Skip to comments.Cliff Deal Hinges on Senators
Posted on 12/28/2012 5:14:01 PM PST by Sub-Driver
click here to read article
Sorry, I’m off your plantation and free. Life’s great as a free man. Despair is for plantation conservatives to struggle with.
There are lots and lots and LOTS of 3rd party's, but hardly anyone will ever vote for them because they are smart enough to want their vote to actually matter. This isn't new either, it goes right back to the beginning when the founders, intentionally or not, effectively created a 2 party framework.
By creating a winner take all system with no chance of coalition government, there is simply no room for competitive 3rd party's. Even in parliamentary systems 3rd party's often struggle to remain relevant. In our system they are squeezed out from the get go.
The lesser of two evils BS still doesnt fly for the more open minded around here. Say howdy to the GOPe plantation bosses for me; but they sure as shit aint doing anyone any favors these days.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. We hear this every election cycle and the result is the same. Plenty of 3rd party's exist, and all fail. The only thing a 3rd party can do is occasionally play spoiler in contests where the 2 real competitive party's are extremely close.
General elections in a 2 party system are not an affirmative endorsement of any candidate or party, they are simply a choice between the only 2 options that can win.
No you're not, you are just taking the easy way out. Anyone can drop out of the political system and contribute nothing. You are just taking the lazy, selfish approach.
We have a 2 party system and have from the beginning. We can all wail and moan about it, but it is what it is. Perhaps the founders made a mistake, I would personally prefer the ability to form coalition governments so I could belong to a real, conservative party - but that isn't the system we have. Once in hundreds of years a major party imploded, but was simply immediately replaced by another which became the 2nd leg of our two party system. You can shake your fist, shout and cry, waste your vote on 3rd party's that won't amount to anything, write in people you like, etc, and the only thing you accomplish is deny a vote to the more right of center of the 2 main party candidates (meaning you make it easier for the Democrat to win).
“The R version differs only on how fast it wants to travel to the same destination.”
I’d rather hit the ground at 4mph than 100mph.
Absolutely, I’m taking the self interested approach. Total pursuit of freedom. No apologies or regrets.
I chewed through my leash and I’m no longer on your plantation, nor voting like a moderate. Instead, I vote for conservatives and pursue freedom. Nothing about your name-calling or commands to get back to my place on your plantation resonates. Next you’ll be calling me an Uncle Tom! Good luck in your slavery.
I see your “two party system” is working for you soo very well...
Oh, we’re getting ready to crash and burn, thanks to both parties.
Your choice of 4 vs 100 is an illusion.
I’m ready to crash and reset.
Getting mad at me won't help you. The founders created this winner take all, 2 party system with no chance of coalition government. If I could change the system I probably would, but I don't have the power to whip up a constitutional convention and demand some new form of electoral system.
Dropping out of the system and letting others do the hard work isn't impressing anyone. There are those that do it every election cycle and they've never achieved a thing. Heck even Ron Paul and his loopy followers figured out 3rd party's have no chance to succeed here, which is why they are back in the GOP tent. Good grief, even the wacky LaRouchies know this and run as Democrats because of it.
Constitution? We don't need no stinkin Constitution /s
People still aren't buying what you are selling.
GOP=Whigs=dodo bird or passenger pigeon.
You’re just making stuff up.
What “parties” did the Founders envision?
Seems I recall our first President being very concerned about factionalism and taking steps to crush it.
“Getting mad at me won’t help you”
That’s just it, I’m not mad. In fact, I have no feelings about your opinions at all. They are simply wrong and not worth wasting my freedom dealing with.
I wish you as much slave happiness as possible on the plantation, working hard for your GOPe Massah. It will be limited, but you choose it, so good luck and best wishes.
I choose freedom.
You realize that come election time 95%+ of people here and on every other conservative website are going to vote for the Republican candidate.
You are not creating yet another 3rd party, nor creating any momentum towards one (there are already 50+ to pick from), and no 3rd party you waste your vote on is ever going to amount to squat.
