Skip to main content

View Diary: New report: More seniors living in poverty, and they want to cut Social Security? (83 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Can someone explain to me (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miss Blue

    why seniors voted for Romney 60-40? Seniors basically abandoned the Democratic party, the party of social security and medicare. I don't think that fact should be swept under the rug.

    •  Did he run on a platform to cut SS? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert

      Honest question, I don't recall.

      Most seniors don't expect any candidate R or D to cut SS.  They assume politicians learned long ago that its politically risky to do that, so they choose candidates based on other issues.

      "If you can't take their money, eat their food, drink their booze and then vote against them, you have no business being up there."

      by Betty Pinson on Wed May 22, 2013 at 10:52:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's kind of what I'm inferring (0+ / 0-)

        Seniors felt they had no skin in the game so they voted their prejudices. In strictly political terms it's an interesting new calculus. How do Democrats get seniors to feel like they have an economic interest to vote DEM when the Republican promises to give everyone the shaft but them?

        •  Not sure its prejudice only (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert

          but yeah, those who voted for Romney were probably responding to economic issues.

          The economy was still very bad, Obama wasn't able to fix it, so they decided to give the GOP another chance.   Most Americans were, and are, focused on the poor economy, much more than any other issue.

          That's why the idea of cutting SS is pure insanity.

          "If you can't take their money, eat their food, drink their booze and then vote against them, you have no business being up there."

          by Betty Pinson on Wed May 22, 2013 at 11:16:27 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  He was cagey (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Mr Robert, mcmom

        It was always in the fine print.  He never took the cuts he put on the table off the table.  They even changed the party platform to diminish the party's commitment to Social Security.   But he always dodged answers to the question and the press being what it is they never pinned him down.  

        •  Unlike Obama, who willingly admitted it (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert

          (facepalm).  IMHO, Obama got lucky last election, he came so close to losing, so many times.

          "If you can't take their money, eat their food, drink their booze and then vote against them, you have no business being up there."

          by Betty Pinson on Wed May 22, 2013 at 11:17:40 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think Obama is getting at something different (0+ / 0-)

            I think he's trying to move Dems away from focusing all their political capital and energy towards seniors and shifting it towards protecting the interests of young adults, students, and parents with small kids.

             The Republicans are going to protect their base (which is seniors a this point). Someone has to be an advocate of the young in this country.

            Republicans have decided to treat all spending as a zero sum game and a big part of the country has brought into that, especially seniors.

            In other words if it's a zero sum game I'd rather Republican leaning seniors take a haircut over the poor and the young. I know it's not popular to say on a progressive site but I think that's the political calculus Obama has made.

            •  You may be correct on that calculus (0+ / 0-)

              and maybe he figures it worked for him, but if the Democratic Party thinks that they are going to ever have a majority in Congress without getting votes from the most reliable of all voters, seniors, particularly in mid term elections then I don't know what kind of map they're seeing across the northern Midwest.

              I'm 62 and my mother is still voting at 92.  You just cannot write off two generations of voters and expect to win elections particularly when those 42 are going to be starting their retirement plans.  

            •  His brilliant opinions are irrelevant (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              He is fast approaching a GOP level of indifference mixed with incompetence. Once he finishes his term he won't be interested in the future of the Dem Party. He willhave used it up and discarded it.

              Dems are better off keeping him out of the strategy and planning processes for the party's future.

              Better to focus on fixing the economy and creating jobs. Its the best way to grow the Dem base.  Simple, honest, straightforward.

              "If you can't take their money, eat their food, drink their booze and then vote against them, you have no business being up there."

              by Betty Pinson on Wed May 22, 2013 at 01:22:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I don't see it quite that way (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I see Obama as focused on the FUTURE. Preparing for it, upgrading our infrastructure to deal with it, educating for it, researching new technologies, developing promising ones.

              That means investing in green tech, space travel, basic research. And yes, the young will reap the benefits of that. I'm not young anymore, but I still want my children and grandchildren to have a better world, not a worse one.  

              The GOP wants to cling to the past, worship it, stop all progress, research, education. They don't want to have to change anything, unless it directly benefits them, and even then they have to think about it REALLY hard.

              They hate change. Obama seems to embrace it, and is trying (and it's got to be frustrating for him) to drag the rest of the party with him.

              If I had to give the parties each a slogan, I think I'd have to give the Dems 'To boldly go' (even though they don't go fast enough) and the GOP would be 'You can't make me, you're not my Mom'

    •  Correction: *former party of SS & Medicare (4+ / 0-)

      Thanks to this push for a Grand Bargain.  One more reason to oppose this garbage.  

    •  Maybe they read the newspaper (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert, TheSpectator

      I mean it was totally clear that Obama did NOT take Social Security and Medicare cuts off the table.

      •  So the party (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Miss Blue

        that want's to hand social security to wall street and medicare to insurance companies gets the senior vote, while the party that accepts cuts in the name of a grand bargain gets villified?

        Seniors might want to do a little more reading.

        •  Betrayal is worse than opposition (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mr Robert, prishannah

          Don't give me the Grand Bargain b.s.  I don't give a hoot about a Grand Bargain. That's all in Obama's head. Americans aren't clamoring for any Grand Bargain.  In fact, Obama's Austerity Agenda is absolutely what I do not want.  Just yesterday it lead DEMOCRATS to vote to CUT FOOD STAMPs.  Hello?!  Did you think you were voting to CUT FOOD STAMPS?!

          Republicans want to give my Social Security to Wall Street?  Well, do you think I like the idea of Democrats cutting my benefits any better?  Why is that better?  The best way to convince Americans that the Republicans are going to keep your Social Security safer is for Democrats to keep taxing you while they cut your benefits.  Particularly, when we have clowns like Durbin, Rendell and all the Fix the Debt, Simpson Bowles folks clamoring to have the benefits reviewed every 10 years to keep cutting benefits.

          I no longer trust the Democratic Party on this issue.  I don't know where they are going because you can't pin them down anymore.  

          If the party wants my support, they can clear this up.  The fact that they refuse to state clear positions on Social Security and Medicare speaks loudly.

    •  They liked his Feigned Piety. . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      . . . that really nice haircut and the most vile word he uttered was GOSH.

      Gramma fell for it every time.  Didn't matter what vile thing you said as long as you did so with a smile.

      "75% of the population has a mental disorder. The remaining 25% are in denial."

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site