The 2010 General Election Thread

Eric Cantor just announced he's challenging Boner for House Majority Leader.

edit: Boner would be the Speaker, Cantor would be Majority leader, someone else will be the Whip. My bad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='mykevermin']Which will enhance the size of our deficit year over year, keep wealth in the hands of the wealthy, and allow Republicans to run in 2012 pointing to Obama's failure to shrink the deficit.

It's kinda sad when you can see, well in advance what political plays they will make - and they still do it, and they execute it well and convincingly.[/QUOTE]

They won't be able to get anything done in the lame duck period besides a pay increase maybe.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Eric Cantor just announced he's challenging Boner for House Majority Leader.[/QUOTE]
Didn't see that coming.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Eric Cantor just announced he's challenging Boner for House Majority Leader.[/QUOTE]
It wouldn't surprise me if Cantor is going to go for the White House.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']House members RARELY go for a White House bid since their name recognition is extremely low.[/QUOTE]
Are you forrealz? Cantor and Boehner have low name recognition?
 
[quote name='speedracer']Eric Cantor just announced he's challenging Boner for House Majority Leader.[/QUOTE]

I'd rather have Cantor than Boehner. Cantor struck me as very intelligent during his interview on The Daily Show. Every time I have seen Boehner being interviewed, he just seems like a giant, orange talking points machine.
 
Yeah that may be true in some cases, but not theirs. Cantor is practically dripping with ambition, so I wouldn't be surprised either.
 
[quote name='Cantatus']I'd rather have Cantor than Boehner. Cantor struck me as very intelligent during his interview on The Daily Show. Every time I have seen Boehner being interviewed, he just seems like a giant, orange talking points machine.[/QUOTE]
Aside from that one appearance, he's been regurgitating right-wing talking points the entire time. You should look up the Republican summit appearance with Obama. So is he better than Boehner? I think not really, but at least he doesn't have a horrible spray on tan.
 
Alvin Greene got 38,000 more votes than Sharron Angle. They got about 680,000 votes between em.

America is a strange place.
 
Cantor is number two, so unless Republicans want to change the pecking order, that's going to be his new position.

To be honest, I hope nothing but neocons stay in leadership.

Also:

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/john-taylor-november-will-see-flash-point-begins-markets-reversal

"After the Republican victory things will change. The Fed will be hamstrung, as Ron Paul, a conservative standard-bearer and harsh critic of the Fed, will head the sub-committee overseeing its actions. Liquidity expansion or new programs will probably drop sharply under his watch."

Look for Republicans to appoint establishment politician x to chair the Monetary Policy subcommittee, and if they can't find someone with more Congressional time than him to chair it, fold it outright.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='perdition(troy']He's running for house majority leader, not speaker of the house.[/QUOTE]
You're right. My bad. I saw majority leader and thought speaker.
 
Yeah after reading that a second time it doesn't make any sense, wasn't paying attention either I guess. Staying up to wtach results last night probably wasn't the best idea.
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah after reading that a second time it doesn't make any sense, wasn't paying attention either I guess. Staying up to wtach results last night probably wasn't the best idea.[/QUOTE]
x2.

If there's one thing you can about the pubs, its that they know how to take turns.:lol:
 
2012 will all be the economy.

If unemployment is still high etc., Obama will be in for a tough fight.

If it's gotten a lot better, he'll win easily and the dems probably make some small gains in congress.
 
http://www.theonion.com/articles/last-remaining-politician-must-rebuild-entire-gove,18384/
WASHINGTON—In the wake of what is being called the deadliest midterm election in the nation's history, Washington's sole surviving politician, Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon's 4th Congressional District, emerged from the rubble of the Capitol building Wednesday to announce his intention to rebuild the fallen U.S. government.

The events of Tuesday night—which included live televised images of Sen. Harry Reid taking a gavel to the head of Sen. Mitch McConnell while Rep. Barney Frank repeatedly smashed the face of Undersecretary for Food Safety Elisabeth Hagen against a marble column—left most Americans believing their entire government had perished in the post-election bloodbath. But the miraculous survival of DeFazio points to a possible way forward.
Click to expand...

