Out of the Past

I never expected this new administration to bring less bailouts, I think we are going to see more. I don't think anyone is shocked Agreed. Just think, though, if GM fails: that's 5 million jobs down the drain. Think about the broader consequences. I don't like bailouts, but I think they may be necessary now to avoid a total economic meltdown. Unless they deal with their unsustainable cost structures bailing them out is simply postponing the inevitable and it's kind of like flushing money down the toilet.

I'm with Harrington on this one. I never agreed with the "Stand behind your President" guys when Bush was in power and I don't expect that now, but to hope that your President will fail is to hope that your country will fail. Not necessarily true. For example I hope he fails in turning Social Security into an entitlement program and I hope he fails in bailing out the auto industry and I hope he fails in stuffing the federal courts with liberal judicial activists. If he fails in all those things we'll be better of.

I don't stand behind him and I don't wish him good luck unless he's doing soemthing I agree with and I don't think that's likely to happen very often. His first week as the President elect was not a good one. So, wait, you don't wish him good luck as president? Does that mean that if he does something you don't agree with that is good for the country you won't be happy? If he tries to do something that is good for the country I would agree with him and I would wish him luck but I don't think the overwhelming majority of his policies will be good for the country so I'll disagree with them (the bad ones) and will hope he fails in his efforts to implement them.

I don't stand behind him and I don't wish him good luck unless he's doing soemthing I agree with and I don't think that's likely to happen very often. His first week as the President elect was not a good one.

The "bitter" comment wasn't meant to divide. It was a gaffe. Are you seriously thinking Obama made such a comment for the purpose of gaining votes?????????? He probably lost votes. The bitter comment was made in what he thought was a private setting and that carries far more weight than anything he says in public. It was a divisive comment and I don't think it was a gaffe. I think he spoke how he feels.

I don't ever recall a Democrat talking about the "Real America". Is that worse than the former chairman of the Democratic party laughing about a potential Katrina 2.0 slamming into New Orleans just in time to disrupt the GOP convention?

For the GOP to survive they need to move to the right on fiscal issues by cutting spending and entitlements and by cutting income taxes on those that pay income taxes and by balancing the budget. If minorities share the GOP's principles then they'll join but if they don't share those principles then let them go. The GOP should not compromise it's principles to mine for votes. It's my opinion that if the GOP returns to the principles I mentioned above that the GOP will return to good health. My point was that it's okay being conservative on fiscal issues but that it has to take a dramatic turn in other areas, most notably the party's anti-immigrant platform and inclination to win elections by dividing Americans. It can be fiscally conservative all it wants and it won't get any increased support from important groups if it continues to bash immigrants, etc. If you think the party will thrive simply by staying fiscally conservative you have another thing coming to you. The GOP should oppose amnesty and should be in favor of securing the borders. I guess this is not popular among many hispanics but it's the right thing to do. Again, the GOP should not compromise it's principles for special interest votes. What do you mean by amnesty? I'm all in favor of an end to subsidizing immigration (among other things), but I do think it's rather counter productive to American businesses to deport the labor force for which there clearly is a demand. The anti-immigrant sentiment prevalent in the GOP today appears (to me) to be more a facet of protectionism than any sort of commitment to "the law". After all, we rewrite the law all the time in this country, so I think we need a more sensible argument for why you want to throw non-violent migrant workers out of the country than just saying "it's the law". A path to citizenship. I wouldn't deport everyone. I would allow those who have being here for many years and who are contributors to our society to remain but wouldn't grant them citizenship and would deport criminals and the ones who depend on public assistance.

4. Only in America......do people order double cheese burgers, large fries, and a diet Coke. I do that all the time except it's water. I would rather eat my calories than drink them.. more enjoyable and filling plus water with lemon tastes pretty good.

For the GOP to survive they need to move to the right on fiscal issues by cutting spending and entitlements and by cutting income taxes on those that pay income taxes and by balancing the budget. If minorities share the GOP's principles then they'll join but if they don't share those principles then let them go. The GOP should not compromise it's principles to mine for votes. It's my opinion that if the GOP returns to the principles I mentioned above that the GOP will return to good health. My point was that it's okay being conservative on fiscal issues but that it has to take a dramatic turn in other areas, most notably the party's anti-immigrant platform and inclination to win elections by dividing Americans. It can be fiscally conservative all it wants and it won't get any increased support from important groups if it continues to bash immigrants, etc. If you think the party will thrive simply by staying fiscally conservative you have another thing coming to you. The GOP should oppose amnesty and should be in favor of securing the borders. I guess this is not popular among many hispanics but it's the right thing to do. Again, the GOP should not compromise it's principles for special interest votes.

Not that I am in favor of this plan, but I wouldn't mind seeing the GOP run on a platform of completely eliminating the IRS and reforming the tax code by switching to a fair or flat tax. Combine this with reduced spending and budget planning and I could see a lot of people rallying around something like this. I would support a flat tax or even a tax with two or three slightly progressive rates. We need to get rid of all the special interest deductions.

For the GOP to survive they need to move to the right on fiscal issues by cutting spending and entitlements and by cutting income taxes on those that pay income taxes and by balancing the budget. If minorities share the GOP's principles then they'll join but if they don't share those principles then let them go. The GOP should not compromise it's principles to mine for votes. It's my opinion that if the GOP returns to the principles I mentioned above that the GOP will return to good health.

When I posted it the RCP average was in a downward trend and was down to low 5s but unfortunately things turned for the worse and it ended at 7.8%. Obama did overpoll by 1.4%.

