Home / Dave Brockington / The Democrats are on the Right Side of Public Opinion

The Democrats are on the Right Side of Public Opinion

Comments
/
/
/
740 Views

as Silver writes about new Gallup data.  Summarized, public opinion overwhelmingly prefers a mix of tax increases and spending cuts to the Republican’s zero tolerance approach to increasing revenue.  The preferred mix by the public is 35% revenue, 65% spending cuts.  Even the average Republican voter prefers a mix of 26% tax increases, 74% spending cuts.  See also The Democratic Strategist.  Only 20% of the electorate are in agreement with the House Republicans that there should be absolutely no tax increases to address the deficit.

How can the Dems possibly mess this up?

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Paulk

    How can the Dems possibly mess this up?

    That’s good. I needed a morning chuckle.

    • JohnR

      I like my coffee black and bitter, like my morning humor…

  • How can the Dems possibly mess this up?

    How many stars are in the sky?

    How many grains of sand are on a beach?

    How many roads must a man walk down?

    • Hogan

      How many roads must a man walk down?

      SPOILER ALERT:

      42

  • David Hunt

    How can the Dems possibly mess this up?

    I see no reason to speculate. I’ll just wait and watch…and hope I’m wrong.

  • The point is, that the discussion going on in D.C. is the wrong discusson. I suspect that when the economy goes further south with whatever spending cut measures do eventually come about, the people who will get blamed will be the ones who control most of the Federal Government.

    We are ruled by not very bright sociopaths. I know I didn’t think this up, but it needs to be said over and over.

  • Just John

    In re McConnell’s proposal: Does the President get to veto a Congressional rejection of his request to raise the debt ceiling?

    • Hogan

      Since the same 2/3 vote would override a veto, why bother?

    • That’s like asking if he can veto a veto override. Since Congress will have to get 2/3 to deny his request, they just showed that they can override a veto.

      • Njorl

        I’m not certain, but I think the “rejection” would be a bill. It could be passed with a simple majority, then Obama would veto it. So, instead of voting against raising the debt limit, Republicans would be voting for not raising the debt limit.

        • McConnell’s proposal is that it would take 2/3 to reject the request.

          IDK how he’d implement that in terms of procedure, but that was the idea.

    • David Hunt

      It’s my understanding that he does, which is the whole point. The debt ceiling gets raised and every single Republican gets to vote against it and call Democrats big spending liberals, but their unanimous opposition doesn’t actually blow up the economy.

      Now I firmly the believe that McConnell’s only problem is that he thinks the GOP would take the blame for it, but at least he’s trying to avoid it now.

  • R. Johnston

    The easiest way for Democrats to mess this up is for them to go with Obama’s “plan,” a plan that is both terrible policy and somewhere to the right of the average Republican voter’s notion of how things should be handled.

    • Where “easy” means “getting Republicans to approve $1 trillion tax hike.”

      These are the Democrats; surely they can come up an easier way to blow this than that.

      • Malaclypse

        I’m confused. These “cuts” involve a promise to make the rest of the Bush tax cuts permanent. You told me there was no chance that those cuts would not expire, meaning that this “hike” is a cut from what you were positive would happen.

        Do the Republicans perhaps disagree with your prognostication?

        • These “cuts”

          What cuts? What are you talking about?

          meaning that this “hike” is a cut from what you were positive would happen.

          No, it’s not. The proposal is a net tax increase compared to current law, including the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. That going into effect is the baseline, and the proposal is for a tax hike above and beyond that.

          I really don’t understand what you’re talking about here. I hope you’re not actually being so petty as to say that raising taxes above and beyond the amount gained from letting the Bush tax cuts expire in a manner that leaves those rates in effect and also raises taxes in other ways is some sort of gotcha moment, on the grounds that ignoring all of the tax increases means taxes didn’t increase.

          But I really can’t tell with you.

          • If you’re saying that raising taxes more than the expiration of the Bush tax cuts would raise them, but in a different manner, proves me technically wrong about something:

            I predict that I’ll still own my Honda Civic next year. Mal, you’d have to be a fool to believe otherwise.

