logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Election results are in!, What do they mean?
Hobbes
post Nov 3 2010, 04:30 PM
Post #1


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,331
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



The mid-term elections are over, and they finished about like most polls predicted they would. The Republicans made very large gains in the House, adding 60 (or more) seats. They picked up ground in the Senate, but not enough to gain control, with 46 seats currently and three still undecided. They also made large gains in governorships. Some of the Tea Party candidates won major races (Paul, Rubio); some lost convincingly (O'Donnell). Both these results, and early exit poll results indicate a dissatisfaction with the direction we were headed. Republicans swept into office with a renewed smaller government mantra, but they only control 1/3 of the government. Boehner, the likely new Speaker of the House, has a propensity for working across the aisle--but now has a supposed mandate behind him. Given all this, the following questions emerge:

1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?

2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

This post has been edited by Hobbes: Nov 3 2010, 07:48 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
pheeler
post Nov 3 2010, 11:13 PM
Post #2


*******
Professional Chem Nerd

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 557
Member No.: 925
Joined: July-25-03

From: Fort Collins, CO
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?

These elections did send the message that the American people are not happy with the results of Obama's policies. Whether that's the fault of the policies themselves is another question. Personally, I think it's too early to say whether many of the policies have worked, but either way, the public is dissatisfied. I can't say I'm surprised when the unemployment rate is still so high, and while the middle class is hurting worse than it has in many years, the banks have taken taxpayer money and turned a huge profit with it.

2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

I do think there will be a slowdown in spending, but it won't necessarily have anything to do with Republican control as much as it's a result of the recovery of the economy in general. What I'm worried about is that revenue will not be increased by letting the Bush tax cuts expire. I am eager to see what kind of legislation Republicans draft since Boehner's excuse for not cooperating has been that the stuff Democrats have brought to the table has been way too liberal. Will we see moderate proposals or extreme right ones?

3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

Obama campaigned on health care reform, and he followed through on his promise. I don't see him backing down and letting Republicans strike down any of the broader reforms he worked for. That said, I don't think he would necessarily veto any change to the new health care laws, provided Republicans can make the case for the change.

4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

Honestly, Clinton was one of the most effective presidents we've ever had, so I hope Obama will take some lessons from his presidency. I don't think I can speculate as to what he will do, though.

5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

In a word, no. According to MSNBC, only 32% of Tea Party candidates won, and I would argue that those who did win were the ones who least broke the Republican mold. The Tea Party will wane, but the anger among the middle class will not. Hopefully, someone will give them a more productive message to rally behind than "throw the bums out."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ConservPat
post Nov 4 2010, 12:26 AM
Post #3


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 3,191
Member No.: 415
Joined: January-31-03

From: Boston
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?
The results mean:
-Voters are upset with the economic stagnation (unemployment is still > 8%)
-As a result, they're upset with government spending
-As a result, anything with a price tag (except defense, the wars and any entitlement that they are receiving) should be cut
-It means that the electorate has the short term memory of the average jellyfish
-It means that the electorate believes that the 'tea party' is not a re-iteration of the Contract with America era GOP

As for what the President will do about the repudiation of his policies, he'll take a few things off of his to-do list (Cap and Trade, if it wasn't already, any more stimuli, etc.). He'll also have to be prepared to veto any GOP attempts to repeal Obamacare. He's already backed down from most of the most leftward of his agenda items; he'll be scrapping the rest.

QUOTE
2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?
I'm sure they'll attempt to follow through on their 'repeal Obamacare' promise. I'm sure that they'll make some meaningless, feel-good cuts; one or two of the most psychotic of the 'tea partiers' may even propose scrapping Medicare of Social Security...but nothing major, policy-wise, will come out of this election on its own. A shutdown of certain 'tea party' talking point targets is a distinct possibility.


QUOTE
3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?
What pheeler said.

QUOTE
4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?
If he would like a second term, he'll triangulate.

QUOTE
5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?
It will assimilate into the establishment, just like in '94. Those that don't will be replaced when the economy is humming again.

CP
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nighttimer
post Nov 4 2010, 04:20 AM
Post #4


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,660
Member No.: 504
Joined: February-16-03

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?

