Can this election settle anything?

  • Article by: E.J. DIONNE JR. , Washington Post
  • Updated: September 24, 2012 - 6:16 PM

Can one election turn the country around and make Washington work again?

  • 38
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
lostinstpaulSep. 24, 1210:47 AM

After reading this, I stopped reading. "Brand Obama has always been resistant to partisanship." What an obviously un informed opinion. Anyone who believes the line, is not paying ANY attention (The left leaning paper has lots of thaat kind of reader)

11
35
alaskanredSep. 24, 1210:49 AM

"President Obama's time in office, however, has given rise to a new approach. Republicans decided to do all they could to make the president unsuccessful. Their not-so-subliminal message has been: We will make the country ungovernable unless you hand us every bit of legislative, executive and judicial power so we can do what we want."********* Yet, they blame the president for the failure to compromise. Can we just acknowledge why this really happening with this one president and put away the talking points for an honest review?

29
13
gandalf48Sep. 24, 1210:52 AM

What need to start doing is compromising for what's best for this country...neither party is doing that today.

13
28
pumiceSep. 24, 1210:52 AM

From the article: "Obama hopes that if he earns re-election by defending tax increases on the wealthy, the current structure of Medicare, and investments in education and infrastructure, he'll have a mandate for a sensible budget compromise." Judging by attitudes and history, the President's platform has more support from and will be easier to sell to the American people than the Romney/Ryan platform--further tax cuts which disproportionately favor the wealthy, voucherized Medicare, voucherize/privatize education, decreased government role in regulating/building transportation, communications and/or energy infrastructure. The difference between the two Parties regarding attitude toward the role of government makes negotiations and compromise more and more unlikely. We, the people, must make informed choices in order to end the dysfunction in D.C.

23
8
alaskanredSep. 24, 1210:56 AM

"What an obviously un informed opinion. Anyone who believes the line, is not paying ANY attention (The left leaning paper has lots of thaat kind of reader)"*********** He appointed republicans in his cabinet and every evil "Marxist" policy he has embraced are creation of Republicans. Name the Republicans in congress who have made an attempt to work with the president without the wrath of the republican party. Is the disconnect that deep?

34
11
pumiceSep. 24, 1210:57 AM

Re: "The right-wing contention is simple: Romney was a lousy candidate, a closet moderate who didn't offer the detailed conservative program in all its splendor and who 'muzzled' Paul Ryan, an idea some Ryan partisans are leaking." And yet, Paul Ryan did not enter the nomination contest, and Mitt Romney handily defeated a field of less moderate contestants ranging from TEApublican to traditional Republican to Libertarian.

21
8
ranger1873Sep. 24, 1211:21 AM

The issue isn't the outcome of the election, because there's no longer a discernable difference between the major parties. Democrats tax and overspend because it's what they do; Republicans help them because it's what THEY do. It's all about the next election. The political will does not exist in Washington to truly address the issues we face. To have any chance of getting anything done, a top-to-bottom cleanout is in order.

21
18
iowasenseSep. 24, 1211:26 AM

Lest we forget--- President Obama had a favorable majority in both Houses from Jan 2009 to Jan 2011. However, instead of pursuing a Budget that would reduce spending he concentrated on getting both the Health Insurance Requirement Act (ACA) and Reforms to the Immigration Laws that have never been funded by Congress or fully enforced by any President since 1986. ****The only way we are going to turn things around with one election is by voting all candidates from both Major Parties out of power. Neither major party wants to do what is best for our country. They are more interested in lining their own pockets with money from the public largesse and staying in office.

8
25
openconceptSep. 24, 1211:43 AM

"From the article: "Obama hopes that if he earns re-election by defending tax increases on the wealthy, the current structure of Medicare, and investments in education and infrastructure, he'll have a mandate for a sensible budget compromise." -- Interesting, liberals always say that when the R's are in office it is NOT a mandate...that they still need to govern for the Country and NOT their own party. Yet when the D's are in power...those mandates...they are just a darn good thing and needed. Hypocritical much?

9
20
dschachenmeyerSep. 24, 1211:47 AM

"The political will does not exist in Washington to truly address the issues we face" ----- Ranger, I agree with you, but I sense it is not limited only to politicians. More and more, I sense citizens themselves have adopted a NIMBY philosophy when it comes to government growth and spending. Most citizens want the short term benefit of entitlements and have little patience or concern for the long term economic affects. A recent poll showed 40% of American favor an increase in government spending on entitlements. Budget numbers and economic reports will never have the same impact as well placed "They are going to destroy the system..." campaign speech. The country will have to go bankrupt before Washington changes its tune on spending.

12
12

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT