What do you think of Democrats hitting 60 in the Senate?

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

 

[quest55720]

It would be very bad for this country. It would make the economic situation much worse than it is right now. If the democrats have complete control I see most people with money sitting on the sidelines the next 4 years trying to hide money. I see double digit unemployment and skyrocketting infation. It will be a return to the jimmy carter and the 70s failed policies.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

You guys did not complain then, in fact gloated.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: quest55720
If the democrats have complete control I see most people with money sitting on the sidelines the next 4 years trying to hide money.

They can leave the country that they hate so much anyway.

Then no need for "hiding".

At least thank you for being honest that you are your kind never trickle down.

The only thing you guys trickle down is shit.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

You guys did not complain then, in fact gloated.

Quote me. Quote PJ. We are the two people you're talking to and accusing of this hypocrisy, so back it up or pack it up.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The Dems getting 60 would be BAD news for the country. Period.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

when did the republicans have a 60-seat margin?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

President Obama can have people in his cabinet that disagree and stir up conversation, we need progress in government and having 2 polar opposites doesn't lead to productivity, it leads to headbutting, and nothing getting done. 60+ D seats is just fine with me.

 

[Thump553]

I'm sick to death of Congress doing nothing but debate stuff like flag burning amendments. In this time of crisis, and when the vast majority of the country feels the country is heading in the wrong direction, I think the new President should have every reasonable opportunity to implement new policies.

Remember, too what masters of delay and misdirection the GOP senate was under Clinton, with their wasteful investigations of everything under the sun until they hit the jackpot and caught him with his zipper down. Not exactly the sort of government I want to see again.

This leftist/liberal scare is pretty much BS, as GWB has proven. Liberalism got a bad name in the US because of LBJ's diasterous guns and butter policies leading to prolonged inflation. GWB pursued essentially the same program, but his led to massive debt, a crashed financial sector and a looming recession.

 

[bdude]

I can't wait.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti
President Obama can have people in his cabinet that disagree and stir up conversation, we need progress in government and having 2 polar opposites doesn't lead to productivity, it leads to headbutting, and nothing getting done. 60+ D seats is just fine with me.

he "can," but what has he done to imply he would want such a thing?

 

[EagleKeeper]

We saw what happened when rubber stamps are purchased cheaply.

Plus the Dems are chomping at the bit to show they can be worse.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Thump553
Liberalism got a bad name in the US because of LBJ's diasterous guns and butter policies leading to prolonged inflation.

Close. FDR.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
You guys did not complain then, in fact gloated.

Dave you're an idiot!!!

The Republicans NEVER came close to 60 seats!
55 is the most seats the Republicans have had. Not even close to 60.

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: Thump553
I'm sick to death of Congress doing nothing but debate stuff like flag burning amendments. In this time of crisis, and when the vast majority of the country feels the country is heading in the wrong direction, I think the new President should have every reasonable opportunity to implement new policies.

Remember, too what masters of delay and misdirection the GOP senate was under Clinton, with their wasteful investigations of everything under the sun until they hit the jackpot and caught him with his zipper down. Not exactly the sort of government I want to see again.

This leftist/liberal scare is pretty much BS, as GWB has proven. Liberalism got a bad name in the US because of LBJ's diasterous guns and butter policies leading to prolonged inflation. GWB pursued essentially the same program, but his led to massive debt, a crashed financial sector and a looming recession.

It also lead to a surplus and an economic boom. It was a great balance with newt leading the way on economic issues. Clinton keeping the social converatives under control it was perfect. I don't want either side to be able to shove thier agenda down my throat unchecked. Both sides have crazy ideas that I never want to see the light of day. If one side has complete control those crazy ideas will be put into law. I want both sides to have to compromise to get anything done. If they can't compromise nothing gets done. A win win as far as I am concerned since this government screws up everything it touches.

 

[Red Dawn]

Bump for merge.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

Exactly. You know if the (R)'s were headed for controlling PJ would be right there warning us how bad it would be. :roll:

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

Exactly. You know if the (R)'s were headed for controlling PJ would be right there warning us how bad it would be. :roll:

I know I would be because that would give the social converatives to much power. Both sides have gone to far away from center since 2000. I don't want the crazy left or crazy right controlling this country. We are on the verge of the crazy left controlling this county with no checks.

 

[bdude]

Seriously, just face it. You're gonna be the minority party for a while. The D's will show the R's how governing is actually done.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: loki8481
if the dems end up with 58 seats + 2 caucusing independents, Joe Lieberman could wind up dying mysteriously of athlete's foot.

Fixed.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
2) It's good because maybe the republicans will reinvent themselves in a good way and the country has a better option in the republican candidate in 2012.

Of course, pigs could fly, too.

The dems were every bit the trainwreck in '04 and they pulled it together. Stranger things have happened.

 

[irishScott]

Congress is going to do jack shit regardless of whose in control. It's now turned into something like a Presidential approval committee. President has idea, congress decides. Congress itself is too ball-less to do anything other than inflate their own salaries/states.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The Dems getting 60 would be BAD news for the country. Period.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Where are your quotes, Dave? We're waiting.

Your baseless claims only make you look more foolish.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
i think the idea of Democrats getting 60 should be scary to everyone except the most leftist of us.

Having one party control government is bad, having one party have complete control and the ability to do whatever it wants could be a disaster.

Why was it OK for your heroes?

Are you blind, Dave? Read the bolded part. Again. Now read it again. And again. He NEVER said it was ok. In fact, he said just the opposite.

Exactly. You know if the (R)'s were headed for controlling PJ would be right there warning us how bad it would be. :roll:

Every time I make an argument from a hypothetical around here, I get my head chewed off. Sorry man, no dice 😉 .

 

[Lemon law]

If the GOP choose to be be the party of grid lock like they did after 2007, having a filibuster proof Senate will be good for the country. If the GOP rejoins the United States and gets real, it does not matter how big the democratic majority in the Senate gets. There are a large number of conservative democratic senators who vote on principle and not party line to keep excesses in check.

But based on polls, I suspect Barrons will land about right in their predictions. And if nothing really changes in the way of external events, the GOP is paying the price for their failures.

But its ridiculous to assume any voter will go to the polls and vote on the basis of what the final count will be in other states.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If the GOP choose to be be the party of grid lock like they did after 2007, having a filibuster proof Senate will be good for the country. If the GOP rejoins the United States and gets real, it does not matter how big the democratic majority in the Senate gets. There are a large number of conservative democratic senators who vote on principle and not party line to keep excesses in check.

But based on polls, I suspect Barrons will land about right in their predictions. And if nothing really changes in the way of external events, the GOP is paying the price for their failures.

But its ridiculous to assume any voter will go to the polls and vote on the basis of what the final count will be in other states.

Can't wait until the election is over... I suspect we will see what a "failure" really is. Sure, I might get a tax cut with Obama as president, but how many low income workers will lose their jobs because of IMHO, his unsound economic policies. These people who want to "redistribute the wealth" from the rich. I hope most of them know that in a recession/depression ,the people who get the pink slips are mostly the poor.