Election Day 2014

BJ#1FAN said:
I never said BO hasn't done anything wrong, you assumed that.

I simply pointed out that the Republicans should shoulder a lot of the blame more than POTUS. They had a game plan set in motion since Obama was elected. Long term election victories, over helping fix the country.

Why did all the RINO's either get run out of the party, or be forced to move farther right than before? Tom Coburn was Ted Cruz 20 years ago. Coburn looked like a moderate Republican once guys like Cruz came into the party.
Click to expand...

In the context of this discussion I assumed nothing. In it, it's only the nasty Rs that are in the wrong. It's only Rs that had a nasty political strategy. That's just silly homer talk. Both sides have made political calculations. Both sides have had a strategy (as they should). If you don't think Reid or Obama or Pelosi did then well...
 
Krgrecw said:
Zito, AA misspoke.

It wasn't the fact that Obama had 93% of the black vote it's that Obama had more black voters turn out than every before that won him the election.

So while Obama may have only had 2% more black voters than others, Obama had a lot more black voters show up to vote than every before
Click to expand...

Without looking at the numbers I believe in 2000 blacks were 8% of the voters, in 2004 they were 10% and the last 2 they were 13%. It's not like black peopel went from 0% to 30%. Again, there were people who didn't vote for him because he's black.

If you look at Obama's exit polls vs Gore's (remembering Gore won the popular vote) you'll see they held White people about the same, but Obama did better across all minorities. That has a lot to do with how the dems took to the streets. Obama won reelection because of the other minorities. Blacks didn't support him any more, but Latinos and Asians did. Romney won like 60% of the white vote but Obama won like 70% of Asians and Latinos. He won because the country's demographic is shifting. Now the Rs clean up in the midterms again, and that has to do with more dedicated voters. Republicans get more of their base to the polls every time. If that ever changes, if the dems can get minorities to the polls all the time, they'll dominate until the republicans change strategies. Can't be racist and expect to win when your race is losing it's control.
 
zitothebrave said:
Without looking at the numbers I believe in 2000 blacks were 8% of the voters, in 2004 they were 10% and the last 2 they were 13%. It's not like black peopel went from 0% to 30%. Again, there were people who didn't vote for him because he's black.

If you look at Obama's exit polls vs Gore's (remembering Gore won the popular vote) you'll see they held White people about the same, but Obama did better across all minorities. That has a lot to do with how the dems took to the streets. Obama won reelection because of the other minorities. Blacks didn't support him any more, but Latinos and Asians did. Romney won like 60% of the white vote but Obama won like 70% of Asians and Latinos. He won because the country's demographic is shifting. Now the Rs clean up in the midterms again, and that has to do with more dedicated voters. Republicans get more of their base to the polls every time. If that ever changes, if the dems can get minorities to the polls all the time, they'll dominate until the republicans change strategies. Can't be racist and expect to win when your race is losing it's control.
Click to expand...

When we can get the generational of "You vote Democrat no matter what mantra" out of the picture then I will feel better. This was preached to us since birth. A lot of blacks are not educated or have weak minds when they can't think for themselves so they do what their parents say. My brother and I do not vote Democrat nor Republican and do not care what skin color you are. Both of us are college grads as well and do not listen to what our parents say. Political talk is one-sided, we beat on poor dad and his Democratic leaning when we go the bible route. He is like, speechless. He has no answers just Civil Rights keep popping up.
 
A lot of whites aren't educated either. They vote republican cause they're the ones who're for business and states rights (code word for let us be racist if we want to for much of the country, similar to how the civil war was about states rights, including the right to own slaves) and that's it. They don't necessarily line up with their beliefs. While you point to black people and say they're anti-gay and anti-abortion, I can point to white republicans who're pro-choice and don't care about gay marriage but vote republicans cause they think the republicans are for smaller government. You're never gonna find a democrat or republican you 100% agree with if you're a normal voter, you're lucky if you find one you 50% agree with.

You act like Civil Rights isn't a big deal either. You have to remember there's no constitutional amendment guaranteeing equal rights, get the right group of idiots in office and Jim Crow can become legal again. While most states you wouldn't notice a difference, there are some you would, absolutely.
 
A few surprises. When I saw Tillis projected to beat Hagan, I figured it would be a big night for R's. Surprised by some of the margins. Warner in VA is a surprise.

Hard to know what to make of the last decade of politics in the U.S. Wave after wave after wave. People complain that nothing is getting done and then they complain when something does get done. I could write a book on that (and maybe I will). Some of this is to be expected given the depth of the economic collapse (which was much bigger than I think most people realize), making it more difficult to build a consensus.

Biggest thing ahead for McConnell is creating a governing coalition in his caucus. My guess is McConnell will want to send Ted Cruz on a fact-finding mission to Mars sometime in 2015. Reid had the same problem and chose to sit on stuff, which only added to voter frustration.

Things that will likely happen: Keystone pipeline approval and some corporate tax reform. I had to laugh a little when watching Fox while working out at the gym yesterday. The selective memory of one of the conservative panelists was kind of funny. He/She was urging Obama to be Clintonesque in his last two years and work for compromise to create a legacy. Funny, I thought Bill Clinton's legacy at that time was one of a philanderer-in-chief.

Fun days ahead.
 
I think what we're seeing is the dems essentially assuming their base turns out enough while the reps insure that theirs does.
 
50PoundHead said:
A few surprises. When I saw Tillis projected to beat Hagan, I figured it would be a big night for R's. Surprised by some of the margins. Warner in VA is a surprise.

Hard to know what to make of the last decade of politics in the U.S. Wave after wave after wave. People complain that nothing is getting done and then they complain when something does get done. I could write a book on that (and maybe I will). Some of this is to be expected given the depth of the economic collapse (which was much bigger than I think most people realize), making it more difficult to build a consensus.

Biggest thing ahead for McConnell is creating a governing coalition in his caucus. My guess is McConnell will want to send Ted Cruz on a fact-finding mission to Mars sometime in 2015. Reid had the same problem and chose to sit on stuff, which only added to voter frustration.

Things that will likely happen: Keystone pipeline approval and some corporate tax reform. I had to laugh a little when watching Fox while working out at the gym yesterday. The selective memory of one of the conservative panelists was kind of funny. He/She was urging Obama to be Clintonesque in his last two years and work for compromise to create a legacy. Funny, I thought Bill Clinton's legacy at that time was one of a philanderer-in-chief.

Fun days ahead.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's worth noting when we start looking at a retrospective of O's presidency. He took office at a time when many economists were saying it would take 12-15 years to get back to what we have considered "normal" economic growth. The Republican position, far from being hopeless, was actually pretty strong. They could wait out Obama's honeymoon, play defense on judicial nominees, etc, and wait for the backlash. After 2010, when any shot at further Keynesian stimulus went by the wayside, their position strengthened even further. If it hadn't been for some Tea Party hubris in 2012, the Rs could have flipped the senate two years ago.

I don't suppose much of anything is going to happen before 2016, although the two things you mentioned are certainly probable. I'm going to be interested to watch immigration reform. If Boehner and McConnell can control their caucuses, it could happen. I wouldn't count on it, though.
 
AerchAngel said:
no.....but they contributed to it as 93% of them vote Dem and they are more Conservative than whites and it is not even close.
Click to expand...

Or maybe you're just not seeing the big issue.

Some people are fine with punting the beliefs of a few things to keep a core of something else. You're not grasping that for many black people keeping civil rights is key. Hell some blacks may even be enlightened enough to realize abortion being legal isn't the end of the world.

BTW if you want to talk about somethings that in 20 years won't be relevant anymore. Pot legality, gay marriage and abortions won't be debated, because the majority of the populace will support them or just not care about them.
 
Julio3000 said:
Yeah, that's worth noting when we start looking at a retrospective of O's presidency. He took office at a time when many economists were saying it would take 12-15 years to get back to what we have considered "normal" economic growth. The Republican position, far from being hopeless, was actually pretty strong. They could wait out Obama's honeymoon, play defense on judicial nominees, etc, and wait for the backlash. After 2010, when any shot at further Keynesian stimulus went by the wayside, their position strengthened even further. If it hadn't been for some Tea Party hubris in 2012, the Rs could have flipped the senate two years ago.

I don't suppose much of anything is going to happen before 2016, although the two things you mentioned are certainly probable. I'm going to be interested to watch immigration reform. If Boehner and McConnell can control their caucuses, it could happen. I wouldn't count on it, though.
Click to expand...

The "new normal" right now is going to be one of slow, but hopefully steady, growth. We've been living on over-consumption for the past 40 years or so. The shock to the system in the mid-aughts has really set us back and has caused a lot of sniping. I don't complain much, because it doesn't do any good, but one of my frustrations is that the average American voter seems to want to have Western Europe's level of social programs with Singapore's tax structure. It doesn't add up.
 
50PoundHead said:
Sarcasm emoticon missing or not?

I am really curious to see how things roll out (if they do roll out).
Click to expand...

Certainly sarcastic. We've seen this song and dance so many times - just going back to the Clinton years. It's the same cycle.

1. (D) President gets elected
2. (R) wins the house in the next election
3. (D) President gets re-elected
4. (R) takes over congress in next election
5. Fed Up with (D) President, the public votes in (R) president.

Rinse & Repeat, only change the letters.

Nothing ever changes. But the 2-party system allows the powers that be to shift the blame from one to the other each cycle. And every time, "this time is different!"
 
sturg33 said:
Certainly sarcastic. We've seen this song and dance so many times - just going back to the Clinton years. It's the same cycle.

1. (D) President gets elected
2. (R) wins the house in the next election
3. (D) President gets re-elected
4. (R) takes over congress in next election
5. Fed Up with (D) President, the public votes in (R) president.

Rinse & Repeat, only change the letters.

Nothing ever changes. But the 2-party system allows the powers that be to shift the blame from one to the other each cycle. And every time, "this time is different!"
Click to expand...

I've been in this business for almost 40 years now and I've got bald spots from all the head-scratching I've been doing since the mid-1980s. I don't know what it is per se that is producing the "waves" you describe. I think it boils down to the average voter not knowing what he/she truly wants, but is somehow sure of what they don't want after something happens. McConnell's in a position to do some pretty big things if he can keep his troops in line and actually work with the House of Representatives. But if the House sends over the Ryan budget and McConnell sends it to the President for a certain veto, we're back to square one and loggerheads. Senate is usually where the deals come together (for good or ill--witness ACA from both sides) and we'll see if that happens now.
 
50PoundHead said:
I've been in this business for almost 40 years now and I've got bald spots from all the head-scratching I've been doing since the mid-1980s. I don't know what it is per se that is producing the "waves" you describe. I think it boils down to the average voter not knowing what he/she truly wants, but is somehow sure of what they don't want after something happens. McConnell's in a position to do some pretty big things if he can keep his troops in line and actually work with the House of Representatives. But if the House sends over the Ryan budget and McConnell sends it to the President for a certain veto, we're back to square one and loggerheads. Senate is usually where the deals come together (for good or ill--witness ACA from both sides) and we'll see if that happens now.
Click to expand...

I think you're right on here. And I believe the two parties offer no difference to one another on the important issues. Therefore the public is always voting against the party in power. So we will keep getting the waves
 
BedellBrave said:
Agreed, but of course the rub is in how we define "the very best." Many on here would surely disagree with my definition of "best." And if they think pursuing things per my definition is harmful then I'd expect them to oppose me.

That said, you are quite right that the debate can/should be more respectful.
Click to expand...

Oh, I absolutely agree. We all have different thoughts about what's best for the country. That's part of what makes this nation great. That we are free to have our own ideas. However, there has to be compromise. Will that happen? Time will tell. Both sides have to do it. Our nation's prosperity depends on it. It's time for our elected leaders in Washington, all of them, to swallow their pride and work together.

And with that, I now reinstate my personal ban on political talk.
 
CrimsonCowboy said:
Oh, I absolutely agree. We all have different thoughts about what's best for the country. That's part of what makes this nation great. That we are free to have our own ideas. However, there has to be compromise. Will that happen? Time will tell. Both sides have to do it. Our nation's prosperity depends on it. It's time for our elected leaders in Washington, all of them, to swallow their pride and work together.

And with that, I now reinstate my personal ban on political talk.
Click to expand...

Good point CC. Like I said in an earlier post, having been involved in and around partisan politics all my adult life (except for a couple of stints bartending while in grad school), I don't know how to figure out where the voting public is right now. Even though I'm left-of-center, I acknowledge that the average voter in the country is center-right when compared to most of the rest of the world and that the country has center-left "hiccups" every decade or so to prevent political sclerosis. What is becoming hard for me to fathom is the level of fear (if that is the right word) that seems to be instilled in the voting public in this era. And it's fear of everything from both sides. The la peur de l'année that dictates how the voting turns out.
 
CrimsonCowboy said:
Oh, I absolutely agree. We all have different thoughts about what's best for the country. That's part of what makes this nation great. That we are free to have our own ideas. However, there has to be compromise. Will that happen? Time will tell. Both sides have to do it. Our nation's prosperity depends on it. It's time for our elected leaders in Washington, all of them, to swallow their pride and work together.

And with that, I now reinstate my personal ban on political talk.
Click to expand...

CC, consider lifting your ban. I think civil posts are conducive to civil discussion and you would add those. I have to step away from time to time when I find myself giving over to too much snark. So, I understand that. I for one though, would welcome your contributions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top