• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

step 1 to massive Dem victories in 2016

haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...

Step #7 The Democratic parties turn to go through steps 1-6

Step #8 wash, rinse, repeat

ANd people wonder what is wrong with this country; it isnt the government nor the people its the factions (called political parties) that are ****ing everything up.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Step #7 The Democratic parties turn to go through steps 1-6

Step #8 wash, rinse, repeat

ANd people wonder what is wrong with this country; it isnt the government nor the people its the factions (called political parties) that are ****ing everything up.
Click to expand...

and that could happen also.

Just for the sake of discussion - how would you either get rid of parties or minimize their impact? Or is it a lost cause?
 
haymarket said:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...an-gop-win-senate-and-they-accomplish-13.html

post 130

just like I said - way back in February 34 weeks ago.

You and I might not see eye to eye Ocean and we may be on opposite sides but I do not lie and I back up my statements when asked. I just wish everybody did that as it would make for a much easier time for everyone.
Click to expand...

Wow. And darn near right on target with your estimate.

Yes, I do apologize, you did suggest way back in at least February that the Republicans may take the Senate.
 
ocean515 said:
Wow. And darn near right on target with your estimate.

Yes, I do apologize, you did suggest way back in at least February that the Republicans may take the Senate.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
ocean515 said:
Wow. And darn near right on target with your estimate.

Yes, I do apologize, you did suggest way back in at least February that the Republicans may take the Senate.
Click to expand...

Him and everybody else in the free world.
 
haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...
In her landmark book, "On Death and Dying", Elizabeth Kubler-Ross presented the five stages of grief.

The ones you're exemplifying here in your post are called denial and bargaining.

Kübler-Ross model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In time, acceptance will come.
 
Ontologuy said:
In her landmark book, "On Death and Dying", Elizabeth Kubler-Ross presented the five stages of grief.

The ones you're exemplifying here in your post are called denial and bargaining.

Kübler-Ross model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In time, acceptance will come.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what that leap across the Grand Canyon of logic has to do with my post.

I predicted this 34 weeks ago and am on record as saying this will be a good thing. That is the complete opposite of DENIAL.
 
haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...

Delusional nonsense.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Keep the faith, even in full view and face to face with political reality. Nothing says ideologically entrenched partisanship like blaming the other side for your side loosing an election and predicting that this loss is the path to political success.

Wow - just... Wow.
Click to expand...
Yeah... I just had a flashback to Chris Mathews after Scott Brown one Ted Kennedy's Massachusetts Senate seat. He actually blamed the loss on Republicans by claiming "it's the economy, stupid" in a not so thinly veiled innuendo.
 
haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...

Hmm, 1964 is not that good of an example. Remember in November of 1963 JFK was assassinated in Dallas. It really didn't matter who the Republicans nominated in 1964, he was going to get his clock cleaned. Sure a William Scranton or a George Romney, Nelson Rockefeller etc. might have held LBJ below 60%, but not by much with the mood of the nation back then.

By the way, my first presidential vote was for Barry in 1964.
 
haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...

We aren't going to see anything close to a 1964 election in 2016. With the nation so polarized, and with so few swing voters, a landslide election is now winning by about 7-10% of the vote rather than the 23% that LBJ won by.

The Democrats may very well win the presidency, and they could easily take the Senate. Although that might be more of a function of having only 2 possible Democratic seats to target compared to about 10 Republican ones.

It's hard even trying to identify 218 seats that the Democrats could win to take the House under even the best conditions.
 
clownboy said:
Oh yeah, that's the ticket, the new dem script is going to be, "the midterm elections went off just how we wanted to set us up for 2016". What a joke.

The dems lost the PEOPLE'S House last night for the minimum of the next decade. You can't ignore that. They also lost any chance of holding parity in governorships.
Click to expand...

Yeah, no ****, huh? :lamo
 
Perotista said:
Hmm, 1964 is not that good of an example. Remember in November of 1963 JFK was assassinated in Dallas. It really didn't matter who the Republicans nominated in 1964, he was going to get his clock cleaned. Sure a William Scranton or a George Romney, Nelson Rockefeller etc. might have held LBJ below 60%, but not by much with the mood of the nation back then.

By the way, my first presidential vote was for Barry in 1964.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I would concede that some of the popularity of Johnson was due to the assassination. However, the opposing party turning hard right was what killed them and that is what spurred the coast to coast rejection of the GOP.
 
Anagram said:
We aren't going to see anything close to a 1964 election in 2016. With the nation so polarized, and with so few swing voters, a landslide election is now winning by about 7-10% of the vote rather than the 23% that LBJ won by.

The Democrats may very well win the presidency, and they could easily take the Senate. Although that might be more of a function of having only 2 possible Democratic seats to target compared to about 10 Republican ones.

It's hard even trying to identify 218 seats that the Democrats could win to take the House under even the best conditions.
Click to expand...

I do agree with you that the nation is more polarized than it was in 64. I also agree with you that there are fewer voters in the middle. The 64 and 72 elections with their complete opposite landslides for first the Dems and then the GOP showed rather clearly that the nations political affiliation were about equally divided into approximate 1/3 segments and that middle 1/3 could go either way.

