The Democrats get control of the House

[DurkaDurka]

Withdrawing from Iraq is not one of them?

They have done nothing but say how much of a failure this war has been. They have done nothing but say bad things about our involvement.

How will the Democrats change the situation in Iraq? It's their turn now.

It is on their watch. Success or failure now rests in the hands of the Democrats regardless of how we got into it.

It seems that American citizens hold similar views to the Dem's questioning of the war, which is osbvious with their win in congress.

The Democrats can change the situation in Iraq by being a check to George W, he no longer has a free reign, he will need to compromise.

 

[I think not]

Well, do you think the number of people that actually voted comes anywhere close to being "We the People"? Somehow, I doubt it. Neglect of civil duty has as much to do with the Dems winning as their campaigining did, I think.

Come on now thomaska, Bush won in 2000 with a minority vote. That's the nature of our election process and I'm glad we have it.

 

[EagleSmack]

It seems that American citizens hold similar views to the Dem's questioning of the war, which is osbvious with their win in congress.

The Democrats can change the situation in Iraq by being a check to George W, he no longer has a free reign, he will need to compromise.

By being a check? Seriously... what does that mean?

We are there fighting. We have boots on the ground in an ever increasing unpopular war. What are they going to check? Are they going to say...

"No more funds for the war."

That is politcal suicide because that will go against them because it shows that they are not supporting the troops. The same argument that they used that our soldiers aren't getting the right equipment will fly right in their face.

I will be blunt. The Democrats have two choices.

Fight it out to its conclusion
Withdraw

 

[EagleSmack]

You know I have been reading these posts on this thread and quite frankly I'm a bit shocked.

The Republicans have controlled Congress for 12 years. The President has been in power for 6 years.

What have they done for We The People? Do my fellow Americans remember that infamous phrase?

I remember a President-Elect in 2000 claiming he will be a unifying force and bring everyone together for the good of We The People. Can any of you honestly say he has reached across party lines with We The People in mind? He was incapabale of reaching within party lines, let alone across them.

He has done nothing, NOTHING, but polarize our great country. He has taken us to war in a country that was NEVER a pressing issue. No there was no pressing issue. But fine, we are there, and we have to deal with it.

We The People spoke last night, just like we did in 1994, in 2000, in 2004. I have lived with a Republican ruled government for a while, and I have always tried to find something good about the present administration. And sometimes I have, but most times I have not.

The Republicans got a spanking for one simple reason, the party has been hijacked by corrupt neo-conservatives that don't give a **** about anything except themselves. Before this disease infested the Republican party, they were a truly conservative party, not a blood thirsty group full of arrogant pricks that don't give a phuck about our rights, rights that millions of Americans fought and died for.

We The People have spoken.

I tend to agree with you on most things and I somewhat agree with you here. I voted for Bush twice and if he could run again I would vote for him. But he has polarized this country. I am not outraged at last night's outcome. The GOP got what it deserved.

But your last paragraph could have easily been used against the Dems in 94 with only changing a few words around. For example "hijacked by corrupt ultra-liberals that don't give a "bleep" about anyone but themselves."

I mean look at Clinton when he took over. One of the first pictures out of that Administration was a shot of Marine One (The Presidential Helicopter) picking up some of his aides on a golf course. This is not Clinton bashing but just an example to make a point. The GOP has had their share of photo ops I am sure.

Let us see how the Dems treat WE THE PEOPLE

 

[#juan]

As long as Bush is still in the whitehouse, things will go along pretty much as they have. It will be interesting to see what the Democrats will do about the new U,S. military bases in Iraq. I always felt that those new bases, under Bush's crowd were permanent. Bush has not announced any exit strategy. It is clear that the American people want out of Iraq, but as someone here suggested, cutting off funding might be seen as not supporting the troops. The Dems might demand an exit strategy from Bush.

 

[EagleSmack]

Bush will never give them an exit strategy. Why should he? If you were in agreement with Bush would you want the President to, now that the GOP got thumped, let the Dems off the hook?

Let me try to make that a little clearer. The Dems have cried foul about this war and in their opinion it's failure. The Dems have control of the House. They cannot force the Executive Office to make an exit plan for Iraq.

