Support NeoGAF

[kehs]

The economy is still bad
…
The economy is getting better

PD summed up.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

I bet Clinton people are scared shitless right now

If I was Obama, yesterday's press conference would have been to announce Immigration action by executive order

 

[Diablos]

Hillary is quite disliked in many places too. Obama (well, the reaction to Obama) has effectively killed the party in the south outside of a few hold overs. We can't assume anything positive in the region in the foreseeable future.

Hillary would do just fine in VA and if Obama could win NC in 2008 she could win it again in 2016. Florida would be competetive too. The rest of the south is a lost cause.

I think the worst candidate out of all the races had to be Braley. What a moron. Honestly he deserved to lose. The Senate was gone anyway.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I bet Clinton people are scared shitless right now

If I was Obama, yesterday's press conference would have been to announce Immigration action by executive order

Why would they be? The problem was turnout.

Its like saying obama was toast for 2012 after 2010

Hillary would do just fine in VA and if Obama could win NC in 2008 she could win it again in 2016. Florida would be competetive too. The rest of the south is a lost cause.

I think the worst candidate out of all the races had to be Braley. What a moron. Honestly he deserved to lose. The Senate was gone anyway.

pryor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-06D9cPTFgo

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Dem Targets: IL, FL, GA, NC, PA, NH, WIS, ND, ARIZ, OH, maybe even LA

GOP Targets: NV, OR, CO

Why would they be? The problem was turnout.

Its like saying obama was toast for 2012 after 2010

Because they are Clinton people. Because Clintons campaigned for Dems in 2014.

 

[Angry Fork]

Losing 2016 presidential would be better for democrats long term than letting Hilary win.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

What, precisely, is making you so worried? Progressive policies are only getting more popular. How else does minimum wage increases basically make a clean sweep even in places like South Dakota in a republican election year?

I know Republicans are always saying "its not the policies it's the packaging", but they're wrong. Republicans may have people liking the word "conservative", and they may have people picking republicans as being better at generalized issues like the economy, but every time you put an actual bill in front of peoples faces. Every time you list out a real tangible change you're proposing to the government, people tend to be for the liberal versions, and not the conservative ones.

The problem really is with the Democrat party, which I actually find encouraging because that can be fixed. In my mind, I think it's largely because they lack focus on a national level. Presidential years gives a party a focus by default, but midterms don't and in today's climate where everything is a nationalized issue, you can't just send out every individual out there to fend for themselves anymore. A big reason Udall had little to campaign on is the national party largely didn't have anything concrete to campaign on, for instance.

It does no good if the only time you ever hear about liberal issues is in campaign promises. Obama at least identified the problem himself at the press conference saying he and others were out there talking about minimum wage on the campaign trail, but it didn't penetrate. I think it's because people just believe politicians will say anything on the campaign trail to get elected, and honestly for good reason too.

Black Mamba is also completely right that people aren't that dumb, but they just can't follow politics as closely as we do. And it's unreasonable to ever expect that of people. But that means you can't just take one half-hearted swing at passing a minimum wage increase, and expect everyone to pick up on your efforts. You just need to push that sort of thing with better focus and more frequency, and constantly explain the tangible acts you've taken to get it to the point where you need the other sides cooperation (though currently hard with no chamber of congress to do it through now). That's how you get issues like that to penetrate people that don't follow politics super closely.

These things aren't hard to figure out, and should they do, I think you'll see a lot more progress in the near future.

Because we need actual liberal policy not lame half-measures that still don't put us close to where we were in the 60s.

I'm glad we can get gay marriage, weed, and minimum wage (still to low) increases. But we aren't making college affordable, tackling climate change, strengthening worker protections, taxing the rich, providing a real safety net, changing the retributive justice system, strengthing PUBLIC education. In fact were slowly losing on most of those issues.

I don't think democrats are doomed just the liberal policy is.

There was a good article in vox today that really gets to the crux of trying to do liberal things to tackle things like income inequality and climate change in the context of the Maryland Loss. The rain tax

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/6/7159239/rain-tax

6) This sounds great, why are people mad?

Well, sure, it sounds great to you. You are a discerning reader of explanatory journalism, and you understand that Pigouvian taxes to correct environmental externalities are part of any savvy modern policymaker's toolkit. But to the man on the street, it's a big ol' tax on his driveway. Even worse, its opponents came up with the idea of calling it a "rain tax." Who would tax the rain? Everyone knows rainwater runoff is totally harmless, unless you care about something silly like wildlife or drinking water.

