| Author |
Message |
    
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1129
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 8:21 pm: | 
|
I'm not trying to incite anyone (maybe a little), but who will you Dems hold accountable when neither house of Congress goes blue.
In my policial opinion, Pelosi has done nothing to further the cause of the Democratic Party. She is constantly upstaged by other Democratic Reps and I do not see any vigor or fight in her let alone a plan. I actually like Dean, as much as I can like any left winger, but Pelosi is rarely seen or heard except when she is piling on. I'd be interested to see what some of you Dems would like to see happen with your party. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1469
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:05 pm: |
|
as Straw says
boring |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2163
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:12 pm: |
|
who will take the blame? while some might think that sounds like a stupid question, I think it's probably one of Southerner's most insightful.
so here's my answer - I'm planning on blaming it on the bossa nova, and if that doesn't work, I'll blame it on Rio. |
Dogbert
Citizen
Username: Dogbert
Post Number: 114
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:26 pm: |
|
Blame it on Cain, don't blame it on me. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3373
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 - 10:59 pm: |
|
Don't blame Cain. After all, Adam Raised a Cain. |
ess
Citizen
Username: Ess
Post Number: 2239
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 12:51 am: |
|
Blame it on the rain. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5724
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:56 am: |
|
Whether blame is deserved or not, Pelosi will take the fall. The House has been deemed more possible than the Senate (though that may change) and the House is the most precious to them because they can be the ones running up deficits rather than Republicans. Pelosi will be fired because her players performed badly on the field, even though it's the players' fault. There is no good agenda or message coming out of Democrats today because they're split on who they are or afraid to tell people who they are. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5503
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 9:05 am: |
|
"The House has been deemed more possible than the Senate ..." Really? Usually the Senate flips more easily than the House. The upcoming election appears to show more vulnerability in the Senate, for Administration supporters. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5726
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 9:07 am: |
|
Maybe you're right. That's not the impression I got. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3431
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 9:42 am: |
|
As long as the elections aren't manipulated, there will be no need for a scapegoat in the Democratic party. This country is sick of GOP corruption and incompetence and will vote accordingly.
Southerner, what are you going to do if Dems get control of Congress? |
dave23
Citizen
Username: Dave23
Post Number: 1827
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 11:29 am: |
|
Given how entrenched incumbents have become thanks to gerrymandering and fundraising advantages, nothing short of a miracle will flip the House. |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 938
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 11:36 am: |
|
Anyone notice how Southerner subtly raises the bar for our side, while lowering it for his? According to the logic of this post, if the GOP loses their sizable advantage, but still retains even a one-seat majority, it's a victory for Republicans. Got that? Losing seats = victory. No wonder their side thinks things are going great in Iraq.
I don't expect the Dems to take back either the House or the Senate...not this time. But the pendulum is obviously swinging, and I believe they'll do it in 2008. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7428
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 11:43 am: |
|
fall guys? Plenty to choose from.
Pelosi: makes sense especially now that black groups are trying to paint her as a racist for her handling of that crook Jefferson. She's going to get hammered from both sides.
Kerry: is making noise again and as usual it's of the flip flop nature. He calls for pullout just as the news in Iraq is becoming favorable.
Dean: He still has time to make a jackass out of himself again.
Gore: He may or may not run and if he does indicate a desire to do so, Democrats will gets bounced during midterms.
Harry Reid: He's so weak Dems would take Daschile back in a minute.
All that said, The fall guy more than a person will actually be liberal politics..The Democrats will have to decide that Hillary has it right. Avoid the left,and try and play it right down the middle. We are witnessing the end of liberal politics in America. It's about time.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3437
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 2:20 pm: |
|
You are so wrong. But your consistency is... um... consistent. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2165
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 2:24 pm: |
|
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1132
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Madden,
I am not trying to be subtle. If you recall in previous threads I have stated the party with control is the party that won. I don't care if it is by 1 seat or all of them. For me, the definition of victory is being able to control the committees. That is where the true power of Congress is wielded. If the Dems take control by 1 seat it will be a loss for my side. If the Repubs maintain by 1 seat then it is a victory. I understand your point about numbers but I don't really care about numbers. I care about control.
Let me flip the issue for you. You Dems are the ones who inflated your own expectations by all the threads and talk about taking back Congress. Now, you are only talking about picking up seats. I think you guys have set the bar so high for yourselves that the only way you can claim a victory is by taking control of at least 1 branch. With all the hysteria and fodder given to you by Bush and the low poll numbers, gaining a few seats in either branch will leave me laughing. This admin has practically hand delivered Congress to you and yet your own dysfunction doesn't allow you to grab it. What a pity.
Notey,
I've said this many times. If the Dems take back Congress, I will say to you and them, good job during the campaign, now get to work and push your agenda whatever that may be. I will not whine, cry, and conspiracize as to why my team lost. I will analzye the situation in order to push my guys not to make the same mistake in two more years. I truly believe the elected officials regardless of party should be allowed to promote their philosophy if they are given that responsibility by the electorate. That is what drives me nuts about you libs. You believe you are so superior that you can't even shake hands after the game and admit you lost. To me, that mindset is so wrong and the American public has through the election process rejected that mindset.
And on another deeper political level, part of me believes a Democratic win this year would be a long term benefit for Republicans. We could then go in to 2008 (which is way more important than 2006) and blame the Dems for everything and really have a foe to campaign against. If we roll you guys yet again this year then we will lose some fodder for 2008. My biggest fear of course is we win in 2006 and things go in the tank (stock market) before 2008 and the Dems not only win back Congress but also the White House. That would be tough for me to see happen, but it is possible. Luckily, I rely on the same things you Dems have relied on for years and that is without a supermajority the minority can simply play the role of spoiler. And we had many decades of practice and we can easily dust of the minority playbook if we had to.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3439
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 4:13 pm: |
|
FROM: Tom McMahon, Executive Director, DNC
RE: 50-State Strategy Results
Per Governor Dean's request, I have put together a few facts and figures for you on the successes of the 50-state strategy. I have made one last-minute addition to this memo -- at the end you will find excerpts from a USA Today profile of our 50-state strategy in action in my home state of Nebraska. It ran on Wednesday as we were preparing this message for you.
Critics say that our 50-state strategy focuses on the long-term at the expense of winning this year. As you will see, that simply is not true. Here are a few important results that our 50-state strategy has produced already:
MISSISSIPPI: Republican Gov. Haley Barbour appointed Democrats representing competitive districts in the state legislature to various boards and commissions, triggering four special elections at a time when he believed that his personal popularity would translate into new Republican legislators. Just a few months prior, the 50-state strategy had taken the number of Democratic Party staff in Mississippi from one full-time person to five. By organizing on the ground the way Democrats in Mississippi haven't had the resources to do in a generation, we swept all four special elections. Now Gov. Barbour has four more Democrats holding appointments in his administration and the same number of Democrats sitting in the legislature.
OHIO: The 50-state strategy means new staff in Ohio who have been reviving the field organizing efforts across the state. In a place where it had been typical to build and tear down an entire campaign infrastructure every election cycle, new staff are creating permanent organizing teams in every single county. These teams will be responsible for various functions during the course of the very competitive campaigns there in 2006 -- and won't disappear after Election Day.
SOUTH DAKOTA: With the added boost from new staff and resources, Democrats fielded a record number of legislative candidates this year, recruiting challengers in nearly 40% more races than in 2002.
INDIANA: With fresh resources and energy, Indiana Democrats have been making waves. The Indianapolis Star reported recently that, "Gov. Mitch Daniels and other state Republicans have taken a beating in recent months from the Indiana Democratic Party" thanks to the 50-state strategy, which provided the opportunity to hire a full-time spokesperson. Indiana is also the first state in the country to hold elections under new laws that requires voters to use photo identification that includes an expiration date. Predictably, rightful voters have been disenfranchised by this law. New staff and resources have helped collect data from the May 2nd primary election that will be needed to appeal to the federal court.
OKLAHOMA: The 50-state strategy has been credited with re-energizing grassroots throughout the state. In April, the new staff paid off when the Democratic candidate scored an upset victory, unseating a Republican incumbent as mayor of Tulsa.
NEW YORK: In rural upstate New York, which Republicans rely on for their base voters, unprecedented ground organizing is showing that the 50-state strategy means leaving no county behind. Already, new staff on the ground have identified 12,000 new Democratic voters -- voters who we will get to the polls this November and in elections to come, helping Democrats up and down the ballot.
UTAH: Already, 2006 marks the best candidate recruitment for the Utah Democratic Party in over 15 years. Democrats have recruited candidates for every single State Senate race, and Democrats have challengers running in ten State House races that went unopposed in 2004. The recruitment efforts, led by new staff deployed as part of the 50-state strategy, include not only life-long Democrats but also six Republicans who have switched parties.
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Regional field organizers deployed as part of our 50-state strategy have already racked up important wins. They have already worked hands-on to elect three new Democratic members to the State House -- in seats that had been held by Republicans since 1912.
These are just a few of the amazing things happening across the country as a result of a 50-state strategy. Remember, we cannot win in every state until we organize and mobilize Democrats in every state.
