• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush faces political nightmare if Democrats win.

BoomerD

No Lifer
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061022/pl_nm/congress_dc_1

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - If Democrats win control of the U.S. Congress in the November 7 election, it would turn the Capitol upside down and create a political nightmare for the already embattled President George W. Bush.

If his Republicans lose the majority, Bush would hear newly empowered calls to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and would suddenly face promised Democratic-led congressional investigations with subpoena power into the unpopular war.

Bush, whose public approval ratings are below 40 percent, would also face Democratic demands he offer "mainstream" rather than "right-wing" judicial nominees if he wants them confirmed.

Bush's fellow Republicans applied a rubber stamp to much of his conservative agenda the past six years, including tax cuts that went largely to the rich.

Polls show Democrats running ahead less than three weeks before the congressional election. If they win control of Congress from Bush's fellow Republicans, they would challenge Bush on fronts ranging from his warrantless domestic spying program to his energy and health-care policies.

"In some ways it would be a nightmare for Bush, but in other ways it could be an opportunity," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Ornstein said Bush, who denounces Democrats as soft on terrorism, could move toward the political center and reach out to Democrats in his final two years in office to overhaul U.S. immigration laws and the Social Security retirement program, two goals he has failed to accomplish.

But Ornstein said that was unlikely. "I've talked to a lot of people who know him well and are really close to him. I have yet to find one who thinks he will change his modus operandi dramatically," he said.

Democrats deny Republican claims they would try to impeach Bush and remove him from office.

Instead, they plan to push their own agenda, "A New Direction for America," which includes raising the federal minimum wage for the first time in a decade, ending some tax breaks to oil companies and making college more affordable by reducing federal student loan interest rates.

Democrats also promise to implement recommendations from the 9/11 Commission to bolster security, ease the threat of global warming and, in response to influence-peddling scandals on Capitol Hill, clean up the way Congress does business.

GRIDLOCK?

"Surprisingly little" will become law, predicted Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. "We're headed for gridlock."

If Democrats pick up at least 15 seats to end 12 years of Republican rule in the 435-member House of Representatives, it will likely be by a slim majority, he said.

And, he said, whether Republicans hold the 100-member Senate or lose it to Democrats, neither side will likely have the 60 votes routinely needed to pass controversial bills.

Bush has predicted Republicans would surprise pollsters and keep the House and Senate. In recent weeks he also has reiterated a Republican battle cry, saying, "Democrats will raise taxes."

Democrats would be unlikely to extend Bush's tax cuts beyond the 2010 expiration but plan to push for lower deficits while keeping popular tax breaks for the middle class.

They say their oversight hearings would focus on what critics see as "waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayers' dollars" in Iraq, homeland security and relief after Hurricane Katrina.

Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record) of California, who would be Government Reform Committee chairman if Democrats took control, said: "It's an important part of Congress's duty under the Constitution to do vigilant oversight. Republicans failed in that regard in the past six years."

House Republican Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri said if Democrats won control, "taxes go up, the economy falters and we have a party in charge that doesn't understand what the war is all about."

"What happens if Democrats take control of the House?" House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland asked. "Shouting and glee after being in the wilderness for lo these many years."


THEN, to add Insult to Injury....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061022/pl_nm/bush_father_dc_1

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush gently admonished his father for saying he hates to think what life would be like for his son if the Democrats win control of Congress in the November 7 election.

It was the latest sign of possible strain in the relationship between the two men.

"He shouldn't be speculating like this, because -- he should have called me ahead of time and I'd tell him they're not going to (win)," a smiling Bush told ABC "This Week" in an interview broadcast on Sunday.

It follows the recent release of a book, "State of Denial," by journalist Bob Woodward, that says the 82-year-old former president was "anguished" over how the Iraq war has played out, although he has dismissed that account.

Earlier this month, the elder Bush was reported to have told a Republican fund-raiser in a Philadelphia suburb that "if we have some of these wild Democrats in charge of these (congressional) committees, it will be a ghastly thing for our country."

He was also quoted as saying, "I would hate to think ... what my son's life would be like" if their Republican Party lost its majorities.

The two men have rarely appeared together in public in recent years. But they praised each other at the October 7 christening of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, named the USS George H.W. Bush, after the 41st president.

