A predictable consequence will be that the Democratic left-wing will read more into the outcome than is warranted and will try to ram an unpopular agenda through Congress. Their interest groups will line up looking for spoils the way Republican interest groups salivated over Bush's two victories.  It is my hope that Obama realizes that he was elected by the great center of the polity and therefore would have the courage to say no to these special interests often enough to keep that center with him.

"ending an era in which the Republicans succeeded at winning votes from the working poor to cut taxes for billionaires."

Correction,

Ending an era in which the Republicans succeeded at winning votes from the working poor to cut taxes for  NY and CA professionals . Marty, You are still and idiot. Billionaires don't pay taxes.  When NY Obama supporters start to pay 65% tax rate, we'll see another realignment.

Be Careful What You Wish For   [Victor Davis Hanson]

For weeks we've been told that the Iraqis were playing tough and demanding time-lines for American withdrawal, the subtext being that mean George Bush was once again conniving for permanent imperial bases. Then Obama gets elected, and within hours we hear that Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari had announced that Obama has "reassured us that he would not take any drastic or dramatic decisions." Lots of luck as they say.

In the coming weeks we may hear some interesting variations of this theme: Obamaniac Europeans shocked that we are consulting the UN on trans-Atlantic problems and conflicted about free trade; new-age hedge-fund directors shocked about new capital gains taxes; and hip Silicon Valley types shocked that their shredded 401(k)s have not surged back and now they learn that a 65% combined federal, state, Medicare, and FICA income tax really does apply to them, despite the Obama sign out front on the lawn.

And nbarry makes that prediction  because that is exactly what the Republican right wing did when they got into power. But part of Obama's job is to push Congress to enact HIS agenda (whether one considers that too left-wing or not, he needs to get Congress working with him on it). I think he will do that pretty well -- he is a persuasive guy.

Billionaires will never pay a 65% tax rate, because their income is mainly from investments, not wages. That's why they want to zero out the capital gains tax rate, so they can save money on hiring clever accountants to minimize their taxes, by simply making income non-taxable. And, of course, by the time anyone hits the top marginal tax rates, they are no longer paying FICA payroll taxes on that income. So the whole 65% number is dishonest in the first place.

jacobtl the cut and paste racist troll is still here!?!  

Dude!  Give it up.  Obama won.

"And, of course, by the time anyone hits the top marginal tax rates, they are no longer paying FICA payroll taxes on that income"

They will according to Obama's ideas of fixing SS. Be ready, my friend, to spread your salary around.  I know, Marty doesn't care, he is already rich, but you will care very soon.

Marty - let's ease up on the Hillary stuff at this point, OK? It's not relevant and its old news.  Move on.

The rest of the points seem astute and I'm still in blissed shock over point number 5 - by far the most important of all.  We've plowed some serious ground on race, now it is time to tackle class.

I spoke to exactly one pollster this whole cycle (living on the Upper West and working at Columbia, they simply don't bother with me). He called early in the primaries and I cut to the chase early on in the conversation, saying "Look, the candidate of eggheads, working poor, young people and African Americans? That sounds perfect to me - these are the exact people who *should* be selecting our next President."  

"Look, the candidate of eggheads, working poor, young people .."

In other words, people who depend on Government for welfare, grands and free education.  

jacobt1 said:

""Look, the candidate of eggheads, working poor, young people .."

In other words, people who depend on Government for welfare, grands and free education. "

There is no way these groups could have elected anyone.

The truth is that the Republicans won because people who voted for them in 00 and 04 didn't vote for them this time.

Look at the map even States from the once solid Republican south voted for the Democrats.

Keep talking about cutting taxes, Jacob. That will guarantee that the Democrats will keep on winning till you smarten up.

Alas, there is no danger of that is there?

"There is no way these groups could have elected anyone"

Yet, but give Obama four years and they will me majority.

jackson, hah.

this is kind of a weak posting. Yes, Hillary will never be President, but she knows it, we know it, no need to rub salt in the wound.

