- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 96,116
- Reaction score
- 33,462
- Location
- SE Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Remember folks, the lesson to take from miderate blue dog democrats losing overwhelmingly to staunch conservative republicans is that the country is really moderate and centrist and that's how they want things done.
Actually, when you look at the statistics, the races that the tea party candidate won were for the most part in ultra-red districts where anyone with an (R) behind their name would have won, with few exceptions.....in competitive districts, the tea-party candidates lost across the board.
I'm glad. But my "spin" is no different that the spin from the far right.....actually I would have to say I've even been more moderate. The reality is...the lesson that I hope the GOP doesn't learn is that America is a centrist country.
As a far-left liberal I hate to admit that...and I hate having Blue Dogs and moderate Democrats, but I accept that this is the reality.
If the GOP accepts your spin and believes that this is a mandate to move the country to the hard right....that can only be good for people like me because they will alienate the vast majority of the people in this country.
Indeed, however the more accurate thing to look at would be 2006.
Indeed. The issue is, just like in 2006, reading what it is will "please" them.
Yes, and specifically to get **** done and create jobs in a conservative manner.
In 2006 the Democrats got swept into office with the focus being on Anti-War sentiment, and the secondary sentiment being against Republican and Bush policies in general. They did this by running moderate to conservative "blue dog" Democrats. After winning they misread the mandate and decided it meant support of universal health care, bailouts, stimulus, cap and trade, and other such things they've been trying to push.
In 2010 Republicans got swept into congress by rejecting moderate and liberal republicans in exchange for conservative ones, and based on a message of fixing the deficit and economy with lowered spending, smaller government, and not raising taxes.
Like the Democrats, if they misread what they were elected for they're going to be booted out. HOWEVER, what they got elected for is NOT the same reasons Democrats got elected in 2006, nor was it the same way. MODERATE democrats were elected in 2006 to give them their majority, primarily due to the war. In 2010 CONSERVATIVe republicans were elected to give them the majority, primarily due to economic and governmental issues.
If the republicans over reach and think this was a referendum on conservatism as a whole and start pushing massive Defense and Social conservative issues as their focus then yes, they're doomed for misreading the message. Similarly however if republicans read this as the country wanting them to be "moderate" and to "compromise" to help the Democratic President pass what he wants then they're ALSO misreading the message.
Lets see the statistics. I want to know where these "ultra-red" districts that were controlled by Democrats before were. Hell, I find it interseting that an "Ultra-red" district was controlled by a Democrat...doesn't seem so "ultra-red".
You speak of statistics Disney, lets see them.
I was referencing the previous poster who cited Rand Paul and Mike Lee....both of those seats were going to be Republican regardless of whether they were tea party or not....I don't know when the last Senator from Kentucky was a Democrat...but I know that Utah hasn't had a Democratic Senator since the 1960's.
Also...New Hampshire is generally a red state....as is Arizona and South Carolina...although to lesser extents. Florida, fluctuates.
....Can you say VP candidate in 2012 ...............
I never said that your Republican party would "only pick up a few seats"....I said that they would pick up between 45-50. I was off slightly....but not as badly as your prediction that they would win 80...LOL.....
The results of the election were definitely a mixed bag. Clearly the Republican party did well in the house, but did not have a particularly strong showing in the Senate, losing most of the close races and not coming close to taking the Senate.
The more interesting thing to come out of this election is to see what direction the GOP takes....if the teabaggers are able to push the GOP further to the right, I think that this would be very good for the Democrats and lefties like me. The more linked the GOP is to Sarah Palin and the fringe groups, the better for us...in fact, I hope that Palin feels a surge and rides it to the party's nomination. 2012 should be fun.
Yeah...maybe he will be Fred Thompson's running mate....or better yet........Bobby Jindal's....LOL
If the GOP accepts your spin and believes that this is a mandate to move the country to the hard right....that can only be good for people like me because they will alienate the vast majority of the people in this country.
Wasn't a rout.
The only thing that happened was R took the congress, D held the senate and still commands the high ground.
It was the biggest pick up of seats in the house... ever.Wasn't a rout.
That's a rout... the GOP also taking the Senate would have been an absolute disaster.
Lets see the statistics. I want to know where these "ultra-red" districts that were controlled by Democrats before were. Hell, I find it interseting that an "Ultra-red" district was controlled by a Democrat...doesn't seem so "ultra-red".
You speak of statistics Disney, lets see them.
America has kicked out the moderates by and large from both countries, leaving the house of representitives with stauch ideological conservatives and staunch ideological democrats with little moderates at all...and the message of that is "CENTRIST!"?
You accept it because its supposed to win you races in "moderate" districts that would take a moderate liberal over a staunch conservative.
....wait a second, didn't almost all the blue dogs lose to staunch conservatives.
it must be because the countries moderate and centrist.
No, its not a mandate to move the country to the hard right in total. Its a mandate to move the country right, in general, on fiscal and governmental issues.
No, the '10 midterms wasn't a rout... the GOP also taking the Senate would have been a rout.
and anyway, I don't see why either side still gets overly excited and emotional over this.. it's the same cycle the Ds and Rs go through ever few years.
No, the '10 midterms wasn't a rout... the GOP also taking the Senate would have been a rout.
and anyway, I don't see why either side still gets overly excited and emotional over this.. it's the same cycle the Ds and Rs go through ever few years.
\So just to be straight, you define a rout only as taking both houses of congress regardless of the margins?
Your wrong, the pick up by the Republicans is the most by either party since 1948.......
So just to be straight, you define a rout only as taking both houses of congress regardless of the margins?
I define routing the opponent as it's meant to be defined. in military terms, that is to defeat overwhelmingly.
\
Again its the biggest rout in the HOR since 1948......You just can't poo poo that........
no. you are wrong. nyaaa!
A couple of years ago it was "ZOMG the GOP will never recover!!1!", a few years before that it was "OOoNOES!1!! the Dems are dooomed!!". and now it's "YAAARRR! The DNC has been routed!!". hehe, the 24/7/365 tv-newstertainment industry have got the some people all riled up. again. PT Barnum would be proud
Might I remind you though sir, that even though Truman suffered that defeat in his midterms, he was still re-elected.
YOu can't just Poo Poo that either.
I define routing the opponent as it's meant to be defined. in military terms, that is to defeat overwhelmingly.
So just to be straight, you define a rout only as taking both houses of congress regardless of the margins?
I define routing the opponent as it's meant to be defined. in military terms, that is to defeat overwhelmingly.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?