Jump to content
topspeaker70

Of Weak Reids and Pyrric Victories

Recommended Posts

GAME OVER. The Democratic Party will be gone - at least as a major political force - in 18 months.

 

C'est pire qu'un crime; c'est une faulte.

 

Sad, sad, sad...

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Democratic Party will be gone as a major political force?

 

Hyperbole, much?

 

 

I wish it were. The Democrats survived 1994, and the Democrats survived 1968-72, but I fear that this time they've shot themselves once too often. Moreover, I fear they suffer from the implicit assumption you have made - that they have some sort of "guarantee" of their future existence.

 

I'm sure the Whigs - not to mention moderate and liberal Republicans - and Ross Perot's Reform Party - felt exactly the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Though I'm not an expert in political parties,) I don't think a precedent exists, anywhere, of a multiparty democracy as entrenched as the one currently established in the US (I could option to terminate this sentence here) devolving into single-party statehood, particularly when the other party is as disorganized as the contemporary GOP. Will the GOP make gains in 2010? Yes. Will those gains be substantial? Yes, I think so - on a good night, the Republicans might take back both houses of Congress, where the Dems hold large majorities. Is the Democratic Party finished? Hell no.

 

I'm intrigued to hear your argument, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify: I did not consider the Democratic Party to be "a major political force" during the period 2001-2007. It became a force again after the 2006 elections, and only because the Bush/Cheney Administration was so UNBELIEVEABLY bad.

 

In my view, neither "major" Party in the USA is a "major political force" unless it controls either one of the three branches of the USFG, OR a majority of the 50 Governorships.

 

Let's see what happens - as I say - I hope and pray that I am 100% WRONG on this...

 

BTW: Of course, regardless of what happens in 2010, the Democrats will nominally "control" the White House through 2012. However, given Obama's almost mind-boggling timidity of leadership with "control" of Congress, I expect him to do less than nothing if the GOP recaptures Congress.

 

Again, if I am wrong, the happiest person in this country will be me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how would a republican controlled house and senate be ANY BETTER THAN THIS.

 

i have a lot of highly conservative family members, but not a single one can articulate to me a reason to vote FOR the gop, let alone a rational reason to vote against a democrat.

 

MORE TAXES! LESS BREAD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
how would a republican controlled house and senate be ANY BETTER THAN THIS.

 

i have a lot of highly conservative family members, but not a single one can articulate to me a reason to vote FOR the gop, let alone a rational reason to vote against a democrat.

 

MORE TAXES! LESS BREAD!

 

(isn't the last part a DnG reference?) just making sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GAME OVER. The Democratic Party will be gone - at least as a major political force - in 18 months.

 

C'est pire qu'un crime; c'est une faulte.

 

Sad, sad, sad...

 

Is this similar to your prediction that the health care bill wouldn't even be brought to the house floor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GAME OVER. The Democratic Party will be gone - at least as a major political force - in 18 months.
In my view, neither "major" Party in the USA is a "major political force" unless it controls either one of the three branches of the USFG, OR a majority of the 50 Governorships.

Sorry to burst your math skills, but barring some sort of wildly unlikely scenario, Democrats will hold the White House until at least January 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny becuause he of all people is old enough to realize that these things are cyclical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its funny becuause he of all people is old enough to realize that these things are cyclical.

Fo' real. The same thing could have been said (more convincingly) in 1998, or 1980, or 1968... Ditto about Republicans in 1932, 1960, 1976...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Pyrrhic

 

Sure, I know things are cyclical... I can even remember having a full-time job!

 

But I also know you have to capitalize on opportunities if you are ultimately going to succeed... every losing contestant on Wheel of Fortune could tell you that. And the Democrats have - as far as I can tell - completely squandered almost ALL of the opportunities they gained in 2008.

 

Final thought: in this thread I am just saying what I believe to be true - which is the antithesis of what I want to be true - so I'll gladly stop.

 

You folks "win on those flow," and more power to you. :) I hope that you win in "the real world" as well. :):):)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the Democrats have - as far as I can tell - completely squandered almost ALL of the opportunities they gained in 2008.