In the end, all you are doing is crying that you're not getting your way and throwing a temper tantrum.
Nah, I'm actively out campaigning AGAINST the GOP to family, friends, and neighbors, pointing out that voting GOP is a wasted vote, since the GOP is liberal, AND doesn't win much because of it.
In fact, I've got the anti-Dewhurst ping list for 2014.
And just what is that?
You cannot make a tax rate a principle. Tax rates are a dependent variable of spending.
The Republican tax "policy" has been corrupt since the Great Compromise of 1986, now on its last legs.
The notion that cutting taxes could cut spending, by "starving the beast", was plausible when Howard Jarvis and David Stockman were advocating for it, but that was 35 years ago. The theory has been proven false.
It's false because of the Reagan-O'Neill Compromise of 1986 - Republicans could cut taxes, Democrats could spend as much as they wanted, using bills of Credit and inflation to make up the difference.
Now we are at the end game of 1986. The dollar is ruined, the demand for "funding" has never been higher, and the peoples' willingness to "contribute" has never been lower.
And what is the Republican policy about all this? Is it "cut spending by $1.6 trillion immediately"? No, it is not.
Is it "taxation beyond the limits of the Constitution is theft"? No, it is not.
It's a pathetic loser whine to the effect that raising tax rates will hurt "the economy", as if they have done anything - ANYTHING - since 1986 to advance natural resource extraction, exploitation of those resources, invention, and manufacturing - the only important parts of any real "economy".
The GOP is a corpse, and it's time for a decent burial.
They certainly did not.
Most of their ingenious methods regarding choosing the President, for example, were designed to deal with three and four-way races, which they believed would be common.
I can’t disagree with anything you said.
Nope, do your homework. We've effectively had a 2 party system from the beginning. The Federalist Party and the Democratic-Republican Party were the first names. The names have changed a bit, but the effect is the same.
What parties did the Founders envision?
They didn't officially enshrine 2 party's, but they created a system that is effectively a 2 party system.
Here you can read up on the concept if you didn't realize that is the system we are living in:
There is strong agreement that the United States has a two-party system; historically, there have been few instances in which third party candidates won an election.
Seems I recall our first President being very concerned about factionalism and taking steps to crush it.
Concerned? Yes. But we still ended up with a 2 party system. Part of it was that they wanted majority candidates to win elections rather than plurality ones. There is an argument for that, but the effect is a 2 party winner take all system.
Washington's farewell speech warned of them. That he was ignored does not mean that there have always been political parties in the United States, far from it. It also does not mean that any existing party is guaranteed any sort of future influence, or even existence.
Parties have come and they have gone. The modern Republican Party has clearly lost any semblance of purpose, and is headed the way of the Whigs in whose wake they arose.
Golly gee Johnny, we've never heard of that before. It's as if there weren't 3rd party right of center candidates (and their supporters) who do the same thing every single election cycle and get precisely nowhere. Let's see, the latest big thing for renegade conservatives was supposed to be Virgil Goode and the Constitution Party. Shockingly, that bombed pretty badly. Heck, some site we know very well was officially anti-Romney till in the end it wasn't - and most everyone, predictably, rallied around the only alternative to even more liberal Democrat party candidate(s) from the office of President on down.
Your just regurgitating the same stuff we hear every election cycle. It's nothing new or interesting. No one is impressed or cares.
Over 200, and your point being? The two parties are the solution to all our problems? Please.
It’s been the 3rd parties that bring the new blood and new ideas to the dialog. They’re the ones that make people start to sit-up and take note; start the process of “Hey, that’s right”.
What were the differences between the two parties the last few elections? “You have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency”, the man who banned ‘assault weapons’ in his State, neither could reference, nor articulate the Constitutional basis to say ‘let’s rein this back’
Who’s the one ‘wasting their votes’, dumping their convictions so THEIR guy hopefully wins?
It’s the ‘only 2 parties can win’ schtick that’s the killer here; be glad you voted for the GOP, the same one that bent over from the start. I’ll be content I voted other, and can rightfully give the bent-over a firm kick in the ass for staying on the plantation in hopes their chains rest lightly on the Benedict Arnolds in their own party.
