Wow, Sen Arlen Specter just switched sides. Another nail to the coffin of the GOP. If you are a moderate Republican, is there still a reason to stay a Republican?
Submitted by SDEngineer on April 28, 2009 - 8:59pm.
mike92104 wrote:
He only switched because he knows he'll get his ass beat by any other republican in his next race. I hope he loses either way.
This is, of course, the GOP party line. But considering how Spector has been treated (and moderate Republicans in general), why would any of them stay? He votes more often with the Democrats than the GOP anyway, so it seems to me that his assertion that he's switching because the GOP has moved further to the right of where he's comfortable with seems pretty reasonable.
In any case, given his district, he's unlikely to lose. His moderate views are the only reason the GOP has held that district. A hard-right conservative would get shellacked in his district.
There's a reason the only statewide elected GOP officials are moderates in the Northeast (or, for that matter, the West coast). There may be pockets of conservatism up there, so a hard right conservative still has a chance of being elected to the House, but those states, by and large, are pretty socially liberal, and in a statewide election, a hard right conservative is unlikely to win.
Same reason why most southern democrats are socially conservative. The difference appears to be in how the party leadership treats those outside of the mainstream of the party.
You know. I'm not sure if the demise of the GOP is a good thing...Afterall, we're seeing what happens when you don't have enough GOP's to balance all the ridiculous policies currently being proposed by Obama and passed by senate and house....
Just remember. When your searching for your dream home, and getting extremely frustrated because of the poor inventory...when you're in that multiple-counter offer in and are getting consistently beat by folks that overbid you.....If you're frustrated that your hard earned tax paying dollars are now subsidizing irresponsible borrowers (first it was just first liens, now it's also second liens)...if you make less than $250k household income and don't understand why your taxes are going to AIG bonuses for individuals for over a million, if you're not sure why you are subsidizing GM and Chrysler despite the crap car portfolio they have....If you're wondering why all that shadow REO inventory isn't going onto the MLS, why you have to pay rent when irresponsible folks get to live rent free in an REO home moratorium after moratorium....and if you're pissed that your savings earning that pidly 2% interest is soon about to be devalued by inflation or the sheer suggestion of a negative interest rate for saving...
...just remember....You're in this mess because you have an out of control government dominated by an out of control democratic party.....and they are there because a lot of you voted based on your ideology and not based on what was better for your wallet.
Submitted by ocrenter on April 28, 2009 - 10:19pm.
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Submitted by CA renter on April 28, 2009 - 11:42pm.
ralphfurley wrote:
ocrenter wrote:
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Maybe there should be more than a two party system and we should have representation like the House of Commons in the Canadian parliament.
I'd like a "no party" system, where you vote for an individual instead of a party. This whole notion that everyone has to fit neatly into a box is partly to blame for our govt's demise (from a citizen's standpoint), IMHO.
Submitted by SDEngineer on April 28, 2009 - 11:51pm.
ocrenter wrote:
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
I would agree with this. Though tempermentally I'm firmly in the liberal camp, I also think that a healthy two party system is overall good for the country, and helps check excesses by one side.
However, this is a tempest of their own making. By moving further and further right, the GOP is making the same mistakes the Democrats did a generation earlier. The problem is not in their appeal to their base (after all, where is their base likely to go?), it's in their appeal to the moderates. By moving further and further right, they alienate the moderates which eventually decide who governs.
I think the GOP have started believing their own kool-aid - their belief that their beliefs are the only ones that make any sense, and therefore that their loss of power is due to not following their ideology rigidly enough. They seem to believe that becoming MORE conservative is the answer, and that will draw people back to them.
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Oh please....
Although I'm not a member of either party, I do follow politics closely. The fact is, Arlen Specter didn't leave the republicans after 45 years because of the right wing influence. Rather, he left the party to save his own ass. Recent polls showed Specter well behind his republican challenger in the 2010 primary. And the reason he is well behind in the polls is due to his support for the bailouts and other big government interventionist programs. In 2010 there will be a huge opportunity for the republicans to regain congress if they start acting like responsible fiscal conservatives. The reason republicans lost control of congress in 2006 was due to their lack of fiscal contraint, as well as their interventionist foreign policy which turned sour in Iraq.
