Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: kwee@oracle.uucp (Karl Wee)
Subject: Re: Review of the Republican National Convention
Reply-To: kwee@oracle.uucp (Karl Wee)
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Belmont, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:56:09 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <BtDuLr.LJK@news.udel.edu> gbc@brahms.udel.edu (Baochun Ge) writes:
>
>	In general, it didn't offer a convinceable economic plan,	

Clinton's "economic plan" is basically a fraud.  Also, Republicans
traditionally don't believe that government should intervene much in the
economy anyway.

In the final analysis, both Clinton and Bush are smart men, and if there's a
clear and politically workable solution, both men would go for it and we
wouldn't see any differences.  Right now there's really no such solution,
and Clinton is trying to tell people that he has a plan to revive the
economy.

That's why I see all this "economic program" stuff as nothing more than
political strategy.

>instead, too much personal attack and Congress bashing.
>It will not work both logically and strategically. Logically,
>not being able to work with Congress and show no sign
>to improve it raise the question of how you can do a better
>job in the second term. Remove the Congress? You must be joking.

The President cannot do a better job without a less political Congress.
Bush has a point when he says Congress stopped him from carrying out
his policies.

To tell you the truth, I have been watching the Chinese students' lobby
for the protection bill.  While I want to see this bill pass, I saw
clearly how completely Congress was controlled by special interest
groups and not the general public.  This is the biggest political
problem of this country.

>Strategically, Congressmen and women are elected from all the states,
>useing major strength to fight them is not wise.

Because of voter frustration, the change rate in Congress this year will
probably be one of the highest in history, according to the analysts.

>As for the most enphasized character and trust issue, 
>denying to take any responsibility for the slousy  economy and
>indulging in attacking others itself whould raise a character and
>trust problem,

Americans don't see this denying as a problem, but perhaps Chinese will.

>not to metion the faulse 128  vs 1 tax raising fussy
>on Clington which has already been persured by the media,  which 
>called a 'sensuous lie' by Micheal Kinsley.

Michael Kinsley is not an impartial judge!  He's one of the most aggressive
and flambuoyant liberals around.  I don't know the contents of Kinsley's
arguments, but I know that Clinton is going to drive many small
businesses (which provide the bulk of today's employment) out of business
by making them pay special taxes on job training and health care.  These
things are important but it seems that there are much better ways to go
than to have the government directly tax and spend.

>	Now the convention is over, the republican still lag 10% -
>12% behind. It seems they really need two home runs in order to make
>up the deficit in the poll by November.

The Republicans' arguments are going to be: yes, things are bad now, but
it'll be WORSE when this deadlock between the White House and Congress
is GONE.  We'll see how well that works.

In the long run, I believe if Clinton wins, he'll be such a bad President
that he will give the final blow to the now-dying Democratic party.  Since
the main party philosophy is basically dead, the Party has become an uneasy
get-together of non-mainstream people with very different philosophies
who had to nominate Clinton, whose philosophy could easily have been mistaken
for a Republican one just several years ago, in order to get any chance at
the White House.  I think the break-up and the weakening of the party is
coming, and Clinton will make it earlier if he wins.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china