Zogby Poll: Perry Plummets to 18%; Trails Cain For Lead

At this point, a doorknob will beat Obama. Romney standing next to Obama on stage near election time will seem presidential enough.

The bad news is republicans will have between 51 and 55 senate seats and will maintain control of the House. One party in control of all 3 hasn't been so good the past 11 years.

I root for gridlock.

 

There's nothing to be done. Almost anything govt. has done has done much more harm than good. It's been like a drinking binge - it might feel good for a short while but the hangover is going to be a painful and lasting one. Like, any jobs Obama's stimulus has "saved" are now gone, but we are stuck with the credit card balance for it.

The deficits during the Reagan years were huge for the time, but this recent debt ceiling increase will cover us for a year and it's as big as all those Reagan deficits combined. It doesn't matter those deficits added to the debt 30 years ago, the sum is still on the credit card statement.

The scale of the problem is staggering. It will take GDP decades to grow enough to bring in the kind of revenues to make the deficits reasonable, let alone make it possible to pay any of it off. Our ability to take any new fiscal or monetary measures is restricted to the point the Fed is trying gimmicks. The Fed used to be able to raise interest rates during good times so they could lower them to stimulate borrowing during down turns; now they can't raise rates much or the credit card payments will be a HUGE portion of what govt, has to spend.

When you're in a hole, you don't get out by digging deeper. Gridlock prevents us from digging the hole deeper.

That's for starters.

 

Gridlock means they won't undertake new ginormous spendy projects.

 

No, it means both parties gets a double helping of pork.

 

Gridlock is kind of a peculiar ambition for someone who thinks the government is doing everything absolutely wrong. Gridlock means it continues as is.

I understand your point that gridlock means it won't get worse, from your point of view. But that's aiming pretty low, if you really believe there is a crisis, don't you think?

barfo

 

It's government. There is a lot of ready, fire, aim to it. I don't have faith it is going to be better at what it's supposed to do, just less focused and more expensive.

The guys at the top are more interested in philosophy and academic exercises than blunt but effective solutions.

Ever read PJ O'Roarke? He's not your typical conservative. If not, you don't know what you're missing.

He writes in "Parliament of Whores" that there are hundreds of agencies tasked with preventing poverty. The cost of the programs and their inaccessibility makes them outrageously expensive and not very effective. He shows how for a fraction of that spending, you can do away with all but one of those agencies, write checks to the people who are below the poverty level so they're well above it, and save considerable tax payer money.

So gridlock keeps the number of those agencies at 150 instead of growing them to 200...

And in the meantime, guys like Ron Paul are making the right policy ideas heard and then we'll see a real change for the better.

I root for continuing resolutions to fail, because govt. shutdown will save us money, and we'll realize together the fraction of the missing govt. that we can't do without.

 

Because the thing we really need in this country is another million+ workers deployed all over the world not getting paid as an experiment to see where we can cut costs...

And when that happens, there will be only ~1.3T more to shave off before we're back to balanced. Because medicare payments (only 700B overrun annually, and going up) and SS payments (ok for now) keep going out in a shutdown.

 

Those workers go on furlough and get paid in arears when the shutdown is over. But govt. will still be bringing in the tax revenue and they might actually have to prioritize how to spend it.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Ron-Paul-Bests-Obama-in-bw-3821734650.html?x=0

Ron Paul Bests Obama in Latest Poll

LAKE JACKSON, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- In a new Harris Poll, 2012 Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul beats President Obama 51 percent to 49 percent in a general election race.

“This is yet another poll that clearly proves how competitive Ron Paul is against the sitting President,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton. “Dr. Paul is making strides, affirming that the American people are looking for conviction instead of the typical status quo rhetoric being offered by establishment candidates.”

These results come just a few weeks after a Reuters/Ipsos survey showed Ron Paul polling within striking distance of President Obama among registered voters. Furthermore, a late August Rasmussen poll showed him within 1 percent of President Obama in a head-to-head matchup.

Another recent Gallup survey, conducted August 17-18, shows Paul only 2 percentage points behind Obama in a general election match-up. In a similar head-to-head survey from last year done by Rasmussen, Dr. Paul drew a statistical dead heat with the President. And earlier this year in a survey by CNN, he did the best out of the other Republicans put up against Obama in a head-to-head poll.

 

Tax revenues increased by 25% after year 6 of the Bush tax cuts. It worked EVERY time.