My favorite line is about halfway down, about Scalia. The Onion is fantastic.
 
Sources confirmed that while searching for a fertile female politician with whom to repopulate Congress, DeFazio discovered the body of a still-breathing Christine O'Donnell and crushed her neck with the heel of his shoe.
Click to expand...
lol
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']2012 will all be the economy.

If unemployment is still high etc., Obama will be in for a tough fight.

If it's gotten a lot better, he'll win easily and the dems probably make some small gains in congress.[/QUOTE]
Yet most economists seem to agree that repairing the economy and getting unemployment back down will not be a quick process, something which Obama keeps saying.

I think it's that people frankly can't handle the truth. They want to be told that "with the flick of my wrist the economy will be whole again!"
 
[quote name='Clak']Yet most economists seem to agree that repairing the economy and getting unemployment back down will not be a quick process, something which Obama keeps saying.

I think it's that people frankly can't handle the truth. They want to be told that "with the flick of my wrist the economy will be whole again!"[/QUOTE]

That and republicans will spend the next two years trying to convince people that the slow recovery is Obama/the democrats fault.

When people are down on their luck, they want someone to blame and thus are easy sells.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']That and republicans will spend the next two years trying to convince people that the slow recovery is Obama/the democrats fault.

When people are down on their luck, they want someone to blame and thus are easy sells.[/QUOTE]

The Republicans will also keep blocking any and all effort to make things better, making other people suffer seems to be working pretty well for them now so why not?
 
So, I have officially learned that my county is full of idiots. We actually elect the person responsible for mosquito control (yeah...). It was essentially between two people: the current person, and a female challenger who campaigned with hot pink signs (not kidding).

The winner (incumbent) had 38% of the vote, and second place (challenger) had 36%. To top it off, almost 23,000 people that voted didn't vote in that race. The winner won by under 2700 votes, and NINE TIMES as many people didn't vote in that race. Over 500 people voted for more than 1 person as well.

*sigh* Idiots.

To top things off, Rick Scott is Florida's governor, Marco Rubio is our Senator, and both my US Representative and FL State Senator are people I voted against. To make things even more WTF-ish, the person running unopposed to be my Florida State Representative was elected with 83% of the vote- except that counts only the votes cast. Due to "massive confusion" at the polls and because he was kicked off and then put back on the ballot a lot, over 16k votes (he only got 32k) were not cast. Oh, and apparently 12 people voted both for him and for a write-in candidate.
 
[quote name='Altanis']So, I have officially learned that my county is full of idiots. We actually elect the person responsible for mosquito control (yeah...).

.....
To top things off, Rick Scott is Florida's governor, Marco Rubio is our Senator, and both my US Representative and FL State Senator are people I voted against.[/QUOTE]

Only in Florida, I guess.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I like you. post in the vs forum more often.[/QUOTE]

It's great to be liked, but be careful what you ask for. I'm no lefty (well perhaps socially I am).

[quote name='dohdough']It wouldn't surprise me if Cantor is going to go for the White House.[/QUOTE]

Unless Cantor is stupid, and from what I know of him, he is not, in 2012, he'll oppose Jim Webb for VA senate...and he'll win handily. Cantor is fairly well liked and Webb was a weak candidate to begin with. If George Allen doesnt make his 'macacca' remark on tape, the rest of the country never hears of Jim Webb. Moreover, there would never be a McCain/Palin ticket as G.A. would have walked to the nomination.

That brings up an interesting point. If I had a time-machine and I could undo that macacca moment, would I do it? On the one hand, as it is, we have our first black president and are not subjected to Allen's Bush-like buffoonery. On the other hand, we now have Sarah Palin as the most influential woman in American politics. Talk about a prisoner's dilemma.

BTW: While I'm not a fan of all of his positions, Cantor at least strikes me as an intelligent man. Something that seems surprisingly lacking in the Republican party these days.
 
[quote name='Msut77']The Republicans will also keep blocking any and all effort to make things better, making other people suffer seems to be working pretty well for them now so why not?[/QUOTE]

Exactly.

On the plus side, the economy is slowly improving, so hopefully that will continue even without any more stimulus spending or other legislation so Dems have something to point to in 2012.

If it doesn't, and especially if we have a downturn, they're fucked in 2012.
 
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/11/03/gop-voters-have-the-leadership-they-deserve/

It might be deplorable and maddening to watch, but what incentive do Republicans have to reflect on the errors of their former ways? None. What incentive have their supporters given Republicans to do this? None. What incentive do they have to abandon their tired refrains and formulate policies that address existing problems? None. Yesterday was a clear sign from Republicans’ core supporters that casting some symbolic nay votes and using the right kind of rhetoric are more than enough to keep them loyally voting for the very same people who just a couple years ago were seen (correctly!) as subverting and tainting the party and the conservative movement with their corruption and folly. There was a brief timeout followed by empty promises of doing better, and now one could assume that all or almost all is forgiven. Not only is there no reason why the Republican leadership would act differently this time, but they would be acting irrationally if they sacrificed the benefits of promoting corporate interests for the sake of principles in which they do not really believe.
The midterm results didn’t represent a dramatic shift in the overall public’s views, but they did confirm that rank-and-file Republicans and movement conservatives are quite happy to enable a party that badly disappoints them every time it is given an opportunity to govern. Four years ago, movement conservatives were looking for the exits and claiming that they as conservatives had nothing to do with those unpopular Republicans. Today, Republican triumph is taken as conservative vindication, and the deeply dysfunctional, unhealthy identification of conservatism with the cause of the GOP has become stronger than ever. In a little while, maybe a few months or a year or two years, the people who made John Boehner the next Speaker of the House will be groaning and complaining that Boehner and his colleagues are reverting to their old ways. That is inevitably what Boehner and his colleagues will do, and why wouldn’t they?
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']Only in Florida, I guess.[/QUOTE]
Nah, I've seen worse things. Remember the 2000 Election? Yeah, that's only possible in a state as fucked up as Florida. I think the better part is that because of that we got touchscreen voting machines that cost millions, only to throw them out after one election because idiots couldn't use them.

The dumbest thing in this election I think though was that 40% of the people here didn't understand that having voting districts drawn without regard to who lives there (R vs D, white vs minority, rich vs poor, etc) was a good thing.

Basically, 40% of Floridians believe that congressional districts shouldn't be fairly drawn.
 
Um...Congressional districts are never fairly drawn anymore. It's called gerrymandering, and that's just how it works nowadays. Saying voters don't think they should be fairly drawn because you don't understand the political process is your ignorance, not theirs.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Um...Congressional districts are never fairly drawn anymore. It's called gerrymandering, and that's just how it works nowadays. Saying voters don't think they should be fairly drawn because you don't understand the political process is your ignorance, not theirs.[/QUOTE]

No, it was up for vote this year in Florida's constitution.

[quote name='Constitutional Amendment Article 3, Section 21']Legislative districts or districting plans may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party. Districts shall not be drawn to deny racial or language minorities the equal opportunity to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice. Districts must be contiguous. Unless otherwise required, districts must be compact, as equal in population as feasible, and where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries.[/QUOTE]

37% (1,866,009) voted against it

But I'm not one to talk, most people would look down on me for voting against an additional homestead tax exemption for military members who were active duty and deployed a year ago.
 
Sporadic it's okay to have voted that down. Almost 1 in 4 did. Only reason I voted for it was because I knew it would pass anyway.

I still can't believe the class size amendment thing didn't pass, because of the stupid fucking referendum that requires 60% in favor for it to pass. I survived HS just fine and most of my classes were 30+ people. In college, most classes have way more than 30 people, especially the classes like basic Chemistry and Bio. My intro to chem class had almost 400 people.

Out of curiosity, did you vote for or against Amendment 1 (the public campaign funding one)?
 
So I'm wondering why there aren't term limits for Senators or Representatives. It could never get passed now obviously, but I'm wondering why it wasn't done from the start. Because it's ridiculous that some old farts have been in for decades.
 
[quote name='Altanis']Sporadic it's okay to have voted that down. Almost 1 in 4 did. Only reason I voted for it was because I knew it would pass anyway.

