Political Reality

TahoeHorn

1,000+ Posts
There are some axioms of US politics which most voters refuse to recognize. I suspect most voters know them deep down inside but refuse to act as if they do. Instead they act like politics works according to their dream, not they way it does. Truths:

1. The President cannot solve all your problems. He isn't king, only President. Congress can and will tell him to go **** himself. It will be their health care plan, not his and so forth.

2. The President has almost nothing to do with things like crime and local education. State and local governments do this. If you don't like it see your city council, not the Prez.

3. Government has a lot less to do with the short-term economy than you think. If you don't like the past few years but liked the few years before that, don't look at the government. See JP Morgan or Boeing or Microsoft. Or the Kuwati or Chinese business. But the government has a lot to do with the long-term impact on the economy. Over decades people and businesses go to the best place. They put their new steel plant in Alabama; they close their auto plant in Michigan. They create eBay in the US; they don't create **** in France. Over the short term they can't do much. You want a government which attracts production, not one which runs it off.

4. Much of the President's power is the power of appointment. (Foreign policy is the big exception.) He doesn't run the student loan program in Marfa, the agriculture program in Dime Box, the housing program in Houston or the space shuttle program in my town. He makes a zillion appointments and they run things. He doesn't know these people or control them. He gets handed lists by party bigwigs in Marfa and Dime Box and he pays off political debts. You know what debts each candidate has. Choose accordingly. The President will not make policy. Not much of it. Thousands of appointees will. One set belongs to the insurance industry, the other to the trial lawyers. One set belongs to the econuts, the other to Big Oil. There are about twenty-five sets and you all know what they are. A candidate can't change the teams very easily and the thousands of players don't march to his command. You get Team A or Team B regardless of candidate and his pretty speeches.
 
I don't know you, but I've seen an Obama commercial. He will change Washington and his universal health care plan will save my family $2500. I promise.
 
You're wisdom has my attention. Can you tackle this for me Tahoe? B/C for the life of me I can't figure it out.

I never thought a republican governor would spend 2 billion (actually 3.8 billion b/c we had to issue bonds since we don't actually have 2 billion just sitting around) on cancer research. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for finding a cure to cancer. But I thought it was bleeding heart liberals who wanted to have government solve all of our problems and make us feel good by spending large amounts of taxpayer money.

Since when did self described conservatives start acting like bleeding hearts.

When we can build highways (primary function of gov't) in Texas without resorting to toll roads, then I'm all for curing cancer with taxpayer money. Otherwise I'd rather keep volunteering my time and money to do so.

And people wonder why the GOP is in disarray. The leadership acts more and more like liberals every day. Bush, Perry, McCain... none of them act very conservative.

Please enlighten me. (this is not a joke)
 
We've traded posts on this in the past about the illusion of the magic wand, but there is reality in your points. It is part and parcel of the genius of the Founding Fathers (yes, a cliche, but true, hear me out) that the system of government they set up prevents radical change and allows competing interests to balance out and forces compromise. The question is whether the Executive on top can change or push policy. Certainly in Supreme Court appointments he can influence policy and direction.

There are individual points in Obama's proposals that make me wince (driver's licenses for undocumenteds -- bad idea based on a faulty premise that somehow they will follow through and get insurance) but overall, I want the discussion to take place. And we all have to acknowledge that there are proposals that go into Congress looking like prime rib and come out looking like sausage.

Taking your post, point by point...

1. Agreed. The President can only set the tone for the debate, but it is better than burying your head in the sand and refusing to acknowledge that there are problems. Savings plans do not begin to address the healthcare issues facing most Americans.

2. These ARE local issues (are you listening GWB? "No Child Left Behind" as a federal mandate does not work unless you fund it) but the Feds can impact them through funding. Even if crime is a local issue, you can fund resources that assist the local government (ex: common radio channel frequencies for local agencies and responders) 9/11 and Homeland Security made the role of the Feds important on crime issues in some aspects.

3. Partially true. Government spending can trickle down to improve the demand end of the economy. Example: increasing federal spending to improve and repair highway infrastructure puts money in the pockets of people (some of whom need trade jobs). It really depends on whether you want to rely solely on fiscal controls to manage or assist the economy.

4. Unquestionably true, so the reality is what sets you promote through your appointments. Let me use my pet peeve as an example: the demolition of the Department of Justice by hiring and promoting people whose legal background and education was defined by an agenda based legal community (Regents) instead of an experience/merit system.

It is tone and direction that the President sets. It also is (and this is the big unknown with Obama -- the lack of experience rap) the ability to implement and follow through.

Remember, I voted for Bush in 2000 because I bought, hook, line and sinker, into his "no nation building" take on foreign policy, even though I did not agree with nearly all of his stances on social issues (stupid me -- I thought "these are local issues and he can't influence them -- wrong)
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

Predict TEXAS-ARIZONA STATE

CFP Round 2 • Peach Bowl
Wed, Jan 1 • 12:00 PM on ESPN
AZ State game and preview thread


Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl website

Recent Threads

Back
Top