If anything, the republicans became the big government party they so often campaigned against.
You know. I'm not sure if the demise of the GOP is a good thing...Afterall, we're seeing what happens when you don't have enough GOP's to balance all the ridiculous policies currently being proposed by Obama and passed by senate and house....
Right on, flu. One party government doesn't work for any of us. But sadly, we're about to find out the hard way.
And by the way, when they're staring down the barrel of a multi-trillion dollar deficit that will DOUBLE by the end of the fiscal year, why on earth are the Dems gloating about their ability to block a GOP filibuster? Do they seriously want their fingerprints - and only their fingerprints - all over this debacle? What nitwits. I can't believe any party in their right mind would want to take complete responsibility for the catastrophe that will ensue after they pile steaming lumps of s*** on top of the huge pile that preceded them. But then again, we are talking about Democrats. Let's not forget they only reason they won the White House - only the fourth time in as many decades - is because George Bush was a complete buffoon and easily the worst president in U.S. history.
Submitted by partypup on April 29, 2009 - 12:40am.
ocrenter wrote:
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
Revolution to follow.
That is why folks need to realize that we are wasting time and breath arguing about a balance of right and left when we should be seeking a balance between no government and total government.
With Obama we are on a fast track toward more and more government. Government will soon be controlling the majority of our economy. That can't make any rational working person feel good when you see how government runs Amtrak, Social Security and seems to find new and more outrageous ways to overspend for almost everything from toilet seats to roads.
Folks need to realize the Dem party and the Rep party and most of the pols that populate those parties are more the same then they are different. Both parties have the same goal which is to self perpetuate and to gain more and more control over your life. While they may seek this control in the different ways they pursue votes, make no mistake both parties want to control your money if not your life.
Specter's switch has made the situation politically for all of us, much worse, as one of the checks on total power (filibuster) may have been lifted. His betrayal of Pennsylvania voters was political pragmatism at it's worse.
As a very proud member of the Christian Right, I'm pretty sure we will not be picking Palin again.
I'd put my money on Huckabee, Romney (long-shot), or some other new business-friendly candidate.
Palin was a terrible pick on so many levels, including her accent and lack of academic and business credentials. Sorry, I doubt the Democrats will have Palin to kick around this time.
I do think it is hilarious about the canard of the Republican Party becoming more conservative. If anything under Bush, we got more liberal, as least with respect to government spending. Moroever, the Democrat Party is hardly the Democrat Party of Kennedy.
Submitted by urbanrealtor on April 29, 2009 - 10:09am.
partypup wrote:
ocrenter wrote:
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
Revolution to follow.
Possibility #4:
The newly self-aware defense mainframe becomes paranoid when humans try to pull the plug.
It launches nukes that set off a chain reaction in other nuclear powers.
Out of the ruins rises a resistance leader and out of the machine oppressors rises a new generation of machine that uses living tissue and rubber over titanium and coltan endoskeletons to infiltrate the resistance.
Also the machines use time travel.
A waitress with big hair is saved from our Governator (who is a cyborg) by a young actor named Michael Biehn shortly before he takes the role as corporal hicks with Sigourney Weaver.
Also, Ron Paul is a platoon leader, Ayn Rand is required reading and we all worship a giant unexploded nuclear warhead.
Just before the end, Charlton Heston shows up and accidentally detonates the nuke.
Spector flipped because PA demographics changed. He couldn't pull a Lieberman - run in the general as an "independent" if he loses the GOP primary, because PA has a Sore Loser law prohibiting running in the general if you lose in the primary.
Pennsylvania is a weird state - they had a pro-choice Republican and a pro-life Democrat for senators. I used to live there, I know how wierd it is.
As a dem, my attitude is that Republicans can keep Spector. Bah.
In other words just another career hack politician who puts his reelection as the highest priority. Everything else, the country, his state, his constituents, etc. are way down below that.
