Independent Voters Shifting Away From Obama, Democrats

RealClearPolitics :

A poll of opinion polls shows Americans' attitudes are changing rapidly.

They are less and less thrilled about the country's direction and Congress, according to Tom Bevan, executive editor of national polling aggregator RealClearPolitics. He says independent voters are shifting away from the polices of the Obama administration and Democrats.

Read the whole story: RealClearPolitics

Comments

[Mach8]

It's been fun Peleador but I think I'm done with you. After claiming I don't know anything about economics, you proceeded to reach into a grab bag of some of the most backward wingnut theories to support your points:

HSAs?
Flat tax?
Tax cuts?

C'mon. Didn't they give you the new playbook?

I've provided links to refute practically everything you've stated, all from objective sources. What more do I have to prove?

Tell you what... I'll give you a few gifts. Maybe you'll get off the wingnut express and join the real thinkers:

Healthcare: Single payer. http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_system_cost.php?page=all

Taxes: Nationalize the Fed. http://www.monetary.org/toddaltmanreview.htm

Financial markets: Glass-Steagall 2.0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act

Capitalism: Near complete deregulation (with the exception of environmental controls)... but unions and collective bargaining have to be made legal ACROSS THE BOARD. Balance, Counter-balance.

Unlike your half-baked theories, the research on these options shows them to have legs. I could give you more but... why?

My guess is that you are a shill but you may just be misguided. Hit the books more, guy... you might learn something.

[Peleador]

Fifth, why are the beneficiaries of deregulation the strong entities? Not that I think this should have been done. Personally, I believe in small capitalism with lots of competition and choice ratr than an oligopoly. I don't mind rules that keep the game honest and put limits on what corporations can do if it avoids oligopolies, but not micromanagement. For instance, simply preventing companies from selling debt without the written consent of the debtor at the time of the sale would would be have prevented the bubble as well as the blow up. Or simply not repackaging and insuring these loans. Requiring that all executive compensation be in cash rather than stock would have prevented Enron and a whole bunch of other failures. And that they may own stock but may not cash it in until they have been out of the company for more than a year. If executives don't own massive stock, they have no incentive to manipulate it for personal gain. Simple rules, easily abided by, not massive, intrusive, expensive bureaucracy.

But Democrats don't want solutions, they want socialism. Even their so-called economics advisors are socialism first, economics second. Look at the degrees helt by Biden's economic advisor. He has a PhD is "social justice" or something to that effect. Nice. How very Marxist.

[Mach8]

You're so adorable...

[Peleador]

I'm going to throw liberals a stick. I've been contending that the Bush administration was not terribly complicit in the housing crash, other than simply not acting forcefully enough to change the regulations. I've seen plenty of evidence that showed he wanted regulation late in the game. But I missed one piece of evidence that actually gives him bi-partisan credit for the disaster -

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=64935
http://www.heritage.org/Research/budget/wm378.cfm

Yes, Democrats were for it. But the Republicans created and backed it, Bush supported and signed it. It *seems* good when you read it. Just like a liberal program. It always *seems* like a good idea, until you find out the hard way about the costs. Like Medicare Part D, this is an example of Republicans out liberaling the liberals and is certainly part of what caused the recession. Of course, I don't think any Democrats voted against this either, but it doesn't matter. Liberal Republicans clearly own a piece of the disaster.

And that's why people are becoming libertarians and independents.

So, if I ever blame on purely on Democrats such as Frank and Dodd again, feel free to cut and paste this. I remember the Ag bill and Medicare bill, but holy crap, batman. I wonder how many of these loans folded.

[Mach8]

Liberal Republicans? Why do right-wingers constantly move the goal post?

So, the recession had NOTHING to do with repealing Glass-Steagall?

Okay.

[Peleador]

Very little to do with it. The banks that least needed help were those that benefited from the repeal of the act.

As you always say. Read a book, read anything.

[RTIII]

The contents of this article don't surprise me. As I've been writing here at HP for a long time, we are locked in a battle for America between the fasc.is.ts - those who believe in the combination of business and state power - and the populists, "We The People." Unfortunately, at this point in time virtually all the Rs are fasc.is.ts and so are about half the Dems. It is precisely because the Dems are so strongly influenced - controlled - by these fasc.is.ts that the independents feel they have no where to turn.

Going out and starting a new party is very tough and quite uncertain of success and none of our third parties are in any kind of position to do much - without media attention, it's kind of hopeless.

