How do you feel about our main two political parties?

I'm not really happy with either right now. Personally, I think the Republican Party is a huge sham. They have a huge amount of power right now, and I'm not really seeing a huge improvement. I can't own all the guns I want nor drive a tank to work. If anything, they have made both more unlikely than ever before

I can't really think of one thing they have done that I like. It's like someone took everything I didn't like about demos and Repubs, and made a party out of it. You mean I can have huge government and someone worried about where my cock is at the same time? Sign me up man.

I'm not really a big fan of demo's either. I don't like how they achieve their goals. I don't think everything can be fixed with a law, regulation, or hand out. If the repubs are big Dad, then the demos are Big Mom, and I like each about equally, not at all.

I really wish there was a common sense party.

There is but no one really wants a monarchy anymore.

One's turned from callous to evil, the other's redefined the concept of ineffective. We need more than two real choices, especially when they suck this much.

James

I quote Douglas Adams, from So Long, and Thanks For All the Fish.

Quote:

---

"On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said Ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in."

---

The only way to kill the two party system is to kill donations to the two parties. If you don't have millions of dollars to spend on a Senate/Presidential campaign, you haven't a chance in hell of even making a difference.

Sadly, as time goes on this country is more and more about the haves vs. the have nots and the have nots are getting their asses handed to them as usual.

The Republican Party today is not Reagan's Republican Party. Bush's RP is something else entirely. :( My favorite Republican president would have to be Reagan, whom Bush just doesn't measure up to.

I don't really consider myself affiliated with either party. Whoever I disagree less with, I vote for.

Re: How do you feel about our main two political parties?

They're useless. Sadly, the best way to keep them from doing anything harmful is to have one side control the presidency and the other the House.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gameoverDude

My favorite Republican president would have to be Reagan

---

You're probably the first person that I've ever heard say this. I constantly hear shit, even from people who defend Republicans to death, about how much shit Reagan fucked up.

Politics just piss me off in general. Neither party impresses me.

Neither party is ideal, but on the whole I still find the Democrats less repugnant because atleast some of them are standing up for the fundamental rights of all Americans, while the Republican body politick has decided to allow one man to hold almost limitless power in government, without oversight, without taking a stand for defending the Constitution, and without any accountability for his mistakes. This Republican Party is no longer the defender of individual rights, small government, and privacy. They let those ideals die with Goldwater, now they are something more akin to fascism tempered with corporate greed.

I just think Z-Day needs to happen so we can all start with a nice, clean slate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Neither party is ideal, but on the whole I still find the Democrats less repugnant because atleast some of them are standing up for the fundamental rights of all Americans, while the Republican body politick has decided to allow one man to hold almost limitless power in government, without oversight, without taking a stand for defending the Constitution, and without any accountability for his mistakes. This Republican Party is no longer the defender of individual rights, small government, and privacy. They let those ideals die with Goldwater, now they are something more akin to fascism tempered with corporate greed.

---

I know it’s a mute point now, but it wasn't to long ago that the demo's were attacking the right to bare arms. And yes, I'm aware that is like an ant hill compared to the rights the repubs are shitting on right now, so no need to point that out. Hell, if the repubs get any worse, I could very well see them banning fire arms to keep those evil terrorist from being able to buy them. And yes, I also see the delicious irony in that the same people that were preaching slippery slope shit about banning guns hurting other rights, are doing the shit they are now.

i like how people use the word facism like facism=evil.

portnoyd is right. i don't care which side wins the office. As long as the president and the house are different I'm cool.

That said I hope a Dem wins next years election unless the Rep. party picks a moderate conservative. No more neo-con shit. it's a liberal belief to begin with anyway.

Well, was there ever really a good Fascist regime anywhere?

As for me, I am disgusted by both of our parties. The republican is out of control, and nothing at all like the republican party of yesteryear (wtf happened to the push for a smaller federal government with more states rights?), and the democrats are made up of a bunch of retards who need to get their acts together.

Hence one of the reasons I said fuck it, and decided to get the hell out of the US for a few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

i like how people use the word facism like facism=evil.

---

that shouldn't suprise you. It is very anti american in concept. plz read the wiki to see what I'm talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist

Rome was heavily facist. Argubably the first facist society. It was the retards like Mussolini like that killed any chance of it being used well again.

