Can naysayers please explain how you would get R's to support middle class cuts without compromise.

[RBInMaine]

Remember, they have already voted it down once, and soon they take the House and more Senate seats. So please explain how you would actually get your position PASSED. Can't wait for he responses.

[Aramchek]

1. that's the benefit of being a naysayer, you never have to explain anything. just scream louder.

[RBInMaine]

2. Yup.

[Clio the Leo]

41. exactly nt

[Davis_X_Machina]

3. Sheer force of will...

...and the moral correctness of their position.

Works every time.

[Aramchek]

7. it would be nice if we lived in your fantasy world. but we don't.

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. I left out...

....ObamabullypulpitFDRarmtwistingJFKcommittechairsLBJprimarychallengersHST!

And giant puppets, with papier-mache heads.

[Vincardog]

4. TAX CUTS are THEIR solutions to everything. Why should I have to get them to support their own

policies? Fuck TAX CUTS lets pass Legislations to create JOBS.

[txlibdem]

36. Legislation that creates JOBS? The WPA

The WPA, which stands for Works Progress Administration, employed millions of people and would have kick started the consumer economy. If consumer spending had been 70% of the economy as it is today it would have been the only thing needed. But since consumer spending by the poor and middle class was at that time a tiny percentage of the total economy, more stimulus spending was needed. Such would not be the case today.

Everyone start writing and calling your congress critters and the Pres. to restart the Works Progress Administration and get Americans back to work!

[ingac70]

5. They aren't going to support anything....

unless it puts the US in a worse situation and undermines Social Security, so just let it all expire. No compromise.

[ZombieHorde]

38. What about the people on unemployment?

Do you trust the Republicans to do the right thing? I don't.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Little Star]

9. +1

[ingac70]

10. +1

[Aramchek]

14. oh, really?? please do lay it all out for us.

how do tax cuts for only the middle class get passed?

[CitizenLeft]

8. I'd like to see those responses too.

Fight! Fight fight fight fight fight!

With WHAT? The same president they've been demeaning and denigrating and insulting and dismissing as weak suddenly has the power to persuade Republicans - the single solitary body of people who hate him MORE than they do - to do what they - AND HE - wants.

[niceypoo]

11. By standing up to them

Which will never happen under this president.

[shellgame26]

35. Oh Good! Nice and vague

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. The uncomfortable answer is that maybe you can't.

For me, the high-end tax cuts are anathema to progressive policies so I'm "okay" with that.



eta: "high-end"

[iamjoy]

13. It Should Have Been Done Already

it should have been done as a campaign issue - before the election. Or, you run ads in districts with representatives opposed to it telling people to call their representative and ask them to vote for the bill. Candidate Obama ran a kick-butt campaign. President Obama needs to realize that campaigning is part of governing.

And you don't say that you aren't going to negotiate with hostage takers and then negotiate with hostage takers.

You say from the beginning that Democrats care more about the American people.

Democrats are willing to place principle (helping the American people) ahead of politics, Republicans will let the American people suffer for their own political gain.

and if it's December, you call John Bohner and Mitch McConneel a couple of Grinches who are stealing Christmas from middle class Americans. I'm sure there's a Scrooge comparison to be found as well..

[Aramchek]

16. so, we punish people until the Repukes relent?? you really don't know who we're dealing with, huh?

[iamjoy]

24. No, We Don't

that's what I'm saying. But it should have been a lot more of a campaign issue than it was. And it should have been one before the election.

So, ultimately, I am not upset with the Democrats capitulating as they really had no choice. I'm upset about the messaging. And I do think if we'd campaigned on it harder, there may have been a choice, but that ship has now sailed and we have to take the rickety boat that's left at the dock. Now, if we'd gotten there a little earlier...

[Aramchek]

26. Obama tried to do that. Congress said no.

[ZombieHorde]

39. Dems are ridiculously horrible at messaging. They seem to have no concept of marketing. nt

[mtnsnake]

15. Simple. Stand your ground. Threaten to let ALL of Bush's tax cuts expire

and you'd see them changing their tune. If they still refuse to go along, then STILL stand our ground, do what's best for the country and let the cuts expire. Then next year you get to work and start real programs that will benefit the middle class, and when the elections come up, the voters will know that it was the Republicans who are most responsible for bad things that happened, tax wise or otherwise.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. Naysayer!

:grr:

[hlthe2b]

19. You, know, while you may not agree that the poster...

they did try to engage in constructive discussion. Do you really find this reply to be helpful?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

28. Uhm, I agree almost totally with that post.

[hlthe2b]

29. Oh, your "mad" emoticon confused me... n/t

[ProSense]

23. You think Republicans

care if the cuts expire and Democrats get the blame?

Threaten to let ALL of Bush's tax cuts expire and you'd see them changing their tune. If they still refuse to go along, then STILL stand our ground, do what's best for the country and let the cuts expire. Then next year you get to work and start real programs that will benefit the middle class, and when the elections come up, the voters will know that it was the Republicans who are most responsible for bad things that happened, tax wise or otherwise.

Such as? Does this involve Congress?

As I said before, Democrats could have held the tax cut vote prior to the election. The House rejected that strategy. Now, it's time to deal, and the best they can do is be upset by the deal.

Not holding the vote before the election was likely a fine strategy for the House because, after the election, they did pass the middle-class tax cuts only.