7) Can we draw any broad, sweeping conclusions from this?

Sure! The rain tax controversy is a little narrow and weird, but it speaks to a big reality in American politics. People really do not like paying taxes. They like having money, and they do not have a lot of confidence that the government will spend their money wisely. This isn't just true of voters in Oklahoma and Nebraska, it's true of voters in Maryland too. It's true that taxing the rich — i.e., having other people pay more taxes — is pretty popular. But people don't want to pay more taxes themselves.

This is a problem for liberals for two reasons. One is that many environmental and public health problems are best-solved through this kind of tax. The logic for taxing impermeable surfaces is a small-scale version of the logic for taxing carbon dioxide emissions. If you can't sell these kind of solutions even in Maryland, you're going to have severe trouble tackling major issues. The other is that the countries who've had the most success in tackling inequality — places like Sweden — don't just tax the rich. To be clear, they do tax the rich more heavily than the US does but they tax the middle class even more heavily. They use these broad-based taxes to finance broadly used social services, just as America's Social Security relies on both broad taxes and broad benefits. If you can't sell people on tax hikes, it's hard to make much progressive headway.

Progressive policy isn't passing, measure that are progressive and require nothing from people are passing. How we fix this problem is unknown and what's got me down. Its the same thing with Obamacare.

We are a country that doesn't want to help anyone if it requires us to contribute our self. We're not europe and I can't see us ever changing. We just hate taxes above all and democrats aren't changing or challenging that.

Losing 2016 presidential would be better for democrats long term than letting Hilary win.

No it wouldn't. Judicial appointments, vetoing GOP bills, etc.

It wouldn't move the party to the left. Did carter's (who was pretty center leaning) loss help the dems?

 

[Diablos]

Did Warner win VA yet?

 

[HylianTom]

I don't know if they've declared him the winner officially yet, but last I checked his margin was growing.

If there's one silver lining state I took from Tuesday, it was definitely Virginia. If the GOP can't win there in a year like this, where the Dem turnout machine was piddly compared to what's coming? That's an ouchie for them.

..

And losing 2016 at this point would be catastrophic, if only due to Ginsburg apparently not wanting to retire yet. She's pretty much forced the Dems into a must-win situation.

Spoiler

And she might be looking at the electoral map, confident that she's fine no matter what.

It's cliche, but 2016's shaping of SCOTUS (and thus politics around so many issues) for the next few decades could be pivotal.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

http://prospect.org/article/democrats-catastrophe-and-need-new-agenda

 

[PhoenixDark]

You yourself used the terminology better. How am I supposed to know what that means. By all accounts the economy of 2016 will be better than 2014 just like 2014 was better than every year before it. Unless there's an unexpected downturn then the direction has been positive for years now. How are you so sure the 6th year itch could have been averted? How often in the history of our electoral process does that even happen?

Beyond the economy, people just find something else to concern themselves with. ISIS and Ebola were probably more prominent in Republican attack ads than anything to do with the economy. How long can one realistically expect to keep winning the Presidency? 3 terms right now amounts to pulling off a miracle. You guys keep trying to assign meaning to these things. Sometimes you lose, that's politics.

I think the last couple years has proven that we can't count any eggs that haven't hatched. The economy should be better in a couple years, but the question should be "for who." Corporations and businesses sitting on a trillion dollars? Wall Street? At this rate it won't be much better for average people, given these jobs being created are minimum wage types.

To make matters worse, the artificial inflation of the stock market has led investors to once again begin propping up junk mortgages, as housing rebounds. We could see another crash within the next decade, at which point we'll once again bail out banks and wonder what exactly did Dodd-Frank accomplish.

Basically whoever waltzes into the presidency in 2016 could be walking into a trap. And unlike Obama in 2009, they won't have the legislative means to address it decently.

 

[Diablos]

That's my top concern about 2016. Even if Hillary wins and Dems win back the Senate, the House is going to stay in GOP hands for a long, long time.

How would President Hillary Clinton get anything she campaigns on done with these clowns? We can't go on like this. The American public may be starting to realize that the House GOP, even by itself, can hold anything they want hostage and get away with it. Does anyone really think it's feasible to keep going until at LEAST 2020 with this kind of shit? It's the kind of thing that makes people stay home, because they know Democrats can't do anything in the face of such unprecedented opposition.