No political partIES were enshrined by the founders, but the structure they created - a winner take all setup with no chance of coalition government, effectively established a 2 party system whether they wished for that or not.
It is what it is. You can try to pretend every election cycle we don't have 2 options, but we do and everyone knows it.
The modern Republican Party has clearly lost any semblance of purpose, and is headed the way of the Whigs in whose wake they arose.
That almost certainly will not happen. And even if it did, the new party would aborb the carcass of the GOP and become the new second leg of the 2 party system. The problem is there is no critical mass over any major issue that could lead to this new political party some are dreaming of. There is the Constitution Party and any number of other partIES right now, and they just don't amount to squat.
The problem is for every Republican voter that thinks the party is not conservative enough on say fiscal issues, another thinks it should be more libertine on social issues, and yet a different person thinks we should be more isolationist, and another thinks precisely the opposite. There is no one issue creating some giant schism that would shatter the party. Instead we have lots of competing interests, which is normal (especially after an election) that are jockeying for a dominant role.
Face it folks; no politician in either party thinks we can ever balance the budget again. If they did they would not be engaged in bitter battles about how to shave a mere $200 Billion off a deficit that totals $1002 Billion. What about the fiscal cliff which both sides fear like it was Armageddon? It only reduces the red ink by $464 Billion leaving a hole of more than half a Trillion dollars. If cutting spending and increasing revenues enough to reduce the deficit to $538 Billion will crash the economy and send us all to financial ruin how in the hell can we ever get it to zero?
Yes, most of the politicians suck - but what we really have is a people problem. Look at most any poll, people will say they think government should be reduced, but then oppose every specific cut other than maybe prisons and foreign aid (tiny amounts of the overall problem). True, there are very few inspirational leaders who want to do the right thing, but what passes for the American public these days has no will to cut much of anything.
The politician that tries to stand up and do the right thing finds precious little support among their constituents. Heck, talk about reforming or slimming down Medicare and Social Security at a Tea Party meeting and see what happens. Even among the best conservatives there is surprisingly little will to scale down big ticket items like that. Most people feel they've paid into it and want their share. It's almost always other people's stuff that should be cut. And hey, once a system is established it's hard to fault people for fighting for their piece of the pie.
I rather suspect the lack of will means we will follow Europe's example and keep kicking the can down the road. One day it will catch up with us and the whole economic house of cards will implode, but that could be a ways off.
“Im ready to crash and reset.”
That’s what marxists say.
Some extremists relish the illusion that everything will fall apart and the world wil be cleansed in damnation.
It wont. Reality is more boring than that.
There is a difference between the two parties. There is a difference between ‘better’ and ‘worse’. Evil happens when those who know good do nothing to stop evil; worse happens when you and I find excuses not to work for the better.
Since nobody’s perfect, you have all the excuses in the world to throw rocks at people trying to do good and whining about their imperfections and claiming they dont do anything for you. That’s the way of powerless extremists, always whining, never solving.
If you don’t see where we are headed, you are willfully blind.
A good start: but now we need to get rid of the remaining RINOs and replace them with Tea Partiers.
Your mistake was twofold: first in thinking that all the incumbents are bums; second in thinking that voting all the bums out would *necessarily* mean voting more Democrats in.
Nice try, though.
Look clown, don't interject yourself into conversation when you don't know what the discussion is about. You still don't know what my point was and yet you continue babbling on making yourself look foolish.
I don't want to have to explain it to you again, because, quite frankly, I don't think you are sharp enough to understand.
You have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency
That was the traitorous RINO McCain and the worthless GOP-E.
Your point (and your premises, and your conclusions, were, and remain, wrong).
It's not that I don't get them -- it's that I completely reject them.
Here's a John Boehner bobblehead doll, it'll cheer you up.
Geeeeze, stop making yourself look more idiotic than you already have.
My point was obvious. Throwing all the bums (bums meaning incumbents) out from both parties, which is what the poster I was responding to orginially suggested, is a dumb idea that doesn't work or happen. Then you bumbled along calling names and yakking about 2010. Let me make this clear one more time so that perhaps it will seep in to your thick skull. 2010 was NOT a throw all the bums out from both parties election. Are we clear? That is not what happened. In 2010 we voted to kick Democrat incumbents out and to keep Republican incumbents in. That is not a throw all the bums out election, that is a throw the Democrats out election.
It's not that I don't get them -- it's that I completely reject them.
No, the problem is you're just not particularly politically savvy and your posts and commentary prove this on a regular basis. You're just sort of a dim bulb and should at least consider refraining from comment till you thoroughly understand the topic at hand.
That's what I've been trying to tell YOU.
As a first step.
The second is that, throwing out all the bums means "throw out all DEMS, and *replace* RINO, GOP-e types with conservatives."
Want me to throw in the Obaama kneepad accessories for your Boehner Bobblehead doll, there?
According to the brilliant Bianna Golodryga just now on ABC News, the cliff mess could screw up the rip roaring Obama economic recovery that’s ongoing.
The first thing that flashed into my mind as I tried to decipher her name was
Don't ask me if that is significant.
Well, you're definitely a foul mouthed type of person. Not what I expect to see on a family oriented site.
That's what I've been trying to tell YOU.
LOL, you're such a dolt man. I mean, I guess every forum has some dunderheads like yourself, but it's difficult to believe you can really be this slow.
This was the comment I originally responded to from tenmountainman:
Throw all the bums out election on both sides.
Here was my response to tenmountainman:
Really? Are we back to this silly populist sounding nonsense? This "throw all the bums out" stuff has never worked. It's a meaningless statement. If you throw a Republican out, you're going to get a Democrat who is more liberal. Period. There are no candidates from any other party's that are going to win these seats. It's either Republican or Democrat. If you throw a Republican out, you get a Democrat. If you throw a Democrat out you get a Republican. If you have a "throw all the bums out election" the House would switch to Democrat control and the Senate to Republicans which would result in no meaningful change.
To which you barge in and said to me:
Forgot 2010, troll-boy?
My original point stands. 2010 was NOT a throw all the bums from both sides out election. Why you elbowed your way into the conversation with a bunch of insults and stupid commentary I don't know. You're wrong as usual, and you've accomplished nothing more than to make a jerk out of yourself.
"Kneepads" are as much a part of the political vernacular as "Kool-Aid".
Nice try, though.
My original point stands. 2010 was NOT a throw all the bums from both sides out election.
No, but it *should* have been : and it wasn't.
Explicitly because of the GOP-e, RINO, troll types like you, who insist, and poison the minds of others, to think that
If you throw a Republican out, you're going to get a Democrat who is more liberal. Period.
You sound like you want to spend more quality time with Karl Rove.
Recall, compare, and contrast Rove's record for Congressional Elections up to 2010, with the Tea Party in 2010:
In past elections, (say 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008) we had the following:
2002 -- a year after the 9-11 attacks, and Americans want security, dammit! The GOP gains 8 seats in the House and 2 in the Senate.
2004 -- Presidential Election; the first one after the "Sore Loserman" debacle in Florida in 2000, and the first one after 9-11.
The GOP picks up 3 seats in the House, the Donks lose 2.
The GOP picks up 4 Senate seats, the Donks lose 4.
Bush wins 31 states, but a mere 286 electoral votes, with a bare 50.7% of the popular vote.
2006 -- the Midterm elections for Bush's second term.
The Dems pick up the House, gaining 31 seats, while the GOP loses 30.
The Dems get the Senate, too, winning 6 seats.
This despite the presence of "The Architect" Karl Rove who brags about his detailed knowledge of the ground game.
But (as we will see) he learned his lesson, after a fashion.
2008 -- the annointing of Teh One.
Obama wins 365 electoral votes in 28 states + a single Congressional district in Nebraska. (Nebraska??!!)
The Donks extend their lead in the House, gaining 21 seats.
And in the Senate, they run the table, gaining 8 seats.