I'd be inclined to hold that against him if it weren't for the fact that 99% of the others are just like him.
Just as the pendulum swung too far when the right overstepped their bounds, I'm sure that the left will eventually overstep theirs too, causing the pendulum to come swinging back the other way.
Submitted by urbanrealtor on April 29, 2009 - 12:05pm.
afx114 wrote:
Just as the pendulum swung too far when the right overstepped their bounds, I'm sure that the left will eventually overstep theirs too, causing the pendulum to come swinging back the other way.
There is no such thing as a permanent majority.
True.
I heard an analysis piece on NPR the other day that was really interesting.
It basically said that as the DNC picks up more moderates, you will see it start to edge to the right.
Meanwhile....Congress approves the 3.44 trillion budget....
Our fearless leader Pelosi's statement....
"Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president's budget ... that is a statement of our national values," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said during the final debate on the House floor.
Yeah, this definitely is a statement of our national values...Specifically, the mindset of "Buy now....pay later (or try to at least)...." and/or "Lay-a-way".
Meanwhile....Congress approves the 3.44 trillion budget....
Our fearless leader Pelosi's statement....
"Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president's budget ... that is a statement of our national values," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said during the final debate on the House floor.
Yeah, this definitely is a statement of our national values...Specifically, the mindset of "Buy now....pay later (or try to at least)...." and/or "Lay-a-way".
God help us....
These are the final days of the Checkbook Republic. It won't end well.
The only hope for the Republicans is that the economy gets worse, not better in the 4 years of the Obama Administration.
True. The Republican partly leadership openly admits that they want the President to fail, and hope that the economic situation gets worse for most Americans. It is the only chance they have to make a comeback in the next four years.
Setting aside religious beliefs which have a tendency to distinguish parties, in my eyes, and focusing on financial aspect, both Reps and Dems seem to have similar policies lately. I mean Dems are propping up the banks. That's something I expect Reps to do. A lot of Reps were appointed by BO.
We are still in a war and though we have some date in the distant future, it remains to be seen whether there really will be a pull out. The Reps were spending as much as Dems. Arlen going over might indicate Dems are leaning more Rep.
Some of the things that would distinguish the two partis can still be explained by religious beliefs/tendencies.
The only hope for the Republicans is that the economy gets worse, not better in the 4 years of the Obama Administration.
True. The Republican partly leadership openly admits that they want the President to fail, and hope that the economic situation gets worse for most Americans. It is the only chance they have to make a comeback in the next four years.
Country First!
The economy always plays a major role in any election and how Obama handles or mishandles the economy will of course be an issue.
It definitely played a major role in Obama's victory. He and McCain were in a dead heat until the late fall when the economy fell off the table.
However, the economy is by no means the Republicans only hope.
IMO the Republican party is in great shape as long as Obama continues the next almost 4 years the same way he has started these first 100. His bumbling of appointments to key positions, his complete naivete and ineffectiveness in geo-politics, his blatant pro-union stance, his financing social engineering by ballooning the budget and his willingness to not even look for political consensus on issues but to ram things through, all have many folks, many who wanted a "uniter" elected, wondering what they did when they elected him.
If you listen to the media you would think that Obama won by better than a 2 to 1 popular vote margin or better. He won roughly 54% to 46% which is to say he got 6 out of every 11 votes. If one person in 11 changes their mind the whole election switches around.
And if you follow the polls you would notice his popularity and that of the Dem Congress have been dropping since the election. It was just celebrated that Obama's approval rating was 61% after 100 days. It sounds good but it is meaningless unless it is measured against others.
So for the sake of context it may be interesting to know that President Bush (W) had a 63% approval rating after 100 days.
Lastly, I don't even listen to Rush Limbaugh but I think this mischaracterization of his statement about Obama is out of hand, particularly, when as it is being used here to paint all Republicans. He made a comment about wanting Obama to fail in his social engineering. Both of you are expanding it to encompass the entire economy and extrapolating it to an entire party.
