U.S. Midterm Elections

[Nova Andromeda]

Yeah I dunno how I'm going to vote when Feinstein is up for re-election. She's a fucking idiot...but it'd leave a bad taste in my mouth to vote GOP. I'll probably have to show up to the polling booth drunk. Or hope there's a viable Democratic contender...

Please use the proper strategy. Vote for and support any liberal/progressive opponent/movement in the primary (i.e., use the Tea Party tactics) and if/when they lose vote for Feinstein.

[Purple]

As noted Dems still hold the trump card of the un-overidable Veto. Republicans will have to compromise, because if nothing improves its going to be the Republicans who catch the blame this time and you'll see the pendulum swing back the other way next cycle.

Random question. What if Obama were to decide to gamble on just that and basically start selectively vetoing only those proposals that don't make life worse for the average american? Not saying that he would do this. But say he goes insane and decides to. What would the effects be?

[Lord MJ]

Dems are in serious trouble. And I if were them I would redouble on standing for policies that are overwhelmingly supported by Americans, but the Dems were afraid to stand for because of fear of being labeled to liberal.

Ugh. No. The Democrats aren't in serious trouble. The party of the President always takes a beating during midterms. On top of that, we're in a time of global insecurity and economic pessimism ... So a GOP takeover of the Senate was, essentially, a given.

However, the shoe will be on the other foot in 2016 ... the sorts of voters that put the President over the top in 2012 will be back out for the Presidential election. Also, the GOP has a bunch of very vulnerable seats in the Senate that they will have to defend in 2016 ... so they'll probably lose control of the Senate then.

Trust me. If the Dems try to run their campaigns in 2016, the way the did here, they will lose big. On top of that there will be inevitable finger pointing after today, with Dems blaming Obama for their parties misfortune, and deciding they have to go further to the right. Furthermore the Democrats favorite to run for President is a right winger who will have a hard time galvanizing the Dem base the way Obama did, other than perhaps with women voters. Young people are not enamored with the Dems, the way they were during Obama's campaign. There isn't a strong progressive to come at Hilary from the left unless Warren decides to run. As it stands, Hilary's attempt to enamor herself to the left so far has been a flop ("Corporations and businesses do not create jobs").

Also, there are some non-trivial divisions between the 'mainstream' GOP, and the lunatic right; and you can expect those cracks to really start showing over the next two years, thanks to the fact that the Republicans in Congress will almost certainly let their ambitions get the better of them (which is to say, we can look forward to two more years of hopeless gridlock.)

This is the best case scenario. But I believe that the GOP money people will have it with the Tea Party, and the GOP establishment will crush it sooner or later.

[Executor32]

I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you that Chicago had voting irregularities!

Someone apparently robo-called election judges in that area and told them they weren't qualified to serve, resulting in a significant number not showing up at all and polling places not being able to open. They did start sorting it out, but that resulted in three hour plus waits to vote in some places and the polling places remaining open past normal closing time. I think I heard on the news this morning the last votes in Chicago were cast around 3 am this morning or something.

On the plus side, at least all five ballot measures* passed. Still pissed about Rauner, though. He effectively bought the election thanks to the $6 million he personally contributed to his election war chest (nearly half!), so he could afford to saturate the airwaves and phone lines with bullshit. I mean, technically the 67% tax increase under Quinn that he was bandying about is accurate, but it's disingenuous as fuck because the increase in question was from 3% to 5%.


*For those not in Illinois, those were for a constitutional amendment expanding crime victims' rights, an amendment aimed at preventing voter ID/voter suppression laws, increasing school funding via a 3% tax on income over $1 million, requiring any insurance plan with prescription drug coverage to cover birth control, and increasing the state minimum wage to $10/hr.

[Soontir C'boath]

The New York State Senate now has a Republican majority. Well, I do not foresee de Blasio's plan to let NYC set its own minimum wage happening anytime soon among other things.

