EPT2008 US Presidential Election - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
| ||
|
XoXiDe
United States620 Posts
On October 13 2008 17:01 The Storyteller wrote: although I do think he's (Obama) more intelligent than McCain and is better at wheeling and dealing and pushing through tough bills That almost made me lol, because Obama has never actually pushed a tough bill through congress. McCain has done a large percentage of the pushing of tough bills for the last 20 years. Maybe this goes back to the point you made about Obama being good at creating an image for himself. He can make himself look lik someone who can push through bills without ever pushing one through. He can also make himself look moderate despite being consistently more liberal compared to his fellow democrats for 3 years in a row. He's a politician's politician. We'll see what kind of an executive he is though. [/QUOTE] What bills has McCain "passed"/sponsored that you consider tough? and what do you consider tough? (seriously curious) | ||
|
Fzero
United States1503 Posts
![[image loading]](http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP-L.gif) | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
What bills has McCain "passed"/sponsored that you consider tough? and what do you consider tough? (seriously curious) Tough legislation deals with issues that are horrendously complicated (therefore easy to attack, take courage to defend because there may not be a "perfect solution"), have opposition from both parties, and have significant consequences. I am just going to list some off the top of my head rather than googling it. McCain-Feingold was a major reform of campaign finance. Campaign finance is horribly complicated and sure to make lots of politicians mad. It is complicated because there is a LOT of money out there that wants to be given to politicians to influence them. But we don't want incredibly rich donors or corporations controlling campaigns. Yet stopping money is a complicated issue. It was hated by Republicans and Democrats alike (incumbents who get the money), yet it passed. Its not perfect, but there may NOT be a perfect solution. And the fact that he took it on shows a lot of courage (it was used against him in the GOP primary). The 2007 Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act he coauthored with Liebermann. This is major legislation to cap CO2 emissions and innovative new technologies. Opposed primarily by Republicans with more support by Democrats. I don't know what the final outcome of this bill was. It may still be in the works. Of course, we also saw his effort to pass the immigration bill McCain-Kennedy (another area where it is easier to criticize someone else's idea rather than create your own). He was also attacked for this during the primary. This one failed to pass, but it represents almost the only major legislation to even deal with illegal immigration in a decade. And it failed because of the GOP, not lack of Democratic support. Not a bill, but you saw him stop the GOP from using the "nuclear option" which would have eliminated the possiblity of filibusters during supreme court nominations. ALL of these bills/actions represent him coauthoring with a democrat or working with them for a bipartisan solution to the most complicated factors facing the Senate. They were also all dealing with issues that are complicated, face resistance and support from both parties and require courage to even get near them. By comparison, Obama's little nuke bill was supported by everyone (you could almost call it a house-keeping bill in that respect) and didn't even make the news when it passed. It was not "tough" legislation. I would have liked to see Obama try to pass a major environmental overhaul bill, illegal immigration bill, or campaign finance, and see how he handled it. | ||
|
Fzero
United States1503 Posts
![[image loading]](http://bartblog.bartcop.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/national-debt.jpg) Full image | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On October 14 2008 02:13 Jibba wrote: Well, Bush's economic policy has basically been a Smith/Keynes abortion. Free market ideals + massive spending. I don't think anyone can say that Bush is a fiscal conservative. That is my main problem with him and with the Republican legislature that finally got destroyed in 2006. They have been behaving like democrats, but they aren't as good at is as real democrats are. The GOP congress deserved to lose and be slapped in the face for throwing away their principles. As for Bush, he is a fiscal liberal and social conservative. His foreign policy is hard to label because neoconservative is not the same as conservative. But its not liberal. His only saving point in my opinion, is that his contributions to the supreme court are far superior to his Dad's, Reagan's, or any other Republican president in the last 30 years. Thats a pure opinion of mine based on my views. However, it should be noted that Bush supported ALL earmarks while the GOP had congress, but then started opposing them once the democrats took control. McCain, however, has been consistently against them. | ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On October 14 2008 02:24 Jibba wrote: I don't you can compare senatorial influence to presidential influence. Length of stay has a huge effect on the former, whereas whoever becomes president will immediately have a large amount of power (and lets be honest, with 60+ Ds in Congress things WILL get passed) and I don't think it would change significantly whether you came in with 40 years in Congress or 2. This is true. But I personally think the government works better when it is divided. Such as during the Clinton years when the GOP had congress. We also saw that when the GOP had it all, they did not govern as well as they normally do. I'm not a historian, but I wouldn't be surprised if this trend showed up throughout history. When one party has it all, they aren't constrained in what they do so mediocre bills that would have been weeded out in a divided government get passed. Many political scientists believe that there is evidence that Americans tend to prefer divided government in how they vote. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
SOCIALISM = CUBAN CASTRO CHINESE DOOM | ||
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
On October 14 2008 02:27 Savio wrote: I don't think anyone can say that Bush is a fiscal conservative. That is my main problem with him and with the Republican legislature that finally got destroyed in 2006. They have been behaving like democrats, but they aren't as good at is as real democrats are. The GOP congress deserved to lose and be slapped in the face for throwing away their principles. As for Bush, he is a fiscal liberal and social conservative. His foreign policy is hard to label because neoconservative is not the same as conservative. But its not liberal. His only saving point in my opinion, is that his contributions to the supreme court are far superior to his Dad's, Reagan's, or any other Republican president in the last 30 years. Thats a pure opinion of mine based on my views. However, it should be noted that Bush supported ALL earmarks while the GOP had congress, but then started opposing them once the democrats took control. McCain, however, has been consistently against them. :| Bush's fiscal policy has been insane just like Reagan's was, and the manner in which the two have destroyed America's coffers was most certainly not "liberal". | ||
|
SnK-Arcbound
United States4423 Posts
On October 14 2008 04:06 Mindcrime wrote: :| Bush's fiscal policy has been insane just like Reagan's was, and the manner in which the two have destroyed America's coffers was most certainly not "liberal". Whoa, you're saying that Regan was a terrible president? | ||
|
Rayzorblade
United States1172 Posts
On October 14 2008 04:14 SnK-Arcbound wrote: Whoa, you're saying that Regan was a terrible president? Iran. Contra. Affair. | ||
|
nimysa
United States383 Posts
On October 14 2008 04:14 SnK-Arcbound wrote: Whoa, you're saying that Regan was a terrible president? Reagan was a horrible president, I mean Iran-contra, star wars, trickle-down economics etc etc and loads of other stuff. | ||
|
gymni
United States32 Posts
![[image loading]](http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/greenberg/qqxsgFiscalConservative.jpg) | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
A.I.D.S. | ||
Last Romantic
United States20665 Posts
Read prz. It's about Obama's tax plan. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
aRod
United States758 Posts
| ||
| ||
