Should the president & Dems come out indisputably against benefit cuts?
Now running against SS recipient who outspokenly wants to destroy SS. Should Obama (and other Dems) go on the record against any benefit cuts (since both programs are healthy and desperately needed)? Or should they avoid the discussion like they always do?
|6 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
|Yes - On the record for no benefit cuts or privatization
|No - Don't make any promises
|0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
Democrats know they will be responsible about it if any cuts are needed and no proclamation would ever be indisputable enough for the disgruntled left.
then I guess "cuts are needed". Why not work for a way to raise and expand benefits?
the programs are healthy, popular, and crucial. It would draw a stark line between the president and the Repukes. And it would also throw a bone to the real Dems, who were abandoned by the admin the week after they took office. Maybe for once Obama should try to rally his base instead of attracting a few "centrists" (right wingers).
However, I believe that Obama's "Grand Bargain" is still on the table. Even if they did come out against benefit cuts would you believe them? It's more likely that they will "save SS and Medicare" by cutting benefits
Romney is running for the office in order to raid and loot the largest pension fund in the country; the dynamics of opposing this require solid promises to the voting public.
"Romney loves America like a tick loves a dog."
The president should try draw a stark contrast between himself and the teabaggers, instead of positioning himself a hair to the left of them.
I am sure that Obama already cut SS, didn't he? He put it on the table and chop chop chop - you could hear that chopping sound clear across the country he was so professionally butcherlike.
At least according to a couple of bullhorns here at DU a while back.
Has any Dem made a campaign issue of this, by saying it won't happen if Dems are elected? No. So, as usual, they avoid the issue
Protecting & Strengthening Social Security
President Obama believes that all seniors should be able to retire with dignity, not just a privileged few. And, he believes that all Americans deserve to know that, if they become disabled or if they lose the breadwinner in the family, Social Security will be there to protect them. Today, nearly 54 million Americans receive Social Security benefits, including 38 million retirees and their family members, 10 million Americans with disabilities and their dependents, and 6 million survivors of deceased workers.
For many of these Americans, Social Security is a key source of income. In fact, for more than half of Social Security recipients aged 65 or over, the program provides over 50 percent of their family income and, because of its lifetime income protection and survivors benefits, Social Security is particularly important for elderly women. . Moreover, the program is not just for seniors. Because of features like survivors benefits, Social Security is one of the largest antipoverty programs for children, and disability benefits also help younger workers and their families and are particularly important to minority communities.
is this avoiding the issue? or do you mean Obama hasn't made a new SS speech since Ryan has been named?
accidentally deleted the part where they pledge not to cut benefits. If you will reread the OP you will see that that was the question.
missed the many times the President did say that.
But I'm not your bloodhound googler, if you really are interested, you will find it.