So, what we populists must do, We The People, is remove all those fas.ci.sts in our party - the Democratic party.

The Big Tent Democratic Party will be a lot bigger when we kick out these Big Business "corporatists" through the Primary process because our ranks will fill with independents looking for a place to call home. But we can't do it with the likes of Reid as Majority Leader...

Use the Primary process to vote in ONLY populist candidates and independents will follow.
.

[Vimes]

So the independents don't like the adminstration that much anymore. Does this mean they favor republicans instead?

Seems to me that with only a two party system a lot of people are forced to vote for the lesser evil.

[jimme]

Yeah okay, if you say so.

[BarackstarObama]

Are we supposed to believe that indies are running towards do-nothing rethugs? Are you freaking kidding me?

[Lauralics]

He noted that the Obama administration "mismanaged" the perception of the economy from the start by "overpromising" results.

At first, Obama aides predicted stimulus spending would hold the jobless rate below 8 percent -- a prediction they now admit was off the mark.

"At the time, our forecast seemed reasonable. Now, looking back, it was clearly too optimistic," Jared Bernstein, chief economist for Vice President Biden, said in June.

The effectiveness of the $787 billion stimulus package likely will figure heavily into the 2010 debate. The nation has lost some 2 million jobs since the package was enacted.

But the White House and liberal economists say things would be much worse without it.

"One of the things we have going for us right now is the stimulus package. That's the thing that has brought us back from the brink," said the Economic Policy Institute's Heidi Shierholz. She said the stimulus is saving between 200,000 and 250,000 jobs a month and noted that there's still 60 percent of the package left.

But Romer, chairwoman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, was less optimistic on that point.

"The fiscal stimulus will have its greatest impact on growth in the second and third quarters of 2009, and by mid-2010, fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to further growth," she said.




Mach8, Christina Romer stated that the "stimulus" pretty much has done all it can.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/obama-administration-manages-expectations-sluggish-economic-recovery/

[Mach8]

1) Last time I checked, it wasn't mid-2010. So the stim is still in effect.

2) I've already commented on the employment situation substantially.

3) "One of the things we have going for us right now is the stimulus package. That's the thing that has brought us back from the brink," said the Economic Policy Institute's Heidi Shierholz. She said the stimulus is saving between 200,000 and 250,000 jobs a month and noted that there's still 60 percent of the package left."

Stim money is propping up jobs at the state level and filling in massive holes in state budgets.

I honestly don't know what point you are attempting to make. That the stim was "useless"? That's pretty easy to state when half of the Union hasn't gone bankrupt.

If you think employment was going to turn around in 9 months even in the best of circumstances, you know even less about economics than I suspect. It's a nice talking point for conservatives but anyone with any knowledge of economics would laugh at you. I would too if your viewpoints weren't so dangerously ignorant.

[Lauralics]

jwredd

I'm pretty sure the bulk of the stimulus money hasn't been allocated yet and what has been is according to schedule. You DO NOT have a quote from anyone other than a republican saying "the Stimulus has done all it can". -Here you go, that much needed info on the stimulus: But Romer, chairwoman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, was less optimistic on that point. "The fiscal stimulus will have its greatest impact on growth in the second and third quarters of 2009, and by mid-2010, fiscal stimulus will likely be contributing little to further growth," she said. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/23/obama-administration-manages-expectations-sluggish-economic-recovery/



Mach, it was the above the statement that was my point, you didn't make that statement but have argued with me heavily. I thought you'd enjoy the statement too, right out of that nice ladies mouth, Christina Romer, Obama's gal.

[Lauralics]

I argued that the stimulus did diddly or piddly with a lot of wasted pork for Obama's cronies. The proof is in the pudding.

[Peleador]

1. The "stimulus" is so badly crafted, it is injecting some money, but at too slow a pace, isn't creating or saving many jobs (except in dreamland), doesn't create the *right* jobs (the ones that have been largely lost) and acts as a drag on the economy because it isn't the stimulus people want - it just puts us in debt and this has a massive, negative psychological impact on the recovery, perhaps more negative than the positive of the stimulus. If I were a business, I'd be closing factories permanently because of Obama's crazy policies and relocating them, rather than simply laying low, so I would make the case that Obama's stimulus is actually making things worse by sending a message to job creators that the lights are on, but nobody's home.

