If Obama loses re-eclection, how will he handle the Fiscal Cliff in Dec 2012?

[JEDI]

Fiscal Cliff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_fiscal_cliff

-expiration of Bush tax cuts.
-reduced re-imbursement for Medicare doctors
-Across-the-board spending cuts ("sequestration") to most discretionary programs

Its 2days b4 the election. Obama is leading in the polls. But lets say he loses.
How will he handle the Fiscal Cliff?

For the past 2yrs, Obama wanted to get rid of the Bush tax cuts.
Now he has his opportunity. If anything comes to his desk, veto it if it contains an extension of the Bush Tax cuts.

Short term, the Fiscal Cliff will hurt but long term, it will help America.
Win/win for Obama? screw Pres-elect Romney becasue his first 2yrs will be hell AND leave America financially stronger in the long run with less deficit.

Your take?

 

[Attic]

He is a true politician and as such has few if any real leadership skills when the shit hits the fan. Should your scenario come to pass I'd expect he'd use rhetoric over substance like true politicians always do when showing any true character proves to be an insurmountable request.

Here's Obama's go to steps in a situation like this:
1) skirt responsibility (blame bush, she/he did it, the other side did it, it would have been worse if not for me, ect...) and then
2) swiftfully proclaim America is strong and will be fine and how much her cares for the country and this major dillema
3) leave the problem to somebody else while implying he's policies are to be credited should the fiscall cliff result in anything good but making sure to imply that should it fail it's not his fault

Win win for a true politician and the partisan hacks swallow (gulp?) it up.

Obama is a fool if you can't see that you're blind. His policies hurt business and he is a very devisive centerpiece for America (his issue, not anothers)

Sadly for the USA, Obama is the better of two fools, but what we see is a lot of folks giving Obama a pass because of party affiliation. Until we start demanding true leaders we will continue to get true politicians.

 

[mshan]

"On the other hand, the baseline projection—running the economy off the cliff—is “too cold” in the sense that it is predicted to put the economy back in recession in 2013, with an estimated 0.5 percent decrease in real GDP.

That result shows up in the following chart as a temporary widening of the output gap (the gap between actual and potential real GDP) before the gap begins to narrow again."

http://www.economonitor.com/dolanec...ns-underline-need-for-goldilocks-budget-deal/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-...nore-pundits-partisans-huffpo-data-says-obama

 

[MovingTarget]

Obama will have little to do with it. If he loses, the GOP-dominated House of Representatives will simply run out the clock until inauguration day, blaming the cliff on Obama. They will do jack squat. If Obama is reelected, he will try to tackle the issue, but the same recalcitrant faction in the House of Representatives will continue to pursue their scorched-earth tactics against any Democrat in office.

The ONLY way for the fiscal cliff to be handled in a responsible way is for Congress to get their collective butts in gear. They caused this mess. They are the only ones with the power to fix it.

 

[techs]

If Romney wins the Republicans will welcome the fiscal cliff. Then they can step in and save the military, Medicare, etc. Since the Bush tax cuts will have expired they can claim credit for another massive tax cut when they reinstitute them for both the middle class and the super rich.
Obama will not be able to do anything to stop the fiscal cliff. However, I assume he will order the government to spend money as if it never happened. This is within his rights as the chief executive. When the Republicans actually settle on a budget then cuts will happen.

Of course Obama could just let the cuts happen and order the government to actually make the cuts in spending and collapse the economy. But Obama isn't a Republican and wouldn't do that.

 

[a777pilot]

Fiscal Cliff:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_fiscal_cliff

-expiration of Bush tax cuts.
-reduced re-imbursement for Medicare doctors
-Across-the-board spending cuts ("sequestration") to most discretionary programs

Its 2days b4 the election. Obama is leading in the polls. But lets say he loses.
How will he handle the Fiscal Cliff?

For the past 2yrs, Obama wanted to get rid of the Bush tax cuts.
Now he has his opportunity. If anything comes to his desk, veto it if it contains an extension of the Bush Tax cuts.

Short term, the Fiscal Cliff will hurt but long term, it will help America.
Win/win for Obama? screw Pres-elect Romney becasue his first 2yrs will be hell AND leave America financially stronger in the long run with less deficit.

Your take?