Goldwater in 64 was identified - right or wrong - as a candidate of the far right and was rejected by the middle.
McGovern in 72 was identified - right or wrong - as a candidate of the far left and was rejected by the middle.

You would need a game changing event to cause a landslide - I agree that under present conditions that would not be possible. However, I would consider the events I described as that game changing event.

You could be correct that as the middle has shrunk from a third or 33% to about a fifth or 20% today the numbers which make up a landslide would look different.
 
haymarket said:
As I have been saying for quite a while now, the best thing that could have happened to the Democratic Party last night was for the GOP to take back control of the Senate by a few vote margin. And thankfully, that is exactly what we got. That was Step #1.

Step #2 depends on the GOP in Congress. I predict they will go all out with all sorts of right wing pieces of legislation and many will actually get passed by both houses and be sent to the desk of the President.

Step #3 depends on President Obama. If he can grow a pair between now and then, he can stand up strong and forcefully and VETO those bills that are too far to the right for the American people. And if he has the guts to do that, he should do so very loudly and very publicly and with all the the righteous condemnation of an Old Testament prophet berating the sinners that he can muster. The American people must know that he will not allow the right wing to take over the nation and pass a political and ideological that destroys 120 years of progress by turning back the clock to the Gilded Age. Of course, Obama has never been a street fighting man - and that is one of the biggest let downs to people like me who voted and worked to get him elected in 2008. But he will need to adopt that rule to save the country from the right wing hordes.

Step #4 is for the GOP and their supporters to get angry and mad and irate and see this as a betrayal of the will of the people to turn to the right (and of course it is not given the nature of these mid term election with a lower dem turnout than in presidential years) and accuse Obama of obstruction. This will only inspire them to stay hard right and not give an inch or modify their views and bills.

Step #5 is for the GOP to embrace a strong right wing candidate in 2016 to bear their standard for President setting up an election reminiscent of 1964 when the GOP turned to the far right and came up with Barry Goldwater. My personal pick would be Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.

Step #6 is election night when we see a rerun of 64 with the GOP going down to defeat all over the nation with a few pockets of exception and the Democratic party sweeps to victory taking back Congress, winning the White House and taking back some parts of state legislatures and governor ships in the landslide.

So now the fun begins when we sit back and watch it unfold.
Click to expand...

The fun thing about internet predictions is that the internet is forever :)



A note on Step 2: So far the "radical right wing agenda" that Republicans are looking to send up are A) corporate tax reform, which the President has called for in multiple SOTU speeches and B) trade authority, which the President has said he wants.


There will be "definition" bills, sure. And no one is so good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory like the Stupid Party. But this time around they may be helped by the fact that the POTUS seems bound and determined to pass an incredibly unpopular amnesty bill by executive fiat, rather flipping the logic of your post around.


I realize you've got to reach for a silver lining. But this one holds a lot of (dare I say it) Hope. ;)
 
cpwill said:
The fun thing about internet predictions is that the internet is forever :)



A note on Step 2: So far the "radical right wing agenda" that Republicans are looking to send up are A) corporate tax reform, which the President has called for in multiple SOTU speeches and B) trade authority, which the President has said he wants.


There will be "definition" bills, sure. And no one is so good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory like the Stupid Party. But this time around they may be helped by the fact that the POTUS seems bound and determined to pass an incredibly unpopular amnesty bill by executive fiat, rather flipping the logic of your post around.


I realize you've got to reach for a silver lining. But this one holds a lot of (dare I say it) Hope. ;)
Click to expand...

Let us see what tax reform actually means when we get the details. Democratic presidents have embraced bad economic policies before that were welcomed by the republicans - NAFTA comes to mind with Bill Clinton - so that does not make Obama immune to also making a bad move. I suspect Obama wants to "get things done" just to pretend to have some sort of legacy of accomplishment. ANd if that means embracing and supporting republican measures like giving corporations and the rich tax breaks- that would be huge mistake.

My post is based on two assumptions the first being the GOP will over reach from the right and Obama will stand strong and publicly oppose it with veto after veto.

Both could be wrong. The GOP leadership may well be aware of the potential pitfalls and try to rein in their more radical members telling them to be patient and wait until they take the White House to go with their majorities. I do not think that would be as easy as it sounds however. But it could happen in one way or another.

And even if the GOP turns out lots of legislation to repeal the 20th century politically - Obama could revert to his usual timid form and want to avoid fighting and pick his shots like protecting the health care law but precious little else.

The writing was on the wall in the first two years when Obama hired Rahm Emanuel to be the chief of staff and then basically handcuffed him emasculating him of his street fighting style. So by no stretch is Obama the type of leader the Dems are going to need over the next two years if the GOP decides to put the pedal to the metal and go balls to the walls far right. The Dems will need a president who enters the ring with a big ball bat wrapped in barbed wire with a nine inch nail driven through it and a willingness to aim directly at the forehead of the opponent. What they could get is a timid guy in a suit quoting from the Marquis of Queensbury rules instead.

