Skip to main content

View Diary: Public ready to blame Republicans if fiscal cliff talks fail (132 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think it depends how this all plays out (5+ / 0-)

    And I think that the Woodward leaked memo will probably put pressure on both sides to go where they were for the deal they supposedly agreed to in 2011 -- $800 billion in revenue in exchange for cuts to entitlements.  

    If the Republicans were smart, what they would do is make clear that they are ready to compromise on revenue and go back to that $800 billion.  Then the pressure would be on the President to go back to his position as well.  I think that if this played out as "Republicans are compromising on revenue, but the President is backing away from his commitment to cut spending" (a commitment to the "grand bargain" that he reaffirmed last month when he was running for Presient) then the blame could shift to the President, I think.

    That's how the Republicans could play this to their advantage, if they were smart and could overcome ideological rigidity.  Whether they will do that remains to be seen.  

    •  we know they won't deal (9+ / 0-)

      which was the point of this kabuki theater all along imo.

      to show they really aren't serious.  that they are willing to play chicken with the "fiscal cliff" (there own messaging used against them) over tax cuts for the rich!!!

      it's beautiful.

      -You want to change the system, run for office.

      by Deep Texan on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 11:57:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree that if the Republicans refuse to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib

        compromise on revenue, they will take the blame. Absolutely.  That's what this poll tells us.  And that makes sense to me.  

        But if they make public that they are willing to compromise on revenue (even partially, such as raising taxes on incomes over $500,000 or $1 million), then the onus shifts to the President to compromise as well, I think.  

        Unlike most of the people at this site who want the Republicans to cave in while the President stands firm on no spending cuts (except maybe in defense), most of the people in this country expect both sides to compromise. And that's what the President pledged to do if elected -- to get the "grand bargain" that didn't happen in 2011.  So if he takes a "no compromise on my side" approach, the blame could shift to him.  

        That's why I said I think it's too early in the process to decide who would get the blame.  A lot of it depends on what positions the parties take.  

        •  and he will (0+ / 0-)

          but they won't

          it's kabuki theater and we finally have somebody who can play.

          i know it upsets all kinds of progressives but it's how the game has to be played.

          -You want to change the system, run for office.

          by Deep Texan on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 12:20:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Positions have already been taken. Boehner said (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Deep Texan

          NO to tax rate increases, period, even though the public has polled in favor of them.

          Obama said veto if no tax rate increases on $250k+

          We're now playing chicken, and the R's are in the weaker position.

      •  what coffeetalk is saying, they DID deal (0+ / 0-)

        and the President blew them off.. he missed a pretty good opportunity on that one.

        I don't know if Boehner will be that willing to compromise again, however.

    •  If the Republicans were smart enough to do that... (7+ / 0-)

      Obama never would have set them up with is poison-pill offer last July.

      And now we are once again seeing the fruits of that strategy.  Nobody is willing to give the Republican Congress the benefit of the doubt when it comes to budget negotiations.

      Art is the handmaid of human good.

      by joe from Lowell on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 12:00:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Change the phrasing, please! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      immigradvocate, jkosnett
      And I think that the Woodward leaked memo will probably put pressure on both sides to go where they were for the deal they supposedly agreed to in 2011 -- $800 billion in revenue in exchange for cuts to entitlements[?]  
      "$800 billion in revenue in exchange for cuts to [earned benefits]."
      Don't help the Republicans by mischaracterizing SS and Medicare, unless you are actually referring to, say, SNAP or TANF or heating assistance.

      Turn the message around!

      "We will find fulfillment not in the goods that we have, but in the good we can do for each other." ~ RFK

      by paz3 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 12:43:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I am 72 (4+ / 0-)

      And took early retirement 10 years ago.Knowing what I know now, there is no way I could have lasted 10+ more years at my job.  Changing the SS retirement age is cruel and for many folks it just can't be done.  Come on folks, take it from someone who has been there and knows how these things go.  You want your mom or dad or granny dragging their old painful bodies around the job until they die?  Trust me, you don't.  Or yourself either.  JMO

      *the blogger formerly known as shirlstars

      by Shirl In Idaho on Tue Nov 13, 2012 at 12:52:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (156)
  • Community (66)
  • Baltimore (48)
  • Bernie Sanders (37)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (30)
  • Elections (24)
  • Freddie Gray (23)
  • Law (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • Education (21)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Texas (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Environment (18)
  • Politics (17)
  • 2016 (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site