Sign in to follow this  
NipkowDisc

democrats take house

30 posts in this topic

well, we just lost the house. did you get a load of the reaction on cnn when they announced it just after eleven. jake and van and wolf and gloria, it was like christmas for them the cutesy utsy little darlings. just the latest example of the bias white middle class americans have been putting up with for decades now from their own country's television news media, a blatant longstanding bias.
well, they got the house and will now plan on blowing all their nuts. why not go whole hog and make maxine waters speaker.

lettum! lettum go nuts or whatever but they would do well to remember strother martin's dialogue from cool hand luke...

"now I can be a good guy...or I can be one mean sonafa bi tch...it's up to you.
it's all up to you."

Image result for trump smiling

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They won accept it, that's life.  Like I stated in another thread, what will the next 6 years (2 Trump and 4 more likely for a Democrat) be like with the GOP retaining the Senate?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NipkowDisc said:

HELL!

:D

Think that's what the Democrats will say along with Spock's "colorful metaphors" if Trump pulls a miracle and win a 2nd term. (highly unlikely)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/07/elec-n07.html

US midterm vote: Democrats win control of House of Representatives

The Democratic Party won control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections on November 6, gaining more than the 23 seats required for a majority. With many House races too close to call or with large numbers of votes still uncounted, particularly in states like California and Washington, which provide for voting by mail, the five television networks projected a Democratic victory with a gain of 30 seats or more.

The Republican Party retained control of the US Senate, gaining several seats in states where President Trump campaigned heavily against Democratic incumbents. It is noteworthy that Democratic senators who capitulated most cravenly to Trump’s vicious persecution of immigrants—Joe Donnelly in Indiana and Claire McCaskill in Missouri—lost their races by wide margins. Republicans also captured Senate seats in North Dakota and Florida, with seats in Montana, Nevada and Arizona undecided as of this writing.

The Democrats made some gains in state governorships, where the Republicans held 26 of the 36 statehouses. Democratic candidates won Republican-held governorships in Illinois, Maine and Michigan, and defeated the most right-wing anti-immigrant Republican, Kris Kobach, in Kansas, usually a Republican state, as well as the two-term governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, notorious for his assault on workers’ rights. But Republicans won the two most hotly contested races in large states—Ohio and Florida. The Georgia race could end up sufficiently close to go to a run-off. Among the biggest states, the Democrats retained control of New York, Pennsylvania and California, while the Republicans held Texas.

Winning control of the House in no way means a shift to the left on the part of the Democratic Party. On the contrary, prominent Democrats have been at pains to declare their desire for bipartisan collaboration with the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Senate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/11/07/elec-n07.html

US midterm vote: Democrats win control of House of Representatives

Winning control of the House in no way means a shift to the left on the part of the Democratic Party. On the contrary, prominent Democrats have been at pains to declare their desire for bipartisan collaboration with the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Senate.

I hope this is so, but I don't believe it.  Especially for the newly elected Dems. as most of them campaigned on being to the left of the current Dem. Party.  Some to the far left.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheCid said:

I hope this is so, but I don't believe it.  Especially for the newly elected Dems. as most of them campaigned on being to the left of the current Dem. Party.  Some to the far left.

 

There were a couple milquetoast social democrats but not really. At the very least, an even more aggressive policy shift regarding Iran and Syria from the "CIA Democrats" can be expected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheCid said:

I hope this is so, but I don't believe it.  Especially for the newly elected Dems. as most of them campaigned on being to the left of the current Dem. Party.  Some to the far left.

 

While both sides will pretend to be willing to work with the other side,  it will all be for show, especially when it comes to issues like illegal immigration and taxes. 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Democrats Say Their First Bill Will Focus On Strengthening Democracy At Home

 

".... topping their legislative to-do list: Remove obstacles to voting, close loopholes in government ethics law and reduce the influence of political money. ........

The bill would establish automatic voter registration and reinvigorate the Voting Rights Act, crippled by a Supreme Court decision in 2013. It would take away redistricting power from state legislatures and give it to independent commissions.

Other provisions would overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, which declared political spending is First Amendment free speech; they would mandate more disclosure of outside money and establish a public financing match for small contributions.

Ethics language in the bill would strike closer to current controversies........