I still can't believe the class size amendment thing didn't pass, because of the stupid fucking referendum that requires 60% in favor for it to pass. I survived HS just fine and most of my classes were 30+ people. In college, most classes have way more than 30 people, especially the classes like basic Chemistry and Bio. My intro to chem class had almost 400 people.

Out of curiosity, did you vote for or against Amendment 1 (the public campaign funding one)?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, bumping up the limit for high school students to 30 was reasonable enough.

I'll be honest, I didn't really understand exactly what Amendment 1 was but I voted against it since it didn't specify what the limit was.
 
Oh, Amendment 1 was to end public campaign financing. I think.

Basically, if Candidate A is raising 10 times what Candidate B is raising, Candidate B can elect to use public funding for their campaign.

The Amendment wanted to stop that. I'm pretty sure it was to end it anyway.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']So I'm wondering why there aren't term limits for Senators or Representatives. It could never get passed now obviously, but I'm wondering why it wasn't done from the start. Because it's ridiculous that some old farts have been in for decades.[/QUOTE]

Because they originally didn't think that people would want to be politicians for life.

One of the pledges Republicans gave to America when they won Congress during the Clinton years was they'd do just that. Didn't happen of course.
 
[quote name='Altanis']Oh, Amendment 1 was to end public campaign financing. I think.

Basically, if Candidate A is raising 10 times what Candidate B is raising, Candidate B can elect to use public funding for their campaign.

The Amendment wanted to stop that. I'm pretty sure it was to end it anyway.[/QUOTE]

Looks like you were right. Makes me glad that I voted against it even if I didn't exactly understand what it was before hand.

Amendment 1 was an initiative put on the ballot by Republicans in the state legislature. It sought to repeal the law providing public matching funds for candidates who agree to limit campaign spending to prescribed levels. This law is intended to allow candidates without the benefit of unlimited personal wealth and/or private donations to still compete with candidates who do have those financial advantages. Amendment 1 received just over 52% of the Yes votes, and so was defeated. This is good news for those who believe in the need for campaign finance reform, although reformers agree that far tougher state and national rules are still needed to bring true fairness to our electoral system.
Click to expand...

http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-west-palm-beach/mixed-bag-of-fl-ballot-amendment-results
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']So I'm wondering why there aren't term limits for Senators or Representatives. It could never get passed now obviously, but I'm wondering why it wasn't done from the start. Because it's ridiculous that some old farts have been in for decades.[/QUOTE]

it needs to happen, big time. 2 terms in each house as a limit. even then, someone could serve up to 16 years, which is crazy long.
 
[quote name='Msut77']http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/1110/Blue_Dog_wipeout_Half_of_caucus_gone.html?showall

I don't know what to think, it sucks that Republicans are now given an even better chance of ruining my country but at the very least the insufferable blue dogs got spanked.

Over 90% of the Progressive Caucus for re-elected.[/QUOTE]

That is the only silver lining of this election. fuck the Blue Dogs. They are, no were, a cancer. Russ Feingold's loss was very depressing. The lone vote against the USA PATRIOT Act and voted against Iraq War and a lot of other BS. That was the big loss for me. Here's some interesting stuff on that election. Really it looks like Obama was a big reason for his loss.
http://progressive.org/wx1103b10.html
 
Is there ANYONE who is okay with what happened in Iowa??!?!? 3 justices who struck down a law defining marriage as man + woman were voted out of their seats.

I could understand if they were corrupt or some shit, but they were voted out because people disagreed with their ruling. Come the fuck on.
 
@joeboo: I'd argue that a 'big reason' for his loss was that the Democrats in Congress either never really bought into their party's leader's (Pres Obama's) ideas or were too scared to enact them. When it became clear that Republicans would not support any of the major inititavies that Mr. Obama ran on, the Dems should have have said, "eff it, we'll do it ourselves. However, wrangling Democratic votes is akin to herding cats so they ended up watering things down to be acceptable to conservatives...then got left at the alter anyway.

How they didnt see that move coming is their true downfall. You dont give up *anything* till you get something solid from the other side. The Republicans basically said we'll help you if you do some of XY and Z. The Dems gave them X & Y and the Repubs basically said "Psyche" (SIKE)!

