"So, as Congress prepares to return to session, my economic team is hard at work in identifying additional measures that could make a difference in both promoting growth and hiring in the short term, and increasing our economy’s competitiveness in the long term. Steps like extending the tax cuts for the middle class that are set to expire this year. Redoubling our investment in clean energy and R&D. Rebuilding more of our infrastructure for the future. Further tax cuts to encourage businesses to put their capital to work creating jobs here in the United States. And I’ll be addressing these proposals in further detail in the days and weeks to come."I'm sure he'll make a big show of shuffling money around. He may even be able to scrape up $20 billion or so for some new initiatives before the election. It's not going to be anywhere near large enough to help.
At this point Obama needs to go for broke with a major brand new stimulus package. No, it will not get passed. Let it be on the Republicans for blocking it weeks before an election on the economy. At this point the House is lost and the Senate is all but gone depending on who you ask. Exactly what does Obama lose politically by trying to pull out all the stops here? Conventional wisdom is that he's doomed anyway.
As Booman said, make the election the Obama stimulus package against Republicans doing nothing. Go down swinging at least.
Posts
13 comments:
Um why would we need another stimulus? The first one worked out so well didn't it?
("OMG IT COULDVE BEEN WORSE")
There's still ~30% left of the Obama Stimulus, let's spend that before going back to the well...
"At this point Obama needs to go for broke"
I'll admit, I laughed at this. He hasn't already?
No. He could do more. Our problems are solvable still.
Obama won't act now. Pessimistically, there are those who believe he's going to let the Dems go under in 2010 and fight back in 2012.
The problem of course is the in the intervening two year, the economy will not improve.
there are those who believe he's going to let the Dems go under in 2010 and fight back in 2012.
Isn't that going for broke? He's going to let his party get pummeled now in hopes to get re-elected. That's being a typical politician.
Move along no change to see here.
Also I just saw this over on Fark, it's fitting.
No, going for broke is fighting back now instead of waiting for later.
Conventional Wisdom is that the Dems have already lost Congress.
What does Obama have to lose now by trying to regain it?
Because hes writing off the election before it even happens. Guess he could have gave into Hillary since conventional wisdom said she would win.
His goal even if he knows he's going to lose seats is to fight for each and every seat if he really believes in Dems cause and their so called accomplishments, but instead you're thinking he is or should worry more about being re-elected.
You misunderstand me. Obama needs to motivate Democrats to keep Congress, and the best way to do that is a major new initiative to correct the economy.
This is what I mean by "go for broke". The alternative is to see the Democrats greatly diminished.
I really think it's too late. He could get a wish list from Paul Krugman and put forward every item on the list and the public wouldn't bite, because they don't understand economic ideas (e.g., why what he's done has been far too timid) -- they only know that nothing he's done seems to have improved their lives, so they simply won't trust him if he says that something else he wants to do will help.
You're most likely correct, Steve.
It doesn't mean he shouldn't try, that's all I'm saying.
wow, somebody mentioned kroog and wafflez didn't go all berserker over it. though there's still a couple of hours left in the workday...
Because why call for more spending when you haven't even spent all of what you asked for before?
There were a great number of items that were supposed to happen with this stimulus and it didn't.
Why have another helicopter dump water on the wildfire? We still have water left in the tank on this one.
Yes, the wildfire isn't out yet because we haven't used enough water in the first place to put out the fire, but we have to save fuel and water, you know.
Darn that President for trying to put the fire out. Wildfires burn out on their own, you know. We only have so much water.
Terrible analogy is terrible
if you have 819 gallons of water and still had ~245 gallons left why wouldn't you use it before going back for more? Simply because 819>245? To hell with the rest of the world and their deficit reductions, we will go it alone. Hmm..that sounds like someone that the left hates but I just can't put my finger on who...
Plus the wildfire is actually the spending, it's quite out of control.
Waffles, I'm a getting really tired of you deliberately misunderstanding the information presented, going off on your own interpretation of the facts at hand, and coming back days later just to declare victory as you "get the last word in".
The act is getting extraordinarily tiresome.
Post a Comment