What did the voters in MA reject? My take.

[volinbham]

1. Washington ignoring the true issues that matter - economic issues.

2. A dismissive attitude towards individuals that criticize the current policies and the overall move towards government intrusion.

3. The attacks against the Teabag style voter.

4. A bogus stimulus bill that was a give away to favored constituents.

5. Flagrant special deals for favored constituents. The Senate deals on HC and the union giveaway probably pushed Brown over the top.

6. Mindless pursuit of HC, cap and trade, etc while paying lip service to jobs and the economy.

7. The "blame game" and refusal to take responsibility. It's Bush's fault, it's Wall St.'s fault, it's the republican's fault. All true but it's also Obama's fault and the Dem's fault and the people's fault.

8. The realization that The Who were right "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss".


Look for a new wave of blaming Wall St. and Bush & Co. in an attempt to be more populist.

I heard Matthews or Maddow or someone on MSNBC saying people are mad at the banks because they were bailed out but won't lend. The solution is taxing them and ramping up regulation. I think they are missing the boat. There is anger about the selective bailouts and bonuses but banks aren't lending because 1) people aren't seeking loans they way the were in the past - esp. businesses and 2) they are following rules about responsible lending. If reckless lending was part of the problem why on earth would we criticize banks for not making reckless loans.

That is all.

 

[rjd970]

Agree wholeheartedly with your points.

The repubs are just the lesser of the evils with regard to this stimulus and HC push IMO. It is just a different philosophy of solution with different special interests benefitting. Let's not forget, the last time the repubs held the white house and a congressional majority they didn't exactly do a stellar job either.

There is no doubt Obama and Congress are out of touch with what the country wants but saying the repubs are in touch is equally wrong. If the situation were reversed we wouldn't see a new wave of blaming wall street and Bush....we would see a new wave of blaming left wing media and Clinton...or whatever scapegoat is popular at the time.

Both parties are failing us here it just so happens it is the dems turn to catch the blame.

 

[JTrainDavis]

Great post,
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[lawgator1]

1. Washington ignoring the true issues that matter - economic issues.

Agree


2. A dismissive attitude towards individuals that criticize the current policies and the overall move towards government intrusion.

Agree somewhat. Its less the "dismissiveness" and more the lack of solid, affirmative, get after it argument from the administration. They seemed to think everyone realized what they were saying was true and allowed the other side to muddle things with "death panels" and the like. Had the adminsitration been stronger in its message and tone, the right could not have portrayed them as effectively as "dismissive."



3. The attacks against the Teabag style voter.


Utter garbage. No one (other than the tea party people) are claiming that this guy is of their ilk. He may be tired of unresponsive government (who isn't?) but he's not one of the protesting single-agenda types that tend to be part of that movement.

4. A bogus stimulus bill that was a give away to favored constituents.

Agreed. But again, a more affirmative effort at communicating at least some of the virtues would go along way to dispelling the myth that its nothing but pork. There's pork, for sure, and that's bad. But not all of it.


5. Flagrant special deals for favored constituents. The Senate deals on HC and the union giveaway probably pushed Brown over the top.


Ironic that the party built on self-dealing is getting away with representing that to be the case, but they've managed to create that impression, so got to agree that's a motivator.


6. Mindless pursuit of HC, cap and trade, etc while paying lip service to jobs and the economy.


See #1.


7. The "blame game" and refusal to take responsibility. It's Bush's fault, it's Wall St.'s fault, it's the republican's fault. All true but it's also Obama's fault and the Dem's fault and the people's fault.

Agree somewhat. The administration would have been better off if they'd limited their blame targets to a few that everyone is already suspicious of. But I agree they spread it around too thin, making it easy to pick off the weaker situations.


8. The realization that The Who were right "Meet the new boss; same as the old boss".


Sadly, agree. Not so much because its 100 % accurate (it isn't), but because the adminsitration did not have its act together on the front end to prevent that sort of atack from the GOP and the right.



Look for a new wave of blaming Wall St. and Bush & Co. in an attempt to be more populist.

I heard Matthews or Maddow or someone on MSNBC saying people are mad at the banks because they were bailed out but won't lend. The solution is taxing them and ramping up regulation. I think they are missing the boat. There is anger about the selective bailouts and bonuses but banks aren't lending because 1) people aren't seeking loans they way the were in the past - esp. businesses and 2) they are following rules about responsible lending. If reckless lending was part of the problem why on earth would we criticize banks for not making reckless loans.