However... the House can force a withdrawl of troops from Iraq. But they have to do it. Sure the President can withdraw troops from Iraq but he is not going to do the dirty work. He will leave it up to them now. It's their show.

I forgot what the law is called but after the Vietnam War, Congress past a law that gave them the right to withdraw troops from a situation like Vietnam w/o the President's approval. I think it is called the War Powers Act. The President has the right to send troops w/o Congressional approval but Congress has the right to pull them out after a certain amount of time AND within a certain amount of time. So the ball is in their court now.

 

[Cosmo]

ITN and Tomaska ... thanks. I am an utter tard when it comes to US politics and your posts here have been most enlightening. Your voting process makes my eyes spin one each way. I have no idea what you folks are doing down there below the 49th, so I just wait for the results. Neither do I have any sort of real comprehension of what each party stands for. I know ... I really need to edjamacate myself.

What I do know is that the head of the household of the neighbour next door has made some incredibly weird political moves both on their own soil and elsewhere. Moves that have endangered my safety and I'm hoping this election will put the brakes on that.

Let me be clear here -- I love Americans. I love your accents, I love the patriotism, I love the bold confidence you show the world, I love your country with its endless beauty, I love the strength and courage of your citizens. I am not one of those who bashes the country and its peoples. I just don't care for Bush and his policies. The guy is dumber than a sack of hair (I've seen a zillion clips to back up that statement) and has done some really bad things to the US through his reign of terror.

Like you said, ITN, a little rebellion is a wonderful thing. I've found that here in Canada having Mein Harper at the helm while having enough of the opposing parties to keep him in line has been a good thing. You said it ... checks and balances. No one party has all the answers, on either side of the 49th. Dividing up the power base a bit makes them all a bit more cautious, less cocky and more apt to find a middle ground solution to relevant issues. That's good news for those of us who dwell in the centre of the political spectrum.

As for the Iraq debacle, I'm very curious to see what happens. Bush went in, made a helluva mess, and now if he walks away the country is likely to return to its former state of being led by another crazy person. The nuts rise to the top in chaos, it seems. It would be nothing but a huge waste of lives, money and effort to step away before the thing is finished. Like ITN said, he should never have gone there, but now that he did he has to see it through. It seems it may have cost him his presidency so there is that silver lining. His only hope of redemption is to find a way to clean up behind himself. I don't think the man himself has a hope, but surely there's folks surrounding him that are more clever. After all, they got the little puppet to the White House. Let's hope they can be as creative in finding ways to fix this mess.

Anyway, congrats to those of you who were hoping to see Bush remain in the big chair, congrats to those of you who were hoping to see the Bush foundation shaken and congrats to any single one of you who can actually decipher the damn voting process of the USA!

 

[gopher]

```Gerrymandering is Constitutional, you make it sound illegal...

The issue of Iraq was one of four major issues and the last in percentage along with corruption, terrorism and the economy. In that order.```


Gerrymandering in order to create a district which is not representative of an area's racial/ethnic composition has always been illegal. Unfortunately, the radical right wing Supreme Court has changed years of legal precedent. Of course, you have to wonder why a party such as the GOP can claim moral supremacy while engaging in unethical practies as it does but that's Republican Pharisaism for you.

As for the four significant issues, it was reported last night that Iraq was the primary concern and motivation behind the voting of the majority. Perhaps there is a new finding or maybe it is being reported differently but that is the way it was reported last night.

 

[EagleSmack]

Well Bush has not lost the Presidency. He is now sort of a lame duck... sort of. I believe he gave up after he won in 2004. Between him and the GOP who have no one but themselves to blame for the predicament they are in and I have no sympathy for them.

I am an unenrolled voter but I have always voted Republican. Here in Massachusetts voting Republican is sort of like spitting in the wind. The Dems always win, it's never even close in this state. Ted Kennedy doesn't even debate his opponents. Why should he debate when he is going to win. The only debate that I can remember him doing was against Mitt Romney (our lame duck Governor now) when he saw that Mitt may have a shot. But in the end Teddy won out as always.

But now the Dems have to lead now. It is easy to sit back and bash and they have had 12 years to do that. Now it is their turn.

In a way I feel a little liberated. I have always supported the GOP and have defended them as they made mistake after mistake. I would be a fool to take part in electing Dems who I feel are even worse than Republicans. The GOP has forgotten what got them elected to begin with. They only have themselves to blame.

But now I get to REALLY see how the Dems are going to handle the country. The whining and Biatching is over. They got their message across and the country is looking to them to fix it.

Will they return to being the pompus liberal elite that got them voted out in the first place or will they do whats right?

Will they go around trying to punish and get revenge on the GOP or will they reach out and FOR ONCE get a true bipartisan Congress that works towards the good of the people?

 

[EagleSmack]

```Gerrymandering is Constitutional, you make it sound illegal...

The issue of Iraq was one of four major issues and the last in percentage along with corruption, terrorism and the economy. In that order.```


Gerrymandering in order to create a district which is not representative of an area's racial/ethnic composition has always been illegal. Unfortunately, the radical right wing Supreme Court has changed years of legal precedent. Of course, you have to wonder why a party such as the GOP can claim moral supremacy while engaging in unethical practies as it does but that's Republican Pharisaism for you.

As for the four significant issues, it was reported last night that Iraq was the primary concern and motivation behind the voting of the majority. Perhaps there is a new finding or maybe it is being reported differently but that is the way it was reported last night.

Gerrymandering has always been practiced by BOTH parties to get the political capital that would benefit their own party. This is not a new GOP idea. The Democrats have done this many times. I remember it was a big thing in the 80's when Reagan was in office. The Dems saw early then that power was slipping and as they still controlled the House. They gerrymandered to carve up districts that would benefit themselves.

In a nutshell... no one is innocent. Both parties do it.

 

[thomaska]

ITN and Tomaska ... thanks. I am an utter tard when it comes to US politics and your posts here have been most enlightening. Your voting process makes my eyes spin one each way. I have no idea what you folks are doing down there below the 49th, so I just wait for the results. Neither do I have any sort of real comprehension of what each party stands for. I know ... I really need to edjamacate myself.

What I do know is that the head of the household of the neighbour next door has made some incredibly weird political moves both on their own soil and elsewhere. Moves that have endangered my safety and I'm hoping this election will put the brakes on that.

Let me be clear here -- I love Americans. I love your accents, I love the patriotism, I love the bold confidence you show the world, I love your country with its endless beauty, I love the strength and courage of your citizens. I am not one of those who bashes the country and its peoples. I just don't care for Bush and his policies. The guy is dumber than a sack of hair (I've seen a zillion clips to back up that statement) and has done some really bad things to the US through his reign of terror.

Like you said, ITN, a little rebellion is a wonderful thing. I've found that here in Canada having Mein Harper at the helm while having enough of the opposing parties to keep him in line has been a good thing. You said it ... checks and balances. No one party has all the answers, on either side of the 49th. Dividing up the power base a bit makes them all a bit more cautious, less cocky and more apt to find a middle ground solution to relevant issues. That's good news for those of us who dwell in the centre of the political spectrum.

As for the Iraq debacle, I'm very curious to see what happens. Bush went in, made a helluva mess, and now if he walks away the country is likely to return to its former state of being led by another crazy person. The nuts rise to the top in chaos, it seems. It would be nothing but a huge waste of lives, money and effort to step away before the thing is finished. Like ITN said, he should never have gone there, but now that he did he has to see it through. It seems it may have cost him his presidency so there is that silver lining. His only hope of redemption is to find a way to clean up behind himself. I don't think the man himself has a hope, but surely there's folks surrounding him that are more clever. After all, they got the little puppet to the White House. Let's hope they can be as creative in finding ways to fix this mess.

Anyway, congrats to those of you who were hoping to see Bush remain in the big chair, congrats to those of you who were hoping to see the Bush foundation shaken and congrats to any single one of you who can actually decipher the damn voting process of the USA!

You should try to decipher the Electoral College, I still don't get that 100%, well I get it...just don't know why we use it. I think it is just the government not trusting us to vote on our own.... I wouldnt be surprised if 80% of americans think that when they vote in a presidential election, their vote goes straight to that candidate or incumbent. Not so, not so all!

