Pethokoukis

Obama’s second term mandate won’t make it to Obama’s second term

I think my pal Jen Rubin is correct, Speaker Boehner and the House GOP have put President Obama and the Dems “in a box” with the Boehner Plan B to avoid a fiscal cliff. Rubin:

The White House is acting like it had no “plan B” in the “fiscal cliff” fight. Ever since House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he would put to a vote a measure to extend all current tax rates except those for households making more than $1 million, the president and his advisers have been apoplectic. How dare he offer something Senate Democrats once approved! Protect all but millionaires?! The Democrats’ ire is as intense as it is nonsensical, and Republicans are openly mocking the White House. … At any rate, the House will pass its bills and send them to the Senate. Poor Senate Dems will actually have to vote on something. This should be interesting to see what they come up with.

Political analyst Chris Krueger of the Washington Research Group neatly outlines the state of play:

The strategy is twofold: inoculate House Republicans for blame in a cliff dive on January 1 AND increase leverage in the negotiations. By passing Plan B, Boehner displays a strength of force by showing he has the support of his rank-and-file.

Furthermore, by taking the middle class tax hike threat off the table, the GOP can retake the negotiating high ground, dig new trenches, and apply maximum leverage on the debt ceiling and demand big spending cuts and entitlement reforms (so the theory goes.)

Good heavens, Obama’s second term mandate isn’t even making it to Obama’s second term. It is fading by the moment as the GOP makes huge concessions on taxes, while Obama dithers on spending cuts. And remember, it’s spending not tax revenue that is the main problem. Obama’s lack of skill as a negotiator is again becoming evident. Here is a great piece by Wall Street economist Robert Brusca:

Obama says: “It is very hard for them to say yes to me,” the president told a news conference. “At some point, you know, they’ve got to take me out of it.”

Question: who is being narcisistic about what here? This is a really crazy statement from a newly re-elected President who outpolled 23 past presidential elections in his popular vote margin of victory and lagged behind 26 then claimed he had a mandate.

Huh? That’s a middle of the pack mandate? Under his Mandate the Republicans ( who were returned to control of the House) were obliged to roll over and raise tax rates right on HIS formula.

While there was to be horse trading because it was a bargaining session, the President demanded hikes in tax rates. The fiscal cliff only needs about $608 billion in savings but the President insisted on $1.2 trillion in revenues from taxes and he claimed that could not be gotten from closing loop holes.

Then he took Social Security off the table. Then he insisted that a ‘pass’ on the Debt Ceiling be included in this deal.

What did he offer to the Republicans for all of these demands? BUPKIS! BUPKIS!

So when they stick stupid demands back in his face he takes it personal (see quote above) This man does not know how to negotiate and we know from the past four years he does not show very good leadership as he left the medical care negotiations to Pelosi and Reid.

So now he is stepping up and this is his idea of bargaining? I am SHOCKED by such an infantile approach. I hope we negotiate using better tactics with foreign countries.

16 thoughts on “Obama’s second term mandate won’t make it to Obama’s second term

  1. The problem with your argument is that Boehner has already made it clear he does not want any major spending cuts. He is now arguing that balanced means one dollar of spending cuts for a dollar of revenue, as opposed to the 3 or 4 for 1 he was arguing for last year. What good is negotiating leverage if he doesn’t intend to use it?

  2. The other problem with your argument is that voters can distinguish posturing from negotiating. Obama does not need a mandate. His reelection in a terrible job market — the first since FDR — was a vote against my-way-or-the-highway R tactics, AKA playing politics while the economy burns. There have been a string of wudda-cudda-shudda posts on this blog since 11-6. Boehner is working on yet another.

      • ” The republicans have damn little to brag about but Obama voters didn’t and still know nothing of Obama…”

        ha ha ha

        and your point is?

        that they would have elected the GOP?

