The Back Alley Archives

whether it's obama or mccain, the next POTUS will have an interesting first 2 years for obvious reasons...what will be inevitable are failed mandates, unpopular decisions, and/or broken promises....we know this...we also know that the next POTUS has a built in excuse as to why his first 2 years were failed imho...the next POTUS can blame the prior administration...it happens all the time.

canada is so fucked up in that they'll have federal elections every 18 months if need be...if the ruling government is deemed to have lost the confidence of the country, they go straight to the polls...and inevitably, the next one coming in has a built in excuse as to why his administration was such a fucked one.

so if mccain wins, he's going to blame having to overcome the democratic led congress the last 2 years and their bi-partisan ways.
if obama wins, he's going to blame 8 years of bush and 8 years of corporate excesses and inequities.




which begs the question, should presidential terms be increased from 4 to 6? or maybe 8?

NO! I think 4 is fine...you talk about the first two years, but what about the last two years? And I really think one of the thing that keeps a POTUS honest is that in his first term he's shooting for a second one...and in his last term, he wants to go out on the good side of history.

I'll be surprised if whomever wins, gets re-elected. The tough times ahead will make it difficult to get re-elected IMO.

I'll be surprised if whomever wins, gets re-elected. The tough times ahead will make it difficult to get re-elected IMO.

well that's what i'm sayin...does the next POTUS get a fair chance to lead?

I'll play the other side. I mean, I agree with Todd. I guess we're finally gonna elect a brother, but we're giving him a janitor's job.

He doesn't get a fair shake. He does start from a really lousy position -- that's a bipartisan lousy. The cupboard is bare. The nation is in recession. The deficit is unheard of.

This is a little like the guy who walks in and takes over a 1-10 team -- if he can go 5-6, hell, let's keep him around for a while.

I will say this as a Democrat: we don't have good leadership in Congress, either side. The partisan bitchery there has made it unlikely that America can respect a leader in a bipartisan way, and that is an enormous loss. And there's nobody seizing the opportunity. Nancy Pelosi, bless her soul, ain't the answer.

don't you love it when conversation is constructive and devoid of name calling?

I'll play the other side. I mean, I agree with Todd. I guess we're finally gonna elect a brother, but we're giving him a janitor's job.

He doesn't get a fair shake. He does start from a really lousy position -- that's a bipartisan lousy. The cupboard is bare. The nation is in recession. The deficit is unheard of.

This is a little like the guy who walks in and takes over a 1-10 team -- if he can go 5-6, hell, let's keep him around for a while.

I will say this as a Democrat: we don't have good leadership in Congress, either side. The partisan bitchery there has made it unlikely that America can respect a leader in a bipartisan way, and that is an enormous loss. And there's nobody seizing the opportunity. Nancy Pelosi, bless her soul, ain't the answer.

But it also grants him the opportunity to go down as one of the greats if things turn around (with or without his help)...

With that said, and in the undying spirit of bipartisanship and substantive discussion, let me just add that Radbag is an asshat.

lol

A CORRUPT asshat.

LOLOL! You forgot to question his patriotism too. Isn't Rad our cult leader as well?

I think a lot depends on the situation. How big will Obama's win be, and what will the makeup of the Senate look like.

One of W's biggest faults, and there are many here, was that fact that he governed like he won some super Reagan style mandate, when he didn't. Turd Blossom Rove also perfected the 50% +1 strategy, which effectively meant that they didn't care about building consensus. And they didn't. That is interesting since I lived in TX when W was governor, and he wasn't a partisan asshole in that job. The thing about the job of Texas Governor is that it is an intentionally designed weak position. The Governor can sign bills and call Special Sessions, but that is about it.

That is one of the many reasons I can't stand W. Effectively he didn't give a shit about my views or the views of anyone else that wasn't in the 50% +1.

Based on everythign I have read about Obama, he is a consensus builder. McCain in 2000 might have been, but there is no way he would be now. He can't afford to lose his base.

I wanted McCain to find a new base in the Republican party that catered more toward fiscal conservatism vs moral conservatism. He may as well be good for that but in picking Palin as his running mate, he made it clear to me that he was going to stick to what the GOP has been doing since Ronnie was in the White House, pandering to the moral minority. I was all for McCain 2000. Eight years later he's a different dude.

Exactly. He sold his soul to people he once called agents of intolerance in order to win. He is a different man than he was in 2000.

Whoever wins, my advice to them is to blame Greenspan.

^^That is already in their inauguration speeches.

From Slider:

Based on everythign I have read about Obama, he is a consensus builder.

Slider, where do you get that? He has never gone against his party or even took a stand against his party in favor of going to the center? He's the most liberal senator even beating out an admitted socialist (Sanders). What makes you think he'd be good at building a consensus?

Actually, I think I can answer it for you. I DO think that his ambition will win out over his ideology and thus, I DO think he will be forced to make some more center decisions and likely piss off some of his past far left croanies. I think he will do this because he has done it in the past. Whenever one of his past left-wing crazy associations started threatening his campaign, he just disassociated with them...he has no problem cutting them loose in favor of making sure he's got the Presidency. So actually, that's a good thing in my view.

As opposed to the maverick that voted with his party and his president 90% of the time? Is he the consensus builder you are pinning your hopes on, Allison?

Do you know how many times he did not agree with Bush? And also, have you seen the number of bills he worked on that included a Democrat on it? Feingold, Kennedy, etc.? Everyone seems to forget that McCain used to be the Dems FAVORITE Republican and then "heaven forbid" he picked a running mate that rallied up his base. Personally, I don't think he's conservative enough and I think his biggest mistake in this campaign was supporting the bailout. If he had stood up with the House Republicans and at least voted "no", I think a whole lot of things would different for him.

But that's my opinion...I'm not saying I'm right, it's just my opinion. And also, I'm not of the camp that blaims Bush for all the evil in the world...sorry, I'm just not.

McCain is not the same man that he once was. Even the staunchest republicans admit that.

what qualifies someone to be the most liberal or most conservative member of congress? I always thought Teddy was supposed to be the most liberal.

McCain is not the same man that he once was. Even the staunchest republicans admit that.

The staunchest republicans still hate the guy. That's not some big admission. They think he's better than Obama, which is the only reason they are supporting him.

Maybe because the staunchest republicans remember what made the republican party great years ago.

What is the main reason, just one, that you are voting for McCain? Your single biggest issue that seperates him from Obama.

I trust him.

Is he babysitting your kids on the weekends? I am not exactly sure what you mean by that.

You don't know what "I trust him" means? Really? It's a wonder you aren't married! LOL. I trust him...I think he will make decisions based on what is best to protect the people and consitution of this country. Do I expect him to always be 100% right, no (see my comment on his decision to support the bailout), but I do think he is 100% dedicated to this country and it's people.

Where do you think Obama's dedication is?

As for the constitution, it isn't worth the paper it was printed on anymore. Politicians from both sides of the aisle have trampled on our freedoms that were guaranteed under the constitution so much that you can't read the writing on it anymore.