USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
leswp1
Well-known member
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
Hmm, that wasn't the poll I heard. Must have missed that one.
As a woman, I find it acutely embarassing that women who are highly qualified have been soundly beaten and belittled when trying to enter politics. Am I now supposed to rejoice that we have come far enough to see women with absolutely no critical thinking skills and apparently totally ignorant of facts/basic knowledge embraced by the public?
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
Don't look for consistency among the American public. They don't trust Obama to handle the economy, but they trust Congressional Republicans even less. They don't believe it is dangerous not to raise the debt ceiling, but they'll blame the GOP if it doesn't happen. Not to mention, a clear majority have no idea what the debt ceiling is, let alone its checkered history (eliminated as Constitutionally irrelevant in one Congress, brought back for political reasons in another, etc).
At any rate, in times like these you need politicians to shape public opinion, not pander to it. Don't hold your breath, though.
Don't look for consistency among the American public. They don't trust Obama to handle the economy, but they trust Congressional Republicans even less. They don't believe it is dangerous not to raise the debt ceiling, but they'll blame the GOP if it doesn't happen. Not to mention, a clear majority have no idea what the debt ceiling is, let alone its checkered history (eliminated as Constitutionally irrelevant in one Congress, brought back for political reasons in another, etc).
At any rate, in times like these you need politicians to shape public opinion, not pander to it. Don't hold your breath, though.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
Wol4ine is right though. Gallup did release a poll on Tuesday showing 2-1 support for rejecting a debt ceiling increase. I bet the same respondents would favor avoiding default by roughly the same margin. The polls are irrelevant, though. Public opinion is incoherent on this issue. And in the end, the choice will be clear. Republicans who have carped against the harmful effects of uncertainty are in danger of scoring an own goal, as two rating agencies have started chirping about the debt ceiling impasse. There'll be a deal.
Wol4ine is right though. Gallup did release a poll on Tuesday showing 2-1 support for rejecting a debt ceiling increase. I bet the same respondents would favor avoiding default by roughly the same margin. The polls are irrelevant, though. Public opinion is incoherent on this issue. And in the end, the choice will be clear. Republicans who have carped against the harmful effects of uncertainty are in danger of scoring an own goal, as two rating agencies have started chirping about the debt ceiling impasse. There'll be a deal.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
I think this is the part where people say polls are unreliable, and that survey takers can phrase questions certain ways to get the answer they want.
But if you don't like that argument, let's just use the latest Quinnipiac poll:
Also
And your precious Gallup poll says:
and
Or as Slate sums it up
I think this is the part where people say polls are unreliable, and that survey takers can phrase questions certain ways to get the answer they want.
But if you don't like that argument, let's just use the latest Quinnipiac poll:
Also
And your precious Gallup poll says:
and
Or as Slate sums it up
Last edited:
unofan
Well-known member
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
http://www.politicususa.com/en/polls-taxes-deficit - 19 different polls show Americans support some tax increases to cut the deficit.
Also, although only 45% approve of Obama's handling of the economy, thy still trust him more than the GOP.
http://www.politicususa.com/en/polls-taxes-deficit - 19 different polls show Americans support some tax increases to cut the deficit.
Also, although only 45% approve of Obama's handling of the economy, thy still trust him more than the GOP.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
Of course. Polls are notorously good at telling what outcomes the public wants to see...and notorously bad at how to get to those outcomes.
ATMs were originally panned in research...with nearly all focus groups and surveys rejected them. Early tests showed gamblers and prostitutes were the only ones who used them.
Wall Street knows this also. If it thought there'd be a default the Dow would drop 1000 pts tomorrow.
Of course. Polls are notorously good at telling what outcomes the public wants to see...and notorously bad at how to get to those outcomes.
ATMs were originally panned in research...with nearly all focus groups and surveys rejected them. Early tests showed gamblers and prostitutes were the only ones who used them.
Wall Street knows this also. If it thought there'd be a default the Dow would drop 1000 pts tomorrow.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
The deficit poll found that 42% of Dems prefer reducing the deficit equally with cuts and tax hikes, 24% Reps agree. But the only Obama plan I know of has the President slashing $1T over the next decade. $100 billion per year is NOT equal with the tax hikes that are already on the books because of Obamacare, let alone any more he wants in the Debt ceiling debate.
But as was stated before, polls are irrelevant. We'll have to wait for the final PWR to see what happens.
That Gallup Poll shows just the opposite; When asked who they trust to handle the Debt Ceiling and deficit, Obama or the GOP, 46% said GOP, only 43% said Obama.
The deficit poll found that 42% of Dems prefer reducing the deficit equally with cuts and tax hikes, 24% Reps agree. But the only Obama plan I know of has the President slashing $1T over the next decade. $100 billion per year is NOT equal with the tax hikes that are already on the books because of Obamacare, let alone any more he wants in the Debt ceiling debate.
But as was stated before, polls are irrelevant. We'll have to wait for the final PWR to see what happens.
WetSubArticCanine
Registered User
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
http://www.adn.com/2011/07/13/1966267/murkowski-it-would-be-a-disaster.html
Advise an extremely good biohazard rig before taking a peak at the attached comments, though.