We have 75 days until the adminstration starts, lets worry about long term repercussions for a little while at least. He is off to a fine start anyhow, I like Rahm. I hope he keeps Gate in at Defense. And I hope the Democrats don't do anything stupid against Lieberman. The time was before the election, not after, now it just would be petty. If the Dems can pass this test, show they can forgive and work with him, then good. Lieberman has 4 more years until he retires. Let him be. Maybe Obama can even make him Ambassador to some country, show he can really put the election behind him.

"they will me majority"

?????????????????????

"We have 75 days until the adminstration starts, lets worry about long term repercussions for a little while at least." blackton

I just had a discussion about this with my wife.

She wants to start celbrating the change in administrations.

I am glad Bush will be gone soon, but it's too early, I said, to celebrate an Obama administration.

I would like to see the layout of personnel and programs before I declare victory.

As for Rahm, I don’t know enough about him to know what he is like.

As for Lieberman I think if they leave him alone he will be happy to vote with them on key issues.

ironyroad said:

""they will me majority""  

Leave the poor guy alone. He gets too confused reposting articles he only half understands to pay attention to his use of language.

He needs to take a vacation and visit some porn sites as Jaunty suggested.

"Only someone resistant to hysteria, modest in promises"

What what what?!! I thought he promised that the oceans would cease to rise and Yes we can! If that's modest what's not? "I am Barack Obama, destroyer of worlds?"

Hah! As if cut-and-paste trolls will ever decide an election!

Actually, my state Government did give me some grands this year. Three grand, in fact, and three more for each family member. But Jacob is wrong because we don't depend on the grands. We just save them so we can afford to send the kids to college, so that they avoid the cruel fate of being like jacobt1.

A READER EMAILS: "Why doesn't anyone including Instapundit, say the obvious: The market was up when it looked as though McCain had a chance. Now that Obama has won -- as a direct result -- the market is tanking. Obviously -- almost 500 point loss each day since Obama has won the election!"

www.pajamasmedia.com/.../026838.php

"JEFF FREY said

"We just save them "

Obama has already taken care of your savings. Enjoy.

The O-List : Thirty people who will rule Obama's Washington. , By the TNR Staff 'Americans Who

jwl:  "I thought he promised that the oceans would cease to rise . . ."

As I keep saying, YOU thought that.  Nobody else around here did.  Most everyone else actually listens.

Reagan and Bush I spent my savings years ago. Bush II has now spent my kids' savings, which they don't even have yet.

No one would characterize obama's promises as "modest. " Please don't tell me that he's already tempering expectations.  Just like the line in his speech.  "Government can't solve everything. "

Man, that's not what you said yesterday!

Here's a good test, jwl:  If you can find anything in any of Obama's speeches or even casual comments to suggest he thought that government could or should "solve everything," then I'll concede your point with good grace.  If not, I'll continue to regard you as a tedious blowhard who posts wild assertions he hasn't a shred of evidence for.

JEFF FREY said,

"Reagan and Bush I spent my savings years ago"

I'm sorry to hear that. How are you going to send your kids to college  to get a useless major and be indoctrinated by liberal professors?

Glad you mentioned Susntein for the Supreme Court.  I had not seen the name discussed by others, but it occurred to me.  Sunstein has never been a judge, of course, but that experience is not required and has little relevance if you know the issues as well as Sunstein does (i.e., better than most judges).  He is politically liberal and judicially pragmatic and cautious.  He is intellectually rigorous, and would, all due respect, be the smartest guy on the Court.  I hope he gets serious consideration.

Diane Wood, the 7th Circuit judge, would be another great choice.

Picking up on jhildner's response to Marty's second point, I have a number of personal favorite legal scholars and judges for the Supreme Court. But I will be steaming mad if Obama picks any of them for his first two appointments, since they're all men. Obama needs to appoint women to at least his first two vacancies. I'd prefer someone in the Earl Warran or Sandra Day O'Connor mold, a thoughtful lawyer with political experience, but I'd settle for a judge like Wood. But gender does matter in this country, and in the last year we've seen the Supreme Court issue several rulings openly contemptuous of women.

