Not too soon to start

[mawilson 2,133]

Dems will lose!

What exactly will they lose?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What exactly will they lose?

Good question. Sure, they'll lose control of the House and perhaps even the Senate. But really this will a major challenge for Republicans. They will no longer be able to just obstruct. They'll have to govern. They'll have to put out in the open the very fact that they don't have a clue on what to do - maybe they have a clue and just chose not to share the specifics of what they propose to do just yet.

As was pointed out above, they'll have to raise the debt ceiling pretty soon unless they want to be the guys that caused America to default on it's debt - with all those nasty little consequences that such scenario would bring along. Say they can sell that as the patriotic and responsible thing to do - which it is - but then they'll have to sort of admit that it was the responsible thing to do when they opposed it. Then they have to address the Grand Canyon sized gap between their tax and deficit policy proposals - cut taxes and eliminate the deficit. Good Luck building that bridge.

Of course, they'll also have to tell their GOP Governors out there to go and ** themselves because they won't send a dime to the states to help make the state budgets work. That'll be very popular back home in their districts when parents find themselves sending their kids into underequipped and understaffed classrooms and when the police can't respond to calls anymore. Or when, in light of the dried up funds from the feds, state and local governments sit there having to raise taxes. Which they will surely blame on the fine folk up in Congress. It'll be entertaining.

Edited October 25, 2010 by Mr. Big Dog

[ready4ONE 5,400]

There is no ** plan except Vote for Us or Die!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There is no ** plan except Vote for Us or Die!

Well, it seems that they will get what they want (i.e. the votes). I'm just not so sure that they really want what they'll get (i.e. the responsibility to govern and deliver on their undeliverable promises).

I'm stocking up on popcorn.

[웃 910]

Well, it seems that they will get what they want (i.e. the votes). I'm just not so sure that they really want what they'll get (i.e. the responsibility to govern and deliver on their undeliverable promises).

I'm stocking up on popcorn.

America has spoken. "Dens will lose"

iPhone typo

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I just threw up in my mouth. Just a little bit.

I got WOOD!

[spookyturtle 9,465]

I got WOOD!

:rofl: You are one sick puppy.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

:rofl: You are one sick puppy.

Duncan prolly wants to feed her

[mawilson 2,133]

Duncan prolly wants to feed her

Who's Duncan?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

All this crowing about the Democrats losing the election. I really don't think the dems are going to be the real losers here...

You deserve exactly what you get.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Post violating TOS and post quoting same have been removed.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

What exactly will they lose?

Control of the house means they lose the ability to introduce tax legislation which must initiate in the HofR. Committees will be chaired by Repubs who can cimply quietly ignore any Dem requests. Absent a discharge petition...there it sits. That alone is huge.

Loss of the filibuster at least, or control of Senate mean sthe same there. Who do you think will fund healthcare? Global warming studies? Who will pass (or even consider) Cap and Trade? If the EPa tries to, the House can cut off their funds.

The way things are going, they will lose the control of the redistricting process for nest year, huge for future elections. The districts will be largely Gerrymandered to Republican preferences.

You cannot underestimate the long-term affect of this. Eventually the Dems will admit, if only quietly, that their attempts to run things down our throats lost them control of the legislative branch. While few will admit it, the passage of the Assault Weapons "ban" lost them control in 1994. Hence NO further gun laws have been considered and the ban was allowed to expire quietly and never considered again.

Global warming will be fixed. As with gun control, it will be decades before anyone has the nads to try and do THAT again. In the meantime, nothing really bad or at least controllable will happen. Imagine someone, 20 years from now trying to tell us that Global Warming is still a threat! Maybe it goes in remission when Dems are out of control in the legislature? GW will become a non-issue because there will no longer be any money in it.

You still think this means nothing?

The Dems KNOW what it means.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Good question. Sure, they'll lose control of the House and perhaps even the Senate. But really this will a major challenge for Republicans. They will no longer be able to just obstruct. They'll have to govern. They'll have to put out in the open the very fact that they don't have a clue on what to do - maybe they have a clue and just chose not to share the specifics of what they propose to do just yet.

As was pointed out above, they'll have to raise the debt ceiling pretty soon unless they want to be the guys that caused America to default on it's debt - with all those nasty little consequences that such scenario would bring along. Say they can sell that as the patriotic and responsible thing to do - which it is - but then they'll have to sort of admit that it was the responsible thing to do when they opposed it. Then they have to address the Grand Canyon sized gap between their tax and deficit policy proposals - cut taxes and eliminate the deficit. Good Luck building that bridge.

Of course, they'll also have to tell their GOP Governors out there to go and ** themselves because they won't send a dime to the states to help make the state budgets work. That'll be very popular back home in their districts when parents find themselves sending their kids into underequipped and understaffed classrooms and when the police can't respond to calls anymore. Or when, in light of the dried up funds from the feds, state and local governments sit there having to raise taxes. Which they will surely blame on the fine folk up in Congress. It'll be entertaining.

Assumes Republicans have been ABLE to obstruct. They haven't. They were in a huge minority in the house and the Dems had a filibuster proof Senate (and really still do given the RINOs there). Obama was making deals with DEMs to get the healthcare bill passed. The Republicans never even had the OPPORTUNITY to obstruct it. The only ones obstructing anything for the last two years have been Dems. They are the only ones that COULD.

They will send the governors the money they DON'T spend for healthcare and Global Warming research, among other things. There will be plenty to go around for Republican purposes, are you serious?

Edited October 25, 2010 by Gary and Alla

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Assumes Republicans have been ABLE to obstruct. They haven't. They were in a huge minority in the house and the Dems had a filibuster proof Senate (and really still do given the RINOs there). Obama was making deals with DEMs to get the healthcare bill passed. The Republicans never even had the OPPORTUNITY to obstruct it. The only ones obstructing anything for the last two years have been Dems. They are the only ones that COULD.

They will send the governors the money they DON'T spend for healthcare and Global Warming research, among other things. There will be plenty to go around for Republican purposes, are you serious?

I see. While there are RINOs within the GOP - presumably suggesting, despite evidence to the contrary in the current Congress, that the GOP ain't always unified in how they vote - there's no such thing on the other side of the aisle. The Blue Dog Democrats aren't the left's equivalent of the RINOs on the right. Very interesting.

Here's the obstructionism visualized. If it didn't exist, then what's that spike there towards the right of the chart?

In terms of the funding for states, you don't seem to remember your history very well. The GOP has not precisely established a pattern or record of actually funding their spending with anything but debt. You may believe that this time around that will change but I won't believe that until I see it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I see. While there are RINOs within the GOP - presumably suggesting, despite evidence to the contrary in the current Congress, that the GOP ain't always unified in how they vote - there's no such thing on the other side of the aisle. The Blue Dog Democrats aren't the left's equivalent of the RINOs on the right. Very interesting.

Here's the obstructionism visualized. If it didn't exist, then what's that spike there towards the right of the chart?

In terms of the funding for states, you don't seem to remember your history very well. The GOP has not precisely established a pattern or record of actually funding their spending with anything but debt. You may believe that this time around that will change but I won't believe that until I see it.

The chart is entirely before Obama was President. The Republicans have not been able to provide anything but lip service since 2009 but you don't show that chart. (Imagine that) Show me the cloture vote on Health care.

But hey, if any of this is true then it is no big deal and will make no difference to you when Pelosi and Reid get fired next week. Right?