The results mean while Obama and the Dems possibly overplayed their hand and overestimated their mandate from 2008, I'm not buying the "repudiation" line the GOP and media are pushing. I'm going to have to see what percentage of eligible voters turned up at the polls Tuesday, though I'm pretty sure it will be smaller than in 2008.

One analyst said the Democrats had two problems yesterday. One was Barack Obama who wasn't on the ballot but plenty of older, White voters showed up to oppose him. The other problem was Barack Obama wasn't on the ballot and didn't bring out the young, Black and Latino voters who turned out in droves for him in 2008.

2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

Nothing shocking is going to happen over the next two years. What did the GOP do when they last had control in both Houses of Congress? I'm sure the GOP will flex their muscles and slash the social safety net as much as possible to get their spending cuts, but since they have already taken defense spending off the table and don't have the stones to go after entitlements, there really aren't a lot of places for them go whacking away. They may posture and flex about curbing pork barrel spending through ending earmarks, but while that may what the Tea Party Republicans newbies are going to demand, the old school Republicans aren't going to want to be denied their chance to feed at the troth.

3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

I don't profess to having any special insights into the workings of the incoming elephants, but I'm sure there will be some legislation introduced to weaken, water down or flat out repeal healthcare reform, but Pelosi and Obama weren't so stupid as to make it easy for a Republican Congress to turn around the train after it left the station. Their best hope is probably that John Roberts and the posse on the Supreme Court finds parts or all of healthcare reform unconstitutional.

Barring that, what I would expect is the Republicans to defund as much of healthcare as they can. They do control the power of the purse and they would be silly not to use it. If a few poor bastards die because they can't get the treatment they would under Obamacare, well, you can't make an omlette without breaking some eggs, right?

4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

Both the president and the Congress will say all the usual things about "working together," "common ground" and the dreaded "B" word--bipartisan solutions.

Don't believe any of it no matter who says it.

The 2012 election season starts next summer. NOTHING WILL BE DONE. The Republicans have no interest in doing Obama any favors that might get him reelected. Obama should know by now, the Republicans don't want to make nice and his base is sick of him trying to work with Republicans.

The "X" Factor here is Obama. All the liberal pundits are saying he should pull a Clinton and move to the Right (or "the Center"). But that ignores the fact that 2010 is not 1996, Boehner is not as ideological as Gingrich, with Rahm Emanuel gone there is no Dick Morris type whispering in the president's ear to "triangulate" and the GOP are not going to allow themselves to be used again as the springboard to Obama's second term.

I got two words for you: GRID/LOCK.

l,;5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

You won't hear this from Sarah Palin or Fox "We Distort, You Can't Decide" News, but only 32 percent won. While they made a conservative Republican party even more conservative, they weren't as formidable nationally. But give 'em time, that's not too shabby for a movement that's only a year or two old.

At least we've put to rest the laughable suggestion the Tea Party was a bipartisan movement. It's just the usual right-wing dogma, only on steroids. rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by nighttimer: Nov 4 2010, 04:41 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Nov 4 2010, 11:07 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,331
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(nighttimer @ Nov 3 2010, 11:20 PM) *
One analyst said the Democrats had two problems yesterday. One was Barack Obama who wasn't on the ballot but plenty of older, White voters showed up to oppose him. The other problem was Barack Obama wasn't on the ballot and didn't bring out the young, Black and Latino voters who turned out in droves for him in 2008.


Some truth to this. Essentially Republicans were running against Obama, but since Obama wasn't running, he didn't really have the platform to defend himself. He could have done it more from his bully pulpit, though.

QUOTE
2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

Nothing shocking is going to happen over the next two years. What did the GOP do when they last had control in both Houses of Congress? I'm sure the GOP will flex their muscles and slash the social safety net as much as possible to get their spending cuts, but since they have already taken defense spending off the table and don't have the stones to go after entitlements, there really aren't a lot of places for them go whacking away. They may posture and flex about curbing pork barrel spending through ending earmarks, but while that may what the Tea Party Republicans newbies are going to demand, the old school Republicans aren't going to want to be denied their chance to feed at the troth.


I agree. I think there will be a fair amount of lip-service early on to placate their support, but that will die quickly, and business as usual will resume.

