Why The Dems Lost..How I See It..

[Kulindahr]

The Dems lost because the stupid youth voters (18-29) didn't show up to vote.

http://www.scpr.org/blogs/elections2010/2010/11/04/low-youth-voter-turnout-hurts-democrats/

but why didn't they show up to vote?

was it a matter of just kids being lazy and dumb, or kids being dissatisfied with the hope and change they got and not feeling compelled to support it in another election cycle?

Does it matter why?

By not showing, the young, the blacks, and the Hispanics just gave this country its biggest lurch toward idiocy in almost anyone's lifetimes.
"Lazy and dumb" is a good description -- it gave us Prop 8 in California, and now it gave us a Congress with a whole new dose of ignorance and bigotry.
Ponder this: if all the young people, blacks, and Hispanics who voted two years ago had voted five days ago, the Republicans would not hold the House.

Not too long back, an astute observer wrote a book that accurately called America A Nation of Cowards. I think the truth for this elections would be "A Nation of Slackers".

 

[Kulindahr]

^ Getting things done is what got us into this mess in the first place. We need to get things undone. We elected these people to get in Obama's face. Not sit down and smoke a peace pipe with him.

Slow down and read a bit.

"Get things done" covers a lot of ground. Repealing the "USA PATRIOT" Act would be getting something done (not that the police-state lovers are likely to do so). Passing a national reciprocity bill for concealed weapons would be getting something done. Getting rid of the Dept.s of Education and Energy and selling off the assets would be getting something done. Passing a new Homestead Act for the poor and disabled using fringe (as in isolated from large blocks) BLM and National Forest land would be getting something done. Throwing out all the laws that keep farmers from growing hemp would be getting something done. Heck, restoring dueling to legal status -- for politicians -- would be getting something done.

 

[Kulindahr]

For those of you who doubt that obama has accomplished a single decent thing have a look >>> http://www.whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

Why is it I end up defending people I can't stand?

Here are some things Obama worked to get done, and signed:

• new law makes it easier for workers to sue for pay discrimination.
  
• bill imposing new rules on credit card companies. The bill was aimed at sparing consumers from sudden interest rate hikes.
  
• bill that gives the Food and Drug Administration unprecedented power to regulate tobacco. The bill will allow the FDA to reduce nicotine in tobacco products, block labels such as low tar and light, and tobacco companies will also have to put large graphic warnings on cartons of cigarettes.
  
• bill that the president has been pushing that extends government-sponsored health insurance for about 4 million uninsured children.

Those are just a few from a long list Rachel Maddow reported. They aren't massive, they aren't all that glamorous, but there's a serious list of them, and they're solid accomplishments. I don't agree that they're all good accomplishments, but they're there, and they show that your cutesy little web site is about as relevant as a little boy farting in the surf.

 

[JayHawk]

Look at the link before you leap.... it is a listing of things accomplished for the good of all by Obama. Sometimes the cover of a book can be misleading. Please see your fourth grade teacher for a lesson in judgement.

 

[Kulindahr]

Look at the link before you leap.... it is a listing of things accomplished for the good of all by Obama. Sometimes the cover of a book can be misleading. Please see your fourth grade teacher for a lesson in judgement.

I clicked on the link. It gave one thing and nothing else. That's why I pointed out there's more.

 

[palemale]

Let me see if I have this right. You think those things are bad and you want to give Big Brother the keys to the entire healthcare system and the authority to demand that you buy into it? Do you honestly NOT see how this could particularly be a problem for gays?

Here's a clue (because I don't think you have one). If Big Brother runs healthcare, he can run your entire life. And that includes your sex life, what you eat, whether or not you exercise, how much you weigh, what vitamins and supplements you can take. Basically, there is no corner of your life they can't reach with this bill as a starting point. If the insurers have to do business with you, they own you. They can't turn you down but you can't turn them down either.

They can say your lifestyle makes you high risk and they can blubber to all the other good little socialists that you will be taking more than your fair share if you get sick and end up needing costly medical care. People who have money in this society have the law on their side for the simple reason that they can afford better lawyers and better lobbyists than you can. If you think for one second that a greedy insurance company won't find a way to chain your ass to a concrete wall with this legislation you'd better think again.

