With so many people disgusted by the recent debacle in Washington, the 2014 elections should be interesting. The Wall Street Journal interviewed representatives of both large and small companies to hear their reactions to the brinksmanship. On the whole executives said they were changing their approach to politics. Some planned to disengage completely, but others were thinking of getting involved in the primaries — backing more centrist and pragmatic Republicans against the more radical ones. Do you think it will make any difference? Do you care?
We are headed for some state legislature elections before the end of this year and the elections to the parliament in March next year. Things have changed dramatically in the last few months in the fortunes of the two national parties and some of the regional biggies too. As you say, our elections too should be very interesting with many changed loyalties.
The recent brinkmanship in the USA that the whole world watched was entertaining for its absurdity. I am not an American but can just say this much about how we felt here. We hoped that the Cruzites lost and were delighted when that happened. I would not be surprised if cruzite replaces luddite soon.
Thanks for your take on the matter. I was hoping non-Americans would chime in too. Apparently Cruz and his ilk are even more popular in some circles now, so it’s too soon to tell what will happen.
What I care about is politicians who are willing to do something about the ever increasing federal debt. The Republicans picked the wrong fight at the wrong time, even though the “affordable care act” is likely to significantly add to the debt. Continuing to do little more than kick the debt can down the road could eventually result in a fiscal crisis that will make this debacle look like the proverbial “walk in the park.”
I agree. It’s too bad the Republicans were so stupid — a lot of people have sense enough to worry about the debt and would like to see some sensible strategies.
Mike, how about some thought from the Republicans on reducing military and home security expenses to reduce the expenses and reducing the deficit which is what creates debt? The spend on ACA is peanuts compared to that massive expenditure.
Lest I be misunderstood, I ask the same question about our military expenditure on keeping Kashmir. I would rather vacate Kashmir and let them stew, but there are too many vested interests with hands out on the expense there. I also criticise our proposed expenditure on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Food_Security_Bill,_2013" The National Food Security Act.
The point is that in both our nations our leadership is taking both our citizens for a big long ride for their own overt and covert agendas.
Ramana — The Republicans, in general, do want to cut expenses in more areas than just health care, including defense.
It’s just that the “Affordable Care Act” isn’t so affordable from the perspective of the federal budget, adding 1 trillion dollars over the next several years to the federal debt — and that’s including revenue increases included in the bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office. My view is that if you want to add a huge new federal program, then include the means to fund it in the legislation. That didn’t happen with the health care law.
I’m not a Republican or a Democrat. In 2008, I voted for Obama and the two senators from our state, both democrats, that voted for the bill. One of them, Blanche Lincoln, lost her job in the 2010 election. The other, Mark Pryor, is up for election next year.
According to the Wall Street Journal today the Republicans want to restore some money to defense and take money away from Medicaid and Medicare. The Democrats want to raise taxes and take money away from other programs. Neither position is unusual.
Jean, I am sorry, I messed up on my comment to Mike. I really wish that this had an ‘Edit’ option! But please do not start another project to install one just to humour my one off goof up.
When I do that I just say, “Oops!” and correct it. Or you can ask me to change your comment if that works better for you.
By “correct” I mean write what I had wanted to in a new reply.
Unfortunately I CARE, since I can’t do anything about it. The U.S. is becoming more liberation than democrat & republican. There’s the rich & the poor to put it in black & white terms. (Not Blacks & Whites)
I meant libertarian– but rather moderate, middle of the road class.
Actually the tea party members call themselves libertarians — down with big government. Even if they bring down the world economy they’re confident they’re standing up for what is right.
It could make a difference if the Rep’s move toward the centre and get rid of the Tea Party nutters. I won’t be holding my breath though.
It’s not likely to happen. The Tea Partiers are very pleased with themselves because they’ve fired up their base. The present bet is Cruz will be running for president in 2016.