|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 25, 2010 20:29:54 GMT -8
Is there a "political tsunami" coming in November? Frankly, I am not sure that will be the case. I would not be surprised to see a pretty strong wave hit, one that will change the balance of power in Washington significantly. But a tsunami? It's far too soon to be sure of that. I present here the opinion of one who is putting his money, even if only metaphorically, on the tsunami prediction. (By the way, this board is open to all, including those who feel that Barack Obama is being criticized unfairly. In fact, I am eager to hear from Obama defenders.) Anyway, here is the piece which sees rough waters ahead for the current administrating. See what you think. spectator.org/archives/2010/04/21/take-the-painkiller-and-go-hom/AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 26, 2010 12:30:20 GMT -8
I think it will be significant but not near what I hope for. Some liberals and Democrats will vote for the Dems no matter what.
|
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Apr 26, 2010 12:36:43 GMT -8
I think it will be significant but not near what I hope for. Some liberals and Democrats will vote for the Dems no matter what. Thats funny. We say the same thing about Republicans. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 26, 2010 12:40:33 GMT -8
I think it will be significant but not near what I hope for. Some liberals and Democrats will vote for the Dems no matter what. Thats funny. We say the same thing about Republicans. ;D It is most likely true and points out the intense battle for the moderate middle. |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Apr 26, 2010 12:47:26 GMT -8
Thats funny. We say the same thing about Republicans. ;D It is most likely true and points out the intense battle for the moderate middle. Which the Republicans will never win as long as they insist their candidates toe the line of the extreme right wing of the party. They are still kicking these guys out.  When moderates are accepted, I might rejoin the party. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Apr 26, 2010 16:26:30 GMT -8
It is most likely true and points out the intense battle for the moderate middle. Which the Republicans will never win as long as they insist their candidates toe the line of the extreme right wing of the party. They are still kicking these guys out. When moderates are accepted, I might rejoin the party. Should you be paying attention to what happened in Virgina, Mass, and New Jersey? It will not be easy, it will not be a sweep, but there will be a significant change in November. There is a place for you if you believe in controlled spending and just a little more honest government. Here at home in California, I can find reasons to be against each candidate for Governor, but not a single reason to be for Brown. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Apr 26, 2010 16:40:21 GMT -8
I'm undecided. Yet, Brown wrote a pretty decent 'amicus curiae' brief to the Supreme Court in the pending *McDonald v. Chicago* 14th Amendment case about incorporating the 2nd Amendment as a restraint against the states.
Meg Whitman talks a good talk. But I don't trust her. JMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Apr 26, 2010 19:24:15 GMT -8
I've offered essentially this analysis before, so forgive me if it seems familiar.
1) The Dems will lose a lot of seats in November. It's the exact number that matters.
2) The House: at least a 20 seat pickup for the GOP. But a Republican gain of only 20-25 seats will cause the Dems to breathe a sigh of relief. A loss of 25 or fewer would be par for the course and would position Obama and his party to rebound, if only slightly, in 2012. (I continue to assume that an Obama loss in 2012 is highly unlikely.)
(3) A moderate loss by the Dems in 2010 followed by a rebound along the same lines in 2012 would mean at least 6 years of mostly left-wing rule in this country. It would likely mean, especially if Obama is able to replace a conservative SCOTUS justice with a lib, that the European style of very big government, welfare state governance that the Left is so fond of will be firmly in place. Once "entitlements" reach a certain level, they basically preclude any other form of government. (Well, any other than the form that takes hold after the economy reaches its inevitable collapse.)
(4) If my fears expressed in #3 come true, the Republican Party will be finished. No GOP slate still committed to limited government, free market principles will ever again take power. There will still be a Republican Party, in name at least, but it will be like the more or less conservative parties of Europe which don't often win and when they do they are incapable of effecting serious pull-backs from entrenched collectivist institutions. We'll all become like Greece then!
5.) If, on the other hand, the GOP can pick up at least 50 seats in the House, the Obama juggernaut will be slowed. Combine that with a pickup of at least 5 or 6 Senate seats, and the march toward a federal government that consumes 60% or more of GDP might be turned back. But . . .
6.) But . . . only if a brilliant Republican candidate rises from nowhere to topple the Anointed One in 2012. Right now a very large percentage of Americans rely largely or almost entirely on federal assistants to maintain themselves. Those people, and I in no way wish to criticize them, are the natural constituents of the party of government. They will more and more believe that a vote against Democrat rule will threaten the favors from government they have come to depend upon and which they consider their right.
AzWm
|
|