Now that we're talking running for office, I'm also planning a bid for one of the Commissioner slots in the city of Miami for 2011. My problem so far has been that most of the people backing me are Democrats and I need some Republicans and Independents as well, as I don't want to be lumped into any one ideological group. Depending on the area you'll be representing, Democrats might be enough. I think you can be a Democrat and get elected anywhere in the City of Miami. I'm not 100% positive on this but I think Ferre, Suarez, Carrolo and Diaz are all Democrats or were at one time or another. I'm not sure about Clark. Those are all the mayors the last 30 years.

I guess I came close on the House and Senate but things definitely turned for the worse after I posted my presidential prediction. I always place the most value on Rasmussen and I should have stuck with him.

I don 't know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, "We must broaden the base of our party"?when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents. A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way. - Ronald Regan I think there is a lot of truth to that. I hope the Rep party doesn't redefine itself in a way that lose their identity and core values in order to 'broaden' their appeal Exactly... but do you want the GOP to do something to attract Hispanics? read that quote again... I said reach out, not change the core values...If border republicans don't like it due to race, then "let them go their way...." I don't think your "reaching out" comment is consistent with the Reagan quote but maybe I misunderstood what you meant by reaching out. What do you mean by reaching out?

When DJK wrote about the percent of people in the US that didn't vote for Obama I think he was talking about the percent of people in the US that didn't vote for Obama. I have no idea how anyone can come to a different conclusion.

Death bed? Last I saw 49 percent of the people in the US didn't vote for Obama. 46 percent 48 percent. 46.3. You have reading comprehension or math problems or both..

Competency? What do you mean by that? Bush was incompetent at nearly every single turn. So he thinks Obama should just be competent. Bush was so disastrous that we just now hope for presidents that don't mess up. I imagine that's what he meant but he did vote for Bush in '04 so why would someone vote for someone that's incompetent? That's why I asked the question. I'm curious. You can ask the millions of others that voted for Bush in 04. I had my reasons back then. I thought he was better than Kerry for the job and I still feel that way. I don't understand why millions who voted for him in '04 view him as incompetent now or even hate him.

I don 't know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, "We must broaden the base of our party"?when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents. A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers. I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.- Ronald Regan I think there is a lot of truth to that. I hope the Rep party doesn't redefine itself in a way that lose their identity and core values in order to 'broaden' their appeal Exactly... but do you want the GOP to do something to attract Hispanics?

Death bed? Last I saw 49 percent of the people in the US didn't vote for Obama. 46 percent 48 percent.

Secretary of Education - Bill Ayers

Competency? What do you mean by that? Bush was incompetent at nearly every single turn. So he thinks Obama should just be competent. Bush was so disastrous that we just now hope for presidents that don't mess up. I imagine that's what he meant but he did vote for Bush in '04 so why would someone vote for someone that's incompetent? That's why I asked the question. I'm curious.

They have to reach out to more voters - they can't continue being an undiverse party. And they have to stop being so extremist on the social issues and such war hawks. I think fiscal conservatism appeals to a lot of voters still, but I think people are tired of the politicis of division and fear. So, in sum, become more liberal on the social issues, stop trying to divide people, and stop being so hawkish. The major social issues are abortion and same-sex marriage. I think the country is pretty much split 50-50 on these issues and probaly leans a but to the right if anything. The country leans a bit to the left on abortion and a bit more than that to the right on same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage amendments passed in California and Florida and California is one of the most left leaning states. In Florida even in Broward county which is as liberal a place as you'll find the amendment got over 50%. The GOP's problems are not caused by social issues. The Republican party is on its death bed. As soon as the under 35 crowd becomes the 35-60 crowd (10-15 years) and constitutes a much bigger proportion of total voters, this country will no longer lean to the right on social issues. Obama won the under 35 vote about 65-30. The vast majority of under 35's are Democrats. If the Republican party hopes to be around in 15 years as a legitimate political party, it's got to start moving to the left on the social issues. I think the question was aimed towards what the Republican party should do in the next 10, 15, 20 years. I think the Republican party as it currently stands is gone for good. I also think fiscal conservatism appeals to a lot of voters, both young and old, so I think they're good with that. If you think the Republican party can survive on their current social and cultural platforms as the under 35 crowd ages, you're sadly mistaken. I don't know how young voters stand on the social issues but as I said before the social issues played no part in this election. The fact that young voters supported Obama means very little in determining where they'll be as they age because young voters tend to drift towards the GOP as they grow older and their family responsabilities increase. It's easy to favor entitlement programs when the funding of those progranms doesn't impact you but it's another thing to support those entitlements when their funding takes money away from your money that you would rather spend on your kids or on a bigegr house or your retirement.

Competency? What do you mean by that?

They have to reach out to more voters - they can't continue being an undiverse party. And they have to stop being so extremist on the social issues and such war hawks. I think fiscal conservatism appeals to a lot of voters still, but I think people are tired of the politicis of division and fear. So, in sum, become more liberal on the social issues, stop trying to divide people, and stop being so hawkish. The major social issues are abortion and same-sex marriage. I think the country is pretty much split 50-50 on these issues and probaly leans a but to the right if anything. The country leans a bit to the left on abortion and a bit more than that to the right on same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage amendments passed in California and Florida and California is one of the most left leaning states. In Florida even in Broward county which is as liberal a place as you'll find the amendment got over 50%. The GOP's problems are not caused by social issues.