        LORD! one would think that in normal times Obama would have rightly been a one term POTUS but the GOP managed to snatch defeat from the jaws….by their really dumb tactics.. and strategies.

        these guys did not deserve to win…

      • A CNN/Opinion Research poll out today says 53 percent think Rs are “too extreme.” On the question of who should compromise more on the cliff, 53 percent say the Rs. The “too extreme” answer in the current survey is first time it was a majority view. Stretching back to 2000, a majority saw the Rs as “generally mainstream.”
        http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/12/20/rel18c-1.pdf

        Which is to say, Juandos, the more they think like you, the less electable they are. Have a nice day!

  3. ” Furthermore, by taking the middle class tax hike threat off the table, the GOP can retake the negotiating high ground, dig new trenches, and apply maximum leverage on the debt ceiling and demand big spending cuts and entitlement reforms (so the theory goes.”

    Good LORD!

    These guys continue to be delusional!

    If the President rejects the proposal – taxes goes up on everyone so how does Plan B take it off the table?

    I’m coming to the view that the GOP is truly delusional about what the American people think verses what their base thinks and what they have to do to govern.

    You simple would not want them in charge of governance because it’s crystal clear they had absolutely no intention of representing all Americans.

    The GOP has gone haywire.

  4. I thought Pelosi said all the spending going through her House of Reps would be “paid for”. So why do we need to raise any taxes?
    Using the word “revenue” is totally dishonest. The only way to guarantee more “revenue” is to collect revenue then compare with what was expected. Then if the amount is lower than expected go and collect more. Raising taxes is not the same as raising revenue. The pirates/barbarians/democrats are only interested in punishing earners; not putting us on firm ground fiscally.

    • “So why do we need to raise any taxes?”

      because we have a 16 trillion debt and are adding to it at the rate of a trillion a year?

      We have this debt and the GOP refuses to deal with the reality that it’s part of the budget issue

      • Right, the GOP is saying cut spending; that to me sounds like they are trying to deal with it. Refactoring the tax code to allow more economic growth is another way to deal with the problem. Your reality isn’t real at all.

        • re: ” sounds like they are trying to deal with it. Refactoring the tax code to allow more economic growth is another way to deal with the problem. Your reality isn’t real at all.”

          cutting spending will get rid of your structural deficit but cutting spending won’t get rid of your debt. you have to come up with more money for that.

          “refactoring” the tax code to cause more growth is bogus to the bone if you don’t have a plan to deal with shortfalls if the predicted /hoped for growth is insufficient.

          that’s what happened before under Bush AND Reagan but the difference is that Reagan took responsibility for the shortfall and went back and upped taxes enough to pay for it.

          this GOP creates debt then disavows it.

          we need them in charge like we need a hole in our head.

  5. “cutting spending will get rid of your structural deficit but cutting spending won’t get rid of your debt. you have to come up with more money for that.”
    Part of the spending is debt service so I don’t get your point. You can cut spending enough to get rid of the deficit and reduce the debt.

    “that’s what happened before under Bush AND Reagan”
    The economy did grow but spending went up. Too much spending then as now.

    “this GOP creates debt then disavows it.
    we need them in charge like we need a hole in our head.”

    True, but the pirates/barbarian/democrats are much worse.

    • re:“this GOP creates debt then disavows it.
      we need them in charge like we need a hole in our head.”

      True, but the pirates/barbarian/democrats are much worse.

      not under Reagan and Clinton.

      the Dems have always been tax &spenders except for the Blue Dogs and we always depended on the GOP to pull things back together – the adults in the budget room but no more.

      they are feckless . They helped to create the 16 trillion debt under Bush and now they disavow it and refuse to recognize that it has to be paid for and that’s going to take taxes to do it.

      they’ve become just plumb irresponsible.

  6. “Hoist with your own petard”

    In medieval France, injured by your own pole-borne bomb meant to blow open doors and gates.

    In the United States, jerrymandered “safe” Republican House districts that assure whomever wins over the crazies in the Primary will win the seat.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>