 |
|
 |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HR-Trevor
Boss Type Guy
Joined: 04 Oct 2002
Posts: 6683
Location: Louisville, KY
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 7:43 pm Post subject: Political Outlook |
|
|
For those who actually have any interest in pondering politics now that the race is over, one has to wonder what exactly is going to happen in the next 2 to 4 years. Since the next two are much more predictable than the following 2 (because of congressional elections) I'll focus on those years.
How hard-right is the agenda of the President and congress going to be? Will new attempts to ban same-sex marriage continue? Will abortion related laws be enacted or repealed? What about tax laws, unemployment and other areas in that vein? Will the war in Iraq get more or less financial support? Will we decide to go to war in another country?
A lot of that depends on the support the President gets. Interestingly, while there is a firmer hold on the houses, there is not necessarily a firmer grip on the conservative agenda. Consider the warning shots fired over Bush's proverbial bow by Arlen Specter about nominations. In fact, the support of Bush by the Republican members of the houses seems rather subdued at the moment, which is surprising.
That might not mean anything at all. It might simply be a mood or how the media is covering it all. Arguments can go either way.
But now that Bush is in office again, there is more to consider than what he may want to push through as President. More precisely, what will he be able to push through, as President? I think in some ways the divisive atmosphere that's existed has empowered Bush. I think now that the dust is settling, the less Democrats fight with Republicans, the more infighting you might see between Republicans themselves, that is, moderates and hard leaning conservatives.
It's just a thought, and none of us can pretend to know what's ahead, but it's an interesting thought nonetheless. For all the bragging or bitching about Bush either way, we might have elected a virtually impotent President, which is of course a stark contrast to the doomsday feeling some Democrats have had since the election.
Just food for thought.
_________________
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato
-- Trevor Rage / Rich Mondy |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
Brokyn
LLAMA SECHS
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 3648
Location: Northern Georgia
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Isn't there a theory that says a president that's elected for a second term will generally take more risks with what he tries to push through the legislative side of things? I can't cite anything in history to back this up, and I'm too tired to google for information, but it makes sense to me.
The first term you're trying to not piss too many people off so that you can get reelected in four years. The second is spent trying to build a legacy for their administration. Not to mention that you really don't have to worry about approval ratings in your second term. There's always impeachment, but how likely are those to go to completion?
So, if this theory is even slightly sound, then Bush may actually be able to push more of his conservative agenda through. He's already on the road to making his tax breaks permanent, so that's pretty much to be expected to go through soon. Abortion.. well, I don't think he's done anything related to abortion besides banning the partial birth variety, has he?
I don't think you have to worry about bans on homosexual unions being added to the constitution. Politicians know that their constituencies do hold people that support gay marriage. I'm not going to touch on the war because there are just so many variables and behind-the-scenes stuff that the public just isn't privy to at the moment.
</rambling>
--William
_________________
Haelrahv Wiki!
++Brown Nosing Points |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
HR-Trevor
Boss Type Guy
Joined: 04 Oct 2002
Posts: 6683
Location: Louisville, KY
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I don't think you have to worry about bans on homosexual unions being added to the constitution. |
I don't think it will happen either, and heaven knows I hope it doesn't. It actually directly conflicts with the Republican line which is that states should be permitted to make such decisions for themselves. Bush's stance on this particular issue is clearly not the Republican norm.
This brings us back to the issue of Bush vs. moderates. Bush, in many ways, doesn't fit the bill of a Republican. He often follows his own personal agenda, which is anywhere from right to the far, far-right. This may make it difficult for him to push his agenda, whatever it is.
The items I'm most concerned about making it through are further limits on stem cell research, further impairements on personal liberty, and further damage to the environment because of "big business" interests. That last one is what seems most possible.
A president is paid handsomely for the rest of his life, and Bush isn't bad off as it is. But I have little doubt Bush will still follow the agenda of businesses, and that agenda will hurt workers, taxpayers, the environment, the deficit, and so on.
So as to not sound like I'm going back on my previous statement to Aesal, understand that I'd love nothing more than to be wrong. But the president described what he considers important during the debates, and the items he named are in great part items I don't personally cherish, either the issue, or how he plans to handle it. I am still open minded enough to think that it's possible GWB could surprise me. But I'm very pessimistic after the last few years and seeing Bush's statements during the campaign.
_________________
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato
-- Trevor Rage / Rich Mondy |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
Tylen
Alpha Antifemale
Joined: 29 Jul 2003
Posts: 1192
Location: Not Colorado
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess this guy wasn't as optimistic.
| Quote: |
NEW YORK (AP) — A 25-year-old from Georgia who was apparently distraught over President Bush's re-election shot and killed himself at Ground Zero.
Andrew Veal's body was found Saturday morning inside the off-limits site, said Steve Coleman, a spokesman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. A shotgun was found nearby, but no suicide note was found, Coleman said.
Newsday, citing a police source it did not identify, reported Sunday that Veal opposed the war in Iraq and was apparently distraught after the election.
Friends said Veal worked in a computer lab at the University of Georgia and was planning to marry.
"I'm absolutely sure it's a protest," Mary Anne Mauney, Veal's supervisor at the lab, told The Daily News. "I don't know what made him commit suicide, but where he did it was symbolic."
Police were investigating how Veal entered the former World Trade Center site, which is protected by high fences and owned by the Port Authority. |
_________________
** The phrase "break a leg" just wasn't ambitious enough for Mellie Knight. [8:31 pm]
** Mellie Knight was soundly defeated by Aesal Anari-Idia in the Zgedhi Gkenrzeg Rav! [8:31 pm] |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
HR-Trevor
Boss Type Guy
Joined: 04 Oct 2002
Posts: 6683
Location: Louisville, KY
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I read about that. One of the first things I thought was, I hope other people equally distraught don't decide to be so strong in their "message".
_________________
"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -- Plato
-- Trevor Rage / Rich Mondy |
|
| Back to top » |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
