I think that graph in the link showing the recovery coincidentally seizing up each time the debt issue resurfaced and congress speaks for itself about how good this level of rhetoric is.
I think you have to look at it all in the context of politics and the fact that most of these people either project or actually believe that Obama is the problem, and doing this is going to help rid the problem.
That's always been a shitty cop out by Republicans. They aren't the first Congress to not like the opposing party's sitting president and other Congresses managed to function according to their Constitutional duties. Stating your purpose as a political party to make sure the other side isn't in power is a disgrace to our system of government. If they don't like Obama's actions, then they should realize they are part of the the branch of government that actually makes laws, get off their asses and do their job.
Sure, but if Obama gets a second term, are they just going to drag their feet for four more years? Again, I'm certainly not voting for Obama, but I'm not so convinced this strategy is going to pay off when the election rolls around. What would you say the odds of Obama winning in November?
I'd say it's 50-50 right now. If Obama wins, I think they will have to change their operating procedure.
No, that would require them actually coming up with a counter proposal to the Obama plan. Voting against a law is not doing anything but showing up and pushing a button. Making laws actually requires some kind of creative effect. There's also much more than just health care they could be taking up which they aren't doing because they feel sitting on their asses is the best way to keep their asses in Washington. You could argue, yes, that they are "smart" in a way, if they are successful in keeping their jobs with this strategy. However, this strategy also clearly marks them as the exact type of horrible, possibly worst ever, Congress the article is portraying them as.
They could come up with 1000 counter proposals to Obama's plan and the Dems wouldn't vote for it. That's where the blame ends up evening out on this issue.
Let's survey the latest polls and news stories and see if that's accurate, Jew. Rasmussen Tracking Poll: Romney +3 Washington Times: Romney +1 ABC News/Washington Post: Tied Gallup Tracking: Obama +2 Quinnipiac: Obama +3 McClatchy/Marist: Obama +2 Dead Heat in Vote Preferences Presages an Epic Battle Ahead - ABC News Gallup Says Obama, Romney in 'Dead Heat' Poll: Obama, Romney in dead heat - The Washington Post Obama-Romney race dead heat in new CNN Poll of Polls – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs Obama, Romney Toe to Toe - WSJ.com Obama, Romney Toe to Toe - WSJ.com So, I think we can conclude that Jew's full of shit on this one.
If that's giving Florida to Obama, that's probably true. It's basically also a statistical dead heat there.
I don't think that Jewie goes far enough in his prognostication. I think that it's more like 98/2 that Obama wins. And the odds might get worse than that, as we draw closer to November. Romney is going to win a couple of swing state, but let's be clear - the issue of the election will never be in serious doubt beyond 9:15pm EST on election night. More simply - there is a ZERO PERCENT chance that Romney beats Obama. ZERO. In fact, there is a greater chance that Dewey beats him, than Romney. I don't care one whit what polling numbers show, or what the talking heads on television spew (you know, their only goal is simply to keep you watching, right?) - it isn't going to happen. In the recent history of modern politics, the thrashing that Romney is about to take may end up being second only to Mondale's (recall, he had a few blips of hope in the summer before the election, too).
