Last edited Fri Jan 30, 2015, 10:21 AM - Edit history (2)
If he's at all concerned about his legacy, the veto will be used as necessary, which looks likely to be the case.
NOT doing that would also hobble the Dems. for the 2016 elections, since the resulting blowback could likely reduce public support for the party and whatever candidate prevails, would tarnish public perception of this administration at the very least, more so than his "Drone Strike" policies have.
Even the conservatives must be following this closely, since they're at risk as much as the rest of "We the People". At least that applies to those wingnuts not wealthy enough (or misinformed enough) to ignore the issue entirely.
And I have to agree with your' concern, this president hasn't publicly stated his case either way, seems to be avoiding the issue. Which applies to the TCP as well. Not very reassuring.
What do I recommend? He should be aggressively Grass Roots, of course, in support of Social Security.
Why not use his position, the "Bully Pulpit" in support of our "social safety net"? I can only guess that he's holding out for a bargain, won't put his cards on the table yet, but really should, now seems to be the time, right?
Not that I agree with our "Safety Net" being used as a bargaining chip for political gain, as we're all aware has already been done with the CPI.
So it's best for public perception that he resolves this issue, demonstrates support of Soc. Security soonest.
If not, it wouldn't be the first time Libs/Dems have shot themselves in the foot before an election, even if it's only due to bad timing in this case.
= new reply since forum marked as read