Who knows where this will end?!?! If the Health Care Reform is constitutional, why, the government could take steps to prohibit people under age 21 from purchasing alcohol, or those under 18 from purchasing tobacco products! Why, I think the next thing they'll do is set up a socialist program to provide health insurance for the elderly. That would be horrible. Wait until the tea party finds out about that, they'll put a stop to it. It would be truly horrible to subject the elderly to socialized medicine. Luckily, the old, white people in the tea party will never tolerate such an intrusion into their right to pay exorbitant premiums to the health insurance companies.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

Why is it that every time I make the mistake of reading your posts I picture Veruca Salt singing "I want it now" as she runs around the golden goose chocolate egg room?

Hell if I know. Maybe you've been sniffing paint thinner or something?

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

This is spot on: if this scheme is judged constitutional, there's no limit at all to government authority.

Except for one thing: the insurance companies aren't the ones to be worried about. If this is constitutional, then the next step, as you say, is restricting things people can do, for the sake of their health. Of course since this is now government, penalties will be in the form of fines.

Fast forward to 2020, with an anti-gay Republican in the White House. She instructs the HHS to adhere to a presidential "finding" she just wrote that asserts that anal sex is detrimental to the immune system -- and anyone engaging in anal sex is to be fined... heavily.

Well, regardless of how it would work, I think we're both seeing the same potential for a massive nanny state. And that's just with the fallout from the mandate. The bill is huge and I'm sure there's plenty of nasty stuff hidden away in there. They managed to get this whole bloated bureaucracy out of the United States Constitution. Imagine what they can do with around 2,000 pages and enough time/lawyers and legal maneuvering.

Now we just have to watch and see what excuse the Republicans come up with for not getting rid of the mandate. I have speculated all along that they probably secretly like it. They didn't have to vote for it. They knew it would be passed without a single Republican vote. So the blame goes to the Democrats. And now they can claim Obama won't let them change it.

 

[JayHawk]

I clicked on the link. It gave one thing and nothing else. That's why I pointed out there's more.

Click on the sarcastic quote inside the buttony lookin thing under each accomplishment it gives many many more of which i dont consider some accomplishments or progress. I will let the others marginalize what I think those items are.....lol

 

[Kulindahr]

Click on the sarcastic quote inside the buttony lookin thing under each accomplishment it gives many many more of which i dont consider some accomplishments or progress. I will let the others marginalize what I think those items are.....lol

Aaargh.

Befuddled by the obvious.

 

[JayHawk]

Meh... hopefully I wasnt too much of an ass pointing it out... I know I have had ( and will have) many 'DOH' moments on here.... used to be things were so petty that if you failed to spell check someone got their panties in a twist.... hope it is calmer now...

The Dems failed because they didnt mobilize their support and the repulican drum beating on Obama resonates when he doesnt defend himself or follow thru on many campaign promises....

he promised change and gave none.... secret, eavesdropping, police state ruler.....


Now of course i predicted he would capitulate once wearing the mantle of power...... it is the nature of the beast these days.... the POTUS is a figure....

I prattle on though....

 

[MoltenRock III]

"Why The Dems Lost", is easy.... they didn't go far enough. They kept trying to negotiate with Republipukes, which is a losing hand. "The Dems" should have crammed down the most liberal / progressive agenda down Republipukes throats using every legislative trick in the book and they would have handily won reelection. Nearly 1/2 the people unhappy with the Health Care Reform package didn't think it went FAR ENOUGH! Why Dems are so damned timid in using every tactic in the book is beyond me. If it was a wingnut Congress (like the 2011 & 2012 will be) they will be cramming nonsense thru the meat-law grinder nonstop.

 

[JB3]

"Why The Dems Lost", is easy.... they didn't go far enough. They kept trying to negotiate with Republipukes, which is a losing hand. "The Dems" should have crammed down the most liberal / progressive agenda down Republipukes throats using every legislative trick in the book and they would have handily won reelection. Nearly 1/2 the people unhappy with the Health Care Reform package didn't think it went FAR ENOUGH! Why Dems are so damned timid in using every tactic in the book is beyond me. If it was a wingnut Congress (like the 2011 & 2012 will be) they will be cramming nonsense thru the meat-law grinder nonstop.

Bullshit.