First, it is for the Congress to take action. He is to give leadership, so we can figure that's not going to happen.

As to what he will do if he losses? That's easy. He will do everything he can to push the American economy over the cliff, just like he will do if he wins. That is his goal....a fundamentally changed America, i.e., broke, put in its place, and its citizens dependent on the largess of a big federal government.

 

[Moonbeam]

First, it is for the Congress to take action. He is to give leadership, so we can figure that's not going to happen.

As to what he will do if he losses? That's easy. He will do everything he can to push the American economy over the cliff, just like he will do if he wins. That is his goal....a fundamentally changed America, i.e., broke, put in its place, and its citizens dependent on the largess of a big federal government.

The economy went over a cliff under Bush. We have had slow but steady job growth sense, the markets are up, housing is recovering, just how is any of this Obama driving us off a cliff. Can you be honest enough to ask if maybe your hatred is blinding you. Surely you are patriotic enough to put your life on the line serving in the military. How much can your ego be worth? Maybe more than life itself? Wouldn't it be enough just to think Romney is a better man for President than Obama or is he so worthless in reality that you have to turn Obama into a monster to support Romney? Jesus!

 

[a777pilot]

The economy went over a cliff under Bush. We have had slow but steady job growth sense, the markets are up, housing is recovering, just how is any of this Obama driving us off a cliff. Can you be honest enough to ask if maybe your hatred is blinding you. Surely you are patriotic enough to put your life on the line serving in the military. How much can your ego be worth? Maybe more than life itself? Wouldn't it be enough just to think Romney is a better man for President than Obama or is he so worthless in reality that you have to turn Obama into a monster to support Romney? Jesus!

LOL!

First, this over the cliff thing happened under the direction of the Democrat controlled Congress.

Next, and more importantly, we are not in a recovery. We are just moving backward more slowly. We will start to have a recovery when the number of private sector jobs increases to a level way above what is needed to keep up with population growth.

Obama had four years and for two of those years total control of Congress. He is a monumental failure and we have this opportunity to get new, fresh and competent leadership. Let's hope We the People take this opportunity.

 

[MovingTarget]

First, it is for the Congress to take action. He is to give leadership, so we can figure that's not going to happen.

As to what he will do if he losses? That's easy. He will do everything he can to push the American economy over the cliff, just like he will do if he wins. That is his goal....a fundamentally changed America, i.e., broke, put in its place, and its citizens dependent on the largess of a big federal government.

Define "leadership" here. What would you have Obama do in this situation? If anything, the past two years have proven that you can lead Congress to sanity, but you can't make it think. The way the rules are set up, all it takes are a few senators or a small faction of representatives going scorched earth to bring all legislative work to a standstill. They have been doing so all along, and then blaming Obama for not getting things done. Politically cunning? Yes, but it is bad for the nation as a whole. He once extended his hand in the spirit of bipartisanship - real leadership - only to have it bitten in return.

 

[a777pilot]

Define "leadership" here. What would you have Obama do in this situation? If anything, the past two years have proven that you can lead Congress to sanity, but you can't make it think. The way the rules are set up, all it takes are a few senators or a small faction of representatives going scorched earth to bring all legislative work to a standstill. They have been doing so all along, and then blaming Obama for not getting things done. Politically cunning? Yes, but it is bad for the nation as a whole. He once extended his hand in the spirit of bipartisanship - real leadership - only to have it bitten in return.

I would say that for there to be Presidential leadership, at the minimum, Obama should talk to the leaders in the Congress.....both sides. Leadership is not just ordering others to do what you say, then complain when they don't obey your orders.

 

[MovingTarget]

I would say that for there to be Presidential leadership, at the minimum, Obama should talk to the leaders in the Congress.....both sides. Leadership is not just ordering others to do what you say, then complain when they don't obey your orders.

I can agree with this. However, merely talking to members of both sides does not guarantee results. There comes a point where no amount of 'leadership' will produce results when faced with a irrational opposition. This is the situation that we find ourselves in. So, either Obama adopts the same scorched-earth tactics and strongarms Congress to an unconstitutional extent, or results do not occur. If he does the former, he and his office no longer retains legitimacy. If the latter, then people complain that he lacks leadership. Opting for the latter in this situation is the only thing that a true leader would do.