The election is marked by numerous unchallenged shenanigans, including voter fraud (voting by felons, votes found in car trunks) in Minnesota, and infamous re-counts in Washington State.
The only thing preventing a total rout is Sarah Palin, who is roundly condemned by the establishment, but targeted by the Dems, after being trashed by advisors lent by the Rockefeller wing of the GOP (as detailed later in Going Rogue).
So, let's look at the record of the Establishment GOP since the first election of George W. Bush (where the victory was so narrow that the Dems complained he was "selected, not elected." (And that, over Clinton's hand-picked successor.)
House: +8 +3 -30 -21 net --> -40
Senate: +2 +4 -6 -8 net --> -8
Heckuva job, Karl.
Compare that to the Tea Parties:
No, but it *should* have been : and it wasn't.
Again, you're a dimwit.
The conclusions follow from the numbers. Running RINOs does NOT work as well as running and supporting conservatives -- note the number of times *establishment* candidates backstab and refuse to support the conservatives who have primaried them, e.g. Murkowski in Alaska, or to fail to support conservatism in general, from Gingrich's attitude regarding Scozzafava in NY district 23, or Coleman's not pushing for a recount in the Franken election in Minnesota, despite the after-the-fact review showing that there were more votes cast by felons than the initial vote discrepancy...
And somehow I knew you'd jam Sarah Palin into the discussion. Weren't you one of those fanatics that were sure she was going to run in 2012 even when it was obvious she wasn't?
Sarah Palin helped a lot in 2010 even though she had been shamefully treated during and after the campaign -- remember the spurious lawsuits (such as her *legal defense fund* being declared "illegal" ??) -- and she still was of great value in 2010.
Which, despite your attempts to move to the goalposts when it suits you, was the election cycle originally under question.
Nice try at ad hoc ex post facto ad hominem, troll-boy. I didn't know you had that much latin in you.
The House should make the Senate pass a budget before any other input is accepted from them.
EVERYBODY, including the rats, knows that the meaningless, drop-in-the-bucket tax hike on the rich does next to nothing to address Americas debt and deficit and is, rather, a purely symbolic concession demanded by the rats for the sole purpose of dividing and ultimately destroying the GOP.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As an historian I disagree with your conclusion that taxing the so called wealthy class is merely symbolic.
Obama means to exercise the IRS in a catchment of administrative intimidation of the wealthy, by audit, pre judgement asset seizure( alowed under the Taxc Code), and executive fiat.
Obama cannot establish his much desired Socialist America as long as there is a functional investment class which creates jobs and wealth in the USA. Just as in Germany and Italy in the q920s and 1930s, the4 fascists movements there had to subjugate and destroy the wealthy class so they could seize control of the economy and dictate who made wealth and when. In addition the fascist movements got their cut in what can be seen as a kind of legal fascist extortion.
This is why Obama wants the tax on the rich so badly. He has positioned the IRS to agressively intimidate, audit and prosecute the wealthy class of the USA.Obama has prepared the IRS by extra hires, and has armed and ammoed them up.
If the GOP supports any plan on taxation of the so called wealthy, then you will see the beginning of the end of a free economy in the USA, and the IRS will be the tool that accomplishes it.When one understands the fascist movements of Europe and applies their historical social trends to Obama, he becomes absolutely predictable.
The GOP needs to defend the entrepreneurial class of America. If the GOP does not, then the economic engine of the greatest nation on earth will be subjugated by Nationalist Socialism and destroyed.
Sorry, but I don't see why Ubanga couldn't do all of that with rates right where they are. How would increasing the tax rate on "the rich" a few percentage points change anything? For that matter, it seems to me that the slimy GOP sneak attack of "closing loopholes and capping deductions" would give the IRS more targets to shoot at. By your scenario, Ubanga should like that option even more than a simple rate hike.
No. I maintain the whole "rate hike on the rich" demand is a pure, 100% political ploy.
