How this Rescue Plan-Bail Out will Play in these Elections, and Why

[FrenchieCat]

It has been made public knowledge and accepted by the majority of voters that this crisis occurred on Bush's Watch and implicates Republican economic ideologies as why we got to this point.

Some Here are afraid that Repugs who are runnings scared will try to spin it otherwise, blame Democrats, and turn the election on its head by voting NO against the Rescue Package.

There is a problem for those Republicans however.......which is that they lack any real credibility. Those outraged Republicans are the "Free Marketers" that have been blamed for our problems to begin with. Those who attempt to vote NO on the rescue bill will need an awfully good solid back up story, and as Republicans, they are on the shakiest of ground....as a NO vote coming from them will be seen as political calculation laced with artificial outrage...by anyone with a 1/2 wit of sense. Some of them might survive, but as incumbents, I doubt it.

There is no doubt that Americans are upset about this bill.....as I am. But, the big question is who are they upset at? Those who caused a need for the Bail out, or those who ended up required to support a rescue bill in order to quash a pending calamity?

I believe that when everything is said and done, Bush, Wall Street, Republicans, and Washington DC, in that order, is how the blame will be ordained. Barack Obama, not really seen as having been in Washington long enough to have contributed to this, will be the last person blamed, no matter the spin. Some may argue that he didn't take enough command of the situation, but Obama is being backed by documented media account of handling his part in a very minimal and non intrusive manner, while John McCain has been reported of politicizing the problem with his campaign antics. Barack has made clear that he is running to clean this shit up, and wasn't part of how it got to where it ended up. He was also the one that provided clear changes to the original proposal, one that is more favorable to Main Street. In otherwords, Barack Obama represents change of exactly what has happened, and there is no way that he will be seen as anything beyond that.

How do I come to this conclusion?

BECAUSE:

There is tangible evidence that Wall Street is going down into the toilet.
Large firms like Caterpillar (equipment firm)having to pay almost twice the prior interest rate
http://www.forbes.com/reuters/feeds/reuters/2008/09/26/2008-09-26T184715Z_01_N25321491_RTRIDST_0_CATERPILLAR-CRISIS.html

GM (auto firm) line of credit worries that show that they are in real trouble http://www.247wallst.com/2008/09/gm-gm-dives-int.html

Washington Mutual failed
http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=91320&feedType=VideoRSS&feedName=Business&rpc=23&videoChannel=5&sp=true

and Wachovia is in talks to sale due to a possible verge of failure.
http://gothamist.com/2008/09/27/wachovia_talks_to_citi_others_about.php

The Chinese Banks have been given directive to stop lending to American banks, unless there is a plan in place.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSPEK16693720080925

There have been many big time players stating that a rescue is not an option but a requirement to avert impending doom. CNN and folks like Warren Buffett are verifying that this is the case.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSPEK16693720080925
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/26/news/economy/bailout_impact/index.htm?cnn=yes

In otherwords, this "crisis" is not made up, as there is verifiable proof of such, nothwithstanding the public witnessing the failure of ALL investment banks as well as the largest insurer in the country, AGI.



It is my prediction that the people will want to vote for the ones who weren't directly responsible and if nothing else, negotiated a better position for the taxpayers.....and I think that they will do this.

In the back of their mind, there have been tell tale signs for a long time, and voters subconsciously will remember watching Bear-Stearns that was bailed out recently...as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

So this ain't happening in a vacuum.

It is true that the Congressional Democrats have had their face on Television more than I would have liked, some of them smiling, which I believe is not a good picture....

but because parade of press conferences by the mediating parties were done to reassure the markets.....as a large part of solving the crisis is re-establishing confidence, this has been a necessity more than grandstanding.

Also remember what there is something damning to point to; something in which John McCain is directly affiliated to The U.S. Savings and Loan Crisis, named as one of the biggest bail out in US history prior to now.

Bailout date: August 1989
Amount: Estimates vary widely, but $200 billion (in 2008 dollars) is a reasonable figure.

What happened: The “S&L” debacle of the late ’80s and early ’90s was long in the making and long in the unwinding. U.S. taxpayers were first put on the hook when then President George H.W. Bush (right) signed the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, which radically reformed the savings and loan industry and federal regulations. When the dust finally settled in 1995, more than 1,000 small lending institutions known as “savings and loans,” also called “thrifts,” had failed. Half of the federally insured thrift institutions in the United States had gone under in less than a decade, and the associated slowdown in new home construction and the financial fallout contributed to the 1990-1991 recession. The underlying causes of the S&L crisis are complex and disputed, but most scholars generally agree that high, volatile interest rates, reckless lending practices, rapid deregulation, and lax oversight paved the way for the greatest banking disaster since the Great Depression.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4470


So I think that this Rescue Plan/Bail out will not affect the presidential race detrimentrally.

