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote



Cantor says Obama promised the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8 percent


The council’s report cited independent studies by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:

• CBO: Between 500,000 and 2.9 million jobs saved or created.

• IHS/Global Insight: 2.4 million jobs saved or created.

• Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.6 million jobs saved or created.

• Moody’s Economy.com: 2.1 million jobs saved or created.

Our ruling

Cantor said Obama’s stimulus was passed with the "promise" of keeping the unemployment rate below 8 percent.

The majority leader says the vow was made in a January 2009 report issued by the incoming administration. But the study did not guarantee specific results from the stimulus, it offered economic projections that contained disclaimers saying the estimates had "significant margins of error" and a high degree of uncertainty due to a recession that was "unusual both in its fundamental causes and severity."

Clearly, the Obama administration can be faulted for estimating the stimulus would hold unemployment just below 8 percent. But contrary to Cantor’s claim, Obama never promised that outcome, nor did his administration.

Again, we rate the statement Mostly False.


Cantor says Obama promised the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8 percent | PolitiFact Virginia


NOW WHY DID WE NEED A STIMULUS AFTER 8 YEARS OF 'JOB CREATOR' POLICIES' AGAIN?

MORE RIGHT WING GARBAGE

To Establish Fiscal Discipline, President Clinton:

Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote. Prior to 1993, the debate over fiscal policy often revolved around a false choice between public investment and deficit reduction. The 1993 deficit reduction plan showed that deficit and debt reductions could be accomplished in a progressive way by slashing the deficit in half and making important investments in our future, including education, health care, and science and technology research. The plan included more than $500 billion in deficit reduction.


"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits." — Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994



"Clinton’s 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity." — Business Week, May 19, 1997


AFTER CLINTON'S FIRST BUDGET SURPLUS, THE GOP PASSED A $700+ BILLION TAX CUT HE HAD TO VETO TO GET 3 MORE!!!


President Clinton vetoed the Republicans' $792 billion tax cut bill yesterday

Washingtonpost.com: Budget Special Report


WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED ONCE BUSH/GOP GOT TOGETHER




David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy.


The “debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy. | ThinkProgress

You claimed President Clinton cut the deficit in half in 1993. The figures I cited from President Obama's White House records show otherwise. But go ahead and claim victory. I'd love to have Bill Clinton back in charge now. I might even vote for him if we repeal the 22nd Amendment.

I really didn't like his defense strategy and I didn't like his constant pandering but in retrospect it was much better than what we have now.

I meant, and a honest person would see, cut in half over 5 years with the 1993 bill not ONE GOPer voted for


YOUR claim that it was a team effort was nonsense, as shown by their $700+ billion tax cut AFTER Bills first surplus!

It appears I've been proven correct. The Obama defender decided that I'm dishonest, and that's how things work when results don't match with promises.

Good luck, I'm done with you.

 

[asterism]

Links for those who don't believe President Clinton was called "

MADDOW: Well, and what we ended up with is what we ended with, in my
opinion, is the two terms of the Clinton administration, which is that Bill
Clinton was—
HAYES: Yes.
MADDOW: -- probably the best Republican president the country ever
had, if you look at the policies that he passed.
Chris Hayes, Washington editor for “The Nation”—thank you very much
for your time tonight. It‘s good to see you.
HAYES: Thank you, Rachel. And happy birthday.

Wednesday, March 31st - msnbc - Rachel Maddow show | NBC News

And then Clinton responded:

Bill Clinton peeved that Rachel Maddow called him a Republican - Salon.com

2010! Wow.

What's the relevance of the date? Was I wrong in what I said?

 

[Sallow]

We are not headed towards a recession.

Of course not.

 

[Dad2three]

You folks on the left need to start thinking about how much trouble you are in and how you're just making things worse. I, like many Bush voters, switched my registration to Libertarian in 2012. We've given up on the Republican party. We don't think they can do jack shit.

You loyal Obama voters who are about to become obsessive Hillary supporters (many of you will claim that she was your first choice but the results show otherwise) are going to stop scaring the shit out of us fiscal conservatives. Virtually all of us held our noses and voted for McCain in 2008, almost all of us held our noses and voted for Romney in 2012. We did this on economic policy alone. None of us want the religious right in charge, none of us want the two-faced Republican hypocrisy, most of us are cool with the gay rights dynamic, and marijuana legalization. But above all, we need this economy to get back into growth mode instead of sputtering stagnation mode.

The more you defend Obama and claim he's been a success, the more likely people like me are going to vote against your next chosen candidate. If you want to win by peeling off votes on the right, you need to wake up. Hillary might try to run on "change" but if her soon to be ardent supporters paint a picture of just a continuation of the Obama "success," you're going to lose.

If you are trying to say that another Clinton in the White House will get us back to the economic growth of the Clinton years that means you have to stop trying to make Obama look good because he has definitely not produced the same results.


Or you can try to move Hillary to the left, force her run on single payer, and we get another clueless Republican.

Got it, the the left hates that Obama is a moderate, somehow understanding the depth and width of the hole the GOP policies put US in, and you voted for in 2008-2012, means we are defending the wrong guy.

Sure, McSame would have got US out of the Bush hole much faster (5-6 ground wars by now) and Mitten's, heck, he would've cut capital gains (historic lows) and Corp taxes (30 year lows, record profits) by now, THAT would stimulate the economy right?


Nearly $2 trillion sitting offshore waiting for ANOTHER failed GOP/conservative 5% tax break to lose jobs (more off shoring like 2004) *shaking heads*

 

[Dad2three]

We are not headed towards a recession.

Of course not.

Well, as long as the GOP has ANYTHING to do about it, they'll try to get US there!