Sorry, but I don’t see why Ubanga couldn’t do all of that with rates right where they are. How would increasing the tax rate on “the rich” a few percentage points change anything?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes that is the case, but do you not yet understand the Obama “campaign.?” Obama’s first term was a shot across the bow to the wealthy.Many understood this and removed their funds to places abroad; even democrat wealth resigned ther citizenship and moved to places like Singapore, but few understood this canary in a cage. Now Obama will misuse the IRS to attack the investment class, just like he has misued the EPA to shut down various coal producers etc. Now the IRS is about to become an attack machine. You have to understand Obama in the context of fascism, and what he must do to convert our nation into a socialist state,base don historical precedents of fascism in Europe.This will be Obama’s next step, and the GOP is handing that all to him without protecting the investment class of the USA.
You can now wave goodbye to the free economy of the USA. Next Obama will subdue America by effectively ending the 2nd amendment via executive order, just as he empowered the EPA to shut down businesses illegally.
No one opposes Obama effectively without being ruined politically, and Washington is full of cowards. These cowards refuse to admit publicly just what kind of political animal Obama is, a fascist, and they fail to oppose him as The People deserve. What you see is tyranny being born with hardly a whimper, rather you see celebration and jubilation as if its a bizarro New Years celebration. Its a joke on a cosmic scale.Its far past gauche and now enters the realm of banal.
The GOP needs too pull the plug on the Obama campaign. Lets go over the cliff and see how America likes it, then Obama can “save us all” during his second term.Obama’s campaign to socialize America must come to an end.
Karl Rove is worse than a zit pustule on the arse of a
fleeing, bleating, democrat, vegetarian herbivore. Have you noticed that all such creatures have notoriously bad breath? And Longblow , well, is a RINO troll operator who is duty bound to his GOP matrix masters, to nip any truth about the GOP and Rove in the bud. He fails miserably..
Sarah Palin may yet run. I hope she does. The country needs all of the Sarah Palins we can get at this point. We are losing our nation to vile tyranny.
No, your conclusions are stupid - and pretty much what I've come to expect from you. You mix apples and oranges, years when we already held the House versus years we didn't, presidential and off year cycles. I'm trying to do you a favor when I say this, you're just not very politically bright and you make a fool of yourself regularly. In light of this, you should really think through and understand the discussion before you shoot off your mouth.
I remember your Sarah Palin infatuation. You were wrong again about that too. I recall you were one of those fanatics that refused to accept she wasn't going to run in 2012 - even when it was completely obvious she was going to stick to her TV gig. You were so politically blind you made a complete idiot of yourself - just like you are doing now.
My original point is correct and stands. 2010 was NOT a throw all the bums from both parties out election - it was a throw the Democrats out election.
But his actual track record *sucks*.
I posted all of those elections in succession to prove that even with *repeated* chances, RINOs don't do as well as they are promised to; and in fact the losses by running RINOs are about as bad as the bloodbaths threatened should (gasp!) true conservatives ever get their preferred candidates on the ticket.
I know you have some ulterior motive for pressing for the RINOs and the GOP-e over and Over and OVER around here, but you no longer have any hope of convincing rational people.
Your still a dingbat man. You’re posts are terrible and make little sense. You get infatuated with people like Palin (maybe you still think she’s running) and Rove and keep bleating about them nonsensically. Politically, your level of understanding is below that of a typical teenage kid - and I suspect all the name calling you do is your attempt to compensate for it. Sad.
The 2nd Party needs to get its ‘nads outa the lockbox and sally forth or be forever chattel.
In case you haven't noticed, Team Obama has been giving themselves public circle jerks over their micro-target-market "flash mob" messaging stole crucial numbers of nominally-pro-Romney-but-very-low-information-voters ("life of Julia" and Sandra Fluck and "binders of women" as well as radio ads broadcast in Dothan Alabama); so subtle that even the Rove SUPER_DUPER_PACTM didn't even have a *guess* as to what the Obama folks were doing; and the complete once-in-a-lifetime Mongolian Flustered Cluck that was Narwhal.
And yet you STILL maintain that following the GOP-e is the only way to avoid electoral disaster.