The GOP has lied and extorted their way into winning a sweeping majority that will plague Democratic policy for the next decade. It's terrifying and sad at the same time, and tragic the the demographics that benefit most from Democratic policies are too lazy to show up.

 

[HylianTom]

The term "managed decline" comes to mind. We're hamstrung by our political structure. Nothing major's going to get done, except for maybe on an emergent basis. We're going to flunk humanity's big test - of whether we can manage to live on the planet without destroying ourselves and each other - in spectacular fashion.

If you had told 20-year-old me that my main hope for national politics later on in my lifetime would be to make the best of a bad situation.. he'd be depressed. Not very inspiring. :/

 

[PhoenixDark]

The term "managed decline" comes to mind. We're hamstrung by our political structure. Nothing major's going to get done, except for maybe on an emergent basis. We're going to flunk humanity's big test - of whether we can manage to live on the planet without destroying ourselves and each other - in spectacular fashion.

If you had told 20-year-old me that my main hope for national politics later on in my lifetime would be to make the best of a bad situation.. he'd be depressed. Not very inspiring. :/

The depressing thing is that the managed decline was in effect even in 2009 and 2010, outside of a couple things like the ACA which got done. Not shitcanning the filibuster is going to haunt a lot of liberal policy advocates. Hopefully next time democrats follow the blueprint of Scott Walker, Rick Snyder, etc: when you have full control, take full advantage of it.

 

[Angry Fork]

No it wouldn't. Judicial appointments, vetoing GOP bills, etc.

It wouldn't move the party to the left. Did carter's (who was pretty center leaning) loss help the dems?

Hilary would appoint and vote for the same people/bills republicans would. I don't know why you guys underestimate how right wing Hilary is. She is far more right than Obama, and Obama is far more right than Reagan.

The best scenario (besides Bernie Sanders/Warren) is dem house/senate, and Rand Paul as pres. Paul is shit on everything except the drug war and surveillance state, which he has a chance of being leftist/reformist on. Hilary is the same level of shit on everything, but we would have no chance of her being progressive on the drug war or surveillance state.

If we're talking pure pragmatism Rand Paul is way better for at least a couple progressive ideas than Hilary is, despite his social darwinist bullshit. But Hilary is the same, she will cut all welfare state stuff if presented with the option. It's slightly progressive in some areas (Paul) vs. no progressivism at all (Hilary).

Allowing her to win would just further drag the dem party through the mud. Kill off third way politics for good.

 

[speculawyer]

I bet Clinton people are scared shitless right now

If I was Obama, yesterday's press conference would have been to announce Immigration action by executive order

Not at all. This election probably benefitted her very much. It created a false sense of "we do better by not running RINOs!", it put several crazy GOPers in office that will say crazy things, with Congressional control the GOP cannot dodge responsibility, etc.

So the GOP is going to run with crazy again and when the larger electorate during presidential years shows up at the ballot box in 2016, the GOP is gonna get thumped.

 

[speculawyer]

Dem Targets: IL, FL, GA, NC, PA, NH, WIS, ND, ARIZ, OH, maybe even LA

GOP Targets: NV, OR, CO

That is a TERRIBLE map for the GOP. I doubt they hold the Senate.

 

[cooljeanius]

Not sure if Ayotte is easy pickings.

Yeah, Ayotte is the best politician that NH Republicans have, whereas the best politician that NH Democrats have is currently occupying the other Senate seat that NH has... Not really sure who would be able to unseat Ayotte... Dan Feltes, who I helped send to the NH state-level Senate this election, is kind of inspiring, but I don't know if he'll have enough experience by 2016 to be a credible challenge to Ayotte...

 

[Coriolanus]

Not at all. This election probably benefitted her very much. It created a false sense of "we do better by not running RINOs!", it put several crazy GOPers in office that will say crazy things, with Congressional control the GOP cannot dodge responsibility, etc.

So the GOP is going to run with crazy again and when the larger electorate during presidential years shows up at the ballot box in 2016, the GOP is gonna get thumped.

Hmm.

11th dimension chess. You see, the plan is to let the reps take over now so that they can fail at everything, then democrats can take everything in '16.

Dude, i was havin a giggle, m8.

 

[ivysaur12]

With all of these progressive ballot measures passing, even in red states, I bet we're going to see an insane number of them show up in 2016, 2018 and beyond.

