Poligaf episode 2010: The Empire Strikes Back
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
Skiptastic
Member
Puddles said:
So giant bills that would fundamentally change the country as we know it are being altered to have modifying affects on the country instead. Sounds pretty much like how the Senate should be run.
Bush also had appointees not be nominated. If his legislation was less altered than Obama's, don't blame that on the system, blame it on the makeup of the body. Besides, two more people on your side earns you a majority that can break the filibuster. If you honestly can't convince two people to "do the right thing", sounds like you need to do a better job of concocting legislation or framing the message.
Byakuya769
Member
Skiptastic said:
See. I think this post proves my point pretty well.
PhoenixDark
Banned
FLEABttn said:
Pretty sure there are a lot of republicans who still hate Gingrich. They might shut down government during the lameduck session, but even that seems unlikely. I'd imagine they realize they'll lose that argument again in the end against a charismatic president.
No.
Important pieces of legislation with broad public support are neutered or removed completely because a majority of 59/100 has to bargain from a position of extreme weakness with 1 or 2 Senators who will keep pushing further and further to the right.
That's not what the Senate was intended to be, skiptastic.
Important pieces of legislation with broad public support are neutered or removed completely because a majority of 59/100 has to bargain from a position of extreme weakness with 1 or 2 Senators who will keep pushing further and further to the right.
That's not what the Senate was intended to be, skiptastic.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/143468/Likely-Voters-Demographically-Typical-Skew-Conservative.aspx
Wow, really? Their LV voter model has 54% of people leaning "conservative" and lean 57% Republican for these upcoming midterms? That's 14% higher than their 1994 scenario.
Not in this climate, no way no how.FLEABttn said:
For the most part, the GOP control the news cycle these days.
I'm sure people will eventually see the light,
No matter how hard Ron Paul clap his hands and believe in fairies, this country just can't function without the federal government, but man, it will take a while and it's not going to be pretty.
Yeah, we're fucked.reilo said:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/143468/Likely-Voters-Demographically-Typical-Skew-Conservative.aspx
Wow, really? Their LV voter model has 54% of people leaning "conservative" and lean 57% Republican for these upcoming midterms? That's 14% higher than their 1994 scenario.
Diablos said:
It's not how much you spend, it's where you spend. Howard Dean showed that in 2006. But yes, money matters, but it's not the sole determiner of public sentiment. It's ALWAYS the economy that drives opinion.
I think you areoff-base here. The 94 Republicans were the well-oiled machine that just came off of 4 decades in political exile. A party that was lead by much more charismatic, seasoned people (Gingrich, Dole) and had executed a mid-term campaign brilliantly. Remember, it is much easier to consolidate support AGAINST something than it is to FOR something. That's all this current crop of Republicans have been able to do. They had their backs against the wall and have only had to play defense the whole time. They are still led by some of the most incompetent leaders this party has had (Steele and Boehner).
Scott Brown is the prime example of anti-establishment sentiment that is driving these past 4 years. They didn't vote for him because he was a Republican .. they voted for him because he "wasn't one of THEM". The candidates that can best represent that this Fall will find the most success.
Like losing the congress in '06 help the GOP in '08?thekad said:
If people understood the legislature they would've already been pissed at the GOP.
And as much as I'm unhappy with the Democrats these days (and I'm REALLY pissed at them at the moment), if you think that having the 2010 model of the GOP control the house will have minimal impact on this country, well, you might be in for a surprise.
thekad said:
I don't understand the point. Because we have 10 percent unemployment, this congress should be passing twice as much legislation? I don't think the issue is output .. I think the issue is focus.
This is you projecting here. You can't use someone like Gingrich as an example of what Republican politicians plan to do then back it off with that statement.
Plenty of shit "got done" in 82-84 and 94-96. Both were very acrimonious times on the Hill due to mid-term elections. I don't see why history can't repeat itself. Is it going to be pretty, will it feel good? Nope.
It will be interesting to see what tack they take when they have more numbers. Their current strategy was merely for political survival coming off 2006 and 2008. As the 94 Republicans found out, you can only push around a President so much before you start to take your own lumps.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Meet Tom Donilon, the next national security advisor
President Loses 'Iron Hand,' Gains Donilon
Oct 8 2010, 1:01 PM ET
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/10/president-loses-iron-hand-gains-donilon/64301/
The key to understand why President Obama picked deputy National Security Adviser Tom Donilon to replace Gen. James Jones has three grooves: one; Donilon is a civilian policy wonk loyal to the President whose hand has been in every facet of foreign policy since the beginning of the administration; he's a politically-savvy Democrat; and he's an adviser who the President can count on to stand up to, to push back against, the military, when necessary.