All proposals on the ballot have passed. The redistricting commission being created will still be beholden to the legislators and schools across the state will be receiving $2 billion in building expansion and technological improvements.

[Lord MJ]

My most pessimistic expectations for this election result is that the GOP would win seats in conservative areas, possibly take the majority. But those gains would be in areas where conservatives are expected to win. The overall trend would favor the Dems though, and gains would be made in governors races for example.

Instead, this was a bloodbath. Where even the worst governors like Scott Walker, Rick Scott, and Sam Brownback were reelected. Deval Patrick and Martin O'Malley were succeeded by Republicans. Which doesn't bode well for O'Malley being a viable Presidential candidate, or the narrative that Patrick was a strong governor.

[Mr Bean]

Fun fact 40% of eligible Texas voters decided they wanted the Republican. Had the Democrats been able to anything as simple as muster 65% of their voter population Wendy Davis would have won easily. The vote reportedly was SO partyline that all of the efforts on both sides was pretty pointless, it was a pure get out the vote win for the Republicans.

Put it this way, Republicans have about six and a half million registered Voters in Texas to the Democrats five million odd voters. The republicans got almost three million to show up. The Democrats managed at best just shy of two million... the Republicans won.

*Edit speaking of low turnout years once again Florida reelected a Governor who should be sitting in prison for the largest fraud case in American history.

[Elheru Aran]

At least the endless campaigning will take a break. Maybe I'll stop getting a million "Obama and X (D) Suck, Vote Republican" flyers in my mailbox.

Seriously, do they have to attach Obama to *every* advertisement they make? It's not like he's running for office or anything...

[Borgholio]

Seriously, do they have to attach Obama to *every* advertisement they make? It's not like he's running for office or anything...

What better way to get Conservatives riled up to vote than showing a picture of the Evil Muslim Communist Illegal Immigrant™?

[Elheru Aran]

Seriously, do they have to attach Obama to *every* advertisement they make? It's not like he's running for office or anything...

What better way to get Conservatives riled up to vote than showing a picture of the Evil Muslim Communist Illegal Immigrant™?

It's just such a fucking dog-whistle. At least have the dignity to attack the candidate himself. Especially when it comes to the office of governor. Senate and Representative, sure, those are going to be a little more cozy with the President probably, but the Governors are at more of a distance. All it does is piss off Democrats and pander to the other side.

[Guardsman Bass]

One big question for me is whether the GOP's post-2010 gerrymandering will be undone by demographic change and better Democratic organization by 2016. The GOP won big in 2000 as well and gerrymandered up a whole ton of state and federal legislative districts, but by 2006 it had all been undone.

[Lord MJ]

Dems need to embrace progressive policies in all areas except one. Guns.

Guns, and anything having to do with guns, is one area that Dems should clear away from. The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

[Borgholio]

The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

There are many issues that the general public is not ready to have a discussion about. Guns, Universal Healthcare, Welfare, Homosexuality, Secular Government, anything Socialist...

[Elheru Aran]

I wouldn't be so quick to say that. The American public can certainly discuss it. Its failing is in that a rabid minority is capable of leading it by the nose by virtue of high profile publicity funded by conservatively led corporations and a manic compulsion to utterly blackwash anybody who speaks a word about control.

The fact of the matter is that the Republican/conservative political machine has spent a lot of time (since Clinton? Bush Sr? Reagan?) honing its message and practicing what whips its members up into a froth. The left wing has nothing so unified as this. And until they do, they're going to keep being at a disadvantage.

The American mindset is easily manipulated by who's loudest, regrettably...

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

At least the endless campaigning will take a break. Maybe I'll stop getting a million "Obama and X (D) Suck, Vote Republican" flyers in my mailbox.

Seriously, do they have to attach Obama to *every* advertisement they make? It's not like he's running for office or anything...