2. Do you know anything about employment? Have you created a business and employed anyone at all?

3. Handpicking ideological morons and calling them economists doesn't make give you any credibility. The stimulus was supposed to 'create' jobs, but when it didn't, they went immediately to the unprovable lie that it is 'saving' jobs. Maybe a few, but not nearly as many as they say. If the government had done no stimulus plan, we'd have started to level off, perhaps even faster than with a stimulus. A 4-6 month social security holiday, followed by permanent tax cuts and capital gains cuts would have created a massive stimulus that would already be working.

[Mach8]

And you lost all credibility by linking to Fox "News." Immediate FAIL.

[Lauralics]

Please, those words came out of Romer's mouth and you can't deny it. Poor arguement.

[Berettasskeeter]

Why? Fox News has the largest audience in the country. Among that audience, it has a reputation for fairness and balance, which they themselves claim. If you don't like the opinion shows, like O'Reilly, fine. What is your problem with the news, though, beyond the fact that you hate them?
Semper fi

[Peleador]

Demonstrate that it is false. Fox has a great record with actual facts. They also share more of them than MSM does. Keep that mind wide shut. Don't want either of those neurons to catch a cold.

[ishkaboodle]

Quite frankly, if you want to be taken seriously around these parts-- you're probably better off not sourcing your info from FOX. Kind of a credibility downer, Rupert.

Being the capitalist-luvin type, one of my favorite Henry Ford quotes seems more than appropriate here:

"Coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; working together is success."

The current administration and congress appear to be constantly slogging through waste water, trying to get something accomplished while thwarted at every turn by "throw the baby out with the bath-water" republican roadblocks.

The reality is: if we don't get this stuff fixed, your finger-pointing and "nah, nah, nah,nah" approach will be great entertainment-- in the bread line.

[Tuckerndfw]

I don't disagree with you but I do agree that using Faux News as your source is not a real good idea.

You get to spend more time debating Faux News than the issue you are attempting to raise.

The stimulus is one of those never ending, no win arguments.

No one can tell what it has or has not done other than allow Wall Street execs and corporate CEO's the ability to shop for new yachts and villas.

That much, we do know. What else it has done other than put us beyond banrupt is hard to tell.

[Lauralics]

Well, since the rest of the media WOULDN'T report what Christina Romer said, I was forced to use Fox. It's like Acorn or perhaps Van Jones, keep it in the hush-hush mode is the Obama media's philosophy. So Fox may be a buzz word "here", but I'm going to use the only source that put's out the relevant stories. What Christina Romer said should have been BIG news, instead we got crickets, hence the utilization of Fox.

[christianmama4change]

Real Clear Politics is a conservative site - enough said.

[Peleador]

Even if it were, dispute the facts, not the source.

A lot of my friends and customers voted for Obama purely on 'hope'. They wanted something different. They are VERY disillusioned right now. Some have admitted making a huge mistake. The others don't even want to talk politics at all suddenly. They look like someone whacked them in the forehead. All you have to do is talk to the Obama crossover or swing voters. Some are still giving him some rope, but many have already expressed buyers remorse.

[gettingitright]

If they could undo this huge "mistake", what would they have done differently? Do you think Palin/McCain would have carried you from the abyss created by the Bush administration?

Obama is not even 25% through his first term and already people are disillusioned because eight years hasn't been undone in 10 months. Who would you like to see leading the country and where do you think the "hopeful" country should be right now?

[AnneMarie27]

Then your friends are way too impatient. How do you undo 8 long years of garbage in less than a year? I was guilty of voting for all the garbage makers (Bush was a minor player, I believe) of the previous administration. I am very grateful to have Barack Obama as President. The alternative is unthinkable!

[Lauralics]

Mach8
If the stim did "diddly" why are Republican governors begging for stim money? Because stim money is propping up the states, the majority of whom have massive budget deficits. Yep, even your Republican friends have maxed-out the state credit cards.

Please read at least one book on economics before making judgments about economic matters.


--I live in Michigan, WE HAVE BEEN RUN INTO THE GROUND WITH DEMOCRAT ECONOMICS, the worst State in the Country.

ps I took three college level courses in Economics.

[jwredd]

Michigan was run into the ground by auto execs with their heads up their arses building SUVs while we're invading other countries to protect our oil interests.

[Lauralics]

The Democrats have made it sooo unattractive for potential business here with their "high" taxes and total union support. Business entrepeneurs don't even look our way and set up shop in other States because let's face it, they want to make a profit.