The worst part about it is that the so called 'Blue Dogs' should have known that regardless of what happened, they would be the first on the chopping block. Most of them are from gerrymandered conservative districts and only got elected because the 'Wall St" fiscal conservatives were pissed w/ the Palin selection and the 'religious right' conservatives didnt care for McCain so they stayed home in 2008. So what did these 'Blue Dogs' accomplish? They distanced themselves from the President to show that they were 'independent' but that didnt save them. And they blocked their own party from passing the reforms that the party claimed were the foundation of the party's platform. So what was the fucking point?

As I am reaming the Democrats, let me ask one more thing, why the heck have the last two Senate Democratic leaders been people that are vulnerable in their own home state? Republicans would never promote someone to the highest position who is from a 'swing state' (or swing district in the case of the House), otherwise, Rick Santorum in his heyday would have risen to higher than 2nd or 3rd. It looks especially weak when your leader is in a fight for their political life. And believe it or not, that matters to a great many voters.
 
Speedracer probably has a better grasp on all the stuff here than I do, but my understanding is that we just voted in a guy whose platform included shutting down a large/important veteran's hospital down here in Waco. The results showed a clear "Imma vote me stu-rayt Repblican tikkit" attitude.

Rick Perry stayed in office. I flush things down the toilet smarter than him every day. He argued that secession was a good idea for a while, if that tells you anything. He was just being interviewed on CNN where he was saying "we can cut the debt," and when pressed on how, he just continued to say "We need to sit down and talk about it."

But what do you want to do? Conversation isn't an answer.

"We need to sit down and talk about it."

It's like a guard in Final Fantasy 1. "Welcome to Corneria! Welcome to Corneria!"
 
[quote name='IRHari']Is there ANYONE who is okay with what happened in Iowa??!?!? 3 justices who struck down a law defining marriage as man + woman were voted out of their seats.

I could understand if they were corrupt or some shit, but they were voted out because people disagreed with their ruling. Come the fuck on.[/QUOTE]

For what it's worth, I'm torn. I don't agree with lifetime tenure for judges, but I don't think judges should be held up to the will of the majority either. Any suggestions for a better system?
 
[quote name='Strell']Speedracer probably has a better grasp on all the stuff here than I do, but my understanding is that we just voted in a guy whose platform included shutting down a large/important veteran's hospital down here in Waco. The results showed a clear "Imma vote me stu-rayt Repblican tikkit" attitude.[/quote]
I haven't heard about this. Who was dumb enough to have thought that would be a good idea?
Rick Perry stayed in office. I flush things down the toilet smarter than him every day. He argued that secession was a good idea for a while, if that tells you anything. He was just being interviewed on CNN where he was saying "we can cut the debt," and when pressed on how, he just continued to say "We need to sit down and talk about it."
Click to expand...
Sittin with my wife last night. Laughing that the emptiest suit I've ever seen is governor of Texas again. There's just nothing to him. Supporters can't even name a single thing about him they like (He's a good 'murkin!). I imagine him being born on a used car lot and slithering out of his egg clutch that was stored in the wheel well of an '85 Dodge. Then my wife reminded me about the last blisteringly awful governor we had before and what he went on to.

I fucking stopped laughing.

I survived Bush and his total lack of intellectual curiosity. I didn't like it but I did it. I goddamn cannot go through a Rick Perry presidency. I can't. I fucking can't do it.

Please god don't make me do it.

[quote name='UncleBob']For what it's worth, I'm torn. I don't agree with lifetime tenure for judges, but I don't think judges should be held up to the will of the majority either. Any suggestions for a better system?[/QUOTE]
15 year appointments. Long enough to feel the isolation of the position (a good thing), not so long that they're untouchable. Long enough that two terms is just about a lifetime. Short enough that it's possible to complete two terms. Long enough that you probably won't be punished for a single decision over the thousands you'll hand down.

Legislators should be beholden to the people. The executive should be beholden to the best interests of the country. The judges should be beholden to the Constitution. Voting them in, while a noble thought, is THE WORST POSSIBLE way to do it. The check on people power is removed.
 
Poor Barry. He's either too arrogant or too deluded to admit that the election was a repudiation of his policies. Here's a hint, Urkel - it's not them, it's you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top