Good post.  Black voters in California turned out one million strong, and 70% voted for banning gay marriage (Proposition 8). That's equal to the 400K margin of victory for the ban. (Not to lay the electoral victory of the proposition at their feet, I think it's an impressive contribution to the coalition of social conservatives on this issue, yes?)

Who knows, maybe Marty is not such an useful idiot. He predicted that Obama would betray :progressive" morons.

 Leftist alienation with Obama is already setting in, and it is hilarious. Here is “Rabbi” Michael Lerner:The Rahm Emanuel selection is an early warning that the peace and justice agenda dropped by Obama after he won the Democratic nomination may be permanently on hold, and the progressives themselves may have to settle for “access” and flowery words at an inauguration address rather than the substance of change. For many of us, just the fact of having a brilliant young black man in the White House will be such a healing experience that we won’t care about this newly emerging reality: unless Obama creates some other path to access and to public input into his policies by those of us who helped build his electoral success, or unless we organize to do so outside the framework of his campaign organization, we may be in for lots of disappointments.

www.commentarymagazine.com/.../42171

"Black voters in California turned out one million strong, and 70% voted for banning gay marriage (Proposition 8). That's equal to the 400K margin of victory for the ban."

Is that true grosof? I got 'yes on 8' literature with Obama on the cover ("I believe marriage is between a man and a woman") with 'yes on 8' ministers backing it up.

Next time, I think gay activists, instead of merely whipping white overclass votes (which is fine), should also go into black churches to make their case, I'd like to think it can be won there as well.

Would be curious to see if the 'no on 8' activists were aware of and tried to respond to the sub-rosa 'yes on 8' campaign that occurred within black churches.

jacob and jwl:

Our guy won, your guy lost. The two agendas were crystal clear, what's with all the whining?

"Man, that's not what you said yesterday!"

Umm, yes it is.

"the market is tanking. Obviously -- almost 500 point loss each day since Obama has won the election!"

I guess there's not much to say to someone whose brain is so broken, he sees these correlations as evidence of anything at all.

"The two agendas were crystal clear, what's with all the whining?"

Obama agenda is not clear at all.

Re: The Treasury/Taxes Guessing Game Continues   [Andy McCarthy]

So Obama says his announced plan is the best medicine, but what he will do is consider waiting to implement it.  Larry, tell me if I'm wrong but isn't that a stark demonstration that even he knows his plan is precisely the wrong medicine?  I mean, if upper-end tax increases are the way to go, if — as the president-elect maintains — economies are grown from the bottom up, what conceivable reason could there be to shrink from getting on with the urgent business of "redistributive change" and "economic justice"?

corner.nationalreview.com/post

FYI, mmatmmathog:

The Treasury/Taxes Guessing Game Continues   [Larry Kudlow]

President-elect Obama gave a news conference today after meeting with his economic-advisor transition team. Wall Street was hoping to hear a Treasury-secretary designate and an Obama decision not to raise investor taxes next year (meaning capital gains). Unfortunately, neither announcement was made.

As a result, stocks traded down from plus-250 to plus-60. However, at the very end of the news conference, Obama was asked directly if he would postpone his upper-end tax increases next year. His response left the door open slightly. He said his economic plan in the campaign is the right program, but over the next several weeks and months he will take a look at the economy. So the guessing game will continue. Who will be his Treasury man and will he raise taxes next year?

Incidentally, after Obama answered that last question, stocks did trade back up plus-160, and they finished the day up nearly 250. In the two days following the election, shares plunged almost 1,000 points — or 10 percent. I’m pinning this on the stock market vigilantes. These investors are rebelling against investor tax hikes and are trying to send a message to the president-elect not to go there.