Obama has become the (brown) face of the slowly receding white hegemony. He's a symbol for the threatening but vaguely defined unease that grips millions of traditional straight white voters who feel as though the world is no longer their oyster. That's the best explanation I have come across for why conservatives are so worked up into such a hysterical anti-Obama frenzy even though he hasn't done anything particularly threatening to conservatives in 6 years.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Dems need to embrace progressive policies in all areas except one. Guns.

Guns, and anything having to do with guns, is one area that Dems should clear away from. The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

Yesterday, Washington state passed a ballot measure mandating background checks for the categories of gun sales not presently covered by background checks (an opposing measure backed by the pro-gun lobby failed, incidentally.) It is slowly dawning on most Americans that the 18th century isn't a nice place to be ... it's just that the pro-gun lobby is very loud, and is usually very effective at beating on their one issue.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Well with the vote having swung the way it has, Obama's increasingly becoming a lame duck.

[Gaidin]

It's just such a fucking dog-whistle. At least have the dignity to attack the candidate himself. Especially when it comes to the office of governor. Senate and Representative, sure, those are going to be a little more cozy with the President probably, but the Governors are at more of a distance. All it does is piss off Democrats and pander to the other side.

You know this is one of the big reasons he couldn't help in the battleground states right? Well, that and the background fight between him and the Senate regarding a few of his missteps that turned that dog-whistle into such a viable campaign strategy in states like Louisiana certainly didn't help...

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Well with the vote having swung the way it has, Obama's increasingly becoming a lame duck.

He still has his favorite tool of late, the Executive Action, to ameliorate some of the gridlock that will be the hallmark of the GOP-controlled Congress of 2015-2016. Of course, that may play into the GOP's favor, since they're going to hang the albatross of Barack Obama and his "abuse" of Executive authority (and his evil socialcommunazi Obama-hopey-changey-care) around the neck of any Democrat who was even remotely associated with him that might be thinking of running for President in 2016 (i.e. Hillary Clinton, who seems to be the only person Republicans appear to hate worse than Obama.)

[Lost Soal]

Dems need to embrace progressive policies in all areas except one. Guns.

Guns, and anything having to do with guns, is one area that Dems should clear away from. The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

Yesterday, Washington state passed a ballot measure mandating background checks for the categories of gun sales not presently covered by background checks (an opposing measure backed by the pro-gun lobby failed, incidentally.) It is slowly dawning on most Americans that the 18th century isn't a nice place to be ... it's just that the pro-gun lobby is very loud, and is usually very effective at beating on their one issue.

And on the othe side of the spectrum Alaba passed a constitutional amendment making gun ownership a fundimental human right.
But in Detroit, a judge said water isn't.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Well with the vote having swung the way it has, Obama's increasingly becoming a lame duck.

He still has his favorite tool of late, the Executive Action, to ameliorate some of the gridlock that will be the hallmark of the GOP-controlled Congress of 2015-2016. Of course, that may play into the GOP's favor, since they're going to hang the albatross of Barack Obama and his "abuse" of Executive authority (and his evil socialcommunazi Obama-hopey-changey-care) around the neck of any Democrat who was even remotely associated with him that might be thinking of running for President in 2016 (i.e. Hillary Clinton, who seems to be the only person Republicans appear to hate worse than Obama.)

From what I've heard, the only thing the Democrats have in their favour going forward is a firm presidential candidate in Clinton (though questions have been raised over her health). While in contrast, the republicans have about a dozen potential candidates and no firm favourite.

James May would agree with you there about Hillary being hated by the reds, having to drive a car adorned with "Hillary for president" through Alabama

[Simon_Jester]

Dems need to embrace progressive policies in all areas except one. Guns.

Guns, and anything having to do with guns, is one area that Dems should clear away from. The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

The biggest issue with Americans and guns is that in a real sense, on gun control, America is two entirely separate countries stitched crudely together at an interface somewhere in Suburbia.

Rural America (and the many suburban Americans who identify with rural roots) are, for purposes of gun ownership, more or less Finland: widespread firearm ownership, and that turns out to just not be a problem.