The perception of Jones was that the former general was often indecisive, at times, to the point where some of his colleagues would joke about the irony of his Secret Service code name: "Iron Hand."
But Jones, former commandant of the Marine Corps, was committed to the inter-agency process he oversaw and to the structure of the National Security Staff he helped to create. This was a deliberate on Jones's part: he believed the policy-making process was so "20th century" in his words and was committed to the new process he helped create, one that elevated issues like cyber security and climate change to the spectrum of daily issues that the National Security Staff wrestled with. Obama selected Jones in part based on the private recommendation of Brent Scowcroft, the former Bush national security adviser, who believed and told Obama that Jones would serve as an honest broker and would help the President navigate the complex terrain of civilian-military relations during a time of two wars. Jones had to first figure out how to handle the assortment of political and policy aides who knew the President better and could channel his voice; this lead to friction that has lasted, in some degree, to this day.
Jones's colleagues at the White House credit him, along with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, for the apparent success of the "Russian Reset," which resulted, most recently, in Russia's decision to move toward the U.S. on sanctions against Iran and return money that Tehran paid to Moscow to purchase S-300 missiles (that it won't receive). Without Jones, a colleague said, the new START treaty with Russia might never have been negotiated.
If Bob Woodward's book, "Obama's Wars," is canon, then two things are true: Jones, while initially warming to Donilon, grew wary of the man who would be successor. And Defense Secretary Robert Gates does not view the prospect of Donilon's new job with enthusiasm. (Gates, today, said that he enjoyed a "good" working relationship with Donilon "despite what you may have read.")
"The Woodward characterization is way outdated and it does not reflect the current state of the relationship," a senior defense official said today. "They did some have issues back during the Af-Pak review, but those issues have been addressed and long-since overcome, and they have enjoyed a good working relationship now for many, many months." The official added that Donilon's ascension does not affect Gates's own timetable for leaving the Pentagon.
If anything, it's Donilon's "tone" that offended Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Mike Mullen, who didn't like Donilon's "butting in" to what were purely defense affairs. A Pentagon consultant who participated in the first Afghanistan review and who is close to several senior generals and admirals put it more starkly: "The military hates the guy."
A senior administration official said that Jones and Donilon "have a far broader working relationship than is reflected in that book," which means, essentially, that it could have been better, but it was not toxic.
Over the next several months, President Obama will govern amid an incredible amount of turnover in his foreign policy team: not only has Gates said that he will not be around forever, but Mullen's tenure as Joint Chiefs chairman comes to an end, along with Vice Chair Gen. James Cartwright, who gets along well with the President and his team. Other key positions that must be filled include the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Army, and the commanding general of the Joint Special Operations Command, the nation's counter-terrorism army. In December, the administration plans to assess the Afghanistan strategy, and in November, Obama plans a ten-day trip to Asia.
Jones had told the president he intended to leave in the final quarter of 2010. After the resignation of Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff, Obama decided that, "[l]ooking prospectively, it's better to get the new team in place now and head fresh into this trip and this review," a senior administration official said.
Donilon shares Obama's impatience with the pace of the troop surge into Afghanistan, and he shares Obama's intention not to get mired in a years-long drawdown that will replace the conventional military footprint with a quasi-combat permanent presence.
He already attends the daily intelligence briefing, explaining to the president what policies are in place to contain and respond to the daily matrix of national security threats. He chairs the deputies process, which is what tees up issues for the President to decide. He has been quite aggressive in expanding the reach of that table, and there is not an issue that does not have, in some way, the residue of Donilon's fingerprints.
Donilon has been the NSS's point person Iran, bringing together diplomatic, military and intelligence policies. He's effectively the deputy to Secretary Clinton in managing the administration's new push for Middle East peace. And he's become active in working the administration's complex military and economic relationships with Asian countries.
The perception of Jones was that the former general was often indecisive, at times, to the point where some of his colleagues would joke about the irony of his Secret Service code name: "Iron Hand."
