We're not better off than 2008, because Republicans block good bills

[Ashleyshubby]

Is that hard to say? Why pretend we're better off?

Stimulus gets the economy going yet the Republicans don't want any stimulus.

Newspapers, GOP and Democratic Party are all acting like babies, using the simplistic reasoning that the President is 100% responsible for how the economy behaves.

We have this thing called Congress, combined with the extent that Bush messed things up, it should be a lethal weapon against Republicans.

Is the denial due to the fact that some blue dog Democrats also block necessary stimulus for economic growth? if so, just say so. Our party has an identity crisis.

[Pholus]

1. “The single most important thing ... is for President Obama to be a one-term president"

Mitch's quote should be wall to wall, 24 hours a day between mid-october and the elections.

Every time the question is asked "Are you better off than four years ago" the response should be:

Yes, but unlike the republicans the Democrats had other, more grown up, goals, ones more in line with the needs of the nation. How much better off would we have been if one of our two major parties wasn't stuck in high school?

And yes, the subject line quote was abbreviated to fit. Full quote:

“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”

[Waiting For Everyman]

2. Would you rather lose 600K jobs per month (2008) or gain 200K jobs per month (now)?

Or put more simply... CAKE OR DEATH?

I think a good metaphor for where we're at now, is an individual person who has a house fire or flood or some such disaster. In 2008 we put out the fire. Now, we have to rebuild. It's that simple. You don't criticize the firemen because they left the house a mess. That part of the job was done well, then comes the next phase. Why is this so hard to grasp on a larger level? Disaster is disaster, big or small.

[brewens]

3. I had a senior Republican friend say "but they never really filibustered anything". I didn't

challenge him on it. He volunteers at our blood center and is a pretty good guy. He was actually one of my first bosses too.

It makes me wonder where he got that? I know what he must mean. The rules are now that you don't actually have to stand up there and do an old-time filibuster, but it still has the same effect. I never heard that claim on FOX "News" or anything else I caught. It could be he and his poker buddies came up with that one on their own.

I had a female crackpot ranting about an executive post on FB "normally you need 60 votes to pass a bill in the Senate". I jumped all over that one. No not "normally" and not even very often until the last few years when Republicans started blocking everything they didn't like.

I'm torn as to if they should just do away with the filibuster or not. I'd say at the very least, return to the old rules. At least let us see who is responsible and what they are saying. The sad thing is, Democrats would probably not do it to Republicans in the same situation. Even to prove a point and force a change in the rules. If they did, the media would be all over them about it.

[LynneSin]

4. That is a message we need to get out there loud and clear

and Joe Biden needs to hold Paul Ryan accountable for all the stalling that Congress did these past 4 years.

[CJCRANE]

5. Another question: are you better off since 2010

when the Repubs regained the House?

What have the House Repubs done for you lately?

[CJCRANE]

9. But the Democrats didn't block as many bills under W.

What the Repubs did this time was unprecedented.

You need to step away from Fox News and Free Republic. Why don't you watch some of Obama's and Biden's speeches uncensored and listened to what they say without the pundits telling you what to think.

Or do you prefer Dinesh D'Souza to think for you? That guy lives in his own little world.

[HughBeaumont]

11. 2016? You mean that speculative fantasy by hyper-Repub creationist D'Sleaza?

You MUST be kidding. You guys aren't even subtle anymore.

[CJCRANE]

12. It's funny how the birthers get all of their ideas

from a guy a from India, a woman from Russia, a news corporation owned by a family from Australia and want to vote for a guy who's father repatriated from Mexico.

[HughBeaumont]

17. . . . all so they can defeat an American citizen that they THINK is from Kenya.

[KharmaTrain]

7. What You Can See Vs. What You Can't...

The dilemma Democrats face now is trying to explain what could have happened as oppposed to what did. No question in my book that President Obama was the right man in the right place to prevent this country from going into a full scale financial implosion that would have been far worse than the recession/depression we've experienced. The problem is how can you describe something that could have but didn't? It's like trying to describe a ghost. It's far easier for the rushpublicans...in their usual disengenuous form...to distort and lie about what happened cause it serves their purpose. They try to ignore the last year of the booooooooooosh disaster as though they had no culpability (right, Pinnochio Ryan??) and then after they've trashed the economy and try to stop any type of rememdy, they not only claim the Democrats and President Obama are failures but that they have the answer. They conveniently try to bullshit people into their memes of the "party of business" despite being the cause of almost every financial downturn for the past century. The sad problem is that a minimum of 40% of the electorate wants to believe the right wing bullshit while we have a soft base. I'm hoping that will change quickly...it better...

[reformist2]

10. Explain a little bit, but focus on the future - "Stay the course, things are getting better!"

We shouldn't fall into the trap of explaining too much, because it is in fact complicated. And as the saying goes, "if you're explaining, you're losing."

[KharmaTrain]

14. Nuance Never Works On The Corporate Media...

I agree with you about falling into a trap...as most "simple yes or no" questions are. It also signifies a difference between the parties. Democrats nuance...and justifiably so. You can't give a straight up or down answer...especially about the economy considering how complex the issue is. Unfortunately the corporate media has their memes for both answers. Say the economy isn't good and it's supposedly an indictment on the ineptness of this administration...say it is good and risk sounding arrogant or disconnected. It's the ultimate "gotcha" question.

It's the unfortunate problem Democrats find themselves in almost every election...explaining. It also shows the difference between a party hellbent on only campaigning and never governing...which requires nuance.

[reformist2]

15. Yep. We lose on the short answer, but we can win on the long answer - and in the debates, hopefully.

Thankfully we still have debates, where the candidates are forced to explain things in more than 7-second sound bites. (If the GOP were smart, they would stop agreeing to them!)

[reformist2]

8. This is a BAD answer, rhetorically. We need to emphasize the positive.

[catbyte]

13. WE ARE BETTER OFF.

My retirement account took a catastrophic hit in 2008 and it looked like I would have to delay retirement at least 7 to 10 years longer than I had planned. Thanks to President Obama's policies, I have recovered most of what I lost in 2008 and I know there are millions more like me around the country. It just seems worse than it is because the right wing noise machine/corporate media keeps pounding you and pounding you with negative craptastic stories. IT IS BETTER!!!!!



Diane
Anishinaabe in MI & mom to Taz, Nigel, and baby brother Sammy, members of Dogs Against Romney, Cat Division
"Dogs Aren’t Luggage--HISS!”

[bigwillq]

16. We're not better off because the two parties

care more about their donors than they do the American people.

Congress needs to unite, work together and do what's best for the people.

The division between the two parties in DC is ruining this nation. Government is failing us.

It really doesn't matter which candidate wins the White House when the Congress is so divided.

If Romney wins, but still has a split Congress, it will also be difficult me him to get much done.

It's easier said than done to "elect a DEM Congress". Since that may not happen, I urge Congress to work together and try to find some common ground. Enough of this division. It's not working.