Not as quick as I once was (You may know the tune): Murkowski. Talked about 3-4 weeks ago with someone who’s known her well for years and years who noted that Lisa was really stressed appearing over this.
http://www.adn.com/2011/07/13/1966267/murkowski-it-would-be-a-disaster.html
Advise an extremely good biohazard rig before taking a peak at the attached comments, though.
Last edited:
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
- adding over a trillion per year to the debt since Obama took office
- extending the Bush tax cuts (and throwing a temporary payroll tax cut into the mix) during a lame duck session where they still had huge majorities in both houses of Congress
- failing to end either of the wars (and adding a third!) since Obama took office in January of '09
- failing to modify or repeal any of the costly crap passed under W
... you can pin whatever you want onto the W administration and the GOP that backed him during that time (though they never had the majorities the Dems did), but you must also realize the Dems had an opportunity to undo at least some of that and didn't, which makes them little better than the GOP that preceded them.
Oh gee, I don't know - how about:
- adding over a trillion per year to the debt since Obama took office
- extending the Bush tax cuts (and throwing a temporary payroll tax cut into the mix) during a lame duck session where they still had huge majorities in both houses of Congress
- failing to end either of the wars (and adding a third!) since Obama took office in January of '09
- failing to modify or repeal any of the costly crap passed under W
... you can pin whatever you want onto the W administration and the GOP that backed him during that time (though they never had the majorities the Dems did), but you must also realize the Dems had an opportunity to undo at least some of that and didn't, which makes them little better than the GOP that preceded them.
leswp1
Well-known member
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
I always new secretly I had a hidden wild side....
I cannot believe people are still hashing out who caused this and picking one side or the other. They all did it. Both sides have different explainations for why but no one has had the skill for thinking ahead for years. Everything is hinged on what will make people vote for me next time rather than what will be best in the long run.
I could care less who belongs to what party. What I care about is that no one seems to remember that the country is pretty evenly split as far as ideology is concerned. NO ONE has a mandate from the whole country to do anything. Unless people start to remember they are not elected by 100% and compromise is necessary, we are watching a bunch of adults who arrested at the 4 yo level throwing tantrums hoping they get their way if they scream loud enough. In my house that always meant you got nothing except punished and I am pretty sure this is how it is panning out in the Capital.
I always new secretly I had a hidden wild side....
I cannot believe people are still hashing out who caused this and picking one side or the other. They all did it. Both sides have different explainations for why but no one has had the skill for thinking ahead for years. Everything is hinged on what will make people vote for me next time rather than what will be best in the long run.
I could care less who belongs to what party. What I care about is that no one seems to remember that the country is pretty evenly split as far as ideology is concerned. NO ONE has a mandate from the whole country to do anything. Unless people start to remember they are not elected by 100% and compromise is necessary, we are watching a bunch of adults who arrested at the 4 yo level throwing tantrums hoping they get their way if they scream loud enough. In my house that always meant you got nothing except punished and I am pretty sure this is how it is panning out in the Capital.
busterman62
I got a pocket full of kryptonite
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
What? Both parties responsible? Impossible!!!
Everyone knows that "The (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) are responsible for this mess and only the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) can get us out of it if the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) would stop playing politics. The (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) received a mandate in the last election to stop the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) from continuing to ruin the country."
Who do you think you are posting a rational thought in a political thread? Please play by the rules with your next posting.
What? Both parties responsible? Impossible!!!
Everyone knows that "The (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) are responsible for this mess and only the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) can get us out of it if the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) would stop playing politics. The (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) received a mandate in the last election to stop the (choose 1.GOP or 2.Dems) from continuing to ruin the country."
Who do you think you are posting a rational thought in a political thread? Please play by the rules with your next posting.
leswp1
Well-known member
unofan
Well-known member
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
Nice strawman, considering the plan the GOP rejected was 83% spending cuts and 17% tax hikes. But you're right. Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.
Nice strawman, considering the plan the GOP rejected was 83% spending cuts and 17% tax hikes. But you're right. Both sides are bad, so vote Republican.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
That's why I don't understand the support for Obama. Especially if you hated Bush policy. Bachman, Palin, what are you afraid of ? they stupid to get into another war? to balance the budget? afraid of social issue?
So you guys ever vote for other party (s) nomination or just stay home if you don't like your party nomination. Too bad Gore and Democrats didn't force the issue after 2000 on changing election to popular from electoral. We might had a chance for 3rd party for president and my vote would mean something.
That's why I don't understand the support for Obama. Especially if you hated Bush policy. Bachman, Palin, what are you afraid of ? they stupid to get into another war? to balance the budget? afraid of social issue?
So you guys ever vote for other party (s) nomination or just stay home if you don't like your party nomination. Too bad Gore and Democrats didn't force the issue after 2000 on changing election to popular from electoral. We might had a chance for 3rd party for president and my vote would mean something.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
I voted for the green party nominee in '00, but that might have had something to do with living in TX (landslide win in the state for Bush was fait accompli) and ballot access rules making it a big deal for them to reach something like 2% of the vote in the state.