Out of all the people I have ever heard bitch and compalin about this country( I'm talking hundreds) your the first I've known to leave. You disliked this place that bad?

im not a fan of either, im fiscally liberal and socially conservative(in short, im the anti-yoshi), so outside of pennsylvania, im kind of boned. I was a republican, but the last few elections i have been drifting heavily, and tuesday looks to be a continuation of that trend. I like how canada does it, multiple parties that have to work together to get the nuber of votes, much less polarizing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

I know it’s a mute point now, but it wasn't to long ago that the demo's were attacking the right to bare arms.

---

They were this close to pushing the Tank Top Act through in 98.

yes, they were defeated by a silent majority

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Out of all the people I have ever heard bitch and compalin about this country( I'm talking hundreds) your the first I've known to leave. You disliked this place that bad?

---

Well I haven't left permanently... (at least I don't think so yet)... it's just nice to finally escape the shittiness of America for a different (better in some ways, worse in others) place. Plus as I said, it was just one of my reasons for leaving. I had others as well.


But on your other note... I don't think you can really call Rome's gov't Fascism. Fascism is from the 20th century and is a product of Nationalism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bbobb

But on your other note... I don't think you can really call Rome's gov't Fascism. Fascism is from the 20th century and is a product of Nationalism.

---

Rome was a highly nationalistic society. They may not have embodied all of the tenets that later fascists would ascribe to them, but they were pretty close. When I say fascism though, I mean the loss of individual rights for the protection of the 'state'.

Looks like a lot of people are fed up with both of 'em. It'd be great fun to see a third party take over just because people wanted something different.

one third party really wouldnt be enough though, it would just split power bases from the closer party and help the more opposed party, arguably the reform party did this for gwb senior and the green party did this for al gore. arguably. the reason i like the canadian system is you get a large spread of parties who have to build coalitions so you dont get polar pandering, people who disagree have to work together, and form a workable comprimise i like that idea mor than what we had, repubs ignore dems and do what they want, or what we will likely have come wed, with dems ignoring repubs and doing what they want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Rome was heavily facist. Argubably the first facist society. It was the retards like Mussolini like that killed any chance of it being used well again.

---

what on earth are you talking about? fascism is anti individualist, anti socialist, and anti communist. It was a response to the loss of faith in capitalism because of the depression of the 30s and a fear and mistrust of the rising communist ideology.

Most people find it to be evil because it promotes the state's will as being more important than the will of the individual.

And no, Rome was not heavily fascist. That is bullshit propaganda used by fascist to prop themselves up.

I hate fuckin wabbits. They always gotta shit on themselves. I'm voting for Ricky Henderson. So is he.

The USA uses an archaic form of democracy as it is, the senate is not based on proportional representation, the lower house is based on an electoral college where the popular vote doesn't matter, the president has too strong veto powers, etc etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AstroBlue

The USA uses an archaic form of democracy

---

stfu plz

AB is right. The whole US system is a disaster.

He's right, especially about the Senate, which really fucks states like New York, Texas and California while giving tiny states that don't matter like Wyoming and Montana far too much power.

Parties suuuuuuuuuuuck. Republican, Democrat, Wig, whatever--as long as there are dominant sides reason and fairness lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint of Killers

He's right, especially about the Senate, which really fucks states like New York, Texas and California while giving tiny states that don't matter like Wyoming and Montana far too much power.

---

good, fuck new york and california.

I like texas though.

http://therandomburrito.blogspot.com...-miss-him.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

good, fuck new york and california.

I like texas though.

---

Statements like this make me seriously worry about you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

stfu plz

---

Truth hurts.

The problem with most mature democracies these days is that the "natural parties" are getting too well established in both the UPPER and LOWER houses so they are essentially elected dictatorships.

I mean, this is very much true in Australia, the Liberal Party hold both the upper and lower houses so they can pretty much do whatever they want with no real way for the opposing viewpoint to "put on the brakes".

The balance of democracy is that you don't want a multi-party government, or nothing really gets done (like the Italian Government which used to have an election every month from coalitions collapsing) and you don't want an established two-party system where the people in charge go balls to the walls with their agenda with no real discourse or refinement (US and Australia).

I think it would be awesome if you could have a smooth lower house so shit can get done, but a messy upper house where deals have to made and agendas need to be checked for things to pass.

I hate the Republicans withe very fiber of my soul, and I just don't plain like the Democrats. It's a sad situation, but that Douglas Adams quote makes good sense. Until a chance for the humans comes up, all we can do now is get the decent lizards in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gameoverDude

The Republican Party today is not Reagan's Republican Party. Bush's RP is something else entirely. :( My favorite Republican president would have to be Reagan, whom Bush just doesn't measure up to.

I don't really consider myself affiliated with either party. Whoever I disagree less with, I vote for.

---

Eeeh. Reagan's Republicans was a bunch of 80's smoke and mirrors with "Feel Good" gas for added effect. While they didn't go around doing what today's Republicans did, they were still pretty bad in themselves.

My favorite Republican president was Lincoln. It went downhill after that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OtakuD00D

Eeeh. Reagan's Republicans was a bunch of 80's smoke and mirrors with "Feel Good" gas for added effect. While they didn't go around doing what today's Republicans did, they were still pretty bad in themselves.

---

Elaborate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AstroBlue

I think it would be awesome if you could have a smooth lower house so shit can get done, but a messy upper house where deals have to made and agendas need to be checked for things to pass.

---

How can this be achived? Is such a system in place? I agree with the rest of what you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

fascism is anti individualist, anti socialist, and anti communist.

---

Never said it wasn't. Considering how this country views those things how far away from facism are we.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

It was a response to the loss of faith in capitalism because of the depression of the 30s and a fear and mistrust of the rising communist ideology.

---

Your point? I never said anything about the origin of facism in the 20th century.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

Most people find it to be evil because it promotes the state's will as being more important than the will of the individual.

---

No. Most people find it evil becuase it seen in the same light as nazism. yes facism is the idea of putting the state over everything else, but that isn't always technically bad. FDR did this during WW2. Argubably America during WW2 was facist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

And no, Rome was not heavily fascist. That is bullshit propaganda used by fascist to prop themselves up.

---

Oh come on. It was a dictatorship with a puppet senate. The ceasar was only around to keep the empire strong, the people happy and rome was put over everything else.

Gozen in Rome you pretty much had no rights to begin with. I think the ideas of facism were made in rome, if it wasn't made their period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gameoverDude

The Republican Party today is not Reagan's Republican Party. Bush's RP is something else entirely. :( My favorite Republican president would have to be Reagan, whom Bush just doesn't measure up to.

---

This is an awesome post, I couldn't agree more.


I <3 Reagan and Nixon!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

good, fuck new york and california.

I like texas though.

---

"I'm glad our system of democracy marginalizes a huge portion of our population as long as that portion is one I don't like!" That's true democracy, folks.

I'm waiting for haoh to come in and inform us all for the billionth time that the US is a republic, not a democracy, even though we're actually both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

This is an awesome post, I couldn't agree more.


I <3 Reagan and Nixon!!

---

IAWTP

The problem is that moderates are completely ineffective, yet they are the only candidates viewed as "electable" these days. Even whackos in moderate's clothing like Kerry have to lie and put on an acting job to win a primary. No real conservative wanted Bush as our candidate, but he was obviously electable. I think the concept of trying to please everyone is what's killing our government's usefulness.

I'm glad Regan's dead. He was the first Antichrist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icarusfall

I'm glad Regan's dead. He was the first Antichrist.

---

No, that was JFK.

I see the republicans as lying shitbags devoid of conscience, serving no one but themselves. I see the attempt to marry themselves to religious conservatives as disingenuous and an attempt to exploit a constituency that stands to gain nothing from supporting them.

The democrats are just disorganized and lacking unity and leadership. Their inability to find and stay behind a strong candidate is really disheartening.

I'm squarely left leaning though I don't always toe the Democratic party line. I think both parties are weak on first amendment issues, which I think are very important. Democrats are often sniveling apologists, too, which I don't buy into. I'm all for personal accountability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

The problem is that moderates are completely ineffective, yet they are the only candidates viewed as "electable" these days. Even whackos in moderate's clothing like Kerry have to lie and put on an acting job to win a primary. No real conservative wanted Bush as our candidate, but he was obviously electable. I think the concept of trying to please everyone is what's killing our government's usefulness.

---

I'll agree, except I think it is important to distinguish between a moderate and a "moderate". When it is an act put on to be electable ultimately those people are worthless. If a politician is truly a moderate then I think that they could be effective. The problem is rarely do you see anybody who you could actually qualify as a moderate across the board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

No, that was JFK.

