Quote:
Originally Posted by MMM
Wow, it feels like 2009 all over again.
Dark I am curious what inspired you to post this. It comes from The New Ledger, a group of right wing writers.
If 68% of people said they were not going to vote for incumbents, then no incumbents would be re-elected. We all know that isn't the case.
Here is the question as it was asked by FOX/AP:
If American voters only had the following two choices on the Congressional ballot -- keep all current lawmakers in office, or get rid of all incumbents in Congress -- what would they do?
A new Fox News poll asked that question, and the answer could be bad news for incumbents this fall.
Sixty-eight percent of voters would oust all incumbents, while 20 percent would keep all lawmakers in office.
FOXNews.com - Fox News Poll: 68% Say Vote Out All Incumbents
That is VERY different than saying they plan on not voting for incumbents in coming elections.
When asked if people would think incumbents should be voted out, the majority will say "yes". Ask them if they think THEIR state's representatives shouldn't be re-elected and then the numbers change dramatically. People think OTHER states' bums should be tossed out, but not usually their own.
This is also true of health care reform (or more accurately, health insurance reform).
When asked if people support "ObamaCare" or whatever you want to call it, the majority say "no". But when asked about individual aspects of the bill, the majority do support it. (i.e. Do you support insurance companies not being allowed to deny benefits because of pre-existing conditions?)
FT.com / UK - Final push as data show bill will cut deficit
The chances of President Barack Obama's healthcare legislation being passed this weekend brightened yesterday, when the independent Congressional Budget Office reported that the final bill would cut the US deficit by more than $1,300bn over the next 20 years. |
Nonsense.
Once again we are shown more "voodoo" accounting by the the Congressional Budget Office which has an incredibly bad record of accuracy. The deficit will not be "reduced", the amount of increase will be reduced, which still accounts for a net increase in the deficit. And, in order for this "reduction" to occur, the economy must be on track, unemployment at a low level, and costs to not exceed what the Budget Office expects.
The cost of the program will be shouldered by individuals and companies which are already heavily taxed. Why do do you think so many US jobs have been outsourced overseas? Caterpillar yesterday stated that the current health care bill would cost them $100,000,000 in the first year, and that is in addition to what they already pay for health care coverage.
But, they can simply move their manufacturing to China or India, pay 75 cents an hour to their overseas workers and tell the US government to "shove it", as many other companies have been doing in recent years.
It is not the governments job to make our lives better. It is the government's job to make an environment where we can make our own lives better.