With so many statehouses in GOP control, this is likely going to be where progressive groups and donors get the most bang for their buck, and the only way they have any real chance at enacting liberal policies until they get the state legislatures back to blue.

Pretty much. And while I generally don't love ballot measures, this feels as if it's the progressive's best resource until a more populist wave, if such a thing ever happens.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Yeah, Ayotte is the best politician that NH Republicans have, whereas the best politician that NH Democrats have is currently occupying the other Senate seat that NH has... Not really sure who would be able to unseat Ayotte... Dan Feltes, who I helped send to the NH state-level Senate this election, is kind of inspiring, but I don't know if he'll have enough experience by 2016 to be a credible challenge to Ayotte...

Gov Hassan would be a great challenger to Ayotte.

 

[HylianTom]

Not at all. This election probably benefitted her very much. It created a false sense of "we do better by not running RINOs!", it put several crazy GOPers in office that will say crazy things, with Congressional control the GOP cannot dodge responsibility, etc.

So the GOP is going to run with crazy again and when the larger electorate during presidential years shows up at the ballot box in 2016, the GOP is gonna get thumped.

Lurking FreeRepublic has been very interesting over the past 48 hours. They can't quite all agree on what can be realistically done over the next two years, what should be attempted, how aggressive to be towards Obama, whether to impeach if he tries anything on immigration, etc.. there are even a small number over there who bring-up the idea that, nope, their electoral math issues aren't by any means solved and that 2016's senate geography is very rugged for them.

A large number of them are cheering the noise that Ted Cruz is going to be making in the Senate. Very encouraging as far as the "GOP running with crazy" theory goes. They're going to make a great scapegoat/foil for the Dems going into '16.

 

[hydragonwarrior]

So how fucked is the US now that we have a Republican majority in both the House and Senate?

If anything, it serves as a lesson to the Dems that they have to learn how to rile their base. Them taking the "high road" of not making a strong media presence like Republicans do with Fox News and other such nonsense is biting them in the ass and will continue to bite them in the ass until they get more aggressive advertising their message and involving their voters in the political game.

At least we can get people to vote during presidential elections though...

 

[Aaron Strife]

So how fucked is the US now that we have a Republican majority in both the House and Senate?

If anything, it serves as a lesson to the Dems that they have to learn how to rile their base. Them taking the "high road" of not making a strong media presence like Republicans do with Fox News and other such nonsense is biting them in the ass and will continue to bite them in the ass until they get more aggressive advertising their message and involving their voters in the political game.

At least we can get people to vote during presidential elections though...

Eh, we're about the same as we were before the elections. Since the Republicans controlled the House there wasn't any meaningful legislation getting passed anyway. The major difference now is Obama can't get his judicial appointees through nearly as easily.

Also losing NC and CO (and probably AK) by a hair makes it harder for us to reclaim the Senate in the future so that sucks.

 

[kehs]

Did you guys hear, that Now We Can Get Congress Going. - Op ed by Boehner/McConnell.

Just do a google search for the title and you get access to the article.

 

[thepotatoman]

Hickenlooper's now up 2.4 points, and turnout is now around 37.3% R - D 32.1% D. Which is really damn close to the 5 pt gap they were looking for. It's also still neck and neck for the legislature, but the dems very well may keep that too.

It's actually not that bad of a showing for democrats there, given the national trend. The problem really was mainly just with Udall.

Also, I'd like to note Udall is losing by 3 points. RCP had him losing by 2.5 points, and Hickenlooper up 2.5 points. National polls underestimated Republicans by an average of 4 points. Add that together, and if polls instead averaged out to be correct across the country, Udall probably would have won with bad polling being specifically in Colorado, underestimating the Democrats. It's possible polling was just good in colorado, but I suspect it was two wrongs making a right in this one state.

 

[AnotherNils]

Did you guys hear, that Now We Can Get Congress Going. - Op ed by Boehner/McConnell.

Just do a google search for the title and you get access to the article.

I've never heard anything about wanting to redefine "full time", but looking at the current definition, I can only imagine this has to with weakening the ACA for employers. Filthy fucks.

 

[HylianTom]

Hickenlooper's now up 2.4 points, and turnout is now around 37.3% R - D 32.1% D. Which is really damn close to the 5 pt gap they were looking for. It's also still neck and neck for the legislature, but the dems very well may keep that too.

It's actually not that bad of a showing for democrats there, given the national trend. The problem really was mainly just with Udall.

