Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yah, figured I'd spin this off for BrentAllen and everyone.


About what I was expectin' so far. A bunch of angry independents, particularly in da rust belt states that got hammered in the economic collapse followin' the 2008 financial shenanigans.


Most Americans don't understand that the economy lags political leadership by 2-6 years, eh?


I'm happy to see some of the more extreme democrats get clipped, disappointed to see some of da extremes on the other side. Amused by da Tea Party folks.


One of these days folks will figure out that by and large the country wants moderate statesmen, not party idealogues on either side.


I think a Republican house might help Obama and the nation. And it'll be fun to see 'em try to decide what to cut in order to be fiscally responsible. Anybody betting that they decide to tackle social security and medicare, da biggest "socialist" deficit programs ;).


Not quite a repeat of 1994 but close. If da Republicans gridlock things as they're posturin', should guarantee an Obama win and swing back toward da middle in 2012, right in line with 1996.




Link to post
Share on other sites

Disappointed to see Harry Reid, Barney Frank and Barbara Boxer survive. Extremely pleased to see Pelosi FIRED!! Also glad to see Alan Grayson FIRED!!


We may not have taken the Senate (looks like we could get very close, with 47, maybe 48), but all those governor pick-ups will make up for it. As of now, it looks like 65+ seats picked up in the House for the Republicans. Only a third of the country voted for their Senator; the whole country voted for their Representative - the country has clearly spoken.


I heard Democrat Eliot Spitzer say that, though it pains him to do so, the last two Democrat presidents (Clinton and Obama) have seen their progressive agendas roundly rejected by the American voters just two years into their terms.


Looks like Prop. 19 will get defeated - no legal weed in California. That will be painful for them, with Jerry Brown as governor.


Favorite line of the day: "The early returns and overwhelming number of Democrats who are coming out we're on pace to maintain a majority in the House of Representatives," Nancy Pelosi. Fail!


This is a center-right country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yah, sherm, it probably is. But then I live in "flyover" country.


Actually, close as I can tell from da election results it's an urban-rural-suburban country.


Da urban folks, relying on government infrastructure just in order to live in an urban area, are more apt to be supportive of government programs. Schools bein' what they are in urban areas, there can be quite an entitlement mentality - "the government should do this for me" kind of thing.


Da rural folks, who are a bit more ethnically homogeneous, a bit more self-reliant on basic services, are more apt to be supportive of the "government should leave us alone" view. Except when it comes to huge farm subsidies, big government work projects like rural electrification, and "defending the border" in order to preserve their ethnic homogeneity. ;)


Then, solidly in da middle, are the rest of us suburban folks, who are increasingly angry at both sides and swing our vote back and forth just to punish the last bunch of nitwits in office. We see some merit in government regulation to prevent Wall Street from takin' down the national economy or BP from destroying the livelihood of fishermen or Pennsylvania from dumpin' acid rain to destroy the lakes in Vermont. At da same time, we're not that fond of subsidies and inefficient government programs, and would like to see some accountability, fiscal responsibility, and statesmanship.


Da primary system we have is set up so that only the first two groups get to choose who is running in the general election, eh? Then da last group casts the deciding votes, usually while holding their nose.


If someone were to start a Moderate's Party in the middle, it would marginalize both the Dems and the Republicans, and the country would probably be all the better for it. Gets tiresome swingin' between Pelosi-liberals and Palin-Teabaggers and then listen to 'em behave worse than most cub scouts in da halls of Congress. But I reckon that group would be slightly right of "center".


Of course, Palin could win da Republican nomination for 2012, in which case the Democrats will sweep the nation. Seems that with each victory, neither side realizes that the country is really moderate.




Link to post
Share on other sites

So, the Election is the Forming Stage, once Congerss gets back in session in January after the Holiday recess its on to the Storming Stage, where new Leaders are chosen and the Parties feel each other out as to who does what to whom then should come Norming as roles are laid out and finally Performing


Well, thats the way it should work out, we have been stuck in Congressional Storming for way way to long

Link to post
Share on other sites


Anybody betting that they decide to tackle social security and medicare, da biggest "socialist" deficit programs

I assume there is sarcasm in this comment. But for the benefit of those who might take it as truth: Social Security does not operate at, nor contribute to the federal defecit. Budgetarily, social security is separate from the general budget, instead operating from the Social Security Trust Fund. For almost all of its history, the program has operated at a surplus. That surplus is invested almost exclusively in US government Treasury Bonds. In effect, Social Security actually helps finance the government's defecit spending.

It is true that if changes are not made, the system cannot function at a surplus indefinitely. Currently, the trust fund will be exhausted in 2037. However, modest changes now can return the system to long-term viablity. Change in some or all of the following may be necessary: retirement age; benefit levels; or FICA tax (or the associated threshold at which FICA retirement witholding stops).

Raising the retirement age further is really a situation of diminishing returns. It is already scheduled to increase to 67 for those born after 1960. This is the highest age among industrialized nations. If it is raised further, a significant number of those who would be receiving retirement benefits will simply be shifted to disability benefits, which also come from the trust fund. While it may be practical for those of us who work in sedentary jobs to work to 70 or beyond, it is not practical to expect the average construction worker, truck driver, or other heavy laborer to work indefinitely. Cutting benefits significantly would obviously not be palpable either. But increasing the FICA witholding limit, if done soon enough, could eliminate most of the projected shortfall.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get chills when I see comments like "we took back the House". Maybe I'm too idealistic and sonce the Legislature "belongs" to the citizens. I'm ignoring the obvious owning by lobbyists and corporations for the moment. Perhaps, once people start thinking in terms of "winning" and "losing" we could actually make some progress improving our government and country.


Until then, I'm afraid we're mired in one big mess. Solutions aren't going to be found in political party rhetoric and campaign ads. Solutions are through and compromise and working for the good of their constituents not just the "blue" or "red" ones.


And the voters are so intelligent in Florida that they elect a man that had the largest fraud case with Medicare. Worst return on investment ever: spend $73 million of your own money to get a job that pays $100,000.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...