QUOTE
4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

Both the president and the Congress will say all the usual things about "working together," "common ground" and the dreaded "B" word--bipartisan solutions.

Don't believe any of it no matter who says it.

The 2012 election season starts next summer. NOTHING WILL BE DONE. The Republicans have no interest in doing Obama any favors that might get him reelected. Obama should know by now, the Republicans don't want to make nice and his base is sick of him trying to work with Republicans.

The "X" Factor here is Obama. All the liberal pundits are saying he should pull a Clinton and move to the Right (or "the Center"). But that ignores the fact that 2010 is not 1996, Boehner is not as ideological as Gingrich, with Rahm Emanuel gone there is no Dick Morris type whispering in the president's ear to "triangulate" and the GOP are not going to allow themselves to be used again as the springboard to Obama's second term.


All probably true. I have seen a couple of pieces comparing 1996 to 2010, and pointing out the differences, not the similarities. I also agree with you about Boehner. I think an opportunity exists there not so much for triangulation but working on the things they agree on, while postponing the others.


QUOTE
I got two words for you: GRID/LOCK.


I think that is likely the end result, but how it comes about might be interesting. It will either be very quietly getting not much done, or huge amounts of sound and fury from both sides...with not much getting done.

QUOTE
l,;5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

You won't hear this from Sarah Palin or Fox "We Distort, You Can't Decide" News, but only 32 percent won. While they made a conservative Republican party even more conservative, they weren't as formidable nationally. But give 'em time, that's not too shabby for a movement that's only a year or two old.


That's a completely fair assessment--not as strong as some might suggest, but not too bad for a young movement. I think where it goes from here will depend on what happens in the next couple of years. If the unrest over their issues continues, they will grow. If not, we might not hear a word about them in the next election.
QUOTE
At least we've put to rest the laughable suggestion the Tea Party was a bipartisan movement. It's just the usual right-wing dogma, only on steroids. rolleyes.gif


I would argue that it's the right-wing dogma (fiscal conservative) that stopped being the usual, but given that, yes, it was always right wing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moif
post Nov 5 2010, 02:21 AM
Post #6


*********
suspending disbelief

Sponsor
February 2004

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,685
Member No.: 424
Joined: February-3-03

From: Aarhus, Denmark
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



Dare I ask, and at the risk of being slightly OT in that I'm not addressing the actual questions, but does this result spell doom for Sarah Palin as a possible Republican candidate in the next presidential election?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Nov 5 2010, 02:55 AM
Post #7


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,331
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(moif @ Nov 4 2010, 09:21 PM) *
Dare I ask, and at the risk of being slightly OT in that I'm not addressing the actual questions, but does this result spell doom for Sarah Palin as a possible Republican candidate in the next presidential election?


No worries...this was intended to be a free flowing conversation about what might happen after the election.

I would say no to your question. Some of the candidates she supported won, some lost...so probably no lasting effect on her impact either way. Most importantly, you don't hear much from the Republicans or talking heads talking about her demise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Nov 5 2010, 03:51 AM
Post #8


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Hobbes @ Nov 4 2010, 10:55 PM) *
...
... Some of the candidates [Palin] supported won, some lost...so probably no lasting effect on her impact either way. Most importantly, you don't hear much from the Republicans or talking heads talking about her demise.

Au contraire:

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uui...BBAE700DEB533EF

Playing with volatile substances. I mean both Palin AND her detractors.

As they say, politics (and ESPECIALLY Presidential politics) is a "contact sport".

Better have a 2 year supply of popcorn on hand, everyone. It's gonna be a reeeeeally bumpy ride.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pheeler
post Nov 5 2010, 04:18 AM
Post #9


*******
Professional Chem Nerd

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 557
Member No.: 925
Joined: July-25-03

From: Fort Collins, CO
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ Nov 4 2010, 07:51 PM) *

QUOTE
There is rising expectation among GOP elites that Palin will probably run for president in 2012 and could win the Republican nomination, a prospect many of them regard as a disaster in waiting.

Then she will have handed Obama 2 elections! MUAHAHAHAHAHA! devil.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Nov 5 2010, 11:12 AM
Post #10


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?

Only if every other midterm election where the minority gained one or both houses of Congress has been a repudiation of the majority.

