Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-24-2014, 06:03 PM
 
Location: Central Ohio
10,823 posts, read 14,898,817 times
Reputation: 16537

Advertisements

Never underestimate the republican party's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

I will believe it when I see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-24-2014, 06:40 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,321,941 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobtn View Post
I disagree. Solve the electoral which means runnng a mainstream guy/woman who openly touts mainstream values during the conservative primary season and all the way to November, than, only than, does the demographic issue dissipate.

I honestly do not care about the first 50 elections. We are not a one tiny subset (white, land-owning males) voting nation anymore. The Edsel will come back before Ozzie and Harriet demographics will.
Sure I agree that the "Ozzie and Harriet demographics" are not coming back. But remember that during the Ozzie & Harriet years ( 1952-1966) the Democratic party was generally in control. Democrats controlled the US House all but 2 of those years. Don't reduce US politics to race. Ultimately it is about ideas, not skin tone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 10:23 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Sure I agree that the "Ozzie and Harriet demographics" are not coming back. But remember that during the Ozzie & Harriet years ( 1952-1966) the Democratic party was generally in control. Democrats controlled the US House all but 2 of those years. Don't reduce US politics to race. Ultimately it is about ideas, not skin tone.

The Ozzie & Harriet reference is not race related, but 3 kids, 2 parent, 1 income household versus the present norm..you betcha..not coming back.

At the same time, the GOP is idiotic if they do not correct their 40 plus percent loss amongst America's fastest growing subset of voters. The same ignorance would hold if the 67-31 single women shellacking did not result in significant changes in positions within the party.

Stupidity is doing the same things again and again, expecting different results. Each of these two subsets of voting blocks were given clear messages by several different GOP campaigns that their values were not welcome in the party, and they responded properly by using their voting rights to send a loud and clear message. Hence, the word President will not appear before the names Romney or McCain.

We need to be adult enough to realize the GOP base is making the POTUS nominee unelectable by out of date policy positions which their chosen puppets have foolishly lacked the spine to fight back against.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 10:38 PM
 
1,825 posts, read 1,416,212 times
Reputation: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Exactly, @ 60 seats. However, there is one caveat--getting a majority in the Senate would put the kibosh on Pres. Obama's effforts to stack the federal courts. Since fed. judges get a life term, that is no small thing.
Obama's efforts to stack the courts, by doing what appointing replacement judges like every president before him has.

Elections have consequences and judges are a big one for president. Obama is not doing anything crazy with judicial appointments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 03:41 AM
 
5,347 posts, read 7,184,843 times
Reputation: 7158
If democrats show up, they win. Simple as that. There are more dems than repubs now.

The problem is they don't show up in midterms. The difference in turnout between 2010 and 2012 was huge. They won the House back in 2006 only because of the Iraq war backlash.
They only care about presidential elections but they don't realize that the president can't accomplish much without Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 11:54 AM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradPiff View Post
If democrats show up, they win. Simple as that. There are more dems than repubs now.

The problem is they don't show up in midterms. The difference in turnout between 2010 and 2012 was huge. They won the House back in 2006 only because of the Iraq war backlash.
They only care about presidential elections but they don't realize that the president can't accomplish much without Congress.
Dems do not show in mid-terms, do show for POTUS, and the reality is, without winning moderates and independents by huge margins, your premise is spot on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,321,941 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egbert View Post
Obama's efforts to stack the courts, by doing what appointing replacement judges like every president before him has.

Elections have consequences and judges are a big one for president. Obama is not doing anything crazy with judicial appointments.
I wouldn't use the term "crazy," but no doubt what has happened under Pres. Obama is a radical shift in how judges are confirmed. No president since FDR has done anything like this.

Supreme Court skeptical of legality of president’s recess appointments - The Washington Post

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees - The Washington Post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 06:25 PM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,460 posts, read 16,443,329 times
Reputation: 5972
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
I wouldn't use the term "crazy," but no doubt what has happened under Pres. Obama is a radical shift in how judges are confirmed. No president since FDR has done anything like this.

Supreme Court skeptical of legality of president’s recess appointments - The Washington Post

Reid, Democrats trigger ‘nuclear’ option; eliminate most filibusters on nominees - The Washington Post
You seriously need to stop with the hyperbole

1. FDR tried to add more justice positons, thats not the same thing as what you are claiming Barack Obama did.

2. the current climate, that you claim is so " radical", is the exact same rules our senate operated by for 173 years. How exactly is it radical ????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 06:30 PM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,064,775 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsjj251 View Post
Those are not voting percentages, those are chances of the seat changing.
LOL....yes I am aware of that. The Dems came up with a pretty strong candidate in Natalie Tennant. She has won statewide election already and is pretty popular. So the election is voting for a popular politician or against Obama. I see those odds at maybe 70-30.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2014, 06:47 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,317 posts, read 22,338,815 times
Reputation: 18436
Default Another nonsense thread from the Right

Irrelevant clown makes a claim that pacifies hapless Republicans, and Pubs jump all over it. Pubs are praying for ANY news to cling to, since their ideology, ideas, and contributions to this society are repulsive and unwanted. Romney had a better chance of winning the presidency it was claimed, and look what happened.

Jennifer Aniston is more likely to date a black man than is Silver in being right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top