The GOP will laugh and the dem support base will cringe.

Again, we shall see.

So we shall see.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
Let us see what tax reform actually means when we get the details. Democratic presidents have embraced bad economic policies before that were welcomed by the republicans - NAFTA comes to mind with Bill Clinton - so that does not make Obama immune to also making a bad move. I suspect Obama wants to "get things done" just to pretend to have some sort of legacy of accomplishment. ANd if that means embracing and supporting republican measures like giving corporations and the rich tax breaks- that would be huge mistake.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that doesn't include compromise with Congress - hence, his 6-Week deadline on Amnesty. He doesn't want to work with the new Congress.

And we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and an idiotic labyrinth of a code that drives companies overseas. Fixing that would actually be an example of good governance, which is why it makes me suspicious that he wouldn't veto it.




To take your logic and highlight it's negative, however, imagine Hillary Clinton answering this question in a General:

"Senator, the President used the power of Executive Order to unilaterally offer amnesty to millions of undocumented aliens, a move that was vastly unpopular with the American people. As President, will you rescind that Executive Order?"

And then Hillary can make a choice: Infuriate her base (and increase the likelihood she loses the election) or demonstrate to the middle that she's going to back a policy they strongly dislike (and increase the likelihood she loses the election). Bill maybe could have twisted his way through that contradiction, but Hillary just doesn't have the skills.
 
cpwill said:
Yeah, but that doesn't include compromise with Congress - hence, his 6-Week deadline on Amnesty. He doesn't want to work with the new Congress.

And we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and an idiotic labyrinth of a code that drives companies overseas. Fixing that would actually be an example of good governance, which is why it makes me suspicious that he wouldn't veto it.




To take your logic and highlight it's negative, however, imagine Hillary Clinton answering this question in a General:

"Senator, the President used the power of Executive Order to unilaterally offer amnesty to millions of undocumented aliens, a move that was vastly unpopular with the American people. As President, will you rescind that Executive Order?"

And then Hillary can make a choice: Infuriate her base (and increase the likelihood she loses the election) or demonstrate to the middle that she's going to back a policy they strongly dislike (and increase the likelihood she loses the election). Bill maybe could have twisted his way through that contradiction, but Hillary just doesn't have the skills.
Click to expand...

Again, lets wait and see.

The tax code needs to be change to make sure corporations pay. We also need to stop subsidizing them especially when they make billions in profits. And if a company wants to leave to avoid payment - that is their right. Just like it is our right to regulate what products can enter the nation for sale here.

I don't quite follow your Clinton scenarios.
 
haymarket said:
I disagree. I would concede that some of the popularity of Johnson was due to the assassination. However, the opposing party turning hard right was what killed them and that is what spurred the coast to coast rejection of the GOP.
Click to expand...

I never considered Goldwater hard right, perhaps he was for his time. Certainly he wasn't hard right on social issues, even back in 1964 he believed in a woman's right to choose and gay rights. He once said as far a gays in the military before the election, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." He did vote for both the 1957 and 1960 civil rights bills before voting against the 1964 version as he thought it was unconstitutional. But that vote painted him as bad man.

But elections can paint anyone one in a very bad light. Goldwater was more of a traditional conservative than a neo one of today. He also told LBJ, "To win that damn war now or bring our boys home."

Yeah, for his time he probably was considered far right.
 
Perotista said:
I never considered Goldwater hard right, perhaps he was for his time. Certainly he wasn't hard right on social issues, even back in 1964 he believed in a woman's right to choose and gay rights. He once said as far a gays in the military before the election, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." He did vote for both the 1957 and 1960 civil rights bills before voting against the 1964 version as he thought it was unconstitutional. But that vote painted him as bad man.

But elections can paint anyone one in a very bad light. Goldwater was more of a traditional conservative than a neo one of today. He also told LBJ, "To win that damn war now or bring our boys home."

Yeah, for his time he probably was considered far right.
Click to expand...

I agree with much you say about Goldwater. That is why I said this in post 42

Goldwater in 64 was identified - right or wrong - as a candidate of the far right and was rejected by the middle.
Click to expand...


he was identified as being from the far right - correct or not.
 
haymarket said:
I agree with much you say about Goldwater. That is why I said this in post 42




he was identified as being from the far right - correct or not.
Click to expand...

Yeah, especially back then.
 
Perotista said:
I never considered Goldwater hard right, perhaps he was for his time. Certainly he wasn't hard right on social issues, even back in 1964 he believed in a woman's right to choose and gay rights. He once said as far a gays in the military before the election, "You do not have to be straight to shoot straight." He did vote for both the 1957 and 1960 civil rights bills before voting against the 1964 version as he thought it was unconstitutional. But that vote painted him as bad man.

But elections can paint anyone one in a very bad light. Goldwater was more of a traditional conservative than a neo one of today. He also told LBJ, "To win that damn war now or bring our boys home."

Yeah, for his time he probably was considered far right.
Click to expand...

Goldwater would be considered a RINO today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom