Obama definitely has been put on notice tonight after the Republican victories. He needs to get things moving or he might be a one term President.

He campaigned for Corzine in New Jersey and it didn't work. People are upset about the economy, the war on terror or whatever we call it now and health care. And now Democrats are collateral damage for him not making good on his campaign promises. The interesting thing to me is that Republicans don't offer any solutions, but an anti-Obama message which is working.

[url]http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/03/2009.elections/index.html[/url]

Re: Republicans strike back

Woooooo!!!! YEAH!!!!!! CHANGE!!!!! It's.... It's CHANGE!!!!!

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[IMG]http://37prime.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/the_coon_change_when_540.jpg?w=460&h=258[/IMG]

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=superdave;803901]The interesting thing to me is that Republicans don't offer any solutions[/QUOTE] yay, bring nothing to the table!! go republicans!!!

Re: Republicans strike back

and the left right paradigm continues.. you guys desperately need a third party.

Re: Republicans strike back

It will be interesting to see what the parties do with this. It would be easy for the GOP to view this as an indictment of Democratic policies -- or an embracing of their own -- but I don't think that either is necessarily accurate.

Turnout amongst Democrats, particularly in Virginia, was really weak, which says as much about the democrats' gubernatorial candidates in VA and NJ as it does about the GOP candidates. Deeds, in particular, turned off a lot of far left dems by running a very centrist campaign, and they didn't turn out for him. Also, the exit polling doesn't show a huge correlation between voters' feelings about Obama and their votes here. Sure, the love-in is over, but there isn't really data to support the idea that I suspect we'll hear that this was some sort of wholesale backlash against Obama.

NY-23 is really interesting, and highlights why the GOP ought not be doing too much back-slapping about voters embracing the more conservative views of the party. A Democrat was elected there for the first time since the Civil War era. The more moderate republican candidate stepped out of the way at the behest of Palin, et al to pave the way for an ultra-conservative candidate to hold the seat, but voters said no deal. The divide between the more vocal wingnuts that can't get elected and the more moderate Republicans that can is still alive and well.

Re: Republicans strike back

So is 1 year out too early to judge Obama's power to turn the economy around and change our foreign policy? Has there been some growth in the economy? Was there a sense of near panic in our country a year ago because of the housing crisis? Is there currently some hope in our country for the economy?

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=Jenks;803986]yay, bring nothing to the table!! go republicans!!![/QUOTE] Not so, any solutions they offer are railroaded in Congress. Go Democrats for not being able to pass radical legislation even within their own party (since they have a supermajority). Maybe they should take the hint and listen to their constituents for a change.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=toasty;804020]NY-23 is really interesting, and highlights why the GOP ought not be doing too much back-slapping about voters embracing the more conservative views of the party. A Democrat was elected there for the first time since the Civil War era. The more moderate republican candidate stepped out of the way at the behest of Palin, et al to pave the way for an ultra-conservative candidate to hold the seat, but voters said no deal. The divide between the more vocal wingnuts that can't get elected and the more moderate Republicans that can is still alive and well.[/QUOTE] The "moderate" Repub was very unpopular and could simply be characterized as another RINO with regards to her stance on many issues. The fact that the Conservative party candidate managed 45% of the vote shouldn't be scoffed at as some lunatic wingnut fringe group.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=vinnie97;804213]Not so, any solutions they offer are railroaded in Congress. [/QUOTE]

they're shitty ideas anyway. :D

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=vinnie97;804214]The "moderate" Repub was very unpopular and could simply be characterized as another RINO with regards to her stance on many issues. The fact that the Conservative party candidate managed 45% of the vote shouldn't be scoffed at as some lunatic wingnut fringe group.[/QUOTE]

This is an awesome response, in that it simultaneously argues that the republican didn't get support because she was not conservative enough, while arguing that the really conservative candidate -- who was endorsed by enough republican icons to become the de facto GOP candidate and push out the actual GOP candidate -- should feel lucky to have garnered 45% of the vote in a district that hasn't voted for a democrat in over a century. That's the risk you take when you just string together talking points without thinking about them -- you might put two together that are inconsistent, as you have here. Good stuff.