But Jones, former commandant of the Marine Corps, was committed to the inter-agency process he oversaw and to the structure of the National Security Staff he helped to create. This was a deliberate on Jones's part: he believed the policy-making process was so "20th century" in his words and was committed to the new process he helped create, one that elevated issues like cyber security and climate change to the spectrum of daily issues that the National Security Staff wrestled with. Obama selected Jones in part based on the private recommendation of Brent Scowcroft, the former Bush national security adviser, who believed and told Obama that Jones would serve as an honest broker and would help the President navigate the complex terrain of civilian-military relations during a time of two wars. Jones had to first figure out how to handle the assortment of political and policy aides who knew the President better and could channel his voice; this lead to friction that has lasted, in some degree, to this day.
Jones's colleagues at the White House credit him, along with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, for the apparent success of the "Russian Reset," which resulted, most recently, in Russia's decision to move toward the U.S. on sanctions against Iran and return money that Tehran paid to Moscow to purchase S-300 missiles (that it won't receive). Without Jones, a colleague said, the new START treaty with Russia might never have been negotiated.
If Bob Woodward's book, "Obama's Wars," is canon, then two things are true: Jones, while initially warming to Donilon, grew wary of the man who would be successor. And Defense Secretary Robert Gates does not view the prospect of Donilon's new job with enthusiasm. (Gates, today, said that he enjoyed a "good" working relationship with Donilon "despite what you may have read.")
"The Woodward characterization is way outdated and it does not reflect the current state of the relationship," a senior defense official said today. "They did some have issues back during the Af-Pak review, but those issues have been addressed and long-since overcome, and they have enjoyed a good working relationship now for many, many months." The official added that Donilon's ascension does not affect Gates's own timetable for leaving the Pentagon.
If anything, it's Donilon's "tone" that offended Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Mike Mullen, who didn't like Donilon's "butting in" to what were purely defense affairs. A Pentagon consultant who participated in the first Afghanistan review and who is close to several senior generals and admirals put it more starkly: "The military hates the guy."
A senior administration official said that Jones and Donilon "have a far broader working relationship than is reflected in that book," which means, essentially, that it could have been better, but it was not toxic.
Over the next several months, President Obama will govern amid an incredible amount of turnover in his foreign policy team: not only has Gates said that he will not be around forever, but Mullen's tenure as Joint Chiefs chairman comes to an end, along with Vice Chair Gen. James Cartwright, who gets along well with the President and his team. Other key positions that must be filled include the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Army, and the commanding general of the Joint Special Operations Command, the nation's counter-terrorism army. In December, the administration plans to assess the Afghanistan strategy, and in November, Obama plans a ten-day trip to Asia.
Jones had told the president he intended to leave in the final quarter of 2010. After the resignation of Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff, Obama decided that, "[l]ooking prospectively, it's better to get the new team in place now and head fresh into this trip and this review," a senior administration official said.
Donilon shares Obama's impatience with the pace of the troop surge into Afghanistan, and he shares Obama's intention not to get mired in a years-long drawdown that will replace the conventional military footprint with a quasi-combat permanent presence.
He already attends the daily intelligence briefing, explaining to the president what policies are in place to contain and respond to the daily matrix of national security threats. He chairs the deputies process, which is what tees up issues for the President to decide. He has been quite aggressive in expanding the reach of that table, and there is not an issue that does not have, in some way, the residue of Donilon's fingerprints.
Donilon has been the NSS's point person Iran, bringing together diplomatic, military and intelligence policies. He's effectively the deputy to Secretary Clinton in managing the administration's new push for Middle East peace. And he's become active in working the administration's complex military and economic relationships with Asian countries.
###
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
Incognito said:
"It's all over now, folks."
I've noticed you like to point out when people may be a little redundant. So, I'm wondering: Is that all you ever do?Door2Dawn said:
Do you even pay attention to politics? Dingell has been in the House since the 50's. If someone like Dingell is in trouble, every Democrat is. He is the longest serving member of Congress.
Aaron Strife
Banned
In fairness, he's been in Congress for over 50 years. The whole "anti-incumbency" thing might hold better there.Incognito said:
But damn. I should start looking at apartments in Vancouver.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Incognito said:
And the economy will only continue to stagnate more.
Damage control or a sigh of relief?
http://www.dingellforcongress.com/2010/10/07/dingell-for-congress-responds-to-gop-poll/
http://www.dingellforcongress.com/2010/10/07/dingell-for-congress-responds-to-gop-poll/
NullPointer
Member
To me this is the worst message to come out of this election (assuming things end up as dire as predicted).thekad said:
To lockstep an entire party into full obstruction mode, and then have the unmitigated gall to paint the other side as purely partisan is such a farce - it's bullshit of the highest order. But its worked like a charm. There was never any chance of bipartisanship. The Republican gameplan worked perfectly - aided by their 24 hour noise and obfuscation machine.
That's the moral of this story, and its one we should all want delegitimized, but instead it will be celebrated.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Incognito said:
He probably shouldn't be serving due to his age/health, I wonder if that has something to do with the polls. If not yea, bad sign.
Dems are so fucked in Ohio/Michigan/etc anyway. Too bad republicans don't have a decent presidential candidate or they'd easily defeat Obama.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
reilo: [new polls]
Diablos: "We're doomed!"
GhaleonB: (polite agreement)
ToxicAdam: (polite disagreement)
PantherLotus: "That's a logical fallacy! But I agree!"
Chichikov: (polite dissertation)
Kittonwy: "ObamaCare is a socialist takeover! (I'm from Canada, btw)"
mckmas8808: "Here's an article. Obama does everything right!"
platypotamus: (polite agreement)
LovingSteam: (polite agreement)
PhoenixDark: (polite disagreement)
Incognito: "Not to sound like Diablos, but we really are fucked."
BigSicily: "Laffer Curve!"
speculawyer: (polite dissertation)
empty vessel: (mind exploding epic novel)
RustyNails: (polite agreement)
Aaron Strife (polite agreement)
Diablos: "We're doomed!"
GhaleonB: (polite agreement)
ToxicAdam: (polite disagreement)
PantherLotus: "That's a logical fallacy! But I agree!"
Chichikov: (polite dissertation)
Kittonwy: "ObamaCare is a socialist takeover! (I'm from Canada, btw)"
mckmas8808: "Here's an article. Obama does everything right!"
platypotamus: (polite agreement)
LovingSteam: (polite agreement)
PhoenixDark: (polite disagreement)
Incognito: "Not to sound like Diablos, but we really are fucked."
BigSicily: "Laffer Curve!"
speculawyer: (polite dissertation)
empty vessel: (mind exploding epic novel)
RustyNails: (polite agreement)
Aaron Strife (polite agreement)
NullPointer said:
It's a hollow victory. The Congressional Republicans are as unpopular as ever. So, if anything, they already have one foot in the grave for the next election cycle if things don't go well.
NullPointer
Member
That's hollow comfort too ;pToxicAdam said:
But I guess we'll see. At this point my interest lies in Proposition 19.
Skiptastic
Member
PantherLotus said:
Skiptastic: (writes up paragraphs long argument, decides it isn't worth it, clicks back button + F5, repeat)
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
My real problem with that argument/philosophy is that I don't think we have time to be fucking around making political points. We need an active legislature prepared to make necessary action in the face of potential economic catastrophes.
On the other hand, I think the economy is already recovered, unemployment will be back around 4-5% by 2012, and we've more or less finished what we can do in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the other hand, I think the economy is already recovered, unemployment will be back around 4-5% by 2012, and we've more or less finished what we can do in Iraq and Afghanistan.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Diablos said:
uhh whoever is the president?
LegendofJoe
Member
Diablos said:
If unemployment gets that low I don't give a damn who gets the credit or not.
leroidys said:
Well, it has entered the political lexicon as one of those buzzwords that immediately illicit a negative reaction. Obama proposes mortgage relief and it becomes a "homeowner bailout", Financial reform becomes another "bank bailout", and I'm sure we will see it used in other ways for years to come.
But, I will agree that Republicans have tried to tie Obama to the auto bailouts. Which was part of the original TARP.
spermatic cord
Member
perfectchaos007
Member
spermatic cord said:
I hear that California conservatives are doing more of their propaganda work to convince people that legalizing weed is a terrible idea. And apparently polls suggest that it's working?
If you legalize the gateway drug, you are legalizing Meth! You don't want all Californians to be on METH do you?
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Averon said:
4-5% is just laughable. I think it'll hit 7.5% by the end of next year.
Jason's Ultimatum said:
Even 7.5% by the tail end of 2011 is highly optimistic imo. This economy needs to be producing over 200k jobs a month just to even start making any meaningful dents in the UE number. We're getting well below half that. I don't see companies doing hiring bonanzas while they're profiting by cutting their payrolls to the bone. What's the incentive to hire?
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
- Status