Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Paul Smith who wrote (112888)	5/7/2005 1:49:37 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 793822

It is my opinion that the Democratic leadership is on the wrong side of this battle - they are siding with the aging baby boomers and against the younger generations. That strategy has the potential to be a real disaster for the future of the party. I don't think that's what's going on. I think it's strictly partisan jockeying. This clip from the piece you posted says it all for me: "many Democratic strategists say there is no down side to opposing Bush's plan and offering nothing in its place." From their partisan perspective, I can't argue with that. If they keep out of it, they can blame Bush either way--if nothing is enacted or if a Republican plan is enacted. If they participate, they will share the blame and/or create a win for Bush by taking some of the heat off him, depending on how the public perceives it. The best case for the Dems, IMO, is that Bush's plan is enacted solely by the Republicans. That way they get a SS fix but don't have to be accountable for it. In the short run, they're better off. In the long run, if the program proves popular, they may not be. But that's an "if" and that's not now.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next