Those harmed will be those seen as Washington insiders, and in particular, Republicans.

Also, for once, the Corporate media will make sure that those who participated affirmatively with this Rescue Plan will not be made to suffer.....because, fortunately, they are affected in this going well due to the interest of their parent companies, i.e., a financial collapse is not in their interest.

Keep in mind that only 250 Billion is being released at this time. The rest of the money comes with strings attached....which means that everyone has to continue to be on the same page, or else, the rest of the funds can be withheld. That means that BIG Business, including Media conglamorations cannot all of the sudden start covering for the Republicans who might want to blame this bill on whomever voted for it.

[ShortnFiery]

1. "the rest of the money" is akin to signing up for a magazine subscription, IT'S AUTOMATIC

unless Congress STOPS THEM.

Don't do it Congress! I never thought, for the life of me, I'd be cheering for the Republican House. Gawd! What strange times. :(

[FrenchieCat]

2. And congress WILL stop them IF there is a storyline adopted

faulting those who voted for the bill.

You are cheering the wrong horse. As an Accountant and speaking with my Financial planner husband (we have been in business for 25 years), one of the lines that is included in any letter accompanying financial statements reads...."this information presented is not for those who are not informed about such matters".

You are talking a dangerous game based on gut reaction of wanting to blame someone, and somehow understating the financial calamities that we have seen to date.

In this case, based on the information that I have bothered to provide, I am calling on you to explain your position, instead of running around like a chicken with the head missing.

[Kdillard]

4. So you prefer that millions of people lose their jobs and savings

and the economy goes into the toilet. You offer no supporting evidence or concrete reason not to support some form of a bailout.
Wallstreet and Mainstreet are connected they fall and we go along for the ride. I prefer that not be the case.

[1corona4u]

5. On this board, those who have nothing to lose are the ones saying

no bailout. They just don't get it. They are so afraid that we are being hoodwinked, that they'd rather let the country go to hell in a hand basket, than to believe that it's for real. I'm not willing to take that chance, no matter where the original idea came from. I have said many times, I'd rather be safe, and do it, than to be sorry later on.

[FrenchieCat]

7. I understand their distrust, after 8 years of GWB.

But especially those on this board need to make sure that they blame the correct parties, and not just blame everyone.

I wonder what would happen if the same people lost their job, and then their home because nothing was done?

But it is possible, for some people, they have to be personally affected to the 3rd degree, before believing anything.

[redstate_democrat]

8. Have you actually READ the House Republican's plan?

Have you? And you agree with them?

Their plan is totally unworkable.

They want these institutions to deposit money into an insurance plan that they all can draw on. Problem with that is that they would basically be depositing money they would have to draw out right away. Secondly, if they had the money to deposit into a fund, then we wouldn't even be in this situation in the first place. The problem is liquidity.

The House Republicans don't want to do anything for home owners. NADA. They don't want bankruptcy reform. They don't want the government to buy these mortgages. They don't want any of that. At least if the government buys the mortgages, the homeowner has a chance to stay in their homes. House Republicans don't want that.

House Republicans also wanted to cut the capital gains tax to zero. WTF?

They also wanted MORE deregulation. WTF?

But you agree with their shenanigans? They weren't simply against the bailout. They were against the METHOD of the bailout.

[FrenchieCat]

3. No other takers?

[1corona4u]

6. Seems to me, that some poeple on this board just got bored with the

other topics, and this is the topic Du Jour. I'm already tired of the whinning and conspiracy bullshit. None of us like it, but we have to do it.

[Grateful for Hope]

9. Thank you for taking the time and effort to post this

It makes a lot of sense, and, I for one, am glad that action is being taken to possibly help to prevent a complete financial disaster for the US (and the entire world).

[Dems to Win]

10. Who is resisting sending $700 billion taxpayer dollars to Wall Street? House Republicans

Your case might be persuasive to well informed voters. But not angry, low-information voters, I fear.

If more Dems than Reps vote Yes on the bailout, there will be more Dems targeted by furious voters. Pelosi should be demanding 199 Republican (100% of them) yes votes for the bailout requested by the Republican president and Republican Treasury Secretary.

I'm angry that Pelosi, Reid, Frank & Dodd did not fight as stubbornly for the alternatives put forth by William Greider, Joseph Stiglitz, et al, as the House Republicans fought for their ideas. I won't vote Republican, ever. I'm a blue voter. But this whole situation seems very dangerous for the Dems, I think.