The evangelical vote has been exploited by the Republicans for 30 years. Over that time, they've often voted against their own self interests -- resulting in their jobs being shipped overseas, their young being shipped off to war, and their environment being ruined for corporate financial gain. For 30 years they've given their vote to the Republicans and what do they have to show for it? There's no abortion ban, no gay marriage ban, and no prayer in schools. If anything, their goals are slipping even further from their grasp as time goes on.
That's the problem when trying to use politics for further a religious agenda. You get the politicians doing the exploiting and the religious side being exploited until ultimately both sides realize they're no longer benefiting from each other -- at which point the coalition goes BOOM.
So what we have now are the extreme right clinging to their tired old canards, leaving no room for the moderates to get things done. When your constituency wants their abortion ban, gay marriage ban, and prayer in schools, what room does that leave for things like the economy, foreign policy, health care and education? You know -- the things that actually affect people in their daily lives?
My guess is that the GOP will eventually jettison the evangelicals and rise again as the party of fiscal responsibility and social libertarianism -- maybe under a different name. The question then becomes, can the moderates on the right win an election without the votes of the millions of evangelicals? It's hard to say, which is why the Republicans find them selves in the predicament that they are in now.
We've already heard a few whispers about the GOP backing off the hardliner stance against gay marriage. McCain's campaign manager said as much, so has David Brooks, and so did McCain's daughter -- although I'm not sure how much relevance she has.
It seems as though public opinion has flipped pretty quickly following the Iowa gay marriage change. I think most people realize that marriage equality is inevitable over the long run and they're afraid of being on the losing team. Perhaps we'll actually see some Republicans switching their stance on this in a hope to exploit it before the Dems can. Remember, Obama ran against gay marriage. Imagine that -- the GOP being the party of gay marriage!
He only switched because he knows he'll get his ass beat by any other republican in his next race. I hope he loses either way.
This is, of course, the GOP party line. But considering how Spector has been treated (and moderate Republicans in general), why would any of them stay? He votes more often with the Democrats than the GOP anyway, so it seems to me that his assertion that he's switching because the GOP has moved further to the right of where he's comfortable with seems pretty reasonable.
In any case, given his district, he's unlikely to lose. His moderate views are the only reason the GOP has held that district. A hard-right conservative would get shellacked in his district.
There's a reason the only statewide elected GOP officials are moderates in the Northeast (or, for that matter, the West coast). There may be pockets of conservatism up there, so a hard right conservative still has a chance of being elected to the House, but those states, by and large, are pretty socially liberal, and in a statewide election, a hard right conservative is unlikely to win.
Same reason why most southern democrats are socially conservative. The difference appears to be in how the party leadership treats those outside of the mainstream of the party.
You know. I'm not sure if the demise of the GOP is a good thing...Afterall, we're seeing what happens when you don't have enough GOP's to balance all the ridiculous policies currently being proposed by Obama and passed by senate and house....
Just remember. When your searching for your dream home, and getting extremely frustrated because of the poor inventory...when you're in that multiple-counter offer in and are getting consistently beat by folks that overbid you.....If you're frustrated that your hard earned tax paying dollars are now subsidizing irresponsible borrowers (first it was just first liens, now it's also second liens)...if you make less than $250k household income and don't understand why your taxes are going to AIG bonuses for individuals for over a million, if you're not sure why you are subsidizing GM and Chrysler despite the crap car portfolio they have....If you're wondering why all that shadow REO inventory isn't going onto the MLS, why you have to pay rent when irresponsible folks get to live rent free in an REO home moratorium after moratorium....and if you're pissed that your savings earning that pidly 2% interest is soon about to be devalued by inflation or the sheer suggestion of a negative interest rate for saving...
...just remember....You're in this mess because you have an out of control government dominated by an out of control democratic party.....and they are there because a lot of you voted based on your ideology and not based on what was better for your wallet.
no, the demise of the GOP is definitely not a good thing.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Maybe there should be more than a two party system and we should have representation like the House of Commons in the Canadian parliament.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Maybe there should be more than a two party system and we should have representation like the House of Commons in the Canadian parliament.
I'd like a "no party" system, where you vote for an individual instead of a party. This whole notion that everyone has to fit neatly into a box is partly to blame for our govt's demise (from a citizen's standpoint), IMHO.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
I would agree with this. Though tempermentally I'm firmly in the liberal camp, I also think that a healthy two party system is overall good for the country, and helps check excesses by one side.
However, this is a tempest of their own making. By moving further and further right, the GOP is making the same mistakes the Democrats did a generation earlier. The problem is not in their appeal to their base (after all, where is their base likely to go?), it's in their appeal to the moderates. By moving further and further right, they alienate the moderates which eventually decide who governs.
I think the GOP have started believing their own kool-aid - their belief that their beliefs are the only ones that make any sense, and therefore that their loss of power is due to not following their ideology rigidly enough. They seem to believe that becoming MORE conservative is the answer, and that will draw people back to them.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Oh please....
Although I'm not a member of either party, I do follow politics closely. The fact is, Arlen Specter didn't leave the republicans after 45 years because of the right wing influence. Rather, he left the party to save his own ass. Recent polls showed Specter well behind his republican challenger in the 2010 primary. And the reason he is well behind in the polls is due to his support for the bailouts and other big government interventionist programs. In 2010 there will be a huge opportunity for the republicans to regain congress if they start acting like responsible fiscal conservatives. The reason republicans lost control of congress in 2006 was due to their lack of fiscal contraint, as well as their interventionist foreign policy which turned sour in Iraq.
If anything, the republicans became the big government party they so often campaigned against.
Right on, flu. One party government doesn't work for any of us. But sadly, we're about to find out the hard way.
And by the way, when they're staring down the barrel of a multi-trillion dollar deficit that will DOUBLE by the end of the fiscal year, why on earth are the Dems gloating about their ability to block a GOP filibuster? Do they seriously want their fingerprints - and only their fingerprints - all over this debacle? What nitwits. I can't believe any party in their right mind would want to take complete responsibility for the catastrophe that will ensue after they pile steaming lumps of s*** on top of the huge pile that preceded them. But then again, we are talking about Democrats. Let's not forget they only reason they won the White House - only the fourth time in as many decades - is because George Bush was a complete buffoon and easily the worst president in U.S. history.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
Revolution to follow.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
Revolution to follow.
That is why folks need to realize that we are wasting time and breath arguing about a balance of right and left when we should be seeking a balance between no government and total government.
With Obama we are on a fast track toward more and more government. Government will soon be controlling the majority of our economy. That can't make any rational working person feel good when you see how government runs Amtrak, Social Security and seems to find new and more outrageous ways to overspend for almost everything from toilet seats to roads.
Folks need to realize the Dem party and the Rep party and most of the pols that populate those parties are more the same then they are different. Both parties have the same goal which is to self perpetuate and to gain more and more control over your life. While they may seek this control in the different ways they pursue votes, make no mistake both parties want to control your money if not your life.
Specter's switch has made the situation politically for all of us, much worse, as one of the checks on total power (filibuster) may have been lifted. His betrayal of Pennsylvania voters was political pragmatism at it's worse.
As a very proud member of the Christian Right, I'm pretty sure we will not be picking Palin again.
I'd put my money on Huckabee, Romney (long-shot), or some other new business-friendly candidate.
Palin was a terrible pick on so many levels, including her accent and lack of academic and business credentials. Sorry, I doubt the Democrats will have Palin to kick around this time.
I do think it is hilarious about the canard of the Republican Party becoming more conservative. If anything under Bush, we got more liberal, as least with respect to government spending. Moroever, the Democrat Party is hardly the Democrat Party of Kennedy.
moderates will continue their exit, leaving the party firmly and fully in the Christian Right. The Christian Right GOP will pick Palin for 2012, Obama wins 70% of the popular vote.
Two possibilities after the 2012 landslide:
#1. moderate Republicans regroup and form a new party of the center. GOP stays and linger on as a fringe party.
