Republican gloating thread

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Cool. Post one. That might be interesting.

thanks bill. you posted it before me. lets see the video.

It will have to wait. I can't access any website that has any streaming videos. I can only assume that the large gaps in posts are embedded youtube videos. But by all means, you can do your own homework and do a simple search of either google videos or youtube.

I did do a google search, but no joy. I did run across two message board items:

1) "Better to be the teabagger than the teabaggee."

2) "I don't mind it when my husband teabags me."

[The_Dude 1,142]

Cool. Post one. That might be interesting.

thanks bill. you posted it before me. lets see the video.

It will have to wait. I can't access any website that has any streaming videos. I can only assume that the large gaps in posts are embedded youtube videos. But by all means, you can do your own homework and do a simple search of either google videos or youtube.

I did do a google search, but no joy. I did run across two message board items:

1) "Better to be the teabagger than the teabaggee."

2) "I don't mind it when my husband teabags me."

ROflmao. I suppose you'll need to turn off your "Liberal Blog Filter" bill

[Peikko 1,575]

Sorry but I can really imagine desperate souls trying to make everything out of nothing.

Has the pattern been looked at that Virginia has spend the last 24 years or something like that electing a governor contrary to the Party that wins the White House. Maybe the proximity to DC makes voters there play rollercoaster.

That's how it has been in Arizona, which is a heavily Republican state. We've had quite a few Democrat Governors, but that didn't mean the commie....er, I mean the Democrats were taking over the state by any measure. I know it's hard to believe for the ideologues here, but most voters actually vote for the best candidate and not simply along ideological lines.

Perhaps Virginia went with tradition this time... and New Jersey went with a punitive vote for the most part. Republicans will try milking this, seeing what they want to see, and Democrats that are concerned about losing political steam will try refocusing their efforts at home and in Washington to remind the electorate of what they voted for last time they voted locally and nationally.

Well - to be fair, Obama did stump for Corzine pretty extensively, but in the context of past presidents, he was merely doing what other presidents have traditionally done...stump for their party.

I always think that is a really stupid thing to do... no matter who does it. IMO whatever + Obama got Corzine, it very likely wasn't sufficient to sway voters to think of the platform more than the punishment of Corzine for whatever reason- real or not real. You know how many people are... not exactly the most rational voters out there.

I agree. Because...when it comes to Governor races, voters don't really vote along party lines.

Neither they should, not just for governor races. The best electoral practice is to vote for whichever candidate has the best policies for the voter. It helps if the campaign promises are contained within a written manifesto and the voter can monitor the progress of their representative

[The_Dude 1,142]

Sorry but I can really imagine desperate souls trying to make everything out of nothing.

Has the pattern been looked at that Virginia has spend the last 24 years or something like that electing a governor contrary to the Party that wins the White House. Maybe the proximity to DC makes voters there play rollercoaster.

That's how it has been in Arizona, which is a heavily Republican state. We've had quite a few Democrat Governors, but that didn't mean the commie....er, I mean the Democrats were taking over the state by any measure. I know it's hard to believe for the ideologues here, but most voters actually vote for the best candidate and not simply along ideological lines.

Perhaps Virginia went with tradition this time... and New Jersey went with a punitive vote for the most part. Republicans will try milking this, seeing what they want to see, and Democrats that are concerned about losing political steam will try refocusing their efforts at home and in Washington to remind the electorate of what they voted for last time they voted locally and nationally.

Well - to be fair, Obama did stump for Corzine pretty extensively, but in the context of past presidents, he was merely doing what other presidents have traditionally done...stump for their party.

I always think that is a really stupid thing to do... no matter who does it. IMO whatever + Obama got Corzine, it very likely wasn't sufficient to sway voters to think of the platform more than the punishment of Corzine for whatever reason- real or not real. You know how many people are... not exactly the most rational voters out there.

I agree. Because...when it comes to Governor races, voters don't really vote along party lines.

Neither they should, not just for governor races. The best electoral practice is to vote for whichever candidate has the best policies for the voter. It helps if the campaign promises are contained within a written manifesto and the voter can monitor the progress of their representative

All political norms are thrown out when it comes to the California Governors race. I think the people of California all collectively lose 75 IQ pts on election day. How else do you justify Ahnold, Pete Wilson, Gray Davis et al?

[alienlovechild 75]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_election_rdp

Again, you are delusional. Yes, there are more members of congress than governors, but congress is what influences federal policy and laws which supercede any state policies, so your point is moot. If you'd read this post, or any variety of political information, you'd see that the virginia governors race was quite expected. Now as for the New Jersey governors race, well, that was a victory, I can't deny that. But Corzine isn't exactly waht you would call a success story, so I guess change was needed. In the meanwhile, two congressional seats that were historically republican seats have changed aisles. So keep predicting what you like, the facts are the facts and you're still delusional.

