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.
Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
There's an LBJ appointment on one of the courts.
The main problem with vacancies is at the District Court level (53 of 63 current vacancies).
I definitely agree though that the retirement wave that is starting is of GOP appointments, from the 20 year period out of 24 (1968-92) that there was a Republican in the White House. If Democrats continue to win the presidency, during those periods in which they also control the Senate we should see a big shift in the federal judiciary.
There's an LBJ appointment on one of the courts.
The main problem with vacancies is at the District Court level (53 of 63 current vacancies).
I definitely agree though that the retirement wave that is starting is of GOP appointments, from the 20 year period out of 24 (1968-92) that there was a Republican in the White House. If Democrats continue to win the presidency, during those periods in which they also control the Senate we should see a big shift in the federal judiciary.
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
Ladies and gentlemen: Phonus Balonus. If the Democrats hang on to the Senate, our resident wise *** will proclaim it a great victory for democracy, or something. Such a phoney.
Ladies and gentlemen: Phonus Balonus. If the Democrats hang on to the Senate, our resident wise *** will proclaim it a great victory for democracy, or something. Such a phoney.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
The "Let Them Eat Cake" Party. Shocked.
The "Let Them Eat Cake" Party. Shocked.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
True enough. The party that has almost single-handedly caused the immiseration of rural whites, which runs ads directed at rural whites every election year.
But until we actually count dollars as votes, they have no choice.
True enough. The party that has almost single-handedly caused the immiseration of rural whites, which runs ads directed at rural whites every election year.
But until we actually count dollars as votes, they have no choice.
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
I thought I was the resident wise *** around here?
Kep needs to stop worrying and let this play out. Last week in Colorado Quinnipiac had the GOP challenger up 10 points for governor. Today they have them even. Either something really drastic happened in 7 days (did the guy come out against legal weed over there) or the polls are bouncing around much like in 2012.
I thought I was the resident wise *** around here?Kep needs to stop worrying and let this play out. Last week in Colorado Quinnipiac had the GOP challenger up 10 points for governor. Today they have them even. Either something really drastic happened in 7 days (did the guy come out against legal weed over there) or the polls are bouncing around much like in 2012.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
It seems pretty obvious that the polls are getting away from the Dems. I trust 538's analysis, and the GOP likelihood has been relentlessly moving up from the 55 it was all summer to the 65 it is now. Most of the close individual races are moving the wrong way. Partly this is because last week's Fright Night campaign (first ISIS, then Ebola) was like a hard rain to the righty base worms. Partly it seems like the Dem candidates just aren't doing a very good job. But part of it I think we have to face is a noticeable wind -- otherwise Udall in particular would be starting to move the other way.
A lot can happen in a coupla weeks, and my money was always on 52. I just don't want to think they could climb higher than that, since then it starts getting into the territory where the 2016 takeback is not as inevitable.
Kep needs to stop worrying and let this play out. Last week in Colorado Quinnipiac had the GOP challenger up 10 points for governor. Today they have them even. Either something really drastic happened in 7 days (did the guy come out against legal weed over there) or the polls are bouncing around much like in 2012.
It seems pretty obvious that the polls are getting away from the Dems. I trust 538's analysis, and the GOP likelihood has been relentlessly moving up from the 55 it was all summer to the 65 it is now. Most of the close individual races are moving the wrong way. Partly this is because last week's Fright Night campaign (first ISIS, then Ebola) was like a hard rain to the righty base worms. Partly it seems like the Dem candidates just aren't doing a very good job. But part of it I think we have to face is a noticeable wind -- otherwise Udall in particular would be starting to move the other way.
A lot can happen in a coupla weeks, and my money was always on 52. I just don't want to think they could climb higher than that, since then it starts getting into the territory where the 2016 takeback is not as inevitable.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
Here's another opportunity for the righties to get smart on Kansas and then try to explain it away.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-failures-brownbacks-experiment-grow-more-serious
Here's another opportunity for the righties to get smart on Kansas and then try to explain it away.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-failures-brownbacks-experiment-grow-more-serious
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
I've often wondered why some folks seem to insist that Senators make better POTUS candidates than governors, because they have "Washington experience". That may be true, but where is the executive track record to match it? As Brownback is proving, he's inept at executive leadership. I don't think I'd trust him to run a company at this point, let alone a state or the entire country.
I've often wondered why some folks seem to insist that Senators make better POTUS candidates than governors, because they have "Washington experience". That may be true, but where is the executive track record to match it? As Brownback is proving, he's inept at executive leadership. I don't think I'd trust him to run a company at this point, let alone a state or the entire country.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
And he'll probably get reelected too.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
Just another village idiot making the case for mandatory retirement upon completing a term during which you turn 75. Too bad it'll always remain a pipe dream of mine.
And he'll probably get reelected too.
Just another village idiot making the case for mandatory retirement upon completing a term during which you turn 75. Too bad it'll always remain a pipe dream of mine.
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
We DO need term limits, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment. Think we can get enough States to pass an Amendment without Congress?
Age Discrimination!
We DO need term limits, but it will take a Constitutional Amendment. Think we can get enough States to pass an Amendment without Congress?
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
But SCOTUS (at least my CRS addled brain remembers they did) struck down a legislative imposition of term limits (as well as the line item veto). If they're going to happen, we'll need an Amendment.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
Prior to Obama, JFK was the last sitting senator elected to the Presidency. While many others had served as senators during their careers, they had spent time in other offices - usually VP - before winning their Presidential elections.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
Term limits sound wonderful but all they do is hand more power to lobbyists and other insiders who know how to game the system. They're not term limited.
What we need is an age limit (which would also require an amendment). AARP would respond to that in the same way that the NRA responds to assault rifle bans. It aint happenin.' The way to term limit or age limit Members is to vote their embedded, enfeebled butts out of there.
Term limits sound wonderful but all they do is hand more power to lobbyists and other insiders who know how to game the system. They're not term limited.
What we need is an age limit (which would also require an amendment). AARP would respond to that in the same way that the NRA responds to assault rifle bans. It aint happenin.' The way to term limit or age limit Members is to vote their embedded, enfeebled butts out of there.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
The CW is the opposite: governors, especially from big states, have a leg up in the nomination process. Partly it's because they have executive experience. Probably more importantly it's because they don't have a DC voting record to defend.
The CW is the opposite: governors, especially from big states, have a leg up in the nomination process. Partly it's because they have executive experience. Probably more importantly it's because they don't have a DC voting record to defend.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
I'd be down for a maximum of 5 terms/10 years in the House and 2 terms/12 years in the Senate. Hey, a man can dream...
I'd be down for a maximum of 5 terms/10 years in the House and 2 terms/12 years in the Senate. Hey, a man can dream...
Re: Campaign 2014: The Epic Struggle To Win The Senate And Change Nothing
I have a friend who has a finance/poly sci background and now teaches at the university level. Conservative by nature. A couple of years ago, he made an interesting comment on what things he looks at to decide whether a presidential candidate has the skills to do the job, political persuasion aside. He said that with the longer lasting and increasingly complex campaigns he looks at the candidate's ability to manage a campaign. Not exclusively, of course, but with significant weight. Either the candidate does it well (or not) or the candidate understands how to choose capable people to do it for him (or not) and delegate effectively. Presidential campaigns are marathons that require long-term strategy and the ability to address diverse interests across a wide range of economies and cultural groups. In addition to those long-term management skills, it requires candidates to deal with inevitable crises that require quick response and judgment.
Some of that makes sense. With the way the distinction between governing and campaigning has disappeared (or never really existed), though, I get uncomfortable using a person's ability to manage a good campaign as an indication whether that person can govern effectively.
All that just relates to a person's ability to lead, of course, not the direction he or she would lead.
I have a friend who has a finance/poly sci background and now teaches at the university level. Conservative by nature. A couple of years ago, he made an interesting comment on what things he looks at to decide whether a presidential candidate has the skills to do the job, political persuasion aside. He said that with the longer lasting and increasingly complex campaigns he looks at the candidate's ability to manage a campaign. Not exclusively, of course, but with significant weight. Either the candidate does it well (or not) or the candidate understands how to choose capable people to do it for him (or not) and delegate effectively. Presidential campaigns are marathons that require long-term strategy and the ability to address diverse interests across a wide range of economies and cultural groups. In addition to those long-term management skills, it requires candidates to deal with inevitable crises that require quick response and judgment.
Some of that makes sense. With the way the distinction between governing and campaigning has disappeared (or never really existed), though, I get uncomfortable using a person's ability to manage a good campaign as an indication whether that person can govern effectively.
All that just relates to a person's ability to lead, of course, not the direction he or she would lead.
Last edited:
- Status