ABC News blog: "Democrats are Dropping Like Flies"

[Lemon law]

Let us not be too down on Non Prof John. After all, the ABC news blog he cites is quite real and not of his making.

But as Zebo and others point out, no one has a truly accurate handle on how the voters are going to react come the mid-term election of 2010. And already the eve of the primary season's of that is already here. As some responsible to their own party announce they are retiring.

I can't talk for anyone but myself, but I am disgusted and angry about the lack of political progress during this past year.

As for the 100% of the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate, they are all going to have a hard sell explaining why I should vote for such a bunch of clueless idiots.

But somehow in that moving target excuse party re election party lines , I think the GOP is going to have the harder sell in saying we stopped anything and everything because GWB is what we stand for.

 

[Craig234]

Let us not be too down on Non Prof John. After all, the ABC news blog he cites is quite real and not of his making.

But as Zebo and others point out, no one has a truly accurate handle on how the voters are going to react come the mid-term election of 2010. And already the eve of the primary season's of that is already here. As some responsible to their own party announce they are retiring.

I can't talk for anyone but myself, but I am disgusted and angry about the lack of political progress during this past year.

As for the 100% of the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate, they are all going to have a hard sell explaining why I should vote for such a bunch of clueless idiots.

But somehow in that moving target excuse party re election party lines , I think the GOP is going to have the harder sell in saying we stopped anything and everything because GWB is what we stand for.

As I've always said, the progressive dems were the ones pushing the right agenda, lacking votes.

The proper backlash is to vote out the Republicans and corproatist Dems and vote in more progressives.

THere was a story recently about Democratic consultants. This could be one negative campaign.

The Republicans are stakng it all on "the Democrats didn'tget anything done (don't mention we blocked), they spent too much (cleaning up our mess), and don't talk about Republican policies.

The Democrats are urged not to talk about the term, but instead to talk only about reminding voters how bad the Republicans are, and don't talk about Democratic policies.

All attack ads, all the time. They should change change the ballot to vote against D or vote aganst R.

 

[Patranus]

As I've always said, the progressive dems were the ones pushing the right agenda, lacking votes.

HAHAHA. So the Democrats are trying to push the most "progressive" agenda since FDR with cap & tax, health care "reform", amnesty for illegals, ect. while their approval ratings are taking and you think they should go more "progressive"?

Wow. You might want to take a look at this graph...

 

[ebaycj]

Hee Hee!

also see this:

Look at the date under bush's number. 10/10/2008. That's being very generous, since a very large amount of the SHTF happened after that.

EDIT: Google reports 21% fall under GWB :
http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=INDEXDJX:DJI
(move mouse over dates, and change the date range to: 1-19-2001 to 1-16-2009)

 

[ebaycj]

HAHAHA. So the Democrats are trying to push the most "progressive" agenda since FDR with cap & tax, health care "reform", amnesty for illegals, ect. while their approval ratings are taking and you think they should go more "progressive"?

Wow. You might want to take a look at this graph...

Their approval ratings tanking could have just as much to do with them "not getting anything done" as it does with "we don't like what they're trying to do but being blocked from doing so".

 

[Jhhnn]

Righties are just whistlin' in the dark, trying to convince themselves that they're not afraid...

The whole premise of the OP is erroneous, at least wrt the HOR-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...01/04/AR2010010403313.html?wpisrc=nl_politics

Despite the usual rouse the troops prognostications form the Right, it's tough to see what sort of strategy they base their hopes on, anyway...

stim-uh-late thu 'comomy with what, tax cuts at the top? Start another war? Even bigger subsidies and bonuses for bankers? More offshoring so that the resulting shrinking paychecks will go further?

Or just general bitterness, sour grapes and denial? Anti-govt backlash from people increasingly dependent on food stamps? From an aging population increasingly dependent on SS?

I'm sure they'll come up with something for the True Believers, bet on that...

 

[Craig234]

HAHAHA. So the Democrats are trying to push the most "progressive" agenda since FDR with cap & tax, health care "reform", amnesty for illegals, ect. while their approval ratings are taking and you think they should go more "progressive"?

Wow. You might want to take a look at this graph...