#2. moderate Republicans retake the party after the complete collapse, re-establishing the two party system.
Possibility #3: The recession/depression doesn't end in 2011 and instead deepens. Obama is credited for worsening a downturn that could have been "fixed" by the GOP. Fingers will point to profligate spending and a series of failed bailouts/stimulus packages that eventually lead to a massive devaluation of the dollar and runaway, Carter-style inflation.
The GOP easily takes back the White House in 2012, re-claiming OH, FL and MI, which have been royally hammered by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies and the housing collapse. Unfortunately for the GOP, the crisis worsens, and it soon becomes clear to everyone that they are just as inept at solving the crisis as Obama was.
The Dems look poised to take back the White House in 2016 -- until Americans finally wake the hell up and realize that they are in the middle of a second great depression caused by the incompetence and greed of both parties - who have played voters like suckers on this see saw for the better part of the past century.
Revolution to follow.
Possibility #4:
The newly self-aware defense mainframe becomes paranoid when humans try to pull the plug.
It launches nukes that set off a chain reaction in other nuclear powers.
Out of the ruins rises a resistance leader and out of the machine oppressors rises a new generation of machine that uses living tissue and rubber over titanium and coltan endoskeletons to infiltrate the resistance.
Also the machines use time travel.
A waitress with big hair is saved from our Governator (who is a cyborg) by a young actor named Michael Biehn shortly before he takes the role as corporal hicks with Sigourney Weaver.
Also, Ron Paul is a platoon leader, Ayn Rand is required reading and we all worship a giant unexploded nuclear warhead.
Just before the end, Charlton Heston shows up and accidentally detonates the nuke.
Later we are all ruled by machines and apes.
And all this because of Arlen Spector.
Just before the end, Charlton Heston shows up and accidentally detonates the nuke.
And don't forget that, due to food shortages, everyone eats Soylent Green...
Cuz its nutritious.
Spector flipped because PA demographics changed. He couldn't pull a Lieberman - run in the general as an "independent" if he loses the GOP primary, because PA has a Sore Loser law prohibiting running in the general if you lose in the primary.
Pennsylvania is a weird state - they had a pro-choice Republican and a pro-life Democrat for senators. I used to live there, I know how wierd it is.
As a dem, my attitude is that Republicans can keep Spector. Bah.
The flip will simultaneously raise the IQ of both parties.
Soylent Green is people!
In other words just another career hack politician who puts his reelection as the highest priority. Everything else, the country, his state, his constituents, etc. are way down below that.
I'd be inclined to hold that against him if it weren't for the fact that 99% of the others are just like him.
Just as the pendulum swung too far when the right overstepped their bounds, I'm sure that the left will eventually overstep theirs too, causing the pendulum to come swinging back the other way.
There is no such thing as a permanent majority.
There is no such thing as a permanent majority.
True.
I heard an analysis piece on NPR the other day that was really interesting.
It basically said that as the DNC picks up more moderates, you will see it start to edge to the right.
The only hope for the Republicans is that the economy gets worse, not better in the 4 years of the Obama Administration.
So bulls would be Democrats and bears Republicans?
Meanwhile....Congress approves the 3.44 trillion budget....
Our fearless leader Pelosi's statement....
"Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president's budget ... that is a statement of our national values," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said during the final debate on the House floor.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/29/h...
Yeah, this definitely is a statement of our national values...Specifically, the mindset of "Buy now....pay later (or try to at least)...." and/or "Lay-a-way".
God help us....
Our fearless leader Pelosi's statement....
"Today, for the first time in many, many years, we have a president's budget ... that is a statement of our national values," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said during the final debate on the House floor.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/29/h...
Yeah, this definitely is a statement of our national values...Specifically, the mindset of "Buy now....pay later (or try to at least)...." and/or "Lay-a-way".
God help us....
These are the final days of the Checkbook Republic. It won't end well.
True. The Republican partly leadership openly admits that they want the President to fail, and hope that the economic situation gets worse for most Americans. It is the only chance they have to make a comeback in the next four years.
