Top News
Home >> 2012 Election News >> Repeat After Me: We Didn’t Lose Because of Social Issues

Repeat After Me: We Didn’t Lose Because of Social Issues

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Repeat After Me: We Didn’t Lose Because of Social Issues”.

About Matt Vespa

I'm a staunch Republican and a politics junkie who was recently the Executive Director for the Dauphin County Republican Committee in Harrisburg. Before that, I interned with the Republican Party of Pennsylvania in the summer of 2011 and Mary Pat Christie, First Lady of NJ, within the Office of the Governor of NJ in 2010. I was responsible for updating his personal contact list. My first political internship was with Tom Kean Jr's. U.S. Senate campaign in 2006.

3 comments

  1. Well, Jan – we on communicating our principles, but for now – I’m pro-gridlock.

    • this is honest question – do you think we should let the sequestration happen? is immediate financial hardship worth the significant national debt reduction it would acheive? My personal opinion is no – economics is mostly mental and reassuring our creditors and the global market is the most important thing for now; if we pass joint legislation that reduces the debt at least an initial moderate amount then investors will continue to feel good about US treasury bonds (still the worlds safest investment, by far) and our ability to fulfill our obligations, and our interest rates will remain low. gridlocking and sequestration only invites further credit downgrades and shaky investors. the world WANTS to be able to put their money in the dollar, considering that it is the currency of global transactions, the current weakness of the main alternative, the Euro; and China’s somewhat hollow market of artificially cheap exports. Right now democrats and republicans agree on 95% of what to do about sequestration: the only major thing they disagree on is that republicans only want to raise taxes on the upper class by limiting deductions/loopholes, and democrats want to do that AND raise the actual rates on the highest bracket. Obama should just drop the rate-hike and sign the bill that we all agree needs to be passed, and then we should turn to entitlements reform and balancing the budget, which will further reduce the debt and improve our situation. This would also promote good-will by giving the republicans the political cover of “raising revenues” without having to admit to an outright tax increase (“closing loopholes” just sounds better…). from a game-theory perspective (like the prisoner’s dillema) the worst thing for everyone is if no-one compromises.

  2. Hmmm, more fodder in the trough. As a Libertarian with a little ‘L” & a Republican with an “R” my personal idenity given me the leeway & opportunity to explore & adopt offerings from both parties. It seems the Republicans lack definition & are in flux & many Libertarians opinions are bedded in cement. Yet, BOTH are Americans with love & affection for this (our) Country. Using this as a base, it would seem that we can get the ying & yang going the same direction, IF we really want to. First, each must clearly define & prioritize principals, then co-mun-i-cate in a manner that isn’t reflective of Congress gridlock. It’s not an overnighter or easy, but to my thinking, it is the only way we can out number & surround the liberal socialist. It starts at home & each of us must figure out “What’s it worth?”
    Thanks, Matt, for making sure our trough was full of fodder.