            Now, prove me wrong by trading me for your Lexus. Then you could write “pwned!” and I’d look soooooooo silly.

          • mpowell

            I’m not saying you’re wrong, but my understanding was that in most discussions of tax policy compared to the ‘baseline’ that we’ve heard about use a baseline that assumes the Bush tax cuts are permanent. Obviously, this is a big deal. Do you have CBO evaluations or something of these plans to demonstrate otherwise? It is very hard to figure out what the hell people are talking about sometimes when a lot of they key sources are being intentionally vague or misleading.

  • wsn

    Krusty the Clown: [miserable] Oh, I thought the Generals were due!

    [watches the game on TV]

    Krusty the Clown:
    He’s spinning the ball on his finger! Just take it! Take it!
    [the Globetrotters score]

    Krusty the Clown: That game was fixed! They were using a freakin’ ladder, for God’s sake!

    • efgoldman

      Krusty for the win!

  • Joe

    That’s nice. Still, the public at large voted Republicans in to control one house of Congress. The system is fixed somewhat so this doesn’t translate to an accurate representation of the people at large. But, so be it.

    1/2 of Congress, the more democratically allotted (imperfect as that might be) one, was just handed to the party with the bad ideas. The other half is thinly controlled by Dems, but Republicans have the power to block them. The balance of power is in the hand of Blue Dogs.

    The voters don’t make the policy. These clowns do.

  • Anonymous

    Nationalize all factory farms now!

  • dangermouse

    Even the average Republican voter prefers a mix of 26% tax increases, 74% spending cuts.

    The problem is that the average republican voter believes that Obama is proposing 0% spending cuts, 100% kenyamuslim taxsocialism and cutting their Medicare.

    • Njorl

      That’s true. Obama wants to cut medicare instead of cutting government programs.

      • dave3544

        Medicare’s not a government program? Hmmm…that changes everything!

      • Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

        Keep the government’s hands off my Medicare!

  • Njorl

    It takes two to tango – one side to make unreasonable, unpopular, inflexible demands, and another side to not give in to them. Both parties are equally at fault. The press is warranted in ignoring the fact that Obama’s position in all of this is to the right of the median Republican, and concentrate on the fact that he isn’t cooperating with Republicans.

  • Karate Bearfighter

    and cutting their Medicare.

    Or replacing it with some kind of government program.

    • Keep the government’s hands off my Medicare, morans!

    • dangermouse

      Unlike the responsible, adult Republican leadership, who want to cut spending for wasteful, bloated government programs like Medicare.

  • “Let’s be clear” = “push my frame”

    Such a clever frame: in the midst of a debate about taxation in which the two parties are staking out contrasting positions, let’s blur the lines. blame the Democrats, and let the Republicans off the hook!

    Nobody is actually confused about how the BUSH TAX RATES got extended – the Republicans insisted on an extension in exchange for a bunch of other things, and Obama decided that the price was right. You aren’t making this “clear” by dissembling about how that happened; you’re just spinning it by leaving out most of the facts.

    And in your mind, doing so absolves 1) the Republicans who passed the BUSH TAX CUTS and 2) the Republicans who got them extended of any responsibility for existing tax rates? (“just know who was responsible for these low rates.”) Yeah…no, that’s beyond lame.

    • Comment written in response to this:

      Erik Loomis says:
      July 15, 2011 at 7:59 am
      Let’s be clear.

      The “Bush Tax Cuts” expired. The sunset date arrived and they are gone. It was this administration and the Democratically controlled Senate and House that enacted the same rates.

      So, when you wish to complain about the level of taxation because you believe it’s too low…..just know who was responsible for these low rates.

      Yup, Eric got so angry at me that he decided to absolve the Republican Party of any responsibility for the Bush Tax Cuts.

      • Robert Farley

        Joe,

        I hope you’re not dumb enough to believe that was actually Erik Loomis…

  • E L

It is main inner container footer text