Though the elder Bush has said his job is to stay on the sidelines, that did not stop him from raising a warning about the prospects for a Democratic takeover of Congress.

Asked whether he had thought about the possibility, the president told ABC: "Not really ... I'm a person that believes we'll continue to control the House and the Senate."

Polls show Democrats running ahead. They must pick up 15 House seats and six Senate seats to take over Congress.

A power shift would create a political nightmare for Bush, whose public approval ratings are below 40 percent. His domestic legislative agenda would be stymied and he would see stepped-up pressure to withdraw from Iraq while possibly facing congressional investigations into the unpopular war. "


Pelosi has said that if the Dems win the House, they won't push to find reasons for impeachment. Think she'll stick to that if the Dems take control of the House?
Damn, I for one, sure hope not...😉

 
Impeachment will be counter productive. Following a tit for tat policy will only bring the Democrats a bad name. One of the reasons the public has moved away from Repubs is the increasing partisanship that has shown up in their workings. Dems would do well to avoid that.

Also impeachment would divert attention from the real issues that should be taken up, and thus portray the Dems as no better than the Repubs.

The Dem leaders know that and would like to be seen as the better choice and not just in this election.

At most we should have a few investigations into some of the corruption and move to on addressing real issues.


 
First they gotta win. Don't get sucked into the Right-Wing media BS that they stand a chance. I wouldn't be donning the party hat until things are confirmed. I'm afraid it's going to et worse before it gets better. Americans aren't convinced there's a real problem yet. It takes us a while....
 
Given the date-rape "bipartisanship" practiced by the Admin and Repub Congressional leaders, whatever misfortunes befall them will be well deserved.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys, honest...

And I'll have tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, too...

And maybe, just maybe, decent and honest Repubs will be able to take back their party leadership from the right fringe... if there are any of them left...
 
Democrats can look forward to getting no nominations passed if they can elect a president. I can see this going bad quickly. Here is a scenario - Democrates take the House and the Senate and they get nothing accomplished in two years, then they get voted out of office.

There are enough democrats for leaving the troops in Iraq, because the alternative could be worse. I would like to see for myself what the actions of the Democrats would be if they elect a president. Change is not always completely bad.

Hmm... Pelosi for President.
 
Originally posted by: piasabird
Democrats can look forward to getting no nominations passed if they can elect a president. I can see this going bad quickly. Here is a scenario - Democrates take the House and the Senate and they get nothing accomplished in two years, then they get voted out of office.

They stop GWB from smearing his feces over the parts of the constitution that stand in his way so the SCOTUS can't read them.


There are enough democrats for leaving the troops in Iraq, because the alternative could be worse. I would like to see for myself what the actions of the Democrats would be if they elect a president. Change is not always completely bad.

Hmm... Pelosi for President.

Change is usually quite good. 🙂

 
Originally posted by: piasabird
Democrats can look forward to getting no nominations passed if they can elect a president. I can see this going bad quickly. Here is a scenario - Democrates take the House and the Senate and they get nothing accomplished in two years, then they get voted out of office.

There are enough democrats for leaving the troops in Iraq, because the alternative could be worse. I would like to see for myself what the actions of the Democrats would be if they elect a president. Change is not always completely bad.

Hmm... Pelosi for President.

It's possible Dems may convince Hillary to back off on the VP slot so it may be Obama/Nancy Ticket.
 
Having a two party government is hardly a political nightmare. The rightwing's overblown and alarmist rhetoric is laughable.
 
Impeachment and conviction sounds good to me.

President Cheney and Vice President Pelosi!

Sure to give ol' Dick a well deserved heart attack:Q:beer:
 
Originally posted by: piasabird
Democrats can look forward to getting no nominations passed if they can elect a president. I can see this going bad quickly. Here is a scenario - Democrates take the House and the Senate and they get nothing accomplished in two years, then they get voted out of office.

There are enough democrats for leaving the troops in Iraq, because the alternative could be worse. I would like to see for myself what the actions of the Democrats would be if they elect a president. Change is not always completely bad.

Hmm... Pelosi for President.

Well, if Bush vetoes everything, Congress isn't just going to sit on its thumbs. And what else does Congress do besides pass laws?

They investigate people.

