Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: How do we make peace with Blue Dogs without giving them their way? [View all]RC
(25,592 posts)17. Although Kent Conrad(DINO ND), was in the Senate, he is a good example of a Blue Dog.
My own belief, Conrad said, is what we ought to do is take Speaker Boehners last offer, the presidents last offer, split the difference, and that would be a package of about $2.6 trillion.
Chris Wallace, to his credit, pressed Conrad for details. And Conrad provided them. The spending cuts would be $1.45 trillion. The revenue would be $1.15 trillion. So, you see there, thats a combination of $2.6 trillion.
This in an amazing offer for a Democrat to make. House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) has already accepted that a balanced deal, by his definition, would include a ratio of 1:1 spending cuts to tax increases. Indeed, his second offer included $1 trillion in tax increases in return for $1 trillion in spending cuts ($1.3 trillion if you count interest). By averaging Boehners second offer with Obamas third offer that is to say, by starting from a baseline that includes more rounds of Democratic concessions than Republican concessions Conrad is proposing a more lopsided deal than Boehner is currently asking for.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/26/the-white-houses-kent-conrad-problem/
Chris Wallace, to his credit, pressed Conrad for details. And Conrad provided them. The spending cuts would be $1.45 trillion. The revenue would be $1.15 trillion. So, you see there, thats a combination of $2.6 trillion.
This in an amazing offer for a Democrat to make. House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) has already accepted that a balanced deal, by his definition, would include a ratio of 1:1 spending cuts to tax increases. Indeed, his second offer included $1 trillion in tax increases in return for $1 trillion in spending cuts ($1.3 trillion if you count interest). By averaging Boehners second offer with Obamas third offer that is to say, by starting from a baseline that includes more rounds of Democratic concessions than Republican concessions Conrad is proposing a more lopsided deal than Boehner is currently asking for.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/26/the-white-houses-kent-conrad-problem/
Good riddance! In reality, Blue Dogs are as big a problem as the Republicans are.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
73 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Do you "not believe in abortions" or do you not believe in abortions being legal?
Taverner
Jan 2013
#12
I would rather women give children up for adoption rather than abort, except in cases where the
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#62
"very pro business"? I agree if you mean pro-big-business and pro-business in foreign countries.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2013
#37
Great post. The purists make me physically ill. They can't see anything but their logic.
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#65
Although Kent Conrad(DINO ND), was in the Senate, he is a good example of a Blue Dog.
RC
Jan 2013
#17
Start by learning to listen & stop insulting those who don't agree with you. Neither you nor anyone
jody
Jan 2013
#19
See my edit change after your post. IMO color of any object is a useless example because some people
jody
Jan 2013
#29
It seems unlikely you will find anyone that agrees with all your opinions and that's all they are.
jody
Jan 2013
#35
OP sought general answers for a path to "peace". No scientist would attempt to use special cases
jody
Jan 2013
#32
Anybody that will vote the Democratic way in the Congress is fine with me. nt
bemildred
Jan 2013
#25
Make it clear that they can come along for the ride for progress, civil liberties, economic
TheKentuckian
Jan 2013
#43
Yeah - we can't deny people's liberties to deny other people's liberties - that would be wrong!
Taverner
Jan 2013
#48
Taverner you changed #45 from "civil liberties" to "liberties". Was that because you aren't able to
jody
Jan 2013
#51
Understand, some people don't know or ignore that the 2nd Amendment is a civil right. nt
jody
Jan 2013
#58
Bullshit!!! If they were republicans, it would be easier for them to simply join that party. They
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#67
Do what the GOPee does, and don't give them committee chairs or memberships unless they toe the line
Erose999
Jan 2013
#59
By realizing that they are democrats too and come from districts where it would easier for them to
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#60
I don't know of any blue dog democrats that are engaged with republicans is the war on women.
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#69
"Also, your argument is an argument towards regional parties. That's a loser every time."
bluestate10
Jan 2013
#70