[Lauralics]

My brother works for GM (develops computer programs for engine chips) and stated that they ran too many lines of the same thing, so I'll agree with that. It should also be mentioned that unions going on strike at their most profitable plants (Acadia and Malibu) pretty much poked a hole in their life preserver, as they were floundering and trying not to drown.

[Mach8]

"ps I took three college level courses in Economics."

And you still know so little... so unfortunate.

Ummm, which Republican states are doing better? And please leave out the ones with massive natural resources like Texas and Alaska. Minnesota, home of the likely Republican candidate, Tim Pawlenty, is sitting on a 4 Billion dollar budget deficit.

[jwredd]

She sort of has to leave those states out even with their resources since they receive more government funds than they pay out. They're big red welfare states.

[Peleador]

And how many did you take?

[Peleador]

I repeat, how many and which ones did you take?

[Lauralics]

Mach8

They needn't bother to read yours as you have NOTHING TO OFFER.

All whining, no substance.

----------­----------­----------­----------­----------­---------

Lauralics

And that trumped up "stimulus" has gained us DIDDLY, my solution was no pork and that's exactly what Obama did, gave us a stimulus that had "nothing" to do with jobs and everything to do with "paybacks" to his cronies.

[Mach8]

Why didn't you add my RESPONSE?

"If the stim did "diddly" why are Republican governors begging for stim money? Because stim money is propping up the states, the majority of whom have massive budget deficits. Yep, even your Republican friends have maxed-out the state credit cards.

Please read at least one book on economics before making judgments about economic matters."

Thanks for playing, shill.

[Flavor]

Your exactly right, I am reading now where they are begging for the stimulis money. Mach8, you know your stuff.

[Peleador]

This is the problem with liberal big government. States shouldn't be the ones scrambling for cash. The feds take so much that the states can't take enough to support themselves. If they try, the locals revolt. But when you're one of 50 states, it's hard to revolt against a gigantic and distant government.

Everyone wants stimulus money to pay bills, but that doesn't mean it will create jobs in any number. The negative impact of a dramatic uptick in government debt offsets most, if not all, of the stimulus effect. And it's too slow, too inefficient to offset it. It's just bad policy.

[jwredd]

Can you describe a stimulus component that couldn't be described as "pork" by someone else?

[Mach8]

Of course not. Most of these conservatives don't realize that "pork" brings employment to many of their communities.

[Shwazy]

Keep focusing on political parties, alignments, and affiliations, and there will never be a solution to the underlying problem.

The problem is that what we call a political system is really nothing more than a legal system of bribes. Those with political interest in pending legislation pay lobbyists, who in turn pay for the political campaigns of legislators. There it is, as clear as the light of the sun, and yet so many act as though political parties really mean something. They don't.

Money is where the rubber meets the road. It is the fulcrum on which political pressure is applied, and it has come to be nearly the entirety of our political process. Money buys propaganda, and propaganda buys votes. Of course, it is possible for a motivated voter to find out the truth of the matter on any single issue, but it is a practical impossibility for a large enough portion of the population to do so for the actual facts on an issue to have significant impact on the voting of the population.

Unless this issue is addressed, corruption will always outweigh legitimate debate. Our system is utterly broken, and it is laughable that we still refer to our system of governance as democracy.

[Mach8]

Correct.

[Shwazy]

And yet, sadly, any discussion of serious issues rapidly devolves into a partisan pi$$ing contest.

Everyone, pay attention. Here's what happens. When the people are sufficiently unhappy to vote out incumbents, the money shifts to those in power. Lobbyists want to have real impact on legislation, and they can't do that by throwing money away on the party out of power.

Those who control the legislative process, i.e., those who fund political campaigns, don't particularly care who is in power. They simply need to make their preferences known along with how much money they are willing to spend on the issue, and the rest takes care of itself. If those in power fail to deliver for the lobbyists, then the opposition is well-funded and ultimately prevails. If the party in power delivers, they gain an entrenched advantage.

In such a system, the people can never win.

[Duppy]

Everyone, stop complaining. Give the guy a chance !

[Flavor]

Duppy, I'm afraid this will come with the territory. You would think that this president has been president for 8 years, boy! how I haven't forgotten.

