by zzyzzx follow (9)
Comments 1 - 9 of 9 Search these comments
I have to say, Obama turns out to be quite reasonable, at least compared to his pre-election rhetorics.
That said, I think different parties ought to control the congress and the White House. Think Gingrich and Clinton. It was wonderful.
My God. You really think it makes a difference? What flavor is that Kool-aid?
Yep - looking at these charts, its clear that the Sex/Drugs/Rock and Roll were a great era, that Cadillac Welfare is better than R&D and Manufacturing, and the CRA and related low cost loans worked out great.
We need more Social Justice, more Welfare, more Public Sector Unions, More Lawyers, More Bureaucrats, more Hope and Change!
Blaming Obama when the electorate already neutered the Democrats by giving the GOP the Houise FOUR YEARS AGO is silly.
Of course, that's all we can expect from conservatives these days, silliness.
The Dems did what they could 2007-2010, in the few months they had control of all power levers in DC (minus SCOTUS of course).
It is true that job growth, even our déclassé New Economy jobs, isn't keeping up with population growth.

contrasts full-time employment (blue) with the growth in age 25-64 population (red)
78% ratio is the long-term trend but we're 10 million jobs under that now.
Conservatives can't have any solutions since it's their policy preferences that have gotten us here.
Going to be a shitty decade most likely, worse than the last.
The post dotcom Bush recovery lasted but 4 years, wonder how much more we've got left in this one.

Maybe Obama can take up Victor Ashe's mantle, and fuck the next Republican President in the ass in the oval office.
At least he would know when to pull out.
I don't think the electorate likes republicans. They are just going around kissing toads-hoping to find a prince. Unfortunately for us, we only have two frogs and no prince.
APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says
The guy who spent a lot of his young adult life with his dick in W's ass was VICTOR Ashe. Arthur was a tragic tennis player who had the good sense not to fuck W in the ass.
Edited for historical accuracy.
Nothing like getting rid of one group of ASSHOLES & replacing them with another group of ASSHOLES.
http://www3.blogs.rollcall.com/rothenblog/obama-poised-to-set-new-midterm-loss-record/
President Barack Obama is about to do what no president has done in the past 50 years: Have two horrible, terrible, awful midterm elections in a row.
In fact, Obama is likely to have the worst midterm numbers of any two-term president going back to Democrat Harry S. Truman.
Truman lost a total of 83 House seats during his two midterms (55 seats in 1946 and 28 seats in 1950), while Republican Dwight Eisenhower lost a combined 66 House seats in the 1954 and 1958 midterms.
Obama had one midterm where his party lost 63 House seats, and Democrats are expected to lose another 5 to possibly 12 House seats (or more), taking the sitting president's total midterm House loses to the 68 seat to 75 seat range.
Most recent presidents have one disastrous midterm and another midterm that was not terrible.
The GOP lost 30 House seats in George W. Bush's second midterm, but gained 8 seats in his first midterm for a net loss of 22 seats. The party lost 26 seats in Ronald Reagan's first midterm, but a mere 5 seats in his second midterm for a net loss of 31 seats.
Democrats got shellacked in 1994, losing 54 seats in Bill Clinton's first midterm, but the party gained 5 House seats in 1998, Clinton's six-year-itch election, for a net Clinton loss of 49 House seats. (The figures don't include special elections during a president's term.)
Looking at Senate losses, Republicans lost a net of 5 seats in George W. Bush's two midterms, while Republicans lost a net of 7 seats during Ronald Reagan's two midterms and Democrats lost a net of 8 seats during Bill Clinton's two midterms. (Again, these numbers do not reflect party switches or special elections.)
Democrats have a chance to tie the number of Senate losses that Republicans suffered during the midterms of Eisenhower, when the GOP lost a net of 13 Senate seats (12 in 1958 and only one in 1954).
Democrats lost 6 Senate seats in 2010 and seem likely to lose from 5 to as many as 10 seats next week. That would add up to Obama midterm Senate losses of from 11 seats to as many as 16 seats.
Democrats will likely not exceed the number of Senate losses they incurred during the two Truman midterms, in 1946 and 1950, when the party lost a remarkable net of 17 seats.
Are the Democrats' losses due to the increasingly partisan nature of our elections and the makeup of the past two Senate classes, or is the president at least partially to blame because he failed to show leadership on key issues and never successfully moved to the political center?
The answer, most obviously, is, “Yes.”
#politics