---

IBTN. Only Catholics can be real anti-Christs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mman

I'll agree, except I think it is important to distinguish between a moderate and a "moderate". When it is an act put on to be electable ultimately those people are worthless. If a politician is truly a moderate then I think that they could be effective. The problem is rarely do you see anybody who you could actually qualify as a moderate across the board.

---

That's an interesting point. For the record though, I believe Bush truly is a moderate, and that is the source of his flaws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

That's an interesting point. For the record though, I believe Bush truly is a moderate, and that is the source of his flaws.

---

Bush's flaws have nothing to do with his political leanings, imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mman

Bush's flaws have nothing to do with his political leanings, imo.

---

I think it's quite the opposite. If you met him I think you would find he to be an okay enough guy, for a Texan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

I think it's quite the opposite. If you met him I think you would find he to be an okay enough guy, for a Texan.

---

It has nothing to do with his personal demeanor either. It is more that he is surrounded by corrupt individuals, and he and his administration keep pushing for more and more power which they have been shown again and again to use in terrible ways. It is in his attitude towards the American public, which the administration obviously thinks is simple and stupid. Etc. etc. All these things really have nothing to do with his political stance (the corruption of a particular party is another thing entirely).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Gozen in Rome you pretty much had no rights to begin with. I think the ideas of facism were made in rome, if it wasn't made their period.

---

That's wrong though. A Roman citizen had rights to property, inheritance, title, and a trial with legal representation. Certainly non-citizens; slaves, foreigners, Jews, etc. did not have those rights, but then they weren't consider Romans. However, no Roman citizen could be denied those rights. In fascism, any right can be denied to an individual if it is seen as being in the interests of the state. Now, one could say that during the more authoritarian times of Rome there was a system akin to that, but the Roman Republic did have rights for the individual and defended them. Most of what was turned into fascism was taken from Rome imposing rule on a foreign people, where the lives of the occupied populace were of little consequence compared to the goals of the Empire (or the Republic). In fact the very word comes from the faces, which was a bundle of sticks around an axe designed to show dissidents the two sides of Roman punishment; 1.) corporal and 2.) execution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

I <3 Reagan and Nixon!!

---

We've been through this before Biff, you can't rationally like both of them. They hated eachother, their ideals were about as far apart as possible, and the way they governed (aside from being corrupt) were vastly different. Sure, you can love them all you want because they both had R's beside their names and held the office of President, but if you have any idea about either man you'd see that it's near impossible to love both.

I can't like two guys with dissenting viewpoints? Why not? I applaud Nixon for his overseas policies and I like Reagan because he rewarded those who attained success in life. Now, there are surely things I don't like about both. Reagan mishandled the entire school riot and Nixon got busted doing what every other president in the world has done, at least he owned up to it.

Nixon also would have saved us from the Vietnam idiocy we suffered through under Johnson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint of Killers

They were this close to pushing the Tank Top Act through in 98.

---

Google refuses to help me. WTF was the Tank Top Act?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

Google refuses to help me. WTF was the Tank Top Act?

---

A bad pun.

confirmed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheebs

Google refuses to help me. WTF was the Tank Top Act?

---

LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

I think it's quite the opposite. If you met him I think you would find he to be an okay enough guy, for a Texan.

---

Pardon me. GWB is not a Texan. Simply moving to Texas and living here for awhile does not a Texan make. At the very best he's a rich wanna-be yankee. No, I repeat, no true Texan has that fake of an accent.

This entire state would be well served to make a law allowing only Texans by birth to hold public office.

In other news, Reps make me sick with the pandering to the extreme "christians" and the Dems only have a chance because the other guys pissed off the real republicans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Six

Pardon me. GWB is not a Texan. Simply moving to Texas and living here for awhile does not a Texan make. At the very best he's a rich wanna-be yankee. No, I repeat, no true Texan has that fake of an accent.

This entire state would be well served to make a law allowing only Texans by birth to hold public office.

In other news, Reps make me sick with the pandering to the extreme "christians" and the Dems only have a chance because the other guys pissed off the real republicans.

---

He lives in Texas, he has owned the Rangers, that makes him Texan to me.