Meanwhile, urban America is, I don't know, Rio de Janeiro: massive divide between the richest rich and the ghetto underclass, with the suburban middle and upper class that ring the cities having a paralyzing fear of that underclass's ability to tear apart their world with criminal violence.

So the America-as-Finland people simply don't have anything remotely resembling the same needs and goals and attitudes on firearms as the America-as-Rio people. It's not that one side or the other is 'not ready to have an intelligent discussion,' because that implies a situation where one side is objectively right and the other is wrong.

The real problem is that what works for medium-sized towns in Indiana doesn't work for Chicago and vice versa when it comes to gun control. So the issue is forever locked in this weird schizophrenic crazyland.

But while I differ from you in my interpretation, I essentially agree on the practical conclusion- the Democratic Party should stay the hell away from guns and disavow any party-wide intention of banning guns, especially at a national level.

There are many issues that the general public is not ready to have a discussion about. Guns, Universal Healthcare, Welfare, Homosexuality, Secular Government, anything Socialist...

We had a discussion on universal healthcare. A lot of Americans are too anarchist to adopt what I think is the sensible and cheap solution, but we had it. We are in the process of having a discussion on homosexuality and the gays are winning. We had a discussion on secular government and secular government won- what's left are fundamentalists who want to reverse the verdict, and they aren't having much luck.

The one issue on your list where the willful ignorance is really the main obstacle to rationalizing the system is welfare, because that's where stereotypes of welfare queens that are entirely fictional take precedence in people's brains over the reality of the lower-working-class.

At least the endless campaigning will take a break. Maybe I'll stop getting a million "Obama and X (D) Suck, Vote Republican" flyers in my mailbox.

Seriously, do they have to attach Obama to *every* advertisement they make? It's not like he's running for office or anything...

Obama has become the (brown) face of the slowly receding white hegemony. He's a symbol for the threatening but vaguely defined unease that grips millions of traditional straight white voters who feel as though the world is no longer their oyster. That's the best explanation I have come across for why conservatives are so worked up into such a hysterical anti-Obama frenzy even though he hasn't done anything particularly threatening to conservatives in 6 years.

The hell of it is that the receding of the hegemony has so much to do with economic forces that were set in place by the ideological ancestors of Obama's modern opponents.

From what I've heard, the only thing the Democrats have in their favour going forward is a firm presidential candidate in Clinton (though questions have been raised over her health). While in contrast, the republicans have about a dozen potential candidates and no firm favourite.

I suspect that the Democrats will have one or more credible dark horse challengers emerge... just like last time Hillary ran.

Also, the health issue is significant; she's already had a serious medical problem at least once, and the track record of people who turn seventy in the White House is not promising in terms of ability to serve out a term successfully.

[Gandalf]

If It Happened There: Americans to Elect Legislature

WASHINGTON, United States—On Tuesday, voters in this country of 300 million, the world’s second-largest democracy and most populous Christian nation, will head to the polls for elections that will determine control of the upper house of the legislature and serve as a referendum on the country’s embattled ruling regime.

While international monitors expect a mostly free and fair contest, questions have been raised about why the equivalent of the GDP of Montenegro is being spent on a contest to determine the membership of a body expected to accomplish little over the next two years. Human rights observers have also noted a troubling rise in anti-immigrant rhetoric stoked by far-right nationalist candidates.

President Barack Obama’s ruling party will almost certainly lose seats, but whether or not the opposition is able to take over the upper house will be determined by closely fought races in the nation’s torrid southeastern swamps, central agricultural region, and even frigid Arctic villages thousands of miles from the capital.