If that was true the supporters of the president's agenda would have been so pissed off that they would have voted overwhelmingly for democrats and made their majorities even bigger.

Your position is nonsense.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Bullshit.

If that was true the supporters of the president's agenda would have been so pissed off that they would have voted overwhelmingly for democrats and made their majorities even bigger.

Your position is nonsense.

LMAO! As usual you have no idea what you are talking about. In this election the "Blue Dog" Democrats were decimated because they were "Republipuke light", while the most liberal and progressive lawmakers were returned to their seats. Look up the FACTS not the spin bullshit you sup on FAUX "News" nightly.

 

[MoltenRock III]

considering your Nov 2nd predictions

not sure you have you finger on the pulse on the electorate either

I said the Dems would keep both the House and Senate, to the jeers of Limbaugh'tards. I was only 1/2 correct.

But as I've said repeatedly, never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate.

 

[JB3]

LMAO! As usual you have no idea what you are talking about. In this election the "Blue Dog" Democrats were decimated because they were "Republipuke light", while the most liberal and progressive lawmakers were returned to their seats. Look up the FACTS not the spin bullshit you sup on FAUX "News" nightly.

The facts are that if the voters that got Obama into office really wanted the agenda he was pursuing completed, they would have voted more democrats in not out. If people were upset that the democrats didn't go far enough, as you say, then they wouldn't have just thrown up their hands and walked away.

 

[JB3]

I said the Dems would keep both the House and Senate, to the jeers of Limbaugh'tards. I was only 1/2 correct.

But as I've said repeatedly, never underestimate the stupidity of the American electorate.

You also said 2-3 senate seats and 20 or so house seats.

Your prediction was about as accurate as Fox news' portrayal of Obama's Asia visit.

 

[JayHawk]

LMAO! As usual you have no idea what you are talking about. In this election the "Blue Dog" Democrats were decimated because they were "Republipuke light", while the most liberal and progressive lawmakers were returned to their seats. Look up the FACTS not the spin bullshit you sup on FAUX "News" nightly.

The reason extreme liberals won re-election and the luke warm mealy mouthed middle of the road version did not is because the Libs reside in safe overwhelmingly liberal based electorates. NOT because of some "your not liberal enough" bullshit.....

The swing swung back to the right because they get what is sold. They at least know what they are getting. Obama and the democrats promised much and delivered none of those items.... Sad really that they can watch the republicans do it over and over and yet cant figure it out for themselves.. Jam it out there and fight for it on the news channels.

Middle ground America or the swing wanted GITMO closed, they wanted Iraq ended, they wanted Afghanistan ended or headed that way, they wanted illegal wiretaps ended (basically all of the OMG bullshit the dems played ad nauseum for the last four years of Bush)

but mostly..... mostly they wanted prosperity and the dems never resoundingly told them it wasnt gonna happen because in reality they have little immediate control over the economy... instead of saying that and saying 'tighten your belt' they spent ridiculous amounts of cash on shit no one can see... so they failed

Think about (in your history book) when the new deal came around the unemployed were shipped off to working camp to do infrustructure work... not cash to corrupt local govt's for "shovel" ready crap that didnt look any didferent to anyone suffering out there...

No they lost for a poor show and poor execution of their self trumpeted goals. So dont be naive.

 

[Kulindahr]

The facts are that if the voters that got Obama into office really wanted the agenda he was pursuing completed, they would have voted more democrats in not out. If people were upset that the democrats didn't go far enough, as you say, then they wouldn't have just thrown up their hands and walked away.

That's back-asswards thinking.

When the people in power aren't getting the job done that people expect, they vote the bastards out. You'd have a really hard time convincing anyone that "they haven't gotten the job done, so send more of them" is going to work. This is government, and what will come to mind is seeing five guys in government vests standing around a hole in the road doing nothing... and that you want them to add two more guys to stand around and do nothing.

What you'll likely accomplish is to convince a heap of them to emulate the government, and do nothing. In fact that's what cost the Democrats the House: if young people, blacks, and Hispanics had turned out to vote in the numbers they did two years ago, and in accordance with polls, the House would still be in Democrat hands -- only by a few seats, but still with a Democrat as Speaker.

 

[Knucklehead]

Damn there's some smart guys here..Hopefully I can get time to respond after my 14 hour shift today..