First, you are an idiot. You can't tell the difference between what I said, that the country needs to elect more progressives for good policies, and saying progressive policies have made them win elections.

No, second, Democrats ran on a progressive platform, and won. Then the corporatist Dems and Republicans have defeated the progressives on all the big issues, and the public is down on them both.

What are the progressives losing on? Strong Wall Street regulation. Civil rights. Strong credit card protections now. Medicare for all. Strong independant consumer protection agency. Public inerest.

 

[Patranus]

First, you are an idiot. You can't tell the difference between what I said, that the country needs to elect more progressives for good policies, and saying progressive policies have made them win elections.

No, second, Democrats ran on a progressive platform, and won. Then the corporatist Dems and Republicans have defeated the progressives on all the big issues, and the public is down on them both.

What are the progressives losing on? Strong Wall Street regulation. Civil rights. Strong credit card protections now. Medicare for all. Strong independant consumer protection agency. Public inerest.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that I am an idiot. Your claim that American wants more "progressive" policies is simply incorrect and I supported that with actual data.

Now, if people are rejecting main stream Democrats and Republicans but at the same time is generally more conservative, is the solution for those parties to go more Liberal or for those parties to get more Conservative?

You fail to realize that people do not want the nanny/cradle to grave state that "progressives" bring to the table.

 

[cubby1223]

First, you are an idiot. You can't tell the difference between what I said, that the country needs to elect more progressives for good policies, and saying progressive policies have made them win elections.

No, second, Democrats ran on a progressive platform, and won. Then the corporatist Dems and Republicans have defeated the progressives on all the big issues, and the public is down on them both.

What are the progressives losing on? Strong Wall Street regulation. Civil rights. Strong credit card protections now. Medicare for all. Strong independant consumer protection agency. Public inerest.

You really do love your "progressive" pipe dream.

The Democrats ran and won on the platform that they were not of the same party of Dubya, combined with the unpopularity of the Iraq war, and the "timely" crash of the financial system. Stop fooling yourself into believing it was your "progressive" utopia that the public on the whole voted in support of.

 

[woolfe9999]

There are more republicans retiring than democrats in the House, the Senate and the governorships:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34714651/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

House: 14R 10D
Senate: 6R 4D
Governor: 4R 3D

The Dodd and Dorgan retirements are at worst a wash for the dems, and maybe a net positive. Dodd was going to lose, and the guy who will run in his stead is very popular in the state. Dorgan probably would have lost, but it's a closer call.

In 1994, the repubs were helped by a huge, disproportate number of dem retirees. So far, it isn't working out that way this time.

That said, predicting the results of these midterms is basically akin to reading tea leaves.

- wolf

 

[ProfJohn]

That said, predicting the results of these midterms is basically akin to reading tea leaves.

- wolf

Not completely. The Republicans should take around 20 house seats based on history. Whether they get more depends on the economy and what the Democrats do in the next few months.

 

[woolfe9999]

Not completely. The Republicans should take around 20 house seats based on history. Whether they get more depends on the economy and what the Democrats do in the next few months.

That might be an average based on history, but there are reasons to believe that this will not be an "average" midterm. If I had to guess, I'd put the number higher than 20, maybe 25 in the house and 4-5 in the Senate. But we'll see.

You're right that the economy will be a large factor. The unemployment stat in October of this year will be the single most important determinant of the outcome.

- wolf

 

[sportage]

I think flies are dropping like democrats...?

 

[cubby1223]

It's not just what the landscape will look like past the 2010 elections. Republicans will gain at least a 41st seat in the Senate.

But the bigger picture is the realization that while the public doesn't want the Republicans of prior years in power, neither do they want the current Democrats either. Think that won't have any impact on the legislation they will be trying to ram through the system before the elections?

 

[Jhhnn]

I figure that Repubs really should do about as well as they did in the 1934 midterms, all things considered, but their propaganda is better today, while the results of their previous misdeeds are masked by increasing debt and govt intervention.

One thing's for sure- Deregulate! Free Market! Ownership Society! Fear! Terrar! Outrage! and the rest of their standard repertoire aren't the hot sellers they once were...

It seems unlikely that "They're just as Bad!" will sell any better...