Anyone want to explain how the President won this time?

[a2liberal]

Since I know someone is always able to come up with a way to spin things as a positive, I'm curious what it is this time.

The way I see it, we have the following situations before and after the fiscal cliff "compromise":

Without compromise:
- spending cuts
- significant tax increases/reversions

With compromise:
- less tax increase, many tax cuts for the richer population made permanent, temporary renewals to some tax breaks for lower income folks (maybe some permanent ones too like the brackets, but I know at least some of the credit renewals were temporary while the lower brackets for 250k-400k were permanent).
-same spending cuts, delayed 2 months.

How is this a win? I tried to see this from the perspective of someone who did want to see lower brackets kept for lower incomes... I personally wanted to see them all revert but I know that's a minority view here. Even from that perspective, I see the "compromise" as trading permanent tax cuts for the 250k-400k and worse, huge estate tax giveaway to the rich, in return for some small bracket decreases and temporary credit renewals for lower incomes.

I openly acknowledge that I may have missed something, hence my reason for posting. Please enlighten me!

[Skinner]

1. I think it's not over yet.

It remains to be seen who will win.

[4 t 4]

22. What? Have I lost time

I think he's asking about the real world. The world in which the president won a second term???

[4 t 4]

24. are You talking about the

sequester, sorry i was taken aback, it is so far from a winner I was confused, sorry

[bluedigger]

2. Everything is not a zero sum game.

[southernyankeebelle]

3. I have come to the conclusion no matter who wins the working people in this country

we are screwed. That is all.

[denverbill]

4. I don't know what you are talking about and why you are worried about 'spin'.

The Bush tax cuts for the rich are mostly gone and the middle class cuts mostly remain. Obama pretty much won on that one, but that's a completely separate issue.

The sequester was a loss for Democrats who wanted 1/2 the money to come from taxes increases. Instead, it was all spending cuts as demanded by Republickers. The sequester is 100% Republicker victory.

[hfojvt]

5. uhm, Obama kept $1.3 trillion in tax cuts for the top 5%

and $2.4 trillion in tax cuts for the top 20%
and only $600 billion in tax cuts for the bottom 60%

so really January 1st was a big victory for the rich, including about $1,000,000 a year in tax cuts for one Mitt Romney

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022130101

And actually the sequester was tied together with the Bush tax cuts in the so-called Fiscal Cliff. Back in December, the Democrats could theoretically have gotten something in exchange for avoiding the $1.9 trillion in tax increases that were going to happen automatically.

Instead we got a mere $600 billion in tax increases and were told that that was a huge victory.

But, of course, Obama and most Democrats consider most of the top 20% to be part of the "middle" and they also don't really give a crap about the bottom 60% because we don't make up a significant percentage of their campaign donors.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

9. x2

[denverbill]

11. So you are suggesting that Obama pass an additional tax cut for the poor and

eliminate all tax cuts for the rich passed by Bush?

Please explain how that would have happened considering that Republicans would have voted against (or not allowed a vote) on any package that didn't give the rich at least some tax cuts?

The highest tax rate went from 33 to 39% on incomes over $400K, the capital gains rate went from 15 to 20%, and the estate tax from 0 to 40%. And the bottom 80% kept virtually all of Bush's tax cuts.

[hfojvt]

12. the numbers say that the top 20%

kept far more of their Bush tax cuts than the bottom 60% did. $2.4 trillion vs. $600 billion.

The capital gains rate was going to 20% automatically. The estate tax rate was going to 50% automatically with a smaller deductible, instead Obama raised the deductible and cut the rate. the tax rate on dividends was going to 39.6% - automatically. Instead, Obama cut it to 20%.

$1.9 trillion in tax increases on the top 5% would have happened automatically. It was some sort of victory to reduce that to $600 billion and call THAT a tax increase? It's a $1.3 trillion tax cut.

