Official midterm elections thread

[Ryan Thunder]

Well "useless" would be preferable to "actively harmful".

I fucking hate that rheotoric and it fills me with bile every goddamn time I hear/read it. You know what other options you have?

They, Akhlut, they. I'm from Canada, where we do in fact have more than two parties.

Third fucking parties. "But they can't win!" Of course not, if you don't vote for them. Maybe Obama and the rest of the Democratic leadership would realize that their sniveling, jerkass, spineless ways are useless if no one voted for them and maybe we'd get someone who is neither actively harmful nor useless.

The risk is that if the third parties are voted for in the current climate, the Republicans will hold the largest voting block, I believe.

[Akhlut]

Well "useless" would be preferable to "actively harmful".

I fucking hate that rheotoric and it fills me with bile every goddamn time I hear/read it. You know what other options you have? Third fucking parties. "But they can't win!" Of course not, if you don't vote for them. Maybe Obama and the rest of the Democratic leadership would realize that their sniveling, jerkass, spineless ways are useless if no one voted for them and maybe we'd get someone who is neither actively harmful nor useless.

It would be nice if the available third party options were either not one trick ponies or not actively repulsive and essentially Republican lite.

In Illinois, at least, the Green Party actually had things like a solid plan for the state budget, workers' rights, reviving the state economy, ways to eliminate waste/corruption, plans to help the environment, and otherwise govern effectively. Given that the Illinois GP is part of the US Greens, I imagine that they have similar enough ideas on how to make this country far more functional than the Democrats have and would probably have much better leadership in place to do so.

Well "useless" would be preferable to "actively harmful".

I fucking hate that rheotoric and it fills me with bile every goddamn time I hear/read it. You know what other options you have?

They, Akhlut, they. I'm from Canada, where we do in fact have more than two parties.

Sorry for lack of clarification: it was a general "you," not directed specifically toward yourself, Ryan, as I've heard precisely that same sentiment echoed by many people every time I bring up the idea of voting for third parties, and I really loathe the two-party dichotomy in US politics and try to convince people that there are other options.

Third fucking parties. "But they can't win!" Of course not, if you don't vote for them. Maybe Obama and the rest of the Democratic leadership would realize that their sniveling, jerkass, spineless ways are useless if no one voted for them and maybe we'd get someone who is neither actively harmful nor useless.

The risk is that if the third parties are voted for in the current climate, the Republicans will hold the largest voting block, I believe.[/quote]

It would depend on how large a combined voting block of Greens/Democrats/other Liberal parties would be. If their combined weight is larger than the Republicans, it'd allow for the liberal third parties to actually play a meaningful role in government, as they'd be able to extract some concessions from the Democrats while simultaneously being able to defeat Republican measures.

[General Zod]

Oh good, Bennett's officially won. I don't have to worry about having a complete whackaloon for a Senator for a few more years. But that .4% is far too close for comfort.

[Dominus Atheos]

What makes me scratch my head here is the lack of anger and frustration at Democrats. They controlled the House, Senate AND the White House yet people here are raging at "Republitards" and the stupid American voting public. I don't know about you but if my management is utterly useless I try to replace it, shake things up. The issue of course is that our Land of the Free only has two options. You can only replace useless with corrupt. But to be angry at the guys who outplayed, out thought and out manuevered the party in power and not be angry at your own team for being a bunch of jackasses makes no sense to me.

What else was the average American supposed to do? Stay the course and reward shitty leadership with more years in office?

Some of us tried to explain this, but all we got was flamed for our trouble. Myself and others have been saying Obama and Reid were terrible leaders for years now, but no one ever listened. It boggles my mind that most people on this site are actually cheering for Harry Reid to win his election. Hell, his victory my greatest regret of the day.

Oh well. I guess those of us who saw this coming can just quietly feel vindicated and those for whom this was a complete surprise because they thought Obama and the Democrats were doing a great job can wail and gnash their teeth for the next two years when Obama loses.

