While I don't expect Tea Partiers to vote for Obama regardless of what anyone says or does, I think this approach could perhaps dampen some enthusiasm for GOP candidates by planting a little seed of doubt -- should I really be voting for and contributing to and campaigning for this candidate who is handing the farm over to the wealthy? Even if Obama is the antichrist, maybe there's a kernel of truth to this destruction-of-the-middle-class stuff and that'd be bad for me and mine. So, maybe some folks vote less or give less or cheerlead less, on the margin. Maybe.
doubt it. people believe what they want to believe. obama will win easily because we're only stupid, not totally insane.
Kaus writes well: -- What was the matter with Kansas: The weakest part of Obama’s grand Kansas manifesto was this passage, in which the President worries about how to “grow our middle class again” in a world where “huge advances in technology have allowed businesses to do more with less, and made it easier for them to set up shop and hire workers anywhere in the world.” And it will require American business leaders to understand that their obligations don’t just end with their shareholders. Andy Grove, the former CEO of Intel put it best: “There’s another obligation I feel personally,” he said, “given that everything I’ve achieved in my career and a lot of what Intel has achieved … were made possible by a climate of democracy, an economic climate and investment climate provided by … the United States.” This broader obligation can take different forms. At a time when the cost of hiring workers in China is rising rapidly, it should mean more CEOs deciding that it’s time to bring jobs back to the United States – not just because it’s good for business, but because it’s good for the country that made their business and their personal success possible. [E.A.] So we’ll retain middle class jobs in America because businessmen keep them here, at least in part, as an act of patriotic charity! 1) How likely is this to happen on the scale that is necessary? Something close to zero. It’s one thing to rely on the generosity of rich people when it comes to funding new hospital wings and small magazines. It’s another when it comes to the basic success of the American economy–which (reminder) has been reliably achieved over the centuries because we have relied on sturdy, universal drive of self interest. 2) It’s pathetic if the mighty U.S. is really forced to beg corporations to produce here out of Warren-Buffetesque philanthropic urges. But it’s especially pathetic for American liberalism, which has always been most appealing when it stood up against the condescension of “alms givers”–but which now celebrates wealthy philanthropists with nauseating ease (a trend I blame, in very small part, on my old employer Slate, with its annual “Slate 60″ charity p*rn feature). “Giving back” is the credo of Hollywood celebrities, not New Deal liberals. Democrats are supposed to be the party of government–government that establishes a foundation for the essential dignity of working people–not the party that sucks up to the Google guys and the Gates Foundation. At least Elizabeth Warren only wanted rich businessmen to pay higher taxes. It’s a sign of liberalism’s humiliating inability to do enough with those taxes that left-wingers now seek to substitute The Giving Pledge. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/07/obamas-charity-capitalism/#ixzz1fsbyjlPw
what's his path to victory? out of the following states, which do you think he'll carry in 2012? Florida North Carolina Virginia Pennsylvania Ohio Indiana Wisconsin
No only will Obama win but the house most likely will flip back to the Dems! Welcome back Madame Speaker!
Their approval ratings are so bad these days that even Congress hates Congress. Sen. Lindsey Graham is so embarrassed about the 9 percent approval rating — released Tuesday night in a New York Times/CBS poll — that he’s going incognito. “It’s so bad sometimes I tell people I’m a lawyer,” the South Carolina Republican told POLITICO on Wednesday. “I don’t want to be associated with a body that in the eyes of your fellow citizens seems to be dysfunctional. It matters to me.” “We’re below sharks and contract killers,” added freshman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.). Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66956.html#ixzz1fskRC2j8
If Newt is the nominee and Europe doesn't take down the economy, Obama probably wins all of those, with the exception of Indiana. Arizona also comes into play, though New Hampshire is more likely to go GOP. If Romney is the nominee, I think it's much harder to predict.
Big ifs there, I doubt Europe gets their **** together. I'm scared if Romney's president, simply because I think a war with Iran is the last thing that we or the middle east need.
come on dude, i am well aware that outsourcing is here to stay but to say that corporations keeping jobs at home is a laughable act of charity?
that's not really what he's saying. in context, he thinks that "begging" to keep jobs at home is pathetic, since it only underscores the ineffectiveness of this president's, and progressive efforts generally, to grow the economy. to be clear, the jobs that have been outsourced aren't coming back. but a vibrant, dynamic economy would create new, different ones, if allowed to do so.