During the 1980s, we had the bond-market vigilantes. They would drive up long-term interest rates whenever they saw inflationary money coming from the Fed. Today, by keeping the door open for no investor tax hikes next year, Obama seemed to quiet the new stock market vigilantes.

corner.nationalreview.com/post

Jacob, does increasing marginal tax rates on the wealthy impact aggregate demand?

If so, please provide the proof.

Can you give me any reason to think that Larry Kudlow knows the first thing about how markets work, and isn't rather just a rich dweeb defending his interests?

Do you understand how markets work?

Larry Kudlow on markets, what' s next jacob, a discourse on race relations by Pat Buchanan?

"jacobt1 said:

"Look, the candidate of eggheads, working poor, young people .."

In other words, people who depend on Government for welfare, grands and free education.  "

jacobt1 - listen piece of excrement, you never worked an honest hour in your life. You're a piece of shit klectocrat and a hard-core and proven anti-Semite. Why don't you return to fucking goats with together with your wholesome KKK father and brother? You guys do it like true Aryans.

Jacob,

Does correlation = causation?

By how much do markets lead/lag on a particular piece of news? One hour? One day? One week? One month?

Do capital gains tax rates explain stock market prices in a statistically significant fashion? If so, how much? Do other macroeconomic factors such as direction in the rate of unemployment, the price of oil, the cost of borrowing or rate of economic activity impact stock prices?

If so, by how much (relative to capital gains rates)?

Jacob, this stuff, although not completely simple, isn't all that hard to understand.

Do you understand any of it?

"Obama agenda is not clear at all."

-raise marginal tax rates on rich people

-cut taxes on pretty much everyone else

-(probably) raise the cap on social security taxes

-dramatically expand health care

-remove most troops from Iraq, add troops to afghanistan

-invest heavily in domestic infrastructure

-invest in clean/green technologies

-cap carbon emissions

That's the general direction he articulated, lotta details obviously, we'll see how it goes...

Hey jacobt1, as the Nazi boy you are, what are you gonna do? Kick some Jews? Kick some blacks to show how much of a man you are? Send us a picture, it would  complete your psychological profile. It's very clear you're piece of shit, a no-good never-do-well resentful bucket of piss who failed at any serious intellectual endeavor, and a coward who never served army - yet who plays the tough guy.

In reality, you're a short fat man who compensates his shitting in his pants, small dick and small brain with internet lunatic rants. Come on, take some penis enhancing medication and see a shrink, don't defecate your shit thoughts here. And if we see each other in real life, you shitty anti-Semite, I'll give you some Jewish blessings in the chin - good enough for your Aryan dentist to replace your rat teeth.

"Come on, take some penis enhancing medication "

Any suggestions?

mmathog  said:

"-remove most troops from Iraq, "

Do you want to make a bet. How many troops will left in Iraq in 16 months?

sleepyavl1  said:

"acobt1 - listen piece of excrement, you never worked an honest hour in your life"

It's true. I have always worked for evil  corporations. I have never been a community organizer.

I'll ask you another way jacob.

If raising capital gains taxes (and marginal rates on the wealth) a bit supplies the funding to build infrastructure (a double positive effect), provide health care, and improve education, might that not mean a longer term rise for the stock market than just narrowly keeping those rates down while the nation falls apart?

"Do you want to make a bet. How many troops will left in Iraq in 16 months?"

That's your only response? I list 8 items and you challenge 1? I guess you now agree that he did, in fact, define an agenda.

I'd bet around 50K troops left in Iraq by July of 2010.

"I have never been a community organizer."

It's really rewarding, you should try it.

"I'd bet around 50K troops left in Iraq by July of 2010."

This is only possible if Bush McCain Lieberman stratagy will be successful .

Otherwise you only have two options, no troops, no embassy or as many as you need.

Actually I'm hopeful that it will be possible to reduce troops to 50-50K in two years, if Obama doesn't screw up in Iraq.