Also, LOL, who cares what you think, especially when said points have already been pointed out here 100 times?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

Nixon also would have saved us from the Vietnam idiocy we suffered through under Johnson.

---

By expanding the war while saying he was ending it or by giving us "victory with honor" as our people desperately clung to helicopters to get the hell out of there shortly before it fell to the Communists?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

Nixon got busted doing what every other president in the world has done, at least he owned up to it.

---

Yeah, letting other take the fall while you lie on TV and then resign in disgrace = owning up to it.

Nixon did some great things, but his paranoia was the end of him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melf

By expanding the war while saying he was ending it or by giving us "victory with honor" as our people desperately clung to helicopters to get the hell out of there shortly before it fell to the Communists?

---

We would and should have won that war, by 86'ing Nixon the path led right to that dirty bastard that was LBJ who continued to fight the bullshit run up the hill, run back down hill war (That JFK stated he would end, bullshit) in order to keep the economy looking good. Hell, his wife's father owned a shipping company that profited millions off the war.

Quote:

---

Yeah, letting other take the fall while you lie on TV and then resign in disgrace = owning up to it.

Nixon did some great things, but his paranoia was the end of him.

---

As opposed to Clinton who lied on TV and didn't own up to it? I'll take Nixon pls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biff_Pocoroba

We would and should have won that war, by 86'ing Nixon the path led right to that dirty bastard that was LBJ who continued to fight the bullshit run up the hill, run back down hill war (That JFK stated he would end, bullshit) in order to keep the economy looking good. Hell, his wife's father owned a shipping company that profited millions off the war.

---

Most of the war took place under Nixon's administration, and while Johnson did a shit job of getting us into it (which overshadowed his great domestic work), Nixon hardly had the upper hand. He lied when he campaigned that he had a plan to end the war. He preferred "Vietnamization - holding the fort until the locals were strong enough to defend themselves - and had us there for another five years. Everyone knows he was buying time to get out and let it fall without us being blamed.

Gee, the more you look at it, the more it looks like Iraq.

Quote:

---

As opposed to Clinton who lied on TV and didn't own up to it? I'll take Nixon pls.

---

Lol, you're comparing Watergate to lying about a blowjob? Do we need to go down that road again?

I'm thrilled that the Dems are taking these midterms. I don't really care for them either, but now they have the political capital to totally fuck this administration in the ass, and they're gonna do it.

I hope the dems take it, but I also hope things don't sway to the opposite end of retarded.

I know what some of you are thinking "what exactly would the demo's do that is retarded?"

I don't know, but I wasn't expecting the republican party to turn into a huge pile of shit either.

It's about time. I'm glad to see the change, and the days of Bush getting a blank check are over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

I'm thrilled that the Dems are taking these midterms. I don't really care for them either, but now they have the political capital to totally fuck this administration in the ass, and they're gonna do it.

---

How about concentrating on fixing the fucking country and leaving vendettas for estranged spouses, bad loans, and fucking someone's girlfriend instead?

The republicans will reap the whirlwind for being a callous, spiteful, and arrogant majority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

How about concentrating on fixing the fucking country and leaving vendettas for estranged spouses, bad loans, and fucking someone's girlfriend instead?

---

If I didn't think Bush and co. are flat out war criminals I would agree.

Congress voted for the war, too. They must also be criminals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

The republicans will reap the whirlwind for being a callous, spiteful, and arrogant majority.

---

that is what worries me. They were not 100% wrong in everything they stood for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Congress voted for the war, too. They must also be criminals.

---

they are. Or at least a lot of fools

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Congress voted for the war, too. They must also be criminals.

---

QFT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

that is what worries me. They were not 100% wrong in everything they stood for.

---

Well, I disagree. However, if it makes you feel any better Bush is still the President and he'll probably go find where he put the veto pen and actually use it. If nothing else, I think we can all agree that it's good to have a government that is no longer ruled by decree of a would be dictator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoyd

They're useless. Sadly, the best way to keep them from doing anything harmful is to have one side control the presidency and the other Congress.

---

Early reports are that the Libs are going to take the House, and possibly the Senate. 2 years of roadblocks and gridlocks at the least. God bless America.

And Nancy Pelosi as the speaker.

Neither Dennis Hastert nor Nancy Pelosi are the kind of people I'd want as Speaker, but of the two Pelosi atleast doesn't hate the Constitution.

