美国总统大选选战开打

Mr Romney also accuses Mr Obama of drowning the American dream in a sea of red ink. But on this issue there is plenty of blame to go round. Although Mr Obama has yet to come up with a serious plan to tame entitlements, he did try last summer to negotiate a "grand bargain" on the deficit. And when that failed, Congress voted for an automatic deficit-reducing spending cut (the "sequester") of $1.2 trillion over the next decade that is supposed to kick in at the end of this year.
罗姆尼还控告奥巴马把美国梦拖入赤字的汪洋大海里。但在这件事情上，奥巴马有许多让人指责的地方。尽管奥巴马至今尚未出台重要的计划来削减国民福利(这里真心不会翻译)，但他去年夏季确实试着在财政赤字上做出“大妥协”。当那失败之后，国会自动对在未来十年内用削减1.2万亿美元开支来填补赤字的方案进行投票，今年年底这一方案应该会通过。

Elections that offer clear choices can be good things. Isn't that politics as usual? But American voters are in danger of being forced to choose in November between a Republican Party that is allergic to needed tax rises and a Democratic Party that lacks the courage to make the spending cuts required for America to live within its means. The prospect is for a shouting match that pushes the parties ever further apart and threatens to make the whole system of government seize up.
要是大选能让人做出明确的选择，那可是好事。这不正是和以往一样的政治吗？但是美国选民正面临这样一种风险，他们被迫在共和党和民主党中做出选择，前者对必不可少的税收提高过于敏感，而后者则缺乏勇气尽可能地削减可以让美国渡过难关的开支. 大选估计要演变成一场骂战，让两个党派分歧更加严重，同时两党彼此威胁要让政府停摆。

This is not politics as usual
这不是和以往一样的政治

Indeed, the system is already dangerously close to seizing up. The present Congress is the most polarised of modern times. The Republican landslide in the 2010 mid-terms swept a new breed of conservative zealot into office, destroying the middle ground and making legislating next to impossible. The Supreme Court is polarised, too—so much so that it might strike down Obamacare, the president's flagship achievement, on the deciding vote of a single judge.
实际上，政府已经有停摆的危险。美国近代历史中，现今的美国国会现极化最严重。2010年美国中期选举共和党取得大胜，国会涌入一群新的保守主义狂热者，破坏了国会的中间立场，同时让立法变得近乎不可能。最高法院也极化严重---因此它可能会因法官的决定票而否定奥巴马这个一流的医改方案。

In short, America is in dire need of the sort of comity Mr Obama promised in 2008. We are not red states and blue states, he said then, we are the United States. What a pity that he is changing tack this time, bashing the rich via gimmicks such as the "Buffett rule" (which is supposed to make millionaires like Mr Romney pay at least the same tax rate as their secretaries) and galvanising his base by brushing aside even the sensible part of the Republican argument that something radical must be done to curb entitlement spending. He may feel he has no choice. But it is a miserable portent for the future.
总而言之，美国亟需奥巴马总统在2008年所承诺的礼让。当时他说“我们不是共和党人，也不是民主党人，我们是美国人”。这次他改变了战略，用诸如“巴菲特法案”（这一法案将让像罗姆尼这样的百万富翁和他们的秘书以同样的税率纳税）一类的花招来打击富人，同时漠视共和党观点中的明智之处（如在削减福利开支方面必须要激进）来巩固自己，这让人颇为遗憾。或许他觉得自己已经别无选择。但是这预示着美国不乐观的未来。