Also, I'd like to note Udall is losing by 3 points. RCP had him losing by 2.5 points, and Hickenlooper up 2.5 points. National polls underestimated Republicans by an average of 4 points. Add that together, and if polls instead averaged out to be correct across the country, Udall probably would have won with bad polling being specifically in Colorado, underestimating the Democrats. It's possible polling was just good in colorado, but I suspect it was two wrongs making a right in this one state.

If it's more of a Udall issue than anything, I hope this bodes well for 2016. Colorado and Virginia resisting the GOP high tide would mean a really nice map going forward.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Republicans still Republicaning.

http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/republican-c-span-caller-says-elections-were-about-tha-1655464154

 

[ivysaur12]

Hickenlooper's now up 2.4 points, and turnout is now around 37.3% R - D 32.1% D. Which is really damn close to the 5 pt gap they were looking for. It's also still neck and neck for the legislature, but the dems very well may keep that too.

It's actually not that bad of a showing for democrats there, given the national trend. The problem really was mainly just with Udall.

Also, I'd like to note Udall is losing by 3 points. RCP had him losing by 2.5 points, and Hickenlooper up 2.5 points. National polls underestimated Republicans by an average of 4 points. Add that together, and if polls instead averaged out to be correct across the country, Udall probably would have won with bad polling being specifically in Colorado, underestimating the Democrats. It's possible polling was just good in colorado, but I suspect it was two wrongs making a right in this one state.

Also, in an off election year, Michelle Nunn was still able to replicate the % from 2012 with 45% of the vote. That's better than Pryor, Braley, Orman, Grimes, Land, McFadden, Weh… Georgia is absolutely in play and Nunn could run again.

Did you guys hear, that Now We Can Get Congress Going. - Op ed by Boehner/McConnell.

Just do a google search for the title and you get access to the article.

lol. Sure, guys.

 

[cooljeanius]

Gov Hassan would be a great challenger to Ayotte.

Meh, I don't really like her as much as a governor as I did Lynch... I supported Cilley over her in the 2012 primary. Although I suppose the main thing I disagree with her about (i.e., whether to increase revenue for the state with a casino or an income tax - I prefer the latter, she prefers the former) doesn't really matter as much at the national level, and if she moves up to the Senate, then maybe we could finally get a governor willing to pass an income tax... (And yes, I'm aware that neither Lynch nor Shaheen passed an income tax while they were governor, either, but at least neither of them pretended that a casino would be an adequate substitute for one)

 

[Aaron Strife]

Meh, I don't really like her as much as a governor as I did Lynch... I supported Cilley over her in the 2012 primary. Although I suppose the main thing I disagree with her about (i.e., whether to increase revenue for the state with a casino or an income tax - I prefer the latter, she prefers the former) doesn't really matter as much at the national level, and if she moves up to the Senate, then maybe we could finally get a governor willing to pass an income tax... (And yes, I'm aware that neither Lynch nor Shaheen passed an income tax while they were governor, either, but at least neither of them pretended that a casino would be an adequate substitute for one)

I don't know much about her politics, I've just heard she'd be a great candidate. And considering she's won both in a good and bad year for Democrats she looks good on paper at least.

 

[thepotatoman]

Did you guys hear, that Now We Can Get Congress Going. - Op ed by Boehner/McConnell.

Just do a google search for the title and you get access to the article.

I think you can just copy the google link and it should give access to everybody. It's Right click > copy link url on the google search link.

 

[Oblivion]

If Dems want old people to vote for them again, they should start advocating for expanding spending on medicare and social security. Why do they not do such things?

 

[thezerofire]

I think you can just copy the google link and it should give access to everybody. It's Right click > copy link url on the google search link.

didn't work

edit: mentions repealing obamacare in the first paragraph, yawnnnnn

 

[thepotatoman]

didn't work

edit: mentions repealing obamacare in the first paragraph, yawnnnnn

Shoot. Oh well.

 

[ivysaur12]

If Dems want old people to vote for them again, they should start advocating for expanding spending on medicare and social security. Why do they not do such things?

Because they can't be populists. They have to be Not Obamas.

 

[Black Mamba]

Matt Taiibi just uncovered the whistleblower in the JP Morgan Chase Fraud Shenanigans.

She's finally speaking out. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-9-billion-witness-20141106

Reading it now...

 

[jamesinclair]

If Dems want old people to vote for them again, they should start advocating for expanding spending on medicare and social security. Why do they not do such things?

