Posted on 12/25/2009 6:34:17 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
One might expect Democrats to be euphoric during this holiday season. After recapturing control of Congress in 2006, and last year taking back the White House by electing America's first African-American president, Democrats are now on the verge of passing a historic health care reform law. But instead of celebrating, they are bitterly divided. Former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean and liberal bloggers are urging the Senate to defeat the health care bill. Many are criticizing President Barack Obama for compromising too much, saying the proposal doesn't go far enough, while more moderate and conservative Democrats are petrified the bill and the President's agenda are too ambitious and will cost them re-election next year. Polls show that while a majority of Americans favour some form of health care reform, most oppose the current Democratic proposals.
The controversy over health care reform isn't the beginning or the end of the problems facing President Obama and Democrats who increasingly fear that in next November's midterm elections their 60-40 advantage in the Senate could be significantly diminished and they could lose outright control of the House of Representatives. In the last six weeks, four Democratic House members in swing districts have announced their retirements, putting their seats in grave danger. A fifth, newly-elected last year with $1,000,000 of party support, just announced he is changing parties, becoming a Republican. This honeymoon cruise with Barack Obama as President has hardly been smooth sailing.
While President Obama's overall poll numbers aren't good, they aren't terrible either. More ominous for Democrats is the beating their party in Congress has taken this year.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
While there's all this talk in the air of civil war/revolution, I'm of the school of thought that we must give the ‘10 elections our best shot.
The problem here is insuring that they (1)actually come off as scheduled; and (2) are reasonably fair and accurate.
Ways MUST be found to insure the integrity of our votes, and of the election itself. What, with ACORN, aided and abetted by SEIU and other unionized thug entities, doing it's dirty work on unprecedented levels, the Obama folks bring in Hugo Chavez's voting machines, an unrepentant and relentless press machine constantly covering and apologizing for the nascent fascists, we have our work cut out for us.
I repeat - ways must be found to handle these things, and the best way, I feel, is to blunt them as quickly as possible whenever something about them hits the public waves. But in a deeper sense, we must also wage these battles behind the lines where they aren't widely known to the public, and where most of the really bad stuff is getting done. Put another way, we need our own version of deep cover and PsyOps to tackle this stuff successfully.
Like I say, this probably demands - indeed, requires - a thread of it's own, but it's something we have to do, and work on it should commence immediately, if not sooner.
That's just the way I see things.
CA....
What has saved us so far from Chavez tactics being used to rig voting machines is the great size of America and the decentralized way that elections are run by thousands of counties across America. We also have a large and fragmented news media that would be very difficult for any dictatorial government to effectively control. An attempt to rig the 2010 elections on a large scale would be an all-in riverboat gamble by the democrats, and it would very likely fail and cause fatal damage to the democrat party when the story got out to the American people. Instead the dems will probably stick to targeted fraud in certain areas where its easier to do and in very close elections where fraud can make the difference between winning and losing. Notice how even with some democrat-run fraud in New Jersey and Virginia, the Republican candidates still won big victories in those two governors races.
Agreed. Conservatives accepted a couple of wooden nickels with the Bush family. Reagan’s greatest political mistake was keeping Bush in for the second term.
Yes.
Damn snack pits.
It may become evident in 2010 that free elections no longer exist (due to ACORN, SIEU, Soros, etc.).
Agree. The media refuses to dig into Bernie Sanders’ socialism and Max Baucus’s cheating on his wife, getting his girlfriend a 14K a year state pay raise. Hell, she went to his divorce attorneys as the state AG. Baucus did not have the balls to tell his wife he wanted a divorce and he had a girlfriend. He dumps her and she finds out later. Where are the irate Dem women?
Yup.
Only 44% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of 0bozo right now, as compared to a massive 56% that disapprove of 0bozo’s performance. 0bozo was elected with 53% of the vote, so he is know down 9% from the votes he had just a year ago.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
0bozo now has a net -12 disapproval after only one year in office.
Even Bill Clinton, who was only elected with 42% of the vote, had an approval rating of a 56% after a year in office.
0bozo is finished.
Nonsense.
The elections in New Jersey last month, where the Democrats got clobbered, despite 0bozo himself campaigning very hard for John Corzine, and sending in all his top campaign staff to run Corzoie’s campaign, plus Corzine (D) outspending Christie (R) by a missive 3:1, plus the fact that the polls had the Jersey elections as a toss up, and still Christie won by a massive 4 %, proves that ACORN is finished as a major force for stealing elections.
Meanwhile Glenn Beck is ever ready to smash ACORN again if they should even attempt to rear their ugly heads up again.
No.
Just no.
It's that same bad economy that got 0bozo elected in the first place. It's all part of the equation And 0bozo has been hollering “I’ Bush's fault” like forever. You can't take out the effect of unemployment from his poll number because his earlier higher poll numbers were high precisely because of economic crises under Bush from last year.
You the good with the bad, same as Bush's poll numbers sank in part from the war. No excuses
And they have redirected it to the point that a civil servant is paid twice as much as a private sector employee. They also have union benefits that have to be paid for as well as they are unable to be fired thanks to union protection. However, all the funds used to pay the government employee is taken directly out of the hands of the private sector employee.
All Nuclear plants in the US are governed by safety rules set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but they have no say whatsoever about how these plants are run as long as they follow the public safety rules. All Nuclear plants are privately owned, with the exception of TVA, which is a hybrid situation, but receives NO public tax money and is self-sustaining.
Why do people & t-shirts use the word “rouge” (e.g., makeup) when they probably mean “rogue” (e.g., wild)?
I once told my ultra liberal landlord that I hoped Obie would get elected because America needed to see what the liberals were really made of.
Notice how even with some democrat-run fraud in New Jersey and Virginia, the Republican candidates still won big victories in those two governors races”
Landslide victories cannot be overturned by stealthy corrupt vote stealing! The fight will be in the tightly contested races.
Subsidies, not ownership. The US has always worked to influence economic factors.
Indeed, that is one of the primary ways that government provided subsidies. But my point is that you and many others on this board seem to think that the USA has, throughout its history, been some kind of capitalist fantasy, where government action in the economic realm was non-existent. That perspective is BS. The US has ALWAYS worked in a "public-private" manner, from the Lewis and Clarke expedition to the current subsidies on alternate energy sources. And, for the most part, it has worked out pretty darned well.
Pure capitalism works no better than pure socialism. But the US has never espoused pure capitalism, and the citizenry currently doesn't want the current level of socialism, either, which I think will be seen in 2010.
I hear your point of view clearly, but this has been going on for years and when do we simply cut off these vain attempts and realize the system is too far gone, too corrupt for voting to work any longer? We’ve been trying the ballot box. At some point when our rights are stomped on it is no longer a mistake or just differing opinions about how to run the country, it becomes clearly a takeover of our liberties, our freedoms, and this country and must be met with force. The first amendment gives us the right to petition the government, to speak out, but when that government refuses to listen then we were given the second amendment to enforce our rights, our liberties, and our voice. We don’t have to ask pretty please or beg, of which we have done for years. We have the right and the force to simply demand, and demanding a right that is being taken away by force of government is not unreasonable.
[Historians may some day praise Mr Obama’s vision and bold ambitions but at this point at least, the public is sceptical and his party apprehensive they may pay the price next year. ]
Hitler had a bold vision and bold ambitions as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.