Country First!
Setting aside religious beliefs which have a tendency to distinguish parties, in my eyes, and focusing on financial aspect, both Reps and Dems seem to have similar policies lately. I mean Dems are propping up the banks. That's something I expect Reps to do. A lot of Reps were appointed by BO.
We are still in a war and though we have some date in the distant future, it remains to be seen whether there really will be a pull out. The Reps were spending as much as Dems. Arlen going over might indicate Dems are leaning more Rep.
Some of the things that would distinguish the two partis can still be explained by religious beliefs/tendencies.
True. The Republican partly leadership openly admits that they want the President to fail, and hope that the economic situation gets worse for most Americans. It is the only chance they have to make a comeback in the next four years.
Country First!
The economy always plays a major role in any election and how Obama handles or mishandles the economy will of course be an issue.
It definitely played a major role in Obama's victory. He and McCain were in a dead heat until the late fall when the economy fell off the table.
However, the economy is by no means the Republicans only hope.
IMO the Republican party is in great shape as long as Obama continues the next almost 4 years the same way he has started these first 100. His bumbling of appointments to key positions, his complete naivete and ineffectiveness in geo-politics, his blatant pro-union stance, his financing social engineering by ballooning the budget and his willingness to not even look for political consensus on issues but to ram things through, all have many folks, many who wanted a "uniter" elected, wondering what they did when they elected him.
If you listen to the media you would think that Obama won by better than a 2 to 1 popular vote margin or better. He won roughly 54% to 46% which is to say he got 6 out of every 11 votes. If one person in 11 changes their mind the whole election switches around.
And if you follow the polls you would notice his popularity and that of the Dem Congress have been dropping since the election. It was just celebrated that Obama's approval rating was 61% after 100 days. It sounds good but it is meaningless unless it is measured against others.
So for the sake of context it may be interesting to know that President Bush (W) had a 63% approval rating after 100 days.
Lastly, I don't even listen to Rush Limbaugh but I think this mischaracterization of his statement about Obama is out of hand, particularly, when as it is being used here to paint all Republicans. He made a comment about wanting Obama to fail in his social engineering. Both of you are expanding it to encompass the entire economy and extrapolating it to an entire party.
The evangelical vote has been exploited by the Republicans for 30 years. Over that time, they've often voted against their own self interests -- resulting in their jobs being shipped overseas, their young being shipped off to war, and their environment being ruined for corporate financial gain. For 30 years they've given their vote to the Republicans and what do they have to show for it? There's no abortion ban, no gay marriage ban, and no prayer in schools. If anything, their goals are slipping even further from their grasp as time goes on.
That's the problem when trying to use politics for further a religious agenda. You get the politicians doing the exploiting and the religious side being exploited until ultimately both sides realize they're no longer benefiting from each other -- at which point the coalition goes BOOM.
So what we have now are the extreme right clinging to their tired old canards, leaving no room for the moderates to get things done. When your constituency wants their abortion ban, gay marriage ban, and prayer in schools, what room does that leave for things like the economy, foreign policy, health care and education? You know -- the things that actually affect people in their daily lives?
My guess is that the GOP will eventually jettison the evangelicals and rise again as the party of fiscal responsibility and social libertarianism -- maybe under a different name. The question then becomes, can the moderates on the right win an election without the votes of the millions of evangelicals? It's hard to say, which is why the Republicans find them selves in the predicament that they are in now.
The other issue was also stem cell.
Yep, forgot about that one.
We've already heard a few whispers about the GOP backing off the hardliner stance against gay marriage. McCain's campaign manager said as much, so has David Brooks, and so did McCain's daughter -- although I'm not sure how much relevance she has.
It seems as though public opinion has flipped pretty quickly following the Iowa gay marriage change. I think most people realize that marriage equality is inevitable over the long run and they're afraid of being on the losing team. Perhaps we'll actually see some Republicans switching their stance on this in a hope to exploit it before the Dems can. Remember, Obama ran against gay marriage. Imagine that -- the GOP being the party of gay marriage!