I voted for the green party nominee in '00, but that might have had something to do with living in TX (landslide win in the state for Bush was fait accompli) and ballot access rules making it a big deal for them to reach something like 2% of the vote in the state.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
I do...Its not a handful of topline policies but the more general approach.
Historically the left has been the party of change and the right of tradition. The lefts change was around civil rights, women having an equal chance in the marketplace and generally allowing for freedom of choice in folks own lives. Generally changes that society today is thankful for...
Today, the left is the party of tradition and the right the party of change. The left in the form of Obama has been very quiet on social policy with the single push of healthcare being attacked as socialism. A few states have had their one issue of gay rights. Otherwise the left has just gone with the status quo.
The right on the otherhand is pushing in all fronts. They are about change...IMO regression. Abortion, media (NPR), changing the Constitution to block gay marriage, guns everywhere, initiating wars (boots on the ground). Heck all the regressive change that Obama gets blamed for was started by the right. Status quo vs. backwards change...big difference.
And sorry, but even more regressive change is definitely change I can live without.
I do...Its not a handful of topline policies but the more general approach.
Historically the left has been the party of change and the right of tradition. The lefts change was around civil rights, women having an equal chance in the marketplace and generally allowing for freedom of choice in folks own lives. Generally changes that society today is thankful for...
Today, the left is the party of tradition and the right the party of change. The left in the form of Obama has been very quiet on social policy with the single push of healthcare being attacked as socialism. A few states have had their one issue of gay rights. Otherwise the left has just gone with the status quo.
The right on the otherhand is pushing in all fronts. They are about change...IMO regression. Abortion, media (NPR), changing the Constitution to block gay marriage, guns everywhere, initiating wars (boots on the ground). Heck all the regressive change that Obama gets blamed for was started by the right. Status quo vs. backwards change...big difference.
And sorry, but even more regressive change is definitely change I can live without.
Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition
I used to be a registered Republican. When I ventured outside the Northeast corridor, I came into contact with a new kind of animal that I had never really seen before: the evangelical.
I'm sure it's a cultural thing. It's not that I'm anti-religion. I couldn't make it through more than 5 minutes of Bill Maher's religulous before having an irresistable urge to do something - anything - else with my time. But I was also raised to believe that if you see someone who claims to be doing God's work in politics that person is an arsehole at best, and a dangerous demagogue at worst. And just my luck, may career has taken me to a bunch of places where those types breed like locusts.
I'm sure some are decent people, but the ones that make it into public life are absolutely loathsome. It's the main reason why I switched to independent and, sometimes Democrat (when I've wanted to vote in primaries).
Beyond that, I'm heavily biased in favor of science (again, no surprise given my background). Whenever I hear some evangelical talking about teaching creationism in public schools, I fear for the country's future. If there is a God, he'll forgive. You know who won't forgive, though? The countries that are blowing past us in science and math.
eta: I'm being honest here. I just don't get it. To my way of thinking, if there's a room full of people and one of them is beating his chest loudly about what a good Christian he is, you can be **** sure that he is one of the one or two least Christian people in the room. Predestination is alive and well in American life. Calvinism was evicted from the Northeast colonies, but it's definitely taken root in the last few places I've lived.
Things could be a lot worse. This country still has an advantage in that we're home to world class higher education and research facilities. We're still pretty good at innovation. And I'm **** sure not going to entrust that to someone like a Bachmann or Perry. Regardless of their policies, presidents lead by example. And I don't want someone setting the example that being anti-science is cool.
I used to be a registered Republican. When I ventured outside the Northeast corridor, I came into contact with a new kind of animal that I had never really seen before: the evangelical.
I'm sure it's a cultural thing. It's not that I'm anti-religion. I couldn't make it through more than 5 minutes of Bill Maher's religulous before having an irresistable urge to do something - anything - else with my time. But I was also raised to believe that if you see someone who claims to be doing God's work in politics that person is an arsehole at best, and a dangerous demagogue at worst. And just my luck, may career has taken me to a bunch of places where those types breed like locusts.
I'm sure some are decent people, but the ones that make it into public life are absolutely loathsome. It's the main reason why I switched to independent and, sometimes Democrat (when I've wanted to vote in primaries).
Beyond that, I'm heavily biased in favor of science (again, no surprise given my background). Whenever I hear some evangelical talking about teaching creationism in public schools, I fear for the country's future. If there is a God, he'll forgive. You know who won't forgive, though? The countries that are blowing past us in science and math.
eta: I'm being honest here. I just don't get it. To my way of thinking, if there's a room full of people and one of them is beating his chest loudly about what a good Christian he is, you can be **** sure that he is one of the one or two least Christian people in the room. Predestination is alive and well in American life. Calvinism was evicted from the Northeast colonies, but it's definitely taken root in the last few places I've lived.
Things could be a lot worse. This country still has an advantage in that we're home to world class higher education and research facilities. We're still pretty good at innovation. And I'm **** sure not going to entrust that to someone like a Bachmann or Perry. Regardless of their policies, presidents lead by example. And I don't want someone setting the example that being anti-science is cool.
Last edited:
- Status