And I thought the Republican Party was dead and gone.

[Kulindahr]

if you'd said 2 years ago ............ that a 60+ seat chg in the house and 6 senators changing .............

There were pundits telling the Republicans to not worry; they'd pick up 45+ seats in the House, based on one thing: the party in power loses seats in a midterm election, and that includes losing essentially every seat that traditionally belongs to the other party.

Johann's right -- this was expected. It was a little more than expected, but only a little.

EDIT: my OH says he thinks the Russ Feingold loss was an upset.

That enemy of free speech on the part of the people needed to go. Now his partner in attacking the First Amendment needs to go -- McCain.

I still think it's funny that all this happened because people actually believe the economy can be fixed. That jobs can be created. That this isn't the beginning of the end for this country. They're in for quite a nasty shock.

The economy can be fixed -- I just doubt the politicians have the balls to do what's necessary.
That's one thing I'll give the Democrats: as Maddow explained, and other sources also show, this Congress tackled things that have been sitting unattended for a decade, even two, knowing it would cost them. Let's see if the Republicans are willing to do the same.

Even the party intellectuals like David Frum said after the elections that the Republican Party is lost because of the T-Bag influence, which is losing them the young, the gays, the immigrants and the urbans.

The Republicans would have done better without the TeaPartites. More than one analyst has said they'd hold the Senate, 51-49, if the TBs had stayed out of the way.

I rather suspect that deep cuts can be made in American defence spending that acknowledges the disappearance of Cold War threats from the Soviet Union. A Republican administration might well be more inclined to move in that direction, than the current Democratic administration that is under siege, even from its left wing.

I just scanned a report by the ISI -- definitely a conservative outfit (they proudly acknowledge that, while rejecting a LOT of the neocon detritus) -- claiming that the Pentagon could cut nearly a full trillion dollars without affecting effectiveness (if I'm keeping my newsletters straight, the Independent Institute concurs).
An opinion piece recommended cutting "only" 3/4 of that, saying the rest should be devoted to deferred maintenance, deferred equipment upgrades, and the like -- getting the troops and their gear updated to the twenty-first century.

Do that and actually end the stupid wars, and bring home a third of our troops scattered around the globe, and it would almost close the deficit.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oh, well I thought you were one of the people on here 2 years ago saying that the party was dead and shrinking. And you were right it was!

The Tea Party brought it back to life again. So yay Tea Party!!!

Now I'm sure your party the democrats are much more nervous moving ahead to 2012.

Please define "Tea Party".

If you're referring to the actual Tea Party folks and not the cling-ons, I'll join your "Yay Tea Party", if they can get some things changed in D.C. If you're including the cling-ons, well, I hope you enjoy the idiocy involved in cheering for people who think you shouldn't be allowed jobs, housing, or public education for something you can't control.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

I don't think we'll get lucky enough to get rid of healthenforcement but I hope they try.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

I don't think we'll get lucky enough to get rid of healthenforcement but I hope they try.

Um... why?

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

Um... why?

Because I want it gone.

 

[jackoroe]

Um... why?

Read the Constitution, and tell us why not.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Because I want it gone.

Ah. The baby wants his way just cuz.

Glad that American politics is so mature.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Read the Constitution, and tell us why not.

At what point did conservatives give a shit about the constitution?

 

[Kulindahr]

Bad argument, Jackaroe.

Your argument could also be used to justify slavery.

Um, no, it couldn't.

Read the Constitution and tell us why.

 

[Kulindahr]

At what point did conservatives give a shit about the constitution?

Always. It's just that they've gotten overwhelmed by reactionaries and pretenders for a generation or so.

(I thank Nixon, who taught that winning mattered more than principle.)

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Always. It's just that they've gotten overwhelmed by reactionaries and pretenders for a generation or so.

(I thank Nixon, who taught that winning mattered more than principle.)

If they cared about the constitution, we'd have no DADT and we'd have no Patriot Act.

 

[laikaNYC]

^ You mean like Obama mandating that Americans be forced to buy something and then be penalized if you don't? Where's that in the Constitution, Jasun?

 

[SuperPsyze]

^ You mean like Obama mandating that Americans be forced to buy something and then be penalized if you don't? Where's that in the Constitution, Jasun?

It's only that way because, for some reason, the public option was taken out. If the public option was there, it would be no different than paying taxes to go to our elementary schools.

I don't know how you feel, but I think all Americans are entitled to good health the same way they are entitled to a good education. At the moment, it doesn't seem like they're getting either...

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

Bad argument, Jackaroe.

Your argument could also be used to justify slavery.

But it isn't being used to justify slavery. Cheap diversionary tactic. Ineffective. Try again.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

Ah. The baby wants his way just cuz.

Glad that American politics is so mature.

I have explained my opposition to healthenforcement at length in the past on this forum. If you really want to know that bad, look it up. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you anymore. The election is over. I'm sure Obama will cling childishly to healthenforcement so I wouldn't worry.

 

[palemale]

Read the Constitution, and tell us why not.

Read the constitution and tell us where it makes the Health Care Reform legislation unconstitutional.

 

[laikaNYC]

Read the constitution and tell us where it makes the Health Care Reform legislation unconstitutional.

No where in the Constitution does it say citizens can be forced to purchase something. The U.S. Constitution doesn't mix well with your Socialist agenda.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

It's only that way because, for some reason, the public option was taken out. If the public option was there, it would be no different than paying taxes to go to our elementary schools.

I don't know how you feel, but I think all Americans are entitled to good health the same way they are entitled to a good education. At the moment, it doesn't seem like they're getting either...

The "public option" was never going to be in there, sherlock. Obama LIED to you. The mandate was a big part of Obama's plan (that would be what he really wanted). The mandate just happens to be one hell of a powerful battering ram that will no doubt make more appearances if it is allowed to stand. You people have no concept of freedom if you have no concept of how important choice is.

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

Johann, just ignore the "socialist" crap.

And.... well, the people who say it who clearly aren't here to debate or discuss... just whine and complain and post talking points.

 

[palemale]

No where in the Constitution does it say citizens can be forced to purchase something. The U.S. Constitution doesn't mix well with your Socialist agenda.

I see you couldn't answer the question.