<VV> Implications of Polls

[George Jones]

Please folks, take this to VV-Talk.


George Jones
--------------------------------
Eastern Division Director, Corvair Society of America (CORSA)
Performance Corvair Group
Central Florida Corvair Club (Since 2009)
Tidewater Corvair Club (since 1987)
Central Virginia Corvair Club (since 2006)
Corvair Society of America (CORSA)(since 1987)
'65 Monza Crown V8 Convertible
'66 Monza Coupe Custom


On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Bill Elliott <corvair at fnader.com> wrote:

>
>
> kenpepke at juno.com wrote:
>
> >
> >I am not one that puts much faith in polls as they tend to be about as
> stable as the waves on the ocean. However, this morning I heard on the radio
> that President Obama's approval percentage has dropped to less than his
> elected percentage.  Does that mean that some Democrats are actually coming
> to the realization that all is not well?
> >
> It wasn't just Dems that voted for him.
>
> >Are they becoming disillusioned with Socialism?
> >
> Don't bet on it. People who are unhappy with their pastor rarely are
> disillusioned with their religion. A lot of the Obama disapproval is
> from leftists unhappy he isn't moving the country towards socialism even
> faster. (Newspaper cover story that on Franken's first day he voted
> against the President's position on a high profile bill... implying that
> he wouldn't be just a hardcore Leftist as his critics have charged. Only
> when you dug into the story did you find that Franken and other Dems had
> taken a position to the _left_ of Obama on this bill... )
>
> >Perhaps 'change' is not working out all that well for them?
> >Some of Congress is looking at the possibility of another 'stimulus' plan.
>  They realize the first one did not stimulate much of anything.
> >
> It was never intended to. It was clearly a spending bill.
>
> >Is this a case of 'If at first you don't succeed, try, try again?'  But
> President Obama has said additional spending of money we do not have could
> possibly be detrimental the the US economy.  What was it that made him think
> it would be good the first time?
> >
> It was "good the first time" and had exactly the intended effect.
> "Billions in aid go to areas that backed Obama in '08"
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-07-08-redblue_N.htm
>
> >Perhaps he is rethinking the 'change' idea.
> >
> >
> Don't bet on it... he has bigger "change" in mind... especially now that
> he has a supermajority... the leftist dream Government.
>
> >There is the possibility that Congress will consider doing something to
> actually stimulate growth this time.
> >
> Don't bet on it.... the Dems are philosophically against anything that
> would actually stimulate economic growth... they only know how to
> redistribute wealth, not create it. Even European Socialists (who
> proudly bear the "Socialist" banner) have matured to the point that they
> recognize the need for wealth to first be created before it can be
> redistributed. This puts them solidly to the economic right of American
> "Progressives".
>
> >Who knows, if enough of the herd goes along with their thinking and starts
> consuming again things might turn around. All they would have to do would be
> to promote buying American and cut taxes from top to bottom.  Uh, not to
> much reason to hope for any of that.
> >
> >
> You got it; see my previous bullet. So far the way to pay for everything
> is to tax "the rich"... which includes small businesses. Collectively
> "the rich" are the ones  who drive the economy, provide jobs, etc. Take
> capital away from them to redistribute and you suddenly find fewer and
> fewer rich to tax from.
>
> (Leftists don't see this as a bad thing... they philosophically would
> prefer a society where the wealth were distributed more equally even if
> that meant there was less actual wealth in the society. In the USSR,
> doctors, trashmen, and the unemployed all lived at roughly the same
> economic level...  around $400/month... . Leftists see this as
> philosophically superior to an economy that would have the doctor making
> $40,000/month, the trashman making $4,000/month, and the unemployed
> making $1200/month. Which do you think the doctor, the trashman, or the
> unemployed would prefer?)
>
> Even Clinton understood this... he didn't balance the budget by
> restraining spending... he balanced the budget by allowing the creation
> of more "rich" which filled the tax coffers through economic expansion,
> not draconian tax increases. Again, the leftist mindset is
> philosophically opposed to economic growth in the private sector.
>
> Only way to turn things around are to replace leftists with
> capitalists... and frankly I'm not betting on that either.
>
> Bill
>  _______________________________________________
> This message was sent by the VirtualVairs mailing list, all copyrights are
> the property
> of the writer, please attribute properly. For help, mailto:
> vv-help at corvair.org
> This list sponsored by the Corvair Society of America,
> http://www.corvair.org/
> Post messages to: VirtualVairs at corvair.org
> Change your options:
> http://www.vv.corvair.org/mailman/options/virtualvairs
>  _______________________________________________
>