So we hit the debt limit...

[grumbler]

Not really. We can simply look back at what the Dems did *before* the TP became powerful. It is hypothetical, to be sure (after all, the TP came to power as a result of those actions in large part), but it is hardly that far out to speculate on.

The Dems had a budget surplus far more recently than the Republicans. The Budget Act of 1993, which started the process of turning a deficit into a surplus, was passed without a single Republican vote.

[Berkut]

Even if the Tea Party people had never been elected, wouldn't the Democrats try and whore themselves out once the polling numbers showed that Americans were turning against the deficit?

Yeah, certainly the Blue Dogs would have continued to have quite a lot of influence. And they had enough to really piss off the tax and spend crowd before, so no reason to think they would not do so again.

Whether they would be enough to actually make a significant difference, I do not know. It does seem like we would have ended up with a much better compromise, like Obama's 1:3 plan (assuming that was a real plan rather than just smoke and mirrors).

[derspiess]

Even if the Tea Party people had never been elected, wouldn't the Democrats try and whore themselves out once the polling numbers showed that Americans were turning against the deficit?

No, because that's not their base.  Their base largely consists of people who benefit from, or are entirely dependent upon deficit spending.

[The Brain]

Even if the Tea Party people had never been elected, wouldn't the Democrats try and whore themselves out once the polling numbers showed that Americans were turning against the deficit?

No, because that's not their base.  Their base largely consists of people who benefit from, or are entirely dependent upon deficit spending.

Racist.

[grumbler]

No, because that's not their base.  Their base largely consists of people who benefit from, or are entirely dependent upon deficit spending.

Ah, another of the amusing tribal narratives! 

[Berkut]

Not really. We can simply look back at what the Dems did *before* the TP became powerful. It is hypothetical, to be sure (after all, the TP came to power as a result of those actions in large part), but it is hardly that far out to speculate on.

The Dems had a budget surplus far more recently than the Republicans. The Budget Act of 1993, which started the process of turning a deficit into a surplus, was passed without a single Republican vote.

And if we can arrange another dot com bubble, maybe we can have a surplus again!

I think it is probably *less*speculative to look at what the Dems did in recent years under similar to today's circumstances than it is to try to compare them to the Dems of 20 year ago under very different political and economic circumstances. Although it is interesting that the period when the Blue Dogs had the most power was also the period during which we came closest to a balanced budget...

It is rather too bad that when the overall voting patterns shifted enough to bring the TPers in it was at the expense of the Blue Dog coalition.

[derspiess]

Not really. We can simply look back at what the Dems did *before* the TP became powerful. It is hypothetical, to be sure (after all, the TP came to power as a result of those actions in large part), but it is hardly that far out to speculate on.

The Dems had a budget surplus far more recently than the Republicans. The Budget Act of 1993, which started the process of turning a deficit into a surplus, was passed without a single Republican vote.

Fine-- so the Dems showed that they can raise taxes and benefit from the tech bubble to balance the budget.  How about we revert to Clinton-era tax rates *and* spending levels?

[Neil]

Not really. We can simply look back at what the Dems did *before* the TP became powerful. It is hypothetical, to be sure (after all, the TP came to power as a result of those actions in large part), but it is hardly that far out to speculate on.

The Dems had a budget surplus far more recently than the Republicans. The Budget Act of 1993, which started the process of turning a deficit into a surplus, was passed without a single Republican vote.

Which would you say was more important in turning the deficit into a surplus:  The Budget Act of 1993 or the dot-com bubble?

[derspiess]

It is rather too bad that when the overall voting patterns shifted enough to bring the TPers in it was at the expense of the Blue Dog coalition.

I think you're putting too much faith in the Blue Dogs to vote their conscience.  I mean, it's not like they stood bravely against Obama, Pelosi, & Reid on Obamacare.

[Admiral Yi]

Even if the Tea Party people had never been elected, wouldn't the Democrats try and whore themselves out once the polling numbers showed that Americans were turning against the deficit?

If the Tea Party had never been elected then they would have continued with their party line of the previous two years, which is that while the deficit is a very important issue to address in the future, right now unemployment is too high and the recovery is too fragile to reduce spending or to raise taxes on the Schumer classes.

[Neil]

It is rather too bad that when the overall voting patterns shifted enough to bring the TPers in it was at the expense of the Blue Dog coalition.

I think you're putting too much faith in the Blue Dogs to vote their conscience.  I mean, it's not like they stood bravely against Obama, Pelosi, & Reid on Obamacare.

Were they opposed to Obamacare?

[derspiess]

It is rather too bad that when the overall voting patterns shifted enough to bring the TPers in it was at the expense of the Blue Dog coalition.

I think you're putting too much faith in the Blue Dogs to vote their conscience.  I mean, it's not like they stood bravely against Obama, Pelosi, & Reid on Obamacare.

Were they opposed to Obamacare?

They were until they got strong-armed into voting for it.  And IIRC, the subsequent 2010 elections cut their ranks almost in half.

[Neil]

It is rather too bad that when the overall voting patterns shifted enough to bring the TPers in it was at the expense of the Blue Dog coalition.

I think you're putting too much faith in the Blue Dogs to vote their conscience.  I mean, it's not like they stood bravely against Obama, Pelosi, & Reid on Obamacare.

Were they opposed to Obamacare?

They were until they got strong-armed into voting for it.  And IIRC, the subsequent 2010 elections cut their ranks almost in half.

I wonder how one strong-arms a Congressman?

[Admiral Yi]

They were until they got strong-armed into voting for it.

Where are you getting this from?  I heard reservations expressed about certain parts of the original proposal, but not the entire concept.

[Admiral Yi]

I wonder how one strong-arms a Congressman?

Plenty of ways.  Withhold election funds from the national committeee.  Withhold presidential drive bys during the campaign.  Withhold choice committee assignments.  Give him a shitty office.