So the Democrats have their new majority and they suddenly have the power to investigate things that they couldn't before because of pressure from the large majority. They're going to start looking, even if it's a very small thing, and they're going to find a lot of very interesting stuff very quickly. Impeachment hearings all around!
 
If bush suddenly finds his veto pen and goes crazy with it after only using it once in ~6 years of rep. congressional control, he's going to look like even more of partisan hack than he already does. If possible. It wouldn't shock me though. It would fit right in with his "I'm taking my ball and going home" childish personality. I swear, he reminds me of a 6 year old sometimes.
 
Of course this is all speculation, but this is how I see it:

Impeachment, forget it. Gotta attach an impeachable offense on him first, which there isnt any, so thats a dead issue.

Senate: no way in hell they will win the Senate.

House: Possibly, although unlikely. Lets assume for a minute they do. Then what? Nothing will get to the Senate that will actually pass, so whats the point? And, any bill that DOES make it to the POTUS's desk wont have enough of a majority to override a possible veto, so they still lose.

Gonna be a bad two years for Dems for sure. Gonna have so much pent up frustration in 2 years their prez ads are gonna be nothing but hate speech.
 
Originally posted by: BoomerD
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061022/pl_nm/congress_dc_1

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - If Democrats win control of the U.S. Congress in the November 7 election, it would turn the Capitol upside down and create a political nightmare for the already embattled President George W. Bush.

If his Republicans lose the majority, Bush would hear newly empowered calls to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq and would suddenly face promised Democratic-led congressional investigations with subpoena power into the unpopular war.

Bush, whose public approval ratings are below 40 percent, would also face Democratic demands he offer "mainstream" rather than "right-wing" judicial nominees if he wants them confirmed.

Bush's fellow Republicans applied a rubber stamp to much of his conservative agenda the past six years, including tax cuts that went largely to the rich.

Polls show Democrats running ahead less than three weeks before the congressional election. If they win control of Congress from Bush's fellow Republicans, they would challenge Bush on fronts ranging from his warrantless domestic spying program to his energy and health-care policies.

"In some ways it would be a nightmare for Bush, but in other ways it could be an opportunity," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Ornstein said Bush, who denounces Democrats as soft on terrorism, could move toward the political center and reach out to Democrats in his final two years in office to overhaul U.S. immigration laws and the Social Security retirement program, two goals he has failed to accomplish.

But Ornstein said that was unlikely. "I've talked to a lot of people who know him well and are really close to him. I have yet to find one who thinks he will change his modus operandi dramatically," he said.

Democrats deny Republican claims they would try to impeach Bush and remove him from office.

Instead, they plan to push their own agenda, "A New Direction for America," which includes raising the federal minimum wage for the first time in a decade, ending some tax breaks to oil companies and making college more affordable by reducing federal student loan interest rates.

Democrats also promise to implement recommendations from the 9/11 Commission to bolster security, ease the threat of global warming and, in response to influence-peddling scandals on Capitol Hill, clean up the way Congress does business.

GRIDLOCK?

"Surprisingly little" will become law, predicted Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia. "We're headed for gridlock."

If Democrats pick up at least 15 seats to end 12 years of Republican rule in the 435-member House of Representatives, it will likely be by a slim majority, he said.

And, he said, whether Republicans hold the 100-member Senate or lose it to Democrats, neither side will likely have the 60 votes routinely needed to pass controversial bills.

Bush has predicted Republicans would surprise pollsters and keep the House and Senate. In recent weeks he also has reiterated a Republican battle cry, saying, "Democrats will raise taxes."

Democrats would be unlikely to extend Bush's tax cuts beyond the 2010 expiration but plan to push for lower deficits while keeping popular tax breaks for the middle class.

They say their oversight hearings would focus on what critics see as "waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayers' dollars" in Iraq, homeland security and relief after Hurricane Katrina.

Rep. Henry Waxman (news, bio, voting record) of California, who would be Government Reform Committee chairman if Democrats took control, said: "It's an important part of Congress's duty under the Constitution to do vigilant oversight. Republicans failed in that regard in the past six years."

House Republican Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri said if Democrats won control, "taxes go up, the economy falters and we have a party in charge that doesn't understand what the war is all about."

"What happens if Democrats take control of the House?" House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland asked. "Shouting and glee after being in the wilderness for lo these many years."


