They Win Again--Even When The GOP Loses They Win

Dantès

New member
Even When the GOP Loses, It Wins
Think the Senate deal is a resounding defeat for Republicans? Think again.
The Editors October 16, 2013

Just hours before a default on our national debt and sixteen days into a wrenching federal government shutdown, it now appears that the barest measure of sanity has prevailed in Washington. The Senate has reached a deal to reopen the government at current funding levels through January 15 and to pass a debt ceiling hike though February 7. The measure is expected to clear the House tonight with scant but necessary Republican support.

Because the deal only includes minor concessions, the Beltway consensus is that it represents a resounding defeat for Republicans, who “surrendered” their original demands to defund or delay Obamacare. In the skirmish of opinion polls, that may be true, for now. But in the war of ideas, the Senate deal is but a stalemate, one made almost entirely on conservative terms. The GOP now goes into budget talks with sequestration as the new baseline, primed to demand longer-term cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. And they still hold the gun of a US default to the nation’s head in the next debt ceiling showdown.

Surrender? Any more “victories” like this and Democrats will end up paying tribute into the GOP’s coffers.

This debate started in 2011 when the president accepted that he couldn’t get support for jobs programs and instead called for “balanced” deficit reduction that included tax increases on corporations and the wealthy and spending cuts. In response, Republicans threatened to default on America’s debts, forcing through the Budget Control Act, which cut nearly $1 trillion in spending over ten years with no tax increases and exacted another trillion in cuts either by agreement of a “supercommittee” or, failing that, automatic across-the-board cuts of $1.2 trillion over ten years. Now the Republicans’ “surrender” locks in that sequester while pushing for further reductions to basic safety net programs—all while tax increases remain off the table and the threat of default is still pointed at the country’s head. Tea Party zealots may have lost their bid to torpedo healthcare reform, but the right continues to set the terms of the debate.

This is particularly perverse because austerity only adds to the country’s troubles. More than 20 million people still need full-time work. Incomes are still stagnant. The top 1 percent continue to capture what little growth there is.


http://www.thenation.com/article/176694/even-when-gop-loses-it-wins
 
I'm still confused as to why the GOP wants to cut programs that the red states utilize the most? Any real business man will tell you that you have to spend money to make money. I wouldn't mind the GOP asking for cuts if they also had investment plans to try and bring more revenue in.

Let me rephrase. Investment plans that don't involve harming the environment, or you know, war.
 
Im basing that statement on many others that contradict that one. I read right wing sites and left and middle. Only way to get closest to the real deal and no I admittedly didnt read the entire article been flipping back and forth
 
Im basing that statement on many others that contradict that one. I read right wing sites and left and middle. Only way to get closest to the real deal and no I admittedly didnt read the entire article been flipping back and forth

I'm curious which sites you judge are 'right wing,' left and middle? Do your 'left' have wings? I avoid wings, WND, Blaze to me are right wing. Right would be 'Breitbart' when not directing to wings.

Middle would be WaPo and most dailies, exception being NYT.

Left would be NYT, Huffington, The Daily Breast

Left wing Daily Kos.
 
Only two did you get right annie Huffpost and occaisionally daily beast.

Politico, Breitbart, Drudge, the moderate view, the realnews christianscience monitor, TheHill and several more...Washington Post, USA today.
 
I'm curious which sites you judge are 'right wing,' left and middle? Do your 'left' have wings? I avoid wings, WND, Blaze to me are right wing. Right would be 'Breitbart' when not directing to wings.

Middle would be WaPo and most dailies, exception being NYT.

Left would be NYT, Huffington, The Daily Breast

Left wing Daily Kos.


Its really not that difficult to determine the persuasion of a blog or media site Annie but you know that :)
 
Its really not that difficult to determine the persuasion of a blog or media site Annie but you know that :)

So really, you don't read multiple sources that you are willing to say why you label them however. You just said you do? Got it.
 
No matter that particular article, this was a huge loss for the GOP.

So that's what I never understood - the amount that was being voted on was a republican amount - it was with the sequester cuts AND was almost to the Ryan budget. The GOP should have been claiming this as a victory as they voted to fund the govt.

Instead, they threw defunding the ACA in there, shut down the govt, nearly put us into default, and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Absolutely the dems have given in way too much to the repubs (so much for saying "dems don't compromise"). And I'm very worried with what they will give away in the round of talks that are going to go on.

If the repubs hadn't forced austerity on us, the unemployment rate would be significantly decreased. But they got what they wanted. And now they want to reduce spending even more? when we have a sluggish recovery? ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/austerity-jobs_n_3224762.html )

So back to the op - this should have been a victory for the repubs - they brought spending way below where the dems wanted it - but luckily, they are so hapless that they made it look like a loss for them.
 
No matter that particular article, this was a huge loss for the GOP.
that depends. If the lose the house or Dems gain 60 seats in the senate then it's a big loss for the GOP. If both happen then it's a huge defeat. If neither happens it's business as usual. Polling data indicates neither will happen.
 
So that's what I never understood - the amount that was being voted on was a republican amount - it was with the sequester cuts AND was almost to the Ryan budget. The GOP should have been claiming this as a victory as they voted to fund the govt.

Instead, they threw defunding the ACA in there, shut down the govt, nearly put us into default, and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Absolutely the dems have given in way too much to the repubs (so much for saying "dems don't compromise"). And I'm very worried with what they will give away in the round of talks that are going to go on.

If the repubs hadn't forced austerity on us, the unemployment rate would be significantly decreased. But they got what they wanted. And now they want to reduce spending even more? when we have a sluggish recovery? ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/austerity-jobs_n_3224762.html )

So back to the op - this should have been a victory for the repubs - they brought spending way below where the dems wanted it - but luckily, they are so hapless that they made it look like a loss for them.
the GOP DIDN't get everything they wanted. Most of the DOD spending cots are in red states and have put a lot of people out of work.
 
Back
Top