If Obama is re-elected, will he overcome gridlock/obstructionism his 2nd term?

If the GOP had any sense they would get with the program and stop trying to see this man from doing the job that he and they are up there to do .

 

Actually, the only way to avoid gridlock is for elected officials of either party to work with each other to move this country forward.

This idea that we will call off the gridlock once you vote "our guy" in is just juvenile and ridiculous. What happened to putting country first?

 

What happened to putting country first? Were you a McCain supporter? That was his tag line.

Putting country first means leading, and it means sacrificing some issues for others in the spirit of compromise. Obama has no clue how to do either -- and has a demonstrated track record of failing to do either. A good example is the budget issue. There has not been a budget throughout the course of Obama's term. That alone is just pathetic. Last year, instead of proposing one, the liberals just sat back and criticized Paul Ryan's budget -- a budget that passed the House. Obama's budget got ZERO votes -- not even a single vote from Democrats. ZERO. And you wonder why we have record budget deficits for as far as the eye can see and 15% real unemployment levels. Complete and total failure in leadership by Obama. The guy is a joke.

 

Given the logic of the current program of obstruction, they'll continue because the essential conditions remain the same (or are more favorable). There'll be another presidential election in 4 years and, without an incumbency, it'll be a little easier to win. But, they'll want to paint the Democratic White House as ineffective, so they have to submarine the government and economy as much as possible. As long as the base doesn't recognize what they're doing and assign blame where it belongs (which doesn't seem likely right now), there's no reason for them to stop.

 

I put as much blame on Clinton, as I do on Bush, when it comes to the economy. They both sat on the sideline idlly while Greenspan and Bernake gave full control to the investment banks. The Dem's have done a great job making Clinton seem like a saviour. They are able to do this by taking advantage of people as gullible and shortsighted as you apparently are.

You blaming Obama for the economy is the exact sort of thing that lets Clinton off the hook. The economy did well under Clinton, because of deregulation. The economy did even better under Bush, because of even further deregulation, and the massive increases in leverage. The economy collapsed, because of the uncontrolled deregulation during those campaigns. It has little to nothing to do with Obama.

All of this said, I'm no Obama supporter. In my eyes, he lost every ounce of credibility when he supported Geithner for Secretary of the Treasury. It was the affirmation I needed to confirm that both Dem's and Rep's are equally responsible for the pillaging of our eceonomy. The Reps want all of the money in their personal accounts, and the Dem's want all of the money in wall street/banks, who will then put money in their bank accounts.

 

That Sandy Weill interview blew my mind.

Then I remembered that this is a guy who had the balls to go through with the merger of Citicorp and Travelers BEFORE they overrode Glass–Steagall. They were so confident in their ability buy whatever law they needed to make the merger legal.

 

I reject part of your meme. I don't believe Obama is a Progressive and I don't believe he actually supports some of the reforms he campaigns on.

 

Obama should compromise if he wins.

That's what leaders do.

 

That's what GOP keeps saying, yet they will not compromise thanks to things like the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

Grover Norquist has systematically had nearly every Republican in office sign this pledge that basically says, "I will never compromise." If they don't sign it, they don't get the party backing they need. Once they do sign it, then they have committed to never compromising on tax issues, lest they be ostrocized by the entire party.

The GOP is content to let the country fall apart. They are playing a game of chicken, and are more than willing to let the cars collide before they concede.

 

If Obama is re-elected, I bet he will be regret.

1% will definitely show him who is the boss.

 

If he's elected, it's a mandate to let the House do what it wants.

 

I think if Obama wins a close one, it really isn't a mandate for Obama.

 

Obama knows better this time.

1. He doesn't have to worry about re-election prospects to do what he wants to do.
2. He knows his policies are popular with the electorate (tax policy, jobs bill etc.) so he won't make the mistake of letting conservative SuperPACS pre-write the headlines for him again like he did with Obamacare.

All that bringing the Republicans to a round table nonsense will end now. He will still face strong opposition, but I expect him to be much more successful.

 

Nah, he's just a lame duck now.