2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

It's hard to say what will happen, as I don't have faith in either party to ever do what's right by the populace. The House controls the budget, so the GOP should strike while the iron is hot and conduct slash and burn operations; eliminate the NEA and NEH and other revenue drains, and drastically slash foreign aid and the DoD budget. Obama will likely veto those moves, but at least then, the GOP can state confidently that they are true to their principles and are the party of limited, accountable government.

3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

....Veto.

4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

I believe that Obama will reach across the aisle; the GOP strategy will likely be to obstruct any measure of success for Obama that could provide foundation for a second term success. That's the game in D.C. No matter what is best for Americans...it's what's best for the party. Obama will attempt to showcase that obstruction and his alleged willingness to compromise.

5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

The tea party was irrelevant once the GOP starting using it as a rental vehicle. Tea party candidates who were victorious on Tuesday will quickly succumb to the Washington game, and be labeled a dreaded 'moderate', and find themselves on a hit list by the unelected true believers, ala Scott Brown.

This post has been edited by Dontreadonme: Nov 5 2010, 11:13 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 5 2010, 04:24 PM
Post #11


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



1. What do these results mean? Was this vote a repudiation of the policies Obama has enacted? If so, what do you think he will do about it? If not, what do you think was the rationale for the change?

The biggest shift since 1948 tells us this was no ordinary midterm loss for the Dems. Add to this the losses of governorships and the drubbing Dems took at the state level and you have a rout of major proportions. Let’s hope someone gets the message.

2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?


That depends on the Democrats. If they continue to insist on the far left agenda and continue calling Republicans the “party of no” then they will fill that description perfectly - and nothing will get done.
3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

Strongly oppose – and Obama would veto if it passed anyway. This historic change that was opposed by the majority of Americans will be defended by Democrats.

4. Will Obama try to work with the Senate to continue his agenda, work with the Republicans to move forward on areas they can, or wait and see what comes out of Congress? Will he adopt a new policy of triangulation, like Clinton did? Or will he stick with his initial policies/philosophy?

I believe he and the left wing of the Party that just got their hats handed to them will dig in and resist moving to the center. They will continue to believe that silly stupid Americans just don’t know what’s good for them - LOL
5. Do these results validate the Tea Party as a legitimate entity politically? Will it grow, or wither on the vine?

Partially. They will not become a third Party imo but will continue to be a forum for discontent with government policy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Nov 5 2010, 04:45 PM
Post #12


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 12:24 PM) *
If they continue to insist on the far left agenda and continue calling Republicans the “party of no” then they will fill that description perfectly - and nothing will get done.


There's something I've been curious about for quite some time. You bandy about the term 'far left' nearly every time you speak about the Democratic Party, and do so in a way that makes you appear oblivious to a 'far right'.

Can you illustrate the difference between 'far left' and anything else left of center?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paladin Elspeth
post Nov 5 2010, 05:19 PM
Post #13


*********
I want the 10th Doctor for President!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,987
Member No.: 721
Joined: May-10-03

From: Between 2 Great Lakes
Gender: Female
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Ted)
2. What do you think will likely happen in government the next 2 years? Will the Republicans in the House become active in trying to form policy through new legislation? Or will they simply work against whatever Obama/the Senate propose? Will there be any significant slowdown in government spending?

That depends on the Democrats. If they continue to insist on the far left agenda and continue calling Republicans the “party of no” then they will fill that description perfectly - and nothing will get done.


I've got news for you, Ted. The "far left" agenda was never implemented. If the "far left" agenda held sway we would be out of Iraq and Afghanistan, we would have in place environmental controls to cut way back the pollution that we as a country produce, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" would truly be a thing of the past, and there would be a single payer health care system that would not allow insurance companies to exclude anybody the way three for-profit health corporations just decided to stop coverage of children altogether lest they have a pre-existing condition!

I'm joining DTOM when he asks:
QUOTE(Dontreadonme)
You bandy about the term 'far left' nearly every time you speak about the Democratic Party, and do so in a way that makes you appear oblivious to a 'far right'.

Can you illustrate the difference between 'far left' and anything else left of center?


You haven't seen "far left" implemented--ever.