...and cover up for pedofiles....




....that we know of. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

If nothing else, I think we can all agree that it's good to have a government that is no longer ruled by decree of a would be dictator.

---

Bush, at best, is a figurehead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Well, I disagree.

---

I don't expect you to. you probably thought the republicans were evil even as far back Bill or Bush Senior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by portnoyd

Early reports are that the Libs are going to take the House, and possibly the Senate. 2 years of roadblocks and gridlocks at the least. God bless America.

---

Better gridlock than uncontested control.

And look towards the future. Democrats win the house, could win the senate. They have a damn good shot in '08.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Congress voted for the war, too. They must also be criminals.

---

They were at worst lied to and at best given very dubious information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

I don't expect you to. you probably thought the republicans were evil even as far back Bill or Bush Senior.

---

The Republicans under Bush 41 were dealers, compromisers, people who would genuinely reach out and try to work in a bipartisan fashion with the (then maj.) Dems. They even were for a time under Clinton, that is until the sham that was the 'Contract w/ America'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

I'm thrilled that the Dems are taking these midterms. I don't really care for them either, but now they have the political capital to totally fuck this administration in the ass, and they're gonna do it.

---

Uh.... how? The best they can do is find some scandals and tighten the purse strings. However I believe if the Dems start attcking the Bush admin. like crazy they will lose just enough goodwill to undo the good of tonight. The country hasn't gone liberal, they gone moderate

This is the setup for 08. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't understand where Lieberman fits into this power struggle. Does he basically control an evenly split Senate (if that's what happens)?

Katherine Harris lost the election. Irony's a bitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

I don't understand where Lieberman fits into this power struggle. Does he basically control an evenly split Senate (if that's what happens)?

---

Yep. Fox News is counting him as an democrat. Lieberman ran under a largely democratic bill and has supported most of thier ideals nationwide. If he was anywhere else he'll be a democrat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Bush, at best, is a figurehead.

---

IBTN. Compared his Governor run(Moderate, Far more Bipartisan) to his presidential and it's obvious that his cabinet was running this country through him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

They were at worst lied to and at best given very dubious information.

---

Riiiiiiigggght. Poor ol' Congress had no idea what they were voting for. What a bunch of horseshit.

VIRGINIA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haohmaru

Riiiiiiigggght. Poor ol' Congress had no idea what they were voting for. What a bunch of horseshit.

---

Well, we can't get rid of them all, so we start with cleaning up the root of the problem.

Bush is more than a figurehead...he's the entire interface of the Christian Right. Redneck America doesn't understand neoconservativism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Better gridlock than uncontested control.

---

Oh, that wasn't sarcasm. Gridlock, IMO, is my most favorable outcome. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by burgundy

Well, we can't get rid of them all, so we start with cleaning up the root of the problem.

Bush is more than a figurehead...he's the entire interface of the Christian Right. Redneck America doesn't understand neoconservativism.

---

are you lumping all those people in together?

Aw, Tennessee, oh no you didn't.

Ain't happening. I think Tester will win Montana, though.

why do they have to put this stupid cow on the front page?

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...1&d=1162965122

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calliander

Aw, Tennessee, oh no you didn't.

---

Yeah..:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calliander

Ain't happening. I think Tester will win Montana, though.

---

He will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

why do they have to put this stupid cow on the front page?

---

Because she's going to run for President.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

are you lumping all those people in together?

---

Obviously he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

why do they have to put this stupid cow on the front page?

http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...1&d=1162965122

---

Dude. That's the house speaker. Who else would they use?

Edit: Nevermind. The fuck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

Because she's going to run for President.

---

you'll vote for that moomoo, too, won't you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avatar

Obviously he is.



Dude. That's the house speaker. Who else would they use?

Edit: Nevermind. The fuck?

---

She spent the most in her election ... 28 million. Meaning 2008 she's running for president.

Forgive me for being ignorant, but how exactly does the speaker of the house get chosen? Why is everyone saying Pelosi is going to be the new one?

Oh and it was funny watching the different networks tonight. Fox News was all sad and dour, MSNBC was giddy and doing their best not to cheer everytime a Democrat was announced as the winner while at the same time sounding like they had a tooth to pull when a Republican was announced, and CNN was just hideous. Wolf Blitzer needs to be put out to pasture, he can't pronounce three words in a row.