THEN, to add Insult to Injury....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061022/pl_nm/bush_father_dc_1

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush gently admonished his father for saying he hates to think what life would be like for his son if the Democrats win control of Congress in the November 7 election.

It was the latest sign of possible strain in the relationship between the two men.

"He shouldn't be speculating like this, because -- he should have called me ahead of time and I'd tell him they're not going to (win)," a smiling Bush told ABC "This Week" in an interview broadcast on Sunday.

It follows the recent release of a book, "State of Denial," by journalist Bob Woodward, that says the 82-year-old former president was "anguished" over how the Iraq war has played out, although he has dismissed that account.

Earlier this month, the elder Bush was reported to have told a Republican fund-raiser in a Philadelphia suburb that "if we have some of these wild Democrats in charge of these (congressional) committees, it will be a ghastly thing for our country."

He was also quoted as saying, "I would hate to think ... what my son's life would be like" if their Republican Party lost its majorities.

The two men have rarely appeared together in public in recent years. But they praised each other at the October 7 christening of a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, named the USS George H.W. Bush, after the 41st president.

Though the elder Bush has said his job is to stay on the sidelines, that did not stop him from raising a warning about the prospects for a Democratic takeover of Congress.

Asked whether he had thought about the possibility, the president told ABC: "Not really ... I'm a person that believes we'll continue to control the House and the Senate."

Polls show Democrats running ahead. They must pick up 15 House seats and six Senate seats to take over Congress.

A power shift would create a political nightmare for Bush, whose public approval ratings are below 40 percent. His domestic legislative agenda would be stymied and he would see stepped-up pressure to withdraw from Iraq while possibly facing congressional investigations into the unpopular war. "


Pelosi has said that if the Dems win the House, they won't push to find reasons for impeachment. Think she'll stick to that if the Dems take control of the House?
Damn, I for one, sure hope not...😉

GOOD! I hope it does come to bite them you know where
 
It is highly unlikely that the Democrats will regain control of congress. Despite this, there will inevitably be a surge of right-wingers gloating about how the "people have spoken" right after election day.
 
Originally posted by: blackllotus
It is highly unlikely that the Democrats will regain control of congress. Despite this, there will inevitably be a surge of right-wingers gloating about how the "people have spoken" right after election day.

Given the attitude of the left side over the past 3-4 months; you would think that there should/will be a Dem sweep and impeachment proceeding starting in Mid January.

this is based upon articles posted here and also the attitude here by some in P&N

 
Originally posted by: wirelessenabled
Impeachment and conviction sounds good to me.

President Cheney and Vice President Pelosi!

Sure to give ol' Dick a well deserved heart attack:Q:beer:
This post is a joke right? You understand that President Cheney gets to pick his own VP, who the Senate just approves.

That might actually help Republicans since that would give them an incumbent VP who could then run for President, especially if it was someone that was not involved with Iraq and had no baggage.

But we are jumping ahead of ourselves, right now any poll that asks "should Bush be impeached and removed" shows results in the 30% or less range. And my source for this is Democrats.com, I think if they had better polls they would show them. link
 
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: blackllotus
It is highly unlikely that the Democrats will regain control of congress. Despite this, there will inevitably be a surge of right-wingers gloating about how the "people have spoken" right after election day.

Given the attitude of the left side over the past 3-4 months; you would think that there should/will be a Dem sweep and impeachment proceeding starting in Mid January.

this is based upon articles posted here and also the attitude here by some in P&N
If the Democrats DON'T sweep shouldn't that be a sign that the American people support Bush and the Republicans? 🙂
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: blackllotus
It is highly unlikely that the Democrats will regain control of congress. Despite this, there will inevitably be a surge of right-wingers gloating about how the "people have spoken" right after election day.

Given the attitude of the left side over the past 3-4 months; you would think that there should/will be a Dem sweep and impeachment proceeding starting in Mid January.

this is based upon articles posted here and also the attitude here by some in P&N
If the Democrats DON'T sweep shouldn't that be a sign that the American people support Bush and the Republicans? 🙂

:thumbsup: QFT
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohn

If the Democrats DON'T sweep shouldn't that be a sign that the American people support Bush and the Republicans? 🙂


Or it's a sign of voting fraud of a scale that's just ridiculous. Or most Democrats didn't bother to go out to vote because they had the elections in the bag.
 
Back
Top