"if raising capital gains taxes (and marginal rates on the wealth) a bit"

"a bit" will not do.

You can't improve  education including higher education without setting an honest accountability and real competition.

Sorry to drag the thread back to the topic at hand, but, irrespective of how we do it, we need to (a) launch a broad stimulus program to get the economy moving in an upward direction again, (b) introduce (or reintroduce) the appropriate regulatory regime for capital markets that was painfully missing over recent years, (c) move back some of the tax burden to the wealthy that they have been shedding over the last few years, (d) start reducing the amount of risk that has been outsourced to the middle class, especially by moving toward a non-employer-based UHC coverage, (e) get moving on a much-overdue infrastructural repair and renewal program (which can overlap with a stimulus program) and (f) move toward a financial and legislative framework that encourages scientific and commercial innovation in clean energy and (as far as possible) low-oil-usage transport networks.

And that's just for starters.

But if Obama can get the nation thinking seriously about how to proceed toward this future goal, he'll have done more than Bush/Cheney have done in eight years for national security.

"You can't improve  education including higher education without setting an honest accountability and real competition. "

And more money.

Short term thinking made companies like Ford, wildly profitable from 1996-2004, on the verge of bankruptcy today.

Bush spent money on stupid crap (tax cuts for rich people and war in Iraq, neither of which inspires long term stimulus), Obama (whose hands are unfortunately considerably more tied up due to Bush's fuckups) wants to spend money on stuff that will grease economic wheels for decades to come.

"tax cuts for rich people"

mmathog, are you rich? I'm curious why tnr readers are so poor. You would think that a two middle aged  professional in Boston, NY or SF would easily make 250K. I would like to hear from such people. Do you really think  that you are rich and should be  taxed with overall taxes rate of 65%?

I will not see a tax hike under Obama (although I wouldn't actually mind), I'm single and I make in the mid 100-200K range...

Tax rate of 65%????? Jacob.... are you trolling wingnut commentary again? You should know better than to come to this forum with that shiite.

As for the wealthy couples in Boston, NYC, and SF, I imagine a lot of them (or at least one member of them) voted for Obama, even though they are guaranteed a tax hike.

I wonder why that is?

Oh, I have an explanation: They realize that there's more to life than the difference between paying 35% and 39% in taxes. They realize that a healthy society, a society where people get fed, get educated, and get some health care not only benefits them, but is also a soundly moral position. (Also, even if they weren't nuts about Obama's tax plan, they might like a guy who won't privatize social security and wage retarded wars retardedly.)

On the other hand, people who are racist, people who hate, people who are xenophobes, are people who can only get off when their bitter lizard-brains are stroked. These people ONLY see 'the other' and obsess over the notion of those stinky lazy brown and black people who steal their taxes and such.

Are you one of those people Jacob?

"They realize that there's more to life than the difference between paying 35% and 39% in taxes"

What about the difference between paying 35% and 39% + new 15% SS taxes + 10% state + city taxes + medicare taxes.

BTW, what's your taxe rate?  Can't you spare 5-10% of your income to help  "brown and black people"?  Are you racist?

WHY ARE ALL OF YOU SO MOTIVATED TO DISCUSS TAX STUFF?....the american people have to have jobs to pay taxes!!!!  

this win did a number of things:

- put an intelligent minoirty in office that ended the "you have to be an old, military, white guy" to be president...this brings massive hope and motivation to people who could be well qualified to be a great president that never thought they could---especially women!

- put a young individual that has fresh and hopefully,  ideals that will benefit the masses not the top elite

- put emphasis on alternative energy which can be the salvation to joblessness...without a question

- put an end to the most corrupt administration and party rule i have ever witnessed...this administration should be tried for war crimes and massive corruption and fraud charges!

- finally an american leader that the world can bond to ...who i am sure will have a relationship building career and attitude bringing good will back to america vs the worn out bush/republican attitiude of "it's my way or the highway" of which i just cannot stand not tolerate anymore!