No Republican Mandate Tuesday

This is kinda interesting. I guess this shows that voters wanted a mandate for change but not necessarily for republican/tea party dominated ideas and solutions. It'll be interesting to see how the republicans read the election results.

 

Your second link was to a NH exit poll - hardly the basis for a national conclusion.

IMHO Tuesday's results reflected an anti-incumbent mood. Lets kick some more of the bums of both parties out next election. For the sake of the survival of democracy, we neeed to find a way to limit, if not demolish the influence of unions (yes, including teacher's unions) corporations, lawyers, etc.

 

Well . . .

Let's first establish that the polling was done in random sample exit and telephone polling (in areas where early voting is substantial) LINK.

As such the opinions of those who voted for the losing side (and one would expect to support the rejected Dem strategies/agendas) are included in the sample. With their sentiments churned into the whole, it can hardly be presented that this poll can be said to represent what THOSE WHO VOTED FOR A 180° CHANGE IN COURSE desire.

As Obama reminded us two days after being inaugurated, "I won . . .", the opinion of the "winners" is the only opinion we should be considering. To "water down" the wishes of the "winners" with the opinions of those who support the rejected agenda is disingenuous.

So, since this is a representative democracy and not a direct democracy the only opinion that matters now is that of those Republicans who were elected to office. You can say they shouldn't consider their crushing of the Demagenda a mandate but that is I think, just wishful thinking LOL.

 

Well here's the results of a CBS poll of voters. It may be more national:

So if republicans are going to repeal health care they will have to convince that 31% and 16% to come around to their view. That may not be easy.

 

Same points as I express above.

"Just 35 percent say the country is headed in the right direction, and 62 percent said it is on the wrong track."
​

Is the mandate that the will of the 62% should be done or is it that the current track should be maintained until the other 35% can be swayed to the "wrong track" side?

It matters little how difficult unnecessary endeavors are . . .

Same question as above applies, why do the winners, the majority, need to sway or gain the approval of those rebuffed, dismissed, rejected and thrown out?

Do you understand how the legislative process works in this nation?

 

Are you referring to the process of repealing Obamacare? From what I've been hearing it won't happen anyway. Even though the republicans own the House their repeal won't get through the majority democratic senate and Obama would just veto their attempt for repeal.

 

I hate to break it to you, but there has never been a piece of legislation named Obamacare to ever pass either house, much less signed by the President. That's all just part of a big propaganda technique used by the corporate sponsors of the TeaBaggers to get power shifted from the people to BIG business. They preyed on poor saps who don't know their Socialism from Shinola to paint President Obama as a Socialist. And those people fell for it, hook, line and sinker. Now, corporate America is one House closer to controlling our Congress. It's hard to say whether that many people have really been duped or if these TeaBaggers really want BIG business to control our nation.

.

 

Boehner's and McConnell's posturing isn't necessarily toothless. The Republicans not taking the Senate is good as the Dems up for re-election in '12 won't be too eager to be Hingehead Obamabots . . . I think it will be amusing watching them hem and haw . . .

21 Dems (plus Lieberman) are up in '12 and if you look it's easy to pick out the wobbly ones. Only 10 Republican terms are up in '12 and in the obverse, perhaps a RINO like Snowe will return to the Republican fold.

A well written comprehensive overhaul will not be ignored nor will it be hustled in the dark of night. The promise that the bill will be available for public review will be fulfilled and if the people like it, scaredy cat 2012 Dems will be eager to vote for it and Obama can not veto it if he wants to be re-elected.

Do you see any change anytime soon in the recent Democratic practice of distancing yourself if not outwardly being opposed to the President? If the new bill passes Obama will know how many overide votes will be there and if he just suspects there is a chance he will get overridden by a Dem majority Senate there is zero chance he will veto.

Face it, far-left agenda embracing libs are marginalized even with a Democratic majority in the Senate. Case in point, on the ballot on Tuesday were 95 House and Senate candidates who pledged support for Net neutrality, . . . All of them lost.

 

I know I was just having fun with the name.

 

If you don't support net neutrality you basically are an asshole against freedom who shows you care more about money than basic access to information.

 

Also take voter demographics into account. Many voters who normally vote democrat stayed home. So this mandate mainly came from republican voters who came out in larger numbers than democratic voters.

Exit Polls Show Voter Turnout Down In Certain Demographics

 

That's funny, someone who is philosophically opposed to government having a say in everything is an "asshole against freedom".

Once you give government the power to establish rules for operation don't be surprised or angry when government establishes rules for operation.

Placing such control in an agency that is subject only to the political whims of the administration in charge is not "freedom".

 

So, can we call the next round of health care legislation Bonercare, after the Speaker to be?

.

 

I'm pretty in favor of a rule that says all websites must be treated equally in their access to broadband. Rules aren't a bad thing, that's why for example you're not allowed to hide cards up your sleeve when playing poker.

 

An interesting propaganda term considering it's been the Republibots who have been "block voting" for over a decade and not the Democrats.

They have been since Clinton was elected. You don't seem to have a very good grasp of the political scale.

Are you saying this is the reason they lost?

.

 

Good one.

Best one I've heard lately is Repugnicans...:beatnik:

BTW, my feeling is the tea-baggers were mostly duped. ..The tea party had some good points but Glen Beck and the like used those real concerns and added heaping scoops of hyperbole to foster irrational fears in folks. (Remember "they are coming for your fishing poles!"?) :rofl:
I really don't blame a some of them...
...humans seem to be genetically programmed to not think clearly when scared shitless.
T'was prolly advantageous for primitive man...

Great shamen sez, sabre-tooth tiger come...
no time to think just run...

ZW

 

Thank you! I have been saying this since HCR passed. It started as a Fox, conservative propaganda technique and now all of a sudden it's made it's way into every mainstream discussion about health care. "obamacare" this and "obamacare" that, it's outrageous.

 

haha, zombiewolf, the one I like to use is "reTHUGlicans"

 

As far as information availability I would not like to be limited but when bandwidth is concerned, all websites are not created equal. Throughput over a certain level (not set by gov) should be charged for like any other utility.

Is the no cards up your sleeves a "house" rule or a rule established by governmental regulation?????

It's easy to "block vote" when the opposing party is introducing legislation written without your input and uses procedural rules to block meaningful debate or amendments.

The marginalization of the far left during the 90's was not a function of conservative politics/policy; it was a function of the Clinton machine. This time around the rejection is again a function of the electorate.

Think McGovern :rofl: :seeya:. . .

No, I just found it interesting, it was one issue in the election coverage that someone had crunched the numbers. I would like to see what the survival rate was for Dems who support gun control.

You talking about "Teabaggers"?

 

If you are one, you are pathetic. Keep laughing at yourself, you'll be laughing all the way to a democratic shutout in 2012 because The America that doesn't follow the media and politics will finally see just how insane you people are.

Guess what? Americans love their social security and they love their medicare...just in case you batshit teabaggers didn't realize that.