You forgot that state governments draw legislative districts after a census and governors have a lot of power at the state level. Gerrymandering is no moot point and it even if the Dems pick up 2 seats, it doesn't necessarily mean they are that much better off as they already had a dysfunctional majority in both houses of Congress.

[The_Dude 1,142]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_election_rdp

Again, you are delusional. Yes, there are more members of congress than governors, but congress is what influences federal policy and laws which supercede any state policies, so your point is moot. If you'd read this post, or any variety of political information, you'd see that the virginia governors race was quite expected. Now as for the New Jersey governors race, well, that was a victory, I can't deny that. But Corzine isn't exactly waht you would call a success story, so I guess change was needed. In the meanwhile, two congressional seats that were historically republican seats have changed aisles. So keep predicting what you like, the facts are the facts and you're still delusional.

You forgot that state governments draw legislative districts after a census and governors have a lot of power at the state level. Gerrymandering is no moot point and it even if the Dems pick up 2 seats, it doesn't necessarily mean they are that much better off as they already had a dysfunctional majority in both houses of Congress.

The point is, the Democrats picked up 2 seats that they were heavy underdogs in meanwhile, the Republicans won a predictable race (VA) and a close race (NJ). The hysteria and gloating i've seen from conservatives (not necissarily ones on VJ), you'd think that they had swept into the majortiy. Yesterday was a political wash. Nobody gained any advantage.

The only good thing I can see that came from it is that I see a divide widening within both parties. I really do hope it leads to the creation of more political parties.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_election_rdp

Again, you are delusional. Yes, there are more members of congress than governors, but congress is what influences federal policy and laws which supercede any state policies, so your point is moot. If you'd read this post, or any variety of political information, you'd see that the virginia governors race was quite expected. Now as for the New Jersey governors race, well, that was a victory, I can't deny that. But Corzine isn't exactly waht you would call a success story, so I guess change was needed. In the meanwhile, two congressional seats that were historically republican seats have changed aisles. So keep predicting what you like, the facts are the facts and you're still delusional.

You forgot that state governments draw legislative districts after a census and governors have a lot of power at the state level. Gerrymandering is no moot point and it even if the Dems pick up 2 seats, it doesn't necessarily mean they are that much better off as they already had a dysfunctional majority in both houses of Congress.

The point is, the Democrats picked up 2 seats that they were heavy underdogs in meanwhile, the Republicans won a predictable race (VA) and a close race (NJ). The hysteria and gloating i've seen from conservatives (not necissarily ones on VJ), you'd think that they had swept into the majortiy. Yesterday was a political wash. Nobody gained any advantage.

The only good thing I can see that came from it is that I see a divide widening within both parties. I really do hope it leads to the creation of more political parties.

Not to justify things, but Ellen Tauscher's seat was a safe Democrat seat. They had like nine well known Dems falling over themselves to get that into seat. The New York 23 seat? The Republican's screwed the pooch there.

Sometimes you get lucky. It's much better to be lucky than good.

So does any of this really matter?

Other than an off election year quickie? Nope.

The California Democratic Primary next spring? Now, that will be interesting!

[scandal 951]

I really do hope it leads to the creation of more political parties.

I don't.

I've lived and participated in the politics of a country that has dozens of fractured political parties (Israel). The constant horse trading that goes on when trying to form coalition governments there is ridiculous, and fraught with corruption.

I've also lived and participated in the politics of a country that has seen traumatic death and rebirth of its political parties within the past 20 years (Canada). The venerable Conservative Party, led by John A MacDonald Canada's first Prime Minister in 1867, basically came unglued at the seams during the 1990s in the aftermath of Brian Mulroney's destruction of the party. The tatters of the Tories were eventually subsumed into Preston Manning's Reform Party and reborn as the "new" Conservative Party. Meanwhile, the Socreds (Social Credit) vanished entirely as a political force and the NDP has eroded significantly. Only one major party has stood its ground (the Liberals) while a new force was born in federal politics (the Bloc Quebecois). I don't see any of these changes as beneficial for Canada. I think the "old" system (the one I grew up with in the 1970s and 80s) with essentially a 3 party system of Liberals/Tories/NDP was more stable and better reflective of Canada's needs than what we have today.

