On the subject of the national debt, this graph shows a similar shape but what is different is that it shows the debt over time vs our GDP. Currently we're running a debt of about 120% of our GDP. So if I understand this correctly, if we were able to take the entire output of the USA for one full year (which we most certainly can't) and applied it to the debt, we'd still be running in the red.
I don't think you need to have any degree in finance, accounting or economics to understand that is a bad situation. I don't know where the threshold of pain is in regards to the number, but I don't think this is sustainable. As much as I did not care for Bill Clinton, he was pragmatic and wiling to compromise with Newt Gingrich to balance the budget and put us on a path of reducing the debt. Albeit it was a modest downward trend, it was moving in the right direction.
Whatever happens tomorrow and who takes office in January, this problem is being ignored. I don't think we can afford to do that anymore. Many have stated in this thread they're absolutely against negotiating with the Dems. I would say if you're a Republican and think we can attack this problem without any compromise on taxes or if you're a Dem and cannot compromise on spending, you are a part of the problem and not the solution.
View the ratio of federal debt to the economic output of the U.S., which can indicate economic health and the sustainability of government borrowing.
fred.stlouisfed.org