 

"The path back to having the public trust government and politics is a long one, but we have to start someplace,"

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/665635832/democrats-say-their-first-bill-will-focus-on-strengthening-democracy-at-home?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=politics&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2041

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

Democrats Say Their First Bill Will Focus On Strengthening Democracy At Home

 

".... topping their legislative to-do list: Remove obstacles to voting, close loopholes in government ethics law and reduce the influence of political money. ........

The bill would establish automatic voter registration and reinvigorate the Voting Rights Act, crippled by a Supreme Court decision in 2013. It would take away redistricting power from state legislatures and give it to independent commissions.

Other provisions would overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, which declared political spending is First Amendment free speech; they would mandate more disclosure of outside money and establish a public financing match for small contributions.

Ethics language in the bill would strike closer to current controversies........

 

"The path back to having the public trust government and politics is a long one, but we have to start someplace,"

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/12/665635832/democrats-say-their-first-bill-will-focus-on-strengthening-democracy-at-home?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=politics&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=2041

Looks like a lame empty effort unless the House Majority Leader can get the Senate Majority Leader on board.

I.e. the 'start someplace' for all Dem proposals now that the Dems can pass bills in the House without a single GOP vote is with the GOP Senate Majority Leader.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2018 at 11:22 AM, HIGHWAY said:

 

Democrat here, BUT I sure as hell hope my party will find somebody, ANYBODY, who'll replace this lady as Speaker of the House and now that they're in the majority again.

(...know why I say THIS?...well, it's 'cause SHE is and HAS been for many a year just about as divisive a figure as that idiot man-child who's now the POTUS!!!)

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2018 at 9:57 PM, hamradio said:

Think that's what the Democrats will say along with Spock's "colorful metaphors" if Trump pulls a miracle and win a 2nd term. (highly unlikely)

NOT necessarily, ham ol' boy!

Nope, Trump DOES have a chance for a second term, alright.

Well, UNLESS we once again see an increased turnout for the 2020 Presidential election, and just like we saw in this recent mid-term election, and were MORE people FINALLY got off their lazy, disaffected and apathetic butts to cast a vote, and thanks in large part as a reaction to that idiot man-child being elected two years ago.

(...OR I suppose as I hear so many Republicans calling it now days, "mob rule"!!!)

LOL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever I hear Trump (and too many of his cronies speak) it's like they are really talking to and about themselves.
It's like that old child hood saying, "I'm rubber and you're glue. What you say bounces off of me and sticks to you."
Silly I know, but I wish that somehow a mirror could be placed in front of these yahoos whenever they start to open their mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dargo said:

NOT necessarily, ham ol' boy!

Nope, Trump DOES have a chance for a second term, alright.

Well, UNLESS we once again see an increased turnout for the 2020 Presidential election, and just like we saw in this recent mid-term election, and were MORE people FINALLY got off their lazy, disaffected and apathetic butts to cast a vote, and thanks in large part as a reaction to that idiot man-child being elected two years ago.

(...OR I suppose as I hear so many Republicans calling it now days, "mob rule"!!!)

LOL 

If Dems run Hillary again,  Trump will win.

But I still believe Trump will come up with an excuse NOT to run for a second term.   I.e. he doesn't wish to go out a loser.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

If Dems run Hillary again,  Trump will win.

But I still believe Trump will come up with an excuse NOT to run for a second term.   I.e. he doesn't wish to go out a loser.

 

I can see that scenario and have since he was inaugurated.  But with his super sensitive ego, you never know.  It would also mean he would have to give up all the crowd functions with all his adoring fans.

Unfortunately the Dems do not have a good selection and Hillary would be a disaster.  I can just visualize them running a far-left extremist and then Trump doing what he does best - go out and rouse up the people that voted for him before.

The problem here is the same as in 2016 - the electoral college decides it.  If Dems offend enough people in purple states, as they did in 2016, the GOPers will win presidency again.

The current elections are good news, but (BIG BUT), the Dems did not do so well in the Senate as the House.  Electoral college is decided on state votes, not House district votes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TheCid said:

I can see that scenario and have since he was inaugurated.  But with his super sensitive ego, you never know.  It would also mean he would have to give up all the crowd functions with all his adoring fans.

Unfortunately the Dems do not have a good selection and Hillary would be a disaster.  I can just visualize them running a far-left extremist and then Trump doing what he does best - go out and rouse up the people that voted for him before.

The problem here is the same as in 2016 - the electoral college decides it.  If Dems offend enough people in purple states, as they did in 2016, the GOPers will win presidency again.

The current elections are good news, but (BIG BUT), the Dems did not do so well in the Senate as the House.  Electoral college is decided on state votes, not House district votes.

Well said:   note there is also another factor;  a viable right-leaning 3rd party candidate;  e.g. John Kasich.

Of course Sanders could run as a independent also if the DNC pulls the type of crap they did in 2016.   

3rd party candidates can only help the Dems since if no candidates gets to 270: If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote.

PS:  not sure what 'each state delegation has one vote' means as it relates to the House.   But if large states like CA and NY get the same number of votes as smaller Red states,   the GOP candidate would win for sure even with the Dems having a majority of the House members (since the Dems do NOT have a majority of the 'states' in the House).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

If Dems run Hillary again,  Trump will win.

But I still believe Trump will come up with an excuse NOT to run for a second term.   I.e. he doesn't wish to go out a loser.

 

If that happens, blame Democrats for Trump winning. 

But how short are memories.

Dems are angry over Hillary Clinton’s latest comments

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/378259-dems-are-angry-over-hillary-clintons-latest-comments

 

Now I'll blame EVERYONE for losing.

1vp59y.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If Dems run Hillary again,  Trump will win."

"But I still believe Trump will come up with an excuse NOT to run for a second term.   I.e. he doesn't wish to go out a loser."

I agree about Hillary, she still represents the "establishment" and what went (and is) wrong with both Parties.
However I think that Trump is too much of a "publicity *H*O**" to not not run again.

But who can be found to viably run against him and his radicalized 40 (or less) percent?

I know that he is aging, but so long as he still retains his sensibilities, I'd like to see Bernie Sanders run in 2020 (and this time remain an independent while doing so). If not him, then someone very much like him, most preferably an independent.

If things continue on (as they're bound to) these next two years, and Trump continues his efforts to disenfranchise and alienate a large chunk of this population with his infantile "rhetoric" and deeds, then someone whose authentically not associated with either of these two corrupt political parties has a much better chance of actually winning this time.
If that can happen, and that hoped for future administration can manage to gain a sense of "progressive" bipartisanship in congress, while bringing most of us together again (and do so without blundering in other ways), then the stranglehold of this "two party" system that we are stricken with will be loosened...
If two such terms can be had, accompanied by a "wave" of "independent" and "green" politicos and voters, then the singular power of these "two" corrupt parties will be broken.

I know, a lot of "wishful" thinking on my part here, but how much longer can "we" continue unhappily bouncing from one party to the other, hoping for truly "positive" change, when each is really the same in all the wrong ways?
If we are deigned to continue as a national entity for another 100 years (or more) then I hope that it is with a government that truly see's itself (and behaves as) a servant "of (all) the people" (and not the other way around).

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the democrats are just as much to blame for the status quo as anyone. for most of the later part of the 20th century they tried and are still trying to BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME.

the GOP is guilty of nothing more than realizing that such an endeavor simply does not work in the real world.

fiscal sanity cannot be based on imaginary sesame street BS.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two cheers for San Fran Nan. After all the dire warnings about how Pelosi would sink the

Dems' chances of taking back the House, they turned out to be wrong. The GOP thought

they could win by demonizing Pelosi and they turned out to be wrong too. You go, girl.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Well said:   note there is also another factor;  a viable right-leaning 3rd party candidate;  e.g. John Kasich.

Of course Sanders could run as a independent also if the DNC pulls the type of crap they did in 2016.   

3rd party candidates can only help the Dems since if no candidates gets to 270: If no candidate receives a majority of Electoral votes, the House of Representatives elects the President from the 3 Presidential candidates who received the most Electoral votes. Each state delegation has one vote.

PS:  not sure what 'each state delegation has one vote' means as it relates to the House.   But if large states like CA and NY get the same number of votes as smaller Red states,   the GOP candidate would win for sure even with the Dems having a majority of the House members (since the Dems do NOT have a majority of the 'states' in the House).

 

I actually thought Kasich was the best candidates the GOP put forth in 2016 and could easily vote for him compared to many of the leading Dems.

The problem with Sanders (other than being a socialist nutcase) is that he is NOT a Democrat.  He still refuses to join the Democratic Party, but expects the loyal Dems to fully support him and his extreme liberal agenda.

As for the House picking the president.  My understanding is that each state's House delegation gets together and decides which one candidate that state will vote for.  Could lead to problems as you surmised if it came down to party line votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us