In the US, we've had a two party system throughout pretty much the entire history of the Republic. Since the Civil War it's been the same two parties - the Republicans and Democrats. Prior to that it was the Democrats and Whigs, going back to the 1820s. I think the two party system works rather well here, all in all. I'd like to see the GOP eventually come back to its true historical role and focus on its core issues: low taxes, pro business, pro individual responsibility and liberty. And without all of the loud rhetoric and demagoguery. I'm not a Republican, but I have a lot of admiration for the many fine Republicans who have served their nation over the years. I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

Like most parties, the Republican party was founded as a one issue party. If there is a big enough issue out there, then you will see a new party displace the Republicans. I am waiting to see if Beck will get his 56 "Refounders".

The Democrats are the legacy party. I don't see them going anywhere.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

Like most parties, the Republican party was founded as a one issue party. If there is a big enough issue out there, then you will see a new party displace the Republicans. I am waiting to see if Beck will get his 56 "Refounders".

The Democrats are the legacy party. I don't see them going anywhere.

Bill, the Republican Party of Lincoln is not the Republican Party of today. Same with the Democratic Party. I mean, what single issue has been the glue to keep that party together over all these years?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

Like most parties, the Republican party was founded as a one issue party. If there is a big enough issue out there, then you will see a new party displace the Republicans. I am waiting to see if Beck will get his 56 "Refounders".

The Democrats are the legacy party. I don't see them going anywhere.

Bill, the Republican Party of Lincoln is not the Republican Party of today. Same with the Democratic Party. I mean, what single issue has been the glue to keep that party together over all these years?

The Republican party should have faded into non-existence long ago, but Reconstruction kept the party in power through the remainder of the the 19th Century. Roosevelt almost killed the party in 1912 with the Bull Moose movement (Progressive Party). The party almost died again in 1980, if not for Reagan pulling heavily from the alumni of the Democratic Party, then displaced by the changes made in 1968. In a lot of ways, the current Republican Party is just a continuation of the Democratic Party legacy, and the Party of Lincoln died with the election of Ronald Reagan.

Abortion has been the glue that has held both parties together for almost four decades now, thanks to Roe v. Wade.

[Dan J 277]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

Not just the part of angry white men, the women are getting into it too.

[The_Dude 1,142]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_election_rdp

Again, you are delusional. Yes, there are more members of congress than governors, but congress is what influences federal policy and laws which supercede any state policies, so your point is moot. If you'd read this post, or any variety of political information, you'd see that the virginia governors race was quite expected. Now as for the New Jersey governors race, well, that was a victory, I can't deny that. But Corzine isn't exactly waht you would call a success story, so I guess change was needed. In the meanwhile, two congressional seats that were historically republican seats have changed aisles. So keep predicting what you like, the facts are the facts and you're still delusional.

You forgot that state governments draw legislative districts after a census and governors have a lot of power at the state level. Gerrymandering is no moot point and it even if the Dems pick up 2 seats, it doesn't necessarily mean they are that much better off as they already had a dysfunctional majority in both houses of Congress.

The point is, the Democrats picked up 2 seats that they were heavy underdogs in meanwhile, the Republicans won a predictable race (VA) and a close race (NJ). The hysteria and gloating i've seen from conservatives (not necissarily ones on VJ), you'd think that they had swept into the majortiy. Yesterday was a political wash. Nobody gained any advantage.

The only good thing I can see that came from it is that I see a divide widening within both parties. I really do hope it leads to the creation of more political parties.

Not to justify things, but Ellen Tauscher's seat was a safe Democrat seat. They had like nine well known Dems falling over themselves to get that into seat. The New York 23 seat? The Republican's screwed the pooch there.

Sometimes you get lucky. It's much better to be lucky than good.

So does any of this really matter?

Other than an off election year quickie? Nope.

The California Democratic Primary next spring? Now, that will be interesting!

I think that was the point that I was trying to make that ALC completely missed. Tuesday was a wash. Nobody really gained any advantage, and nothing really surprising happened. I think the CA-10 wasn't as sewn up as many thing, purely because of Garamendi. I don't think he's a good politician or representative. He's a career politician who only sees his career, not his constituents. As to the NY-23 race.... I hate to say it, but Newt was right.

The California election cycle for the next couple of years will be intriguing. I really don't think Barbara Boxer has much to worry from Carly Fiorina. ####### can Fiorina run on? Fiscal conservatism and knowledge? Hell no, she ran hewlett packard into the ground. I wonder who will be running for Feinstein's seat. As for the CA governors race, I really don't see Meg Whitman winning. Arnold was the "outsider" pick, and people see how horribly that went down. I think Feinstein will win, but no mandate victory. In that race, I will undoubtedly be as my democratic and republican friends say "throwing my vote away" by voting Libertarian.

[HAL 9000 96]

I cringe to think what they must feel, rolling in their graves, to see what has become of their fine party.

The new GOP:

Lol I saw that image and the other angry dude next to her. Anger is the operational concept here.