We somewhat agree in that I'm now of the opinion that commercial lending will remain stalled until the banks have the confidence that they will get paid back. I don't think it has anything to do with adherence to any sort of guidelines -- its just that right now they still see weakness that makes them nervous about helping anyone expand. That will change, in time, as it always does.

The Dems should say that their regulation will be simply to foce greater disclosures of what's being traded and by whom. They can talk about the bundling of risky debt, the collateralization of bad debt, etc. Say we can't have these guys at the big trading houses buying up bad mortgage notes by the hundreds of thousands and then selling the returns on them, with no one looking over their shoulder. They can buy all the debt they want, they can package and resell it. But when they do, the people who own shares of the mutual funds buying it like its a REIT are going to be told, "hey you, your 401k dollars are in part going to buy up subprime paper, and the brokers are making a fortune."


That is all.

.

 

[droski]

But when they do, the people who own shares of the mutual funds buying it like its a REIT are going to be told, "hey you, your 401k dollars are in part going to buy up subprime paper, and the brokers are making a fortune.".

by what theory of yours do 401k owners not know what their mutual funds are buying? they have to disclose their holdings adn they are always available on their website.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

In short, capitalism is evil!

 

[OrangeYankee]

The one thing the Repubs did not have was the filibuster proof senate like the dems have, and that did cause a lot of gridlock. However, they didn't even really try to push anything that needed doing especially on the domestic front. And they tried their hand at a disastorous fiscal hybrid in "compassionate conservatism" that fell totally flat. Hey lets create new huge entilements but try to cut taxes that will work!

The blame can go all around party wise. At this point the people need to make sure the individuals who are wanting fiscal responsibilty and individual freedoms (both) need to be kept while we try to weed out the rest.

 

[kev20]

our company stock was up as much as $2.80 this morning. probably as a direct result of the win by Brown last night.

 

[lawgator1]

by what theory of yours do 401k owners not know what their mutual funds are buying? they have to disclose their holdings adn they are always available on their website.

No, and I'm sure you are right that typical individual investors who have their 401k on autopilot wouldn't be aware of it.

But if at the end of the year the statement gpoing out to a large corp's employees said that the trading companies involved made billions and you made 3 % trading these things, then someone might go, hey, wait a sec here.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

No, and I'm sure you are right that typical individual investors who have their 401k on autopilot wouldn't be aware of it.

But if at the end of the year the statement gpoing out to a large corp's employees said that the trading companies involved made billions and you made 3 % trading these things, then someone might go, hey, wait a sec here.

This is how you justify government take over and government bailout?

 

[Velo Vol]

1. Washington ignoring the true issues that matter - economic issues.

This, and

(2) A candidate who acted as if she was entitled to the seat.

 

[Velo Vol]

our company stock was up as much as $2.80 this morning. probably as a direct result of the win by Brown last night.

As opposed to the Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 all being down over 1%.

You're right; your company is America's bellwether stock.

 

[volinbham]

.

3. The attacks against the Teabag style voter.


Utter garbage. No one (other than the tea party people) are claiming that this guy is of their ilk. He may be tired of unresponsive government (who isn't?) but he's not one of the protesting single-agenda types that tend to be part of that movement.

You are missing the point. Whether or not you agree with the teabag crowd or the townhall crowd they are for the most part made up people voicing their legit (to them) concerns.

The response to these people expressing their opinions was to deride them, label them as dumb, racist, redneck, etc.

It's not hard to see that even if you don't agree with them that the ruling elite is completely ignoring voices from voters.

What matters is how the ruling elite responded to angry voters.

 

[BigPapaVol]

There was also a tinge of needing a brakeman on the train to the left laced with some "I had no idea what Obama would be" vote.

 

[allvol123]

Sum it up in one word: Obama.

 

[gsvol]

 

[gsvol]

A couple more reasons:

Pretty funny article by Ann Coulter.

The Democrats immediately remind Americans what they didn't like about Democrats, and their power is revoked at the voters' first possible opportunity.

Obama has cut the remembering-what-we-don't-like-about-Democrats stage of this process down from two to four years to about 10 months.

 

[droski]

No, and I'm sure you are right that typical individual investors who have their 401k on autopilot wouldn't be aware of it.

But if at the end of the year the statement gpoing out to a large corp's employees said that the trading companies involved made billions and you made 3 % trading these things, then someone might go, hey, wait a sec here.

what the hell are you talking about? corporations have billions more than i do, of course they are making more money than i am.