The problem is that before the bill goes to the President, it has to pass the Senate, which last Saturday was unable to pass the middle-class tax cut only (four Democrats voted against. Even when they raised the threshold to $1 million it failed with five Democrats voting against it.

A better strategy, if they wanted a deal at this late stage, would have been to try to identify what a better deal would look like to gain the votes needed in the Senate.

So Congress has to either negotiate a better deal now or later.

Later, means the deal will be negotiated by Republicans. They will not need a single Democratic vote in the House, and there will be five more Republicans in the Senate.

They will ensure that all the things that are currently being held hostage by them are still held hostage in the next Congress.

They will negotiate a deal that includes more tax cuts for the rich, middle class tax cuts, a lesser deal for the unemployed and none of the stimulus provisions.

The President will have to sign or veto a bill with relief for the middle class and unemployed. It's unlikely that the GOP will change their package to accommodate the President and Democrats when they are the majority in the House.

Republicans are assholes, and they are not going to act otherwise. This is not shut the government down, this is about tax cuts for the middle class and stimulus provisions. Any package that Republicans negotiate will be accepted by Americans as "the best we can do," especially when they are calling the shots in Congress.

The Democratic Congress needs to make the deal better now because it's unlikely to get better in the next Congress.

[mtnsnake]

25. It's only YOUR opinion that Democrats will get the blame, not everyone's opinion

There are more than a few experts who think it's the Republicans who will get the blame if middle class tax cuts are not extended by virtue of us sticking to our guns for once in our lives. How about we do what's right for this country by not letting the rich continue getting their OBSCENE handouts regardless of the political consequences?

[ProSense]

27. It's your opinion that they want the middle class tax cuts to expire.

They don't. Senator's Brown and Sanders said as much.

[ZombieHorde]

40. What about the unemployed? Having one's benefits expire, especially during the winter holidays, is

really bad.

[redirish28]

18. Simple. I have 2 ways of doing it.

I'd ask the repugs if they wanted to do things the easy way.


Follow what the majority of people polled who say they don't want these Tax cuts for the wealthy and want unemployment extended


Or I'd say you can do it the hard way.


Invite the Republican leadership to the White House for a "sit down talk" and once the republicans get there explained that THEY have to convince a panel of people I -as president-convene.

This panel would include TRUE average Americans working 2 jobs to make ends meet. 99ers who the republicans calls lazy welfare cheats. College students who just graduated and can't find a job.
People who only get paid the Fed min wage and can't afford health care benefits.


I would then locked the door and let the two sides talk it out for an hour (though I think 15 minutes would yield a MUCH better and quicker "compromise".

[zipplewrath]

20. Mostly by finding their holy grail

They want things just as the president does. Ultimately, they would have been forced as well.

This really isn't about the GOP. It's about conservative democrats that use the GOP. You watch, this will get passed because of a large number of GOP votes and only enough dems to pass it.

Obama's continued willingness to provide political cover for his blue dog friends is what makes all of this possible. And in fact much of this was due to Pelosi not willing to work with the GOP and the White House. So they just went ahead without her.

[Warren Stupidity]

21. I'm now convinced that capitulation is the best strategy.

thank you for your efforts to make this clear. Before, I stupidly thought our party ought to fight and stand its ground, now I've seen the light.

[niceypoo]

31. +++++++++++ 10,0000000000000000000000

[Stargleamer]

30. They will support them, as long as the Rich get them too

What should have been done is to have made them filibuster--so Americans could see how obstructionist they are. Make them pay political costs for their greed.

Don't capitulate to them!!!!

[budkin]

32. You let them expire completely. The end.

[Vinnie From Indy]

33. The OP displays a gargantuan ignorance of politics

The simple answer is to mount a political fight that makes it in the best interest of some GOP'ers to support the legislation. One aspect of a fight like this is to ACTUALLY fight. The facts are clear! Obama delayed having this fight by HIS choice soon after taking office. In addition, just as with HCR and the public option, this President did not mount anything remotely resembling a PUBLIC campaign to roll back these tax ciuts. There was no major effort to have Obama people push for a roll back on TV or in speeches across the country. There simply was no real committment to mounting a public campaign. Without that, there was no chance to get a few GOP'ers to vote for it.

In short, the OP wants the reader to assume that a "good fight" was made and lost. There wasn't! That is simply rewriting history. I hope all DU'ers understand this and take a moment to review the trajectory of this issue.

[Davis_X_Machina]

37. This strikes me...

.."The simple answer is to mount a political fight that makes it in the best interest of some GOP'ers to support the legislation" as the statement of someone who doesn't read the newspapers.

Dude, the GOP just stonewalled medical assistance for 9/11 workers injured in the response and recovery and clean-up.

They just stonewalled the Defense budget, for chrissakes, because of DADT. Our brave warriors' lifeline -- and the lifeline of our precious defense contractors -- two GOP sacred cows.

In the real world, there is no 'political fight that makes it in the best interest of some GOP'ers to support the legislation.'

[golfguru]

34. easy explanation...

Naysayers first priority is to penalize the 2% top earners.
Nothing else is as important, including any projected effect on employment
for common & ordinary working people.

I can't find any other explanation.

In the middle of this deep recession, where common & ordinary people
are hurting due to lack of jobs and about to expire unemployment benefits,
the president made the only right decision, a bi-partisan COMPROMISE.

By definition, extreme partisans on either side will not like anything bi-partisan.

[ProudDad]

42. Already have, unrec...