Paul Ryan admits that the republicans have lost the next election...

[imagep]

Well, not in so many words, but he did allude to it...

Rep. Paul Ryan, the Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee, "said something to the effect of, 'Look, we know you don't like our position, we know you probably don't respect our position, but we're the Republican majority," CNN correspondent John King reported Friday on CNN's "New Day."
"'You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season, so we need to learn to have a conversation with each other.'"

Progress, but still no deal, as shutdown enters Day 11 - CNN.com

 

[Slyfox696]

Well, not in so many words, but he did allude to it...



Progress, but still no deal, as shutdown enters Day 11 - CNN.com

Uhh, he said nothing like that, at least not in the snippet you posted.

 

[imagep]

Uhh, he said nothing like that, at least not in the snippet you posted.

He implied it by saying "You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season". He is clearly suggesting that it is highly likely that the republicans will not be able to retain control of the House.

 

[Slyfox696]

He implied it by saying "You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season". He is clearly suggesting that it is highly likely that the republicans will not be able to retain control of the House.

No, that is not suggesting they are going to lose, that is a simple statement of fact. It's acknowledging the situation COULD change, not that it is likely to change.

 

[LowDown]

Well, not in so many words, but he did allude to it...



Progress, but still no deal, as shutdown enters Day 11 - CNN.com

There's no reason to think that Republicans have lost the next election. In the last shutdown the Republicans got all the blame and went on to win the next election.

 

[Fiddytree]

He implied it by saying "You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season". He is clearly suggesting that it is highly likely that the republicans will not be able to retain control of the House.

You're overthinking it. All he is stating is that Obama has at least until 2015 to deal with them, so they need to get negotiations rolling in the meantime.

 

[KevinKohler]

Many republicans have successfully gerrymandered their districts so that they are going to win by a landslide, simply because of the demographic of people within each voting block. Hell, because of this, some might even be running unoposed. Again.


This, of course, is just more evidence of a point I've been hammering on for over a year now. Focusing on short term gains, at the expense of long term viability. Baring any change, the republicrat party is dead in the water after another three, maybe four election cycles.

 

[Respecthelect]

This is why Ted Cruz is the Republican party leader, not Paul Ryan. Many, if not most, Republicans see this as a net loss, but Cruz is correct - this is a huge win for Republicans. Cruz planted a flag that says, "no more." No more big government solutions. No more hurting the little guy a lot to try to harm he rich guy a little. No more industry takeovers. No more kings.

With this fight, Ted Cruz said, the Republican party stands for prosperity and individual rights. This country is on the way to success and Ted Cruz is the leader.

.

 

[Ray410]

Why post a headline that is not true?

What is there to discuss if the premise of the thread is a lie?

 

[imagep]

There's no reason to think that Republicans have lost the next election. In the last shutdown the Republicans got all the blame and went on to win the next election.

If they don't stop Obamacare, and it doesn't look like they can, then they will lose.

 

[imagep]

You're overthinking it. All he is stating is that Obama has at least until 2015 to deal with them, so they need to get negotiations rolling in the meantime.

Implying that he is not confident that they will win. He's doubtful.

 

[imagep]

Why post a headline that is not true?

What is there to discuss if the premise of the thread is a lie?

Who says it's not true? I believe it to be true. He knows that republicans are finished.

 

[LowDown]

If they don't stop Obamacare, and it doesn't look like they can, then they will lose.

On the contrary, once the ACA becomes fully implemented the Democrats won't be able to elect a dogcatcher. (I exaggerate only slightly.)

Most of the people who get subsidized premiums will still be paying more for insurance than they did before Obamacare. 30 million people still won't be covered. I don't think it will be popular. ACA supporters are really fooling themselves on that score.

 

[LowDown]

Many republicans have successfully gerrymandered their districts so that they are going to win by a landslide, simply because of the demographic of people within each voting block. Hell, because of this, some might even be running unoposed. Again.


This, of course, is just more evidence of a point I've been hammering on for over a year now. Focusing on short term gains, at the expense of long term viability. Baring any change, the republicrat party is dead in the water after another three, maybe four election cycles.

Nope. They said the same about Republicans in the last government shutdown, and the Republicans went on to win big in the next election. (How many times are we going to hear that the Republicans are finished? Every time liberals sense that they have an advantage they say that, and it has never been true. They said it in 2008 and the Republicans won big in 2010, and so on and so forth.)

 

[Fiddytree]

Implying that he is not confident that they will win. He's doubtful.

Again, you're overanalyzing it.

You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season, so we need to learn to have a conversation with each other.'"

You're tossing out most of the sentence in order to focus on that small portion. This eliminates meaning.

 

[Deuce]

This characterization of a paraphrasing of Ryan's words seems to be taking a bit of a leap.

 

[imagep]

Again, you're overanalyzing it.



You're tossing out most of the sentence in order to focus on that small portion. This eliminates meaning.

