1.
Bill Fusroy
| #1
Reply | Quote

As a leftist voter, who nonetheless voted for Obama, and who often votes for the Democrats, only because the other option is still worse, I was so disappointed by Obama’s early appointments of Geithner and Summers and his keeping on of Bernanke, [all of whom, as former Wall St. and Banking insiders are clearly interested in protecting the interests of the large zombie-banks, not the common people, like myself, whose retirement and other accounts were devastated by their almost unmanageable malfeasance,] I had ripped the Obama sticker off my car within two weeks of his taking office!

In my opinion the Democrats will get slaughtered in the 2010 midterm elections, since: 1.) they did next to nothing to re-regulate even the grossest banking system defects, — e.g. reinstating Glass-Steagall, forcing derivates to be traded on a legitimate exchange etc. — even leaving the same corporate pirates in charge, — unlike, say, in the U.K., where officials sacked each and every one responsible for their meltdown, — but more pressing still, and relevant to the 2010 election, 2.) the Democrats passed a “stimulus bill that is nowhere near large enough to create sufficient consumer demand among average Americans to pull us out of a recession that will be a depression come election time, and 3.) much like the Republicans with their “trickle down” approaches, most of Obama’s stimulus bill did not provide the unemployed, low-wage workers and the poor with money, loans and mortgage relief to stimulate the economy by buying new goods, but instead provided tax incentives and scads of liquidity to the wealthy, in the hopes, as economists put it, that “pushing on the string” of the money supply would somehow magically create demand. But everyone know you have to PULL on a string to move something. PUSHING on one, in this case, by giving huge reserves to the most crooked banks, will just allow the banks to invest in the highest paying bonds around the world, and do nothing to help the struggling workers, unemployed and poor people in this country.

In short, the real unemployment rate come November 2010 will be around or over 20%, the common people will be justifiably furious, and hence will vote Republican in droves, even despite their dislike of that party’s many non-economic policies. And Democrats will have squandered their greatest opportunity, an almost ideal presidential candidate and control of voth houses of Congress, in over a century.

I apologize for the double post here. I thought the website would just correct the first version, which was full of typos etc. But alas, I can’t figure out how to delete it.

The Republicans will make modest gains. Pelosi will retain her crown. The left will continue to impose their various agendas. Mostly, due to continued intense leftist activism, voter confusion and the incompetence of the Republican Party. The Republican right will rant and rave to no avail. The ideas of Saul Alinski will continue to enjoy success as the left recreates our country. Things are pretty awful.

It would be considered normal for the President’s party to lose 15-20 seats in the House in the first off year election, so I won’t read much into that if it happens. If the Republicans are able to gain more than 40 seats – and shift the majority, that will be a major rebuke to the President and outgoing Speaker Pelosi.
I believe war fatigue and a misunderstanding of some of the Bush policies led people to respond to the President’s message of change in 2008. But I believe that the vast changes that have been promoted by the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda have startled voters. I believe if the election were today (or if the voters had understood what they were voting for the last time) the outcome may have been different.
This should bring out unhappy voters in large numbers to try to change the majority in the House to put the brakes on the direction of government.
I was not a Clinton supporter, but he moved to the center as President and, I believe, would be more appropriate for conditions today.
I expect to see the Republicans regain control of the House in 2010.

I hope Democrats will be replaced with people who will listen to their constituents–Republican, Democrat or otherwise–especially about healthcare and the sanctity of life.

I certainly do believe that Democrats will lose seats in 2010. The things that the Democratic party are doing today are downright anti-American and so far left they will lose the independent vote because of their extremism. They have the upper hand now and are cramming their far left agenda down middle America’s throats but middle America will rise up and resist this tyranny. Obama has been the most devisive President since Bill Clinton.

@Ted

In a free country, we get to vote for how we wish to be governed and I believe the populous has spoken. SO whether we like it or not, nobody is cramming anything. Did you think it was cramming when the conservatives controlled Congress?? I believe Bill, up there, would have. In fact, as upset as Bill appears to be, he never said that what is happening now is unAmerican.

There was a time, long ago as a school child, we were taught that what made Americans different from third world nations is that we did not threaten mayhem to over throw government when we didn’t agree with elections. What I see now as a Murdoch inspired hub-bub, is pushing the limits beyond what the hippie movement did, since the media did not support the hippies as I recall. Tyranny? Please.. By the same measure we could have called Newt’s era tyranny. And the last time I checked, Murdoch was not a U.S. citizen.

I think, to borrow from Clinton – it’s the economy, stupid. And the message to Wall Street is – it’s not your economy, stupid. So, if Wall Street recovers, but Main Street does not, Democrats lose. Since we really don’t know where this is going yet into the first and second quarters of next year, and whether job numbers turn around even a little, it is anyone’s guess.

Obama has missed many opportunities, but the biggest was to institute a real jobs program as a stimulus. When people are at work and earning what they need to pay for housing, food and other necessities, then we have a basis for more rational discourse about other aspects of government. Bush, terrible president that he was, was able to use power even when Congress didn’t give it to him. I cannot help but believe that there are many ways, through regulation and executive powers, that would have allowed Obama to mold much to improve the job situation. I know that he could have pleased many more of his supporters, like Gays and liberals like me, if he had used his power as a War President to stop the firing of Gays in the military. His wooing of the far right will have no success, but it will make a lot of liberals stay home. He will lose a lot of his base, and, because he has not put average Americans back to work in large numbers, unhappy swing voters who are economic losers may well swing to Republicans in a desperate hope for change.

I see a lot in my own little microcosm. I am the Chair of a Democratic Club in Orange County, California. We started with a large, enthusiastic membership this year, excited about what Obama would do. Now, I can barely get anyone to turn out for our monthly meeting or our weekly discussion group. Getting volunteers for voter registration is a huge chore. In an area with a small African American population, we had four on our Board. Two have resigned, and the other two are only sporadically active. The only active people are the “usual suspects” — older white women like me who have faithfully done the work for years, walking precincts, collating materials, registering voters, and just plain showing up. And most of us were Clinton supporters who faithfully worked long hours for Obama when he became the nominee.

Sharon Toji

Agree with Ted Baker’s analysis and Obama has completely missed the boat concerning jobs stimulus and will pay for it in 2010.

I sincerely believe that there will be a major shift after the 2010
elections. For the first time since the American revolution people are
taking the to streets and airwaves to protest what we consider the hijackign of our country.
Even in ultra-liberal Massachusetts our local, state and Federal reps will see just what a loyal American citizen can do when they feel they are being ignored and mis-represented.
God Bless America- Charley Soares

I think most voters are uneducated and pretty ignorant.

Among those with an IQ over 100, there is a dawning awareness that the Federal Government has way exceeded their constitutional authority and there will much talk of the 10th amendment and I hope a strong 10th amendment movement bringing power and decision making back to the states and from there much closer to the individual citizens. States will start voting to nullify federal requirements and legislation that the federal government has no authority to make in the first place.