As Governor Dean says, we can wait around for the pendulum to swing back in some of these states -- or we can get out there and give it a push. To step up and give it a push yourself, donate here:
http://www.democrats.org/peoplecount
ADDENDUM:
Here are excerpts from the article that appeared this week in USA Today:
Democrats rebuild on the prairie
By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY
[...] When Howard Dean ran for chairman of the Democratic National Committee, he promised state parties he would spread money and professionals around the country in a long-term quest for viability in "red" Republican states. He's followed through with a 50-state plan to revive moribund state and local organizations.
Dean says Democrats have dug themselves "a deep hole" by focusing on one election at a time, usually in the "blue" states where Democrats are strong. "That's a cycle that has to be broken. We want a long-term business plan," he says. [...]
The state was a low priority for the DNC. Of the $731 million the party raised for the 2004 elections, Nebraska got $12,000. "The national Democrats were sucking money and volunteers" out of Nebraska, state party chairman Steve Achelpol says. Adds executive director Barry Rubin, "They called us an 'export state.'"
Times have changed. The DNC is now spending $120,000 a year to pay the salaries of three organizers and a spokesman here. Nationwide, the party has hired and trained about 190 people in 50 states in its $10-million-a-year program. The goal is to create voter lists and activist networks that don't vanish when campaigns are over or powerful Democrats retire [...]
Success stories cited by the DNC include West Virginia, where the party created a precinct program to bolster organizing and turnout and has recruited leaders for almost half the state's nearly 2,000 precincts; and South Dakota, where the state party fielded candidates for 94 of the 105 legislative seats -- 26 more than in 2002. [...]
Two years ago, 11 Democrats were on the November ballot for the state Legislature; this fall there will be 15. Four years ago, Democrats had a candidate in one of three races for Congress.
This year they have candidates for all three seats: cattle rancher Scott Kleeb, attorney Jim Esch and former lieutenant governor Maxine Moul. All three are "a cut or two above" the usual in quality, says state politics expert Robert Sittig, a retired University of Nebraska professor. [...] |
Madden 11
Citizen
Username: Madden_11
Post Number: 941
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 6:02 pm: |
|
For me, the definition of victory is being able to control the committees.
Of course it is. But I don't expect it to happen overnight. Displeasure with the President doesn't directly tranlsate to displeasure with local representation. More than anything else, incumbents will win because the system is rigged in their favor, and because people who can't make up their minds will pull the lever for the name they recognize. That's why I don't expect change overnight, or even in two or three election cycles. It took the Republicans a LONG time wandering the woods before Newt Gingrich came along.
You Dems are the ones who inflated your own expectations by all the threads and talk about taking back Congress.
Not this Dem. I never have and still don't expect the pendulum to swing that wide in one fell swoop. But Americans have been voting their fears for a long time now, and Republicans can only go back to that well so many times. What you don't seem to understand is that these things are cyclical. Your side wins a few elections and you suddenly think you're going to be emperors for life. That's the real cause behind all this corruption and cronyism and fear-mongering...you guys honestly believe that the pendulum has stopped, and that there will never be consequences for you. You took that 51% as a sign from God, instead of the tiniest sliver of a majority that it actually represents. And you basically bought into the laughable Rove-generated hype that you have some kind of mandate. Those beliefs are going to bite you in the •••...maybe not in 2006, but a lot sooner than you seem to think.
This admin has practically hand delivered Congress to you and yet your own dysfunction doesn't allow you to grab it. What a pity.
Well, at least we can agree on something. If the Democratic party leadership had the kind of bloodlust that the GOP leadership does, there never would have been a second President Bush. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1133
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 - 8:51 pm: |
|
Madden,
We probably agree on the political machinations to a large part, so you can stop hating on me just because we disagree on philosophies.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about cycles. We have no disagreement on the premise. Where we disagree is where the pendulum currently is. I believe the pendulum is still swinging rightwards where you obviously believe it is coming back to you guys. From a political viewpoint, I see nothing that leads me to think the pendulum is swinging to the Dems. Please present the evidence. And please don't give me poll numbers. A poll has never decided an election in history. I agree with you that it will take several elections for you guys to regain power. If you guys gain some seats in 2006 then I'll agree that maybe the pendulum has at least stopped going right. But, as of today, the Dems have been absolutely destroyed in the last 5 elections. Why you believe the pendulum is swinging to the Dems is interesting to me. You could have made the same arguments before the last election as you could today and by any measure 2004 was a whitewash for the Repubs no matter how you slice it. Sure the Presidential race was close, but in the end Bush was reelected and the Repubs PICKED up seats.
Your point about the Repubs taking a long time to find Newt is true. That is why I think you Dems will be out of power for at least another decade. You guys have no Newt and are still relying on the old playbook. I believe the Dems are so beholden to their internal special interest groups that it will be a lot harder for them to form a cohesive message than it was for the Repubs. Is the Congressional Black Caucus even speaking to Pelosi these days?
Again, Madden, set aside the difference in governmental philosophy, and we pretty much agree on the big picture of politics. And believe me, I know we are not emperor's for life and I seriously doubt God gives a rat's arse which party is in power. I am not a loon, although I often enjoy playing that role on MOL. It takes a lot of hard work and some luck to win a political race. As a Repub we beat our heads against the wall for 40 years until we finally broke through the fortified wall of incumbency. As you stated, that is a tough feat which is why I'm glad we have it on our side now. Maybe I'm wrong and the Dems will sweep to power in 2006 and 2008, at which point I'll take my lumps. Being in the heartland I see amazing things every election cycle and it is all bad for the Dems. Most of my friends and family always, always, always voted Democratic because that is what you did as a good southern family. The past 10-15 years have really seen a mindset change and really has relegated the Dems to a bicoastal party. Under the electoral college and 2 Senators from each state, this really hurts the Dems. You guys should think about breaking California and New York into about 10 states instead of just 2 big ones. These are the kinds of discussions I enjoy because they can be made without partisanship for the most part.
|
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 3446
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:06 am: |
|
It takes a lot of hard work and some luck to win a political race.
Not if you cheat. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7447
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:21 am: |
|
 |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1134
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:56 pm: |
|
And a little Diebold in your pocket is nice as well. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 824
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 10:08 pm: |
|
Murtha |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5555
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 28, 2006 - 10:28 pm: |
|
The Republicans are absolutely obsessed with Murtha, apparently.
It's a little silly, really. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1202
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 7:38 am: |
|
We are obsessed with all Democrats because they are wrong on every issue and must be defeated. Did you really expect the Repubs to sit back this year? We will go after whichever Dem is foolish enough to come up against us. At least Hillary has learned to stay very, very quiet and run from the left until the last minute. Murtha is making a power move within the Democratic ranks so he's a nice big juicy target. The goal is to win in November. This is where I laugh at you Dems. You lose because you believe winning is silly. Why do you enter the race if you really don't care? |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 835
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 6:31 pm: |
|
McGreevey? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5200
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 8:58 pm: |
|
You've got McGreevy, we've got Rowland. Or is it vice-versa? Anyway, they cancel each other out (except didn't Rowland do time?) |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 837
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, June 29, 2006 - 9:21 pm: |
|
This is getting harder. I said Murtha, and you said "no". I said McGreevey, and you said "no".
Therefore the only culprit can be : Howard Dean !
I guess the dems will have Teddy Kennedy take him for a ride over a bridge with Teddy's portuguese water dog.
Kind of like what they did with Fredo in the "Godfather".
"Never cross the family, Howard."  |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3443
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:15 am: |
|
This is s stupid question. Blame will fall on whoever the candidate is, and on Howard Dean. If the candidate cannot convince people to vote for him/her, then they deserve to lose. Dean will take heat because he is the leader of the party.
It's not being a scapegoat, it's putting blame where blame is due.
Scapegoating (punishing someone for the errors of others) would be blaming someone unrelated to the election. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1586
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:18 am: |
|
I think Isiah Thomas is available. |
Factvsfiction
Citizen
Username: Factvsfiction
Post Number: 841
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 3:57 pm: |
|
You mean Larry Brown? |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1213
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Rastro,
Good point. So why are many libs still bashing Bush for his victory? I've said it many times, put the blame where it belongs. Kerry, Edwards, and McAuliffe let you Democrats down big time. But instead of going after them you go after the side that put in the work to convince the electorate to vote for them. Believe me, if we lose Congress this November, I will turn towards my own side to see what went wrong and try to fix it in the next two years. Attacking the winning side is really just a waste of time. Every election is winnable regards of the opponent. That is why I don't waste my time on my opponent. If I do the hard work then my side will win regardless (and if not, just call Diebold in the 20th hour!) |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5202
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:32 pm: |
|
You're too facile with the "blame Diebold" meme. It's well documented that a) Diebold's systems are not secure; b) Diebold's systems are not accountable; and c) Diebold is a heavily Republican company with a former Chair who vowed to elect Bush by whatever means necessary.
When Diebold (and the idiots in public office who purchase their stuff) becomes trustworthy, open and accountable then we won't have any reason to suspect them of wrongdoing. Until then we're going to continue to beat that drum until people listen. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1216
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:25 pm: |
|
I love the sound that drum makes so please continue playing it. I won't stand in your way. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page