Think you want to vote Democratic to teach Republicans a lesson? Not a bad idea, in theory.
What country do you intend to live in during that lesson, though?
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Support Dean’s World
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
Think you want to vote Democratic to teach Republicans a lesson? Not a bad idea, in theory.
What country do you intend to live in during that lesson, though?
{ 21 comments }
Shamelessly stolen from somewhere I don’t remember:
If losing elections made political parties better, the Democrats would be in a lot better shape than they are now.
OK, but look: Losing in 1964 did make the Republicans better (Nixon doesn’t count, he was a holdover). Being out of power until 1994 also made the GOP better… but not better enough.
The difference is we can’t tolerate now while “getting better” what was tolerable then. As intolerable as the GOP seems right now…
1. We will still have a Republican president. It’s mathmatically impossible for Dems to get the necessary 2/3 majority in the Senate to remove Bush and Cheney from office (assuming no Republican support for leaving Pelosi as next in line for the Presidency), or even to override a veto.
2. Speaker Pelosi will not only teach the Republicans a lesson. It will also force Democrats to put forward specific policy proposals, and it will teach the American People a lesson about how the Democrats would govern if they were to win the Presidency in 2008.
Maniakes,
as to point 2, Jonathan Chait has a roundup here:
link.
This is the sort of thinking I hate. The apocolyptic if the Democrats win we are all doomed sort of thing. That is simply stupid.
Even if the Democrats won huge majorities in the Senate and House, and won the Presidency in 2008 it wouldn’t be the end of America or anything like that. Sure some things would be different. We would have a bit higher taxes, perhaps our foreign policy and defense wouldn’t be handled as some of us would like, but it wouldn’t be the end of the world.
Democrats and Republicans are more alike than they are different. It is fine to be convinced that one outlook is superior, but letting that convince you that the other is pure evil is just dumb.
I’d like to live in a country that has a responsible energy policy.
Australia is nice..
zach,
I’ve seen bits and pieces of the points discussed in that article, but I still think it would do Democrats a lot of good to have to write and vote on bills as a majority party, and it would do the American people a lot of good to see how the Democrats would govern as a majority party.
I want a choice election in 2008. I want specific proposals from each party to be on the table, and I want each party to have to articulate why they think theirs is better.
And while I’m wishing, I also want a pony.
I’ve actually lived elsewhere (Tanzania, Japan) and no matter how much people in this nation drive me up a f***ing wall, they are “my” people.
BTW I left the USA a transnationalist and returned a nationalist. 5 years in Nippon will do that to you.
The democrats aren’t pure evil. Their heart is generally in the right place.
They’re almost pure incompetence. That’s the problem.
Chris: oddly, that’s about my impression of the current administration: it’s heart is in the right place but it’s incompetent.
Maniakes,
absolutely. put me down for a space jet ;p.
Dave, it isn’t stupid. Facts are facts. Will the world come to an end? No. In fact, there’s an argument that “Bush unleashed” becomes a true conservative with a Democrat Congress, vetoing bills and with no one to protect. Could be fun.
But these are just facts about Pelosi. Everyone is free to come to his own conclusions.
Kirwin writes:
BTW I left the USA a transnationalist and returned a nationalist. 5 years in Nippon will do that to you.
Agreed fully. I served overseas, and have spent time in Europe, Asia and South America — each time I came home, just made me grateful for being a Yankee, and convinced me that much of what squabble about is entirely trivial.
HankB
that begs the question. why haven’t the Rep tied their Dem opponents to Pelosi?
why havent they made her a national figure, well known to the masses?
“Bush unleashed”
When Bush was governor of Texas, he was faced with a Democratic legislature. His term as governor looked a lot like No Child Left Behind – a lot of cross-party cooperation. At the time the complaints were from the Republicans, who said they couldn’t get in his office, because Bob Bullock (the Democratic Lt. Governor of the time – the two offices are elected separately) and Pete Laney (the Democratic House Speaker) were there all the time. It did help that Laney and Bullock were, by national standards, conservative Democrats. (Laney’s home district gave Bush 76% of its vote in 2004, while giving Laney close to 60%.)
Bush has a rep as a partisan, ignoring the Democrats. He actually just ignores the group not in power. If the Dems win the House, I expect Pelosi to have as much access to the White House as she can stand. If she refuses to work with him, it will be on her accord, not his.
Oh come on, the world “as we know it” won’t disappear just because the majority or the presidency changes party. Unless you expect an overthrow of government?
I suspect the Democrats are going to end up with a small majority. Frankly, the Republicans have squandered away their right to power. As for the next two years and whether we end up with a Dem President with a potential Dem Congress, that depends on the outcome of two possible scenarios:
1) The Democrats spend the next two years in a gridlock tying up Congress by investigating the Bush Administration into the ground. By the end of the two years, the country will be sick of them…again.
2) The Democrats will propose workable policies and reasonable solutions to current issues and problems that have a fair chance of passing. They will swallow their partisan pride and make some effort at working with Bush to prevent gridlock and vetoes. They will actually show some chance of sweeping the 08 elections.
So which does everyone think it will be?
“They’re almost pure incompetence. That’s the problem.”
And goddammit, republicans know incompetence when they see/cause it. How shall I count the ways?
Katrina
WMD that don’t exist
Greeted as liberators
Abramoff – nice hat.
Foley – http://www.hotpageboylove.com
Delay -loved him on the exploitation of Micronesian workers!
Limbaugh on MJ Fox and on Oxycotin
O’Reilly
Iraq – nuff said “Don’t blame Rumsfeld, he’s not on the ground. The Generals are in Iraq.”
Remember, they fired the guy that said the Iraq war would cost $287 billion
K. Harris in FL Just say no to botox and her personal Jesus
Shot to the face after a few shots.
Ann Coulter on 9/11 widows and on fact checking
Frist on Terri Schiavo
Gays republicans against SSM?
Pat Robertson…well, that not incompetence, that’s just fucking lunacy
“Oil will pay for the war”
“Last throws of the insurgency”
Condi on security
Bush on simple comprehension, but good job on balancing the projected budget surplus.
Bill “Double Down” Bennett at the slot machine. Hey, what’s a few million down the tubes when you have the love of Christ in your heart.
I’m just getting warmed up, so don’t get me started on incompetence. Conservatives run on the platform that government doesn’t work and that it’s inefficient. Then they get elected and prove their point…funny? Fucking hilarious!!!
I can’t wait until the dems take the house and senate so we can finally have some accountability through a few much needed hearings.
But how do you really feel, Tim?
I’m Army Strong, and yourself?
Wow, so when the Washington Times recounts the career of a political enemy, she doesn’t come off good?
What are the odds?
Shall we list the incompetence of past Democratic Administrations Tim?
Actually to save time I’ll just list one:
Jimmy Carter.
The fact is, nothing’s gonna change other than some switching of offices. Congress is broke, I see little that’ll be done in the next 2 years to fix that, no matter who orders the drapes.
Comments on this entry are closed.