 

[I think not]

Gerrymandering has always been practiced by BOTH parties to get the political capital that would benefit their own party. This is not a new GOP idea. The Democrats have done this many times. I remember it was a big thing in the 80's when Reagan was in office. The Dems saw early then that power was slipping and as they still controlled the House. They gerrymandered to carve up districts that would benefit themselves.

In a nutshell... no one is innocent. Both parties do it.

Thank you, couldn't of said it better.

 

[I think not]

You should try to decipher the Electoral College, I still don't get that 100%, well I get it...just don't know why we use it. I think it is just the government not trusting us to vote on our own.... I wouldnt be surprised if 80% of americans think that when they vote in a presidential election, their vote goes straight to that candidate or incumbent. Not so, not so all!

The Electoral College serves a great purpose. Minorities are not being ignored. The minority Cuban population for example in Florida (about 3 million) have a huge voice in Florida, whereas in the entire US they would be a squeak and nothing more. The Electoral College needs some tweaking, that's about it.

 

[thomaska]

Just a quick aside here...for a rhetorical question..

Um, assuming that most of the voting machines are the same ones used in the 2004 elections...why aren't the democrats insisiting they all be tested and retested, and inspected for tampering?

 

[I think not]

Just a quick aside here...for a rhetorical question..

Um, assuming that most of the voting machines are the same ones used in the 2004 elections...why aren't the democrats insisiting they all be tested and retested, and inspected for tampering?

Several reasons, after 3 major elections in the US they have had ample time to fix any problems.

Second and possibly more important, the left wing fringe wihtin the Democratic party isn't complaining because the Dems won.

Now, don't lump everyone iun the Dmoecratic party a moonbat and fringe left wing, because they aren't.

Just as not everyone in the Republican party has been hijacked by neo-conservatism.

 

[thomaska]

Several reasons, after 3 major elections in the US they have had ample time to fix any problems.

Second and possibly more important, the left wing fringe wihtin the Democratic party isn't complaining because the Dems won.

Now, don't lump everyone iun the Dmoecratic party a moonbat and fringe left wing, because they aren't.

Just as not everyone in the Republican party has been hijacked by neo-conservatism.

I know they arent all moonbats, and not everyone is a neo-con...I just thought it was funny on Fox and Friends the other morning, the morning crew asked some moonbat about all the stolen election hoopla that occured right before the Presidential elections, her response was,

"How do you know it didn't happen?"

Nice huh?

 

[gopher]

Gerrymandering has always been practiced by BOTH parties to get the political capital that would benefit their own party. This is not a new GOP idea... In a nutshell... no one is innocent. Both parties do it.

I know the history of both party's machinations better than you do. The point I made, however, was that the courts had a precedent in applying rules that allowed or disallowed gerrymandering. Now with the new right wing extremist leanings of the US Supreme Court the GOP was allowed to engage in unfair and unprecedented gerrymandering. Despite that the Democrats won the election.

 

[gopher]

Just a quick aside here...for a rhetorical question..

Um, assuming that most of the voting machines are the same ones used in the 2004 elections...why aren't the democrats insisiting they all be tested and retested, and inspected for tampering?

Why aren't the Republicans posing that question? It is possible that they aren't because it may reveal that they got fewer votes than are being reported.

 

[I think not]

Gerrymandering has always been practiced by BOTH parties to get the political capital that would benefit their own party. This is not a new GOP idea... In a nutshell... no one is innocent. Both parties do it.

I know the history of both party's machinations better than you do. The point I made, however, was that the courts had a precedent in applying rules that allowed or disallowed gerrymandering. Now with the new right wing extremist leanings of the US Supreme Court the GOP was allowed to engage in unfair and unprecedented gerrymandering. Despite that the Democrats won the election.

Nope you're clueless, as usual. Gerrymandering has been a hot political topic as long as I can remember.

If we want change, we change the Constitution. It's that simple.

 

[gopher]

Horsesh*t.

If the Democrats are really smart, they'll do the same type of gerrymandering that the Pukes have done in the past 10 years. If those right wing traitors don't like it, too damn bad - they'll be getting their just desserts.