Nukem2 wrote: He certainly needs to step a cross the aisle a bit. With a GOP House, he does not have a mandate . He does need to be conciliatory.

Nukem2 wrote: He certainly needs to step a cross the aisle a bit. With a GOP House, he does not have a mandate . He does need to be conciliatory.

KeadysCombover wrote:

Nukem2 wrote: He certainly needs to step a cross the aisle a bit. With a GOP House, he does not have a mandate . He does need to be conciliatory.

Does the GOP House need to be conciliatory as well?

Mutaman wrote: Just off the top of my head. I don't know what Obama will do (other than not be Romney). But here's my top ten list.

10. Require that all Americans who have not already done so, be required to take a class in basic economics.
9. Legalize internet gambling.
8. Legalize reefer. 
7. Sanction all those pundits and others who are always wrong. 
6. Get serious about prosecuting the boys on Wall Street who break the law.
5. Get serious about immigration reform.
4. In the past 13 months, the East Coast has been mauled by two hurricanes  an earthquake, and the hottest summer on record. And as I post, a blizzerd is now hitting us in Early November. Something is really wrong. If you care about your kids, better start focusing on the environment.
3. Focus on creating jobs, stimulating the economy, and end the Bush recession.
2. Now that Obamacare has survived every challenge, get it implemented and make it work.
1. Get this ridiculous war in the Mideast that nobody ever talks about over, and bring our boys home.

Mutaman wrote: Just off the top of my head. I don't know what Obama will do (other than not be Romney). But here's my top ten list.

4. In the past 13 months, the East Coast has been mauled by two hurricanes  an earthquake, and the hottest summer on record. And as I post, a blizzerd is now hitting us in Early November. Something is really wrong. If you care about your kids, better start focusing on the environment.

Mutaman wrote: Just off the top of my head. I don't know what Obama will do (other than not be Romney). But here's my top ten list.

10. Require that all Americans who have not already done so, be required to take a class in basic economics.
9. Legalize internet gambling.
8. Legalize reefer. 
7. Sanction all those pundits and others who are always wrong. 
6. Get serious about prosecuting the boys on Wall Street who break the law.
5. Get serious about immigration reform.
4. In the past 13 months, the East Coast has been mauled by two hurricanes  an earthquake, and the hottest summer on record. And as I post, a blizzerd is now hitting us in Early November. Something is really wrong. If you care about your kids, better start focusing on the environment.
3. Focus on creating jobs, stimulating the economy, and end the Bush recession.
2. Now that Obamacare has survived every challenge, get it implemented and make it work.
1. Get this ridiculous war in the Mideast that nobody ever talks about over, and bring our boys home.

gr8one1 wrote: Will be difficult for Obama to move to the center, as he is a left wing ideologue. However
moving to the center may have been the price Clinton extracted from him for h is very aggressive
campaigning on Obama's behalf.

DukeWayne wrote:

 

Tell us again about those big crowds Mitt is drawing.

Considering you were dead wrong about everything you predicted about the election, why should we think that you are right about anything else? 

MarcWhit wrote: Along with what else has been posted here, a couple more of note...

* Taxes will be raised on those making more than $250,000/year (though I expect that number gets "negotiated" up to 500K or so).

* Obamacare will be more fully implemented. Perhaps even to the point where some individual states stop refusing to accept federal funding to better execute a federal law that has been passed by the Legislative branch, signed by the Executive branch and cleared by the Judicial branch.

* At least one - and perhaps two - new Supreme Court justices will be named.

As for reaching across the aisle, Mr. Obama was well on his way to doing so with Mr. Boehner last year, until Mr. Boehner failed to deliver those he supposedly "leads."

And, yes, I chuckle at the thought that a man who just won (likely) 332 Electoral Votes and became the first president since Eisenhower to earn at least 50% of the votes in back-to-back elections needs to be the first one to "reach out."

MarquetteHoopsWarriors wrote:

MarcWhit wrote: Along with what else has been posted here, a couple more of note...

* Taxes will be raised on those making more than $250,000/year (though I expect that number gets "negotiated" up to 500K or so).

* Obamacare will be more fully implemented. Perhaps even to the point where some individual states stop refusing to accept federal funding to better execute a federal law that has been passed by the Legislative branch, signed by the Executive branch and cleared by the Judicial branch.

* At least one - and perhaps two - new Supreme Court justices will be named.

As for reaching across the aisle, Mr. Obama was well on his way to doing so with Mr. Boehner last year, until Mr. Boehner failed to deliver those he supposedly "leads."