I'm not in the camp that thinks that this was the only national race that mattered, or that the Democrats ought to be high-fiving each other for winning this particular race, but it does highlight the very fractured nature of the GOP right now. You folks need to get your house in order if you don't want in-party backbiting that characterized this race -- and the propping up of a far right candidate that no moderate could vote for -- to prevent you from taking back any seats in 2010.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=prearmaGope;815852] The whole point of my post [COLOR=Red][B][I]was [/I][/B][/COLOR]that ...[/QUOTE]

Was there another post that preceded this one? Not showing up, if so.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=toasty;804404]This is an awesome response, in that it simultaneously argues that the republican didn't get support because she was not conservative enough, while arguing that the really conservative candidate -- who was endorsed by enough republican icons to become the de facto GOP candidate and push out the actual GOP candidate -- should feel lucky to have garnered 45% of the vote in a district that hasn't voted for a democrat in over a century. That's the risk you take when you just string together talking points without thinking about them -- you might put two together that are inconsistent, as you have here. Good stuff.[/quote] Firstly, you're wrong about it not having been held by a Repub in over a century. More lamestream media misinformation/lies: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district[/url] - if you're basing your argument on how conservative that district traditionally is, it holds no water. Doesn't matter anyway, the majority of this country is still of a conservative mind and are realizing the mistake they made in believing in Obama's rhetoric, which is partly evidenced by this chart: [url]http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll[/url]

[quote]I'm not in the camp that thinks that this was the only national race that mattered, or that the Democrats ought to be high-fiving each other for winning this particular race, but it does highlight the very fractured nature of the GOP right now. You folks need to get your house in order if you don't want in-party backbiting that characterized this race -- and the propping up of a far right candidate that no moderate could vote for -- to prevent you from taking back any seats in 2010.[/QUOTE] When the GOP behaves like Democrat-lite clones, it's time to start reeling them in, and that includes insane spending bills at a time when they can be least afforded.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE]Firstly, you're wrong about it not having been held by a Repub in over a century. More lamestream media misinformation/lies: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_23rd_congressional_district"][COLOR=#d2d2d2][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yor...ional_district"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Yor...ional_district[/COLOR][/URL][/URL][/QUOTE]

in an online debate, reading skills and comprehension are essential.

what he said was [b]democrats[/b] have not held the seat in a century.

see quote...

[QUOTE]in a district that [b]hasn't voted for a democrat[/b] in over a century.[/QUOTE]

hopefully this clears up your mis information, thanks.

Re: Republicans strike back

Clearly, I read too quickly. Anyway, that race was small potatoes to the one that just concluded...if that isn't a referendum on the current direction this country is headed, nothing is.

Re: Republicans strike back

to bad an independant didn't win. That would have been a big message

Re: Republicans strike back

[quote=runningman;826451]to bad an independant didn't win. That would have been a big message[/quote] HOLY FUCK!! We agree on something!! MARK THE CALENDER!! 8)

Re: Republicans strike back

It is fun watching the Democrats blaming each other why they lost. A lot of factors including taking the public for granted, a lame candidate in Coakley and an anti-Democrat public. And shocking this happened in Democratic Massachusetts instead of say Texas.

As I mentioned earlier, I think the voter message is it's more a disapproval of Obama and the Democrats performance than the Republicans have great ideas. And yes, the Democrats lost the independent voter like me and many others in the last year. And by the way, his attractive college age daughters are available.

Re: Republicans strike back

hopefully this really will kill the pathetic health care joke of a bill there trying to rush through. i have my doubts though.

Re: Republicans strike back

[QUOTE=chuckc;826547]hopefully this really will kill the pathetic health care joke of a bill there trying to rush through. [/QUOTE]

Hopefully.

Re: Republicans strike back

watch mondays episode of the dailyshow on the website for hte daily show. stewarts first 15minutes are all about this and some of the bext stewart i have ever seen..