Oh, the joys of American politics...

[Peikko 1,575]

Barack Obama and his Democratic allies have scored a series of victories in primary races while the Republican establishment has lost out to agitated Tea Party supporters, bolstering the president's hand in November's mid-term elections.

The results of primaries in four states on Tuesday will leave moderate Democrats facing Republicans who have been tainted by extreme views, or accusations of unethical conduct, in key races for the US Senate and state governorships. This should undermine the Republicans' attempts to retake control of Congress. "This is the best night the Democrats have had this year," said Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. "They've improved their position in all four states and the Republicans weakened theirs. The Democrats couldn't have written a better script."

Crucially for Obama, Senator Michael Bennet won a clear victory for the Democratic nomination against Andrew Romanoff, who had Bill Clinton's backing and was billed as likely to draw strong support from discontented liberals. Obama had campaigned heavily for Bennet, who won by with a nine-point lead, so the result undermines claims that the president is a liability for candidates.

Bennet's prospects have been helped by the decision of Colorado Republican primary voters to elect Tea Party supporter Ken Buck as their candidate for Senate. Buck, who beat the Republican leadership's favoured candidate, is thought likely to alienate many independent voters.

The Republicans elected a candidate for governor of Colorado, Dan Maes, who is widely viewed as a liability to the party because of his extreme conservative views, including a claim that a bicycle sharing scheme in Denver is part of a United Nations plot to take over the city. Republican leaders backed an establishment candidate who was thought to have a better chance against the Democrats.

The Colorado races appear to show the anti-Washington sentiment said to have swept the country is working more against Republican insiders than Democrats.

"Colorado is the big one," said Sabato. "It has strengthened Obama's position. The Republicans turned down Jane Norton, who could have won the Senate race in November, for a Tea Party candidate, Ken Buck. The Republicans have also given it away on the governor."

The results of primaries in three other states – Connecticut, Georgia and Minnesota – also appeared to favour the Democrats in November.

In Connecticut, Linda McMahon, the former head of World Wrestling Entertainment, won the Republican nomination for the US senate to run against Democratic challenger Richard Blumenthal, who is accused of falsely claiming he served in Vietnam.

McMahon won after spending $20m of her own money.

"Connecticut Republicans today nominated a corporate CEO of WWE who, under her watch, violence was peddled to kids, steroid abuse was rampant, yet she made millions," said Robert Menendez, chairman of the Democrats' Senate campaign committee.

In Georgia, the Republican vote in the race for governor split after a vicious campaign between Nathan Deal, a former congressman who resigned amid allegations of corruption, and Karen Handel, who was portrayed as not conservative enough on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.

The Republican leadership favoured Handel but Deal won by a wafer-thin margin by portraying himself as anti-establishment despite being named by one watchdog as among the 15 most corrupt members of Congress. He resigned as a member of the House of Representatives this year after an ethics investigation concluded that he had improperly used his office to direct hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of state funds to his family's car salvaging business.

However, Sabato noted that despite the restless mood among some voters, and the influence of the Tea Party, establishment candidates will dominate November's races.

"The Tea Party candidates have undermined the Republicans in some states and districts but not in most," he said. "The renomination rate is 98%. Some of the Tea Party candidates will win but would it have been better for the Republicans to have mainstream candidates? Absolutely. No question about it."

Link

Really? Surely it would be better by far to actually campaign on real policy not all this mumbo jumbo grandstanding that's done by both major parties and now the tea party. If anything will lead to the downfall of the USA it will be this acrimonious political divisiveness.

[^_^ 5,021]

If anything will lead to the downfall of the USA it will be this acrimonious political divisiveness.

This acrimony has been part and parcel of American politics from the beginning. Fret not.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Really? Surely it would be better by far to actually campaign on real policy not all this mumbo jumbo grandstanding that's done by both major parties and now the tea party. If anything will lead to the downfall of the USA it will be this acrimonious political divisiveness.

It would be nice if our representatives actually represented the will of the people in their districts and stopped playing political games.

I think the only way to get this done is to set term limits on representatives and Senators. 2 terms for reps, 1 term for senators. Lawmakers should not be making this a career. It wasn't intended to be a career in the first place. We'd also save some $$ if we stopped giving them retirement and health care for life after they leave Congress. Then, if that happens, people like you and me would have a more realistic shot at representing people in our respective districts/states.

[Peikko 1,575]

It would be nice if our representatives actually represented the will of the people in their districts and stopped playing political games.

I think the only way to get this done is to set term limits on representatives and Senators. 2 terms for reps, 1 term for senators. Lawmakers should not be making this a career. It wasn't intended to be a career in the first place. We'd also save some $ if we stopped giving them retirement and health care for life after they leave Congress. Then, if that happens, people like you and me would have a more realistic shot at representing people in our respective districts/states.

Yay, I agree with someone!

[^_^ 5,021]

It would be nice if our representatives actually represented the will of the people in their districts and stopped playing political games.

I think the only way to get this done is to set term limits on representatives and Senators. 2 terms for reps, 1 term for senators. Lawmakers should not be making this a career. It wasn't intended to be a career in the first place. We'd also save some $$ if we stopped giving them retirement and health care for life after they leave Congress. Then, if that happens, people like you and me would have a more realistic shot at representing people in our respective districts/states.

I think my Congressman represents me just fine. If yours doesn't, organize against him/her and change the outcome. Term limits are no cure for voter apathy.

[Peikko 1,575]

Although I'm also in favour of placing very strict limits on campaign budgets to make politics accessible to people without vested interest money or personal fortunes and limiting campaigns to a maximum of three months. In this day and age, 3 months is ample time to get everyone the information they need to vote, years is ridiculous.

I think my Congressman represents me just fine. If yours doesn't, organize against him/her and change the outcome. Term limits are no cure for voter apathy.

That's true, but I get what he means, that politics should not be in and of itself a career. Career politicians are by and large not very good at the task of being a politician because they simply do not have real life experience, just a bunch of theoretical clap trap.

[^_^ 5,021]

Although I'm also in favour of placing very strict limits on campaign budgets to make politics accessible to people without vested interest money or personal fortunes...

Publicly funded campaigns has been a clarion call of the American progressive movement for years. Unfortunately, we've not had a progressive President yet and have small minorities in Congress. The progressive caucus is I believe smaller than the Blue Dogs.

[DukeOfYork 28]

One idea I've always had is to not allow lobbyists who are not from the respective Congressman/woman's district or Senator's state to try to influence their votes. They represent me, not some out of state firm or interest group!

Every time I suggest this though, people remind me that lobbyists are protected under their 1st Amendment right to Freedom of Speech.

Still, it's not a bad idea...

[Peikko 1,575]

Publicly funded campaigns has been a clarion call of the American progressive movement for years. Unfortunately, we've not had a progressive President yet and have small minorities in Congress. The progressive caucus is I believe smaller than the Blue Dogs.

No kidding, and there is no incentive for there to be one either - vested interest is so totally ingrained in US politics - it's surprising it's allowed to be called a free and fair system - it's more feudal in nature rather like some African systems.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Term limits - particularly for parliamentarians - are a horrible idea. Many states have them and I fail to see that there's better representation and less political grandstanding going on the states. And even if you institute term limits, the career politicians will still be around.

4 years on the school board, 4 years in the city council, 4 years at the county, 4 years in the state house, 4 years in the state senate, 4 years in the US House and then 6 in the Senate. Voilà, 30 years spent in politics the term limits be damned.

[^_^ 5,021]

Term limits - particularly for parliamentarians - are a horrible idea. Many states have them and I fail to see that there's better representation and less political grandstanding going on the states. And even if you institute term limits, the career politicians will still be around.

4 years on the school board, 4 years in the city council, 4 years at the county, 4 years in the state house, 4 years in the state senate, 4 years in the US House and then 6 in the Senate. Voilà, 30 years spent in politics the term limits be damned.

Yeah the only way we can make sure our elected reps have non-political careers and aren't "career pols" is for us to vote that way.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Yeah the only way we can make sure our elected reps have non-political careers and aren't "career pols" is for us to vote that way.

Exactly!

[Peikko 1,575]

Exactly!

How do you vote that way without the mechanism for those who don't choose politics as a career to stand unless they have the fortune of the likes of Meg Whitman? Noting that even she may not have enough money to counteract the vested interest vote in CA.

[^_^ 5,021]

How do you vote that way without the mechanism for those who don't choose politics as a career to stand unless they have the fortune of the likes of Meg Whitman? Noting that even she may not have enough money to counteract the vested interest vote in CA.

Publicly financed campaigns.

That's all you need to bust this mofo wide open. Term limits are an eyewash.

[mawilson 2,133]

I think the only way to get this done is to set term limits on representatives and Senators.

Your vote can set term limits on any elected official.