Actually, you are correct. I shouldn't have done that, because it just goes to prove my point even more. Ryan indicated that they only "need to have a conversation with each other" through the next election season. After that, it's not going to matter, because dems will still be in control of the POTUS, the Senate, and will have likely taken over the House.

 

[NeoVsMatrix]

.... In the last shutdown the Republicans got all the blame and went on to win the next election.

they.. WHAT ???

To my recollection, in 1996, Bill Clinton was re-elected safely, the GOP won 2 extra seats in the senate , and lost 15 seats in the House, though maintaining the majority in both chambers.

If you want to call this "won the election" as a general statement, i guess you can, for the House and the Senate.. but sure not for the presidency. And i personally would differ in my communication, losing 15 seats in the House is not a "win" per se.
It was just not as bad a loss for them as to lose the majority.

In the Senate, they clearly won.

 

[head of joaquin]

American voters don't like losers. The GOP came out of this thing as a big time loser. They impact of that in the next election will be much larger than the pundits think. I doubt the tea party types win any elections, and many will be replaced either by normals or by Democrats.

 

[Captain America]

I believe that there will be plenty of Republicans left in the house after the next election. Aside from the obvious gerrymandering done by the GOP to assure their positions, there is no shortage of bogs, gully's, creek bottom's, in America where American's are clinging to their guns, bibles (as Obama alluded to the last election,) and their Rush Limbaugh on their am radios. Yeah, they might wipe their butts with dried corncobs but they still get to vote.

Now, I don't think we'll see many seats picked up by them in the Senate and the Oval Office is out of the question for them. But I'm sure there will be no shortage of yuk-yuk districts voting republican.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

If they don't stop Obamacare, and it doesn't look like they can, then they will lose.

Apparently the websites are doing a better job of stopping Obamacare than anyone could have imagined. I can't wait until some hack blames that on Bush!

 

[Zyphlin]

He implied it by saying "You're stuck with us for a while, at least through the next election season". He is clearly suggesting that it is highly likely that the republicans will not be able to retain control of the House.

No, YOU'RE suggesting that it's Highly Likely.

He's suggesting that it's possible, because it is possible. NOTHING in his words in any way indicate the level of probability, it only notes the reality...that until the next election those who are in congress are in congress and that's not going to change.

 

[Zyphlin]

If they don't stop Obamacare, and it doesn't look like they can, then they will lose.

That's just amazingly naive and poor political predicting there.

The only reason the lack of stopping Obamacare would've caused Republicans in the house to lose an election is if they hadn't tried. There's no question, what so ever, that they tried to the best of their abilities. It's unlikely that a wave of voters who swept them in during the 2010 election is going to sweep them out given that effort.

Additionally, it ignores realities within the country at the moment and in the makeup of the House. There are not a large amount of vulnerable Republican House seats up for grabs at this point and while that may change a bit, it's unlikely to change massively. Ideological demographics split across the urban, suburban, and rural parts of the country mixed with the standard and long term procedure of gerrymandering currently being in the republicans favor, leads to a situation where ousting Republican controll of the House in this election cycle is highly unlikely.

It may be even pushing it to suggest at this moment that Democrats are going to make significant gains in the House, but at least that's a somewhat reasonable position. But it is a massively outside shot that they actually manage to cause Republicans to "lose" the house.

 

[MMC]

Many republicans have successfully gerrymandered their districts so that they are going to win by a landslide, simply because of the demographic of people within each voting block. Hell, because of this, some might even be running unoposed. Again.


This, of course, is just more evidence of a point I've been hammering on for over a year now. Focusing on short term gains, at the expense of long term viability. Baring any change, the republicrat party is dead in the water after another three, maybe four election cycles.

Hows that work out here in Chicago with that gerrymandering? Think Pennsylvania will have more than one district that made one vote for a Republican Presidential Candidate this time round. Ya knows.....that virtual impossibility stuff. :roll:

 

[MMC]

I believe that there will be plenty of Republicans left in the house after the next election. Aside from the obvious gerrymandering done by the GOP to assure their positions, there is no shortage of bogs, gully's, creek bottom's, in America where American's are clinging to their guns, bibles (as Obama alluded to the last election,) and their Rush Limbaugh on their am radios. Yeah, they might wipe their butts with dried corncobs but they still get to vote.

Now, I don't think we'll see many seats picked up by them in the Senate and the Oval Office is out of the question for them. But I'm sure there will be no shortage of yuk-yuk districts voting republican.

Don't worry the Democrats will make up for it.....see there will be a disaster that will hit NY and several other Liberal States. Then a massive winter storm will come in and it will be time to vote.

Course the Dems will send out all those trucks to vote so that those states will not miss a beat and will still produce the Amount of numbers reflecting people put their emergency situations on hold to go and vote. As there was nothing else to do and that Voting takes precedent despite their living in the cold and watching their Homes get swept out to sea.