What do you mean by "squandered"? The Democrats have been corporate sell-outs since I can remember and complicit with the worst aspects of American empire since... well, also as long as I can remember. Why would they ever attempt to diverge from this path when doing so, while temporarily popular, would lose them a substantial amount of corporate support?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have a pretty optimistic view of the democratic party's prospects. the state of the union next month will give the president the opportunity to frame the debate heading into the midterms, and the jobs situation will almost certainly improve. they will probably lose some seats but i think it will be far from a disaster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the state of the union next month will give the president the opportunity to frame the debate heading into the midterms
Any examples of a presidential address moving poll numbers in his direction on any issue at all over the past 4-5 months?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any examples of a presidential address moving poll numbers in his direction on any issue at all over the past 4-5 months?

 

sarcasm? he got a bump on health care in september when he addressed congress on the issue. people said it was dead after august, and he is poised to have something on his desk pretty soon here. not there yet but when obama gives speeches they tend to go well. i thought thats what everyone agreed on with the man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sarcasm? he got a bump on health care in september when he addressed congress on the issue.
Says who? Gallup has been asking the following question for the past four months: "Would you advise your member of Congress to vote for or against a healthcare bill this year, or do you not have an opinion?" In the last poll before Obama's September 9 speech (the Aug.31-Sept. 2 poll), the results were 37% for, 39% against, 24% no opinion. In the first poll after his speech (the Sept. 11-13 poll), the results were 38% for, 40% against, 22% no opinion. He didn't move the numbers at all, really...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, a 1% bump is still a bump, even if it's not particularly significant. Second, with that poll, you also have to think about the trajectory of health care reform approval ratings. That is, were they already declining and did Obama's speech both reverse that trend and increase approval ratings for the plan? That could be significant, though I don't have any polls* to suggest it is the case. Now, let me emphasize that I'm not claiming that those necessarily are the case, but they are things that you need to account for when making assertions about approval ratings and health care. And, for the record, I think that health care is going to be a major liability for the dems in midterms and I wouldn't been surprised to see them lose a sizable number of seats.

 

*not because they don't exist. because i don't want to spend time looking for them.

Edited by maxpow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, since the "Conservatives" have - today - adriotly seized upon this moment in history to declare Dick Cheney to be their champion (see, "Human Events") predicting anything in American politics continues to be a crapshoot!

 

Hhahahahaha...

 

What is it with these people? At least Sarah Palin is fun to look at!

 

Beam me up Scotty! I miss James Traficant! Without or with the tribble on his head! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please compare and contrast my post of 12/19/09 with the polling data of today (3/3/10) and Senator McConnell's announcement that, if healthcare reform is passed by "reconciliation," the GOP's unifying campaign theme in November 2010 will be the repeal of "Obamacare" (whatever the hell that may ultimately turn out to be).

 

I don't know how we did it, be we've allowed the GOP propagandists to convince millions of people that giving medical treatment to people who need it and can't afford it is some kind of devious tyrannical plot. It's ridiculous, but that's where the "debate" now stands.

 

Only we Democrats could take a totally noble cause like healthcare reform and twist it into a lose-lose scenario... :(

 

Oy!

Edited by topspeaker70

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I wouldn't mind people waking up after all this crap and realizing that both the GOP and the Dems are idiots, and we need to start electing people based on morals and efficiency (Stance on those, obviously, varying, but that's not the point) instead of who can scream "I'M GOP/DEMOCRAT SO YOU HAZ TO VOTEZ FOR ME NAO K!!!!" the loudest. Let's face it: Neither party represents SHIT anymore, they've both outlived their usefullness by several decades.

 

Incidentally, it's REALLY easy to determine the general political bias of Cross-X from this thread. Like, easier than usual. :P

EDIT: Not sure what I said here that merits the "fuck you!", but if whoever repped me could please enlighten me that would be great. I'd like to do it again.

Edited by Algae
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now really, this is absurd. If the Democrats could survive 1994, they can survive 2010. The notion that the Democrats will lose any significant ground is hyperbole to the highest degree. 2010 is not the exception for midterm elections; it is the rule. 1982, 1986, 1990, 1994, 2006, and now 2010 - all these saw the party in power lose seats. The Democrats lost 75 seats in 1946, and won 80 in 1948. The party in power always loses seats. 2002 was the exception to the rule.

 

In 2012, the GOP may make gains, regardless of whether or not Obama is reelected. If he loses, the GOP will lose in 2014; if he wins, the Democrats will suffer.

 

Predictions of the Democrats' death are greatly exaggerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Predictions of any party's death are normally overstated. When Carville crowed about the 40 year majority in 2008, and Time said the GOP was dead, they were obviously wrong. And, same now to those who say the Dems are dead. In the end, Neil Peart is right: No change is permanent, but change is."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...