What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Priceless said:
NY-26 (GOP +6) went to Democrat Kathy Hochul 48-42 tonight. First time a Democrat has won since the 19th Century. The pundits will start spinning this....now.

Oh, and indications are that Sarah Palin is finally going to announce for POTUS next month when her movie debuts in Iowa. The film is called "The Undefeated" so it must not be about the '08 campaign.

Nate Silver called this the "worst night for the GOP in some time".
Click to expand...

Hey its guaranteed to be more exciting than any movie Mitt Romney comes up with.

Regarding New York's 26th district, I get a kick out of a point the talking heads never make, which is in bad times people are angry at whatever party's in office. The same people who wanted to "send a message" last time STILL want to send messages out and don't care who they're sending it to. I'm not sure how that got misinterpreted as a "lets gut Medicare" mandate, but at the very, very least is shows that the Ryan vote will have to explained in much better terms for anybody who voted for it in any remotely swing district.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I didn't know anything about Pawlenty, so I found these interviews enlightening. Can't see myself voting for any of the declared candidates this time around.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

geezer said:
I didn't know anything about Pawlenty, so I found these interviews enlightening. Can't see myself voting for any of the declared candidates this time around.
Click to expand...

That's a great article and since I lived it I can honestly say it's 100% accurate. If you want to elect a snake, then elect Pawlenty cause that's exactly what he is.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Rover said:
I get a kick out of a point the talking heads never make, which is in bad times people are angry at whatever party's in office.
Click to expand...

The smart ones always point this out. Since almost all of what passes for "political analysis and opinion" is just entertainment programming, nobody's going to lead with "no story here," the way no sports talk show leads with "team X lost last night, and it means nothing -- 80% of sports is luck."

The only interesting thing about NY-26 is everybody was up to their ears in it. Special elections are like that -- they get huge bandwidth from national organizations because there's no competition for resources. So while it means zippo as far as actual voters go, it might mean a smidge with regards to how well different interest groups are using their leverage. But probably not.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Priceless said:
Nate Silver called this the "worst night for the GOP in some time".
Click to expand...

There's a Comment to that article that might be the most insightful statement of all:

the best thing that happened to democrats, and they stumbled into it, was losing the house
Click to expand...

I used to think the Dems were going to lose 7 or 8 Senate seats (they are defending 23-10 this cycle) and get buried even deeper in the House, even with an Obama win, but I'm starting to think they may wind up virtually holding serve everywhere. The Ryan budget may be the single worst (just from the standpoint of raw politics) move made by a major party since the Dems backed the VRA in 1964 and started down the road to losing the South.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Kepler said:
There's a Comment to that article that might be the most insightful statement of all:



I used to think the Dems were going to lose 7 or 8 Senate seats (they are defending 23-10 this cycle) and get buried even deeper in the House, even with an Obama win, but I'm starting to think they may wind up virtually holding serve everywhere. The Ryan budget may be the single worst (just from the standpoint of raw politics) move made by a major party since the Dems backed the VRA in 1964 and started down the road to losing the South.
Click to expand...

I readily admit that the Senate is up in the air but I never understood the angst over the House. 24 seats in a situation where 61 GOP held seats are in Obama won districts isn't that hard to overcome if he wins re-election. I thought David Frum (former Bush speech writer I believe) framed it best when he wrote that the biggest problem with Ryan's proposal is that he put Medicare reductions in the same bill as tax cuts for the rich, two separate issues that should be dealt with at different times. Now his opponents can easily cast it as robbing seniors to pay of rich people. The ads practically write themselves, rightly or wrongly, and while they can throw some darts back at the Dems, the bottom line is they are on record voting for this. I'm real interested to see how the Nevada race plays out now.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

He was not ready for the people to turn on him so quickly that is for sure. He thought this would catapult him to TP Darling and future of the GOP...instead he became the face of rob from the poor to pay the rich! This will be an albatross around his neck for years to come.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

I'll say this for Ryan - he doesn't make a very good villain.

Interviewed on morning Joe this am, they showed the TV spot where grandma gets thrown off the cliff and asked for Ryan's response:

"You should have seen how many takes it took me."
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Rover said:
I readily admit that the Senate is up in the air but I never understood the angst over the House. 24 seats in a situation where 61 GOP held seats are in Obama won districts isn't that hard to overcome if he wins re-election.
Click to expand...

We'll see whether "Yes we did, we need more of the same" can be sold as well as "Yes we can, it's time for change." He's shown the Chicken Littles and the True Believers that he's just a boring centrist president, so any irrational exuberance he wins with the former he loses with the latter.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

amherstblackbear said:
I'll say this for Ryan - he doesn't make a very good villain.

Interviewed on morning Joe this am, they showed the TV spot where grandma gets thrown off the cliff and asked for Ryan's response:

"You should have seen how many takes it took me."
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Republican candidate in NY-26 (Corwin) is amused.

IMHO Ryan's problem is that his plan is a cynical ploy to have the majority of voters not pay anything towards deficit reduction while sticking to everybody else. That's not a brave nor a defensible plan. If he wants to cut the deficit via Medicare reductions, fine, but he needs to explain why the very generation of people who got us into this fiscal mess, the people born in the 1940s and 1950s who for a generation have voted for no taxes but sky high govt services now deserve to be exempt from cleaning up the problem? As far as I'm concerned the only people who get a free pass are the WWII generation, and you've have to be in your 80's to have fought in that war. Maybe in your late 70's to have contributed to the war effort even if you weren't old enough to serve. Beyond that, if I'm going to pay (and I'm willing to do so) so are you. Enough of the generational BS. When do I get to stop paying for the generation that's going to bankrupt Medicare, Social Security and the whole country in general?
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Rover said:
I'm sure the Republican candidate in NY-26 (Corwin) is amused.

IMHO Ryan's problem is that his plan is a cynical ploy to have the majority of voters not pay anything towards deficit reduction while sticking to everybody else. That's not a brave nor a defensible plan. If he wants to cut the deficit via Medicare reductions, fine, but he needs to explain why the very generation of people who got us into this fiscal mess, the people born in the 1940s and 1950s who for a generation have voted for no taxes but sky high govt services now deserve to be exempt from cleaning up the problem? As far as I'm concerned the only people who get a free pass are the WWII generation, and you've have to be in your 80's to have fought in that war. Maybe in your late 70's to have contributed to the war effort even if you weren't old enough to serve. Beyond that, if I'm going to pay (and I'm willing to do so) so are you. Enough of the generational BS. When do I get to stop paying for the generation that's going to bankrupt Medicare, Social Security and the whole country in general?
Click to expand...
You'll stop paying when we can't borrow money any more. I thought it was quite interesting that Bill Clinton has come out calling on the Democrats to not just blast any sort of Medicare reform, as the Dems could ride this all the way to a huge election victory in 2012 if they really played it to the hilt. Ryan badly miscalculated by packaging the tax cuts with Medicare reform. He'd have been clobbered for Medicare reform no matter what, but it was a bad miscalculation to package it the way he did. Too bad, as this may be the beginning of another bit partisan snit, meaning there's even less chance of compromise and any sort of meaningful reforms before this whole thing comes crashing down on us.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

It's the same as the GOP blasting any effort to restore the Clinton tax rates. Plenty of blame to go around, here.

We have severe tooth decay, brought to us by the Dems' candy diet and the Republicans' refusal to brush. Each side now gleefully points out the mote in the other's eye while doing nothing about the beam in their own.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Kepler said:
We have severe tooth decay, brought to us by the Dems' candy diet and the Republicans' refusal to brush.
Click to expand...
Very good! elegantly simple (and no Latin!) and accurate, what with the childishness of the voters. I might want to borrow this.
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Never ceases to amaze me.

Listening to the local right wing station this morning for a little bit and they were discussing the pending government shutdown here in Minnesota. The prevailing opinion was to let the government shutdown and we'll find out that we don't need all this crap and it will precipitate a bunch of government cutting because we'll find out we don't need any of the stuff government is doing. This was all discussed under my favorite new right wing banner, "taxes is stealing".

Now this premise does make some sense without any context. But here's the context. The Minnesota government has been cutting for 8 years. Tim Pawlenty was the governor during this time. Are we to believe that there is so much waste available to cut that Mr. Pawlenty decided while he was in office not to shine a light on it? Or he decided to cut essential snow plowing service over getting rid of that bloated State employee who offers nothing of value? Really? So, after listening to that how in the hell would anyone in their right mind take a Tim Pawlenty candidacy seriously?
 
Re: 2012 Elections Part I: All Politics is Yokel

Kepler said:
It's the same as the GOP blasting any effort to restore the Clinton tax rates. Plenty of blame to go around, here.

We have severe tooth decay, brought to us by the Dems' candy diet and the Republicans' refusal to brush. Each side now gleefully points out the mote in the other's eye while doing nothing about the beam in their own.
Click to expand...
Nice bible quote!;)

And a very good analogy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top