And, yes, I chuckle at the thought that a man who just won (likely) 332 Electoral Votes and became the first president since Eisenhower to earn at least 50% of the votes in back-to-back elections needs to be the first one to "reach out."

Leaders need to lead.

He's also one of the first to be re-elected with a smaller percentange and smaller number of votes than his first election.  He does not have anything remotely close to a mandate.  He needs to be the leader here.  He campaigned on being "All of the above on energy".  He campaigned on being bi-partisan.  Lets see it.  The buck stops with him.

MarcWhit wrote: All that was heard from many on this board - from our leader Mr. Dodds on down - was that Ohio and Wisconsin would decide the election.

Well, let's be bipartisan for a moment and give Mr. Romney Ohio, Wisconsin and even Florida...he still isn't at 270. Heck, toss in New Hampshire; still not there.

The United States does not run a "one person - one vote" system for president, it is state-by-state. And both campaignes realized there were 8-9 states that would determine the winner...so that is where the time, talent and treausre were focused; not on individual vote totals in the other 40+. Mr. Obama won all of the "swing states" except one.

Quite frankly, Mr. Romney got his assed kicked in the column where it counts in the states where it counted most.

(And let's stop referring to Wisconsin as a "swing state" until someone under age 28 - and counting - was alive the last time a Republican won the state in a national election.)

As far as I'm concerned, the Bush tax cuts expire Dec. 31. If Republicnas don't want that to happen, they know the address where Mr. Obama lives...now and for the next four years.

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

MarcWhit wrote:

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

MarcWhit wrote:

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

That would be great. I don't know if we will ever really know why that agreement fell apart. Like everything else in politics, I'm sure both sides have their own stories and the truth lies somewhere in between. Always blame to the other side.

Mutaman wrote:

DukeWayne wrote:

 

Tell us again about those big crowds Mitt is drawing.

Considering you were dead wrong about everything you predicted about the election, why should we think that you are right about anything else? 

DukeWayne wrote:

Mutaman wrote:

DukeWayne wrote: 

I was wrong about the election. So what?  

CaribouJim wrote:

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

MarcWhit wrote:

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

That would be great. I don't know if we will ever really know why that agreement fell apart. Like everything else in politics, I'm sure both sides have their own stories and the truth lies somewhere in between. Always blame to the other side.

IIRC I think both sides were getting pressured from the extremest in both camps - have to tell far left and right to take a hike for the good of the country.

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

CaribouJim wrote:

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

MarcWhit wrote:

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

That would be great. I don't know if we will ever really know why that agreement fell apart. Like everything else in politics, I'm sure both sides have their own stories and the truth lies somewhere in between. Always blame to the other side.

IIRC I think both sides were getting pressured from the extremest in both camps - have to tell far left and right to take a hike for the good of the country.

The problem from my perspective is the President is one of those inhabitants of the too far left. If he truly wants to get something done, he needs to be a leader and move closer to the center like Clinton did.

MUfanPhD wrote:

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

CaribouJim wrote:

MUAlphaBangura wrote:

MarcWhit wrote:

OK, Alpha, here is what we can do, for starters. Go back to the Obama-Boehner agreement from the Summer of 2011. Pass it, sign it, put it into law. Today. Right now.

The basis for agreement from the nation's top Democrat and the nation's leading Republican is already there; just act on it. Cool photo op when the bill is signed. Handshakes all around.

Everyone can agree with that, yes?

That would be great. I don't know if we will ever really know why that agreement fell apart. Like everything else in politics, I'm sure both sides have their own stories and the truth lies somewhere in between. Always blame to the other side.

IIRC I think both sides were getting pressured from the extremest in both camps - have to tell far left and right to take a hike for the good of the country.

The problem from my perspective is the President is one of those inhabitants of the too far left. If he truly wants to get something done, he needs to be a leader and move closer to the center like Clinton did.

First, no one was going to sign that agreement, because as Caribou notes, there was pressure from the extremes.  None of the senators/congressman up for re-election could afford to look weak.  This is actually more true on the Republican side because of the Tea party movement.  So both parties basically agreed to just deal with it later.

As for the bolded comment above.  I see this comment on here a lot.  But pundits on both sides pretty much agree that Obama and the left are fairly close to center.  The republican's because of the Tea Party movement have moved so far Right, that it has alienated the middle and likely cost them this election.  The republican's commentators after the election were saying the party needs to move away from the right cliff and back towards the center.

The only thing I really hear people complain about being far left for Obama is Obamacare.  But even that was modeled after a plan originally proposed by Gingrich (Far Right) and Romney.