In 1994, Republicans claimed House and Senate - first time in 50 or so years, and Clinton moved to the right, which resulted in improved economic environment, and Clinton was reelected.
Judging 0bama’s demeanor for the future, as evidenced by the yesterday’s lecture, however, he does not seem to be in a hurry to replicate Clinton’s triangulation.
Still, he is very likely to get a Republican Congress, albeit nowhere near with the majorities the Democrats now enjoy. Nevertheless, it will have a positive impact on the economy, and he will certainly claim the credit, and thus might be reelected.
By the looks of it, Republicans in Congress - whether a majority or minority - will block all his meaningful policies, and still claim credit for any success while avoiding any blame.
Clinton’s administration acted on the economy long before the GOP won congress, Peter. One of Clinton’s first and most influential acts of the first term - the 1993 bill - didn’t have any republican votes. Gee whiz - tax cuts to the middle class and aiming for a balanced budget, no way!
But then again, of course the Republicans took credit for everything they could during the Clinton presidency. Except for the repeal of Glass-Steagal, apparently.
4uk4ata, you are a dedicated Democratic hallucinator.
Check the real history and facts thereof.
Clinton’s version of the 0bama’s ‘stimulus’ bill was blocked by Republicans …
Contract with America, which he dobbed during the elections as Contract on America, but after the elections, almost the entire contract got adopted, which brought about decades long expansion … .
Until of course, the Republicans attempted to out-Democrat the Democrats … .
Peter, I think you may be wrong. I was talking about the Omnibus Act of 1993, (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, to be exact). It passed, despite heavy Republican opposition. It increased taxation in some areas, and was one of the reasons why deficits diminished under Clinton (of course, a major reason was economic expansion).
Contract with America brought about “decades” long expansion? Considering that many of its measures were passed in 1995, and the 2000s had little of the economic upswing of the 90s, that is wishful thinking. As for how exactly it affected the economy… You think it did more with a fiscal responsibility act (that the courts canned, iirc) than the bill from 1993 that affected taxation?
And no, the GOP didn’t try to out-Democrat the Democrats. Clinton was simply a moderate, and he made some compromises where he thought it necessary.
No offense, man, but you aren’t exactly fit to throw names around.
MAG - According to the Peter Principal if Obama has risen to his level of incompentance he can’t rise any higher, but there is a corollary to the Peter Principal that says:
“If you enter the system above you’re level of incompentance then there is no limit on how high you can rise.” This what makes Sarah Palin so dangerous.
” … economic upswing of the 90s …” That was the mother of all bubble economies - dot com craze, which also triggered another RE bubble.. We were, lucky that there was no government involvement, a’ la FHA group, and the debt was not securitized and derivatized, as the ‘AAA-rated RE-loans were in the 2,000’s, otherwise the financial crises would have been much greater.
In fact, it was that economic expansion - pricing out lower income stratus, that prompted the: ” … . Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government sponsored enterprises that purchase and securitize mortgages, to devote a percentage of their lending to support affordable housing…” The >> FHA group, and etc., which is the root cause of the present financial malady.
LOCO - George Bush was as incompetent as it gets, but then he entered the system far, far about his level of competence, Obama is trying to be a “nice” guy which never works in politics.
petergrt over 14 years ago
It is way too early to write him off …
In 1994, Republicans claimed House and Senate - first time in 50 or so years, and Clinton moved to the right, which resulted in improved economic environment, and Clinton was reelected.
Judging 0bama’s demeanor for the future, as evidenced by the yesterday’s lecture, however, he does not seem to be in a hurry to replicate Clinton’s triangulation.
Still, he is very likely to get a Republican Congress, albeit nowhere near with the majorities the Democrats now enjoy. Nevertheless, it will have a positive impact on the economy, and he will certainly claim the credit, and thus might be reelected.
Magnaut over 14 years ago
he might rise to mediocrity….nut he’s already Peter Principal’d
4uk4ata over 14 years ago
By the looks of it, Republicans in Congress - whether a majority or minority - will block all his meaningful policies, and still claim credit for any success while avoiding any blame.
Clinton’s administration acted on the economy long before the GOP won congress, Peter. One of Clinton’s first and most influential acts of the first term - the 1993 bill - didn’t have any republican votes. Gee whiz - tax cuts to the middle class and aiming for a balanced budget, no way!
But then again, of course the Republicans took credit for everything they could during the Clinton presidency. Except for the repeal of Glass-Steagal, apparently.
petergrt over 14 years ago
4uk4ata, you are a dedicated Democratic hallucinator.
Check the real history and facts thereof.
Clinton’s version of the 0bama’s ‘stimulus’ bill was blocked by Republicans … Contract with America, which he dobbed during the elections as Contract on America, but after the elections, almost the entire contract got adopted, which brought about decades long expansion … .
Until of course, the Republicans attempted to out-Democrat the Democrats … .
POPPA1956 over 14 years ago
Good one-term & Mediocre two-term are not the only choices.
Dtroutma over 14 years ago
The gloating folk might want to remember Tom Dewey.
4uk4ata over 14 years ago
Peter, I think you may be wrong. I was talking about the Omnibus Act of 1993, (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, to be exact). It passed, despite heavy Republican opposition. It increased taxation in some areas, and was one of the reasons why deficits diminished under Clinton (of course, a major reason was economic expansion).
Contract with America brought about “decades” long expansion? Considering that many of its measures were passed in 1995, and the 2000s had little of the economic upswing of the 90s, that is wishful thinking. As for how exactly it affected the economy… You think it did more with a fiscal responsibility act (that the courts canned, iirc) than the bill from 1993 that affected taxation?
And no, the GOP didn’t try to out-Democrat the Democrats. Clinton was simply a moderate, and he made some compromises where he thought it necessary.
No offense, man, but you aren’t exactly fit to throw names around.
kennethcwarren64 over 14 years ago
MAG - According to the Peter Principal if Obama has risen to his level of incompentance he can’t rise any higher, but there is a corollary to the Peter Principal that says:
“If you enter the system above you’re level of incompentance then there is no limit on how high you can rise.” This what makes Sarah Palin so dangerous.
Loco80 over 14 years ago
So then you admit that Mr Obama is as incompetent as it gets, and it can only get worse.
petergrt over 14 years ago
Piglet, though I remember the period quite well, I don’t have the time to search for specifics, but here is just one stab:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/22/us/gop-senators-prevail-sinking-clinton-s-economic-stimulus-bill.html?pagewanted=1
” … economic upswing of the 90s …” That was the mother of all bubble economies - dot com craze, which also triggered another RE bubble.. We were, lucky that there was no government involvement, a’ la FHA group, and the debt was not securitized and derivatized, as the ‘AAA-rated RE-loans were in the 2,000’s, otherwise the financial crises would have been much greater.
In fact, it was that economic expansion - pricing out lower income stratus, that prompted the: ” … . Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government sponsored enterprises that purchase and securitize mortgages, to devote a percentage of their lending to support affordable housing…” The >> FHA group, and etc., which is the root cause of the present financial malady.
kennethcwarren64 over 14 years ago
LOCO - George Bush was as incompetent as it gets, but then he entered the system far, far about his level of competence, Obama is trying to be a “nice” guy which never works in politics.
d_legendary1 over 14 years ago
<==========I represent the common man Ken. Remember that.
d_legendary1 over 14 years ago
<==========I represent the common man Ken. Remember that.