Because they only support republican policies.

See:

Romneycare
Cap and trade
Domestic spying
Drone terror campaigns
Etc

 

[thepotatoman]

So, is the media still freaking out about Ebola and ISIS, or is that over now that the election is over?

 

[Black Mamba]

The deal was widely considered a good one for both sides, but Chase emerged with barely a scratch. First, the ludicrously nonspecific language surrounding the settlement put you, me and every other American taxpayer on the hook for roughly a quarter of Chase's check. Because most of the settlement monies were specifically not called fines or penalties, Chase was allowed to treat some $7 billion of the settlement as a tax write-off.

Couple this with the fact that the bank's share price soared six percent on news of the settlement, adding more than $12 billion in value to shareholders, and one could argue Chase actually made money from the deal. What's more, to defray the cost of this and other fines, Chase last year laid off 7,500 lower-level employees. Meanwhile, per-employee compensation for everyone else rose four percent, to $122,653. But no one made out better than Dimon. The board awarded a 74 percent raise to the man who oversaw the biggest regulatory penalty ever, upping his compensation package to about $20 million.

lol, American Justice everyone.

 

[Wilsongt]

Did you guys hear, that Now We Can Get Congress Going. - Op ed by Boehner/McConnell.

Just do a google search for the title and you get access to the article.

Repeal the ACA. The next two years are going to be hilarious.

Congress to Obama: Doth thou wish to repeal Obamacare?
Obama: no.
congress: But thou must!
obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
x infinity

 

[ivysaur12]

So, is the media still freaking out about Ebola and ISIS, or is that over now that the election is over?

The election stopped Ebola.

 

[Cat]

Repeal the ACA. The next two years are going to be hilarious.

Congress to Obama: Doth thou wish to repeal Obamacare?
Obama: no.
congress: But thou must!
obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
Obama: no
Congress: but thou must!
x infinity

I know. Ted Cruz is on it:
http://tpr.org/post/us-senators-tex...ng-obamacare-immediately#.VFurTqd7KVc.twitter

I filled out the contact forms for both my senators stop this nonsense.

 

[Wilsongt]

All I gotta say it, every piece of shitty legislation and senate appointment that comes out of this new congress, America deserves every bit of it. I hope the GOP fucks over medicare just to make the old people suffer.

 

[Black Republican]

Dem Targets: IL, FL, GA, NC, PA, NH, WIS, ND, ARIZ, OH, maybe even LA

GOP Targets: NV, OR, CO



Because they are Clinton people. Because Clintons campaigned for Dems in 2014.

Reid will lose 100% unless the GOP run another fucking looney again. i wouldnt be surprised if he retired both his seat and minority leader status before then

 

[HylianTom]

The divisions begin already.

There's an entertaining article at {*sigh*} newsmax entitled GOP Leaders to Tea Party: The Infighting Stops Now, where it covers McConnell's vow to not shut down the government over the next two years.

The comments section, as usual, is hysterical, and full of TP voters vowing to fight or to sit out in 2016 if the party goes too moderate. Honestly, they seem all too happy and eager to shit all over the party leadership..

(Not sure if we're allowed to link to newsmax, but the article is easily found.)

 

[Black Mamba]

All I gotta say it, every piece of shitty legislation and senate appointment that comes out of this new congress, America deserves every bit of it. I hope the GOP fucks over medicare just to make the old people suffer.

Not sure why people keep mentioning stuff like this. the GOP fuck medicare over for people under 65...mostly under 55, not the elderly.

They won't "break their promise" to the elderly, only everyone else. We'll be screwed, not them.

 

[BotoxAgent]

The divisions begin already.

There's an entertaining article at {*sigh*} newsmax entitled GOP Leaders to Tea Party: The Infighting Stops Now, where it covers McConnell's vow to not shut down the government over the next two years.

The comments section, as usual, is hysterical, and full of TP voters vowing to fight or to sit out in 2016 if the party goes too moderate. Honestly, they seem all too happy and eager to shit all over the party leadership..

(Not sure if we're allowed to link to newsmax, but the article is easily found.)

what is "too moderate" for the TP? not impeaching Obummer?

 

[BertramCooper]

There's an entertaining article at {*sigh*} newsmax entitled GOP Leaders to Tea Party: The Infighting Stops Now, where it covers McConnell's vow to not shut down the government over the next two years.

Tea Party to GOP Leaders: