Non White emerging Majority, The Dems are not Your

Non White emerging Majority, The Dems are not Your Friends

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/21/legal-but-still-poor-the-economic-consequences-of-amnesty.html

African-American unemployment is now twice that of whites. The black middle class, understandably proud of Obama's elevation, has been losing the economic gains made over the past thirty years.

""Latino-Americans have made huge strides in previous decades, but now are also falling behind, with a gradual loss of income relative to whites. Poverty among Latino children in America has risen from 27.5 percent in 2007 to 33.7 percent in 2012, an increase of 1.7 million minors.

Logically, many Latinos and African-Americans might suspect that amnesty won't be a great deal for them. There are occasional signs of disquiet. A recent Pew survey found that not only half of all whites, but nearly two-fifths of African Americans and roughly even a third of Hispanics approved of increased deportations of the undocumented. A Wall Street Journal-NBC poll found that well less than half of Latinos supported the President's action.

This ambivalence may reflect the reality that legalization of the undocumented may be felt hardest in those places, such as California, that have attracted the most newcomers, and also have highly developed welfare states. Today public agencies in Los Angeles, with an estimated one million undocumented immigrants, are bracing from large increases in the demand for state provided services.""

But wait, It will get worse.

Dave Farnsworth

When no insurance is better than ObamaCare

When no insurance is better than ObamaCare
http://www.salon.com/2014/11/10/scotus_could_roil_the_gop_how_new_threat_to_obamacare_may_backfire_on_the_right/
""But it's not at all that simple. The biggest political challenge facing the GOP is the fact that "repealing" or otherwise damaging the Affordable Care Act, while ideologically satisfying, carries with it some very real consequences. The states that opted not to create their own health exchanges – the states that would lose their health insurance subsidies if SCOTUS rules against the government – are mostly Republican-governed states. The sudden unavailability of those tax credits would mean that a lot of newly insured people in those states would no longer be able to afford their health coverage. They will expect their elected officials to do something to mitigate the damage, which would be catastrophic. Close to 5 million people across the country would see their health insurance costs spike.""

This is incomplete. What about the 5 million who didn't qualify for the tax credits who gain the removal of the tax on those without insurance. Since insurance is meaningless without doctors and this uninsured group will need doctors, this could cause a migration of doctors to the uncovered states combined with a migration of newly unsubstituted to the remaining states. In fact the states could encourage this with tax relief.

Assuming the healthcare law has an increased level for health savings accounts (which are needed with the high deductibles), many in the uncovered states can self insure (that is pay cash). Cutting the government out of healthcare has been shown to be much more efficient, with many doctors charging the deductible levels for cash customers.

As a result the average income in the uncovered states will go up, the doctor availability will go up, and the federal insurance tax will be eliminated.  What is not to like.

End thew denial, move on

End thew denial, move on
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/leonard-pitts-jr/article3649521.html#storylink=cpy

""The first time he said it was 10 years ago.

Back then, it seemed a brisk wind in a stuffy room, a reclamation of defining verities somehow lost in the smoke and haze of political expedience. He said it again last week and the effect was starkly different — somehow forlorn, like birthday cake after the party, or a Christmas tree set out on the curb on Jan. 2.

"I continue to believe," said President Obama, "we are simply more than a collection of red and blue states. We are the United States."

The first time he said this, it brought the Democratic National Convention to its feet and made him a rock star. Ten years later, he's a president halfway through his second term and he was speaking at a press conference the morning after the midterm elections, the morning after his party was drowned in a Republican deluge.

Doubtless, the president intended it as a statement of defiant principle. Instead it came across, to these ears, at least, as a rhetorical Hail Mary pass. It wasn't so much that the president's high-minded assertion was untrue as that it seemed immaterial. You wondered if anyone was still listening.

Even by the not-stellar standards of modern politics, the campaign of 2014 was a disappointment. It was the Year of No Ideas.

""
That is no ideas acceptable to the Obama mindset.  Some say cynicism, others would say reality.
That this author and the president is trying to blame something else, other than his own performance indicates a state of denial.

It is up to the Republicans to drive the nail on the coffin by enacting those ideas (thought non existent.)

notWhistling Past the Graveyard

Whistling Past the Graveyard
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/05/upside-of-democratic-party-loss-in-midterms-column/18544401/

''So onto the good news: With few exceptions, our candidates ran strong races in this adverse climate and ably stood up for Democratic values. The Clintons stood up for an inclusive national party, tirelessly campaigning across the Midwest and South. And Democratic donors and outside groups stood up, ensuring our candidates were financially competitive to the end.""

Republicans have "Democratic" value except they are serious.  Many are former Jack Kennedy supporters, who expressed the ideals of individual contribution now are the republican mainstream.

'"The Tea Party caucus in the House is now stronger. The Republican presidential primaries are weighted to the right – and Senators Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio will invariably tack in that direction, exercising a gravitational pull over the internal processes of Congress. They will set off vicious rivalries, both among themselves and with the Republican older guard, which itself may fracture over which establishment horse to back in blocking a Tea Partier from the nomination. Mitch McConnell may run the Senate, but it often won't seem that way.""

The tea party has been primarily absorbed into the mainstream. It won't be business as usual, the tea party values are built in.

""First, extremism. Then, corruption. The special interests that paid for this victory know that in      all likelihood it will be short-lived, and thus they will behave like pigs at the trough. Their real agenda will be revealed when they seek to undo and rewrite regulations for their own benefit, such as undermining environmental protections and seek all manner of goodies from Senate appropriators.""

Here we have projection.  The Democrats have been the party of extremism and corruption. He is describing a reasonable projection of the Democratic way.

""The same dynamic will unfold with respect to all of the pseudo-scandals the Republicans will gin up and investigate; already, loose talk of impeachment permeates the outer reaches of the conservative movement.""

Since the scandal's are real, and the perpetrators will be lining up to  rat out their fellow democrats  we might consider this after the legal system finishes with the democrats, but by then, it may be unnecessary. Impeachment is a path Obama doesn't deserve.  He lives for the spotlight, irrelevance is a just reward.

When the parties are extremely far apart, who is to say which is extreme. If we capture a group of true politicians among the democrats, we can generate  bipartisanship.