As far as Democrats and pundits calling the Republicans "the Party of No," what the hell else have they done these past two years besides kvetch and obstruct? They carried the use of the filibuster to an historic high. They insisted that Obama needed to work with them, and every time he tried they refused to do so, to the point of abandoning bills that they--the Republicans--proposed, just to deny Obama any credit whatsoever during his term.

Do I think that that is going to change? Probably not, even IF Democrats and pundits "make nice" by not calling the folks across the aisle the "Party of No."

I don't think it will make a bit of difference. The Republicans have learned that they can gain seats in the House just by sitting like bumps on logs, criticizing and blocking virtually every measure the Democrats come up with. The would-be "Management" has learned the value of a strike from the "Hourly Employees," and there is no one above them to make them get back to work.

So we'll see just what the Republican agenda is, whether it really is going to be much different from what they've been doing for the past two years. As far as positive change goes, I'm not holding my breath until some Reps grow a pair and decide to do something for the sake of our country rather than accruing power for their own sake.

This post has been edited by Paladin Elspeth: Nov 5 2010, 05:26 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Curmudgeon
post Nov 5 2010, 06:22 PM
Post #14


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,197
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(moif @ Nov 4 2010, 10:21 PM) *
Dare I ask, and at the risk of being slightly OT in that I'm not addressing the actual questions, but does this result spell doom for Sarah Palin as a possible Republican candidate in the next presidential election?

Surely Ted wants to know what we on the "Far Left" fear from the nomination of Sarah Palin for President.

Five Myths about Sarah Palin is a "news story" that popped up on my home page yesterday. (I notice that it is actually a couple of weeks old.) The Washington Post outlined why she is a promising candidate. Okay, the machinery of the Party of Noh is still rehearsing and still seems to be planning for Sarah to be the lead in the play.

MSNBC is currently running clips from Fox News and Rush Limbaugh detailing how much money is being spent, and how many hotel rooms that Obama had booked at the Taj Mahal for his trip to India. To the best of my knowledge, the Taj Mahal is one of the world's most famous tombs, with room for only the two bodies that are entombed there. They are also claiming that he is using a third of the U. S. Navy to make the trip, but I am certain that I saw clips of Obama boarding Air Force 1. (I am reasonably certain which network I trust more, but since we have Concast cable, version Orwell.1984, I can't actually change channels to watch anything else.)

So, in two years, if I look at the primary ballot and I have a well prepared Democratic slate where I don't need to choose between candidates...and I have the opportunity on the Republican slate to nominate Sarah Palin rather than Mitch McConnell; it might be very tempting to vote in the Republican primary. My theory being, perhaps even someone like Ted would vote against a Sarah Palin/Glenn Beck slate in November 2012.

Then again, there is that final rational step the founders wrote into the Constitution. Republicans might decide to nominate Electors to the Electoral College who would clearly understand that, "When Sarah Palin is elected, in the best interests of the country," they must exercise their right to write in such names as Dick Cheney and Karl Rove in the privacy of the Electoral College voting process.

Yes Sarah Palin still has a chance to run for President; just as it is possible that the White Smoke that rises from the Vatican when the next Pope is elected will be from Marijuana.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pheeler
post Nov 5 2010, 06:41 PM
Post #15


*******
Professional Chem Nerd

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 557
Member No.: 925
Joined: July-25-03

From: Fort Collins, CO
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 08:24 AM) *
3. Were the House to propose any significant changes in Obama's Health Care, would the Senate go along with them or would they strongly oppose it? If any such bill were to come out of Congress, would Obama veto it?

Strongly oppose – and Obama would veto if it passed anyway. This historic change that was opposed by the majority of Americans will be defended by Democrats.

You and the rest of the far right love to ignore that fact that many Americans opposed the bill because it didn't go far enough. There are a lot of people who stopped supporting it after the public option was dropped.

CNN poll just before the health bill passed.

QUOTE
20. As you may know, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate are trying to pass final
legislation that would make major changes in the country’s health care system. Based on what you
have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor it or generally oppose it?
Mar 19-21 2010

Favor 39%
Oppose 59%
No opinion 2%

That is a pretty whopping margin in opposition.

