[ male announcer ] another reason people switch to state farm. aw, i could ve gotten a falcon. [ male announcer ] get to a better state. [ falcon screeches ] today we saw a side of the president we haven t seen for a while, his fighting side. ready to take on his political opponents. so the speaker says, we can t
income. income gained 281% from 79 to 2007. the bottom 20% only went up 16%. what are we talking about? this is supposed to be america. this is supposed to be a land where we all have a fair chance. how do you have that kind of imbalance in income growth? well, i think roosevelt said it best. of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and there are reasonable colleagues under there, as you pointed out, in polling data, they understand not only all americans. but republicans understand the fairness behind this. but we have a few, as roosevelt said, that are frozen in the ice of their own indifference towards working america. as you rightfully point out, that s the war that s taking place on labor. that s the war that s squeezing americans and all for what? over a political fight for power.
resonating with a base and with beyond a base, a democratic broad electorate who has criticized the president tactically for conciliating too much, for giving up too much, more being too unreasonable against an unreasonable opponent? mark schmidt had an interesting piece in the new republic where he referred to the president s fighting bipartisanship as opposed to other kinds of bipartisanship. i think the base likes the fact that this package to get the economy moving is bigger than they expected it to be and they like the fact he s fighting for it. but the ideas, themselves, are fundamentally bipartisan. so you had the odd spectacle of paul krugman and david brooks both praising this. one liked the bipartisan side. the other liked the fighting side. so maybe he can win re-election. e.j. dionne, senior fellow at the brookings institute and washington post columnist. stick a pin in that. we will be coming back to that assertion momentarily i m sure.
resonating with a base and with beyond a base, a democratic broad electorate who has criticized the president tactically for conciliating too much, for giving up too much, more being too unreasonable against an unreasonable opponent? mark schmidt had an interesting piece in the new republic where he referred to the president s fighting bipartisanship as opposed to other kinds of bipartisanship. i think the base likes the fact that this package to get the economy moving is bigger than they expected it to be and they like the fact he s fighting for it. but the ideas, themselves, are fundamentally bipartisan. so you had the odd spectacle of paul krugman and david brooks both praising this. one liked the bipartisan side. the other liked the fighting side. so maybe he can win re-election. e.j. dionne, senior fellow at the brookings institute and washington post columnist. stick a pin in that. we will be coming back to that
do you think that it s resonating with a base and with beyond a base, a democratic broad electorate who has criticized the president tactically for conciliating too much, for giving up too much, more being too unreasonable against an unreasonable opponent? mark schmidt had an interesting piece in the new republic where he referred to the president s fighting bipartisanship as opposed to other kinds of bipartisanship. i think the base likes the fact that this package to get the economy moving is bigger than they expected it to be and they like the fact he s fighting for it. but the ideas, themselves, are fundamentally bipartisan. so you had the odd spectacle of paul krugman and david brooks both praising this. one liked the bipartisan side. the other liked the fighting side. so maybe he can win re-election. e.j. dionne, senior fellow at the brookings institute and washington post columnist. stick a pin in that. we will be coming back to that assertion momently i m sure. the