[Peleador]

He already has had a chance. He's doing all the wrong things at all the wrong times in all the wrong ways. Sheesh. He could have done some things that would have blown away Republicans, been great for the country and would have cemented Democrats for 20 years. But he did the opposite of that. Way to go Affirmative Action President!

[Mach8]

Here we go...

"Way to go Affirmative Action President!"

Credibility meet window.

[Duppy]

Why is everyone complaining about Obama's policies ? He did not approve the bank bailout. That was approved under Bush. I am not a fan of GWB but if the banks were not bailed out the entire financial system would collapse. That would have totally wiped out the FDIC. Did anyone check the current remaining funds at the FDIC after only 103 smaller banks collapsed ?

[Peleador]

Stimulus. Obama Care. Cap and Trade.

That's enough to turn off anyone.

[Mach8]

I have a simple question for the Obama haters...

Where are your SOLUTIONS?

You don't like the bank bailout? Well, the alternative was economic collapse or nationalize the Fed. So destruction or "socialism." What is YOUR solution?

Have a problem with the healthcare bill? Well a single-payer system is the most fiscally responsible. Otherwise, a strong public option is the other most fiscally "conservative" solution. Isn't that what it's all about, "fiscal conservatism"? What is YOUR solution?

You guys are hypocrites. Anything that runs contrary to your corporate paymasters is "socialism." And then so-called "independents" spam these sites without solution the first.

Dems may be soft hypocrites but at least they are moving in the right direction. Conservatives and "independents" do nothing but complain and offer nothing in return.

[gettingitright]

I also want to know how people can get so worked up over something that does not affect their day-to-day lives.

In theory, I'm appalled that the architects of the economic recession are still getting "paid". But the greed and lack of a moral/ethical compass have always been the hallmark of Wall Street. This sick and soulless culture is not Obama's doing or his fault. This would not be enough to turn me against a POTUS who, while excrutiatingly deliberative, is still the best hope for bringing substantive change to America. There must be another reason "independents" are being fair weather fans. Or maybe Glenn Beck is just that influential.

Have patience with Obama. You still have to be IN the game to change it. That's just a fact. We can't be so idealistic that we have unrealistic expectations.

[Peleador]

100% deductible HSAs from a flat tax, with a pooling or catastrophic insurance options for over $20K expenses. This drives the cost of medical care to 25-50% of current costs, eliminates most all of the bureaucracy and insures everyone (there is more to it than above)

It's too late to prevent the economic collapse, but if Dodd/Frank had done their job early on, there'd be no need. All it would have taken would be a) a law that prevents the sale of any debt without the express written consent of both parties at the time of the sale of the debt. OR, simply remove any government loan guarantees so that there was no incentive to write bad loans. Either would have worked. A slow down in the economy, but not a collapse.

Any other things you'd like to have solved? Just ask. I can come up with a *simple* solution that is cost effective for most anything. Even Constitutional ones.

[Mach8]

Man you are chock full of failed strategies, aren't you?

1) HSAs? Health Savings Accounts? You mean those things Bush wanted to invest in the stock market? Yeah, that would have worked out great. Read the "Criticisms" portion as that is my position:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_savings_account

2) Flat taxes OF ALL KINDS are the worst kinds of taxes because the wealthy end up paying far less as a proportion of total income than the non-wealthy.

The rest was just complete nonsense. I urge anyone who thinks you know what you are talking about to do their own research.

[Lauralics]

justthefacts17

As I drive my car behind all the Volvos,Bee­­mers,Priu­s­es etc.,
I can't help but notice the "Obama" bumper stickers fading
in the sunlight and leaving behind a great metaphor for all to realize.

-I had to bump this up as it is sooooo true. So many midwestern voters placed their trust in Obama because of his promises on NAFTA, hoping they'd get their jobs back. Little did they realize that the group they fell in with aren't buying "their" products. I still drive a GM vehicle as many of my families livelihood depends on this automaker, too bad so many liberals don't realize this and place their Obama stickers on foreign cars.

ps GM has made their mistakes, I'm not blind, but a little "faithfulness" should have been called for as autoworkers and suppliers are down the tubes. A sad irony is that unions always lean Democrat feeling they've got their back, I hope that knife feels good.

[Tuckerndfw]

Obama appears to shove everyone other than his corporate sponsors under the bus.

Appears to be a habit.

[Lauralics]

What's amazing is so many are STILL willing to ignore this. A zombie stumbling along and mumbling "I see and I obey" comes to mind.