QUOTE
21. (IF OPPOSE) Do you oppose that legislation because you think its approach toward health care is
too liberal, or because you think it is not liberal enough?
QUESTIONS 20 AND 21 COMBINED
Mar 19-21
2010
Favor (from Question 20) 39%
Oppose, too liberal 43%
Oppose, not liberal enough 13%
No opinion 5%

Oh wait, only 43% oppose it because it's too liberal, the other 52% either support it or believe it's not liberal enough!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 5 2010, 08:40 PM
Post #16


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
DTOM
Can you illustrate the difference between 'far left' and anything else left of center?


I consider just about anything Nancy P pushed hard for to be far left – esp. the public option and cap and trade. The key here is that the far left could not pass much of their agenda even though Dems owned both branches of government and the WH. Why? Because moderate and more conservative Dems opposed them
QUOTE
PE
As far as Democrats and pundits calling the Republicans "the Party of No," what the hell else have they done these past two years besides kvetch and obstruct? They carried the use of the filibuster to an historic high
.

Please stop babbling the idiotic Obama Pelosi crap. Republicans had positions and they were summarily shut out. Nancy put up here Bills and Republicans were not even allowed in the room for most of it including the back room Healthcare deals.

Yes the far left you love failed because DEMOCRATS stopped them PE. whistling.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dontreadonme
post Nov 5 2010, 08:44 PM
Post #17


Group Icon

**********
I think, therefore I am an enemy of the State....and Fox News

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,452
Member No.: 359
Joined: December-25-02

From: Nestled in the Shenandoah
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Libertarian



QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 04:40 PM) *
Please stop babbling the idiotic Obama Pelosi crap.

Yes the far left you love failed because DEMOCRATS stopped them PE. whistling.gif


........and this is why I paused before asking you a pointed question. I had a gut feeling that this is what would come in response.

And yes, I know the above was directly in response to PE, but you failed to answer my question. For you: Right = Mainstream/patriotic/American/whatever......Left = Far left/Socialist/anti-American/whatever.

I'll keep my questions about how your opinions are formulated to myself from now on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 5 2010, 08:49 PM
Post #18


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Nov 5 2010, 04:44 PM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 04:40 PM) *
Please stop babbling the idiotic Obama Pelosi crap.

Yes the far left you love failed because DEMOCRATS stopped them PE. whistling.gif


........and this is why I paused before asking you a pointed question. I had a gut feeling that this is what would come in response.

And yes, I know the above was directly in response to PE, but you failed to answer my question. For you: Right = Mainstream/patriotic/American/whatever......Left = Far left/Socialist/anti-American/whatever.

I'll keep my questions about how your opinions are formulated to myself from now on.

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. I never said Right = anything of the kind.

You asked what I thought far left was and I told you. If you consider the takeover of healthcare by the government to be centrist then we disagree. Same for cap and trade.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pheeler
post Nov 5 2010, 08:51 PM
Post #19


*******
Professional Chem Nerd

Sponsor
October 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 557
Member No.: 925
Joined: July-25-03

From: Fort Collins, CO
Gender: Male
Politics: Slightly Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 12:40 PM) *
Please stop babbling the idiotic Obama Pelosi crap. Republicans had positions and they were summarily shut out. Nancy put up here Bills and Republicans were not even allowed in the room for most of it including the back room Healthcare deals.

Yes the far left you love failed because DEMOCRATS stopped them PE. whistling.gif

Classy, Ted. If you're interested in idiotic babbling, why don't you take that vitriol to Yahoo! or something?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 5 2010, 08:58 PM
Post #20


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,416
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(pheeler @ Nov 5 2010, 04:51 PM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ Nov 5 2010, 12:40 PM) *
Please stop babbling the idiotic Obama Pelosi crap. Republicans had positions and they were summarily shut out. Nancy put up here Bills and Republicans were not even allowed in the room for most of it including the back room Healthcare deals.

Yes the far left you love failed because DEMOCRATS stopped them PE. whistling.gif

Classy, Ted. If you're interested in idiotic babbling, why don't you take that vitriol to Yahoo! or something?

I answer as I am addressed.

And as for healthcare the “public option” had support when many thought it would be cheaper.

Well we know the CBO said that was not going to be the case. And then there is the lies about Medicare “savings”

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: November 18th, 2018 - 10:56 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.