There is no shortage of pressing issues, from a sluggish economic recovery to multiple foreign wars, facing this large and diverse society. Still, elections in this vast nation can often be characterized by idiosyncratic local rituals. In this campaign season, feats of strength involving dominating animals have been popular. One opposition candidate for national office has boasted of castrating pigs, another of wrestling alligators. While the country’s citizens have migrated en masse to large cities in search of greater economic opportunity, specialists in American folkways say people here still value these demonstrations of rural aptitude. Not to be outdone, government loyalists have boasted of their marksmanship and snowmobiling skills.

Appealing to nationalist sentiment, the opposition has accused the government of allowing too many immigrants to make their way across the country’s southern border, tying this issue to fears of deadly viruses and terrorism. There have also been disturbing unconfirmed reports of a “war on women” being waged by religious extremists in the country’s Western mountains.

In this deeply traditional society, where great import is accorded to family ties, powerful clans build patronage networks, and political office is often passed between relatives. Remarkably, one race pits the cousin of a former governor against the daughter of a former senator.

With control of the upper house coming down to just a few key races, the election has been bitter, combative, and expensive. In one coastal state, the ruling party and its supporters have spent more than $26 million attacking a single opposition candidate. Not surprisingly, the election has also become a contest for influence among America’s politically powerful oligarchs, who often seek to control elections by employing a complex form of legally sanctioned slush funds.

The vast fortunes spent and passions aroused are particularly noteworthy given that few expect the legislature to pass much in the way of meaningful legislation. America is still governed under an unwieldy 18th-century political model employed by few other functioning democracies. With the executive mansion and legislature controlled by two different parties, there’s little hope of large-scale reforms.

While 2014 has seen a rash of military coups and America boasts both a staggering level of income inequality and the world’s most heavily armed populace, political forecasters say a violent uprising is still unlikely. While few are satisfied with the political process as it exists, most Americans are either apathetic about the state of affairs or deeply invested in the current system. Most are already gearing up for the all-important presidential election coming in two years. Not surprisingly, many expect it to be another brutal contest between the country’s two top political dynasties.

[Guardsman Bass]

This is probably my favorite piece so far on what the next two year will be like, from Prospect.

A Republican party in the flush of a sweeping victory isn't exactly going to be looking for areas where it can dial back its demands. If someone would like to explain how a GOP caucus in Congress even farther to the right than the one whose antics we currently enjoy would be more inclined to compromise with Barack Obama than it is now, I'm all ears. While you're at it, you could elaborate your thoughts on unicorn migration patterns and the location of the Tooth Fairy's home.

Ah, but won't Republicans be obligated to show they can govern, once they have power? Of course not. The incentives that have propelled them to their current heights of obstruction—the desire to subvert Obama's presidency, non-competitive districts that push them to the right, a base that equates compromise with betrayal—will remain unchanged. And they've been handsomely rewarded for it! Karl Rove can encourage them to act responsibly for the sake of their 2016 nominee, but they'll be no more inclined to listen than they are now.

[Joun_Lord]

Dems need to embrace progressive policies in all areas except one. Guns.

Guns, and anything having to do with guns, is one area that Dems should clear away from. The American populace is not ready to have an intelligent discussion about that matter.

Yesterday, Washington state passed a ballot measure mandating background checks for the categories of gun sales not presently covered by background checks (an opposing measure backed by the pro-gun lobby failed, incidentally.) It is slowly dawning on most Americans that the 18th century isn't a nice place to be ... it's just that the pro-gun lobby is very loud, and is usually very effective at beating on their one issue.

That passed after several high powered left wing billionaires (atleast one of which has nothing to do with Washington) injected butt-tons of cash into the state to get it passed. The NRA spent plenty of money too but less then their counterparts.

Using that as an example of Americans finally getting civilized along with the rest of the world and learning to start trusting the cops to protect them is about the same as using a massively funded NRA law to show how boorish and backwards and phallically challenged Americans are. Neither really shows the will of the American people, it shows which lobbying group can spend the most. And it does show that Americans can be swayed by whomever is the loudest but that ain't exactly a big secret put away in some warehouse by Top Men.

Guns are still a highly divisive topic.