Instigator
Banned
Cooter said:Let's ask GAF. Even if you're an Obama supporter how do feel with the likely possibility of a super majority?
I'm ok with it.
Cooter said:Let's ask GAF. Even if you're an Obama supporter how do feel with the likely possibility of a super majority?
Hellsing321 said:Yeah it means Obama and the Dems have n even easier time to get their legislation through. If they totally screw the pooch then they'll just be ousted in 2-4 years like the Reps were. I don't see a big problem.
1-D_FTW said:What's the point of that question, though? Either you blatantly lie or you give an honest answer like 4 percent and get crucified (especially if your opponent has no scruples and is willing to sell the "Chocolate Fudge Diet."
Even that theoretically awesome plan that would get us energy dependent in 10 years would require a huge ramp up that would only begin making a dent in four years time. I agree, if it's gonna be completely scrapped by the next administration, it'll never get done. But one would assume a great plan would transcend politics to some degree.
Nevermind how it overlooks what happens when their platform is given free reign.Incognito said:Golly, no! Tell us, professor Cooter! What is with disgruntled Republicans suddenly becoming champions of fractured government?
Fragamemnon said:the only thing I've ever seen libertarians truly control is the ability to, on demand, ruin any political discussion post on the internet
Cooter said:Let's ask GAF. Even if you're an Obama supporter how do feel with the likely possibility of a super majority?
Cooter said:Ok, does everyone understand the difference between 55 senators being of one party and 60? Serious question.
If the Democrats can get 60 members in the Senate, they can disallow filibustering, and allow progressive legislation to follow a much quicker route through the Senate.
It's worth noting that both Ras and Gallup has Obama dropping below 50% for the first time in quite a while.Trurl said:Gallup:
Obama:49%
McCain:43%
For the most part these polls are just boring now.
Cooter said:Ok, does everyone understand the difference between 55 senators being of one party and 60? Serious question.
Evlar said:Let the Republicans wander in the wilderness, let them suffer the fruits of catering to their extremist wing. They'll despair, they'll retool and rebuild, and hopefully they'll arrive at a consensus that makes sense for modern America before the Democrats become too drunk on their new power.
Agent Icebeezy said:I feel great about that, but I'm a Democrat.
I forget where I read this, but this is so true. The worst thing a politician can do is make a decision that makes you, the voter, ask the question of, what do you take me for? That is what the pick of Palin did. It was his first presidential decision and he threw a pick-6 in football terms.
Hitokage said:Nevermind how it overlooks what happens when their platform is given free reign.
Er, no, filibustering will still be ok. They'll just have the votes needed to end debate at will making most attempts useless.If the Democrats can get 60 members in the Senate, they can disallow filibustering, and allow progressive legislation to follow a much quicker route through the Senate.
GhaleonEB said:It's worth noting that both Ras and Gallup has Obama dropping below 50% for the first time in quite a while.
Let's see where things are at this time next week. Both of the previous debates helped Obama extend his lead, but polls tend to close down in the final weeks of an election.
Hitokage said:Yeah, well, forgive me if I don't care if the Dick Cheneys of the world wallow in irrelevance and powerlessness.
GhaleonEB said:It's worth noting that both Ras and Gallup has Obama dropping below 50% for the first time in quite a while.
Incognito said:Golly, no! Tell us, professor Cooter! What is with disgruntled Republicans suddenly becoming champions of fractured government?
Cooter said:Ok, does everyone understand the difference between 55 senators being of one party and 60? Serious question.
VictimOfGrief said:What I'm getting at is we're going to be in the same shit with different people holding the shovel.
Vennt said:Simple, they knew full well what a "permanent Republican majority" meant, and now realise they don't hold the keys to the gun cupboard any more they are scared.
"It was OK when we wanted the power..."![]()
knitoe said:Debates don't mean much unless someone really screwed up. Don't remember, Bush ever winning any debates. Obama rise was due to what's going on with stock market > economy.
Yeah, you could make that statement if you're apathetic, ignorant, or so far removed from either platform they're all godless communists to you.VictimOfGrief said:What I'm getting at is we're going to be in the same shit with different people holding the shovel.
mckmas8808 said:Link to the article
Talk about Fact Checking. McCain loses again. I wonder how hard they will try to push this Joe the Plumber/small business thing even though it's a big lie?
The debates helped Kerry close the gap with Bush, and helped Obama build his lead so far.knitoe said:Debates don't mean much unless someone really screwed up. Don't remember, Bush ever winning any debates. Obama rise was due to what's going on with stock market > economy.
Cooter said:Let's ask GAF. Even if you're an Obama supporter how do feel with the likely possibility of a super majority?
lawblob said:Crazy to think that just 4 years ago Republicans were talking about the demise of the Democratic party. :lol
My, what a difference four years can make. Thanks W.
Karma Kramer said:No... Obama rise is a combination of things. Stock Market, Debates, Palin fuck ups, McCain suspending his campaign, ineffective ayers attacks... etc.
Why do people like to look at things in black and white?
Tideas said:Guys, i'm scared. someone hold me.
![]()
![]()
Vennt said:Indeed, the Democratic party lost an election, the Republican party is looking at the prospect of losing cohesion entirely.
knitoe said:#1 issue in America is economy. If it's bad, helps Obama. Good, helps McCain. Other doesn't play major role. Sure as hell won't give Obama lead he has now.
The real winner last night was Joe the Plumber, McCain said, laughing. Joes the man.
Joe! Joe! Joe!, the crowd chanted.
Later, McCain says Obama will take Joes money and give it to someone else. Were not going to stand for that.
lawblob said:Crazy to think that just 4 years ago Republicans were talking about the demise of the Democratic party. :lol
My, what a difference four years can make. Thanks W.
Karma Kramer said:So your saying that is Obama would have lost all three debates he would still have this lead?
My bad. Not enough sleep last night.Fragamemnon said:Ras is still at 50% Obama, just +1 McCain to 46%. His model isn't playing out with the rest of the polling in swing states, though, his decision to keep the immediate post-convention GOP self-identification numbers in the rolling partisan makeup fubars everything.
Who's providing the insurance and healthcare won't change under Obama's plan, just who can afford it and how it is funded.PrivateWHudson said:With Obama's Healthcare plan, will I be able to opt out of my employer offered insurance, and buy into the awesomeness that is the Government Employee insurance plan?
Hitokage said:
knitoe said:Maybe, after 30 years of just talking, people would want some sort of measuring stick. Figure, if one guy says "4%" other guy better have exact number too (better or worse). If he can't make that number, have no problem with getting rid of them after 4 years. Problem is both of these candidates only care about saying stuff to get elected and re-elected, and not solving this problem. At this rate, we'll be talking about "energy in-dependency" for another 30 years.
Soroc said:What the hell is this shit??? Has this gotten any play??
Father of Bristol Palin's baby speaks
http://www.blackbottom.com/watch.php?v=WdBJd9b9i8A
reilo said:Who's providing the insurance and healthcare won't change under Obama's plan, just who can afford it and how it is funded.