[Mayabird]

Iowa voted three supreme court justices out of office, as petty retribution for legalizing gay marriage. Damn. On the plus side, gay marriage didn't get any less legal, nor will it. We still have the last laugh.

Fuck Iowa.

I was told all these little stories about "ooh, Iowa isn't that stupid and it's actually more progressive than people think" and such bullshit. No. Iowa is not all that much smarter than other people. Iowa might be less stupid than georgia, but that's like saying it hurts less to be beaten with a baseball bat than to have acid poured on your face before you're doused with gasoline and set on fire. No, Iowa will bend over and take it in the ass by the closeted cock of the Coloradan fundies while all of them scream that it'll destroy civilization as we know it.

The short-term effects of this are simple spite. It won't change the decision. But what this does is let Focus on the Family and its minion puppets know that there is no line drawn that they can't cross. They can do whatever the fuck they want and have whatever stupid influence they desire so long as they throw enough money at it. Because people are stupid. It might put a culture of fear in the judicial system, now that Iowa has thrown away all of its integrity because the state is actually full of stupid yokels who listen to TV ads from the lairs of Colorado Springs and obey their orders. They know that now. The judges that'll be appointed to replace these three will be up for retention in two years and the fundies will be pressing them, probably making all the stupid shit lawsuits they can, hoping to overturn Varnum v. Brien, and hanging the threat of having them all thrown out over the heads of all the justices. I can only hope that when it happens, the justices flip them off with integrity, even knowing that they'll be martyred too on the cross of either stupid populism or corporate fundamentalism (or maybe both, but my metaphors are really falling apart at this time).

They'll also be pushing for a constitutional amendment to re-ban gay marriage, and also if it's the same as before, basically strip gay people of all civil rights that they can. It'll take two years, but they know that throwing enough money at it will do it.

Now I have to figure out what to do about it.

Fuck Iowa. Fuck Iowa slightly less than georgia.

[JME2]

Two is if the Tea Party movement either breaks away from the Republicans and pull a Ross Perot on them siphoning off huge amounts of votes and weakening their overall appeal or if they simply hijack the party and get Sarah Palin to be the standard bearer in 2012. Palin has her appeal in the deep red states but on a national level she will crash and burn.

The fact that they're pushing their own independent caucus without Republican involvement is a good sign in that direction, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

You're right about the jobless recovery. Unless Obama makes progress, it's going to be the albatross around his neck.

[Shroom Man 777]

Oh no, Mayabirdies, it doesn't matter! Civil rights? Marriage equality? Healthcare? Pffft! Those are unimportant compared to nuclear energy and the engorgement of the military budget and the space program or gun rights or whatever, and these single fixation/issues are more important than any other trivial concerns such as those you've stated, and as long as we get these then any backslide on American progressivism is acceptable. After all, the previous eight year administration has been so good and these folks just want some more of it.

[Mr Bean]

Indeed. Most of the people who turned out to support Obama in 2008 stayed home this year. If the Democratic leadership hadn't been so damned spineless. If Obama had taken the hard-line stance and actually gotten something done, instead of letting the GOP set the tone and pace of the debate, the people who supported him in 2008 (young progressives and liberals) would've been motivated enough to go vote.

I am TIRED of hearing that shit - "young progressives and liberals" weren't motivated to vote and it's all Obama's fault? - what a load of fucking horseshit! Those same sniveling brats whine that no one listens to them, that they're ignored, taken for granted, the world shits on them... well, what the fuck do they expect? If you don't care enough about your circumstances to get up off your ass and VOTE, if you can't be bothered to do at least that much WHY the fuck should the people in power care about you? Think about it.

If the "progressives" and the "young" and the "liberal" and the "XXX" want something they have to do at least the minimum. You can't sit back on your ass, claim you were not sufficiently motivated, and blame someone else. Fucking self-motivate you spineless pussies - if you want it YOU have to get up and get it. Whine-whine-whine - the Democrats didn't get enough done and Obama is not the messiah - I'm going to sit home and pout! Wah-wah-wah - the republicans and the tea party won, woe is me! You know WHY they won? They fucking got up off their asses and VOTED!. That's IT. Those are the two reasons we see these results: the right went out and voted and the left stayed home and pouted.

Now, if YOU, personally, voted go ahead and piss and moan but if you didn't vote shut the fuck up and do better next time.

Sorry to burst you balloon Broomstick but your entire argument is premised on the fact that there are strong progressive congressmen and senators out there for them to go vote for instead of Republicorp party or the Democratic party. The best two progress voices in the US are now out of power, we lost Allan Grayson and Russ Feingold. Who's our number three guy? In Ohio as an Independent voter if I wanted to vote for a progressive I have ZERO options. Go across the border to Kentucky and I also have zero people who qualify as progressive. There were more Communists on the ballot in Ohio than Democrats who have progressive stances. Every Democrat I voted for (And most lost, as did my Libertarian votes) was at best a part time friend of local business interests rather than the property of American Multinational Corporations. I had no hope of support for gay marriage, ending the wars, scaling back Corporate rights, promoting Nuclear power, rebuilding our infrastructure, stopping the massive money printing operation that wall street is running because they own the "Federal" Reserve and getting Universal Heath-care running.

None of the Democrats I threw my votes away on would have done ANY of the things I wanted. The things I know they did support (Ending the wars is about it) I know they would fail on... because they are Democrats.

Let me put this in a LGT prospective for a second, if Democrats refuse to do anything for your rights and Republicans are actively hostile to your rights who do you vote for? You might say Democrats except Democrats will go along with "defense of marriage" amendments that Republican put up.... so who do you vote for? Vote for the party hostile to your rights or the party that votes for bills that removes your rights?

[Dominus Atheos]

Indeed. Most of the people who turned out to support Obama in 2008 stayed home this year. If the Democratic leadership hadn't been so damned spineless. If Obama had taken the hard-line stance and actually gotten something done, instead of letting the GOP set the tone and pace of the debate, the people who supported him in 2008 (young progressives and liberals) would've been motivated enough to go vote.

I am TIRED of hearing that shit - "young progressives and liberals" weren't motivated to vote and it's all Obama's fault? - what a load of fucking horseshit! Those same sniveling brats whine that no one listens to them, that they're ignored, taken for granted, the world shits on them... well, what the fuck do they expect? If you don't care enough about your circumstances to get up off your ass and VOTE, if you can't be bothered to do at least that much WHY the fuck should the people in power care about you? Think about it.

If the "progressives" and the "young" and the "liberal" and the "XXX" want something they have to do at least the minimum. You can't sit back on your ass, claim you were not sufficiently motivated, and blame someone else. Fucking self-motivate you spineless pussies - if you want it YOU have to get up and get it. Whine-whine-whine - the Democrats didn't get enough done and Obama is not the messiah - I'm going to sit home and pout! Wah-wah-wah - the republicans and the tea party won, woe is me! You know WHY they won? They fucking got up off their asses and VOTED!. That's IT. Those are the two reasons we see these results: the right went out and voted and the left stayed home and pouted.

Now, if YOU, personally, voted go ahead and piss and moan but if you didn't vote shut the fuck up and do better next time.

Fuck off you crazy bitch. We don't "owe" you our votes. Someone has to give us a reason to vote if you want us to do it; and this election, there was no reason. Even in this 8 page thread I still haven't heard one negative consequence that a GOP-controlled House will cause that wouldn't have happened anyway, and I haven't heard even one good thing that would definitely have happened under a Dem-controlled House that is now prevented.

Our votes wouldn't have mattered. Nothing would have changed.

[Feil]

God damn Maine Democratic party. Their worthless governor nominee couldn't even pull the guaranteed 20% of the vote that would vote Democrat if Mao ran on the blue ticket, but managed to steal 19% of the vote away from the real candidates anyway, so now we have a batshit crazy gay-hating education-ruining piece of shit Republican winning by 1.5% over the (sensible) independent frontrunner in stead of a 17.5% margin win for 'not fucking crazy'.

At least our House seats stayed blue.

EDIT:

Even if you turn in a blank ballot, you're still voting in your interest, provided you think that your interests generally align with those of your demographic. Politicians don't generally screw over people who they expect to vote.

[Thanas]

Sorry to burst you balloon Broomstick but your entire argument is premised on the fact that there are strong progressive congressmen and senators out there for them to go vote for instead of Republicorp party or the Democratic party. The best two progress voices in the US are now out of power, we lost Allan Grayson and Russ Feingold.

Damn. Grayson as well? Kudos to the two, though. They were the sane ones.

Who's our number three guy?

Barney Frank?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

If you want to have a vote that says something but refuse to vote for one of the two major parties, why wouldn't you vote third-party even knowing that won't change this one election? Worst case it has no effect, same as you not voting. Best case, a surge in Green or Socialist or Rent Is Too Damn High votes might actually send a message.

God damn Maine Democratic party. Their worthless governor nominee couldn't even pull the guaranteed 20% of the vote that would vote Democrat if Mao ran on the blue ticket, but managed to steal 19% of the vote away from the real candidates anyway, so now we have a batshit crazy gay-hating education-ruining piece of shit Republican winning by 1.5% over the (sensible) independent frontrunner in stead of a 17.5% margin win for 'not fucking crazy'.

I have no idea what prompted the initial slide of support from Mitchell to Cutler last week, but once it started I think it was just a case of everyone but the die-hard Democrats voting not-LePage. I know that had I voted after Mitchell's support started plummeting I would've voted Cutler in a heartbeat.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Wisconsin here, looking forward to several joyful years with Scott Walker. Here's some of the stuff I anticipate:

1) Tax cuts to the wealthiest 1-2% of the state.
2) Increased public transit costs combined with cutbacks of transit services.
3) Massive cutbacks to drug treatment programs.
4) No additional county jail space to account for the inevitable increase in crime and homelessness that will result from 3.
5) Probably an attempt to fuck with abortion rights.
6) Immigration bullshit.
7) Cutbacks to education (hey, he never completed college, so no one else should either!)
8 ) Cutbacks and price increases to transit systems.
9) Cutbacks and increased furloughs to government jobs, further clogging the court system.
10 ) Tax increases to the rest of the state, despite his promises not to.

I'M MOVING TO CANADA!!!11!!

Okay, not really, but I'm seriously considering moving to another state as I do actually have an interest in completing some post-secondary education.

[Broomstick]

Third fucking parties. "But they can't win!" Of course not, if you don't vote for them. Maybe Obama and the rest of the Democratic leadership would realize that their sniveling, jerkass, spineless ways are useless if no one voted for them and maybe we'd get someone who is neither actively harmful nor useless.

The risk is that if the third parties are voted for in the current climate, the Republicans will hold the largest voting block, I believe.

Not if the third party is Tea Party - then the Democrats win. Which is, of course, why the Republicans co-opted the Tea

[Darth Yan]

How would the repbulicans get tax cut's made permanent? They don't have the majority in both houses, and I'm not sure the democrats would support that particular motion, even if they are fairly spineless. Other then that, I kind of agree with just about every pessimist here. Obama did kind of blow it. And wasn't there some other guy who ran in 92 as a third party that got quite a bit of press attention?

[Soontir C'boath]

Even if you turn in a blank ballot, you're still voting in your interest, provided you think that your interests generally align with those of your demographic. Politicians don't generally screw over people who they expect to vote.

If you want to have a vote that says something but refuse to vote for one of the two major parties, why wouldn't you vote third-party even knowing that won't change this one election? Worst case it has no effect, same as you not voting. Best case, a surge in Green or Socialist or Rent Is Too Damn High votes might actually send a message.

Indeed, if all the people who decided they won't vote actually do, even if it's just a write-in saying "Noth Benning Ovar" or a third party, perhaps we'd be getting somewhere. As we've seen in this election, republicans have made strides against the democrats anyway.

By the way, the Green Party in NY secured the 50k votes needed for a ballot line.

[Mr Bean]

Who's our number three guy?

Barney Frank?

Frank would be called a progressive voice in some regards but he's fallen into the Wall Street trap. He is owned if not in body in at least soul by them. He is one of the people who cheered on the appointment of people like Larry Summers and his ilk.

Don't get me wrong on LGT issues, on abortion and Civil rights he's a great guy. But on Finical issues he's a huge disaster. He covers for the Federal Reserve constantly, and like Obama he goes from "Rar claw back bonuses!" to "What audit the fed? Bah we don't need to do that! Trust Tim!" He's our closests thing to a number three but his issues with lack of aggressiveness on Finical issues make him a huge liability.

[MKSheppard]

What makes me scratch my head here is the lack of anger and frustration at Democrats. They controlled the House, Senate AND the White House yet people here are raging at "Republitards" and the stupid American voting public.

I was just at Daily Kos and saw this gem:

"They [Republicans] had the House. They had the Senate. They had the press. They had a plan to destroy every social safety net and grind away the last vestiges of programs it had taken decades to build."

The problem is I think the Democrats have been continually mirror imaging / projecting onto the Republicans what *they* would do if they had that kind of power.

The Dems saw that they had a chance to do one of their big checkmark objectives now that they had the Government effectively under their control (Congress/POTUS); and got sucked into a self-licking ice cream cone loop to justify that objective.

Large Scale Health Care has long since been a wet dream objective of the Democratic party since FDR; which partially explains why they let their pursuit of it blind them.

The Democratic leadership should have after the first couple weeks of polling Congressmen informally on the HC Bill, should have quietly shelved it once it became apparent that the Democratic caucasus, as much as they liked it, did not want to go forward to a near-straight party line vote that left them with it as a possible albatross around their necks.

As it was; the massive size of the HC Bill itself (1,000+ pages), the attitude of "we have to pass it to find out what's in it", and the fact that it basically did change on an hourly basis turned off a lot of people.

But I think the kicker has come since it's passage.

Remember Obama saying:

"If you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have"

Heh.

Boeing raising prices on it's plan due to ObamaCare

3M drops retirees from plan starting in 2013 due to Obamacare

McDonald's asks for an exemption or else it will drop health care for its workers

I think the feds granted McDonalds that exemption.

Seniors face hikes in Medicare Prescription Premiums under current coverage due to Obamacare

Rate Hikes from Aetna and Regence BlueCross/Blue Shield of Oregon

BTW; Regence BlueCross/Blue Shield of Oregon is a nonprofit; so their rate hike isn't because of evil profits.

So yeah; this was a very ill thought out and designed bill -- and it inserted a really large amount of regulatory uncertainity; since so much of the bill despite it's huge size was left up to government regulators to 'flesh out'.

So companies are stuck in a holding loop waiting for a whole bunch of things to firm out before they commit to any big expansions, et al.

Plus it's basically the gift that keeps on giving to the GOP.

BOEHNER OBAMA, YOU MAGNIFICENT BASTARD!

[eion]

Whatever you might think about what the 111th Congress accomplished, they did in fact get a lot done. It was one of the most legislatively productive congresses in years, which is sad in its own way.

I'll let Dr. Maddow expound

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 2#39959392

One reason Democrats lost so big in the House is because they didn't conserve their political capital to hold onto power, they expended it to get shit done.

[Thanas]

*snip*

Shep, I'd thank you to not bring up stuff that was already discussed in a different thread - and especially not when it has already been found out most of these insurers wanted to raise premiums either way. The HC plan has no connection to raising prices and that shall be it for this thread.

If you want to argue this tangent any further, please do so in the relevant thread. You have my permission to necro if you want to.

[Thanas]

Stuff HoS'ed.

Apparently, people do not get the message that when you ask them politely to knock it off, you actually mean it. Some apparently think that means they can get a "last shot" in, while at the same time whining about censure. In case you do not get it - just because I try to be civil instead of going all "Fuck off, asshole" on you, does not mean the polite request will not be enforced by oppression. It does not matter what rank the poster has, whether he or she is a newbie or an old member in good standing - when you are asked to stop, you stop.

If you disagree, go talk to a supermod or an administrator.

[Liberty]

The way I see it, there are today two fundamentally different conceptions of what America should be:

The extreme right wants a libertarian free market business centered theocracy that ensures both public morality and unbridled capitalism. They emphasize personal responsibility and are therefore against social security, medicaid, welfare, and any form of government run health care. The free market is always best and can do EVERYTHING better than the government. An unbridled free market is the friend of the people, and the government is the enemy.

The extreme left wants a Sweden-style social democracy with social safety nets and the government running things that can be done more efficiently by the government, such as health care. The government should protect the environment and guarantee the rights of minorities and people's happiness and safety. The free market must be regulated and big business controlled. The government is the friend of the people, and an unbridled free market is an enemy to the people.

The question becomes which side can convince the average American people that their side is right, which side can weave the rhetoric the best, which side can persuade.

There are two problems with this situation:

First, we have this legacy from the Cold War years that says that socialized anything is a communist dictatorship and the free market is ALWAYS good. Realize that the American school system taught that for generations, and to some extent still does. The American people don't understand that it was the free market that fucked the economy over two years ago. They don't understand what the country was like under the unbridled capitalism of the late 1800s, with its vast divide between rich and poor. This all works against the left, which isn't even really allowed to proffer its view of society without being shouted down as anti-American.

Second, while Obama made gains in the rhetoric war, he dropped the ball on actually implementing his policies. Adding to his problems, however, was the reality that a huge number of Americans see government run health care as the implementing of a communist dictatorship.

The way I see it, only when average Americans realize that social democracy has its merits and is not simply an evil communist conspiracy to enslave them will things change.

Also, several people here have said that Obama shouldn't have focused all his energy on health care. While agree the reform didn't go far enough and that it should have been done faster and less drawn out, true health care reform, meaning a single payer system, is one of my primary political goals right now. People who aren't American or who have always had cushy health care through their jobs don't understand what a tremendous hassle and pressure and difficulty the current American health care system is. I HATE it. A universal health care system would simplify my life tremendously and remove a lot of stress.

And also:

Fuck off you crazy bitch.

I know the policy on this board is that insults are fine, but I also know that homophobic insults are not allowed. Personally, I find "bitch" sexist. If it's allowed, that's fine, but I thought I'd mention that I really do find it sexist.

[Thanas]

Fuck off you crazy bitch.

I know the policy on this board is that insults are fine, but I also know that homophobic insults are not allowed. Personally, I find "bitch" sexist. If it's allowed, that's fine, but I thought I'd mention that I really do find it sexist.

It is allowed.

[Uraniun235]

At least Ron Wyden's still in. He's not perfect but I'd say he's much better than most of his fellow Senators.

[TimothyC]

You fucking imbecile. You deserve every last fucking problem you just brought down on yourself.

Jesus Christ, you and your countrymen just voted back in the party that fucking destroyed you and now you're smug? What the fuck?

And the fact that I was talking about a state level race went way over your head. I've said before that I can accept some form of UHC, if it's done right, and the way it was done doesn't count as the right way to do it. This is a side track anyway.

When I voted (I live in a solid republican House district and my senator that was up for election, but the seat didn't change party so that's a wash), I was voting on State issues. First among those was getting even a run of the mill bland, (and probably slightly corrupt) republican in the Ohio AGs office and in the Ohio Secretary of State's office. Why? So that we don't have a repeat of 2008 when the Ohio Secretary of State (who runs elections in Ohio) Jennifer Brunner tweaked as much as she could to increase democratic turnout (Including preventing local election boards from reviewing voter registrations, and not enforcing the law that says you need to be registered for 30 days before you can vote*). The only reason the court cases were dropped is because it was found the the Ohio GOP didn't have the standing to bring them. Following the election the laws in Ohio were changed to close the loopholes that she used.

*This happened because Ohio started the no-justification early voting before the '30 days before the election' registration date passed, so in that timeframe it was possible to register and vote on the same day without a provisional ballot that could be thrown out if the registration was found to be fraudulent.