I suggest first of all that

1. Obama at least TRY to offer tax cuts that favor the bottom 60%
2. Obama should stop pretending that tax cuts that give $2.4 trillion to the top 20% and $600 billion to the bottom 60% are "middle class" tax cuts

But then again, why should Obama do that when he has DUPED so many people into believing that tax cuts for the rich are really tax increases on the rich and tax cuts for the middle class? I mean why stand up for the working class when screwing the working class and lying to them works so well?

How would that have worked? I don't know. He would have fought for the working class and perhaps lost. As it stands now, he fought for the upper class and won and now lies to the working class and pretends that the $3.7 trillion was all about us. When so very little of it goes to us.

[bigbrother05]

6. Technically the Orangeman only claimed a 98% win on sequester

Don't think any Dems considered the sequester a win for our side, but rather a poison pill for the others. This is going to be painful before the RWNJs will consider any changes. They'll crow that they held the line against the big spenders, but everyone touched by the cuts will remember who crowed about their win and that should factor in come Nov 2014.

[sharp_stick]

7. Not really a 100% win for the pukes

they really do not want to see 1/2 the cuts come from defense And I mean they really really don't want that to happen, it's one of their largest lobbies and the defense industry funds the pukes pretty much 8 or 9 to 1 against the Democrats.

No matter how it's spun the defense cuts are a major major deal over the next 10 years and there is no way in hell I can see the pukes let that happen.

Some of the teabaggers think the sequester is a great idea but just wait until the checks stop coming in.

[Puzzledtraveller]

8. 3 x 3 dimensional chess, that's a whopping 9 dimensions!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. It's Showbiz. A series with cliffhanger endings and more to come.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken

[magellan]

13. The only win here is for the extreme right

They got the spending cuts they wanted. Bloody-minded as they are, they don't care where they come from or who's hurt. And they have good reason to think Obama will give them more by way of cuts to social programs in order to end the crisis.

[Boomerproud]

15. With "massive" defense cuts (at least the media is yelping about it)

whether there's a terrorist attack on US soil or US interests (which can be anything at this point) or not who's going to get blamed for "America being less safe." Obama that's who-and Boehner and McCain will be leading the charge with the entire Right going Yee HAW.

[magellan]

20. They (the media and anyone else) can blame Obama all they like

I'm sure they will. The media is the right's lapdog. But that doesn't mean Americans will buy it.

The scary thing is that a majority of the GOP don't care what Americans think. Period. The end game for them has always been destroying social programs, and they'll continue whittling away until it's done.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. We do not know who will win

This is far from over.

For the moment the WH is ahead on the posturing war. Polls say the American people are mostly blaming the GOP...stay tuned.

[4 t 4]

17. anyone that tells you this sequester

is any kind of win in any format is just as much the problem. (both sides) This is bullshit and everyone looses except those who are very wealthy,it doesn't affect them at all. This is not a whoops , oh sorry couldn't be helped. This has been in place for a very, very long time. I know my avatar is 4t4 but I can't listen to him on teevee and haven't been able to since 2008. It has been 5 years and the average household median is $50,000 I made that much in 1997 and I bet many others did too. Think about how you have been reduced to be grateful for anything short of homeless.

[Autumn]

21. So true and you are so right.

It's a pathetic game they are playing and it's designed to benefit them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. I am talking of the political games

Not the pain we are all gona feel.

For the record, I don't think it will last as long as the GOP intends it to.. Business has started to scream already.

[Autumn]

16. republicans screwed the pooch on this. Real people are going to be hurt

by this and those people are going to raise hell with those idiots. This hurts the republican voters too. They can end this stupid sequester and do their job. Edited to add. I don't think anyone's going to win, least of all the people.

[DiverDave]

18. They couldnt give a flying flip. THEY are just fine

And you are right alot of decent hardworking taxpaying folks are gonna get hurt.

[Autumn]

19. The American people are not stupid, they know who is doing this.

These people are not fit to be in office.